"Yes, I know. But I just didn't like Hillary"

[EffieBlack]

[lunamagica]

1. But..but her emails!

[unblock]

2. and to think they actually said the problem with her emails was that russia might see them.

[PunkinPi]

15. There's one for that too...

[betsuni]

3. Good reason not to marry someone, bad reason not to vote for the only sane candidate.

But this is too much to ask, that people vote for party over fake news about an individual.

[cyclonefence]

4. If you don't vote for what you consider "the lesser of two evils"

the greater evil wins.

[world wide wally]

28. Invariably

[heaven05]

5. exact thinking

of so-called allies. SO TRUE as to one reason we are in this fix, and I mean a mellofahess, today.

[paleotn]

6. That's about right

And we thought voting for Nader in 2000 was political stupidity. Some people need to get it through their heads we're not voting for prom queen every 4 years.

[watoos]

7. With all due respect

what is the purpose of this thread?

This question from a Hillary voter.

[uponit7771]

9. The other excuse for not voting for Hillary was they didn't like her

[uponit7771]

8. Yep

[ehrnst]

10. Yeah, she was totally gonna give our country to Wall Street, and drone kids...

[Raven123]

11. And how did that work out for you?

[calimary]

23. Yep. THAT'S what has to be asked now.

MUST BE asked now.

So how’s that workin’ out for ya now?

But... but... but... the tax cut! Yeah? How much have your costs gone up? Tax cut covered those increases? How’s the farm doing since the tariffs were imposed? You don’t work for Harley Davidson do you? And, uh, how’s the stability of your health insurance plan? And that pre-existing condition of yours...

We DO have comebacks. More, seemingly, by the hour.

Btw - I think we’ve got a Made-in-Heaven wedge issue working here, in the family-separation humanitarian crisis at the border. And we oughta exploit the hell out of it. Many previously diehard R-voters are crumbling like dry cookies. I met one at the Portland rally just yesterday.

This is a WEAPON. And we’re fools if we don’t use it.

[Demobrat]

37. Why?

To make people feel stupid? Ashamed? To make them admit once and for all that you were right and they were wrong? What will that accomplish?

Personally I think we’ll accomplish much more by letting go if the last election and focusing on the next. We’ll never flip the diehards but maybe, just maybe, we can bring along a few decent people - if we can manage to refrain from alienating them even further through finger-pointing and contempt.

JMO.

[Raven123]

46. We can all tailor our language better. At least I can

However, consider what the GOP has done. We criticize the GOP for accepting Trump, but they had their eye on the prize. Somehow we have to make sure that those who fell into the "I just didn't like HC" mentality consider the effects of such a thought process in the voting booth, and not just in 2018.

[Mr. Ected]

12. I guess 25 years of Hillary bashing in Congress and in the media

Hit its mark.

Most people who "hate" Hillary cannot tell you why. They can't explain the problems with her email server, who was harmed, and how it differs from everyone in the Trump administration and in the Republican Congress that also use private servers. They can't tell you why Hillary was responsible for Benghazi!, just that she was personally responsible for the death of 4 innocent Americans.

They can't tell you because they're Pavlov's dog, someone just rung a bell, and they're salivating like a drooling fool.

[calimary]

17. My friend insists she just didn't trust Hillary.

Because bullshit. She was supposedly a liar and too sneaky.

I reminded my friend that “sneaky” is refusing to release your tax returns and then long about the reason why.

No comeback for that, but I just can’t seem to get through. And my friend never explains where Hillary’s purported lying and sneakiness - maybe because it’s the crap she absorbs from watching Pox Noise.

We’ve gone round and round about this for way too long.

[sheshe2]

13. "Yes, I know. But I just didn't like Hillary"

*spoken in a whining voice*

Yes, a well thought out, sound, mature and educated reason for not voting for Hillary and therefore allowing evil incarnate into our house.

[calimary]

18. All that really says is - "I swallowed the crap."

Or, as one activist put it, this weekend, “face down in the Koolaid.”

Right where my friend is. The same one who swears she doesn’t have a drinking problem (literally) even while her kids have called me several times, worried to death about what they’ve observed several time by now: stopping over at her house at 2 in the afternoon and finding her already drunk.

[sheshe2]

21. Face down in the Koollaide, yep.

So sorry about your friend, calimary.

[TexasBushwhacker]

19. The response is "So you like Trump?" N/t

[luvtheGWN]

25. Unfortunately, there are plenty of women

who don't like strong, resourceful, smart women. Why? Jealousy, maybe? It goes along with folks who think a strong business woman is "pushy" while a strong business man shows strength and leadership. Sexist as hell, but still a reality in the U.S. And certainly promulgated by men who don't want women to usurp their supposed "Gawd-given authority".
I'm glad my Prime Minister doesn't see it that way.......

[EffieBlack]

43. Well, she WAS awfully ambitious, you know...

I mean, who ever heard of anybody thinking they should be president?

What a beeatch.

[heaven05]

14. wish I could K&R

10,000 times.

