Shattered: Hillary Clinton campaign biographer: Here’s where she went wrong

Kurmugeon · Apr 22, 2017

If the Hundreds of Millions of Dollars from illegal Foreign interests that came pouring into the Hillary campaign had come from British Petroleum Oil Interests, or Italian Fashion Designers, or Japoanese Whaling Corporations...

It might have been kinda "Cronnie Captitalists" status quo.

But it was Wahabists Muslim interests pushing for America to accept Hundreds of Thousands more "Syrian Refugees", who are mostly neither from Syria, nor Refugees...

...in numbers so large, as to completely dwarf both the LEGAL limits on Immigration, but also bigger than the numbers of Mexican, Honduran, El Salvadoran, and Guatimalan Illegals that Obama was already flooding the Nation with.

Hillary made an open, public, Campaign Promise to not only continue the Obama Administration vast importation of Muslims, but to increase the numbers 5X!

Hillary Clinton: U.S. should take 65,000 Syrian refugees - CBS News

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/where-hillary-clinton-stands-on-donald-trump-immigration-issue

Politifact: Hillary Clinton for 500% Increase in Syrian Refugees

Even the Left-leaning Politifact agrees, it is what Hillary promised!

This was being done, even as hundreds of Americans are being attacked and killed by Radical Muslims, both Foreign born, and those Native Born Muslims, who were converted to Radicals by contact with the Foreign Born Mulsims.

The POTUS is our Commander in Chief, the person who holds the responsibility to defend and protect American Citizens Lives more than any other person in our Government!

And the Lefties Wonder why Hillary lost?!

-
-

zimmer · Apr 22, 2017

_Sal said:
not the correct thread buddy and we will be modded

and your claim of

is the ONLY part of any of your posts in this thread that is completely honest and reflects a semblance of awareness

For full disclosure, the "I don't know..." section is below in its entirety:
I don't know, perhaps you find such sentiments fuzzy, warm and familial. I find such a mindset bordering on Mengele.

What do you call a life that come out from between a woman's legs if it is not a baby? I'm curious. Your post below is what has driven that question. I figured with your comment you've thought about it, and could furnish a clear, simple and coherent answer.

_Sal said:
your ignorance knows no bounds...you can't abort a "baby"

and why would you vote to save an aborted fetus....god many of you Trump people are terrifying in your simple emotionally generated beliefs

What is being "modded"? Did you typo and mean "mobbed"?

Kurmugeon · Apr 22, 2017

Here is a Saudi Prince claiming that he funded 20% of Hillary's Campaign.

Saudi Arabia Has Funded 20% Of Hillary's Presidential Campaign, Saudi Crown Prince Claims | Zero Hedge

In the Political Optics of the 2016 campaign, given the number of recent Muslim Terror Attacks with large numbers of American Citizens Dead or Disfigured...

It would have been far less destructive to the Hillary Campaign to have been caught taking large sums of money from British Petroleum, dispite the recent eviromental damage from the Gult BP Spill!

And then there was Huma...

-

Hawkeye10 · Apr 22, 2017

Kurmugeon said:
And Hillary spent the most money on any political campaign EVER, by a wide margine!... and lost!

The fact that all that money, particularly the hundreds of Millions coming from Foriegn Saudi Royal interests, is very reassuring to me!

The fact that Hillary's Foreign Muslim Money could not make the difference means that my bright, handsome, ambitious GrandDaughter might actually have the freedom to pursue the academic and science career and life she desires... because Amerca will not be under Democratic Party Imported Sharia Law!

I doubt that Hillary has tried to economize since her husband was Gov of AR, which makes these claims that she lost in part because she was unwilling to spend money really funny.

_Sal · Apr 22, 2017

zimmer said:
For full disclosure, the "I don't know..." section is below in its entirety:
I don't know, perhaps you find such sentiments fuzzy, warm and familial. I find such a mindset bordering on Mengele.

What do you call a life that come out from between a woman's legs if it is not a baby? I'm curious. Your post below is what has driven that question. I figured with your comment you've thought about it, and could furnish a clear, simple and coherent answer.

What is being "modded"? Did you typo and mean "mobbed"?

yeah that's what I meant :shock: :roll:

wow, you really are smart after all

zimmer · Apr 22, 2017

_Sal said:
yeah that's what I meant :shock: :roll:

wow, you really are smart after all

Some folks... are truly... amazing...LOL... now back to the issue which has defined Demokrat politics for almost 50-years.

