T Nation

More Lies From Hillary


#1

Many of you have already read about Hillary's interview on CNN. You are also aware that in that interview she lied about never having received a subpoena. This is the first major interview that she has given and she could not get through it without lying.

I maintain that she is the worst possible candidate that the democrats have fielded (if she wins the nomination) since Michael Dukakis (1988).

http://www.examiner.com/article/hillary-clinton-s-subpoena-problem


#2

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Many of you have already read about Hillary’s interview on CNN. You are also aware that in that interview she lied about never having received a subpoena. This is the first major interview that she has given and she could not get through it without lying.

I maintain that she is the worst possible candidate that the democrats have fielded (if she wins the nomination) since Michael Dukakis (1988).

http://www.examiner.com/article/hillary-clinton-s-subpoena-problem

[/quote]

She comes off as a bitch. So I really want her to win the nomination. She’s our best chance to wrestle the Executive branch out of democrat hands.


#3

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Many of you have already read about Hillary’s interview on CNN. You are also aware that in that interview she lied about never having received a subpoena. This is the first major interview that she has given and she could not get through it without lying.

I maintain that she is the worst possible candidate that the democrats have fielded (if she wins the nomination) since Michael Dukakis (1988).

http://www.examiner.com/article/hillary-clinton-s-subpoena-problem

[/quote]

She comes off as a bitch. So I really want her to win the nomination. She’s our best chance to wrestle the Executive branch out of democrat hands. [/quote]

As much as I agree with your first sentence. if Bernie Saunders somehow pulled off the nomination he would lose by landslide proportions.


#4

You guys know how to tell if a politician is lying? The tell is when their lips are moving.


#5

I actually have some dyed-in-the-wool Democratic friends who now say they believe she’s unelectable.


#6

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
I actually have some dyed-in-the-wool Democratic friends who now say they believe she’s unelectable.[/quote]

I hope that she neither gains the nomination; and if she does, she doesn’t win the Presidency.

With that said…“The Clinton Machine” should never, EVER be underestimated.

Mufasa


#7

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
You guys know how to tell if a politician is lying? The tell is when their lips are moving.[/quote]

At a townhall meeting, I once told a politician that when he wasn’t busy kissing babies, he was taking their candy from them.


#8

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
You guys know how to tell if a politician is lying? The tell is when their lips are moving.[/quote]

At a townhall meeting, I once told a politician that when he wasn’t busy kissing babies, he was taking their candy from them. [/quote]

Is what followed worth re-telling? If so, I’d love to hear it … that’s great!


#9

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
I actually have some dyed-in-the-wool Democratic friends who now say they believe she’s unelectable.[/quote]

The die hard Hillary Clinton supporters believe that she will win mainly because she is a woman. But, as I pointed out in a previous post women as a group have not voted for the republican candidate since 1988 when they found George H.W. Bush a more attractive candidate than Michael Dukakis.

http://cawp.rutgers.edu/fast_facts/voters/documents/GGPresVote.pdf


#10

[quote]polo77j wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
You guys know how to tell if a politician is lying? The tell is when their lips are moving.[/quote]

At a townhall meeting, I once told a politician that when he wasn’t busy kissing babies, he was taking their candy from them. [/quote]

Is what followed worth re-telling? If so, I’d love to hear it … that’s great![/quote]

Nothing overly shocking, I have no problem raising some hell and saying what people want to say but are afraid to.

After the applause subsided, this panel of professional liars concluded that my personal opinions should be kept to myself.

But my 2 minutes allotted to me were not up. I questioned how the cost of the stupid high speed train went from a voter approved cost of $34 billion to a stumbling $98 billion. As the audience affirmed my question, I was told to sit down, and to stop wasting time. The crowd got pissed that this panel of shmucks talked to me in that manner, taxpayer shouting ensued. That’s about it.


#11

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
I actually have some dyed-in-the-wool Democratic friends who now say they believe she’s unelectable.[/quote]

I hope that she neither gains the nomination; and if she does, she doesn’t win the Presidency.

With that said…“The Clinton Machine” should never, EVER be underestimated.

Mufasa[/quote]

That’s generally true in war as well as politics. Never underestimate your opponent. Go at it with passion and a well thought out battle plan. I doubt whomever the republican nominee is that they will underestimate the Clinton machine. Although I will say if that machine was so good it would not have lost to Obama in 08’.

