Hillary’s newest outburst against the people who didn’t vote for her
It’s an odd thing that yesterday I wrote a post comparing Obama’s “bitter clinger” remarks to Hillary’s comments about “deplorables,” and almost immediately after that I I saw that she’d just doubled down on those sort of comments, this time while speaking in India:
…I win the coasts, I win Illinois, Minnesota, places like that. But what the map doesn’t show you is that I won the places that represent two-thirds of America’s gross domestic product. So I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward, and his whole campaign, Make America Great Again, was looking backwards. “You don’t like black people getting rights, you don’t like women getting jobs, you don’t want to see that Indian-American succeeding more than you are, whatever your problem is, I’m going to solve it.”
Clinton didn’t stop there. She also trashed women—white women, that is—in a very odd way:
“Democrats, going back to my husband and even before, but just in recent times going back to Bill and our candidates and then President Obama, have been losing the vote, including white women. We do not do well with white men and we don’t do well with married white women,” Clinton said.
She went on to say that white women face an “ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should.”
Clinton said that she was on the way to winning the white women vote until then-FBI Director James Comey sent a letter to leaders in Congress less than two weeks before the election stating that the FBI reopened its investigation into her use of a private email server while she was secretary of state.
“All of a sudden white women, who were going to vote for me and frankly standing up to the men in their lives and the men in their workplaces, were being told, ”˜She’s going to jail. You don’t want to vote for her. It’s terrible, you can’t vote for that.’ So, it just stopped my momentum and it decreased my vote enough because I was ahead. I was winning, and I thought I had fought my way back in the ten days from that letter until the election. I fell a little bit short,” Clinton said.
That is really quite extraordinary. So this supposed champion of women everywhere, and of their autonomy, sees the married white women who didn’t vote for her as husband-obedient lemmings, just standing by their menfolk (remember this?) and not being able to think for themselves.
What’s going on here, besides Hillary Clinton being Hillary Clinton? Why would she continue an approach that really doesn’t seem like a winning tactic—and one that is especially ironic in a woman who got her start in politics through her association with her own husband?
The first hint is in the manner in which she was introduced at that forum in India, as the “woman who should have been the president of the United States of America.” Can you imagine hearing that at least 20 times a day, every day, from almost everyone you meet? It feeds both her considerable ego as well as her towering defensiveness.
I think that Clinton has never gotten over the shock of losing to Donald Trump. I can only imagine the joy that his nomination engendered in the Clinton camp. Hillary must have felt that now she was practically home free, the dream of a lifetime almost realized. She would be a historical First much like Obama, and she would be able to solidify and extend the huge gains made for the left during his presidency. She could taste it; she could feel it.
The ignominy of losing, and of losing to Trump of all people, must have felt almost Shakespearean in its agony. Why wouldn’t she lash out at anyone she perceived as causing that to happen, and why wouldn’t she grab onto any and all conspiracy theories to explain it? Anything to avoid facing the fact that she lost because Americans just didn’t want her to be president, and they preferred even the likes of Trump to her.
And to top it all off, Hillary did win the popular vote, and although that’s not the way elections are won in this country it’s certainly another fact that made her defeat especially sharp in the psychological sense.
But aside from the personal and emotional reasons this approach—of dissing those who didn’t vote for her—would appeal to her, I assume that Democrats in general think this approach is the winning one, because it is so very common on that side. All the good people vote for us! All the thinking people vote for us!
This is not new. Remember Adlai Stevenson? He famously said—with a great deal more wit and charm than Hillary Clinton—the following:
A supporter once called out, “Governor Stevenson, all thinking people are for you!” And Adlai Stevenson answered, “That’s not enough. I need a majority.”
He never got that majority. And now Hillary Clinton is in the process of realizing that she never will, either.
You’re assuming she is still in full control of her faculties. Dr. Ted Noel made a very strong case last year for her having Parkinson’s. One of the symptoms apparently is something called Parkinson’s rage, where the patient basically goes totally off. Combine her deteriorating mental abilities with the physical (the falls yesterday) and there’s a good case, I think.
http://www.vidzette.com/podcast-61-hillary-falls-again-and-again/
His site has all the older videos from last year which lays out the Parkinson’s case.
