Democrats – Not Russians – Sunk Clinton

Dear Democrats: If you want to find who is responsible for Donald Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton, then look inside your own political party.

Democrats – not Russians – sank Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Yes, the federal government says that it has evidence that Russians hacked into the DNC – just as Russians tried to hack into the RNC the same way.

Yet, the federal government hasn’t demonstrated that the hackers gave anything that they obtained to either Wikileaks or the Trump campaign. The claim that Russian hackers gave stolen information to Wikileaks is an unproven claim.

However, we now know that the Clinton-campaign information that Wikileaks revealed came from . . .

(Drum roll please!)

. . . disgruntled Democrats.

From the Daily Mail:

“A Wikileaks envoy today claims he personally received Clinton campaign emails in Washington D.C. after they were leaked by ‘disgusted’ whisteblowers – and not hacked by Russia. Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and a close associate of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, told Dailymail.com that he flew to Washington, D.C. for a clandestine hand-off with one of the email sources in September. . . He said the leakers were motivated by ‘disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders.'”

Now, who could have tilted the primary-election playing field against Bernie Sanders?

From The Hill: “The Podesta leaks dominated the news cycle toward the end of the presidential campaign. The leaked material brought to light the fact that then-CNN contributor and now-interim Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairwoman Donna Brazile gave the Clinton camp advance warning of questions that would be asked during primary debates.”

One disgruntled Democrat went public about why she is disgruntled. From Politico:

“Three weeks before Election Day, as she sat at her kitchen table to fill out her ballot, Kim McKinney Cohen was angry and fed up. The Democratic Party, to which she had been unswervingly loyal for four decades, had sabotaged her chosen candidate, Bernie Sanders, and then lectured her about the need to vote for a woman whose hawkishness and arrogance rubbed her the wrong way. When Hillary Clinton said dismissively supporters of Donald Trump were “a basket of deplorables,” Cohen had heard enough. “Well, then,” she sighed, “I guess I’m a deplorable.” She took a black ink pen and carefully shaded in the rectangle next to the name Donald J. Trump.”

Now, President Obama himself is admitting that Democrats are responsible for Clinton’s defeat.

Then there is this:

It is one thing to prove that Russians hacked into the DNC and tried to hack into the RNC. It is another thing to prove that such hacking had any influence on the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.

Again, nobody has proven that the factual data revealed by Wikileaks came from Russia.

Besides, that factual data wouldn’t have been harmful to Hillary Clinton if Clinton or her aides hadn’t been doing or saying anything wrong.

Boris Badenov might have pointed his periscope toward Clinton, but he isn’t responsible for what he saw. That responsibility lies totally within the Democratic Party.


The above post was originally published @ The Moderate Voice.

Bill Clinton's Bitter Blather
Weekend Caption Contest™ Winners December 16, 2016
  • Paul Hooson

    One factor that wasn’t discussed is whether the U.S. is not ready for a female president. Many voters might have felt the job belonged to a male, even if that male was much less qualified or experienced in governmental affairs. I personally think Clinton was held to a unequal level of scrutiny than her opponent because of her gender. For example, I haven’t seen any proof that the Clintons in any way made any profit from The Clinton Foundation, instead they donated a great deal of money. In some cases, some staffers, without the support of the Clintons might have arranged for large donors to get some appointment or phone call from the Clintons, but that also does not translate into any benefit the Clintons received or a donor received. Compare that against Donald Trump using funds from his own charity foundation to pay off a civil lawsuit brought by a county government against a violation at a golf resort he owned or collecting millions of dollars donations supposedly for veterans, then not sending a penny to veterans until THE WASHINGTON POST complained about possible fraud. He’s been sued about 4,000 times with about 75 active lawsuits left, and recently had to settle the racketeering lawsuit at his failed Trump University.

    Hillary Clinton is plastic and seems cold and not genuine, which many people don’t like. And, even former Secretary Of State Colin Powell also used his private Email server as Secretary Of State, however I still see her as held to a much lower threshold of evidence than Donald Trump.

    Today, after the tragic assassination of that Russian ambassador, Trump right away proclaims it an “Islamic” terror act, when I doubt that any formal intelligence agency has yet come to that same conclusion. Rather than being inspired by ISIS, all of the scenes of hospitals being bombed, wounded or killed families in Aleppo might have inspired this individual to act out of anger as Turkey and Russia have rocky and uneven relations. This is typical of what we can expect from Trump, he opens his mouth and proclaims anything, even if it’s not grounded in fact. He lacks the common discipline that previous Republican and Democratic presidents both shared. Compare him to a president like George Bush who is a very decent man, who refrained from being too critical of the Obama Administration because he believed that to be an improper role for an ex-president. I can’t expect Donald Trump to ever refrain from opening his mouth, even if what he is saying has no basis in truth. Whatever falls out, falls out.

    All that being said, I’m just counting the days until Trump gets himself impeached, and Mike Pence takes over.

    • “One factor that wasn’t discussed is whether the U.S. is not ready for a female president.”

