Hillary Clinton’s problem isn’t Bernie Sanders. It’s Hillary Clinton

[gtopa1]

salon?

She's finished. Like every other female psychopath.

There's no postmen to boost you now, hag.

I think Hillary is an awful retail politician.

And if the Republicans had nominated an affable, sensible candidate, she'd probably be in a lot of trouble.

Instead, you nominated an orange-hewed Nazi Misogynist Reality TV Rodeo Clown.

No one is unaffected by modern times. Now days we look aat Hitlers rants as excessive, but i have looked at the opposition potiticians of his day and they are just as "alpha" in their delivery. The communists politicians were the same, but they lacked passion because, even then, their wives were lesbians. Hitler was above all that, he rejected it and hardened his heart, and forged the last stand for the West.

Even i, in my dilapitated state will come o the last battle and God will be on our side. It is fordained. Thouh i too, have orange skin, as is the fashion. My blood is blue.

Wtf you talking about, Goosey???

Greg

Fashions come and go.

No worries.

Greg

 

[gipper]

If you support Mrs. BJ, you support the policies of a fanatical Neocon. You also gladly accept the billionaire class having total control of the POTUS....you may also believe lying and deceitfulness are admirable qualities.

Let's see, the billionaire class..Good thing Trump isn't a billionaire, that would make him one of the bunch...

Oh Beavis...You really can't be this dumb.

Is Trump OWNED by the billionaire class? There is a difference, but sadly your small mind can comprehend it.

Did the Good Lord give you a large manhood to compensate for your tiny brain?

 

[candycorn]

her credentials are indeed impressive—.

In her case, it’s all it will take to beat Drumpf. There is nothing he can say about her (truthfully anyway which isn’t a barrier for him or his supporters of course) that isn’t already known.

Once every blue moon it happens but hasn’t since 1988 to where the party in power keeps the Oval after 2 terms. You’d have to go back to FDR to see an example and Truman’s win which was a total shock to everyone—so much so that papers printed that Dewey defeated him.

R Ike got 2 terms.
D Kennedy/Johnson got 2 terms
R Nixon/Ford got 2 terms
D Carter got one
R Reagan got 2 terms
R Bush Sr. got one
D Clinton got 2 terms
R Bush Jr. got 2 terms
D Obama got 2 terms.

There is supposed to be zero way HRC could win in this climate. That she is destroying Drumpf in most polling is great. More of that to come. And in November, I’m confident that voters will install her as the next president.

She is having a hard time beating a socialist, and most of his votes will go to Trump. Also after the debates, Trump will be our next president and Hillary will be fully investigated. Then put in jail where she belongs.

Oh lord.

Care to make it interesting?

If Hillary becomes President, you use this avatar until inauguration day:

If Donald Trump becomes President, I use this avatar until inauguration day:

Counting electoral votes and 12th Amendment actions only. No wiggling out if popular vote and EV are in disagreement or if there is some sort of indictment/convention shenanigans.

 

[The Great Goose]

I'd like to interfere as an intermediatry, and be in a locked room with shrillary. Just me and her and my shins and feet.

I'm not a sadist but i do think think, the women AND men of the West would appreciate an impartial chat with Shrillary about "equality".

 

[candycorn]

I'd like to interfere as an intermediatry, and be in a locked room with shrillary. Just me and her and my shins and feet.

I'm not a sadist but i do think think, the women AND men of the West would appreciate an impartial chat with Shrillary about "equality".

Eww…sicko

Once she’s sworn in…you can have all of the fantasies about her you want.

 

[The Great Goose]

I'd like to interfere as an intermediatry, and be in a locked room with shrillary. Just me and her and my shins and feet.

I'm not a sadist but i do think think, the women AND men of the West would appreciate an impartial chat with Shrillary about "equality".

Eww…sicko

Once she’s sworn in…you can have all of the fantasies about her you want.

No one gives a crap about your misandrist perversions, you homosexual.

