Support NeoGAF

[NYCmetsfan]

I'm less concerned with any unknown skeletons Hillary might have as I am worried about her shortcomings as a candidate. This story is just depressing, she doesn't want to campaign, hates the press, invited David Plouffe over for consultation and took none of his advice, and has contempt for every part of the process. The private email dustup basically reinforced why she has terrible instincts. She hates so much of political and public life that I wonder what her motivation is for being in the game anymore.

People can tell when someone doesn't want to be somewhere anymore, at her email press conference she looked like the whole event was completely beneath her and that she was just humoring the public. I mean, no one would've enjoyed that moment, but she looked like she didn't even care if it went well. Candidates have to ask people for their vote, on that basic level she's not very good.

Don't read politico on clinton, their part of that swamp that peddles in this nonsense

 

[NeoXChaos]

I'm less concerned with any unknown skeletons Hillary might have as I am worried about her shortcomings as a candidate. This story is just depressing, she doesn't want to campaign, hates the press, invited David Plouffe over for consultation and took none of his advice, and has contempt for every part of the process. The private email dustup basically reinforced why she has terrible instincts. She hates so much of political and public life that I wonder what her motivation is for being in the game anymore.

People can tell when someone doesn't want to be somewhere anymore, at her email press conference she looked like the whole event was completely beneath her and that she was just humoring the public. I mean, no one would've enjoyed that moment, but she looked like she didn't even care if it went well. Candidates have to ask people for their vote, on that basic level she's not very good.

She is not bill clinton. She is never going to be Bill Clinton. His political gifts are not hers. Dont expect a Hillary that will be sunshine and rainbows. Ditto with APK. The beltway wants a competitive primary for ratings. Jerry Brown is correct in the primary rational in that she does not need one despite what the press thinks. Is she rusty? Sure but look a Romney who had a primary. Self-deportation, 10,000 bet.....

Jeb Bush would love to be in Hillary Clinton shoes. All the past frontrunners got primaries but did it really change anything for most of them? not really, most got scares but at the end of the day atleast on the Republican side, the establishment got their man.

 

[Dan]

Sen. Tom Cotton states the obvious.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/...-stopped-because-they-already-control-tehran/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mX8y-91tfCo

“Moreover, we have to stand up to Iran’s attempts to drive for regional dominance,” he continued. “They already control Tehran and, increasingly, they control Damascus and Beirut and Baghdad. And now, Sena’a as well.”

Senator, who do you think should control Tehran if not the Iranians?

 

[thepotatoman]

Sen. Tom Cotton states the obvious.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/...-stopped-because-they-already-control-tehran/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mX8y-91tfCo



Senator, who do you think should control Tehran if not the Iranians?

Also, how does Iran have any control over Beirut or Baghdad?

 

[BSsBrolly]

I think some of the folks in this thread are too quick to dismiss concerns over the emails. It's as though any wrongdoing other than murder just isn't a problem.

Whether the emails will have a detrimental effect in the long run is impossible to predict, of course, but it's silly to pretend that the criticisms are entirely without merit.

EDIT: McConnell vows: no vote on attorney general until abortion flap solved

Spoiler

Do-the-right-thingery?

That's why the emails aren't a big deal. No wrong doing, not even a rule broken. It's definitely not the smoking gun republicans were hoping for.

Edit: nobody is saying the criticisms are without merit. It was stupid, with that said, she wasn't told she couldnt do it. It's not like she used private email in spite of the law.

 

[Trouble]

Also, how does Iran have any control over Beirut or Baghdad?

Control is the wrong word, replace it with 'influence' and it makes a bit more sense. They definitely do their utmost to exert influence elsewhere, but that's not a stone the U.S. should think about tossing lightly.

Also, Cotton is an idiot.

 

[Coriolanus]

Yeah, i mean, trying to influence your neighbours? What kinda monsters do something like that?

 

[Aaron Strife]

Yeah, i mean, trying to influence your neighbours? What kinda monsters do something like that?

Didn't they attack Bruce Braley over that

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Sen. Tom Cotton states the obvious.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/...-stopped-because-they-already-control-tehran/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mX8y-91tfCo



Senator, who do you think should control Tehran if not the Iranians?

There is no Iranian domination in iran

 

[Poodlestrike]

Sen. Tom Cotton states the obvious.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/...-stopped-because-they-already-control-tehran/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mX8y-91tfCo



Senator, who do you think should control Tehran if not the Iranians?