      Paul, the gender card that you are trying to play has expired.

      • Paul Hooson

        I don’t completely dismiss your premise that other Democrats did Clinton no favors by some of their Email discussions either. – In the “Rust Belt” the Clinton Campaign miscalculated that Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin were sure things, and didn’t run enough ads or make enough appearances to completely nail down these three critical states lost by a scant 77,744 total votes when Clinton won the national vote by 2,864,974 votes and 2.09% and 48.05% for Clinton and just 45.96% for Trump. Had Clinton narrowly won those three states, she would have won the election and the discussion here today would be all of the things that went wrong for Trump to lose the election by nearly 3 million votes.

        Clinton had to run against too many opponents, Trump, Putin, the FBI Director, but still won the popular vote by nearly 2.9 million votes, despite all her shortcomings, but just did not have the right combination of electoral votes to win this time. A less tainted Democrat with a more traditional appeal to blue collar and union workers could have easily pulled this one out. If Trump fails to deliver the jobs he claims, guts environmental standards regarding clear air and drinking water, etc., only gives tax breaks to other billionaires, cuts imports driving prices up or creating consumer goods shortages he could erode his thin claim to any “mandate” he might claim. George H. Bush proved that despite the fall of Communism and a successful war during his administration that he could erode his 1988 mandate of 54% of the vote to just 38% in 1992. And Jimmy Carter proved that economic problems could erode 1/3 of his voters as well.

        • Doc Musgrove

          “Had Clinton narrowly won those three states, ……” she didn’t, and she lost. If a frog had wings he wouldn’t bump his ass when he jumped.

          • Retired military

            And if my aunt had balls she would be my uncle (unless she gender identified as something else).

        • jim_m

          Clinton won 2.8 million more votes nationally, but she won 4.3 million
          more votes in California alone. That means that Trump actually won the
          popular vote across the nation by 1.5 million votes. Anyone who thinks
          that California represents this nation is flat out delusional.

          Your position is by default a claim that a small minority of the country should be given veto power over the rest of the nation by virtue of their unusually large population and completely atypical skew to one political party. Because the dems can achieve a massive turnout in a handful of counties you demand that those counties should determine the direction of a nation of hundreds of counties with a diverse economy and interests.

          You are demanding that a very narrow set of interests and concerns override those of everyone else to their detriment.

          You are grossly ignorant on this topic and, as usual, you are making a complete fool of yourself. You should be embarrassed.

          • Vagabond661

            And how many of those 4.3 million were actual citizens AND alive?

          • Wait – are you saying the metabolically challenged don’t DESERVE to vote?! What are you, some sort of WARMIST, insisting that only those with a pulse should even be considered?

            WARRRRMMMIIISTTT! 😉

          • Jwb10001

            My grandfather voted for Hillary, I tried to talk him out of it but by the time I got to the grave yard it was too late.

          • Far less than 100%…

        • Jwb10001

          Clinton had to run against too many opponents Trump, Putin,Comey? When did Trump, Putin and Comey put Clinton’s emails on a private server to avoid accountability? When did this evil trio send condescending emails about Bernie Sanders and his supporters, When did this evil bunch convince Clinton she had the electoral college sewn up and need to worry about winning the popular vote?
          You’re delusional and buying into all the excuse making these people are spouting. What about Trump having to run against the entire established media, and 1/2 the republican party? You run for president you need to be ready for whatever comes your way, Clinton wasn’t she lost move along. You want to be constructive, help your party find a reasonable candidate that won’t look down on 1/2 the country and can offer some sort of message to the working lower/middle class.

          • Retired military

            You forgot that Trump knocked Clinton out at the 911 ceremony and made her stumble into her van with the battery falling out of her pants leg.

          • Jwb10001

            I think that was one of those russian drug umbrellas that they stick in your leg to poison you. Maybe it was that alien tech that Comey got from Cheney that can induce stumbling stupidity.

        • Retired military

          See my post above about the 6 states that Hillary won by only 200k votes combined. Again. Your argument is meaningless and falls apart.

        • Steven Modica

          People need to stop with this whole popular vote crap. If it was the popular vote that mattered, Bernie would have run against Trump anyways.
          Russia/ Putin was not one of Clinton’s opponents. The FBI director was only relevant because of all of her shady/ illegal operations. Had she not sent classified documents or had a private server, maybe she wouldn’t have had to deal with the FBI at all. Also, if she was a more respectful person in general, maybe Dems wouldn’t have felt as compelled to let these internal leaks get out. I think her biggest opponent that she couldn’t overcome was herself.

          • Retired military

            Up above Paul admitted the popular vote means diddly squat in reply to my number of states comparision. He replied that basically number of states don’t matter only getting to 270 EC votes does. Yet he argues about the popular votes.

          • Steven Modica

            Mind = blown. I can’t keep up with this liberal logic. I can only hope to scratch the surface of this intellect one day.

          • Scalia

            Don’t try to follow Paul. He rarely makes sense.

