How did Hillary lose? I would really like to discuss this.

[Siete]

good practice ... now you better start practicing this one..

How did Hillary win and get elected POTUS ?


(I'll go first)

Impeach Obama
Kill Healthcare
Immigration ... send the Mexicans home
Benghazi

ya know, RW talking points rather than issues important to the REST of the country.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

good practice ... now you better start practicing this one..

How did Hillary win and get elected POTUS ?


(I'll go first)

Impeach Obama
Kill Healthcare
Immigration ... send the Mexicans home
Benghazi

ya know, RW talking points rather than issues important to the REST of the country.

Those are all pure propaganda points, the exact recipe for a democrat victory. No substance, all propaganda.

 

[candycorn]

they have books on this you could read....or you know google..
The short answer is Hillary lost because she was old and tired, and Obama was young and fresh. There is nothing else to figure out

No she was betrayed.

Yup. They threw her under the bus for the half black guy no one ever heard of.

Incorrect. Lazy assed hacks had not heard of Obama. From his keynote address at the 04 convention, he was on a trajectory to leave an impact on the Party. Even someone of your limited intelligence could have seen it.

Her party betrayed her because the half black guy was more marketable than the first woman president.

Only someone who can't remember/understand history would believe such a bald faced lie like the one you just told.

You see dimwit, there are these things called delegates. If you get a majority of them, you win the nomination. There is no betrayal going on...there are voters who cast votes.

If you were to have done some research into the topic you're opining about instead of (as always), just shooting from the hip...you would have seen this map.

The gold states were one's Hillary won. The purple states were ones Obama won.

This is probably too deep for your shallow mind but I'll endeavor to explain it to you. It was established before the contests began that the Democrats would award most of their states on a proportional basis. This means that if you win Texas 50 to 47 percent, you get 65 of the delegates and the "loser" Obama got 61. A margin of four What Clinton's campaign didn't grasp or understand or ignored was that a state like Idaho where Obama got 80% of the vote, he got 17 of their delegates to Hillary getting 3. A margin of 14. So between the two contests, Obama actually came away with 10 more delegates. The headlines at the time actually heralded Clinton's resurgence and her ability to win large states whereas the real story was the delegate count.

Again, had you done ANY research into the topic, you would have known that Clinton way over-spent in her 2006 Senatorial election; had over-spent in the ramp-up and roll-out of her presidential campaign. So when it came to competing in obscure caucuses, the Clinton campaign had trouble mounting a ground game.

Again, all of this is well-documented. Nobody threw anyone under the bus. What it comes down to is the conservative/GOP pre-set position that if a black person is in their line of view, they are there because of one of three reasons:

1. Affirmative Action
2. They are in the wrong neighborhood
3. Someone is behind the scenes facilitating this miscarriage of justice.

It's against your DNA to think or, perish the though, give credit to the shepherds of the Obama campaign that they ran a smarter campaign than Clinton for you see, a black couldn't possibly beat a white person when all other factors are equal.

Obama did. It's been 8 years. Accept it.

My limited intelligence huh? Well I never heard of the dude till he started running for POTUS. Neither did anyone I know. They all asked who the hell is Obama?

No shit.

You just defined what limited intelligence is. That none of your acquaintences knew about Obama speaks volumes to the groupthink. There was a candidate back in the 1960's who lost and his spouse was famously quoted as saying something to the effect, "Everyone I know voted for us."

As for his being half black ? Of course you bring that up because it means more to you than it does to me. The guys a lousy POTUS and I could care what color he is.

I never called the man "half black" in my life. I was quoting you dummy.

Obama's Skin color is 100% of what your point was about you ignorant shit ingot.

Perhaps your the one who needs to catch a clue.

Thanks for yet another reason to laugh at you. The next clue you find will be the first one you stumble across you ignorant bitch.

2008 was Hillary's year and her party threw her under the bus and decided to support the half black guy and the LSM helped him right along.

I just blew your idiotic post out of the water showing stats, facts, and figures. For the sake of salvaging whatever clout you may still have, please explain how the convention had to be brokered if she was "thrown under the bus"? Perhaps I'm giving you too much credit. There are these things called National Conventions that political parties have....you do know THAT much, right? Each state sends delegates to this convention to represent the votes of that state during the primary/caucus. Obama didn't have a majority. By definition, you are wrong.

Its been eight years and we have no choice but to accept it. Doesn't mean we have to agree with it.

Catch a clue.