“I won the places that represent two-thirds of America’s gross domestic product”. Not really, but you did win 100% of the most corrupt cities, some with 110% of the vote.
physicsguy:
No, he did not make a strong case for Parkinson’s. He made a very very weak case.
I responded to the Parkinson’s idea before. Please see this and this.
What the progressive left has finally done with their sometimes vaunting, sometimes bitterly frustrated triumphalism, is to once and for all drop the old liberal pretense of value-neutral and disinterested universalism, and embrace instead a particular collectivism which sees white males and traditional western culture as the – by their inherent nature – enemy.
It’s a “Kill the Boer” – mentality modified to suit the broader soft totalitarian redistribution principles of the modern liberal.
But here’s the deal. There’s nothing to negotiate now – she has defined it as an existential question. There is no moral common ground. Dismally convoluted and precarious series of inferences regarding the contending parties resolving into existentially antagonistic moral species, become instantly otiose, as the progressive opinion leader blithely announces it as a standard operating assumption she has held all along.
Compromise then, is just a truce awaiting a fresh outbreak of hostilities.
As I mentioned in the bitter clingers thread, she has balance issues & psychological issues because she cannot move on, she has to re visit & harp upon incidents that a mentally healthy person puts behind them. Her difficulty with balance can be an early signs of alzheimers. All people over 65 presenting for medical treatment are asked if they fell within the last year, as a rough screen for the malady. Queen Elizabeth is 91 do we hold our breath when she goes on a walk about? Merkel, 65 ? Is she tottering? Something is definitely wrong with her brain
For a great response from commenter go to UK daily mail
some are. Excuse the pun, hilarious
But aside from the personal and emotional reasons this approach–of dissing those who didn’t vote for her–would appeal to her, I assume that Democrats in general think this approach is the winning one, because it is so very common on that side. All the good people vote for us! All the thinking people vote for us!
neo: That’s the way progressives think and now that they’ve taken over the Democratic Party, that’s the way Democrats think.
This approach has worked incredibly well in the past, going from unpopular positions to the winning hand on civil rights, the Vietnam War, feminist issues, gay rights, the Iraq War, same sex marriage and on the cusp of the trans-whatever agenda.
If things go badly under Trump — the economy collapses or the North Korea business goes horribly sideways and millions die — Democrats, maybe even Hillary, will pick right up from where they left off and start running the table again.
I believe they’ve pushed it too far and that strategy has reached its sell-by date, but I don’t count on it.
Compromise then, is just a truce awaiting a fresh outbreak of hostilities.
DNW: In other words what the Muslims call hudna. But I’ll bet you know about that.
Hudna: a tactical pause intended only for rearmament, a temporary respite in the war between Islamic forces and non-Islamic forces.
The authoritative Islamic Encyclopedia (London, 1922) defines hudna as a “temporary treaty” which can be approved or abrogated by Islamic religious leaders, depending on whether or not it serves the interests of Islam; a hudna cannot last for more than 10 years.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/236310/when-cease-fire-not-cease-fire-david-bedein
Oddly, this article from the atlantic came to my attention from another blog. I read it and am amazed at how the author never calls out the outright lies on the left and in particular Hillary. He of course focuses on Trump and conservatives. Reading something like this shows how Hillary can still think that she was unjustly wronged. Hillary is the very definition of a conspiracy theory nut but he certainly misses it. Anyway….just passing this along incase someone wants to see how the other side thinks of us. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/how-america-lost-its-mind/534231/
Hillary dixit:
No, the map doesn’t show that. What it shows is that Hillary won states that represent 49.5% of America’s GDP. That is SOO easy to check. as Wiki has both election results by state and GDP by state. Perhaps if you break it down in a county-by-county vote you get two-thirds, but I doubt it. By states, it’s about even.