      • pennywit

        I don’t think we can say that gender was “the” factor. But I also think it may have been “a” factor in voters’ decisions.

        • jim_m

          On balance I believe more people voted for Hillary because they wanted to see the first female President than voted against her because they thought that a woman can’t do the job.

          • I wouldn’t have any problem with voting for a woman President – assuming the woman was actually capable and competent as opposed to lying to me about what I’d seen over the last 30 years with Clinton Inc.

            Fiorina? Sure. Condi Rice? Hell, yes!

            Hillary? Oh – hell no!

        • Jwb10001

          You can say that about anyone that runs, race was a factor too, blacks voted for Obama in much higher numbers than for Clinton. You could say that race was a factor that might have kept Trump from winning the popular vote. These things are always a factor. Looking at that as a contributor is a sure way to miss the bigger points, a complete lack of trustworthiness and a piss poor campaign having nothing whatever to do with Clinton’s gender.

          • pennywit

            *Shrug* also true. I think that in a race that was as close as this one was, it’s hard to pin down any one thing that as the deciding factor.

        • Hank_M

          Lord knows Hillary tried to use her gender as a deciding factor.
          Some might posit as the only reason to vote for her.

          • pennywit

            I am very conspicuously not disagreeing with you here.

        • Retired military

          “”a” factor in voters’ decisions.”

          The same could be said of the weather, the news, what phase of the moon that Aquarius was in, which side of the bed people got up on, did they get laid within the past day, week, month, or year, and how many squirts of mocha latte decaf that the starbucks guy squirted in their coffee the day they voted. What is your point?

    • Ha,ha!

    • Brett Buck

      The US was and is ready for a *competent president that believes in the founding principles* regardless of gender or race.

      This is another silly strawman argument

      • Paul Hooson

        Trump had to be sent to a military school by his father because his erratic behavior was a problem for him as a child. I don’t see at all where his mental problems with impulsive and vindictive behavior have improved at all. – Mike Pence’s cool, calm and collected personality is the polar opposite of Trump’s lack of self-discipline and self-control.

        • Brett Buck

          What the hell does that have to do with what I wrote, or what I was responding to?

          I am beginning to agree with Rodney – you can’t even follow a simple thread. Good Lord!

          • Paul Hooson

            My understanding is that you have a philosophical agreement with conservative principles, however presidential campaigns are much more like some high school election for class president or home coming queen, where a lot voters vote for the personality, not the philosophy.Trump was like a more extreme version of the wacky Ross Perot as well as had a major party nomination, so he had a better opportunity to win than Perot. Populist one-liners ringed well with some voters, while other voters only rolled their eyes in horror.

            At any rate, I’ve offered my opinion here. Everyone has an opinion on this election. Nothing is written in stone somewhere that one opinion is the correct one.

          • Scalia

            Yes, everybody’s entitled to their opinion, and my opinion is I’m sick and tired of your bringing up the popular vote when it’s been addressed over and over again. If you take away New York City and Los Angeles, Trump wins the popular vote. Neither the Founders nor we want two cities determining who the president is.

            Moreover, your continual harping about the popular vote is no different than a fan insisting that his team is the better team even though they lost the game. You can harp about how your team had more time of possession, more first downs, more yards per carry, more passing yards, fewer penalties, more scoring opportunities, and better-looking cheerleaders, but all of that is irrelevant. Your baseball team may have scored far more runs in the Word Series than the team that won (15-0, 0-1, 0-2, 0-1, 0-1), made far fewer errors, etc., but all of that is irrelevant. According to the rules of football, the team that scores the most points at the end of the game wins the game, and in a baseball series, the team that wins the most games wins the series.

            You’re no different from a baseball loser who screams, “But my team scored far more runs than the other team! We need to change the rules!!” For what I think is the fourth time: NEITHER CANDIDATE WAS PLAYING FOR THE POPULAR VOTE. They both knew the rules going in, SO THE POPULAR VOTE IS IRRELEVANT!!!

            If you have a hard time reading English, may I suggest Google Translate?

          • Paul Hooson

            My point in illustrating the rather large difference in the popular vote is that no clear rejection of Hillary Clinton or mandate in favor of Donald Trump existed. Clinton’s campaign failed to realize that Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin were so close, and did not put in the extra advertising, campaign appearances and “get out the vote” efforts in those states. That miscalculation cost her the election regardless of whether some choose to blame other variables.

          • Scalia

            My point in illustrating the rather large difference in the popular vote is that no clear rejection of Hillary Clinton or mandate in favor of Donald Trump existed.

            You still don’t get it. You’re so obsessed with running your mouth, you fail to even understand what we’re saying. Your “rather large difference in the popular vote” reduces to two cities: New York & Los Angeles. Trump won across the board in the rest of the country. The mass of media pummeled him relentlessly, the vast majority of polls buried him, and establishment Republicans opposed him. Even he expected to lose the race and in spite of all of that, he won the Electoral College decisively. Republicans control every branch of the federal government, they control the majority of governorships and state houses. If you don’t think that’s a mandate, then you can’t be reasoned with.