The only thing we have to accept is that you do zilch to back up anything you say (because you can't) but as long as there is a warm embrace of racism in the GOP, you'll have a home there.

Good for you I suppose.

 

[candycorn]

they have books on this you could read....or you know google..
The short answer is Hillary lost because she was old and tired, and Obama was young and fresh. There is nothing else to figure out

No she was betrayed.

Yup. They threw her under the bus for the half black guy no one ever heard of.

Incorrect. Lazy assed hacks had not heard of Obama. From his keynote address at the 04 convention, he was on a trajectory to leave an impact on the Party. Even someone of your limited intelligence could have seen it.

Her party betrayed her because the half black guy was more marketable than the first woman president.

Only someone who can't remember/understand history would believe such a bald faced lie like the one you just told.

You see dimwit, there are these things called delegates. If you get a majority of them, you win the nomination. There is no betrayal going on...there are voters who cast votes.

If you were to have done some research into the topic you're opining about instead of (as always), just shooting from the hip...you would have seen this map.

The gold states were one's Hillary won. The purple states were ones Obama won.

This is probably too deep for your shallow mind but I'll endeavor to explain it to you. It was established before the contests began that the Democrats would award most of their states on a proportional basis. This means that if you win Texas 50 to 47 percent, you get 65 of the delegates and the "loser" Obama got 61. A margin of four What Clinton's campaign didn't grasp or understand or ignored was that a state like Idaho where Obama got 80% of the vote, he got 17 of their delegates to Hillary getting 3. A margin of 14. So between the two contests, Obama actually came away with 10 more delegates. The headlines at the time actually heralded Clinton's resurgence and her ability to win large states whereas the real story was the delegate count.

Again, had you done ANY research into the topic, you would have known that Clinton way over-spent in her 2006 Senatorial election; had over-spent in the ramp-up and roll-out of her presidential campaign. So when it came to competing in obscure caucuses, the Clinton campaign had trouble mounting a ground game.

Again, all of this is well-documented. Nobody threw anyone under the bus. What it comes down to is the conservative/GOP pre-set position that if a black person is in their line of view, they are there because of one of three reasons:

1. Affirmative Action
2. They are in the wrong neighborhood
3. Someone is behind the scenes facilitating this miscarriage of justice.

It's against your DNA to think or, perish the though, give credit to the shepherds of the Obama campaign that they ran a smarter campaign than Clinton for you see, a black couldn't possibly beat a white person when all other factors are equal.

Obama did. It's been 8 years. Accept it.

Great post

What it leaves out is that Hillary cheated in Florida and Michigan to claim delegates. Both Florida and Michigan attempted to "jump the line" and hold their primaries in January. Those primaries were declared invalid and the other candidates withdrew their names. Hillary kept her name on the ballot and "won" those states

Democratic Party presidential primaries 2008 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Thanks for the kind words. Right you are.

 

[candycorn]

Every possible Republican presidential nominee polls below Hillary.

Why is that not part of this discussion?...or are we going to cherry pick Obama's low approval ratings as valid, and the polls showing Hillary ahead as "skewed"?

If you demonize your oponent, you can't fight them effectivelly. - Jon Stewart.

Too much regurgitation of issues that won't affect the race. Like Benghazi, and shit from the 90's.

What you're right about is that the election won't be decided on Ben-gotcha.

We do know this, Hillary has run one "hot" election where she was seriously challenged and she was a disappointing campaigner.

Past Presidents have run multiple times prior to winning so it's not a reason to dismiss the challenger.

 

[JoeB131]

I go back. Many on the left don't want to talk to me about it. But I still as a political animal want to know how did she lose?

Short answer-

1) A lot of Democrats looked at the prospect of reliving the 1990's and impeachment and fake scandal of the week and figured, "Meh, let's go with the black guy."

2) A lot of the Democratic Base never forgave Hillary for voting for Bush's war, which they hated by 2008.

3) Tactically, Hillary thought it would be over on Super Tuesday, where she won most of the major contests except Illinois. She had no infrastructure on the ground in those later states, and Obama was able to lap her.

4) Obama was more likable, which counts for a lot more in primaries than it does in the general.

Now, for 2016 Of these, 1) isn't a factor, because the GOP will go apeshit no matter who the Dems nominate. 2) Isn't a factor because probably being more hawkish isn't as much a liability. 3) She won't make the same mistake on campaign organization.

which leaves only 4- the likability factor.