You failed to answer my question. What do you call a living human which emerges from between a the legs of a woman? Is this not a baby?

From what I could understand from what you have written, is this is not a baby. So what is it? Being a Demokrat, you've obviously been given some talking points on this... so what are they? Or have you given a thought about this, and have an definition?

Puigb · Apr 22, 2017

Crovax said:
It's a nice narrative but the facts don't tell the same story. Trump got the same votes that McCain and Romney got the difference is the blacks and Latinos didn't vote for Hillary the same way the voted for Obama. They chose to stay home and I suspect it had a lot to do with Hillary's skin color since Hillary was promising to pretty much be a 3rd term of Obama and as a group they loved Obama and his policies.

I disagree. For instance had it been Bill Clinton instead of Hillary Clinton running, those blacks and hispanics voters would have come out for him in higher numbers than his wife.

Keep in mind that Hillary even did worse with white voters than Obama. She just was a bad candidate, period.

Puigb · Apr 22, 2017

tres borrachos said:
She ran one of the worst campaigns in the history of Presidential campaigns. Walter Mondale and George McGovern had better messaging than she did. She is a bad woman and her campaign was a reflection on that, and it's why someone as weak as Trump pulled off a win.

Why does it upset you so much that she ran a bad campaign? Most people in this country probably don't care anymore about her, so I'm not sure why you miss her so much.

I think Trump voters are so angry that she ran a bad campaign because they realize that Trump only won (barely) because Hillary was the alternative. That means they know that Trump's agenda is and has never been supported by the majority of Americans.

It also brings the strong possibility that Trump could end up being a one term president, provided the Democrats field a decent candidate in 2020 (and assuming he even runs again).

Puigb · Apr 22, 2017

lurchadams said:
It amazes me how conservatives are so obsessed with the Clintons. You won! You control all branches of government. Conservatives don't seem to be happy unless they have someone to vilify.

The conservative obsession with the Clinton's stems from the fact that Bill Clinton was a better president than pretty much any modern Republican president.

Crovax · Apr 23, 2017

Puigb said:
I disagree. For instance had it been Bill Clinton instead of Hillary Clinton running, those blacks and hispanics voters would have come out for him in higher numbers than his wife.

In 1992 maybe but not now democrats have spent the last 16 years talking about how whites have systemically rigged the game against minorities

Keep in mind that Hillary even did worse with white voters than Obama. She just was a bad candidate, period.

Romney won whites by 20%, Trump won whites by 21% and the white vote was down by 1% from 2012 to 2016. Not really any difference

Puigb · Apr 23, 2017

Crovax said:
In 1992 maybe but not now democrats have spent the last 16 years talking about how whites have systemically rigged the game against minorities

Romney won whites by 20%, Trump won whites by 21% and the white vote was down by 1% from 2012 to 2016. Not really any difference

LOL, so your argument is that minorities, which includes hispanics and Asians, are more racist against whites than blacks? Look, if you want to argue that Hillary's drop in support among blacks may have been race related, that's fine (though too simplistic), but to argue that hispanics and Asians, both whom have more racial resentment towards blacks than whites, preferred Obama over Hillary because he's black and she's white is delusional. The fact of the matter is, Hillary received a lower % of the vote among all races, including even whites. Both times in 2008 and 2012 more whites voted for Obama than Hillary in 2016. She was just a bad candidate, period. Her drop in support had very little to do with race, IMO, and more to do with her just not being likable. There's a reason why she lost to a junior senator in 2008, and some Reality T.V. star in 2016, and it's because people generally don't care for her.

Crovax · Apr 23, 2017

Puigb said:
LOL, so your argument is that minorities, which includes hispanics and Asians, are more racist against whites than blacks? Look, if you want to argue that Hillary's drop in support among blacks may have been race related, that's fine (though too simplistic), but to argue that hispanics and Asians, both whom have more racial resentment towards blacks than whites, preferred Obama over Hillary because he's black and she's white is delusional. The fact of the matter is, Hillary received a lower % of the vote among all races, including even whites. Both times in 2008 and 2012 more whites voted for Obama than Hillary in 2016. She was just a bad candidate, period. Her drop in support had very little to do with race, IMO, and more to do with her just not being likable. There's a reason why she lost to a junior senator in 2008, and some Reality T.V. star in 2016, and it's because people generally don't care for her.