One more point, I feel that “the machine”, in the case of Hillary Clinton, is better than the candidate. And having a great candidate is far more important than whatever machine is driving the candidate.


#12

Shouldn’t her first name be spelled: HiLiary ?


#13

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
I actually have some dyed-in-the-wool Democratic friends who now say they believe she’s unelectable.[/quote]

The die hard Hillary Clinton supporters believe that she will win mainly because she is a woman. But, as I pointed out in a previous post women as a group have not voted for the republican candidate since 1988 when they found George H.W. Bush a more attractive candidate than Michael Dukakis.

http://cawp.rutgers.edu/fast_facts/voters/documents/GGPresVote.pdf
[/quote]

Well W. was already an unpopular president in the 2004 election, but Kerry was so bad that W won more convincingly than in 2000. So I think likability plays a huge role in presidential elections specifically.
I mean, obama literally came out of no where and landslid-ed it in 2008. Though I hate the son of a bitch, he came off as likable to most. He spoke well and people liked him which allowed people to believe the impossible.
I really think Hillary the bitch is just plain unlikable. She just rubs people the wrong way, she always had.
When the rest of America comes out of their ‘Dancing with the Stars’ coma and start paying attention to the presidential race, that’s going to bite her in the ass. It does not seem like she has any real competition in the Democratic party. The Republicans have it relatively easy in this election cycle. The candidate doesn’t even have to be that good, just likable. Surely out of the 100 or so candidates running, one of them has to be a personable fellow. So long as it’s not Huckabee, Bush or Trump the republicans have a decent shot at the presidency.


#14

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
I actually have some dyed-in-the-wool Democratic friends who now say they believe she’s unelectable.[/quote]

I hope that she neither gains the nomination; and if she does, she doesn’t win the Presidency.

With that said…“The Clinton Machine” should never, EVER be underestimated.

Mufasa[/quote]

That’s generally true in war as well as politics. Never underestimate your opponent. Go at it with passion and a well thought out battle plan. I doubt whomever the republican nominee is that they will underestimate the Clinton machine. Although I will say if that machine was so good it would not have lost to Obama in 08’.

One more point, I feel that “the machine”, in the case of Hillary Clinton, is better than the candidate. And having a great candidate is far more important than whatever machine is driving the candidate.

[/quote]

Yeah, if Bill were running I’d say the Clinton machine is an imposing specter. But Bill was an expert politician, Hillary not so much. She’s a smart lady and I give her credit for that, but she’s no where near the politician that Bill was. Speaking strictly in terms of political prowess, there hasn’t been a better pure politician since Kennedy. I’d say Reagan was a close second, but Bill is a political machine. That is of course putting politics aside and looking at talent alone. Personally, I didn’t care for Bill’s stances but he was a hell of a politician.


#15

I would also add this, Pat…

Bill LOVES Politics, and specifically the Presidency.

It was in his blood from time as a young boy he shook hands with President Kennedy. Where other people left the Office with great relief…Bill C has stated (and I’m paraphrasing) that he truly missed being President.

Also, Pat…what is it that you don’t like about Jeb? (He seems level headed; appears well versed on most topics…and seems likable…)

Is it the name? The “Rhino” label? Other?

Mufasa


#16

[quote]pat wrote:

Yeah, if Bill were running I’d say the Clinton machine is an imposing specter. But Bill was an expert politician, Hillary not so much. She’s a smart lady and I give her credit for that, but she’s no where near the politician that Bill was. Speaking strictly in terms of political prowess, there hasn’t been a better pure politician since Kennedy. I’d say Reagan was a close second, but Bill is a political machine. That is of course putting politics aside and looking at talent alone. Personally, I didn’t care for Bill’s stances but he was a hell of a politician. [/quote]

I would put your friend and mine, barry H obummer ahead of slick willy. Atleast willy was a governor and could run on things accomplished. Obummer was some no name “community organizer” who managed to get to the white house. That takes some serious political skill.

With that said, politicians are absolute scum of the earth. I put them somewhere between cock roaches and the white stuff you get in the corner of your mouth when you’re real thirsty (sirus the virus quote)

These people are not leaders, not the best and brightest, and their only real skill is lying and deception in a likable manner.


