What did Hillary do wrong and what's next for her?

Buchan said:
Her husband's mass incarceration bill of the mid-1990s tore apart families on a monumental scale, and many of those families were African American. Inconceivable that more wasn't made of this during the election run.
Click to expand...

It was suprising that Sanders did awful with the African American vote in the primaries. He only fared well with the young.




black-vote-dems_cc84abd808e194d21d16a8c49cd504af.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.png
 
Buchan said:
I'm reading 'Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton's Doomed Campaign' at present. Pretty decent read with a good insight into how the inner circle worked throughout the primaries and the General Election. Time after time, it becomes apparent that the Clintons are simply bullies in the strongest sense of the word and people who actively seek to crush anyone who dares stand in their way.

The disastrous #ImWithHer social media campaign slogan summed up their arrogance and self-obsession beautifully. This, coupled with the notion that it was 'her turn', will always be the lasting memory of the 2016 race, for me. Laughably bad and laughably out of touch.
Click to expand...

simply laughable all round.
 
Fergies Gum said:
It was suprising that Sanders did awful with the African American vote in the primaries. He only fared well with the young.




black-vote-dems_cc84abd808e194d21d16a8c49cd504af.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.png
Click to expand...

A new-ish poll of approval ratings had him performing best among African Americans. I think visibility itself was a big factor. It especially makes sense if the 25 states in your graph were the initial ones.

That said, those numbers above 45 are so dismal. Republicans might do better!
 
Buchan said:
I'm reading 'Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton's Doomed Campaign' at present. Pretty decent read with a good insight into how the inner circle worked throughout the primaries and the General Election. Time after time, it becomes apparent that the Clintons are simply bullies in the strongest sense of the word and people who actively seek to crush anyone who dares stand in their way.

The disastrous #ImWithHer social media campaign slogan summed up their arrogance and self-obsession beautifully. This, coupled with the notion that it was 'her turn', will always be the lasting memory of the 2016 race, for me. Laughably bad and laughably out of touch.
Click to expand...

Do you recommend for reading? Tempted to order it from Amazon

George Stephoplous said the virtually the same 15 years ago in his autobiography detailing his time as the senior aide to Bill Clinton. Many others have also said the same thing down the years. So it seems this is a genuine life long personality trait.
 
Suedesi said:
At the risk of repeating myself
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/201...ions-trump-wins.403345/page-413#post-19235600

On the economy - the US Congress/administration are so incompetent that they are arbitrarily handing $Billions of US tax revenue away. Take Google, Apple or Amazon; when they earn international profits, those are returns on R&D that was almost exclusively conducted in the US. Yet the bureaucrats in charge, have allowed these US companies to relocate their intellectual property abroad to Ireland, Bermuda, Cayman, Luxembourg and other tax havens through arcane and non-transparent accounting moves. So basically Google's IP (initially funded by the National Science Foundation) is actually claimed by the company to reside in Bermuda, out of the reach of IRS.

One example - Apple profits booked in a foreign country, say Germany, are shifted back to Ireland where there's prolly a sweet deal of 0-1% tax rate. Then the Irish profits are shifted further onward to Bermuda, where tax rates are zero. $100mm in profits in Germany, are paid as a royalty to an Irish based subsidiary of Apple. Then Apple pays no taxes in Germany (since gross revenues are offset by royalty payments) and the $100mm in royalty are booked in Ireland. Then these profits are brought back to the Caribbean tax heavens - the Irish subsidiary pays a "royalty" to the Cayman sub and voila, $100 mm is back in the Caribbean tax free (minus a small haircut in Ireland).

Now if all of Apple's overseas subsidiaries were to be consolidated into one corporate account, and all the company's profits earned on US intellectual property were consolidated into one bottom line, these accounting maneuvers wouldn't matter. Apple's $100mm German sales would hit the US corporate account bottom line where it belongs. But in fact, the opposite is true - un-repatriated "foreign earnings" of US Companies are deferred under the tax code, so that's untaxed. Basically, American companies are sitting on more than $2 TRILLION of accumulated profits that they've booked abroad in this manner to avoid US corporate taxes.