 

[rightwinger]

I go back. Many on the left don't want to talk to me about it. But I still as a political animal want to know how did she lose?

Short answer-

1) A lot of Democrats looked at the prospect of reliving the 1990's and impeachment and fake scandal of the week and figured, "Meh, let's go with the black guy."

2) A lot of the Democratic Base never forgave Hillary for voting for Bush's war, which they hated by 2008.

3) Tactically, Hillary thought it would be over on Super Tuesday, where she won most of the major contests except Illinois. She had no infrastructure on the ground in those later states, and Obama was able to lap her.

4) Obama was more likable, which counts for a lot more in primaries than it does in the general.

Now, for 2016 Of these, 1) isn't a factor, because the GOP will go apeshit no matter who the Dems nominate. 2) Isn't a factor because probably being more hawkish isn't as much a liability. 3) She won't make the same mistake on campaign organization.

which leaves only 4- the likability factor.

I think the public is bored with Hillary. She has been in the spotlight for 22 years and we have seen what we are going to see. As a candidate, Hillary is stale and beatable

But the problem is Republicans lack a candidate who can beat her. They deed a dynamic candidate who will speak of a new direction. All republicans are offering is a return to the 1980s. If Republicans run on a platform of Benghazi, blowjobs and cankles jokes they will be soundly defeated

 

[Claudette]

they have books on this you could read....or you know google..
The short answer is Hillary lost because she was old and tired, and Obama was young and fresh. There is nothing else to figure out

No she was betrayed.

Yup. They threw her under the bus for the half black guy no one ever heard of.

Incorrect. Lazy assed hacks had not heard of Obama. From his keynote address at the 04 convention, he was on a trajectory to leave an impact on the Party. Even someone of your limited intelligence could have seen it.

Her party betrayed her because the half black guy was more marketable than the first woman president.

Only someone who can't remember/understand history would believe such a bald faced lie like the one you just told.

You see dimwit, there are these things called delegates. If you get a majority of them, you win the nomination. There is no betrayal going on...there are voters who cast votes.

If you were to have done some research into the topic you're opining about instead of (as always), just shooting from the hip...you would have seen this map.

The gold states were one's Hillary won. The purple states were ones Obama won.

This is probably too deep for your shallow mind but I'll endeavor to explain it to you. It was established before the contests began that the Democrats would award most of their states on a proportional basis. This means that if you win Texas 50 to 47 percent, you get 65 of the delegates and the "loser" Obama got 61. A margin of four What Clinton's campaign didn't grasp or understand or ignored was that a state like Idaho where Obama got 80% of the vote, he got 17 of their delegates to Hillary getting 3. A margin of 14. So between the two contests, Obama actually came away with 10 more delegates. The headlines at the time actually heralded Clinton's resurgence and her ability to win large states whereas the real story was the delegate count.

Again, had you done ANY research into the topic, you would have known that Clinton way over-spent in her 2006 Senatorial election; had over-spent in the ramp-up and roll-out of her presidential campaign. So when it came to competing in obscure caucuses, the Clinton campaign had trouble mounting a ground game.

Again, all of this is well-documented. Nobody threw anyone under the bus. What it comes down to is the conservative/GOP pre-set position that if a black person is in their line of view, they are there because of one of three reasons:

1. Affirmative Action
2. They are in the wrong neighborhood
3. Someone is behind the scenes facilitating this miscarriage of justice.

It's against your DNA to think or, perish the though, give credit to the shepherds of the Obama campaign that they ran a smarter campaign than Clinton for you see, a black couldn't possibly beat a white person when all other factors are equal.

Obama did. It's been 8 years. Accept it.

My limited intelligence huh? Well I never heard of the dude till he started running for POTUS. Neither did anyone I know. They all asked who the hell is Obama?

No shit.

You just defined what limited intelligence is. That none of your acquaintences knew about Obama speaks volumes to the groupthink. There was a candidate back in the 1960's who lost and his spouse was famously quoted as saying something to the effect, "Everyone I know voted for us."

As for his being half black ? Of course you bring that up because it means more to you than it does to me. The guys a lousy POTUS and I could care what color he is.

I never called the man "half black" in my life. I was quoting you dummy.

Obama's Skin color is 100% of what your point was about you ignorant shit ingot.

Perhaps your the one who needs to catch a clue.

Thanks for yet another reason to laugh at you. The next clue you find will be the first one you stumble across you ignorant bitch.