 

[jknowgood]

her credentials are indeed impressive—.

In her case, it’s all it will take to beat Drumpf. There is nothing he can say about her (truthfully anyway which isn’t a barrier for him or his supporters of course) that isn’t already known.

Once every blue moon it happens but hasn’t since 1988 to where the party in power keeps the Oval after 2 terms. You’d have to go back to FDR to see an example and Truman’s win which was a total shock to everyone—so much so that papers printed that Dewey defeated him.

R Ike got 2 terms.
D Kennedy/Johnson got 2 terms
R Nixon/Ford got 2 terms
D Carter got one
R Reagan got 2 terms
R Bush Sr. got one
D Clinton got 2 terms
R Bush Jr. got 2 terms
D Obama got 2 terms.

There is supposed to be zero way HRC could win in this climate. That she is destroying Drumpf in most polling is great. More of that to come. And in November, I’m confident that voters will install her as the next president.

She is having a hard time beating a socialist, and most of his votes will go to Trump. Also after the debates, Trump will be our next president and Hillary will be fully investigated. Then put in jail where she belongs.

Oh lord.

Care to make it interesting?

If Hillary becomes President, you use this avatar until inauguration day:

If Donald Trump becomes President, I use this avatar until inauguration day:

Counting electoral votes and 12th Amendment actions only. No wiggling out if popular vote and EV are in disagreement or if there is some sort of indictment/convention shenanigans.

I already made that bet with you, remember?

 

[pwjohn]

No matter what you think about Hillary Clinton as the presidential primaries wind down, there is one undeniable fact that lingers in the background. Despite having had enormous advantages from the start of the campaign—no serious competition from within the party, solid support from national party leaders, a massive war chest and a nationwide grassroots network built over the course of decades in national politics—Clinton has struggled to put away a 74-year-old Jewish socialist who has had almost no establishment support.

Say whatever you want about Clinton’s lengthy résumé—and her credentials are indeed impressive—her performance this primary season is hardly indicative of a strong candidate.

Indeed, Clinton concedes that she’s not a natural politician, lacking the charm of her husband or the charisma of Barack Obama. But what should be troubling to those who hope to see a Democrat in the White House next year is that Clinton seems to suggest that this weakness isn’t problematic, that her résumé and policy-wonk reputation will be enough to carry her on Election Day.

Maybe. But don’t be too sure.

Look no further than the 2000 election, when another policy-wonk Democrat with little charm or charisma—Al Gore—failed to ride his impressive credentials to the White House. Gore, a two-term vice president with prior lengthy service in both the Senate and House, lost to an anti-intellectual GOP opponent with no Washington experience. Sound familiar?

Many Democrats are having difficulty accepting the fact that Clinton, despite her résumé, is a weak politician. In this state of denial, their defense of Clinton becomes aggressive, as they lash out at Bernie Sanders for staying in the race, implying that Clinton has earned the right to glide to the finish line unopposed.

A prime example of this Clinton-entitlement mentality can be found in a recent Boston Globe column by Michael A. Cohen, entitled “Bernie Sanders declares war on reality.” Cohen insists that Sanders is “illogical, self-serving, hypocritical” and “intellectually dishonest” in trying win the nomination by swaying superdelegates away from Clinton. “Instead of coming to grips with the overwhelming evidence that Democratic primary voters prefer Hillary Clinton to be the party’s 2016 presidential nominee,” Cohen writes, “Sanders continues to create his own political reality.”

Unfortunately, Cohen ignores the fact that the “overwhelming evidence” isn’t strong enough to allow Clinton to claim the nomination with pledged delegates alone. Had the evidence been so overwhelming, courting superdelegates would be irrelevant. Because Clinton has been far from dominating in the primaries and caucuses, the true “political reality” is that she will need superdelegate support to secure the nomination. Fortunately for Clinton, she appears to have the support of an overwhelming majority of superdelegates, but those allegiances can change up until the time of the convention vote, so Sanders is alive as long as the race comes down to a fight over them.

