Why is the scheduling of the debates even an issue, may I ask? Everyone knows that Ms. Clinton will win the nomination anyway, I know it, you know it, the networks know it, and nobody wants to watch the debate, so the networks don't want to waste a time slot.
Are ****ing kidding me? If everyone knows it, why is the DNC actively shcheduling the debates on Saturdays when no one watches? Do you think that happens by accident, despite being unprecedented? Have you even been paying attention to what the DNC is doing? The networks don't want to waste a time slot? That's nonsense. Presidential debates always do well in terms of viewers. Bernie Sanders has cut Hilary Clinton's national poll numbers in half, exceeded 2008 Obama in terms of fundraising, and has won several prominent union endorsements. No one is saying he isn't a long shot, but I can't stand people who don't care at all about completely undermining the democratic process so Hilary can get in the white house. What in the world do you think the primaries are even for? They're purpose is to vet out the candidates, pit them against eachother, so the one with the best ideas comes out on top in the end. I expected better from you, honestly.
I think this is a pretty effective response.
Well, you're certainly a Hillary detractor.
Yes, and? Why should Hillary be above reproach? Why should any politician be above reproach, regardless of which party they support?
See how easy it is to answer a yes/no question?
Because it is a ridiculous question. I have never said I support Trump in any way, shape or fashion and have continuously rebuked him, yet you continue to accuse me of being a Trump supporter time and time again. Even with this response, I wouldn't be surprised if you accuse me of supporting him again by the next page.
She has been accused of sl*t shaming a rape victim, commody trading of cattle futures, Whitewater, Travelgate, Troopergate, Pardongate, Chinagate, Filegate, having a Swedish slush fund, overcharging for speech fees, looting the White House, stalking, scaring, and threatening Gennifer Flowers, Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones, being a ‘Muslim Brotherhood princess’, having something to do with Saul Alinsky's illegal activities, ordering Vince Foster murdered, doing something illegal with her email account, and being personally responsible for the Benghazi mess.
You specifically accused me of spreading falsities about Hillary Clinton, yet here you list a bunch of accusations that I never made. If you don't have a logical response to what I say, then say so, but to continue to spread falsities about me I think has well gotten past old by this point.
Baba Yaga, I have nothing against Bernie, but he'll never be the nominee.
The Republicans have turned the word "socialist" into political poison due to propaganda (ignoring Nelson Mandela and Golda Meir, it seems) and these days, most voters think that supporting an admitted socialist has the same moral integrity as supporting cannibalism.
He won't be the nominee, trust me.
I find this to be very disturbing. Regardless of how electable you think Bernie is, he, as well as the people, deserve an honest, free and unbiased election. For a cabal of Hillary supporters to game the system in her favor because they think she is more electable is shameful and anti-American. Let the people decide who they want, not Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the rest of the Hillary feet washing brigade. How can you call yourself a democrat, how can you believe in the democratic system and yet even think what you said is a good thing.
What if the general election was the same way, with a group of individuals in a back room deciding who should win based on how presidential they think that person is? Would you support that, especially if your candidate is the one who gets the short end of the stick?
1. She Aligns Herself With Obama’s Current Policies
Ms. Clinton maintains her individuality when it comes to her candidacy for president. However she is still in line with Obama’s current policies on health care, foreign affairs, the environment, and gun control. If Clinton wants to win the White House, maintaining an alliance with Obama is key. Clinton has only offered improvements on his current policies rather than combating them like the Republican candidates.
You praise her for her individuality yet also say she agrees with everything Obama says. Those statements are contradictory. Also, I find it funny that you want her to be aligned with Obama's policies yet had the DNC done in 2008 what you praise them for doing to the debates this election cycle, Obama would never have been president. Remember, Hillary was supposed to run away with the election back then as well before Obama toppled her. Hence the reaction by the DNC this time around to ensure she wins.
2. The Media is Behind Her
Republicans say this is a bad thing, but it's Freedom of the Press. And despite the alleged scandals surrounding Hillary Clinton, most of the media (unless you’re Fox News) is behind her and the way she presents herself. In fact, most media outlets and polls continue to claim she has won every debate so far. Overall, Clinton continues to shine and I can’t see the media momentum slowing down any time soon.
Another disturbing comment. The press is supposed to be unbiased and impartial yet here you are praising them for being on Hillary's side. If that's the case, how can you trust anything they say? How can anyone trust what they say. And yet you think this is good? So far you think having the DNC game the primary process for their chosen one to win is good, as well as the media being biased towards certain people. If that's your dream country, I don't want to live there.
5. Social Movement Says “It’s time”
We are once again living in a world where equal rights and pay is front and center for women, so why not finally have the first female President of the United States? Abortion rights are an issue, which Republicans (who claim they want smaller government but have no problem telling a woman she must carry a child to term) on the pro-life warpath again. If anything, the current social movements say it’s time for a woman to take the office and in a world that is primarily dominated by men, Clinton could make a radical change to the political landscape in Washington.
The best person for the job should win. Saying that a woman should win because it's time for one to win is in itself sexist.
And equal pay is just empty rhetoric used by the Dems. They keep talking about it, but no Democrat in any state or county offers equal pay across the board for anything. Even in the Obama White House, despite what he says, men are being paid more than women.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/male-female-pay-gap-remains-entrenched-at-white-house/2014/07/01/dbc6c088-0155-11e4-8fd0-3a663dfa68ac_story.html
And Hillary has no ground to stand on. She was in the White House for 8 years as the first lady and 4 as the Secretary of State, not to mention 8 years as a senator. Yet in all that time, with al the influence she has, this equal pay she speaks of has never been achieved at any level whatsoever. I can bet 4 years from now, if she is president like I suspect she will be, she'll still be talking about equal pay.
