RE: ???? Is No one going to mention the nose dive clinton took at ground zero?
September 13, 2016 at 11:26 am
(This post was last modified: September 13, 2016 at 11:28 am by Drich.)
(September 13, 2016 at 10:52 am)ReptilianPeon Wrote: Dirch, I have been one of Hilary's harshest critics and even I have to admit that she currently has no health problems that would exclude her from being president (this may change obviously). She lied about her health, sure, and that is what I was bemoaning. But here's the thing: All of these nonsensical right wing attacks make legitimate criticism of Hilary increasingly hard. People now think everything is a silly GOP attack and it's disheartening.
There's plenty of real scandals you can attack Hilary on, such as:
1. Putting a Clinton Foundation donor on an advisory board for tactical nuclear weapons.
2. All of the other pay to play revelations.
3. Not knowing what the different classification marks on e-mails meant.
4. Siphoning top secret government information to an unguarded homebrew server
5. Accepting money from criminals like al-Saud.
6. Selling weapons to South Sudan, a country known to use child soldiers.
7. Her support of a no-fly-zone over Syria, the same crazy thing people like Chris Christie proposed.
The list goes on and on. Please get informed on the real scandals the cable news hesitates to talk about. Coughing and falling alone, even lying, isn't enough to exclude. I think it could be fun to see Hilary elected simply so I can say to people "Ha! I told you so!"
Cough*douche
Yes your list is impressive, and yes it does indeed 'address real issues.'
Now, I have a simple question..
Do you think the whole voting populace looks to substantive topical or timely issues to determine a candidate's worthiness to hold the office of POTUS?
-Or-
Can the electoral process be more accurately compared to a popularity contest? Popularity based on what if not on some surface value attribute that a voter happens to identify with or simply like?
Now what happens when that popular person's physical or mental well being is called into question? does that identfiable attribute remain or is it dimished in anyway? If so is does it change the want to vote for this person?
Take another look at your list.
Now ask yourself honestly, has it made a dent in the hardcore never trump-eters? has it put any of them on their heels? or do they just buckle down and hang on to some 'faith' that their canidate is better than trump?
Now take a look at how hard some of these hillary supports are defending her health.
If this is a non issue ask yourself why would anyone invest an effort in her defense? If this is pneumonia like they said then the only thing need be said is wait two weeks and see for yourself. Or better yet if it was a matter of hydration why not just say give her water, and have her dance a jig after she recovers...
Like it or not this medical issue stabs at the popularity contest voters, and while you can indeed win people over with the "issues" a large base will never be swayed by your arguments. So to say there is only one way to reach out to people or to "do your part" is elitest B/S.
There are blind morons who will only vote along political party lines, then the next largest group are the prom king voters, then the smallest group votes issues. How can I say this? Because the GOP is still kicking and the tea party is all but gone. Because the tea party could not formally topple the GOP solely on the issues, the country nominated trump based on popularity and feeling.
You might want to trivialize popularity and feeling, but in truth the next president will be elected based on a general consensus of popularity and how the country 'feels' about that person. So unless you can be flexible enough to debate the issues to those who need to debate issues but also talk against popularity and feelings, you will only be speaking to the smallest group of voters.