Me. I should control Tehran, and Sen. Cotton supports me 100%. Ask him yourself.

 

[B-Dubs]

Me. I should control Tehran, and Sen. Cotton supports me 100%. Ask him yourself.

Wait a minute, he promised me Tehran! I was going to make a new Tehran, only with Blackjack and hookers. Actually forget the Blackjack and Tehran.

 

[NeoXChaos]

In 2016 race, an electoral college edge for Democrats

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-2016-race-an-electoral-college-edge-for-democrats/2015/03/15/855f2792-cb3c-11e4-a2a7-9517a3a70506_story.html?hpid=z5

http://rothenberggonzales.com/ratings/president

Gonzales’s analysis, which some will dismiss as premature but I applaud (it’s never too early!), reaffirms one of the most important — and undercovered — story lines in presidential politics in the past decade: the increasing Democratic dominance in the electoral college.

Gonzales notes that if you add up all of the states that are either “safe” for the eventual Democratic nominee or “favor” that nominee, you get 217 electoral votes. (A candidate needs to win 270 to be elected president.) Do the same for states safe or favoring the Republican standard-bearer, per Gonzales’s rankings, and you get just 191 electoral votes.

That Democratic advantage becomes even more pronounced if you add to the party’s total the states that “lean” Democratic, according to Gonzales. Put Pennsylvania (20 electoral votes), Iowa (6) and Nevada (6) into the Democratic column and the party’s electoral vote count surges to 249 — just 21 votes short of winning a third straight presidential race. (Gonzales doesn’t rate any states as “lean Republican.&#8221

Well Aaron and Ivysaur. You guys must be thrilled how right you both have been on this EC advantage and Cris Calizza/Gonzales have backed you both up.

 

[thepotatoman]

Control is the wrong word, replace it with 'influence' and it makes a bit more sense. They definitely do their utmost to exert influence elsewhere, but that's not a stone the U.S. should think about tossing lightly.

Also, Cotton is an idiot.

Maybe that word would work in order to make it technically correct, but I don't think that's what he was going for. If he wanted to say influence, he should say influence, not control. I think he was trying to make it sound like they've been on the war path throughout the region, and for people who only watch that show, that's all they're going to get out of it.

It just shows is how terrible the media is for not saying "wait a second, what the hell are you talking about?" while they're doing the damn interview, at least on the Tehran point.

 

[Trouble]

Maybe that word would work in order to make it technically correct, but I don't think that's what he was going for. I think he was trying to make it sound like they've been on the war path throughout the region, and for people who only watch that show, that's all they're going to get out of it. It just shows is how terrible the media is for not saying "wait a second, what the hell are you talking about?" while they're doing the damn interview, at least on the Tehran point.

Yeah, I wasn't trying to infer that Cotton misspoke. He's clearly an idiot and meant exactly what he said.

 

[BSsBrolly]

Scott Walker scares the ever loving shit out of me. The thought of him becoming president is enough to keep me up at night...

 

[HyperionX]

Scott Walker scares the ever loving shit out of me. The thought of him becoming president is enough to keep me up at night...

Not for me. He's such a shitty candidate, and a person in general, that the only thing he could do in a Presidential election is lose spectacularly.

 

[demon]

Scott Walker scares the ever loving shit out of me. The thought of him becoming president is enough to keep me up at night...

As I said before I want him to be the nominee just so I can finally see him lose. Such a massive shit head.

 

[ivysaur12]

In 2016 race, an electoral college edge for Democrats

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-2016-race-an-electoral-college-edge-for-democrats/2015/03/15/855f2792-cb3c-11e4-a2a7-9517a3a70506_story.html?hpid=z5

http://rothenberggonzales.com/ratings/president





Well Aaron and Ivysaur. You guys must be thrilled how right you both have been on this EC advantage and Cris Calizza/Gonzales have backed you both up.

(Gonzales doesn’t rate any states as “lean Republican.&#8221

I find this so interesting. We'll get there eventually with Georgia and Arizona, but there isn't really a Pennsylvania of Republican states. North Carolina definitely tilts GOP, but we'll see what happens in 2016.

 

[StopMakingSense]

Scott Walker scares the ever loving shit out of me. The thought of him becoming president is enough to keep me up at night...

Walker would be the conservative McGovern.

 

[Poodlestrike]

As I said before I want him to be the nominee just so I can finally see him lose. Such a massive shit head.

That reminds me, would he have to give up his governorship to run?

That'd be amazing.