This is one weak nominee: Hillary Clinton’s problem isn’t Bernie Sanders. It’s Hillary Clinton

salon?

She's finished. Like every other female psychopath.

There's no postmen to boost you now, hag.

Wow dude, you're fucking dangerous......;;

 

[candycorn]

her credentials are indeed impressive—.

In her case, it’s all it will take to beat Drumpf. There is nothing he can say about her (truthfully anyway which isn’t a barrier for him or his supporters of course) that isn’t already known.

Once every blue moon it happens but hasn’t since 1988 to where the party in power keeps the Oval after 2 terms. You’d have to go back to FDR to see an example and Truman’s win which was a total shock to everyone—so much so that papers printed that Dewey defeated him.

R Ike got 2 terms.
D Kennedy/Johnson got 2 terms
R Nixon/Ford got 2 terms
D Carter got one
R Reagan got 2 terms
R Bush Sr. got one
D Clinton got 2 terms
R Bush Jr. got 2 terms
D Obama got 2 terms.

There is supposed to be zero way HRC could win in this climate. That she is destroying Drumpf in most polling is great. More of that to come. And in November, I’m confident that voters will install her as the next president.

She is having a hard time beating a socialist, and most of his votes will go to Trump. Also after the debates, Trump will be our next president and Hillary will be fully investigated. Then put in jail where she belongs.

Oh lord.

Care to make it interesting?

If Hillary becomes President, you use this avatar until inauguration day:

If Donald Trump becomes President, I use this avatar until inauguration day:

Counting electoral votes and 12th Amendment actions only. No wiggling out if popular vote and EV are in disagreement or if there is some sort of indictment/convention shenanigans.

I already made that bet with you, remember?

My bad, hard to keep the Drumpf supporters straight.

 

[candycorn]

I'd like to interfere as an intermediatry, and be in a locked room with shrillary. Just me and her and my shins and feet.

I'm not a sadist but i do think think, the women AND men of the West would appreciate an impartial chat with Shrillary about "equality".

Eww…sicko

Once she’s sworn in…you can have all of the fantasies about her you want.

No one gives a crap about your misandrist perversions, you homosexual.

You’re the “man” saying something about shins and and feet and being locked in a room with Secretary Clinton. My guess is that you have some sort of fixation on her that reveals your sick desires….

 

[dannyboys]

her credentials are indeed impressive—.

In her case, it’s all it will take to beat Drumpf. There is nothing he can say about her (truthfully anyway which isn’t a barrier for him or his supporters of course) that isn’t already known.

Once every blue moon it happens but hasn’t since 1988 to where the party in power keeps the Oval after 2 terms. You’d have to go back to FDR to see an example and Truman’s win which was a total shock to everyone—so much so that papers printed that Dewey defeated him.

R Ike got 2 terms.
D Kennedy/Johnson got 2 terms
R Nixon/Ford got 2 terms
D Carter got one
R Reagan got 2 terms
R Bush Sr. got one
D Clinton got 2 terms
R Bush Jr. got 2 terms
D Obama got 2 terms.

There is supposed to be zero way HRC could win in this climate. That she is destroying Drumpf in most polling is great. More of that to come. And in November, I’m confident that voters will install her as the next president.

She is having a hard time beating a socialist, and most of his votes will go to Trump. Also after the debates, Trump will be our next president and Hillary will be fully investigated. Then put in jail where she belongs.

Trump's upcoming announcement: Rush Limbaugh for AG. John Bolton as Sec. of Defense. Sean Hannity as SOS.

 

[rdean]

No matter what you think about Hillary Clinton as the presidential primaries wind down, there is one undeniable fact that lingers in the background. Despite having had enormous advantages from the start of the campaign—no serious competition from within the party, solid support from national party leaders, a massive war chest and a nationwide grassroots network built over the course of decades in national politics—Clinton has struggled to put away a 74-year-old Jewish socialist who has had almost no establishment support.

