Support NeoGAF

[Aaronology]

She is a fair weather flip flopper politician

Hillary has consistently moved to the left over the course of her very long career in politics, one already distinguished by its progressiveness. Please cite examples of her oscillating between positions and not evolving the way anyone would over the course of decades. And then, once you have done this, show me how it is remarkable enough a pattern in Clinton that it differentiates her from politicians in general.

 

[marrec]

I honestly don't know why people don't like her. Are there decisions she made as SOS or as a senator that people think will continue into the Oval Office? She could be the biggest liar in the world, and she still has a lifetime worth of public service and helping people that you simply cannot deny. Her qualifications are second to none. Who or what else do people want?

They don't like her because she's not a great orator (thought great in smaller crowds), she was seen as a carpetbagger by some in 2000 when she ran for Senate in NY, she was a bit too nasty to Obama during their primary season in 2008, she has been inextricably tied to the attack on Benghazi (for some) And she's been needlessly obfuscatory about her private e-mail server.

She's seen as having quite a large influence on our decision to go into Libya in the first place. She voted for the Iraq war.

I think that's it. As far as the more (or less) legitimate reasons for disliking her. Edit: Oh, she didn't pass the ideological purity test administered by Bernie Sanders and his followers.

Other people dislike her because she's a powerful take no shit woman, and that's their worst nightmare.

 

[Mackenzie 92]

If you wanna talk shit you better have something to back it up

This is pretty much it.

If you start popping off with a bunch of right wing propaganda BS, then you're rightly gonna get piled on.

On the other hand if you have some valid concerns or criticisms most gaffers will engage in civil discourse.

 

[Sir_Crocodile]

All WaPo and NYT are doing is bash Trump. What about Hillary? Given all the skeletons she has in her closet, I am surprised there isn't more press (from left-leaning media outlets) about them.

If there are all these fantasticly explosive skeletons, why aren't right wing journos blaring them out from the rooftops instead of peddling the same whitewater/benghazi garbage that's been proven false time and again?

 

[FallingEdge]

Off topic has the same problems as gaming; an infestation of poorly informed bandwagoners whose primary contribution is to act incredulous, offended or reply with a meme picture.

yeah i read this on /r/iamverysmart/ as well

 

[Lys Skygge]

Remember landing under sniper fire in Bosnia? What do you call that if not an outright lie? And what do you call people who tell outright lies if not liars?

So she embellished one story and she's labeled a liar?

 

[Orbis Tabula]

I've PM'd mods across the internet soon you will be banned from Twitter.

Too bad my hackers are catching all your PMs before they even get to the cyberwebs! Mods can't see me, man! I'm the breathe from a ghost's whisper...

 

[Kinyou]

Hey, who hasn't told everyone they were attacked by a sniper in Bosnia?

Some of my best friends are snipers in Bosnia!

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

I did. I'm not saying Breitbart is deserving of Pulitzer. Just saying they're in the same bucket as the other given how one-sided they are.



All WaPo and NYT are doing is bash Trump. What about Hillary? Given all the skeletons she has in her closet, I am surprised there isn't more press (from left-leaning media outlets) about them.

Lol, Trump is running one of the worst campaigns I've ever seen, frequently doing mind-boggling shit, and you're wondering why he's being bashed? Perhaps you should question why you find rationality so offensive.

 

[radios shipping overview]

Nah I'm good , not getting sucked into a multi page debate to be told how she's above whatever criticism I throw at her . I've been in enough threads or observed enough threads to see the routine . My previous post reflects what I've seen going on over the last few months since the primaries wrapped up . Point to me a single thread dedicated to a Clinton criticism that sticks and has support by Clinton GAF agreeing it's a fair criticism and I'd walk back on my point , yet I haven't seen a single thread of that sort yet . So that means Clinton is either infallible or there's a conscious effort not to acknowledge criticism to come her way .

Are you asking for a thread discussing a flaw of Clinton's without any actual discussion? Just people nodding and agreeing with each other?

 

[ElectricBlanketFire]

Remember landing under sniper fire in Bosnia? What do you call that if not an outright lie? And what do you call people who tell outright lies if not liars?

And there was a thread on it at the time, including Y2Kev (mod with Hillary avatar) who jokes about it.