            Everything appeared to be going against Trump, and you want to act like a crybaby and blame Big Bad Comey or the Commies.

            Get over it, Paul. You lost fair and square. The deck was STACKED against Trump and against all conventional odds, he won decisively. Man up and quit trying to count first downs.

          • yetanotherjohn

            I’m trying to understand your point. Yes, Hillary loosing MI, WI, PA that she “should have won” cost her the election (actually it was loosing any one of those three that cost her the election). Her loosing states that hadn’t voted for a republican president since 1988, 1984, 1988 respectively is a rejection of her. Her loosing 6 states that voted for Obama in 2012 (FL, IA, OH, MI, WI, PA) is a clear rejection of her. And likewise, they are a mandate for Trump. He won. In the words of the poet, “Elections have consequences”. Further, the GOP holding onto majorities in house and senate, especially in light of a very hostile senate map is a mandate and a clear rejection of the dems.
            The dems and the media (but I repeat myself) have been trying to deny that Trump “really” won. He did. Trump got a larger portion of minorities, women, etc against Clinton than Romney did against Obama. That was just enough to give Trump the win. Another way of saying that is that percentage reject Clinton.
            The Clinton campaign was so limited in imagination, they really couldn’t imagine loosing. They spent resources to run up the popular vote, rather than secure the 270th electoral college vote. You are right, that’s Clinton’s bad. Could last minute ad buys have stemmed the tide? Consider this, Clinton could have lost any of the states he won except for Texas and still won. This isn’t 2000 where any state flip would have flipped the election.

            In 1976, Ford lost by less than 25,579 votes in Ohio and Mississippi. He lost by less than 37,000 votes in Ohio and Wisconsin. If he had just run some more ads in those states, could he have won the election? Maybe. Its an interesting question thats fun for political junkies to ponder. But at the end of the day, the reality is that Carter won and the country paid the price (and is still paying the price). Clinton lost by more than 3x the votes Ford lost.

            Trump may turn out to be a wonderful president, the worst president ever (tough competition with Obama and Carter in the mix) or somewhere in between (my personal suspicion). Like Carter, we will judge him based on what the future holds, not on popular vote totals or which states he won.

          • Retired military

            Yes and if you look at 6 states that Hillary won by less than 200k votes combined (like NH which went for Hillary by 2500 votes) then you would realize that your argument falls apart.

          • Jwb10001

            You could if you tried see the other side of this argument, Trump won, BY THE RULES in a landslide 304 electoral votes! The republicans held their ground when they were supposed to take a beating. The republicans gained ground in state elections including places like Minn. If you look past the national presidential election you’d see the message was very successful in most of the country. Trump has a mandate to focus on the working lower/middle class that voted for him in a very large part of the country. The democrats have a choice, work to compromise or stand in the way, either way Trump will put forward his agenda the congress will have to deal with it. In 2 years the country will judge both sides.

          • Your point is best covered by a hat.

          • jim_m

            Your so-called point completely ignores where that differential in the popular vote comes from. It is so demographically and geographically narrow as to be a demand for a despotic rule over the nation by a very narrowly defined group of people residing in a number of counties that you can count on one hand and still afford to have lost a finger or two.

          • Jwb10001

            Complaining about losing the electoral vote while winning the popular vote is like a basketball team complaining that they hit 10 2 point basket while the other team only hit 8 3 point baskets, why is it fair they lost?

          • jim_m

            Ironically, Hillary was afraid she would win the electoral college and lose the popular vote.

            Convinced they’d easily win the Electoral College, in the closing days of the campaign the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign were worried they’d lose the popular vote to Donald Trump.

            As such, rather than focus on swings states like Michigan or Wisconsin, the DNC followed a plan conceived by interim Chairwoman Donna Brazile that poured millions into places like Democratic Party strongholds like Chicago and New Orleans in an attempt to bolster Clinton’s overall vote total.

            This focus on the popular vote at the expense of the electoral vote may have ended up costing Clinton the White House.

            You play the game to win. Hillary won the game she was playing, it was just the wrong game and she was the only one playing it.

          • Brett Buck

            You make a gender card argument, I rebut it, and this is the resulting spew of off-topic drivel? Have you recently suffered a blow to the head?

            I can respect people who have a strong opinion and can express it, even when their opinion is wrong. You aren’t even able to understand the argument or sensible respond – even when the content is ONE SENTENCE! Oy Gevalt!

          • Scalia

            That’s the way it has been with Paul for a long time.

          • Retired military

            “so he failed to convince anything near a majority of voters that his views or leadership qualities ”
            Last I checked He got about 48% of the popular vote. That is near a majority.

          • jim_m

            Outside of LA and San Francisco Trump carried the US by over 1.5 million votes. That IS a mandate. And for the people who voted for him, being opposed to those two metropolitan areas is actually a plus.

