• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

The Audacity of Hopelessness

I don't think it's that simple. For example, she wins if Ted Cruz is the Pub nominee in what would have been a more normal red/blue map. But Trump broadened the map from the beginning with his potential appeal to the Rust Belt states, a few of which he succeeded in flipping. His populist message in what was a change year contributed to his winning. So did his not walking and talking like a normal politician in a change year. And things like her email scandal, Russian hacking, ACA rate increases, Comey, PC and transgender issues probably all played small parts as well. And Clinton and her surrogates are blaming some of these external things, particularly Comey and the Russians, for her losing and not taking much of any responsibility themselves. But first and foremost she was a shite candidate, she bungled the emails issue from the beginning, and their strategy down the stretch was tone deaf and poor. Brooklyn merits a lot more blame than they and most Dem party members are currently assigning.

Definitely. But I don't think posters here are the ones who aren't blaming Hillary, her team, and the DNC.

It was such a narrow margin that maybe she could have won without Comey and the Russians, but that doesn't mean all the rest isn't true.
 
There is a unique political segment in Europe that BSF would fit right in - Socially and fiscally liberal, trade protectionist, anti-immigration, very isolationist, very pro-Israel and untrusting of Islamic countries. I had a few conversations with people from England and France who fit that exact profile, and they believe all of the torture reports coming from Allepo about Assads regime is propoganda from ISIS and Al-Qeada

I think I'm pretty balanced when it comes to Israel. I've been very critical of Israel at times. Definitely not pro-Israel. And I'm not pro-Assad, but the only truly pro-western faction in Syria is the YPG. The Assad regime is awful, but it's way better than some of the Islamists we have been supporting. If the Russians hadn't intervened Assad would have fallen, perhaps in a matter of weeks. If that had happened the bloodbath would be even more horrific. Russia has been kicking jihadi ass all over Syria- that's a good thing. The bad thing is a lot of civilians have also been killed. Meanwhile, the US set aside $500 million to train a "moderate" force. They spent over $200 million of it training a handful of men and in their first engagement they were routed/taken hostage by the Nusra Front and had to call in US air support. It was a bit like Obama's Bay of Pigs, a complete fiasco, but rarely gets mentioned. It's all well and good to say you want Assad gone, but think about who in Syria will replace him and what will happen. We have special forces embedded with the Kurds/YPG, that's the right thing to do, but we've also supported jihadis. The Islamists we've supported will turn the US/Saudi supplied weapons on us first chance they get. It makes more sense to me to cooperate with the Russians and Kurds to try and get as pro-western as possible figurehead to replace Assad. The Russians have the most influence over Assad. I think he would give up power once he can proclaim the war over and the SAA was victorious. But I am skeptical of MSM reports regarding Syria. They've done a terrible job informing the public and much of it is extremely biased. McCain and Obama are both terrible on Syria. But Obama is better than McCain/Graham. But he's not good.
 
Last edited:
Definitely. But I don't think posters here are the ones who aren't blaming Hillary, her team, and the DNC.

It was such a narrow margin that maybe she could have won without Comey and the Russians, but that doesn't mean all the rest isn't true.

Remind me what you are referring to here. What actions did the Russians undertake that is worthy of this passing reference? Please be specific.
 
Remind me what you are referring to here. What actions did the Russians undertake that is worthy of this passing reference? Please be specific.

He's referring to the emails that showed how the DNC/Hillary campaign tried to rig the election. He'd prefer the American public not be informed about just how deceitful and dirty Hillary is.
 
Remind me what you are referring to here. What actions did the Russians undertake that is worthy of this passing reference? Please be specific.

I'm guessing that he's referring to Russian hackers hacking the DNC and providing Wikileaks with the smoke that it doesn't appear signaled a fire when it came to Clinton and Podesta emails. Your boy Comey and the FBI investigated Clinton's emails and didn't find anything illegal, so it was an effective smokescreen. What the DNC did wasn't illegal, even if it was unethical and undemocratic (the RNC was guilty of the same thing, even more explicitly if we're being honest, until the bitter end), so it was an effective smokescreen.

