|Hooker - 2016-04-02 |
The choice is going to be her or one of Trump/Kaisch/Cruz (in that order of probabiliy) and everyone is going to be up on her nuts.
|Tough American Bouncer - 2016-04-02 |
I am starting to get "gender swapped Nixon" -wibe with regards to her.
She's kind of right, compared to everyone else running (except Sanders) her 0k (not counting donations to the Clinton Foundation) from oil and coal isn't actually that bad, and this is just a distraction from the million she's gotten from the financial industry so far.
And even Sanders has taken a few thousand from energy interests.
The latest Bernie hypocrisy I've been enjoying (for lack of a better word): how he's won six of the last seven caucuses, and therefore he represents the will of the people.
Caucuses are not primaries; they aren't run by your state government with conveniently located polling stations in every town, but maybe a few per county. And they are time-consuming; the caucuses may eat up a chunk of your day, and the head counts are conducted at a fixed time. So caucuses impose significant barriers to people who may not have time or transportation, and they're certainly not a great option for anyone with limited mobility.
The turnout at caucuses is a fraction of what you see at primaries, which is a big red flag. For example, less than 5% of deep blue Washington showed up to their Democratic caucus, while over 10% of purple-red Ohio voted in its Democratic primary. Sounds to me like caucuses present significant barriers to half the voters, give or take. That's voter suppression that Republicans would sell their souls to achieve.
And Bernie -- Mr. "Let's Make Election Day a National Holiday So Nobody Can Say They Couldn't Take Off Work To Vote" -- is making like his relative success at caucuses (specifically caucuses) is proof that he is the man the people prefer. Fuck that bullshit. If Bernie were doing poorly at caucuses, you know he and his fans would be screaming bloody murder about how unfair caucuses are; but Bernie isn't about fairness, he's about whatever gives him an advantage. Not a shred of principle to the man as far as I can tell.
Because I know somebody's going to go there: no, I'm not saying that Bernie's wins in caucuses are in any way illegitimate; he didn't make the rules, and he won the caucuses fair and square. This is about him drawing dishonest conclusions from them that additionally go against the ostensible principles behind his platform.
|Crackersmack - 2016-04-02 |
"The Bernie Sanders campaign countered by pointing to a Greenpeace tally that says she has collected “,259,280 in bundled and direct donations from lobbyists currently registered as lobbying for the fossil fuel industry.”
Additionally, Greenpeace found “,250,000 in donations from large donors connected to the fossil fuel industry to Priorities Action USA,” the main Super PAC backing Clinton’s campaign."
Also lets not forget the millions of dollars she was personally paid (not campaign contributions) in the form of "speaking fees" by oil industry interests, including 0,000 from a major investor in TransCanada and the Keystone XL pipeline.
Then there is this: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/hillary-clinton-fra cking-shale-state-department-chevron
Hillary Clinton using her position as SecState to push fracking hard, all over the world.
The "Bernie does it too" bullshit is so incredibly disingenuous; there is no comparison, and straight-up lying about this is only going to make it hard/impossible to win over a sizeable chunk of Bernie voters in November. Just own it.
ah yes, the "Hilary is the most corrupt politician to have ever politiqued in the history of politiking" guy.
Did the word get out that Cena had dropped the act and Enjoy has retired, so we get an influx of new people auditioning for the part?
When was the last time that we elected a President that had been personally paid tens of millions of dollars under shady circumstances by industries that would profit tremendously from favorable administration policy? Adding up to million in the two years before being elected. That's OK with you?
The numbers I'm seeing are more like 0k in direct donations. .2 million would put her about even with Ted Cruz.
Also the number I got was from NPR, who were falling over themselves to downplay the whole thing.
Whose own otherwise mostly-respectable 2015 donor list also includes Dow, GlaxoSmithKilne, Warner Bros., Goldman Sachs, Fox Broadcasting(!), Target, Globoforce, Universal, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, Disney, and Reddit.
Point being a donor list with at least a little dirt is a donor list that probably doesn't exist.
When was the last time that we HAVEN'T elected a President that had been personally paid tens of millions of dollars under shady circumstances by industries that would profit tremendously from favorable administration policy?
What Oscar Wildcat said.
If Bernie actually got some shit done as a politician I would be more inclined to believe all his promises. As it stands now he might as well be going around promising to stop global warming and remake batman v superman into a good movie
|memedumpster - 2016-04-02 |
The fact that every single candidate doesn't just go on CNN together and say "American oil companies will deposit billion in my personal account within 24 hours, or if I'm elected president I will write sixty differently worded executive orders cancelling their subsidies on day one" is really disappointing.
Massive and blatant in front of everyone corporate fleecing is a very real nu-politik possibility that should be explored and exploited. The American people will NOT (as in I would bet my life on this) break their herd instinct and side with the least powerful, they absolutely would allow it, possibly even promote it.
Dear state governors who love money more than life, give this a shot. Pick a billion dollar corp and just rape it to death in front of us all, then be amazed at the votes and support.
First one of you uses the military to destroy a company too big to fail makes me an eternal American flag-waver.
|Nominal - 2020-05-21 |
Same exact bullshit from the same exact people back in 2016.
Only now in 2020 they've mostly dropped the progressive act and are openly supporting Trump and decrying all criticism against him.
Yes there are many parallels with 2016, I agree. I haven't seen anybody here claim to be a progressive and openly support Trump however.
|Crackersmack - 2020-05-21 |
Fuck, I just re-watched the video and it's a perfect 15 second summary of the 2016 election. Clinton is just blatantly lying and being shitty and aggressive about it, displaying all of the hubris of somebody that feels like these annoying peasants are trying to deny her something that she rightfully owns. Just a fucking gross, corrupt, reprehensible person.
And now we found somebody even worse and we're gonna get to do this all over again.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|