2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary camp prepared for AP announcement like she knew it was coming
Get the word out please - Hillary sent out an email to fund raise tonight based on the AP announcement TONIGHT.
A smart girl on Twitter figured out that it was created 2 days ago!!!
See this twitter link then do your stuff.....
https://twitter.com/Cold_Stare/status/740025607166164992?s=07
Bernie needs us to pass the word and help get the voters to the polls. It's worth your time to watch and share...
https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4mynxy/get_the_word_out_please_hillary_sent_out_an_email/
yourpaljoey
(2,166 posts)wendylaroux
(2,925 posts)TOP DEFINITION
pull a clinton
1. To state a lie as the truth.
2. Creating new definitions in your mind so you can always tell the whole truth about anything all of the time.
3. To tell an old truth and make it sound like a new truth.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pull%20a%20clinton
yourpaljoey
(2,166 posts)reformist2
(9,841 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)and could pull the trigger when ever she wanted. THe posts were sometime over the past few weeks, but I can't find them.
jzodda
(2,124 posts)Its not good news before CA primary. It could cause her supporters to stay home because it becomes meaningless.
What possible good would it do her campaign for this to come out 12 hours before the final primaries?
JudyM
(29,204 posts)jzodda
(2,124 posts)There is no way to fight off nutty conspiracy theorists. Ten more days till all the tin hatters and Bernie bros go bye bye.
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Silver_Witch
(1,820 posts)TDale313
(7,820 posts)Those Supers did not go to the AP saying they supported her (and just the right number to put her over) on the eve of an important primary day without the campaign's ok. No way, no how. This was planned, this was timed. Why? Because the Clinton camp really, really wants to win California and does not want the embarrassment of a loss here. This supresses the turnout, which by all accounts favors them. Could it backfire? Yes. But this was no friggin' coincidence.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Do you have the slightest idea how journalism works?
And the reality is, lower turnout favors Bernie. One word: caucuses.
JudyM
(29,204 posts)IT was perfectly timed to discredit a win in CAli by Sanders.
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)She knew she would be mere votes away and NJ was all but a given. Even Bernie admitted that. Smart girl? Nah, naive girl is more like it. Hillary was prepared, just like she is to be President.
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)JudyM
(29,204 posts)Come on, now.
LexVegas
(6,031 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)LexVegas
(6,031 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)Sanders never had a chance. He did no groundwork, had no support in Congress, and joined the Democratic Party at the last minute, expecting to be treated as a savior. Those are the 'tactics' of someone who didn't know what he was getting into.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]
Response to J_J_ (Original post)
Post removed
peace13
(11,076 posts)It would have been so easy for her to say thanks but no thanks. We are going to play this thing out tomorrow in CA. She would have looked like a....president. But no, she sits back and collects whatever they can steal for her!
apcalc
(4,462 posts)what she did say was essentially
'flattered AP, but we have primaries to win tomorrow'.
avaistheone1
(14,626 posts)Clinton followers are easily fooled.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)welcome to the clinton machine 2.0
expect more of the same from the entrenched establishment and HRC
progressive / liberal principles are the ultimate casualty here
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)They were most likely planning on using it tonight.
I worked in graphic design and TV broadcast and advertising production. Graphics like that are made ahead of time.
Renew Deal
(81,847 posts)Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)They do these things way ahead of time. So they can thoroughly spell check, fact check, and make sure things look proper WELL before they go live. There are those who will see a conspiracy everywhere they look, however.
joshcryer
(62,269 posts)The file names are intentionally labeled to fuck with people. Think of it as an Easter egg of someone in the design department.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)not the screenshot of the tweet. I looked again. Still, nothing nefarious.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Had ready to go. Older folks, those known to have bad drug problems, etc.
LiberalFighter
(50,787 posts)joshcryer
(62,269 posts)Someone in the graphics department is being cheeky as fuck and people are falling for it.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I saw someone making a claim and a bunch of people asking for confirmation ... but nothing confirming the claim.
But since I am unfamiliar with Twitter ... maybe, I missed something.
joshcryer
(62,269 posts)If you put it in your browser it's a direct screenshot of the AP's Twitter post.
Look at the URL: a.hrc.onl/imageman/2016_Q2-Email/20160605_hfa_graphic/secret-win-V2-060416c_02.png
"secret-win-V2-060416c_02.png"
There are only two logical explanations: The Clinton camp has control over the AP's Twitter account, countless workers at the AP making this call, and graphics designers at the AP's twitter department.
Or the Clinton folks purposefully embedded a cheekily named URL in the email just to fuck with people. They can easily say it was a "typo" (because on the number pad 4 is right under 7), but because every single other image in the email has the same typo (add 01-08 to the end of the URL), they would've had to have noticed it. It was 100% intentional.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)I was thinking that the picture she was railing against was the original graphic that AP posted (which could've been made a couple days out), not the screenshot. Still, it's funny as hell. Many will see conspiracies where none exist.
Renew Deal
(81,847 posts)And they have graphics people on staff. It's an easy image to create.
The news doesn't make Sanders any more presidential. But whining about it makes him less presidential.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Love that there is proof. It was clear before that this is how the Hill camp rolls but it is nice that there is proof. She is a thief and an untruthful person as it turns out. And this....on the eve of CA.
To the Hill folk that don't understand. Last night she tried to take the wind out of the sail. To discourage people from going to vote pretending it was a predetermined election. To steal the election by stopping the process. If the MSM can get away with this you have to ask yourself what other things can the corporations get away with, with Clinton's consent. Imagine going to the bank one day and having the bank tell you you can only have half of your money. They have decided to change the rule, steal your money like they tried to steal people's votes. Oh boy now you feel it. You know what it feels like to have YOUR money stolen. Seriously people it is past time to wake up. Hillary is the machine and it is not going to work for you........e...v...e...r.........
apcalc
(4,462 posts)Why would she want to depress turnout and have her big day today pre-emptied? That makes no sense at all.
The end of the day will tell. I appreciate your comment.
joshcryer
(62,269 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,708 posts)joshcryer
(62,269 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,708 posts)Vattel
(9,289 posts)So I doubt there was anything nefarious here.
CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)Proud Public Servant
(2,097 posts)Any campaign that DIDN'T have a template ready to go when the inevitable announcement came is an amateur operation. And Hillary has not been running an amateur operation.
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)Anyone could see that with only a few more SDs needed that the press would vie for the scoop.
But go ahead and launch more conspiracy theories. They'll keep you warm in Novenver.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)out of bag but he was off by a day..........
MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)Of the sane world.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)It wasn't. It's been obvious since March that a Sanders victory was becoming increasingly unlikely by the day. The only genuine uncertainty was exactly when the 2383rd delegate would come.
onenote
(42,598 posts)in the Marist poll? I've searched high and low and I can find no evidence that the Marist poll ever reported that Sanders had the enormous lead shown in that graphic.
Seems like some over-active Sanders supporters have been busy creating fake screen shots.
Demsrule86
(68,469 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)I can never vote for her.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)gollygee
(22,336 posts)The question would have been when, not if.