 

[Coriolanus]

Not for me. He's such a shitty candidate, and a person in general, that the only thing he could do in a Presidential election is lose spectacularly.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Remember, Clinton had been elected in the Perot Election, and prior to him, no Democrat had been re-elected since Truman. (LBJ became President less than a year before the 1964 election, I don't really think it counts.)

If you are saying Perot swung the election to Clinton, you are mistaken. Exit polls in both elections showed Perot voters pretty evenly split.


It's a common misconception that certain parties on the right have repeated so often that it's widely believed.


Also, the "no democrat re-elected in however long" really boils down to Jimmy Carter didn't win a second term. Unusual circumstances for LBJ (didn't run) and Kennedy (didn't run).

 

[pigeon]

In 2016 race, an electoral college edge for Democrats

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-2016-race-an-electoral-college-edge-for-democrats/2015/03/15/855f2792-cb3c-11e4-a2a7-9517a3a70506_story.html?hpid=z5

http://rothenberggonzales.com/ratings/president







Well Aaron and Ivysaur. You guys must be thrilled how right you both have been on this EC advantage and Cris Calizza/Gonzales have backed you both up.

This article is terrible.

Democrats don't have an advantage because of the electoral college. They have an advantage because there are more Democrats, hence there are more states that are probably going Democratic. Putting that on the electoral college is like saying that a one-legged man has a disadvantage racing a two-legged man because of the layout of the road.

 

[Aaron Strife]

This article is terrible.

Democrats don't have an advantage because of the electoral college. They have an advantage because there are more Democrats, hence there are more states that are probably going Democratic. Putting that on the electoral college is like saying that a one-legged man has a disadvantage racing a two-legged man because of the layout of the road.

Well looking at the 2012 results Obama only won by 3.9% but won the tipping point state (Colorado) by 5.4%. If you applied a universal swing Romney's victory margin would have needed to be 1.5% to win in the electoral college. Likewise in 2008, Obama's victory margin was 7.2% but once again the tipping point state was Colorado and he won by 9% there, meaning McCain would have needed an overall margin of 1.8%. Far less pronounced in 2004, Kerry could have won the electoral college but lose the popular vote if he swung Ohio (2.1% loss in Ohio compared to his 2.4% loss nationwide).

I'd assume the winner just outperforms their popular vote margin in the electoral college although 04 shows Democrats might have a small advantage. But yes that is ultimately just a result of more (more importantly, bigger e.g. California and NY) states being Democratic.

 

[Metaphoreus]

Huckabee Pursues Unconventional Ways to Fund a Campaign

In a wood-paneled study lined with books and framed family photos, the prospective presidential candidate looks into the camera. “I’m Mike Huckabee,” he says with all the folksy charm that propelled a career as a preacher, politician and broadcaster.

But this is no campaign ad. It is an Internet infomercial for a dubious diabetes treatment, in which Mr. Huckabee, who is contemplating a run for the Republican nomination in 2016, tells viewers to ignore “Big Pharma” and instead points them to a “weird spice, kitchen-cabinet cure,” consisting of dietary supplements.

“Let me tell you, diabetes can be reversed,” Mr. Huckabee says. “I should know because I did it. Today you can, too.”

The American Diabetes Association and the Canadian Diabetes Association caution against treatments like the one peddled by the company Mr. Huckabee represents.

As Mr. Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor and Fox News host, contemplates jumping into the Republican field, he is haunted by his first presidential try in 2008, when he won the Iowa caucus on a populist wave, but eventually sputtered out largely because of money shortages.

Even as he seeks to put the ghosts of 2008 behind by winning over major Republican donors, he has pursued some highly unconventional income streams — not just the diabetes endorsement, but selling ads on email commentaries he sends to thousands of his supporters.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Huckabee declined to say how much he earned from these efforts. But she said he had broken off as a spokesman for the diabetes cure a couple of weeks ago, suggesting concerns that the unusual endorsements may appear un-presidential.

Indeed, Mr. Huckabee risks being viewed by voters less as someone who aspires to be seen as presidential timber, than among washed-out candidates of the past, like Bob Dole, who went on to make Viagra ads, and former Senator Fred D. Thompson, who pitches reverse mortgages.

One ad arriving in January in the inboxes of Huckabee supporters, who signed up for his political commentaries at MikeHuckabee.com, claims there is a miracle cure for cancer hidden in the Bible. The ad links to a lengthy Internet video, which offers a booklet about the so-called Matthew 4 Protocol. It is “free” with a $72 subscription to a health newsletter.