2008 was Hillary's year and her party threw her under the bus and decided to support the half black guy and the LSM helped him right along.

I just blew your idiotic post out of the water showing stats, facts, and figures. For the sake of salvaging whatever clout you may still have, please explain how the convention had to be brokered if she was "thrown under the bus"? Perhaps I'm giving you too much credit. There are these things called National Conventions that political parties have....you do know THAT much, right? Each state sends delegates to this convention to represent the votes of that state during the primary/caucus. Obama didn't have a majority. By definition, you are wrong.

Its been eight years and we have no choice but to accept it. Doesn't mean we have to agree with it.

Catch a clue.

The only thing we have to accept is that you do zilch to back up anything you say (because you can't) but as long as there is a warm embrace of racism in the GOP, you'll have a home there.

Good for you I suppose.

You are an ass all right. An Obama loving ass.

Oh and I could care what color the man is. Your the one who keeps calling everyone a racist who doesn't like or agree with Barry.

Yep and the Dems did throw Hillary under the bus because they decided they would go with the half black guy as POTUS. He was more marketable than that old broad Hillary.

Oh and I'm not a Rep there asshole. I'm a registered Indi.

Oh and speaking of shit ingots. That gotta be you baby.

Your the one who throws racism in the mix every chance you get. In your eyes racism is the only reason everyone isn't worshiping Barry.

You can't understand how some folks don't like his polices and his fundamental change for America. Its just gotta be racism. LOL

Oh have a nice day there corncob. I know I will. LMAO

 

[toxicmedia]

Every possible Republican presidential nominee polls below Hillary.

Why is that not part of this discussion?...or are we going to cherry pick Obama's low approval ratings as valid, and the polls showing Hillary ahead as "skewed"?

If you demonize your oponent, you can't fight them effectivelly. - Jon Stewart.

Too much regurgitation of issues that won't affect the race. Like Benghazi, and shit from the 90's.

What you're right about is that the election won't be decided on Ben-gotcha.

We do know this, Hillary has run one "hot" election where she was seriously challenged and she was a disappointing campaigner.

Past Presidents have run multiple times prior to winning so it's not a reason to dismiss the challenger.

IMO, given the impulsive nature of busy American voters, and the rationale behind their votes......

The average voter at the booth will have 2 types of mental images running through their psyches.

Hillary in the white house as First Lady, and then Secretary of State.

And at best, Jeb Bush, and memories of how much better the Obama and Clinton administrations ended compared to GW.

 

[toxicmedia]

I go back. Many on the left don't want to talk to me about it. But I still as a political animal want to know how did she lose?

Short answer-

1) A lot of Democrats looked at the prospect of reliving the 1990's and impeachment and fake scandal of the week and figured, "Meh, let's go with the black guy."

2) A lot of the Democratic Base never forgave Hillary for voting for Bush's war, which they hated by 2008.

3) Tactically, Hillary thought it would be over on Super Tuesday, where she won most of the major contests except Illinois. She had no infrastructure on the ground in those later states, and Obama was able to lap her.

4) Obama was more likable, which counts for a lot more in primaries than it does in the general.

Now, for 2016 Of these, 1) isn't a factor, because the GOP will go apeshit no matter who the Dems nominate. 2) Isn't a factor because probably being more hawkish isn't as much a liability. 3) She won't make the same mistake on campaign organization.

which leaves only 4- the likability factor.

No Democrat I know blames Iraq on anyone but Bush...IF they blame anyone for it. Obama won because he had few liabilities. Democrats did not reject Hillary, in fact they still overhwhelmingly approve of her as a presidential candidate..Hillary is more likable than Obama. If anything, Obama may have appeared more trustworty, but now now.

Just my take....

 

[candycorn]

No she was betrayed.

Yup. They threw her under the bus for the half black guy no one ever heard of.

Incorrect. Lazy assed hacks had not heard of Obama. From his keynote address at the 04 convention, he was on a trajectory to leave an impact on the Party. Even someone of your limited intelligence could have seen it.

Her party betrayed her because the half black guy was more marketable than the first woman president.

Only someone who can't remember/understand history would believe such a bald faced lie like the one you just told.

You see dimwit, there are these things called delegates. If you get a majority of them, you win the nomination. There is no betrayal going on...there are voters who cast votes.

If you were to have done some research into the topic you're opining about instead of (as always), just shooting from the hip...you would have seen this map.

The gold states were one's Hillary won. The purple states were ones Obama won.

