The (Semi) Official Trump Election/Inauguration thread...

[ghitch75]

Assange To Hannity: Our Source Was Not The Russian Government | Video | RealClearPolitics

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...n-government-not-source-wikileaks-emails.html

 

[T.Lex]

There is a great deal of word-mincing, on both sides.

The Russian gov't does not have to be "the source" to have assisted in the hacking. That's very much like saying contract security in Iraq and Afghanistan are not the US gov't.

At the same time, releasing confidential emails, during an election cycle, is not "hacking" the election. It may have been done to damage one particular side, but the reality is (as it turns out) the people who didn't vote for HRC probably weren't going to vote for her anyway (we just didn't know it).

And Obama's response - which is absolutely consistent with his administration's response to foreign policy issues - was irrational and apparently unconnected to what actually happened.

If Trump turns out to be consistently an asshat in foreign policy matters, he'll be doing better than Obama, who was an inconsistent asshat.

 

[Alpo]

She ran an awful campaign from a strategic standpoint.
She's married to Bill.
Obama's foreign policy has been a disaster and she was the water carrier. Add Chris Stevens to the mix and a film (13 hours) released in 2016 and still playing...Benghazi never went away.
She stole votes from Bernie.
Any armadillo has a better personality. Including roadkill.

Clinton was such an awful candidate that half the country thought a lying sexist egomaniac was a better choice.

 

[ghitch75]

good to see you back Alpo....

 

[bwframe]

Ford cancels Mexico plant, expands U.S. factory


Donald Trump Targets GM on Mexico Imports; Ford Cancels Plan for Mexico Factory - WSJ

 

[jamil]

There is a great deal of word-mincing, on both sides.

The Russian gov't does not have to be "the source" to have assisted in the hacking. That's very much like saying contract security in Iraq and Afghanistan are not the US gov't.

At the same time, releasing confidential emails, during an election cycle, is not "hacking" the election. It may have been done to damage one particular side, but the reality is (as it turns out) the people who didn't vote for HRC probably weren't going to vote for her anyway (we just didn't know it).

And Obama's response - which is absolutely consistent with his administration's response to foreign policy issues - was irrational and apparently unconnected to what actually happened.

If Trump turns out to be consistently an asshat in foreign policy matters, he'll be doing better than Obama, who was an inconsistent asshat.

That's the thing that people need to focus on but the current administration and the press don't want to focus on. The DNC's is the only actual server that supposedly got hacked, though Assange implies that it was DNC insiders who had access to DNC email servers, who leaked those emails. Of course, Podesta didn't get hacked, he got phished and divulged his email credentials. Neither sources revealed the big story of the election, though. The big story was that the Democratic nominee was under an FBI investigation for being a douchewitch. Everyone already knew how corrupt she was before the emails were leaked.

But Hillary could have won had she paid more attention in states she thought were a lock. Her campaign thought there was no way she'd lose those three states, so in her hubris, she concentrated on some fairly red states to pad her EC win. She lost for not only being a douchewitch, but for being a stupid douchewitch.

She ran an awful campaign from a strategic standpoint.
She's married to Bill.
Obama's foreign policy has been a disaster and she was the water carrier. Add Chris Stevens to the mix and a film (13 hours) released in 2016 and still playing...Benghazi never went away.
She stole votes from Bernie.
Any armadillo has a better personality. Including roadkill.

Clinton was such an awful candidate that half the country thought a lying sexist egomaniac was a better choice.

That pretty much sums it up. The dems ran Hillary because it was her turn, not because she was a good candidate. And the sycophants fawned over her, calling her best candidate to ever to run for the Presidency. Well, except she was also a criminal.

Oh. And. Welcome back.

 

[KLB]

She ran an awful campaign from a strategic standpoint.
She's married to Bill.
Obama's foreign policy has been a disaster and she was the water carrier. Add Chris Stevens to the mix and a film (13 hours) released in 2016 and still playing...Benghazi never went away.
She stole votes from Bernie.
Any armadillo has a better personality. Including roadkill.

Clinton was such an awful candidate that half the country thought a lying sexist egomaniac was a better choice.

Welcome back

Not quite half of the people that voted thought so, but it was enough.

Isn't there a Dem that would have made a better candidate? Bernie gave her a run for her money and he was an outlier.

 

[Alpo]

The obvious choice would have been Biden.

 

[jamil]

Welcome back

Not quite half of the people that voted thought so, but it was enough.

Isn't there a Dem that would have made a better candidate? Bernie gave her a run for her money and he was an outlier.

It's ironic that the most popular candidates on both sides aren't really of the parties they participated as in the election. Bernie switched his party to Democrat during the campaign, demanded to be a "superdelegate", and quietly switched back to Independent, afterwards.

But to answer the question, I can see myself being able to vote for a guy like Jim Webb. But the Democrats would never have nominated him. I think he learned where he stood with today's D party when he was booed off the stage for not supporting nonsense gun restrictions.

 

[T.Lex]

My Dem friends really liked Kaine. They would've preferred him at the top of the ticket, except as noted above, it was HRC's "turn."

 

[KLB]

My Dem friends really liked Kaine. They would've preferred him at the top of the ticket, except as noted above, it was HRC's "turn."

We are lucky it was

 

[T.Lex]

On the GM thing. That's great, and all, but I also wonder how much more expensive Fords will become. Then they'll have to discount, which will make them less viable in the long run. That's part of what contributed to the last auto industry collapse.

If they can get union concessions to net out at the same cost-of-production, then I'll count that as a win.

 

[jamil]

The obvious choice would have been Biden.

Biden could possibly have pulled it off, since he didn't have the high negatives like Hillary. He also had a good relationship with working class union workers which broke for Trump against Hillary, especially around Pennsylvania. It would be difficult for today's democrat to appeal to many of the democrat crossover voters, and still appeal to democrat's base lefties. But I think Biden could possibly have pulled that off. Not that I would have wanted a Biden presidency. Aside from him not being the criminal that Hillary is, Biden's policies would likely not be much different from hers.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Paul Ryan secures enough votes to be House speaker

 

[jamil]

Paul Ryan secures enough votes to be House speaker

That's not surprising.

 

[KLB]

Paul Ryan secures enough votes to be House speaker

Yippee

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Reports that both Bill and Hillary will be attending the inauguration.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Mark this in your calendar. I'm give Trump 2 Thumbs UP for speaking out against the House plan to roll back the ethics office. Certainly a pleasant surprise.

 

[ghitch75]

George W Bush will attend too...

Clintons, Bush 43 to attend Trump Inauguration - CNNPolitics.com

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Liberals Panic as Trump Could Flip Left-Leaning Ninth Circuit