Another recent pitch sent out to Huckabee’s supporters carried the subject line “Food Shortage Could Devastate Country.” It promoted Food4Patriots survival food kits, described as the “No. 1 item you should be hoarding.”

Although a disclaimer on the emails says Mr. Huckabee does not endorse these products, that might not be enough to dissociate him, as a future presidential aspirant, from their claims, which are designed to pry open the wallets of small-donor conservatives, some of whom distrust mainstream sources of information.

 

[Trouble]

Huckabee Pursues Unconventional Ways to Fund a Campaign

Hmmm... perhaps tobacco pills?

 

[benjipwns]

If you are saying Perot swung the election to Clinton

I'm not. As seen in my post where I didn't.

 

[benjipwns]

http://www.vox.com/2015/3/16/8220537/al-gore-president-2016

Democrats need a debate about where their party goes next. Obamacare's passage marked the rough completion of the social safety net that liberals began constructing during Franklin Delano Roosevelt's presidency. The end of the Iraq War drained Democrats of their foreign policy fervor. The rapid acceptance of gay marriage has robbed them of the next civil rights fight. There is work left to be done in all these arenas, but over time, the party will need to discover new dreams, much as Republicans have found the Ryan budget.

The closest thing Democrats have to an organizing concern is income inequality. But their solutions are neither sufficient to the scale of the problem nor quickening to the pulse. Raising the marginal tax rate on dividend income is not the clay from which political movements are crafted.

To many Democrats, the fight the party needs is clear: Hillary Clinton vs. Elizabeth Warren. But the differences between Warren and Clinton are less profound than they appear. Warren goes a bit further than Clinton does, both in rhetoric and policy, but her agenda is smaller and more traditional than she makes it sound: tightening financial regulation, redistributing a little more, tying up some loose ends in the social safety net. Given the near-certainty of a Republican House, there is little reason to believe there would be much difference between a Warren presidency and a Clinton one.

The most ambitious vision for the Democratic Party right now rests with a politician most have forgotten, and whom no one is mentioning for 2016: Al Gore.

Gore can actually fund a campaign

:jnc

 

[Fenderputty]

Which Gore?

Or this one:

 

[Plinko]

Huckabee Pursues Unconventional Ways to Fund a Campaign

Another recent pitch sent out to Huckabee’s supporters carried the subject line “Food Shortage Could Devastate Country.” It promoted Food4Patriots survival food kits, described as the “No. 1 item you should be hoarding.”

LOL at "Food4Patriots." Taking advantage of that paranoid right-wing.

 

[Wilsongt]

Looks like Lynch's confirmation is going to be held up yet again due to Republicans being Republicans about the human trafficking bill.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Going up against your former boss wife?

Not happening.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Which Gore?



Or this one:

We need a bearded president again.

And Hillary clearly isn't going to fill that niche.

Obama looked awesome at his last campaign stop - he had a bit of peach fuzz.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Gore? lol #hottakes

No one gives a shit about global warming outside of liberals.

 

[benjipwns]

Gore? lol #hottakes

No one gives a shit about global warming outside of liberals.

But it's the only visionary issue other than income inequality left after Obama completed the Progressive Utopia started by FDR.

 

[benjipwns]

Which Gore?



Or this one:

SXSW Gore:

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Gore? lol #hottakes

No one gives a shit about global warming outside of liberals.

This isn't true in the slightest. Both the GOP and Dem platforms have a large part of them coping with the problems. It just isn't a powerpoint anymore. Its debates about coal plants, solar rebates and tax credits, electrical grid policy, electric cars, military policy, etc. Its very important on the local level (didn't you claim sandy saved the pres or something?) and will only get more important as we're seeing with funding battles in congress, californias wildfires and drought, farming problems.

Its not smart electoral politics to be screaming global warming but the smaller issues ad up

 

[thepotatoman]

You know, by this point in 2007, all the big guys had already officially announced a campaign, or officially announced their upcoming official announcement. John Edwards actually did it December 2006.

Is Citizens United the difference here? I'm guessing the candidates get to fully cooperate with their "exploratory committee" superpacs with unlimited donations up until they announce themselves.

 

[benjipwns]

But only a combined fourteen Republicans and Democrats have even formed exploratory/campaign PACs.

Republicans:
Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, Chris Christie, Mark Everson, Jack Fellure, Lindsey Graham, George Pataki, Rick Perry, Scott Walker.