Take Gilead for example, which owns Sofosbuvir, a drug to cure Hepatitis C. Gilead bought the drug from drug developer Pharmasett, which did all the R&D in the USA. Yet the intellectual property on the drug is claimed by Gilead to be Irish for tax purposes. So, when Gilead fleeces US govt by charging $1,000 for a drug that costs $1 to manufacture, and the money is paid by the US Govt to pay for the treatment of a US citizen in the US, Gilead has the balls to book the US profits in Ireland. You can't make this shit up.

Trump has been the only one of the remaining candidates that has talked about the issue. He's talked about lowering the corporate tax, or an amnesty that would allow that money to be brought onshore. He's talked about "bad trade deals", and spoken about in protectionist terms as well, and how he wouldn't eat another Oreo. Fine, that's what the masses understand, as opposed to drawing the fecking diagram containing 50 subsidiaries and special purpose vehicles!!!

I'm not sure what Clinton's policy on the matter is, but I'm assuming as Obama MK2, she doesn't have a clue. And Bernie is probably busy pontificating on just redistributing the wealth.

Also, while you mention regulations, Billary's close relations with Wall Stree helped stoke two financial bubbles (99-2000 and 2005-8) and the Great recession. In the 90's they pushed financial deregulation for their campaign backers that in turn let loose financial fraud, manipulation and toxic assets and eventually collapse. In the process, Billary won elections and got mighty rich.

On national security - Clinton is always on the side of intervention. Foreigners always believe that GOP are the neocons and the Dems act as doves to counterbalance the warmongering. This is not true - both parties are divided between neocon hawks and doves who don't want the US involved in unending wars. Hillary is a staunch neocon whose record of favoring American force and war adventures explains much of our current security danger.

Bill instituted an official US policy to support regime change in Iraq (see Iraq Liberation Act) which laid the foundations of the Iraq war in 2003. Of course by then, Hillary was a senator and a staunch supporter of the war in Iraq which caused thousands of lives, cost trillions of USD and caused more instability in the region than any other single decision in modern foreign policy.

As Secretary of State she was among the most militaristic and disastrous in modern US history. Let's talk about Libya and Syria.

On Libya, she's gotten flack over Benghazi, but her support in overthrowing Qaddafi has been far worse. She promoted regime change in Libya, which not only was in violation of international law but also counter to basic judgment. Libya descended into civil war and unsecured arms stashes quickly spread and fed weapons to Boko Haram in Nigeria, spawned war in Mali and fueled ISIS in Syria and Iraq. Of course, at the time she quipped on Qaddafi that "we came, we saw, he died".

In Syria she again promoted regime change, demanded that al-Assad be removed and thought this would be quick, costless and successful. Her declaration at the time was "Bashar must get out of the way" etc. Of course, no place on the planet is more fecked up today than Syria, and no place poses a greater threat to US security. 10 million Syrians are displaced, refugees are drowning in the Mediterranean and undermining the stability of Greece, Turkey and the EU. ISIS of course has moved in and used Syria as the base for worldwide terror attacks.

She's also supported NATO expansion (why?) at every turn, including Ukraine and Georgia, against all common sense. Of course, poking the Russian bear in the eye has led to counter-reactions in both Georgia and Ukraine, so as Secretary of State she's presided over the restart of the Cold War with Russia. Add that to her glowing CV.

Is it bad judgment? Does she blindly trust the CIA? Does she want to show that as a Democrat she will be more hawkish than the Republicans? Is it to satisfy her hardline campaign backers? I don't know, and I don't care. Whatever the reasons, she's got an awful record and for that I don't want her to run the country.

If it takes a clown in her stead, so be it.
Click to expand...

Superb.
 
Buchan said:
1101960715_400.jpg


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...istory-of-america-and-russias-mutual-meddling

'Outside intervention in domestic politics is as old as politics itself.'

Clintonworld loyalists continuing to push this Russian angle for their spectacular and embarrassing loss last year is another reason for her demise: it's never, ever her fault.
Click to expand...
So, both the US and Russia successfully influencing elections somehow...doesn't help prove their point...? You're presenting evidence that goes against your own argument.
 