Like I already pointed out the white vote was pretty much the same from 2012 to 2016. Hillary got a lower % among minorities because those who voted for Obama stayed home. Black turnout was down 7%, latino turnout down 8%, and asian turnout down 11%

So lets get the facts here, whites who voted for Obama also voted for Hillary but minorities who voted for Obama stayed home. Im not saying 100% its because of race but it sure looks that way.

Puigb · Apr 23, 2017

Crovax said:
Like I already pointed out the white vote was pretty much the same from 2012 to 2016. Hillary got a lower % among minorities because those who voted for Obama stayed home. Black turnout was down 7%, latino turnout down 8%, and asian turnout down 11%

So lets get the facts here, whites who voted for Obama also voted for Hillary but minorities who voted for Obama stayed home. Im not saying 100% its because of race but it sure looks that way.

Hillary received 37% of the white vote. Compare that to 43% of whites voting for Obama in 2008, and 39% voting for Obama in 2012.

Both whites and minorities voted in higher numbers for third party candidates in 2016 compared to 2008 and 2012. The facts don't back up your assertion, especially in particular with hispanics and Asians. And there's no way you'll convince me hispanics and Asians are more racist against whites than blacks. It's the other way around.

_Sal · Apr 23, 2017

zimmer said:
Some folks... are truly... amazing...LOL... now back to the issue which has defined Demokrat politics for almost 50-years.

You failed to answer my question. What do you call a living human which emerges from between a the legs of a woman? Is this not a baby?

I did not fail to answer, I was very clear. I am not getting into a discussion about abortion in this thread. If you want to discuss abortion there is a place for it...start a thread and I will respond to you there.

From what I could understand from what you have written, is this is not a baby. So what is it? Being a Demokrat, you've obviously been given some talking points on this... so what are they? Or have you given a thought about this, and have an definition?

I am not even close to being a Democrat I am far more left than that. But that is irrelevant too.

Abortion goes into another section, the fact that you have not yet been modded is your luck.

zimmer · Apr 23, 2017

_Sal said:
I did not fail to answer, I was very clear. I am not getting into a discussion about abortion in this thread. If you want to discuss abortion there is a place for it...start a thread and I will respond to you there.

I am not even close to being a Democrat I am far more left than that. But that is irrelevant too.

Abortion goes into another section, the fact that you have not yet been modded is your luck.

You brought up the fact a life coming from between a women's legs is not a life... and you can answer the question, but by not answering the question... it's obvious you have nothing that resembles a coherent answer. Or, you realize how ridiculous your statement is, and you don;t want to admit how wrong you were... and how wrong and vile Obama and Demokrats are.

_Sal · Apr 23, 2017

zimmer said:
You brought up the fact a life coming from between a women's legs is not a life... and you can answer the question, but by not answering the question... it's obvious you have nothing that resembles a coherent answer. Or, you realize how ridiculous your statement is, and you don;t want to admit how wrong you were... and how wrong and vile Obama and Demokrats are.

you need to work on phraseology it is disgusting and displays much about your character and belief system

also your assumptions about my statements are not my problem

zimmer · Apr 24, 2017

_Sal said:
you need to work on phraseology it is disgusting and displays much about your character and belief system

also your assumptions about my statements are not my problem

Nice attempt at diversion. My word selection is excellent... thank you. I understand you don;t like it, because you can't answer the question, because it makes you look awful, but I didn't make the statements about babies, not being babies... you did.

Again... You made a statement about about babies not being babies because you desired them not to be babies... so my question is... if a live human emerges from between the legs of a woman, if it is not a baby, what is it?*

My character is fine thanks

I sleep well every night.

My belief system is one of valuing life. Yours not so. You seem to believe an attempted abortion, which results in a baby is not a baby. Therefore should be left to die because it's an unexpected and unwanted baby. We'll call the The Obama Infant Kare Act. Live and let die. That is a suspect, cold hearted and callous belief system. Or are you trying to tell me it is one of fuzzy warmth, nurturing and caring?

*It seems this line bothers you. I hope I'm not shaking your world view, but children aren't really dropped of by storks.

