Koyaanisqatsi
Veteran Member
It's just non-stop sophistry.
I know. I really wish you'd stop.
Cute, but unlike you, I have actually demonstrated your sophistry. It stands unaddressed.
It's just non-stop sophistry.
I know. I really wish you'd stop.
Favourability against Trump doesn't mean someone is not hated. Party loyalty within the Democrats to Hillary doesn't meant he general public doesn't hate her either.
Favourability against Trump doesn't mean someone is not hated. Party loyalty within the Democrats to Hillary doesn't meant he general public doesn't hate her either.
Favourability against Trump doesn't mean someone is not hated. Party loyalty within the Democrats to Hillary doesn't meant he general public doesn't hate her either.
What else doesn't mean something else?
Favourability against Trump doesn't mean someone is not hated. Party loyalty within the Democrats to Hillary doesn't meant he general public doesn't hate her either.
It's perhaps better to say that people are uninspired by her or just don't care about her.
Remember that most of her election events had crowds in the hundreds
while Trump was drawing in thousands
Clinton's favorable rating among Democrats fell 11 points to 76% just after the election; it has not improved significantly in the ensuing months, and currently stands at 77%..
Favourability against Trump doesn't mean someone is not hated. Party loyalty within the Democrats to Hillary doesn't meant he general public doesn't hate her either.
What else doesn't mean something else?
Speak another falsehood and I can tell you.
Of racists who had never been allowed out of their doublewide gimp-cages and encouraged to publicly get their hate on about niggers and kykes and cunts etc.,etc., etc.
Once again, your own source proves that's false. 77% evidently ARE inspired by her and care about her.
And, you know, the fact that she won would tend to argue against crowds being an issue.
Clinton's favorable rating among Democrats fell 11 points to 76% just after the election; it has not improved significantly in the ensuing months, and currently stands at 77%..
Source?
So... a third of registered voters are democrats and Hillary has support from 77% of them
In Pew Research Center surveys conducted in 2017, 37% of registered voters identified as independents, 33% as Democrats and 26% as Republicans. When the partisan leanings of independents are taken into account, 50% either identify as Democrats or lean Democratic; 42% identify as Republicans or lean Republican.
Among independents, the drop [for Trump approval] has been sharper, from 47% approval last month to 31% now.
So, 77% of 33% that identify as Dems and 1/3 of 37% of Independents are pro-Hillary and together Dems and Dem-leaning Indies make up 50% of the total registered voters.
There are some 200,000,000 total registered voters, so if we assume for the sake of argument that every registered voter miraculously voted, how many votes (based on final percentages) would Hillary get today vs. Trump?
Of racists who had never been allowed out of their doublewide gimp-cages and encouraged to publicly get their hate on about niggers and kykes and cunts etc.,etc., etc.
Who cares?
They voted in the places which mattered.
Look at it, Koy:
View attachment 18804
How could ANY Dem candidate have overcome latent racism?
Or prepare for the devastating effect of the fucking FBI dropping a political atomic bomb two weeks before the election; a bomb that had been carefully and conclusively dismantled by Hillary's team to the point where had the election been held before Comey dropped it, all indications were that Clinton would have easily beat Trump.
You can't just hand wave away the actual facts.
Donald Trump only got elected on his policies of populism and anti-globalism and nothing more.Most Americans recognized that Trump was a blowhard, an adulterer and a narcissist long before election day. That wasn't the problem. The problem what that most Americans settled for voting on one of the two most deplorable scumbags in the history of US elections. IMO, the least deplorable scumbag won but that doesn't mean they aren't still a deplorable scumbag....or continue to be one. Trump's attack of the media after the attempted bombings is just one example.
Hillary would have been an effective globalist leader and nothing more. She would have done exactly what the globalist corporate cabal wanted from her and she would have probably even fixed her hair to look pretty doing it. She might have skimmed some more money off her foundation but other than that would have basically stayed out of trouble.
But that just isn't what the people wanted this time around. It was a simple as that.
I've read through this thread now and I still haven't heard any solid argument for why Hillary is so bad.
What part of "thirty years of accumulated rumors, lies, innuendo, phony investigations and republican fomentation of hatred" don't you understand?
She is likely the very worst person on the entire north american continent to nominate for any national position.
Ah. So all Republicans have to do is spread rumors, lies, innuendos, phony investigations and hatred against any Democratic nominee and that person is eliminated from contention. Just like they did agains, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Pelosi, Reid and every other person the Democrats nominate.
It's the thirty years part that you don't seem to understand. Give your opponent that much advance notice, and they'll generally be able to squash you, even with a weaker force. Right now I believe that if one could force a referendum on Trump vs either Gore, Kerry, Pelosi, Reid or virtually any other Dem, Trump would go down in flames. But vs Hillary? Probably not.
Look at it, Koy:
View attachment 18804
I've read through this thread now and I still haven't heard any solid argument for why Hillary is so bad.
What part of "thirty years of accumulated rumors, lies, innuendo, phony investigations and republican fomentation of hatred" don't you understand?
She is likely the very worst person on the entire north american continent to nominate for any national position.