Say whatever you want about Clinton’s lengthy résumé—and her credentials are indeed impressive—her performance this primary season is hardly indicative of a strong candidate.

Indeed, Clinton concedes that she’s not a natural politician, lacking the charm of her husband or the charisma of Barack Obama. But what should be troubling to those who hope to see a Democrat in the White House next year is that Clinton seems to suggest that this weakness isn’t problematic, that her résumé and policy-wonk reputation will be enough to carry her on Election Day.

Maybe. But don’t be too sure.

Look no further than the 2000 election, when another policy-wonk Democrat with little charm or charisma—Al Gore—failed to ride his impressive credentials to the White House. Gore, a two-term vice president with prior lengthy service in both the Senate and House, lost to an anti-intellectual GOP opponent with no Washington experience. Sound familiar?

Many Democrats are having difficulty accepting the fact that Clinton, despite her résumé, is a weak politician. In this state of denial, their defense of Clinton becomes aggressive, as they lash out at Bernie Sanders for staying in the race, implying that Clinton has earned the right to glide to the finish line unopposed.

A prime example of this Clinton-entitlement mentality can be found in a recent Boston Globe column by Michael A. Cohen, entitled “Bernie Sanders declares war on reality.” Cohen insists that Sanders is “illogical, self-serving, hypocritical” and “intellectually dishonest” in trying win the nomination by swaying superdelegates away from Clinton. “Instead of coming to grips with the overwhelming evidence that Democratic primary voters prefer Hillary Clinton to be the party’s 2016 presidential nominee,” Cohen writes, “Sanders continues to create his own political reality.”

Unfortunately, Cohen ignores the fact that the “overwhelming evidence” isn’t strong enough to allow Clinton to claim the nomination with pledged delegates alone. Had the evidence been so overwhelming, courting superdelegates would be irrelevant. Because Clinton has been far from dominating in the primaries and caucuses, the true “political reality” is that she will need superdelegate support to secure the nomination. Fortunately for Clinton, she appears to have the support of an overwhelming majority of superdelegates, but those allegiances can change up until the time of the convention vote, so Sanders is alive as long as the race comes down to a fight over them.

This is one weak nominee: Hillary Clinton’s problem isn’t Bernie Sanders. It’s Hillary Clinton

salon?

She's finished. Like every other female psychopath.

There's no postmen to boost you now, hag.

No, it's Bernie.
Offers of free health care
free college
bringing jobs that don't exist anymore back
Revolution against the obstructionist GOP

I can understand why his fantasy agenda is attractive.

 

[candycorn]

No matter what you think about Hillary Clinton as the presidential primaries wind down, there is one undeniable fact that lingers in the background. Despite having had enormous advantages from the start of the campaign—no serious competition from within the party, solid support from national party leaders, a massive war chest and a nationwide grassroots network built over the course of decades in national politics—Clinton has struggled to put away a 74-year-old Jewish socialist who has had almost no establishment support.

Say whatever you want about Clinton’s lengthy résumé—and her credentials are indeed impressive—her performance this primary season is hardly indicative of a strong candidate.

Indeed, Clinton concedes that she’s not a natural politician, lacking the charm of her husband or the charisma of Barack Obama. But what should be troubling to those who hope to see a Democrat in the White House next year is that Clinton seems to suggest that this weakness isn’t problematic, that her résumé and policy-wonk reputation will be enough to carry her on Election Day.

Maybe. But don’t be too sure.

Look no further than the 2000 election, when another policy-wonk Democrat with little charm or charisma—Al Gore—failed to ride his impressive credentials to the White House. Gore, a two-term vice president with prior lengthy service in both the Senate and House, lost to an anti-intellectual GOP opponent with no Washington experience. Sound familiar?