Put into a spreadsheet. Easy as pie. I bet even all those geeks at Hillary’s election center in Brooklyn could have done it. (Though as Maine split 3-1 electoral votes for Hillary/Trump, that had to be taken into consideration.)
Neo quotes:
Ah yes, the good old Adlai quote. I am also reminded of seeing a bumper sticker in the 1980s, when I was still an Independent voter: “Vote Republican. It’s better than thinking.”
When a Demo condescends to you, an appropriate response would be to bring up the Adlai quote and ask, “Are you so devoid of original ideas that you need to keep repeating something that was old hat 60 years ago?”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_GDP
I still like Ike and I’ve got the buttons to prove it.
I never see it as wise to diagnose Parkinson’s (or anything else) from a distance, whether one is an MD or not. I just don’t think it’s enlightening.
As I get older, clichés get harder to resist. This time, I can’t help but think “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.”
Applies to Hillary, as well as all those women who keep telling her that the presidency was stolen from her.
Clinton was probably basing that two-thirds of GDP comment on these findings by the Brookings Institution:
Gringo: don’t bother about the pie charts and such; she just makes crap up on the fly.
Van: I’ve got a Dewey button…
The less-than-500 counties that Hillary Clinton carried nationwide encompassed a massive 64 percent of America’s economic activity as measured by total output in 2015. By contrast, the more-than-2,600 counties that Donald Trump won generated just 36 percent of the country’s output–just a little more than one-third of the nation’s economic activity.
Good to know that places like Detroit, Baltimore and St. Louis are so optimistic and moving forward. I bet their inner-city residents will be thrilled when they hear the news.
And as Jim Treacher wrote today, maybe her Indian audience should ask themselves why, if Clinton and the left are so pro-woman, they’ve been so hateful towards Nikki Haley, who was born into a Sikh family.
I also found the 64% of GDP by counties, from another source. So, it appears that Hillary WAS more or less telling the truth when she stated,”I won the places that represent two-thirds of America’s gross domestic product.” She can’t remember “counties,” and has to resort to “places?”
The Democrats have been telling us for decades that they are the party of the people, the party of the little guy. Undoubtedly the 2016 report about capturing 64% of the GDP by counties was also correct in 2012, a year when Democrats informed us that they were for the little guy against that horrid plutocrat Mitt Romney. Whatever floats your boat, I guess.
The Democrat party is no longer the party of the little guy, no longer the party of the people. It is the party of plutocrats, of Jeff Bezos and the Silicon Valley billionaires. It is the party of John Kerry and the Kennedy clan. It is the party of Clintons who won their hundreds of millions courtesy of their political connections. It is the party of places with the greatest inequalities of income, like California. The Democrat party now constitutes those who look down at their noses at the less rich – unless the less rich are diehard Democrats. The Democrat party consists of those who label as “deplorable..racist..bigoted…phobic” people who have the effrontery to disagree with saintly Democrats.
Disclaimer: I used to vote Democrat.
OlderandWheezier
Good point. Though some of the Hindis in the audience would probably support some Sikh-bashing. Diversity ain’t what the Demos tell us it is.
“I won the places that represent two-thirds of America’s gross domestic product”.
Does anyone know how this is actually *counted*? For example, does GE’s entire contribution to the GDP get counted in its headquarters state (CT or MA, depending on whether they’ve finished their move yet), or does it get counted where the people actually work and ship out the products (SC for gas turbines, etc)??
“And to top it all off, Hillary did win the popular vote, . . . .”
As I keep tirelessly pointing out, possibly even including in past neo-neocon comments at some point:
It is not at all clear who won the 2016 national popular vote, should we deduct from the vote totals all votes from
– people who are not living here legally, and
– people who are not living, period.
Actually, Miklos, medical people giving me their opinions after they use their, powers of observation, is something I find extremely useful & interesting. The barrel chested man who has COPD, the jaundiced person with yellow sclera who has a liver ailment., the woman you see in a super market who has no use of her left arm and drags her left leg, a stroke survivor.
Medical people use *observations* continually, it cuts through quite a bit of clutter when arriving at your diagnosis and course of action. Your mileage might differ.
