1 1
markharju

Hillary the Hypocrite

Recommended Posts

"I'm With Her" 2017: Clinton told CNN that it was time to abolish the electoral college. “I think it needs to be eliminated,” she said at the time. “I’d like to see us move beyond it, yes.” https://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/13/politics/hillary-clinton-anderson-cooper-electoral-college-cnntv/index.html

Clinton 2020: Now, she will be one of 538 electors, likely casting a vote for the Biden-Harris ticket, who are overwhelmingly likely to win New York.

Anyone else see the hypocrisy here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please expand on why you think this is 'hypocrisy.'

A quick search didn't reveal anything on how she became one.

But as a former Senator and Presidential candidate, she's got the political capital to become one if she wanted.
Or the notoriety to be appointed one if other people wanted her as one. 

In either case, she's part of the political landscape (not as much as the conservatives would like to paint her as). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, markharju said:

Anyone else see the hypocrisy here?

Dude, you regularly post about how much you hate Islam because of their violence, then post fantasies about people dying and "throwing themselves from skyscrapers" and how "some people need some Pb badly."

You don't get to talk about hypocrisy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, markharju said:

...Anyone else see the hypocrisy here?

 

27 minutes ago, billvon said:

Dude, you regularly post about how much you hate Islam because of their violence, then post fantasies about people dying and "throwing themselves from skyscrapers" and how "some people need some Pb badly."

You don't get to talk about hypocrisy.

The SC dead center statement of the year.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, markharju said:

"I'm With Her" 2017: Clinton told CNN that it was time to abolish the electoral college. “I think it needs to be eliminated,” she said at the time. “I’d like to see us move beyond it, yes.” https://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/13/politics/hillary-clinton-anderson-cooper-electoral-college-cnntv/index.html

Clinton 2020: Now, she will be one of 538 electors, likely casting a vote for the Biden-Harris ticket, who are overwhelmingly likely to win New York.

Anyone else see the hypocrisy here?

Hi Mark,

IMO you might gain by taking some anger management classes.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
16 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Mark,

IMO you might gain by taking some anger management classes.

Jerry Baumchen

It's really weird that he describes the left as "raving leftist psychoses" who are "overemotional" when you remove the word "leftist" it pretty much describes him. It actually sounds like he's the most emotional person here.

Edited by olofscience

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Coreece said:

About as hypocritical as those who bitch about a two party system but keep voting for one of the two parties.

 

Coreece, it's not hypocritical. Sort of it's a Sophies choice, right? If you are involved you need to make a choice that gets you somewhere close to what you hope for. Protest votes for people who will only get a few percent max in a contest where a few percent determines who will win are worse than not voting. Just how it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Coreece said:

About as hypocritical as those who bitch about a two party system but keep voting for one of the two parties.

Again, as long as the Electoral College remains in place, effectively a FPTP system, it will always come down to a 2-party system. Simple mathematics.

https://youtu.be/Nd-9op64t2M

https://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

... Protest votes for people who will only get a few percent max in a contest where a few percent determines who will win are worse than not voting. Just how it is.

I'd say that 'it depends'.

While it's true that there are contests where a few percent decide the outcome, there have been a lot of contests where I can't see enough difference between the candidates to matter anyway. 
Or contests where there's only one major party candidate running.

I've always liked the platform some of the 'middle' 3rd parties have. Not "Labor/Socialist", not "US Constitution" or "Tea Party". 

So whenever there's been a race that either isn't close, or I don't like (or hate) either of the candidates enough to vote for (or against) either of them, then I'll vote 3rd party. Libertarian most often, but not exclusively.

In 2012, I couldn't see enough difference between Obama & Romney to care. 
In 2016, I hated Trump, but didn't like Clinton. I was foolish enough to trust the polls, even though they were pretty close. 

No regrets on the first one, and only a little on the second. 
My biggest surprise was that the percentages of votes for the 3rd parties didn't improve at all in 2016. 
I was hoping that with both candidates being rather unlikeable, 3rd parties would see a significant increase.
I was wrong. 

And to head off any 'throwing away your vote' comments, I voted for Dole in 96 & McCain in 08. And for a variety of state level candidates over the years who had little or no chance of winning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1