 

[rjinaz]

I did. I'm not saying Breitbart is deserving of Pulitzer. Just saying they're in the same bucket as the other given how one-sided they are.



All WaPo and NYT are doing is bash Trump. What about Hillary? Given all the skeletons she has in her closet, I am surprised there isn't more press (from left-leaning media outlets) about them.



Read above. Not about quality per se, but complete one-sidedness.

Are you seriously equating the two? Trump says something stupid or does something stupid almost daily now. He gives them the material.

Clinton doesn't. So I guess what you are saying is until Clinton starts being a dumbass like Trump then in your mind the media that covers mostly Trump is unfair.

"Trump said stupid thing today and we are covering it. But just to make things fair, Hillary emails Hillary Benghazi"

 

[RedAssedApe]

hillary is a girl and has cooties

 

[whyamihere]

IAll WaPo and NYT are doing is bash Trump. What about Hillary? Given all the skeletons she has in her closet, I am surprised there isn't more press (from left-leaning media outlets) about them.

Like the NYT article that broke the email story?

 

[Hasphat'sAnts]

It's fair to criticize her policy stances over the years.

It's intellectually dishonest to peddle these "Both sides are equally terrible" taeks

 

[Bad Trip]

Are you asking for a thread discussing a flaw of Clinton's without any actual discussion? Just people nodding and agreeing with each other?

No I'm saying there's an unwillingness on this site to have a discussion about her faults as a political candidate without it being hand waved away .

Do you think Clinton has no faults or negatives as a political candidate ?

 

[Maztorre]

Breitbart is to the right wing what the New York Times, the WaPo and the Guardian are to the left-wing.

This is "both sides!!!" nonsense. Breitbart is a series of glorified talking points for the alt right. And neither the NYT or the WaPo are particularly left wing either, but at least they and the Guardian (which is socially left but a large volume of its coverage is economically centre-left) are capable of journalism relative to Breitbart.

All WaPo and NYT are doing is bash Trump. What about Hillary? Given all the skeletons she has in her closet, I am surprised there isn't more press (from left-leaning media outlets) about them.

I shouldn't have bothered, logic has already left you. The reason Trump is "bashed" is because he spews bullshit on a near-constant basis which is obviously gold dust to newspaper and 24/7 news channels. Hillary Clinton's skeletons have been the subject of media coverage spanning decades at this point - there is less to write because its been done to death. The right's lack of smears for Hillary at this point is why they have resorted to their insane witch-hunt over Benghazi and the lock her up chants at rallies, they're running out of stuff because it's all been dug up before to get at both her and her husband for 20 years.

 

[whyamihere]

Nah I'm good , not getting sucked into a multi page debate to be told how she's above whatever criticism I throw at her . I've been in enough threads or observed enough threads to see the routine . My previous post reflects what I've seen going on over the last few months since the primaries wrapped up . Point to me a single thread dedicated to a Clinton criticism that sticks and has support by Clinton GAF agreeing it's a fair criticism and I'd walk back on my point , yet I haven't seen a single thread of that sort yet . So that means Clinton is either infallible or there's a conscious effort not to acknowledge criticism to come her way .

This is actually really annoying. "There are things I can criticize her for that are real, but you're all so mean that it's not worth it, but they're real!"

 

[jay]

It's fair to criticize her policy stances over the years.

It's intellectually dishonest to peddle these "Both sides are equally terrible" taeks

I sense there is a lot more vitriol for the left than for the "both sides are equally bad" people, who are fewer in number.

 

[marrec]

No I'm saying there's an unwillingness on this site to have a discussion about her faults as a political candidate without it being hand waved away .

Bruh, I just spent 200ish words across a few posts in this thread listing out her, more or less, legitimate faults. Most people don't actually care about a private e-mail server that's been thoroughly investigated and dismissed by the FBI and Justice Dept.

For a lot of people though, those faults pale in comparison to the good she's done and the hardwork she's put in for the American people.

 

[RMI]

All WaPo and NYT are doing is bash Trump. What about Hillary? Given all the skeletons she has in her closet, I am surprised there isn't more press (from left-leaning media outlets) about them.

why climb the tree when there is a never ending supply of low hanging fruit? Blame Trump for making it easy for them.