Democrats:
Jeff Boss, Martin O'Malley, Vermin Supreme, Jim Webb, Robby Wells

 

[benjipwns]

Also lol, this made me look up Edwards' announcement:

NEW ORLEANS -- Former Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards jumped into the presidential race Wednesday a day earlier than he'd planned, prodded by an Internet glitch to launch a candidacy focused on health care, poverty and other domestic issues.

The North Carolina Democrat's campaign accidentally went live with his election Web site a day before an announcement Thursday that was scheduled to use Hurricane-ravaged New Orleans as a backdrop.

The slip-up gave an unintended double-meaning to his campaign slogan on the John Edwards '08 Web site: "Tomorrow begins today."

Aides quickly shut down the errant Web site but could not contain news of the obvious, even in the shadows of former President Ford's death.

"Better a day earlier than a day late," said Jennifer Palmieri, an Edwards adviser.

Late Wednesday, Edwards announced his intentions to supporters in an e-mail. "I'm running to ask millions of Americans to take responsibility and take action to change our country and ensure America's greatness in the 21st century," he wrote.

Earlier, Edwards visited the site of his planned announcement for a photo opportunity. He did yard work at the home of Orelia Tyler, 54, whose house was gutted by Hurricane Katrina and is close to being rebuilt.

In his e-mail, Edwards said he chose to announce in New Orleans because it demonstrates the power people have to build America when they take responsibility instead of leaving it to Washington.

Edwards listed five priorities to change America. Among them: "Guaranteeing health care for every single American," "Strengthening our middle class and ending the shame of poverty," "Leading the fight against global warming," and "Getting America and the world to break our addiction to oil."

He also listed "Providing moral leadership in the world _ starting with Iraq, where we should begin drawing down troops, not escalating the war."

this guy lol

 

[Aaron Strife]

But it's the only visionary issue other than income inequality left after Obama completed the Progressive Utopia started by FDR.

Well we also need this

as well as a public option for Obamacare and legislative immigration reform.

Then throw in drug law reform and we should be good for the next hundred years or so.

I wish Biden was a viable candidate

 

[Metaphoreus]

Here's Cass Sunstein on Clarence Thomas, the Eccentric:

U.S. Supreme Court justices may be wise, obtuse, fair or political, but we don't ordinarily think of them as eccentric. William O. Douglas, who was on the court in the middle of the 20th century, has long counted as the only unambiguously eccentric justice. But now, as an opinion on separation of powers issued last week makes clear, Justice Clarence Thomas has joined him.

A judge can be counted as eccentric if he holds positions that don't fit with established law and that depart, frequently and significantly, from those that prevail within the court. A judge who is eccentric is not necessarily wrong, and eccentricity can be appealing. To many liberals, and especially to many law students, Justice Douglas seemed bold and admirably rebellious, in part because he was not bound by precedents.

. . .

Justice Thomas is also a fan of liberty, but ideologically he stands at the opposite pole from Douglas, and he interprets the Constitution in a radically different way. More than any justice in history, he is an originalist, insisting that the Constitution’s provisions should be interpreted to mean what they meant at the time they were ratified. Like Douglas, however, Thomas isn't committed to respect for precedent; he believes the original meaning of the Constitution has priority over any judicial interpretation.

The results can be unquestionably eccentric. Last week, Thomas announced his view that Congress lacks the constitutional power to give administrative agencies (such as the Department of Health and Human Services and the Environmental Protection Agency) the authority to “formulate generally applicable rules of private conduct.” That’s radical stuff. It appears to suggest that HHS can't issue binding rules to implement the Affordable Care Act and that EPA can't issue the air quality rules that have defined its work for more than four decades.

I'm not sure if Sunstein meant to give "eccentric" its normally negative connotation, but I'd certainly have chosen a different word to describe Thomas. Also, while I pointed out Thomas' opinion concurring in the judgment in Perez, I believe I failed to point out his opinion concurring in the judgment in Dept. of Transportation v. Association of American Railroads, which also gets into the historical and theoretical weeds of the separation of power.

 

[benjipwns]

Well we also need this

I prefer the version that goes 300 mph and "stops in every town" this one simply isn't a big enough dream for a mind like Ezra's.

AND WHY DOES CANADA GET PART OF OUR HIGH SPEED RAIL?!?!?!?

 

[Aaron Strife]

I prefer the version that goes 300 mph and "stops in every town" this one simply isn't a big enough dream for a mind like Ezra's.

AND WHY DOES CANADA GET PART OF OUR HIGH SPEED RAIL?!?!?!?

