The Politics Thread

[quartermainefan]

She was unlike the typical first lady though.   They said all along they were two-for-one, and it seems safe to assume whatever the Clinton administration was doing, she was in the loop making decisions or at least helping make them.   She was integral in getting him elected when the whole Gennifer Flowers thing was happening, and she was the lead warrior when the impeachment thing happened.   The whole phrase "vast right wing conspiracy" was started by her.   She doesn't try to say "Oh, I was just the first lady hosting luncheons and setting menus" so we shouldn't either.    She was also active in his administration in Arkansas.   It's also safe to assume he will be the most influential first spouse ever, even more than Eleanor Roosevelt.    They're a package deal and don't try to hide it.  That's part of what makes them so interesting.

[DRW50]

Hillary took a backseat after the 1993/1994 health care fiasco, so I do wonder how much she was involved with NAFTA, but it's a no-win situation. She can't run on claiming she was the little woman, but I question how much of a role she had in policy after early '94. 

[Vee]

Watch the debate!

 

Even Corey Lewandowski is down.

[Vee]

Please register in order to view this content

 

Focus groups on CNN and FOX call it for Hillary.

Edited September 27, 2016 by Vee

[marceline]

I agree with Vee. Watch the debate. I thought it would stress me out but it was a thing of beauty. Now we get to see how he'll weasel out of the next one.

[Roman]

not CT. and I'm sorry that I am delusional because I don't agree with your opinion. that is very sad. and shows your ignorance. 

well, Morning Joe and AM Radio here in STL are saying RUMP won the debate. 

[JaneAusten]

 

I hate to tell you but your credibility is lacking when you reference Breitbart. And seriously do you really think the Trumpkins minds are changed? Who do you think is favoring his tweets? Why does favoring a tweet matter anyway? You really get yourself worked up over things that are not going to change. I tend to be a pessimist by nature, but there are just some things that really go beyond the scope of reasonableness.

 

 Everyone pretty much knows NAFTA has been a mixed bag. It's not all bad. And let her talk about her role as first lady as being the champion for getting Children's healthcare passed. Or how Clinton walked out of office with a surplus or how wages grew more during his administration then they had in 35 years.

 

[Roman]

Hillary Clinton just now: "anyone who claims about microphone problems is not having a good night."

[DramatistDreamer]

 

 

Unfortunately many politicians on both sides have oversimplified the nature and the value of trade. Now many Americans do not have much of an understanding about the complexity of trade, simply parroting talking points heard on the cable news shows and heard in rallies.  Trade is much more nuanced than we're hearing in most media and sadly, during several election cycles now.

 

No sovereign nation can expect to have a healthy economy or GDP without trade. A protectionist dictum will not make for a successful economy. Venezuela employed this type of tactic in their economy over several generations. Has anyone read about Venezuela's economy lately? I have, it's quite sad. Let's just put it this way...they are now forced to import oil from the U.S., one of Venezuela's long-time enemies. Think on that for a moment.

 

like @JaneAusten stated, there were some positives as well as negatives on NAFTA. In trade, no one side gets everything they want. The key is to get more of what you want/need for your side and yes, there were definite missteps but the U.S. had some key benefits as well, probably a bit more than the drawbacks. It wasn't all terrible as some want to describe.

Edited September 27, 2016 by DramatistDreamer

[Soapsuds]

Robbie Mook, Clinton's campaign manager, was just on The View. He so damn cute....anyways...Robbie said Clinton only needs 10 more electoral votes to be the next President of the US. He mentioned that after the discussion went to why the election was so close.

[Ms. Quartermaine]

That's why I said only one from Breitbart. I don't count that site. Or Drudge. I didn't like seeing the other 4.

 

And I have a tendency to associate popularity with re-tweets/favorites, and I know it's ridiculous, but I do it, anyway. It's similar to the large crowds at his rallies. I know they don't matter, but I still don't like hearing about them. 

Edited September 27, 2016 by Ms. Quartermaine

[Soapsuds]

Top show of the night in 18-49s

NBC’s “Presidential Debate” 9-11 p.m., 5.0 rating.

Top show of the night in 18-34s

NBC’s “Presidential Debate” 9-11 p.m., 3.7 rating.

Top show of the night in total viewers

NBC’s “Presidential Debate” 9-11 p.m., 15.58 million.

 

New York alone had a 55 rating....LOL...more than the superbowl......LOL

[Vee]

Rudy was out there crying that Lester Holt was biased, and that Trump should refuse to do any more debates unless the moderators stop fact-checking.

 

Trump, of course, blames his microscope conspiracy. The alt right kids spammed a lot of polls - not enough to change the prevailing opinion that she wrecked him - and then tried to make a "TrumpWon" hashtag happen, but it's been hijacked entirely by people mocking them.

[Soapsuds]

LOL...is he serious?....What a dumbass!

[DRW50]

It's clever, as it puts more pressure on future moderators to shill. And most of them will. I'm already seeing the spin become CW, from various pundits and political sites, that Trump was unfairly treated and that he got most of the questions, while Hillary didn't have to talk about Benghazi or e-mails, etc. 

Edited September 27, 2016 by DRW50