[Roy Rolling]

16. The Clinton Foundation!

"Just another slush fund for the Clintons"---Trump Foundation miscreant trustees

[calimary]

20. Which is exactly what independent nonpartisan outfits like

charitywatch.org have NOT discovered. And they’ve been keeping track. I looked it up during the campaign, and the Clintons’ efforts got an absolutely sterling rating.

But of course charitywatch.org is lying now, too, ‘eh?

[exboyfil]

29. I know we come back to Clinton was going to win

but I never understood why they allowed the Clinton charity to get bashed during the election without responding with info ads of their own. It is the media's fault as well.

[calimary]

40. Yes, DAMMIT! The bad guys are ALREADY on with ads

for “another great Supreme Court Justice!” Add placed by something I think is called “Judicial Crisis Network”.

I just saw it on MSNBC no less.

Sorry to shout but WHERE THE FUCK ARE OUR ADS?????

[elmac]

22. yep, she has been under a smear campaign for decades

all the so called news networks flamed the fire because decent=more profits. I hope she runs for office again but wouldn't blame her if she doesn't.

[czarjak]

24. Kinda how propaganda works...

[safeinOhio]

26. What I hear from trump voters....

Just wanted to shake things up....


Got their wish, only it's their SS, MC, IRA and job that has the shakes.

[exboyfil]

27. 2016 will go down in history as the most important election

since 1860.

[Drahthaardogs]

30. What is the point of doing this?

Do you think people are so dense that you have to shove "I told you so!" In their face?

Maybe you are right and we need to. God, I hope not.

[CentralMass]

31. I doubt that there are many if any people who are reading this post that did not vote for Hillary.

[AllaN01Bear]

32. but but but bengazi

[TryLogic]

33. People do what they think is best, and sometimes they miss the mark. Move on for God's sake.

(I held my nose and voted for Hillary.)

[MrsCoffee]

38. But you're over it now?

You've moved on?

To where?

Is it better in your world?

Has anything been resolved there?

Has the investigation ended?

Did Mueller issue his report saying nothing affected the outcome of the election?

Now is not the time to shut the fuck up. Now is time to remind people exactly what happened in hopes of not letting it happen again. People need to be reminded of the absurdity that led us to this point. Even if it bothers a few people that it keeps being brought up. It's worth it.

[lunamagica]

41. Nope. Sorry. We will never forget

[EffieBlack]

44. Your need to say you "held your nose" to vote for Hillary shows you haven't moved on

So, maybe you should work on that before lecturing anyone else.

[sheshe2]

53. So TryLogic

what was the logic you used that caused you to dislike her so intensely then you finally had to hold your nose to vote for her?

hold one's nose
phrase of hold

1.
squeeze one's nostrils with one's fingers in order to avoid inhaling an unpleasant smell.

2. Fig. to attempt to ignore something unpleasant, illegal, or "rotten." He hated doing it, but he held his nose and made the announcement everyone dreaded.

[Raven123]

55. True, but if they didn't vote for HC because they "just didn't like her"

I would question if if they did the best they could. Did they understand the issues in play? Did they understand the impact of their decision on SCOTUS? - and therefore their freedom. Did they understand the impact of their vote on the economy, immigration?

We don't have to belittle them, but we have to make sure they understand The impact of Trump's policies and appointments to executive and judicial branches of our gov't. If we don't, Trump will. And you know what he will say? Every negative thing that happens will be because of the Dems. You see it every day. A reminder that Clinton wouldn't have separated families, discriminated against Muslims, passed tax cuts for the rich, engage the US in trade wars is well worth the discomfort they might feel. If they did the best they could, we all have a problem. let's help them do better.

[certainot]

34. local sunday morning limbaugh station blowhard i was just sampling

explained it though - hillary would have a band at the border welcoming all the illegal immigrants (future dem voters)

[marble falls]

35. Another thing I hate: the Steiners and the Hillary protest non votes and protest votes for ....

Trump.

Now they are whining because they think we're so mean and angry about that, that if we don't ease up on those voters they won't participate in the the November elections.

Anyone who voted for Trump or Stein or not at all ought to keep it to themselves. I have no understanding how they did what they did in the face of who everybody knew was going to be a disastrous Trump regime.

[planetc]

36. What if all this slushy "thinking" was designed to convice us that she didn't win?

If the majority of DU thinks Clinton lost in the electoral college, then there wouldn't be a strong push to examine just how convenient for Trump the voting in four states was. Thinking that Clinton was covered in slurs for the entire campaign, which is true, makes it easier to believe that she actually lost, although she won the popular vote handily. And in a large handful of states the final vote count looked fishy as hell.

And we don't know: we have no way of checking elections for accuracy, especially the 29% of votes which generate no paper. We are not going to get our elections cleaned up if most people believe they could not actually be stolen. I see just as much resistance to the thought of actual election theft on DU as in the general population.

All segments of the population would rather think about sexism (which is real), or media malfeasance (which is real) or weak messages (debatable) or ANYTHING rather than talk about stolen elections, at which a hell of a lot of evidence points.

FOX News watchers are not the only ones wearing blinders.