Many Democrats are having difficulty accepting the fact that Clinton, despite her résumé, is a weak politician. In this state of denial, their defense of Clinton becomes aggressive, as they lash out at Bernie Sanders for staying in the race, implying that Clinton has earned the right to glide to the finish line unopposed.

A prime example of this Clinton-entitlement mentality can be found in a recent Boston Globe column by Michael A. Cohen, entitled “Bernie Sanders declares war on reality.” Cohen insists that Sanders is “illogical, self-serving, hypocritical” and “intellectually dishonest” in trying win the nomination by swaying superdelegates away from Clinton. “Instead of coming to grips with the overwhelming evidence that Democratic primary voters prefer Hillary Clinton to be the party’s 2016 presidential nominee,” Cohen writes, “Sanders continues to create his own political reality.”

Unfortunately, Cohen ignores the fact that the “overwhelming evidence” isn’t strong enough to allow Clinton to claim the nomination with pledged delegates alone. Had the evidence been so overwhelming, courting superdelegates would be irrelevant. Because Clinton has been far from dominating in the primaries and caucuses, the true “political reality” is that she will need superdelegate support to secure the nomination. Fortunately for Clinton, she appears to have the support of an overwhelming majority of superdelegates, but those allegiances can change up until the time of the convention vote, so Sanders is alive as long as the race comes down to a fight over them.

This is one weak nominee: Hillary Clinton’s problem isn’t Bernie Sanders. It’s Hillary Clinton

salon?

She's finished. Like every other female psychopath.

There's no postmen to boost you now, hag.

No, it's Bernie.
Offers of free health care
free college
bringing jobs that don't exist anymore back
Revolution against the obstructionist GOP

I can understand why his fantasy agenda is attractive.

I know, right?

If Bernie’s plans were remotely in danger of being implemented, he’d have my vote. They are not sustainable.
I think the Drumpf supporters have been swallowing the jisim of snake oil salesmen for so long that they are institutionally unable to differentiate from crapolla from the right vs. crapolla from the left.

The only difference is Bernie’s brand of nonsense is well meaning and Populist without the asterisk of race or religion. Drumpf’s brand of nonsense is rooted in basic arrogance, meanness and xenophobic fear.

 

[Dot Com]

No matter what you think about Hillary Clinton as the presidential primaries wind down, there is one undeniable fact that lingers in the background. Despite having had enormous advantages from the start of the campaign—no serious competition from within the party, solid support from national party leaders, a massive war chest and a nationwide grassroots network built over the course of decades in national politics—Clinton has struggled to put away a 74-year-old Jewish socialist who has had almost no establishment support.

Say whatever you want about Clinton’s lengthy résumé—and her credentials are indeed impressive—her performance this primary season is hardly indicative of a strong candidate.

Indeed, Clinton concedes that she’s not a natural politician, lacking the charm of her husband or the charisma of Barack Obama. But what should be troubling to those who hope to see a Democrat in the White House next year is that Clinton seems to suggest that this weakness isn’t problematic, that her résumé and policy-wonk reputation will be enough to carry her on Election Day.

Maybe. But don’t be too sure.

Look no further than the 2000 election, when another policy-wonk Democrat with little charm or charisma—Al Gore—failed to ride his impressive credentials to the White House. Gore, a two-term vice president with prior lengthy service in both the Senate and House, lost to an anti-intellectual GOP opponent with no Washington experience. Sound familiar?

Many Democrats are having difficulty accepting the fact that Clinton, despite her résumé, is a weak politician. In this state of denial, their defense of Clinton becomes aggressive, as they lash out at Bernie Sanders for staying in the race, implying that Clinton has earned the right to glide to the finish line unopposed.