M J R:
Your point is irrelevant.
Of course that might have happened, but one can always say it happened, whether it did or not, in order to say “It didn’t really happen.” But it did really happen: as far as we know, she won the popular vote.
What’s more, she has every right to say so and to think so (unless she knows for certain exactly how many fake voters there were, and that they are the ones who put her over the top—and by the way, I don’t believe that’s the case).
Her supporters certainly believe she won the popular vote, too. They are going on that assumption, and it makes her actual loss of the election far more bitter for them.
She apparently imagines that in winning the majority vote in areas producing 2/3rds of the GDP, she did it by winning them on the basis of the votes of those who actually produced the economic activity in those areas.
Has no one ever seen an auto plant in a ghetto before?
The more Hillary opens her mouth, the more she is making the case that many folks did the right thing by NOT voting for her.
I’m so glad I didn’t vote for Hillary.
I’ll admit for the first time, I voted for Trump…..
I haven’t told anyone that.
I’m not sure about whether or not conservatism will win in the long term because the answer to that will reveal itself in the future. I’m not sure anyone is being convinced to understand conservatism – some how young people like death, misery (socialism) and continuing to be wards of the state.
I’m not sure what Hillary’s message is yet. Vote for me so you can have – what? What Hillary? What were you selling us minions?
She’s pretty corpulent. Look at her waddling in the videos in India. That could ‘splain it. Every time the wind presses that billowing protective sheet back against her, you want to stare and grimace. Or you don’t want to, but kinda do anyway.
More people would probably have remarked on her startling fatness and its relevance , if it were not for that distractingly weird Indian officer along side her, with his 1970’s style military leisure tunic stretched to popping over his bouncing inner tube waist and mortifying man-boobs.
Looking at them together is like receiving a visual one-two punch as you scan the sidewalk… first the vomit then the turd.
His beret prevents us from observing if a carpet flap comb-over completes the look. But the two surely belong together. Made for each other.
DNW:
Hillary is certainly overweight, but “startling fatness” is not a good description, IMHO. She’s fairly typical for women her age. She carries virtually all of her weight below the waist, and always has, although she’s definitely gained some weight over the years (as is very typical).
If she was just somebody’s grandma and not Hillary Clinton no one would think much about it. Sure, she could stand to lose 20-30 or so pounds, but that’s well within the norm for a woman of around 70.
By the way, I watched the video of her slipping on the steps. In my opinion, what’s going on there is that she has very flat sandals and they are stone steps. Flat sandals like that often have completely slick smooth bottoms which under certain conditions can become very slippery, and stone steps could easily be one of those conditions. She is not looking particularly dizzy or unsteady there; what I see is her taking a step and the sandals failing to get any traction and slipping beneath her as thought it’s ice she’s stepping on. That’s why it happens twice.
I’m not into making excuses for Hillary, but I call them like I see them. That’s what I see here, and I don’t care if it’s Hillary or anyone else. She does plenty of things I can’t stand, but I’m not going to imagine things that aren’t there.
Trum knew the Wicked Witch of the West, HRC< had stolen the election from him given his own internal polls.
However, he didn't know that the Alt Right and Deep State would barely overturn that result.
In the primary season and the election season of 2016, I asked what Republicans were going to do about Democrats stealing the election. No answer. They put it up to Luck or God I guess.
Let’s chronicle Hillary s falls
She fell back when she was SofS, that was while getting up from a chair when she had a flu virus,can’t recall last time I fell out of a chair. It was reported that she hit her head causing a blood clot on her brain for which she was hospitalized,in dire condition as judged by seeing bill and chels at her bed side. She is discharged & wears sympathy glasses as she testifies at a congressional inquiry into beinghazi attack.
She fell boarding an airplane while S of S. She fell in the UK while in heels & running & holding a cup of coffee, so she does challenge herself! Broken toe that time,better than second clot on brain..Almost fell at 911 memorial but a stanchion on the sidewalk supported her
Now she takes 2 headers in India but some people think it’s her shoes, I think it’s a brain problem !
