So, ratfucking Hillory Rodam Clinton will

[Old and In the Way]

Make us stronger fighting Jeb Buzh? I am facinated that "Democrats" want to destroy Hillary. Who else can we destroy? No other Democrat can be elected because almost 50% of the population are votiing morons. So enjoy Jeb Bushing's SCOTUS!

[jobycom]

1. Where's your proof that....

The people attacking her want Jeb to lose?

[Old and In the Way]

3. Where is your proof that they want Hillary to beat Jeb? nt

[jobycom]

9. I make no claim that such evidence exists.

IMHO, people attacking our candidates in the way that the Republicans attack them, whether it be Clinton or anyone else, are more interested in seeing the front running Democrat lose than in any particular Democrat winning. Not the first election where that's seemed like the case for some.

[GusFring]

2. Democrats are their own worse enemy. Just look at what Obama has to deal with

[BP2]

29. So we should all be silent and compliant. After all, "it's Hillary's turn" ... right??! n/t

[GusFring]

33. Yes. Unless there's a better option that can win a general election. And there isn't.

[Scootaloo]

4. Well, it';s what we were told when Obama was receiving a "ratfucking" in 2008

Except in that case, the ratfuckers went home to the republicans after he still won the primary.

[BlueCaliDem]

5. Well, just saw a poll on Rachel Maddow (I believe) that shows Clinton and John Ellis equal.

It appears that making mountains out of molehills is working! Thanks to talking heads like Lawrence O'Donnell, Alex Wagner, and Chris Matthews, among many other so-called Liberals.

Good goin', guys! Wooohooooo! Another Bush in the White House!

[doxyluv13]

6. living in reality always makes us strong

To stay with your phraseology, Hillary has ratfucked herself, it that's what's happened and sticking our heads in the ground won't make it go away. I think, at this point, it's a minor blow to her candidacy, but I am worried it will get worse. What if there was sensitive classified material in those emails stored on her homebrew server? That could sink her.

[Old and In the Way]

8. cSorry, I meant Rodham.

So discuss m y other piints.
.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

19. I'm guessing Hillary was at least smart enuf to use @state.gov for classified communications. Hillary's a lot of things, but stupid isn't one of em.

[MBS]

20. Actually, she didn't use state.gov at all

That is one of the head-scratchers about this.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

23. That wud be astonishing if true; I know for a fact govt personal cant keep classified info on their personal computers or servers.

[MBS]

24. I just finished listening to State Dept spokeswoman

Marie Harf, who noted that HRC had neither a "classified" nor "unclassified" (apparently, and sensibly, there are two different systems) state.gov email .
See the PostTV video in this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/state-department-reviewing-whether-clinton-e-mail-violated-security-rules/2015/03/05/16d1547e-c378-11e4-9271-610273846239_story.html

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

25. Not sure what you're sayin, but I was talkin bout Hillary's private email & whether she used it to communicate classified info. If so, big trouble.

[leftofcool]

26. She is not stupid enough to do that.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

31. Yes left, that's what I was sayin. If Hillary is 1 thing, she's highly intelligent, so yes, Id be shocked if that happened. Highly doubtful.

[MBS]

27. I was just saying that,

according to the State Dept press secretary, HRC really had no state.gov account of any kind ,classified or unclassified.
The press secretary left unanswered the question about how classified information was communicated (in a way, the details are really perhaps not the public's business, provided it was protected) , but I agree completely with leftofcool that HRC would not be stupid enough to have used her private email account for transmitting such information.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

32. k gotcha - my point exactly. This all might be a tempest ina teapot as long as it doesnt involve classified info.

[Xipe Totec]

7. It's Thursday, not Friday. Can you at least try to spell her name right?

okaythanks.

[Old and In the Way]

10. Really, you didn't know who I was talking about?

Be honest here, you'd prefer a Reuplican to be POTUS. Then they can elect conservative candidates for SCOTUS Amirite?

[Xipe Totec]

11. No, I just prefer you spelt her name awright.

You have a right to dislike her. I have no quarrel with that.

But when you spell her name wrong, it makes you sound drunk. So it's hard to take your position seriously.

[Old and In the Way]

13. welll, that is probBly correct. I have had too much to drink.

That. Is life!

[Xipe Totec]

14. Cheers!

I'm not too far behind.

[BP2]

30. You make it sound if Hillary doesn't run, a Democrat can't win. Oh, ye of little faith. n/t

[Jamaal510]

12. It's only around 50%

No other Democrat can be elected because almost 50% of the population are votiing morons.

of the people who actually bother to vote (which would mean maybe 1/4 of the country votes GOP at the most). Roughly half of the entire country either won't vote or can't vote. I get the main idea of what you're saying, though. This news story about HC is pretty much BS and is irrelevant to the average person's daily life.

[still_one]

15. I would not judge All Democrats on the basis of comment from DU. The Democratic party has always

been an inclusive party

[MannyGoldstein]

16. I've only seen wolf@#$&ing, not rat@#$&ing.

You know, where FDR democrats want the wolves-in-sheeps-clothing Third-Way predators to go the @#$& away.

[demigoddess]

17. yes, you are right about "democrats"

it is all them and no one else.

[Major Hogwash]

18. If Republicans didn't hate Hillary as much as they do, she wouldn't be . . .

. . . such a lightning rod for criticism from their party.
Since they do, and she is, they would turn out in unprecedented record numbers to vote for their candidate in 2016.

[SunSeeker]

21. So we should only nominate someone the GOP doesn't hate?!

Last edited Fri Mar 6, 2015, 03:11 PM - Edit history (1)

That'll get us a great candidate.

[Cosmocat]

22. They reflexively shift their focus to the the strongest candidate

They spent 15 years vilifying her knowing she was the strongest democratic presidential candidate.

UNTIL, Barrack Obama emerged as the presumptive democratic nomiinee.

At that point ...

They LOVED them some Hillary, hell RICHARD SCAIFE, who was the very embodiment of the "right wing conspiracy" had his newspaper endorse her.

At that point, it was all hate Obama, all time, flag pins and whatever stupid ass shit they have been able to drum up for the last 7 years.

This is what people don't get it.

it isn't the person, it is just desperate and savage need to destroy democrats that drives it all.

The last 7 years have looked the same exact way they would have looked had it been Hillary, just change out sexism as the tool of convenience for race baiting.

I guess what I am saying is, while they will vilify her and try to destroy her, it isn't because she is Hillary.

[corkhead]

28. Right now she is not my first choice for President. If she becomes the nominee she will get my vote

but frankly, I am hoping for someone more populist to beat her in the primary.