#17

“Hey…can you hook a Brother up with that Monroe chick?”


#18

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Yeah, if Bill were running I’d say the Clinton machine is an imposing specter. But Bill was an expert politician, Hillary not so much. She’s a smart lady and I give her credit for that, but she’s no where near the politician that Bill was. Speaking strictly in terms of political prowess, there hasn’t been a better pure politician since Kennedy. I’d say Reagan was a close second, but Bill is a political machine. That is of course putting politics aside and looking at talent alone. Personally, I didn’t care for Bill’s stances but he was a hell of a politician. [/quote]

I would put your friend and mine, barry H obummer ahead of slick willy. Atleast willy was a governor and could run on things accomplished. Obummer was some no name “community organizer” who managed to get to the white house. That takes some serious political skill.

With that said, politicians are absolute scum of the earth. I put them somewhere between cock roaches and the white stuff you get in the corner of your mouth when you’re real thirsty (sirus the virus quote)

These people are not leaders, not the best and brightest, and their only real skill is lying and deception in a likable manner.
[/quote]

QFT

I hear folks call Barry a Failed President.

I don’t think so; I think he has succeeded in much of what he set out to do.

Do I agree with his politics? Pfft… No.
I disagree with most everything he’s done but he’s not a failure.

Remember when he said that he wanted to fundamentally change America?

He might very well have done that in 8 short years.

… and it’s a shame.

mf


#19

[quote]MudFlap wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Yeah, if Bill were running I’d say the Clinton machine is an imposing specter. But Bill was an expert politician, Hillary not so much. She’s a smart lady and I give her credit for that, but she’s no where near the politician that Bill was. Speaking strictly in terms of political prowess, there hasn’t been a better pure politician since Kennedy. I’d say Reagan was a close second, but Bill is a political machine. That is of course putting politics aside and looking at talent alone. Personally, I didn’t care for Bill’s stances but he was a hell of a politician. [/quote]

I would put your friend and mine, barry H obummer ahead of slick willy. Atleast willy was a governor and could run on things accomplished. Obummer was some no name “community organizer” who managed to get to the white house. That takes some serious political skill.

With that said, politicians are absolute scum of the earth. I put them somewhere between cock roaches and the white stuff you get in the corner of your mouth when you’re real thirsty (sirus the virus quote)

These people are not leaders, not the best and brightest, and their only real skill is lying and deception in a likable manner.
[/quote]

QFT

I hear folks call Barry a Failed President.

I don’t think so; I think he has succeeded in much of what he set out to do.

Do I agree with his politics? Pfft… No.
I disagree with most everything he’s done but he’s not a failure.

Remember when he said that he wanted to fundamentally change America?

He might very well have done that in 8 short years.

… and it’s a shame.

mf

[/quote]

I agree, hes even got the supreme court working in his favor to bypass constitutional barriers. What other president has pulled that off?


#20

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
I actually have some dyed-in-the-wool Democratic friends who now say they believe she’s unelectable.[/quote]

The die hard Hillary Clinton supporters believe that she will win mainly because she is a woman. But, as I pointed out in a previous post women as a group have not voted for the republican candidate since 1988 when they found George H.W. Bush a more attractive candidate than Michael Dukakis.

http://cawp.rutgers.edu/fast_facts/voters/documents/GGPresVote.pdf
[/quote]

Well W. was already an unpopular president in the 2004 election, but Kerry was so bad that W won more convincingly than in 2000. So I think likability plays a huge role in presidential elections specifically.
I mean, obama literally came out of no where and landslid-ed it in 2008. Though I hate the son of a bitch, he came off as likable to most. He spoke well and people liked him which allowed people to believe the impossible.
I really think Hillary the bitch is just plain unlikable. She just rubs people the wrong way, she always had.
When the rest of America comes out of their ‘Dancing with the Stars’ coma and start paying attention to the presidential race, that’s going to bite her in the ass. It does not seem like she has any real competition in the Democratic party. The Republicans have it relatively easy in this election cycle. The candidate doesn’t even have to be that good, just likable. Surely out of the 100 or so candidates running, one of them has to be a personable fellow. So long as it’s not Huckabee, Bush or Trump the republicans have a decent shot at the presidency.[/quote]

I don’t like Jeb only because he is not the best choice for the GOP. But, he would beat Hillary in a race for the Presidency.