 

[Tankman]

Nah I'm good , not getting sucked into a multi page debate to be told how she's above whatever criticism I throw at her . I've been in enough threads or observed enough threads to see the routine . My previous post reflects what I've seen going on over the last few months since the primaries wrapped up . Point to me a single thread dedicated to a Clinton criticism that sticks and has support by Clinton GAF agreeing it's a fair criticism and I'd walk back on my point , yet I haven't seen a single thread of that sort yet . So that means Clinton is either infallible or there's a conscious effort not to acknowledge criticism to come her way .

Democrats have many complaints about Hillary(hawkish, problems with the Clinton foundation, her relations to moneyed interests). The US has a two party system and flipping the Supreme Court supersedes any deficiencies she would have as a legislatively limited president.

 

[Blader]

The idea that journalism has to be fair and balanced is the reason climate deniers and anti-vaxxerd still air time on CNN.

Journalism doesn't have to treat everyone the same. Some people and subjects are deserving of more and harsher scrutiny than others.

 

[Aaronology]

No I'm saying there's an unwillingness on this site to have a discussion about her faults as a political candidate without it being hand waved away .

Do you think Clinton has no faults or negatives as a political candidate ?

By all means list the faults you think are being dismissed.

 

[Christine]

No I'm saying there's an unwillingness on this site to have a discussion about her faults as a political candidate without it being hand waved away .

Do you think Clinton has no faults or negatives as a political candidate ?

No, I don't think she is without fault.

 

[Tranqueris]

I'll never understand what must it be like to live in the right wing alternate reality where Breitbart is considered a reputable news organization..

https://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/...mear-campaign-against-gold-star-family/212089

In the meantime, some of Trump’s allies have begun a smear campaign of baseless and vicious innuendo against the Khan family. Based on zero evidence, Breitbart now claims Khizr Khan has connections to the Saudi Arabian government, the Clinton Foundation, and terrorism

 

[Bad Trip]

This is actually really annoying. "There are things I can criticize her for that are real, but you're all so mean that it's not worth it, but they're real!"

So do you believe Clinton has no negatives or failings as a political candidate ?

 

[Eidan]

Read above. Not about quality per se, but complete one-sidedness.

Both covered the Clinton email scandal extensively. The Washington Post employs conservatives like Charles Krauthammer and Jennifer Rubin who write hit pieces on Democrats all the time. Tell me more about this complete one-sidedness.

 

[yanipheonu]

She's kind of a dork, fairly uncharismatic, and lies about as much as I'd expect for a politicians who's been in the business this long. But I mean, she's a politician, I don't expect any of them to be spotless.

She just seems so tame in comparison to Mt. Gaffe erupting next door.

I've never felt pressure to not post negatively about here though.

 

[whyamihere]

Is there anyone here who believes that Hillary Clinton is a perfect candidate without faults?

If not, can we stop pretending that's a real argument instead of the ridiculous strawman it is?

 

[spindashing]

No I'm saying there's an unwillingness on this site to have a discussion about her faults as a political candidate without it being hand waved away .

Do you think Clinton has no faults or negatives as a political candidate ?

Let us have a discussion, then.

What are Hillary Clinton's faults?

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

So she embellished one story and she's labeled a liar?

Who hasn't embellished a story, or hasn't lied? I would love to meet this "human-being".

 

[Otakumegane]

My only (current) outstanding criticisms of Hillary Clinton is that her and her party was incredibly active in trying to prevent another Obama from swooping in with unparalleled charisma and take the primaries. The "establishment" as you would like to call it, wanted to have Hillary as the nominee, and therefore took steps to lessen the impact of other nominees. A failure to address that lead to the DNC email leaks and its ongoing aftermath where many of us are pissed at what happened, we realize it's too late too late to change it, and neither do we want to draw attention to anything that might give Trump a fighting chance.

More important than the criticism of Hillary is the absolute squashing of all things Trump. America as a whole is worse than it was before he became a political icon.

 

[Alucrid]

Let us have a discussion, then.

What are Hilary Clinton's faults?

she doesn't play overwatch

 

[radios shipping overview]

No I'm saying there's an unwillingness on this site to have a discussion about her faults as a political candidate without it being hand waved away .

Do you think Clinton has no faults or negatives as a political candidate ?

Sure, she has flaws. Sure, she wasn't my first pick. But this is a discussion forum with a lot of members. If you bring up a criticism of one of the two major candidates for president of the United States, some people are going to debate you on it. That's what forums are for.