          • jim_m

            THis is the map of what Paul consders to be an electoral mandate to run the entirety of the country: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/dc4625e4e623b4d09ff1365c101a7d543e9b7a56ce82078b43c716eeef7a45de.png

          • jim_m

            And this is the map of the parts of the country that voted for Trump and which are not meaningful: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/84993f3afd9ae314b67ee9703fcb7324d2dd46e1be1058a0646c7038a6ed9afe.jpg

          • jim_m

            Which of those maps looks like the United State of America and which looks like nothing at all?

          • Retired military

            Thanks Jim. I was going to post a link to this map but you beat me to it.

          • Trump did lose the popular vote by nearly 2.9 million votes, but only won the election because of having the right combination of electoral votes, so he failed to convince anything near a majority of voters that his views or

            That’s not an an insignificant “only”, that’s the rules of the election. Trump lost by more than 2.9 million in California, He could’ve campaigned more in California, possibly gaining back the 2.9 Million but still lose California. It made no sense to expend those resources unnecessarily. He chose the right strategy that followed the rules of the election that were laid out, as opposed to taking a knife to a gun fight, which the HRC campaign seemed to do. If we ever did change from the Electoral College to national popular vote then when and where candidates politic would change and who they make promises to would change. It’s an apple and oranges comparison to apply that popular vote count, from the electoral college system, would be the same with a non-electoral college system.

          • Paul Hooson

            Elections are a lot like a basketball game. Some things move the ball up the court or move the opponent’s ball up the court. The most surprised they won the election was the Trump Campaign, polls had them at least 2 points down, which usually translates to losing enough electoral votes to lose the election. The outcome was the biggest surprise since 1948 because the results from Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan were not expected. Worst case scenarios for the Clinton Campaign had Trump no higher than 266 electoral votes for example.

          • Scalia

            The most surprised they won the election was the Trump Campaign…

            Says who? Who’s to judge who was the most surprised? Sure Trump expected to lose, but Hillary expected to win. Did you see the video of Bill Clinton jumping up and down like a little girl on election night? I’d say they were just as surprised if not way more surprised than Trump.

            Besides, you replied to Rodney without even bothering to address his statements. So typical of you.

          • Jwb10001

            “says who” says Paul, he just knows stuff the ordinary guy has no way of knowing. First off either he or a member of his family knows virtually everyone and is involved in virtually everything. Given this level of insider knowledge he clearly knows more than any other living human on the planet.

          • jim_m

          • That response doesn’t really respond to anything in my statement.

          • Jwb10001

            Hillary’s people were drinking and partying like it was 1999 on election day, I’m pretty sure they were the most surprised. Trump was also surprised but I suspect always had the feeling he could win if the late breaking votes went his way. The team that was way too over confident was team Hillary.

          • Retired military

            “Worst case scenarios for the Clinton Campaign had Trump no higher than 266 electoral votes for example.”
            Obviously those worst case scenarios were NOT worst case scenarios for the Clintons.

          • True the vote in CA, and it’d be interesting to see how many of those popular votes disappear.

            Look at what happened with the recounts they sponsored – Trump ended up getting more votes in each, and Detroit’s system was shown to be a rancid pile of garbage.

            Frankly, that was embarrassing – and a REAL good example why we need verifiable ID to vote.

          • Amen.

        • jim_m

          Paul demonstrates that he is a fucking moron and cannot respond to the actual content of people’s posts. He is grasping at straws (and strawmen) to find a way to explain why his support of neofascists is acceptable,

          • Retired military

            Paul
            Think of it this way.
            Trump won 30 or 31 states. Hillary only won 19 or 20. Hillary lost.

          • Paul Hooson

            John Kennedy only won 22 states and won the presidency. The math is what states are won to total 270.

          • Retired military

            So why the hell are you bring up the popular vote????????????????????

        • Jwb10001

          Well I suggest you watch what you’re writing here before Trump finds out and turns his out of control lunatic ego on you. You’re heading for an internment camp brother. If you’re looking for out of control vindictive impulsive behavior take a gander at the people protesting the electoral college votes yesterday.

    • LiberalNightmare

      As an american, I feel that we aren’t ready for a felon as president.

    • jim_m

      You. Are. A. Dumbass.

      Clinton received the scrutiny she did because she has been on the public stage for decades, because she has a history of lying, because she has a history of secretive and duplicitous activity, because she tried to force socialized, single payer medicine down our throats when Bill was President, because she lied about Benghazi, because the only reason for the private email server was to avoid public scrutiny and avoid having her malfeasance on display for everyone.

      Hillary received more scrutiny because she is engaged in more illegal and unscrupulous activity.

      The fact is that from the start imbeciles and fascist apologists like you claimed that this was not about her character or her behavior, but about her vagina. Nobody bought it. After 8 years of being told that the only reason people disagreed with obama was because they were racist and that opposition to bloated government, cronyism, and regulatory parasitism was not because people actually disagreed with these policies but because they were just reflexively opposing them because of obama’s skin color.