Buchan said:
'Outside intervention in domestic politics is as old as politics itself.'

Clintonworld loyalists continuing to push this Russian angle for their spectacular and embarrassing loss last year is another reason for her demise: it's never, ever her fault.
Click to expand...

Attempted intervention from outside parties is indeed common. What's extremely uncommon is for the outside interventions to involve overt criminal acts against an electoral candidate while their opponent welcomes, encourages and defends such acts (whilst simultaneously denying they even occurred!) and subsequently attempts to provide concessions to the perpetrators.

Trump and his team are desperately trying to paint this whole situation as being normal. It's not. Not in the slightest.

On a related note do you fancy answering some of the questions you've been asked in the Trump thread? I'm particularly interested in hearing your opinion on who outside of the Trump team was desperately trying to cover up the June 9th meeting as you alluded to in this post.
 
Current GOP Playbook, basically a revised narcissist's prayer.

1. It didn't happen.
2. And if it did we didn't know
3. And if we did it's not our fault
4. And if it is it's no big deal
5. And if it is you should be grateful.

We're getting towards 5. Not quite there yet. See Iran-Contra timescale for further details.
 
Buchan said:
Her husband's mass incarceration bill of the mid-1990s tore apart families on a monumental scale, and many of those families were African American. Inconceivable that more wasn't made of this during the election run.
Click to expand...

Her and Bill spent the years after the election heavily focused on healing those wounds. Obama bringing her in as SoS helped a lot, and then supporting her nomination.

Sanders just didn't have the history with the major players in the black political communities, and Clinton's team jumped in early to stamp out any momentum by spreading bullshit lies about him being racist. David Brock at his 'finest'..
 
Fergies Gum said:
It was suprising that Sanders did awful with the African American vote in the primaries. He only fared well with the young.




black-vote-dems_cc84abd808e194d21d16a8c49cd504af.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.png
Click to expand...
Those numbers are staggering. Especially when you consider Sanders' history of civil rights activism and the work he has done for minority communities in Vermont. I don't agree with some of his political positions but I'm struggling to see how black people in America could possibly see Clinton as the better candidate.
 
Buchan said:
1101960715_400.jpg


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...istory-of-america-and-russias-mutual-meddling

'Outside intervention in domestic politics is as old as politics itself.'

Clintonworld loyalists continuing to push this Russian angle for their spectacular and embarrassing loss last year is another reason for her demise: it's never, ever her fault.
Click to expand...

She's quite correct to push the Russian angle. They did interfere and compel people to vote for Trump via their targeted social media/fake news campaigns in swings states. Despite all of that she still managed to trounce him by nearly 3m votes.
 
Raoul said:
She's quite correct to push the Russian angle. They did interfere and compel people to vote for Trump via their targeted social media/fake news campaigns in swings states. Despite all of that she still managed to trounce him by nearly 3m votes.
Click to expand...

Plus the little irrelevant detail about it being a federal crime.
 
Raoul said:
Despite all of that she still managed to trounce him by nearly 3m votes.
Click to expand...

This electoral nonsense again. Sanders regularly 'trounced' her in the primaries (see Wisconsin results, for one) yet she picked up as many delegates in the state because of the Democrats' crazy 'superdelegates' system. I don't recall there being a huge call for voting reform when that was happening.

The Democrats loved the electoral system prior to the General. They felt it suited them and that they had it wrapped up according to their Mook-led analytics. The only time the argument about the electoral system being bad was after Clinton lost.

Again, it's never, ever her fault.
 
Buchan said:
This electoral nonsense again. Sanders regularly 'trounced' her in the primaries (see Wisconsin results, for one) yet she picked up as many delegates in the state because of the Democrats' crazy 'superdelegates' system. I don't recall there being a huge call for voting reform when that was happening.

The Democrats loved the electoral system prior to the General. They felt it suited them and that they had it wrapped up according to their Mook-led analytics. The only time the argument about the electoral system being bad was after Clinton lost.

Again, it's never, ever her fault.
Click to expand...

The Dem superdelegate system is a sham and has been rightfully called out as such, and changed for future election cycles.