Do you know anyone with a similar history.? & those are the falls we know about,how about the ones we haven’t heard of or seen. Cannot be called a normal situation at all.
Molly NH:
She didn’t take “headers.” Look at the video; I did, and that’s my conclusion.
I have taken quite a few falls myself. I slipped on the ice very badly about 5 weeks ago, sprained my ankle, and it’s still bothering me. I caught my toe on some pavement a number of years ago and did a really bad faceplant; I chronicled it here in some detail. In addition, I’ve slipped on steps (wet leaves; also a time with marble steps) and I was in my 40s for one incident and about 12 for the other, and sprained my ankle badly both times. I have many friends of many ages who have fallen many times under many circumstances (broken wrists, ankles, etc) and none of them have any underlying problems. One, for example, tripped on a rather long skirt and broke her wrist very very badly; she was about 50 and perfectly healthy.
In addition, I’ve fallen a few times (tripped on different things, such as a non-secured rug) and not hurt myself.
These things happen quite frequently to healthy people. As far as Hillary’s health goes, I listed her actual health problems (rather than her imagined ones) here.
I agree with Neo about those sandals and those bumpy, irregular stone steps. I noted she finally kicked the sandals off and then had no problems. I’ve always avoided buying any shoes that have smooth leather soles because they make it very easy to slip.
In the same time frame (6 yrs) I have fallen zero times and I am 4 yrs younger than her. I had misses though, my sandal lip got caught on the stairs as I was going up and I was able to catch myself & correct to stay upright. Then I backed into an
open dishwasher door but again was able to correct and hold my balance. Like Trump describes her, low energy & crooked not a good look for the first female President
So neo I guess you and she have things in common
I m glad I don’t t.
Sorry for your falls take care
What a loser.
MollyNH:
You’ve never tripped or slipped going down stairs (or anywhere else), in your life? Never caught yourself slipping a little?
I will not guess about HRC’s health issues. She doesn’t look healthy for her age in my eyes, which I suspect involves over indulgence when it comes to food and drink, and the blistering bitterness she feels from once again being denied what she views as her rightful reward.
OTOH, imagine being married to Slick for decades, and then imagine being married to the shrew queen for decades. Neither role is a recipe for good physical or mental health.
I welcome her words and the hysterics of the media talking heads, it is refreshing to observe our would ne masters admit how much they hate the peasants.
I prefer to examine HRC and her party on the basis of their stated iideas, and actions, rather than on projected or imagined hypotheticals, which distract and quickly descend into ad hominem attack.
Many on the Left invoke such tactics in their tireless campaign against President Trump. It’s childish (and ineffective). Such tactics lower the tone of the debate.
neo-neocon, 8:23 pm — “M J R: Your point is irrelevant.”
I concur with you in that, as you state below, “Her supporters certainly believe she won the popular vote, too. They are going on that assumption . . . .”
I respectfully do not and can not concur, in the sense that we’re seeing more and more of this sort of voter fraud in recent years, and all of us of sound principle and good will, especially including the goo-goos (good government types), and even Hillary-bots, need to be shaken from their stupors about voter fraud. (If there’s always been widespread voter fraud, and not just in recent years, that underscores my position even more.)
“But it did really happen: as far as we know, she won the popular vote.”
I do know that the official tally says she won the popular vote.
But I do not know how many votes for each candidate were legitimate votes.
“What’s more, she has every right to say so and to think so . . . .”
neo, I do not quarrel with her right to say so and think so (I know that you know that).
“Her supporters certainly believe she won the popular vote, too. They are going on that assumption, and it makes her actual loss of the election far more bitter for them.”
I agree with these last two sentences. I just don’t want us to lose sight of the voter fraud issue. It’s relevant to me, because I’m not as willing as some are to happily set the issue aside, even if just for the sake of argument, even if there’s no argument but just for the sake of a discussion of Hillary’s and her followers’ bitterness.
Miklos thinks what’s going on between Conservatives and Progressives is a debate. How quaintly charming naivete.