      No one gives a rip about Hillary’s vagina. People cared about her character and found it desperately wanting. The only reason she won the nomination is because the dems rigged it for her to win it. I suppose pointing that fact out is sexist too in your book.

      • Retired military

        The dems started playing the sexist card right after Hillary announced (the first of several times) that she was running.
        Paul, why did Hillary have to keep introducing herself to the American public?

    • jim_m

      Today, after the tragic assassination of that Russian ambassador, Trump right away proclaims it an “Islamic” terror act,

      Paul, the man did it on camera and can be clearly seen shouting “Allah Ahkbar!” WTF more do you want?

      Are you so mentally incompetent that you are unable to form a conclusion from that evidence on your own? Are you so incapacitated that you require some of your betters to tell you what to think?

      Clearly, that is so. If you cannot think for yourself stop posting here.

      • Retired military

        Now now. lets not jump to conclusions. Just because they are muslim terrorists doesn’t necessarily mean they are muslim terrorists.

    • jim_m

      The Colin Powell lie has been done before Paul.

      “He did write former Secretary Clinton an email memo describing his use
      of his personal AOL email account for unclassified messages and how it
      vastly improved communications within the State Department,” the
      statement said. “At the time there was no equivalent system within the
      department.”

      Powell did something because he had no other choice. Hillary had that choice and chose to have an illegal private server with no safeguards so she could evade FOIA requests and any public oversight of her behavior. She also took advantage of the situation to illegally destroy emails that were under subpoena.

      Nor did Powell use a private email server that he controlled to avoid FOIA.

      Stop lying about the Colin Powell thing. It only shows that you do not know anything on this topic. Frankly this smacks of blaming it on a convenient black man.

    • I think America is more than ready for a female president. Just not HRC, the most odious candidate the Democrats could possibly come up with.

      We’ve seen numerous women leaders in the world, Golda Meir, Thatcher, Ghandi, and Merkel to name a small number. Women are at all parts of government. Congress, Senate, Judges, important cabinet positions. They have moved into significant CEO positions in business in America. It just hasn’t happened yet, but when it does it won’t be anything all that significant or shocking, (except as an important milestone). The media will probably try to make it more profound or dramatic than it is. There will alway be some misogynists that will poo poo it, but overall I don’t think it will be that surprising when it does happen.

      Given all the negative attacks that happen to candidates, maybe they’re the smarter ones, that not that many of them make the attempt yet.

  • yetanotherjohn

    You can posit hundreds of reasons why Clinton lost, but at the end of the day it was really the democratic elite who made the democratic party lose, with Clinton being the flag bearer for that party.

    Clinton was a poor campaigner, this was shown in her 2008 run.
    Her server issues surfaced more than a month before she formally entered the race.
    Two democratic contenders had formed exploratory committees before she entered the race (Webb and O’Malley) and Sanders entered only a couple weeks after she announced.
    If the elites in the democratic party, the DNC, the major donors, media, etc had intervened, the democrats could have fielded a candidate who could have beat Trump.
    Instead, the democrats kept doubling down on Clinton. As late as the convention, the ‘super delegates’ (aka the democratic elite) could have pulled the plug on Clinton.

    Reid lied about Romney’s taxes in 2012. Did that lose the election for Romney? Probably not, but if it had the issue was the lie. If Romney really hadn’t paid taxes, then the issue would have been Romney not paying taxes, not Reid lying about Romney’s taxes.

    Clinton decided the private server was a good idea. No one forced her to do that. Hillary thought an ever changing story on the server and the emails was the best course. The media bent over backwards to support her story even as drip by drip the truth came out. If it had been a republican candidate with the same server, the press would have ripped them to shreds, not covered for them. Comey punted when Clinton should have been indicted. Comey’s description of “extreme recklessness” was almost a textbook definition of the “gross negligence” of the statute. But again, the democratic elites covered for Clinton, rather than switching to a candidate who could have beat Trump.

    The democrats working with the media to provide softball questions for Clinton was something Clinton also thought was a good idea. The fact that wikileaks exposed that isn’t the issue, the fact that she did it was the issue.

    The Clintons thought that starting the Clinton foundation would be a good idea. They used it to live high, paying for their travel, etc and to employ their inner circle. Theirs a reason the Clinton foundation had such a low percentage of donations going to actual charity and such a high percentage going to “overhead”. The conflict of interest (potential, actual or appearance) that donors giving to the Clinton foundation might expect a quid pro quo from the Clintons didn’t seem to bother Clinton. Again, where were the adults in the democratic party to take her aside and say choose between the Clinton foundation and another run at the presidency.

    Again and again, Clinton made choices that any rational observer would have said disqualified her from being president. But the democrats didn’t act rationally then and they aren’t acting rationally now.

    You can point to hundreds of “what if” that might have changed the 2012 election, including what if the media hadn’t kept up a continual drum beat that she was going to win. Did that drum beat cause enough people in key states to stay home rather than vote or to vote against her because they could see the media’s thumb on the scale? It’s as good of explanation as any. But since so much of the media act as spokes people for the democrats, rather than third party observers, the media can bee seen as just an extension of the democratic party.

