What a stupid thing to do...

She lost so much because of her decision to do this, and you are correct story or not it's damaging. To say otherwise is denying reality.

* Disclaimer... Responses in 3 minutes or under in indicate clear "Shillaryness".

That gets many props from me. Seriously. Very proud to see that.

I know that likely means nothing but I felt I had to say it. Especially after our dust up the other day.

We have to tackle the party's issues head on. No matter who might be hurt or what may come from it. We're not Republicans. Trying to hide them or cover possible issues up doesn't help at all. In fact it just makes things worse for everybody.

If it's bunk, and it may well be, it will come out and we'll know the truth soon enough. Thanks again.

In general I'm pretty fair... Dust up or not.

This was a bad call on her part. I won't go as far to call it a crime but it certainly leaves that lane of attack open.

It could have been avoided with a bit more care. Or at least handled better.

She put everyone in the party and especially her supporters in a tough spot. It just sets us all up to fail and sets her supporter up for more ridicule from us. Tough spot indeed.

"Hello?"

"Hello. I'm from the Hillary Clinton For President campaign. Quick question: do you think Clinton's use of a private email server, possibly compromising national security secrets, shows a lack of good judgment?"

"Um...hello?"
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]

Think it was stupid, and there are lots of people I've talked to on the ground who aren't supporting her because of this... Whether it's an issue or not... And who knows in the GE if she is the nominee maybe they won't care?

But somehow I doubt it.

The Clinton hate is so strong some would rather slide down a "razor into lemon juice" than vote for her.

the most recent problems with he email, only came out yesterday,but again nothing in your post negates mine. It's a fact that her unfavorables are high. And it's just denial to think that the ongoing email story, isn't problematic.

Agschmid may support Clinton but he/she is smart enough to see the possible problems. Hell, Ray Charles could see the potential in this.

and NONE of this is going away. It's this and a thousand other things that could very well get Bernie the nomination.

...of the republican-originated/invented scandal for your own political purposes here.

I think that says more about the political cravenness of self-identified Democrats who spend time trying to convince us how much we should all be concerned about the latest news story about them, than it says anything about Hillary's integrity. In fact, you don't even bother to make the case - arguing (and hope, hope, hoping) instead that the self-serving 'perceptions' you're promoting here will imperil her candidacy.

One thing her detractors have yet to learn about Hillary, is that Americans aren't really as receptive of these Clinton 'scandals' as promoters expect them to be. Most Americans remember republicans' associations with the first Clinton scandal and their attempt to invalidate our votes through impeachment by exploiting a consensual affair.

Most Americans similarly associate these email eruptions with political exploitation, whether from republicans or anyone else looking to make political hay out of them. They have a way of drawing sensible Americans to Hillary's defense, rather than enticing them to hop aboard the scandalmongering bandwagon.

I've said repeatedly that I think Hillary is the prohibitive favorite and that I will vote for her in the general.


It's hard to have much respect for posters that so easily twist words and puts their own words into others mouths, as you so frequently do.

...or anything like that.

as negative. And your habit of sticking your words in the mouths of others, is disgraceful.

...good times.

This isn't sex, it's something entirely different. I hope they do...I have no wish for this to blow up in all our faces.

Is that the point?

I don't know how many times I have to say this: I believe Hillary will be the nominee. My comments have nothing to do with advancing him or hurting her. It's simply my analysis.

The RW has made an industry of it. It's disappointing to see it posted unironically on DU as a reason not to support her candidacy.

From the moment that "emailgate" first appeared, a year or so ago, I predicted that this would not go away. Yes, the Republicans have done their level best to exaggerate and compound the problems, and much of their Stuff is unfounded. But the fundamental problem - the decision to use a private server exclusively for all of her State Dept email - will always persist. Quite apart from the issues of email confidentiality and security (which are mostly overblown IMHO), and conflict-of-interest ethics and implied sense of "special rules-for-us" entitlement (both of which do have merit IMO), it reflects, above all, poor political/strategic judgment.. Was there no one among Sec. Clinton's army of political advisors and other staff to point out the (completely obvious) conflict-of-interest issues, the potential confidentiality issues, the ways in which such a system would raise all the old questions about squishy integrity, sense of entitlement, etc, the huge potential for Republicans to exploit all this for their political gain? No one who thought about the potential political consequences for someone with such clear presidential ambitions? Could not Sec. Clinton have seen these issues for herself, even without the guidance of staff? How could someone as smart, knowledgeable and politically and legally experienced as Sec. Clinton not see the political danger/stupidity of setting up her email system this way??

are a chimera.

Just like large chunks of his platform.

Your talking points are very fresh and well timed.

He's never faced the Republican attack machine. And he's temperamentally unsuited for it.

McCaskill mentioned his Soviet Flag?

She talked about a hammer and sickle in a general sense.

As far as I know, she didn't produce a photo of his Soviet Flag or mention it directly.

BTW, your inference that I'm producing "talking points" and them being "fresh and well times" are essentially as hominem.

Neither you nor any Sanders supporter has an answer to what Sanders can or will do once he's subjected to having his actual past thrown at him.

She lost to him. Remember that?

and an ability to take adversity gracefully, to Sanders is silly.

And Sanders supporters are the ones touting his "favorability" as if it would last.

How did it work out the last go round?

THe more we see of HIllary, the less the is liked, the less she is trusted. The more she slides in the polls, the nastier she gets, and the favorables plummet more. It was fun to watch in 2008. It's kind of sad this go round. But, I'll still enjoy it.

Should I put the word "yawn" in quotations like that or would you prefer it to be in asterisks to indicate that I am yawning in real life like this *yawn.*

will last.

That will not stop him.

I can just see him getting all agitated and angry having to deal with it. LOL

I am even more annoyed that the Republicans are delaying the investigation until March. If they think there is something there they should pursue it. They just want this issue to hang over the elections longer.

Someone needs to just say "put it up or shut up!"

I have absolutely no interest in defending another Clinton for 4 years.