It’s a war, not a debate. Trump won because he recoginzed that fact. He won on an ad hominem strategy. Had he stuck to polite debate and Marquess of Queensbury rules, he’d have ended up no different than Romney and McCain.
Neo & Gringo:
Adlai Stevenson’s electoral map looked like George Wallace’s (yellow).
You should ask condescending liberals (but not me) why they think that is.
I’m no physician but I know poor health when I see it. I seriously don’t expect this woman, the would-be American Evita, to be a force in 2020.
know what I mean?
Generous attitude, Neo.
But no, “startled” is the reaction you will have if you see the particular clip I described. When she’s being escorted about in an armored pantsuit, that belly and spreading hips are less pronounced. But even draped in the pantaloons and tent top she’s got on, the breeze betrays her physique; that of a pregnant bowling pin.
Yeah well, not “Grandma”; but instead, Ms Politics of Meaning, or Schoolmarm to America. As such, she should manifest some of the personal virtue and self-criticism she suggests is lacking among the Basket of Deplorables.
And my grandmothers didn’t look like that. Nor my mother. Nor … well … she’s not of that age.
Fifty pounds probably, Neo. Forty at least. I never mock the fat for being fat, per se. Just those who would presume to tell me how to live … when they can’t muster enough self-discipline to get on an effen treadmill themselves.
No mercy for Hillary.
I guess being so tall, she can be conceded a few extra kilos, LOL
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/is-hillary-clinton-getting-taller-or-is-the-internet-getting-dumber/2015/09/24/58af4dfa-5e33-11e5-9757-e49273f05f65_story.html?utm_term=.0c72a2266238
Let’s say the sandals did have slick soles, there are plenty of sandals made with nonslip soles, or you can get them put on your shoes– there are still shoe repair shops in NYC, people walk a lot there.
If it’s shoe related wardrobe malfunctions, that shows extremely poor judgment, never mind politics.
She falls frequently, has even banged her head hard enough to get a concussion and blood clot. She is taking blood thinners where they warn you repeatedly about falling and still she totters around on ‘sensible’ looking, but slippery shoes???
Frankly, she doesn’t wear cute enough shoes to justify frequent falling because of them.
On the plus side, bones seem ok, given all the falling, so there’s that.
Esther you make an excellent point regarding HRC’s shoes. I travel quite a bit and though only 58, have arthritis in my feet, so put a lot of thought into what shoes to bring on my trips that always entail a lot of walking. To date, I’ve managed to be both fashionable and head-off any problems. Indeed HRC shows amazing incompetence in wardrobe choice on such an important issue considering her history and that doesn’t even take into account the ugliness of her choice. Or perhaps her issues are more serious and shoe choice wouldn’t make a difference. And if that is the case, she still chooses to travel? I found her to be the most politically driven person I ever saw, from the time of her first 60 Minutes interview. My opinion hasn’t changed and it explains the woman.
Esther:
Unless there’s a few falls of Hillary’s that I’ve missed, she doesn’t fall “frequently.”
This is a woman of around 70 who is very very much in the public eye, with her every move scrutinized, traveling all over the world. As far as I know she’s fallen (or almost fallen) 3 times: once as I detailed in point #2 here (reportedly from dehyration), once during a grueling campaign there was this incident (which may have also been dehydration and heat, although it’s really unclear what caused it), and this slippage on the steps in India.
I think that, considering the pace she leads and her age, and all the conditions of travel and heat and maybe not eating regularly and not hydrating properly, it’s not a high number.
I’m certainly not saying that I agree with her on much of anything or that I think she shows good judgment in any way, shape, or form. But I think there is little evidence for this commonly-held (on the right) idea that she has some big illness that’s being covered up.
Manju:
Neo & Gringo:Adlai Stevenson’s electoral map looked like George Wallace’s (yellow).
Which reminds me of another interesting electoral fact related to Adlai. Eisenhower got a higher percentage of the vote in the South in 1956 than Goldwater did in 1964. So much for the liberal narrative informing us that Goldwater’s vote against the 1964 Civil Rights Bill was the initial cause for Southern whites changing their votes from Democrat to Republican.