    Bottom line, it was the democrats who defeated themselves and at least part of that defeat was in selecting Clinton as the candidate.

  • Par4Course

    When did Democrats ever promote personal responsibility for anything? No matter what, it’s always someone/something else’s fault. The DNC needs a shipment of mirrors to help them find the people to blame for Clinton’s November loss.

  • LiberalNightmare

    The democrats brought this upon themselves, with a combination of arrogance and corruption.

  • Hank_M

    Hillary sank her own campaign. The dems, along with a lot of help from the media, actually did a pretty good job of defending the indefensible.

    She was and is a lousy campaigner. Most people would rather listen to fingernails on a chalk board than listen to her shrieking at the podium. She didn’t help matters by employing that smug smarter-than-everyone smirk of hers. Her answers were always a great sounding word salad that left people wondering what the hell she meant.

    She tried to run on her record. But that fell flat when people actually, you know, looked at it.
    Even she couldn’t provide an answer as to her greatest achievement.
    Per the NY Times in April 2014 “It was a simple question to someone accustomed to much tougher ones: What was her proudest achievement as secretary of state? But for a moment, Hillary Rodham Clinton, appearing recently before a friendly audience at a women’s forum in Manhattan, seemed flustered.”

    Hell, she wouldn’t have beaten Bernie without help from the DNC.

    Lousy candidate, lousy Senator, lousy SoS, lousy wife. and a despicable person to boot.

    It’s amazing she got as far as she did.

  • Retired military

    One thing that few people mention but I am sure that cost Hillary quite a few votes was her 911 performance and her health issues.

  • Vagabond661

    I wouldn’t be surprised if it was discovered the Democrats tried hacking into the RNC.

    • jim_m

      I don’t know. Given the degree of ignorance that the dems have displayed about cyber security I think the most sophisticated attack they could mount would be googling the RNC’s website address.

      • Retired military

        Now wait a minute. Hillary assured us that she could protect us from cyber threats even though didn’t know that C on an email meant it was classified.

  • jim_m

    Democratic Fault lines:

    Comey’s fault
    Russia’s fault
    Fake news fault
    Hacker’s fault
    Alt-Right/White supremacy fault
    Misogyny fault

    More faults than California.

    • Retired military

      You left out Racism.

      • yetanotherjohn

        I ran out of gas. I… I had a flat tire. I didn’t have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn’t come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake. A terrible flood. Locusts! IT WASN’T MY FAULT, I SWEAR TO GOD!

        • Retired military

          And the dog ate her concession speech

  • Retired military

    Paul

    You should follow the example set here.

    http://redalertpolitics.com/2016/12/18/columbia-students-vote-to-install-tampons-in-mens-room/#WCbS9vzdjROBHPrY.99

    Make sure in your strip club you have free tampons in both the men’s and women’s room. Liberals demand it.

    • Jwb10001

      Well you know it’s difficult these days to know who’s going to be in who’s restroom.

    • jim_m

      From the reviews it sounds like he has bigger problems than just the bathrooms. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6d27b4c503b5212b136cdc61a1ca9100353621e181d10756d5abe7a8b877a2a4.jpg

      • Paul Hooson

        The place passed health inspections and other city and county inspections with no problems. Back around that time there leak issues with the new roof which were addressed and some mold problems cleaned up. The 13,500 ft. club had a giant flat roof. Most laughable was that I’m some sort of “creeper gramps”. like I’m Al Lewis from THE MUNSTERS because me and my 27 year old girlfriend ran the place. The OLCC, city government, police and others did obstruct my regular liquor license because they thought I had too many African American customers which I believe to be illegal under federal antidiscrimination laws. I might form a political committee to abolish the OLCC here as a relic of the prohibition era and make myself the campaign chairman. I was a campaign chairman for a state legislature candidate before.

        • Jwb10001

          So how did your law suit turn out? Did you rake in millions suing the city because you had too many African American customers? I’m curious because that may be the most outlandish accusation I’ve heard in awhile.

          • jim_m

            Sounds like he really does need to lay off the drugs.

          • Paul Hooson

            I don’t even use aspirin. I personally hate drugs. They hurt productivity. I’m nearly 62 and work two jobs now and will be adding a third job next week. You don’t work three jobs and do drugs. Lazy people do drugs and don’t even work one job…

            You always go for the lowblow personal attack regardless of whether there’s any truth there. Your only standard of ethics is whether something seems like a good lie to tell about me. So fuck it…

            I get up at 3am this morning to head off to one of my jobs.

          • Paul Hooson

            I haven’t filed a suit yet in this matter because I have several matters at hand. Whenever I had a show with mostly African American entertainers and customers, police gang enforcement, regular police, fire department, OLCC, city and county inspectors showed up in droves every few minutes to interrupt the event, looking for some reason to cancel the event and harass customers, compared to nights I offered White rock acts, and not one of these agencies showed up all night to disrupt the event. Someone was orchestrating this harassment, the city government, arranging for these agencies to show up every few minutes to disrupt the event and disrespect my right to operate a business. This fucking bullshit only cost me about $2 million, so I think I have more than adequate grounds to seek some damages here.

