Mostly I think she knows that with regards to actual policy change, she actually has more influence as a Senator than she would as the President. Presidents hold veto power which is likely their biggest card to play (also executive orders), but for actual lasting domestic policy change, those things need to start with the House/Senate before they even get to the President to be signed.
I think that was also a big part of the Sanders campaign, to try to draw attention to some of those other down-card races where a Republican incumbent was vulnerable, to try to bring more like-minded Democrats/Independents into the fold.
Yeah, I would agree with pretty much all of that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
She's also unelectable.
Why? She's well-spoken, principled, experienced etc... How is that person unelectable when her actual antithesis is on the other card?
I actually wouldn't be surprised if she was pressured to stay out of it by the cronyism surrounding Hillary. Outside of those that take an interest in politics, not many people know who she is. Had she actually began a campaign, I think people would have latched onto her very quickly as a favorite, pushing Hillary's "womanness" aside (for lack of a better term, I can't believe something like that actual has to be considered a factor), and taking the socialist angle from Bernie without all the wild hippy grandpa aura of Bernie. Ultimately being the 1st female presidential nominee (and very likely victor). Something I think Hillary has decided is her birthright.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to Coach For This Useful Post:
The Daily Show's Jordan Klepper did a piece last night on Trump supporters, asking questions about why they support Trump, problems they have with Obama/Clinton, etc. Really effective way of highlighting the insanity of Trump's army of dumb.
If I were Clinton, I'd be hiring 'reporters' to go to Trump events and ask perfectly reasonable questions on camera, then airing the interviews as campaign ads. Everyone knows Trump says stupid ****, airing those types of ads aren't going to change anything.
Americans on the fence about this election don't understand the movement they'd be joining by making a 'scorched Earth' protest vote for Trump. She's already taking heat for her 'basket of deplorables' comment, just double down and make it impossible for Trump's TV minions defend.
There's no way 40% of America is this stupid.
Last edited by HotHotHeat; 09-21-2016 at 08:05 AM.
The Daily Show's Jordan Klepper did a piece last night on Trump supporters, asking questions about why they support Trump, problems they have with Obama/Clinton, etc. Really effective way of highlighting the insanity of Trump's army of dumb.
If I were Clinton, I'd be hiring 'reporters' to go to Trump events and ask perfectly reasonable questions on camera, then airing the interviews as campaign ads. Everyone knows Trump says stupid ****, airing those types of ads aren't going to change anything.
Americans on the fence about this election don't understand the movement they'd be joining by making a 'scorched Earth' protest vote for Trump. She's already taking heat for her 'basket of deplorables' comment, just double down and make it impossible for Trump's TV minions defend.
Oh, and it isn't isolated to just the United States. The same level of stupidity exists in Canada as well. The difference is that there are 10 times the people in the United States, so it appears you have 10 times the stupid. Per capita, not much difference. But the sheer number of dumb people, much more evident. One more difference is the stupid people down here proudly advertise their stupidity.
Spoiler!
The Following User Says Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
There's not. You have to remember that Satan himself as GOP nominee would be polling around 40%. Any generic candidate would be polling at that number. It's just the way it is in the team politics environment we live in. I think when you break it down, the true hardcore Trump supporters (aka the cultists) is probably in the 15-20% range. Still frightening, but he has a significant chunk of people voting for him either because they "have to" (team politics) or they hate Hillary that much.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Senator Clay Davis For This Useful Post:
I cant say how disappointed I am in the Daily Show and trevor noah specifically. Their attacks on Trump are totally off the mark and aren't convincing anyone of something they dont already believe.
I can't help but feel if Stewart was still there the commentary on Trump would be a lot more effective and better constructed.
I cant say how disappointed I am in the Daily Show and trevor noah specifically. Their attacks on Trump are totally off the mark and aren't convincing anyone of something they dont already believe.
I can't help but feel if Stewart was still there the commentary on Trump would be a lot more effective and better constructed.
To that point, however, you saw Trump supporters--they literally don't actually care how often he flipflops on opinions and stances on various things. They support him come hell or high water. Hardcore Trump supporters 1) aren't going to be swayed and 2) likely aren't watching The Daily Show anyway.
The show isn't the same as it was when Stewart was around, certainly, but they haven't done a terrible job.
The Following User Says Thank You to wittynickname For This Useful Post:
To that point, however, you saw Trump supporters--they literally don't actually care how often he flipflops on opinions and stances on various things. They support him come hell or high water. Hardcore Trump supporters 1) aren't going to be swayed and 2) likely aren't watching The Daily Show anyway.
The show isn't the same as it was when Stewart was around, certainly, but they haven't done a terrible job.
The difference I think is that Stewart had better success getting access and exposure on other news programs as part of panels. Noah doesn't have that clout. Stewart could still do that but he now has that "what does he know he's out of the game" aura around him.
The hardcore Trump supporters aren't going to be swayed because he's the "in" the alt-right has been looking for.
Trump's audience for his "African American Town Hall". And if you look closely, you can see his African American is in attendance (though he does look lost and confused).
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
More "black outreach" by trying to nationalize a program that has been deemed unconstitutional, proven to not actually work, and mostly targets black people. But hey suburban white women love it I'm sure
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
More "black outreach" by trying to nationalize a program that has been deemed unconstitutional, proven to not actually work, and mostly targets black people. But hey suburban white women love it I'm sure
Good lord.
The "alt-right" is dancing in the streets right now.
A longtime aide to the Trump family defended Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s record of charitable giving on Wednesday, arguing some money given to Trump’s foundation by third parties "is his money."
Lynne Patton, a senior assistant to three of Trump’s adult children and the vice president of son Eric Trump’s charitable foundation, told The Des Moines Register that some donations to the Donald J. Trump Foundation should be recognized as contributions from Trump himself because in some cases that money would have been paid to Trump directly.
“A lot of times Mr. Trump will give a speech somewhere or he’ll raise money in some way and he asks that that entity, instead of cutting a personal check to him, cut it to his charity,” Patton said. “That’s money that otherwise would’ve been in his personal account, right?”
“So when he cuts a check from his foundation for let’s say, St. Jude, it is his money,” she added. “No ifs, ands or ways about it.”
