2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIn The USA, Winning Is Winning - Unless Your Name Is Hillary
http://www.hillarymen.com/latest/winning-is-winning-unless-your-name-is-hillaryIn The USA, Winning Is Winning - Unless Your Name Is Hillary
The national medias obsessively negative and often openly hostile Hillary Clinton coverage is driven by a single absurd premise: that she should be winning, and by a wide margin.
The idea that any candidate ought to be winning a presidential election is laughable on its face, let alone a woman in a nation that has embarrassingly never elected a female president.
Virtually every mainstream article and news segment in the 2016 campaign portrays anything less than total victory as Hillarys failure.
It's the straw man versus the strong woman.
Ahead of twenty opponents in the polls? Failure. Not far enough ahead.
(more) http://www.hillarymen.com/latest/winning-is-winning-unless-your-name-is-hillary
Evergreen Emerald
(13,069 posts)And, in an effort to make it appear that she is not in the lead by a large margin, the polls put her up against Biden who is not even running, and who has a high favorability rating due to his position as VP, because he is not running (which always reduces the rating), and due to his recent personal tragedy.
The republicans, with the help of the media (and recently by "progressives" are doing everything they can to bring her down. Just like last time.
Backwards and in high heels.
BooScout
(10,406 posts)Take Biden, the non-candidate out of the equation and she's another 20 points or more ahead. It's never enough for some folks.
djean111
(14,255 posts)that she will win, and by a wide margin.
Yes, it is laughable, and yet - this was the basic premise that the Hillary campaign started out with.
I would have been thrilled to vote for Liz Warren. That gender card is getting a bit creased and worn.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)I suspect her numbers will go back up as the media and voters tire of the email witch hunt... when there is no witch to be found.
BooScout
(10,406 posts)A lot of Americans are getting it that it is nothing but a political witch hunt at tax payers expense and all brought to us by the GOP smear machine.
Evergreen Emerald
(13,069 posts)She has said from the beginning that she knows this will be a race, and that she has to earn the position, just like every other person running. The opponents put up the strawman and then knock it down. She has not said she is inevitable.
And, regarding the gender card. I do not believe you. I believe that the reason Warren is so popular is because she is not running. The constant attacks on Clinton, the expectation that she must be absolutely perfect, contrary to other candidates, the constant twists and distortions, and scrutinizing every turn of phrase, movement of the head, benign statement leads many to believe that gender does play a role.
sgtbenobo
(327 posts)maybe people are just tired of the wrong people being president.
BooScout
(10,406 posts)Especially considering the mess he inherited from Bush. I think Hillary will do a great job as well.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)sgtbenobo
(327 posts)I cried tears of joy when President Obama won. Bernie can finish the job. HRC would not even start, or try. She is a waste of time.
BooScout
(10,406 posts)I think she's a fighter, always has been, always will be. We'll have to agree to disagree.
Evergreen Emerald
(13,069 posts)Why can't we have a conversation without the attacks? So, I see that you have not been here long. Tell us about yourself.
sgtbenobo
(327 posts)But I have a daughter who should grow up in a country instead of a corporation.
Evergreen Emerald
(13,069 posts)We heard so often in the Bush election that there was little difference between a democrat and a republican. Boy, did we learn our lesson. They stole our treasure, killed our citizens, plunged us into "recession," destroyed our good name around the world and we are still working out way from the disaster that was Bush, et. all.
I look forward to a Hillary presidency. She is one bad-ass feminist.
sgtbenobo
(327 posts)please. She is a shill but super cool when you get to know her
Evergreen Emerald
(13,069 posts)And, I think as a Democrat, you should research your opinions before spewing them on a liberal board, we don't need any rw-talking-point BS.
And, your snark has not abated. Perhaps you could back up your RW lies with facts and when you feel like being a snark, talk into a pillow, or go for a walk.
sgtbenobo
(327 posts)Thank for showing us where the goal posts are
Evergreen Emerald
(13,069 posts)And I do see that you like the snarky argument rather than supporting facts. Your source, by the way is insufficient.
sgtbenobo
(327 posts)maybe I'll explain to my youngest about silly people
MADem
(135,425 posts)Skylights, recycling, sustainable materials--they all laughed at her until they saw that the store was popular because the lighting was nicer and--what a greedy board likes best-- it cost less to operate.
They didn't let her do much on that board--she was a token woman in response to pushback from women about the abundantly male nature of the WM boardroom. She did what she could.
Anyone who is trying to make something out of that brief period in her distant past has an agenda. It's not a valid complaint, and it was fully vetted last time around. I guess we have to pull this shit up again and shove it in a few faces: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/us/politics/20walmart.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
When it came time to pick members, Mrs. Clinton, who led the advisory group, reached out to at least two colleagues from the McGovern presidential campaign Mr. Mauro and Roy Spence, who headed an advertising firm in Texas that did extensive work for Wal-Mart.
Under her watch, the advisory group drew up elaborate plans. Consumers would bring in used motor oil and batteries for recycling. Suppliers would reduce the size of their packaging. And Wal-Mart would build stores with energy-saving features.
Wal-Mart executives put much of the program into place. In 1993, for example, they opened an experimental eco-store in Kansas, with skylights and wooden beams from forests that had not been clear cut.
One executive derided it as Hillarys store because it was more expensive to build than the average Wal-Mart, but several of its features, like the skylights that cut energy bills by reducing the need for artificial lighting, were widely copied across the industry.
We were on the leading edge of something that is being mandated now, said Bill Fields, the head of merchandise at Wal-Mart in the early 1990s who worked closely with Mrs. Clinton on the environmental project.
The First Lady of Arkansas was a "token"? She also had $100,000 Of WalMart Stock, and Mr. Walton described her as a "strong willed young women." And she was a lawyer.
However, I do agree with you that she probably couldn't do anything about the labor situation, and probably for several reasons, not to mention that her husband was governor. And she does appear to have chosen two issues to focus on: women and the environment, and possibly archieved some modest success. Also, she'd better get in front of this, and I don't think "token" would be a good strategy for her.
sgtbenobo
(327 posts)please. She is a shill but super cool when you get to know her
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)You probably don't need me to say that, but I since a HRC supporter suggested the opposite, I wanted to offer a counter opinion.
Also, be cautious about revealing too much about yourself on DU. Some people will use that information against you (not the above poster, per se, but I've seen it happen).
if we could we would bring you back ice cream.... ta thanks really
uponit7771
(90,346 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Wonder if they will finally give her email a rest. Doubt it.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)EXACTLY. THANK YOU!
That is a most refreshing piece of honesty, from a Hillary supporter.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)that I'm talking about the negative way our media covers the Clintons. Been going on for 25+ years. No reason to think it will change.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Actually I think she's doing better, lately, because among other things she's dropped that shtick. When she played defensive, persecuted and irritated "what, with a cloth" that was when her campaign really hit the rocks.
But I was making a joke. I understood what you were saying, I just thought your choice of wording was a bit ironic.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)You either have to crush all opponents, or people will start talking about how your campaign theme doesn't fit.
You'd think Clinton would have learned this the first time.
Persondem
(1,936 posts)oasis
(49,388 posts)press passes when she's president.
Flying Squirrel
(3,041 posts)She or her supporters needn't take it personally (and she's still getting way more press than Sanders).
Cha
(297,275 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)There are only polls predicting who will win. That is not the same thing.