51st state.

 

[benjipwns]

On the lighter side:

“In 1986, I was as ready to leave the closet as I would ever be—but how would I do so?” ex-Rep. Barney Frank recalls asking in a Politico essay titled “My Life as a Gay Congressman.” He finally acknowledged the truth, but “for many years, I was ashamed of myself for hiding my membership in a universally despised group.”

Just one question: How in the world did he manage all those years to conceal being a member of Congress?

Here's the politico piece: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/barney-frank-life-as-gay-congressman-116027.html

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Clinton seems much more willing to call out sexism than obama is doing for racism.

https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/577559904774459392
https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/577560394987921408

(I don't think that the case with the AG but I think this tweet shows that shes not afraid of being a forceful voice of females against a male dominated field)

 

[Aaron Strife]

Clinton seems much more willing to call out sexism than obama is doing for racism.

https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/577559904774459392
https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/577560394987921408

(I don't think that the case with the AG but I think this tweet shows that shes not afraid of being a forceful voice of females against a male dominated field)

The best thing about blocking Loretta Lynch is if Republicans stonewall Obama's AG nominee for so long Eric Holder could become the longest serving AG in history. Conservative boogeyman Eric Holder gonna take your guns away and give them all to the Mexicans.

 

[benjipwns]

Clinton seems much more willing to call out sexism than obama is doing for racism.

(I don't think that the case with the AG but I think this tweet shows that shes not afraid of being a forceful voice of females against a male dominated field)

When hasn't that been the case? It's the entire reason the Clinton White House had to forcefully domesticate her.

During the '92 campaign she was more prone to saying things like this:

I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession which I entered before my husband was in public life.

You know, I'm not sitting here like some little woman standing by my man, like Tammy Wynette. I'm sitting here because I love him, and I respect him, and I honor what he's been through and what we've been through together. And you know, if that's not enough for people, then heck, don't vote for him.

lol from 2007:

"Having a woman in the White House won't necessarily do a damn thing for progressive feminism," writes Bitch magazine founder Lisa Jervis in LiP magazine. "Though the dearth of women in electoral politics is so dire as to make supporting a woman — any woman — an attractive proposition, even if it's just so she can serve as a role model for others who'll do the job better eventually, it's ultimately a trap. Women who do nothing to enact feminist policies will be elected and backlash will flourish. I can hear the refrain now: 'They've finally gotten a woman in the White House, so why are feminists still whining about equal pay?'"

Center For New Words program director Jaclyn Friedman puts it. "Hillary's not my friend. She's not actually progressive. The fact that she's a woman is an unfortunate red herring."

But this is arguably the most important thing:
Hillary Clinton's Gay, Lesbian, & Feminist Task Force - Her Femi-Nazi Lesbianism Revealed

CHAPTER 1
PHOTOS OF HILLARY’S LESBIAN FEMI-NAZI GIRLFRIENDS REVEALS HOW HILLARY SUPPORTS AND DEFENDS LESBIANISM AND HOMOSEXUALITY

CHAPTER 2
RUDY GUILIANI CROSS DRESSING WAS A JOKE NOT TO BETAKEN SERIOUSLY

CHAPTER 3
THE DEMOCRATIC GAY AND FEMINIST AGENDA

CHAPTER 4
HILLARY CLINTON ON ABORTION AND PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION – YET SHE WANTS TO GIVE BABIES $5,000.00 EACH FOR COLLEGE?

CHAPTER 5
PHOTOS SHOWING THE LESBIAN WOMEN WHOM HILLARY CLINTON IS SISTERS WITH

FOR A FULL EXPOSE ON WHAT HILLARY CLINTON ENDORSES,SEE LESBIAN PHOTOGRAPHY VOLUMES I, II, AND III!

 

[NYCmetsfan]

When hasn't that been the case? It's the entire reason the Clinton White House had to forcefully domesticate her.

During the '92 campaign she was more prone to saying things like this:



lol from 2007:



But this is arguably the most important thing:
Hillary Clinton's Gay, Lesbian, & Feminist Task Force - Her Femi-Nazi Lesbianism Revealed

I'm aware of her history. It seemed much more muted in her senate runs and in 2008. I remember a lot of people wonder, when she gave her concession speech and gave a forceful defense of a women president, where that clinton was on the campaign trail.

 

[benjipwns]

Well, you gotta remember how that campaign was run:
*links to five thousand exposes of which 4879 blame it on Mark Penn*