This however has feck all to do with Trump being a Russian stooge whose financial entanglements made him a GRU target for collusion and quid pro quo with Putin's Russia. Therein exists the true crime. Hillary can take a small fraction of the blame for the election results since she ran an uninspiring non-populist campaign, but the bulk of the fault for this mess still lies exclusively with Trump and his Russian backers.
 
I am glad she's releasing her book this year and not next year when the midterms happen.

Hopefully she stays away in a years time when we're gearing up for the midterms and doesn't get involved.
 
Last edited:
What's next? Hopefully a slow & agonizing terminal illness

A book about what happened? She happened - the corrupt whore who has been involved with one scandal after another since she's ever been involved with public office was ultimately & quite fortunately found out.

Then the temerity to frame the argument that somehow not voting for her was a vote for Trump, well perhaps if she hadn't been involved with rigging the primarie and cheating against Bernie we'd have Sanders in office

Chelsea also now getting into the 'game' herself, bringing with her a legacy of corrupt Clinton baggage who have taken advantage of special interest groups & lobbyists without ever having to work for anything nevermind relate to the average person who haven't benefited from privilege
 
FCBarca said:
What's next? Hopefully a slow & agonizing terminal illness

A book about what happened? She happened - the corrupt whore who has been involved with one scandal after another since she's ever been involved with public office was ultimately & quite fortunately found out.

Then the temerity to frame the argument that somehow not voting for her was a vote for Trump, well perhaps if she hadn't been involved with rigging the primarie and cheating against Bernie we'd have Sanders in office

Chelsea also now getting into the 'game' herself, bringing with her a legacy of corrupt Clinton baggage who have taken advantage of special interest groups & lobbyists without ever having to work for anything nevermind relate to the average person who haven't benefited from privilege
Click to expand...

Hear, hear.
 
FCBarca said:
What's next? Hopefully a slow & agonizing terminal illness

A book about what happened? She happened - the corrupt whore who has been involved with one scandal after another since she's ever been involved with public office was ultimately & quite fortunately found out.

Then the temerity to frame the argument that somehow not voting for her was a vote for Trump, well perhaps if she hadn't been involved with rigging the primarie and cheating against Bernie we'd have Sanders in office

Chelsea also now getting into the 'game' herself, bringing with her a legacy of corrupt Clinton baggage who have taken advantage of special interest groups & lobbyists without ever having to work for anything nevermind relate to the average person who haven't benefited from privilege
Click to expand...
Which part of Hillary got millions more vote in the primaries than Sanders did you not get?
 
Fergies Gum said:
I am glad she's releasing her book this year and not next year when the midterms happen.

Hopefully she stays away in a years time when we're gearing up for the midterms and doesn't get involved.
Click to expand...
I guess given the nature of us political cycles the democratic selection process for 2020 will be effectively in process (securing backing, funding etc)
If she is considering a run in 2020 then I guess she will need to be involved around the mid terms... perhaps that's why her books coming out sooner rather than later?
 
sun_tzu said:
I guess given the nature of us political cycles the democratic selection process for 2020 will be effectively in process (securing backing, funding etc)
If she is considering a run in 2020 then I guess she will need to be involved around the mid terms... perhaps that's why her books coming out sooner rather than later?
Click to expand...

It'll be absurd and ridiculous if she was considering a run in 2020.

I think its highly unlikely she will run again.
 
Fergies Gum said:
It'll be absurd and ridiculous if she was considering a run in 2020.

I think its highly unlikely she will run again.
Click to expand...

Yeah, she'll be well into her 70s and was a fairly shite candidate in the end anyway. Time for someone different, whether it be an old face or a fresh one.
 
Cheesy said:
Yeah, she'll be well into her 70s and was a fairly shite candidate in the end anyway. Time for someone different, whether it be an old face or a fresh one.
Click to expand...

She was a fairly shite candidate from the start. They should never have run someone with those kind of negative polling numbers, it was insanity.
 
FCBarca said:
What's next? Hopefully a slow & agonizing terminal illness

A book about what happened? She happened - the corrupt whore who has been involved with one scandal after another since she's ever been involved with public office was ultimately & quite fortunately found out.