          • Jwb10001

            So you single handedly uncover the government breaking federal civil rights law and you’re too busy to deal with it….. got it.

          • Paul Hooson

            No. I have some overlapping legal issues with some real estate scammers who hired a thug to repeatedly harass, threaten me, hack my Emails, which might be easier to prove and win a claim in court because I have a Email in my possession that a thug was offered a $30,000 payment to beat me out of my property in this scam. With more evidence in my possession against a company holding a real estate license, I think this case will be easier to win than a battle against a number of government agencies who will lie under oath in court to save their asses.

          • Jwb10001

            If I were you I’d move from that racist cesspool, of government corruption, what is it again Portland Or. Run no doubt by democrats.

          • Paul Hooson

            Some liberals are racists. It’s a sad fact. The OLCC had a lawsuit by an African American employee treated unfairly before as well as recent lawsuit by an African American nightclub also treated unfairly. There’s a pattern there.

          • Jwb10001

            and yet you still wanted a crooked lying incompetent democrat to be president…. oh well some people are beyond help. Enjoy your life in your democrat run hell hole.

          • Paul Hooson

            I don’t like Hillary Clinton much at all. But, I always disliked Trump as a person much more. He’s one of most reckless con men ever. – I believe that either one would be impeached and be the subject of congressional hearings. It was a terrible election.

          • Jwb10001

            You don’t like Hillary? Seriously? Man you don’t make sense.

          • Paul Hooson

            I dislike them both, but just find Trump far more objectionable than the plastic Hillary. When Trump was on THE APPRENTICE, I could at least change the channel.

          • Scalia

            You dodged his point. There’s a pattern here.

          • Such are the cesspools that are Democrat dominated communities…

          • Paul Hooson

            Sure one party is all good and the other party all bad. The world is black and white and not grey, right?

          • I’m sure you ascribe it to cosmic coincidence…

          • Paul Hooson

            The only thing I’m sure of is I get up at 3am to go to one of my jobs. Nobody that signed leases with me wanted to pay the $5000 a month rent to lease my nightclub, so I work two jobs even though I’m nearly 62 and will start a third job next week…

          • Sounds like the consequences of a series of poor choices to me, old man. You are emblematic of the Generation which grows old without ever becoming adult, let alone wise.

          • Jwb10001

            If you’re so strapped for funds you should get that law suit going, I’m telling you there’s millions in it. You’d make such a name for yourself you’d have your own show on MSLSD. I mean COME ON MAN! Your city is using the power of the government to crush a poor small businessman using the most egregious racism I’ve heard in decades. You’re just sitting on it? Quit your jobs go on welfare and get to crushing the oppressive racist regime that’s breaking federal law to hold you down. If not well then I guess we can conclude it’s just another delusion that you’re so well known for.

          • Paul Hooson

            I’ve earned a little over $700,000 so far this year. But, had to pay off $80,000 in lawyer bills because tenants did not pay the rent they agreed to in the leases they signed, and another $75,000 in taxes along with paying off a $500,000 mortgage, so I’ve had major expenses. – If not for the Oregon Liquor Control and City Of Portland interference in my business affairs, my gross income might have exceeded a couple million or so. – Holding jobs gets me out of the house and less bitter that people cheated me on paying the rent or interfered in my business affairs.

          • nanny

            You must be hallucinating, you lost the club and you lost the small amount you had invested. You have never earned $700,000, just saying.

          • Paul Hooson

            You don’t know what you’re talking about. I needed cash to pay off some debts such as legal bills, taxes and the mortgage on the property worth about $2 million. I made a sales agreement in my lawyer’s office that gave me cash, but I’ve put together a $1 million dollar package with a real estate investor friend to reopen the club. But, a major burglary of about $51,000 in sound and audio equipment and other problems complicated this arrangement. We might try to pay back the lender of the $700,000 and look for legal grounds to bust the lease of the current renters, as one possible path. Other paths are to reopen a new used car dealership where prices are at near record lows right now. For example. a 2000 Ford Focus can be bought at auctions for $200 right now and turned over for $1500 the next day.

          • In what you will no doubt consider to be another coincidence:

            The biggest increases [in Homocide rates] were seen in San Antonio, Chicago, Phoenix, Suffolk County, NY, and Memphis — all run by Democrats.

          • Paul Hooson

            I think crime statistics will point out much of these problems are associated with gangs and drugs among some minority community areas. Some violent youth gangs might require a new member to commit a felony or even murder to join. – Most major cities in the U.S. lean Democratic in voter registration, so the cause and effect of blaming them for a growth of crime does not connect here. Smaller Republican-leaning towns may not have the same problems with drugs and gangs that larger cities have.

          • Pony up some statistics then.

          • Jwb10001

            What are these strange statistics you speak of?