2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHelp me with what I heard
Did Clinton just say "the truth and that's what you will get from now till I am elected President"
So after she is elected she is going to lie to us again? I mean that is what she said so fair to quote it right?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Nyan
(1,192 posts)what the shit show is this?
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)"I'm having roast beef for dinner" doesn't say anything about what I'm having for lunch tomorrow either.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)cheapdate
(3,811 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)"I am going to exercise every day until I lose 10 pounds" is closer.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)no claim whatsoever about what happens after 10 pounds, nor does it even imply what might happen. They might keep exercising and they might not.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)She said she would tell the truth until she becomes President (paraphrased). Also setting an end date.
I am sure that she will sometimes tell the truth after becoming President just as someone would also exercise on occasion after losing those 10 pounds.
It was just a minor misstatement. Not a big deal. You must know that I don't take this seriously.
DVRacer
(707 posts)Was the idea of "Bernie is going to raise taxes" with no context that things can be clipped and look like something else rather than what it really is.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)Hillary Clinton, neoliberal, expansionist, war-horse that she is, might be our only chance to keep the White House out of Republican hands come November. I would like that.
'She's an untrustworthy liar' is not helpful.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Hillary is a terrible candidate. Simply covering up that fact does not solve it.
Polls show Bernie does better in head to head match ups. He also does not have the baggage Hillary does.
His net approval rating is about +26 and hers is -27 (depending on what poll you look at). Running someone with a huge net negative instead of someone with a huge net positive is crazy.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)He might not win. I'd rather have Hillary over any Republican, and it's not even close.
Whether any of us likes it or not, it might be HRC in the general.
I'm not sure if you've heard the Donald's opinion of the EPA and environmental protection. It's ugly.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)to have a nominee that I want to vote for.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)Draw contrasts. Leave the mud-slinging to Charles and David Koch. Don't do their work for them.
It's an imperfect world, else I'd be voting for Captain Paul Watson of the Sea Shepherd.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Goldman Sacs truth or City Bank... or...???
neverforget
(9,437 posts)Help me with what I heard
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511067468
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Just eff off troll
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jan 25, 2016, 11:50 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not hide worthy at all.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Why is there an alert of this post?
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: "Just eff off troll" Is that the alert? Really? What's the reason this should be hidden other than being a newbie?
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: An amusing interpretation.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I think it's a little bit early to be throwing the label "troll" around. The folks responding to the thread are doing fine addressing this issue. If this low post-count poster is a troll, MIRT will get him/her soon enough.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)I'm confused. Not even one single person voted to hide this, and I agree with them.
DVRacer
(707 posts)I'm ok with it please debate me on my context not my post count
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)And they will most likely get their jury privileges suspended.
George II
(67,782 posts)DVRacer
(707 posts)BainsBane
(53,072 posts)to foment poutrage among her detractors.
What she said is completely true: there are millions of dollars spent against here spreading crap, spreading lies and that she can't do anything about that. She is going to keep going, not give up, and tell the truth. Now, some people aren't interested in any of that. They will declare everything she says a lie because she said it, and because they don't actually care about the truth, particularly in this age where too many decide truth not based on evidence but in relation to their own egos.
She is just going to keep getting up every day and putting one foot in front of the other and fight for the issues she cares about. That is what she has always done, and that is why people like you hate her so much. She doesn't let Karl Rove, Trey Gowdy, the Tea Party, half-wits or ratfuckers deter her. She marches on, and that is precisely why she is so disliked by those desperate to hold on to their own grip on power and/or privilege.
You see, the most formidable thing about Clinton is her perseverance. She has proven herself stronger than all the hate and misogyny directed against her. She is better, smarter, and more accomplished than any of her detractors. They hate because that is who they are. She works to try to make America a better place because that is who she is.
MauriceLawrence96
(48 posts)we gave George W. Bush such a hard time for getting caught in lie after lie - and rightfully so.
Then why are so many democrats turning a blind eye to Hillary Clinton's many documented lies? Aren't we supposed to be better?