 

[Shadow Broker]

I just can't believe that our two candidates are Hilary and Trump.

One is shit and the other only looks good because the other is shit.

I hope when she becomes president she makes me regret thinking little of her and shows she is more than capable as our first Madam President.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

You're seriously putting Breitbart on the same tier as the New York Times?

Damn this is your best hot take since calling my home province welfare bums and then saying you're become a tax expatriate because you were so angry about Liberals winning the Canadian election.

Y'all should know better..lol.

 

[whyamihere]

So do you believe Clinton has no negatives or failings as a political candidate ?

Obviously she has negatives and things that I don't like about her because she is a politician who is not me. Why is this an argument? What are you actually trying to argue?

 

[marrec]

she doesn't play overwatch

That's it I'm voting for Stein.

 

[spindashing]

she doesn't play overwatch

probably plays Battleborn

what a Crook

 

[Bad Trip]

Is there anyone here who believes that Hillary Clinton is a perfect candidate without faults?

If not, can we stop pretending that's a real argument instead of the ridiculous strawman it is?

Then why are any criricisms of her past policy, views , dealings in politics , or simply her character hand waved away ?

 

[rjinaz]

No I'm saying there's an unwillingness on this site to have a discussion about her faults as a political candidate without it being hand waved away .

Do you think Clinton has no faults or negatives as a political candidate ?

That's because many of us have been having these political discussions for months now. For example, I have long determined that regardless of what faults Hillary has, compared to Trump they just don't matter.

Now I know in your mind that's probably a confirmation, but really it's not. Trump is a hot mess. Hillary has yet to do anything even remotely comparably bad as Trump. The moment she does, then maybe we can talk. Most if not all that is brought against Hillary is petty or silly at best.

I don't like Hillary's wallstreet history/ties hence why I voted for Bernie. But that just doesn't matter anymore especially when we learn today that he is putting a bunch of his money buddies in charge of running this country.

 

[Tankman]

Let us have a discussion, then.

What are Hilary Clinton's faults?

She doesn't understand tech. Her desire to escape public scrutiny made her vulnerable to foreign hackers by running a private server.

 

[Aaronology]

So do you believe Clinton has no negatives or failings as a political candidate ?

That you even think this qualifies as a gotcha question speaks volumes about what you think of people who support Clinton and GAF in general. Of course she has negatives and failings, because she is human and imperfect. Even as a political candidate there are aspects of her career that will give some pause for due reason. Why do you appear to be under the impression you're in a forum where any one is afraid to say this?

 

[Durden77]

Maybe it wouldn't provoke such reactions if most of it was not delivered in the "both sides are the same" packaging.

This does really suck, because they're obviously not. When thise posters get shut down, it's understandable.

And also I don't literally mean that like mods don't allow this or anything, didn't mean to confuse anyone or try to attack any mods. I meant the general atmosphere here implies this to me.

 

[QuantumZebra]

I feel the reason why people get piled on when criticizing Hillary is that most of the time their criticisms are baseless. They usually spout non-sense they read from a meme once. Whenever someone says "Hillary is corrupt and a LIAR!" they usually have no facts to back those claims up. They only have "feelings".

.

 

[Crossing Eden]

No I'm saying there's an unwillingness on this site to have a discussion about her faults as a political candidate without it being hand waved away .

Do you think Clinton has no faults or negatives as a political candidate ?

You keep talking about her supposed faults without actually naming them and backing them up. Multiple people have asked.

 

[Slayven]

Breitbart is to the right wing what the New York Times, the WaPo and the Guardian are to the left-wing.

Breitbart is a white supremacist news rag. One that has work with people that support terrorism

 

[digdug2k]

No I'm saying there's an unwillingness on this site to have a discussion about her faults as a political candidate without it being hand waved away.

Do you think Clinton has no faults or negatives as a political candidate ?

Heh. I love how instead of saying "Yes, I don't want anyone to disagree with everything I say" you say "I don't want people to hand wave away everything I say". Master level craftsmanship going on here. Applause to you and your friends.

 

[B-Dubs]

Then why are any criricisms of her past policy, views , dealings in politics , or simply her character hand waved away ?

They aren't. What criticisms are hand waved? You've got to give examples!