[plimsoll]

39. I don't think very many DU folks don't think the election was stolen.

What none of us knows for sure is how. There are too many ways to perform election fraud now, and given the GOPs propensity for projection we can be be certain beyond a reasonable doubt that the results were “adjusted.” Why is that even a question. Regardless: Who would bring the charges. Who would adjudicate? The voter suppression and gerrymandering make the corruption endemic.

What we may want to ask ourselves at this point is why the GOP was so insistent they were the real American Patriots (tm). Why did they need to proclaim that so loud, and who were they trying to convince.

[planetc]

42. I'm not sure what you're concluding here.

Are you saying that there re so many ways to rig the elections that we shouldn't try to unrig them?
Also, you ask:

"Regardless: Who would bring the charges. Who would adjudicate? The voter suppression and gerrymandering make the corruption endemic."

A collection of voters, or one voter, would complain. The FBI would investigate. Congress would adjudicate, since they are supposed to resolve elections when the vote count for president isn't clear. My question is: Are the Democrats as reluctant as Republicans to clean up this mess? Voter suppression and gerrymandering will become illegal under a new American General Election Safety law.

[plimsoll]

49. I conclude that the country those rules applied to is rapidly disappearing.

I don't assume a collection of voters who are assumed to be "enemies of the state" will be listened to.
Why should I continue to believe the FBI would listen to these complaints?
Why should I continue to believe the DOJ would bring them to trial?
Why should I continue to believe a GOP controlled congress would do anything to protect systems that could remove them from power?

Through Gingrich, and Bush I believed that the system of checks and balances would prevent profound deviations from the norms of our society. Today the executive and legislative branches and with Kennedy's retirement the court will have a majority of people who are, to be blunt, hostile to the concerns of those who deviate from their worldview in the slightest.

Noam Chomsky has long said that the public opinion was the only other power outside the control of businesses and an imperial government. Given the "social" media's ability to promote anti-social behavior I think that is grossly naive.

I don’t know if reluctance is the right word to describe the current feelings. Some section of the GOP has decided that destroying the norms of American society was the only way to remain in power. How do you fight an enemy that doesn’t care what damage they do in their pursuit of power, are we prepared to destroy the country to stop them? I think it’s a moral conundrum, one the GOP can answer in the affirmative, but perhaps we can’t.

[planetc]

57. Thanks for your very thoughtful response.

You ask:

I don't assume a collection of voters who are assumed to be "enemies of the state" will be listened to.
Why should I continue to believe the FBI would listen to these complaints?
Why should I continue to believe the DOJ would bring them to trial?
Why should I continue to believe a GOP controlled congress would do anything to protect systems that could remove them from power?"

And they're all good questions. First, even the GOP can't afford to pretend that we're all "enemies of the state." They have to maintain the pretense of a republic if not a democracy for their own base, so they cannot recommend cancelling elections without backlash from their base, not to mention ours.

As for the FBI and DOJ, I will persist in believing that these organizations can be made to function adequately in a sufficiently serious national crisis, which this would be. The alternative to trusting our own governmental departments is to give up early the pretense that America can fix its own problems. I don't see that as a good strategy. I would rather proceed on the assumption that a definite number of Americans can be shown to have broken existing laws for the purpose of stealing elections. They can be punished, and a new law passed which would protect all general elections. The learning curve during these procedures will be enormous, but enormously rewarding.

And as for a GOP controlled congress, I don't think the fixers can steal every election--they still have to maintain some semblance of real elections. It behooves us Dems, of course, to use the power we would acquire with a Democratic controlled congress to actually do something about this, rather than kicking the can down the road.

If we could rouse the media to talk about this issue as though it really existed, that would be a great help. They will have to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into this story. But they spend a great deal of time congratulating themselves on their vocation to "speak truth to power." Let the media put their jobs and egos where their mouths are.

[plimsoll]

58. I think we are closer to agreeing than it appears.

I posted this elsewhere, because I'm struggling with how we battle this rising tide of behaviors I consider to be at odds with American ideals. This was in response to a thread on Red Dawn, which is still a horrible movie.

Still us

[mcar]

45. K&R

[JI7]

47. One problem with these threads

Is the assumption that most of those people would do anything differently and have regrets.

They don't.

[Baclava]

48. Who can forget?

[Tom Rinaldo]

50. Huge crowd, must be dozens...

Maybe even three figures

They were wrong, we all know that. Meanwhile we should be able to register many times more new voters, in every district every month, than the number of people who showed up for that "event".

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

51. Yes Tom, so true... but then some never miss an opportunity to divide.

[Meowmee]

52. Scary thing

Is I’m sure they would and will do the same all over again if they don't like the candidate etc.

[Cha]

54. Is it any wonder? They allowed themselves

to be suckered by Stein LIES, sarandOn LIES.. and andrea Mitchell's constant hatemongering droning about her emails.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Stupid FUCkS.. and they're going to do it again in 2020.

[Orsino]

56. No one was asked to like her vagina.

But that's where a lot of the hate was focused.