He's referring to the emails that showed how the DNC/Hillary campaign tried to rig the election. He'd prefer the American public not be informed about just how deceitful and dirty Hillary is.

The DNC and the Clinton campaign did not try to rig the election, though they did influence the course and outcome of the primary.

You can make your point without being dishonest. In fact, a handful of us (you, me, mdmh and maybe birdman...any others?) were making this point about how the DNC and Clinton were acting in the primaries even before the hack and release of emails. It's not like the left was lockstep with Clinton the entire time. There were, are, and continue to be a lot of anti-establishment voices within the party.
 
Last edited:
He's referring to the emails that showed how the DNC/Hillary campaign tried to rig the election. He'd prefer the American public not be informed about just how deceitful and dirty Hillary is.

It is an inconvenient truth to be sure.
 
It is an inconvenient truth to be sure.

Absolutely nothing intentionally biased about publicly releasing hacked email correspondence from only one campaign in the race. Remind me again why the American public had the right to see those emails? Does the American public have the right to see your emails? What about the mayor of your town - do you have the right to march up to their office and demand to see their emails? You know what, I demand to see all of the email correspondence from the RNC and between Trump and Conway. That's how this works, right? I'm fairly certain we've have multiple successful Presidental elections in the internet age where we didn't see the hacked email correspondence from one party. How exactly did that work?
 
Last edited:
Absolutely nothing intentionally biased about publicly releasing hacked email correspondence from only one campaign in the race. Remind me again why the American public had the right to see those emails? Does the American public have the right to see your emails? What about the mayor of your town - do you have the right to march up to their office and demand to see their emails? You know what, I demand to see all of the email correspondence from the RNC and between Trump and Conway. That's how this works, right? I'm fairly certain we've have multiple successful Presidental elections in the internet age where we didn't see the hacked email correspondence from one party. How exactly did that work?

I am sorry we found out what your party was trying to do behind the scenes. Life's just not fair.
 
I am sorry we found out what your party was trying to do behind the scenes. Life's just not fair.
and everyone can tell how interested you are in finding out what your own party is doing behind the scenes. You know who else was coincidentally uniterested in our election being "fair"?
 
and everyone can tell how interested you are in finding out what your own party is doing behind the scenes. You know who else was coincidentally uniterested in our election being "fair"?

The public had a right to know about the crookedness and deceit she tried to keep hidden. And Assange says it was not the Russian government that was behind it.
 
No. The public doesn't have the "right" to know that. If we had the right to know it, we would know it about every political candidate, and not just the one you happen to hate.
 
Should the press not report on something that's in the public interest if they don't have something similar to report on the other side? And let's be real, the MSM was BRUTAL to Trump. Was it a coincidence that the grab her in the pussy tape was released at the same time as the first Wikileaks dump? What do you think the press reported on? It was wall to wall coverage of Trump "scandals" for months. Hillary got more than enough favorable press.
 
Remind me how concerned you were about seeing Trump's emails, since you have a "right" to see them. Feel free to quote any of your past posts calling for equal transparency.
 
No. The public doesn't have the "right" to know that. If we had the right to know it, we would know it about every political candidate, and not just the one you happen to hate.

Did the public have a right to know about Trump advising Billy Bush you had to grab 'em by the pussy?
 
Did the public have a right to know about Trump advising Billy Bush you had to grab 'em by the pussy?
I was unaware that Trump had said that in private, recorded it himself, and had the recording stolen from him.
 
In addition, I was unaware that Trumps political rival had called for an enemy Foreign power to steal that audio from him in order to influence the election.
 
I was unaware that Trump had said that in private, recorded it himself, and had the recording stolen from him.

What about Kurt Eichenwald getting a hold of Trump's medical records and reporting on them- in the public interest? What about the efforts to raise money and get outtakes from The Apprentice released, where it was believed Trump might have used the n word- would you have supported that? Whoever had hoped to leak it did not own the footage.
 
Back
Top