Then the temerity to frame the argument that somehow not voting for her was a vote for Trump, well perhaps if she hadn't been involved with rigging the primarie and cheating against Bernie we'd have Sanders in office

Chelsea also now getting into the 'game' herself, bringing with her a legacy of corrupt Clinton baggage who have taken advantage of special interest groups & lobbyists without ever having to work for anything nevermind relate to the average person who haven't benefited from privilege
Click to expand...
The Chelsea vs Ivanka election is not far way...
 
If she wants a future in politics Chelsea would do well to cull most of the people her father and mother had in their circles and keep just a few to have the experience/knowledge around but go brand new everywhere else. So that she can have name recognition but little of the stink.
 
FCBarca said:
What's next? Hopefully a slow & agonizing terminal illness

A book about what happened? She happened - the corrupt whore who has been involved with one scandal after another since she's ever been involved with public office was ultimately & quite fortunately found out.

Then the temerity to frame the argument that somehow not voting for her was a vote for Trump, well perhaps if she hadn't been involved with rigging the primarie and cheating against Bernie we'd have Sanders in office

Chelsea also now getting into the 'game' herself, bringing with her a legacy of corrupt Clinton baggage who have taken advantage of special interest groups & lobbyists without ever having to work for anything nevermind relate to the average person who haven't benefited from privilege
Click to expand...

Any need for that first part?
 
roseguy64 said:
If she wants a future in politics Chelsea would do well to cull most of the people her father and mother had in their circles and keep just a few to have the experience/knowledge around but go brand new everywhere else. So that she can have name recognition but little of the stink.
Click to expand...
Hope she stays clear of it, sick of the family dynasties.
 
Fergies Gum said:
It'll be absurd and ridiculous if she was considering a run in 2020.

I think its highly unlikely she will run again.
Click to expand...
It's unlikely and probably not a great idea, but the Dems don't have anyone with her name recognition or connections.
 
JustAFan said:
Hope she stays clear of it, sick of the family dynasties.
Click to expand...
Oh no, not for the presidency. Doubt she'd go for that. I'm thinking she might consider a run as a NY senator or rep. Probably in 2020. Next year might be too soon.

Or she could just as easily stick to charitable work and the private sector and make loads while being an occasional commentator. Pays to have connections and family money.
 
Cal? said:
It's unlikely and probably not a great idea, but the Dems don't have anyone with her name recognition or connections.
Click to expand...

I would say Sanders and Biden would come close to matching her name recognition.

Age will be an issue with the 2 in a few years time and i am still gutted that Bernie never got a fair shot at the primaries with the full Democratic party machine working against him.
 
Last edited:
FCBarca said:
What's next? Hopefully a slow & agonizing terminal illness

A book about what happened? She happened - the corrupt whore who has been involved with one scandal after another since she's ever been involved with public office was ultimately & quite fortunately found out.

Then the temerity to frame the argument that somehow not voting for her was a vote for Trump, well perhaps if she hadn't been involved with rigging the primarie and cheating against Bernie we'd have Sanders in office

Chelsea also now getting into the 'game' herself, bringing with her a legacy of corrupt Clinton baggage who have taken advantage of special interest groups & lobbyists without ever having to work for anything nevermind relate to the average person who haven't benefited from privilege
Click to expand...

Jesus fecking christ man, she may have been an appalling politician, corrupt, whatever you want to call her but what on earth has she done to warrant the first comment?
 
Fergies Gum said:
I would say Sanders and Biden would come close to matching her name recognition.

Age will be an issue with the 2 in a few years time and i am still gutted that Bernie never got a fair shot at the primaries with the full Democratic party machine working against him.
Click to expand...
:confused:

Hillary is the only one of the right side of 70 out of those 3.
 
It's pointless to speculate about a new run. She's soiled goods now. Losing to Obama was acceptable, he is and is seen as a once in a generation politician and public speaker. Losing to The Donald even with all the mitigating factors is still a undeniable failure, unless Mueller's investigation actually prove that voting tally were tampered with, in which case she will blitz into the WH as the wronged candidate who kept silence to protect the institutions, but not bloody likely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.