A prime example of this Clinton-entitlement mentality can be found in a recent Boston Globe column by Michael A. Cohen, entitled “Bernie Sanders declares war on reality.” Cohen insists that Sanders is “illogical, self-serving, hypocritical” and “intellectually dishonest” in trying win the nomination by swaying superdelegates away from Clinton. “Instead of coming to grips with the overwhelming evidence that Democratic primary voters prefer Hillary Clinton to be the party’s 2016 presidential nominee,” Cohen writes, “Sanders continues to create his own political reality.”

Unfortunately, Cohen ignores the fact that the “overwhelming evidence” isn’t strong enough to allow Clinton to claim the nomination with pledged delegates alone. Had the evidence been so overwhelming, courting superdelegates would be irrelevant. Because Clinton has been far from dominating in the primaries and caucuses, the true “political reality” is that she will need superdelegate support to secure the nomination. Fortunately for Clinton, she appears to have the support of an overwhelming majority of superdelegates, but those allegiances can change up until the time of the convention vote, so Sanders is alive as long as the race comes down to a fight over them.

This is one weak nominee: Hillary Clinton’s problem isn’t Bernie Sanders. It’s Hillary Clinton

salon?

She's finished. Like every other female psychopath.

There's no postmen to boost you now, hag.

she is a weak candidate with no noteworthy accomplishments aside from holding titles that were given to her.

Sent from my VS415PP using Tapatalk

 

[amrchaos]

You what the sad truth is.

Even after no mainstream or popular democrat challenged her in the primaries, and the fact that the GOPnhas gone and nominated a realityvTV rodeo clown.........

.....there is still a significant chance that Hillary will not win.

The polls between Hillary and the orange faced bozo are starting to tighten and we are not,officially in the generals.

 

[williepete]

When you've lost CNN....







---------------

 

[rdean]

No matter what you think about Hillary Clinton as the presidential primaries wind down, there is one undeniable fact that lingers in the background. Despite having had enormous advantages from the start of the campaign—no serious competition from within the party, solid support from national party leaders, a massive war chest and a nationwide grassroots network built over the course of decades in national politics—Clinton has struggled to put away a 74-year-old Jewish socialist who has had almost no establishment support.

Say whatever you want about Clinton’s lengthy résumé—and her credentials are indeed impressive—her performance this primary season is hardly indicative of a strong candidate.

Indeed, Clinton concedes that she’s not a natural politician, lacking the charm of her husband or the charisma of Barack Obama. But what should be troubling to those who hope to see a Democrat in the White House next year is that Clinton seems to suggest that this weakness isn’t problematic, that her résumé and policy-wonk reputation will be enough to carry her on Election Day.

Maybe. But don’t be too sure.

Look no further than the 2000 election, when another policy-wonk Democrat with little charm or charisma—Al Gore—failed to ride his impressive credentials to the White House. Gore, a two-term vice president with prior lengthy service in both the Senate and House, lost to an anti-intellectual GOP opponent with no Washington experience. Sound familiar?

Many Democrats are having difficulty accepting the fact that Clinton, despite her résumé, is a weak politician. In this state of denial, their defense of Clinton becomes aggressive, as they lash out at Bernie Sanders for staying in the race, implying that Clinton has earned the right to glide to the finish line unopposed.

A prime example of this Clinton-entitlement mentality can be found in a recent Boston Globe column by Michael A. Cohen, entitled “Bernie Sanders declares war on reality.” Cohen insists that Sanders is “illogical, self-serving, hypocritical” and “intellectually dishonest” in trying win the nomination by swaying superdelegates away from Clinton. “Instead of coming to grips with the overwhelming evidence that Democratic primary voters prefer Hillary Clinton to be the party’s 2016 presidential nominee,” Cohen writes, “Sanders continues to create his own political reality.”

Unfortunately, Cohen ignores the fact that the “overwhelming evidence” isn’t strong enough to allow Clinton to claim the nomination with pledged delegates alone. Had the evidence been so overwhelming, courting superdelegates would be irrelevant. Because Clinton has been far from dominating in the primaries and caucuses, the true “political reality” is that she will need superdelegate support to secure the nomination. Fortunately for Clinton, she appears to have the support of an overwhelming majority of superdelegates, but those allegiances can change up until the time of the convention vote, so Sanders is alive as long as the race comes down to a fight over them.