Southern Whites’ Shift to the GOP Predates the ’60s
Hillary:
The polls don’t show what proportion of the high school dropout vote Hillary got, as the polls stopped reporting that in 2016.Exit polls and election results — what we learned.
Just wondering- is it racist that in 2012, when Obama ran, the high school dropout vote was counted, but in 2016, when white-bread Hillary ran, the high school dropout vote wasn’t counted?
Today is Pi day! 3/14.
Pie are round
Cornbread are square!
I have heard the health conspiracy stories, but have no idea about the state of her health, because I’m not a doctor, or have even seen her in person.
I think it is reasonable to observe that she seems unsteady on her pins and that decent footgear could help keep her from accidentally slipping.
But her comments seem to be intentional, not a slip of the tongue.
Boy…we’re sure spilling a lot of verbiage on someone who will NEVER be POTUS.
She should be a convict, and maybe she will & maybe she won’t, BUT she will NEVER be POTUS.
And IMHO…
Her continued public verbal diarrhoea is one of the ways we get Trump 2020.
Don’tcha just love it, Neo?! The white female-spouse of a serial philanderer, hyper-sex addict OUTSIDE his marriage is criticizing those brutalized, bullied ladies who didn’t buy her grift?!!
It activates my Gag Reflex for lying bullshit.
Hillary has slipped or fallen more or less on her own. Neo’s misadventures involved obstacles or ice. There’s a difference.
I am seventy three and live in the upper midwest. The only falls I’ve had in years are on ice.
Richard Aubrey:
I have slipped on slick steps when I’m wearing shoes with no traction. That is my assessment of what is happening here, on scrutinizing the way she is moving.
Her other two falls were supposedly due to dehydration, feeling dizzy and weak as a result. You either believe that or you don’t, but if someone is dehydrated it can happen.
As I said, I have plenty of friends who have fallen for reasons like that once or twice and they are perfectly healthy people. It happens. Hillary is out gadding about, keeping a pretty hectic pace, and she is under constant scrutiny, so every misstep is on camera or reported on
Why isn’t it enough to criticize Hillary Clinton for what she’s done, her policies, the things she’s said? There’s a rich and fertile field there. Why exaggerate and imagine? It’s the flip side of people on the left saying Trump has dementia. I don’t think much of it on either side.
neo-neocon said:
She and her supporters are free to say and think she won the popular vote. I am free to point out there is no such thing. At least as far as relevant metrics go. We have fifty one (including the District of Columbia) separate elections when we elect a President. We don’t have a nationwide popular vote for a reason.
It’s a pretty simple concept; if you want to know how Presidents are elected it’s written right there in the Constitution. No mention of a national popular vote, is there. Because the smaller states would have never ratified the Constitution without the electoral college. Then, as now, the people in the smaller states understood if we had a national popular election all a candidate would have to do is run up the score in two of 13 original states to win. It’s much the same now. If a candidate runs up the score in New York and Kali then that candidate wins.
Arguing that there’s a national vote tally that’s somehow relevant is ridiculous. If you’re campaigning to have a larger national popular vote than your opponent, you’re doing it wrong. It’s like the losing team in the Superbowl arguing they really won by citing all the stats in which they outperformed the winning team, like pointing out they gained more yards rushing. Or that they beat the point spread in Vegas.
That’s not how you win football games. The only stat that counts are putting points on the scoreboard. The only stat that counts in Presidential elections is the electoral vote tally.
Looks like Hillary took another header. This time in the bathtub.
Broken wrist, the news reports say.
Sorry to be late to this party, but invoking GDP is problematic, as the kids say these days. GDP is a measure of activity, not wealth.
To illustrate; if the air force were to load up and bomb Detroit flat, the GDP would get a healthy bump from replacing the bombs, refueling the planes, and rebuilding Detroit.
Note there would be no increase in wealth or well being, not to mention some fatalities along the way. But GDP!!!