_Sal · Apr 24, 2017

zimmer said:
Nice attempt at diversion. My word selection is excellent... thank you. I understand you don;t like it, because you can't answer the question, because it makes you look awful, but I didn't make the statements about babies, not being babies... you did.

Again... You made a statement about about babies not being babies because you desired them not to be babies... so my question is... if a live human emerges from between the legs of a woman, if it is not a baby, what is it?*

My character is fine thanks I sleep well every night.

My belief system is one of valuing life. Yours not so. You seem to believe an attempted abortion, which results in a baby is not a baby. Therefore should be left to die because it's an unexpected and unwanted baby. We'll call the The Obama Infant Kare Act. Live and let die. That is a suspect, cold hearted and callous belief system. Or are you trying to tell me it is one of fuzzy warmth, nurturing and caring?

*It seems this line bothers you. I hope I'm not shaking your world view, but children aren't really dropped of by storks.

nothing bothers me except your comprehension skills and your emotional masturbation spewing all over the thread

zimmer · Apr 24, 2017

_Sal said:
nothing bothers me except your comprehension skills and your emotional masturbation spewing all over the thread

It's a nice attempt to deflect, but I'm not so easily led astray. Though not perfect, my comprehension and writings skills are quite exceptional, thank you.

So...

Let's knock of the BS, and go back to your first post in an attempt to rebut my claims:

_Sal said:
your ignorance knows no bounds...you can't abort a "baby"

and why would you vote to save an aborted fetus....god many of you Trump people are terrifying in your simple emotionally generated beliefs

You offer contradictory statements:

1. You claim you cannot abort a baby. Which indicates you believe this is a life.

2. You claim a baby (aborted fetus) that arrives to the universe as a living being, a live human life, an individual... instead of a dead one, should not be saved. Why?

When a women has a human life emerge from between her legs, what do you call it? Even if it was an attempted abortion? Is this not a "baby". A living human life? If not, what do Demokrats call this human life?

OK. You call it an "aborted fetus". But it's a life when emerges as a life from between her legs. You would like to kill this life? Why would you not do everything to help this life?

These are not emotional based statement or questions. These are legal and moral questions.

For me, that living human is a life. Having defied the odds, and emerged as a life, a living human being, are you suggesting intent now trumps this individuals "rights" to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

Please explain.

If you claim this life has no right to live, no effort should be made to save this innocent life, am I not correct in my accusation of such people being heartless, or having a heart of coal? If not... why not?

_Sal · Apr 24, 2017

zimmer said:
It's a nice attempt to deflect, but I'm not so easily led astray. Though not perfect, my comprehension and writings skills are quite exceptional, thank you.

So...

Let's knock of the BS, and go back to your first post in an attempt to rebut my claims:

You offer contradictory statements:

1. You claim you cannot abort a baby. Which indicates you believe this is a life.

2. You claim a baby (aborted fetus) that arrives to the universe as a living being, a live human life, an individual... instead of a dead one, should not be saved. Why?

When a women has a human life emerge from between her legs, what do you call it? Even if it was an attempted abortion? Is this not a "baby". A living human life? If not, what do Demokrats call this human life?

OK. You call it an "aborted fetus". But it's a life when emerges as a life from between her legs. You would like to kill this life? Why would you not do everything to help this life?

These are not emotional based statement or questions. These are legal and moral questions.

For me, that living human is a life. Having defied the odds, and emerged as a life, a living human being, are you suggesting intent now trumps this individuals "rights" to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

Please explain.

If you claim this life has no right to live, no effort should be made to save this innocent life, am I not correct in my accusation of such people being heartless, or having a heart of coal? If not... why not?

I am kind of shocked actually, that you have not yet been modded for beginning a whole anti-abortion thread in the General Politics forum...however dude, I am not being lured in AND have told you repeatedly but apparently you are lacking in comprehension skills...you want to discuss abortion...take it to that section and start a thread

this is my last reply to you zimmer in this thread

take it to the proper place

:2wave:

Shattered: Hillary Clinton campaign biographer: Here’s where she went wrong

Kurmugeon

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant

Kurmugeon

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man

_Sal

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant

Puigb

Puigb

Puigb

Crovax

Puigb

Crovax

Puigb

_Sal

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant

_Sal

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant

_Sal

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant

_Sal