This is one weak nominee: Hillary Clinton’s problem isn’t Bernie Sanders. It’s Hillary Clinton

salon?

She's finished. Like every other female psychopath.

There's no postmen to boost you now, hag.

she is a weak candidate with no noteworthy accomplishments aside from holding titles that were given to her.

Sent from my VS415PP using Tapatalk

You know that's not true. Weak is being in congress for 25 years and having no accomplishments.

 

[Dot Com]

name any NOTABLE accomplishments by hiLIARy and NO, holding titles is not an accomplishment

Sent from my VS415PP using Tapatalk

 

[Jack4jill]

No matter what you think about Hillary Clinton as the presidential primaries wind down, there is one undeniable fact that lingers in the background. Despite having had enormous advantages from the start of the campaign—no serious competition from within the party, solid support from national party leaders, a massive war chest and a nationwide grassroots network built over the course of decades in national politics—Clinton has struggled to put away a 74-year-old Jewish socialist who has had almost no establishment support.

Say whatever you want about Clinton’s lengthy résumé—and her credentials are indeed impressive—her performance this primary season is hardly indicative of a strong candidate.

Indeed, Clinton concedes that she’s not a natural politician, lacking the charm of her husband or the charisma of Barack Obama. But what should be troubling to those who hope to see a Democrat in the White House next year is that Clinton seems to suggest that this weakness isn’t problematic, that her résumé and policy-wonk reputation will be enough to carry her on Election Day.

Maybe. But don’t be too sure.

Look no further than the 2000 election, when another policy-wonk Democrat with little charm or charisma—Al Gore—failed to ride his impressive credentials to the White House. Gore, a two-term vice president with prior lengthy service in both the Senate and House, lost to an anti-intellectual GOP opponent with no Washington experience. Sound familiar?

Many Democrats are having difficulty accepting the fact that Clinton, despite her résumé, is a weak politician. In this state of denial, their defense of Clinton becomes aggressive, as they lash out at Bernie Sanders for staying in the race, implying that Clinton has earned the right to glide to the finish line unopposed.

A prime example of this Clinton-entitlement mentality can be found in a recent Boston Globe column by Michael A. Cohen, entitled “Bernie Sanders declares war on reality.” Cohen insists that Sanders is “illogical, self-serving, hypocritical” and “intellectually dishonest” in trying win the nomination by swaying superdelegates away from Clinton. “Instead of coming to grips with the overwhelming evidence that Democratic primary voters prefer Hillary Clinton to be the party’s 2016 presidential nominee,” Cohen writes, “Sanders continues to create his own political reality.”

Unfortunately, Cohen ignores the fact that the “overwhelming evidence” isn’t strong enough to allow Clinton to claim the nomination with pledged delegates alone. Had the evidence been so overwhelming, courting superdelegates would be irrelevant. Because Clinton has been far from dominating in the primaries and caucuses, the true “political reality” is that she will need superdelegate support to secure the nomination. Fortunately for Clinton, she appears to have the support of an overwhelming majority of superdelegates, but those allegiances can change up until the time of the convention vote, so Sanders is alive as long as the race comes down to a fight over them.

This is one weak nominee: Hillary Clinton’s problem isn’t Bernie Sanders. It’s Hillary Clinton

salon?

She's finished. Like every other female psychopath.

There's no postmen to boost you now, hag.

Betting against Clinton is like betting the sun won't rise. Don't.

And Hillary is Hillary's problem. That doesn't mean she isn't the next President.

 

[williepete]

name any NOTABLE accomplishments by hiLIARy

This is the country that voted for the Obidiot twice and knows everything about the Kardashians but can't tell you who Winston Churchill is. Yeah. We're doomed.








----------------------