This is probably too deep for your shallow mind but I'll endeavor to explain it to you. It was established before the contests began that the Democrats would award most of their states on a proportional basis. This means that if you win Texas 50 to 47 percent, you get 65 of the delegates and the "loser" Obama got 61. A margin of four What Clinton's campaign didn't grasp or understand or ignored was that a state like Idaho where Obama got 80% of the vote, he got 17 of their delegates to Hillary getting 3. A margin of 14. So between the two contests, Obama actually came away with 10 more delegates. The headlines at the time actually heralded Clinton's resurgence and her ability to win large states whereas the real story was the delegate count.

Again, had you done ANY research into the topic, you would have known that Clinton way over-spent in her 2006 Senatorial election; had over-spent in the ramp-up and roll-out of her presidential campaign. So when it came to competing in obscure caucuses, the Clinton campaign had trouble mounting a ground game.

Again, all of this is well-documented. Nobody threw anyone under the bus. What it comes down to is the conservative/GOP pre-set position that if a black person is in their line of view, they are there because of one of three reasons:

1. Affirmative Action
2. They are in the wrong neighborhood
3. Someone is behind the scenes facilitating this miscarriage of justice.

It's against your DNA to think or, perish the though, give credit to the shepherds of the Obama campaign that they ran a smarter campaign than Clinton for you see, a black couldn't possibly beat a white person when all other factors are equal.

Obama did. It's been 8 years. Accept it.

My limited intelligence huh? Well I never heard of the dude till he started running for POTUS. Neither did anyone I know. They all asked who the hell is Obama?

No shit.

You just defined what limited intelligence is. That none of your acquaintences knew about Obama speaks volumes to the groupthink. There was a candidate back in the 1960's who lost and his spouse was famously quoted as saying something to the effect, "Everyone I know voted for us."

As for his being half black ? Of course you bring that up because it means more to you than it does to me. The guys a lousy POTUS and I could care what color he is.

I never called the man "half black" in my life. I was quoting you dummy.

Obama's Skin color is 100% of what your point was about you ignorant shit ingot.

Perhaps your the one who needs to catch a clue.

Thanks for yet another reason to laugh at you. The next clue you find will be the first one you stumble across you ignorant bitch.

2008 was Hillary's year and her party threw her under the bus and decided to support the half black guy and the LSM helped him right along.

I just blew your idiotic post out of the water showing stats, facts, and figures. For the sake of salvaging whatever clout you may still have, please explain how the convention had to be brokered if she was "thrown under the bus"? Perhaps I'm giving you too much credit. There are these things called National Conventions that political parties have....you do know THAT much, right? Each state sends delegates to this convention to represent the votes of that state during the primary/caucus. Obama didn't have a majority. By definition, you are wrong.

Its been eight years and we have no choice but to accept it. Doesn't mean we have to agree with it.

Catch a clue.

The only thing we have to accept is that you do zilch to back up anything you say (because you can't) but as long as there is a warm embrace of racism in the GOP, you'll have a home there.

Good for you I suppose.

You are an ass all right. An Obama loving ass.

Oh and I could care what color the man is. Your the one who keeps calling everyone a racist who doesn't like or agree with Barry.

Yep and the Dems did throw Hillary under the bus because they decided they would go with the half black guy as POTUS. He was more marketable than that old broad Hillary.

Oh and I'm not a Rep there asshole. I'm a registered Indi.

Oh and speaking of shit ingots. That gotta be you baby.

Your the one who throws racism in the mix every chance you get. In your eyes racism is the only reason everyone isn't worshiping Barry.

You can't understand how some folks don't like his polices and his fundamental change for America. Its just gotta be racism. LOL

Oh have a nice day there corncob. I know I will. LMAO

Gee another lazy post where you get nearly everything wrong. You brought up race but, true to form, accuse others of bringing it up. Your President Obama and I agree on some things, but disagree on a lot of them. Nobody that anyone knows worships him.

One thing you're correct about. You will have a nice day Ignorance is bliss and you have the market cornered.

 

[Zander]

Hillary's biggest problem is her own party. She's not "liberal" enough. She's not going to sail into the convention unopposed....

 

[Claudette]

Your the ignorant one and yep you keep accusing everyone of being racist. And no I didn't bring up race. Shit ingot. I like that and it definetly applies to you.

I called him half black, which he is.


Doesn't mean I'm racist. Just means you think anyone using the term black is racist because my God how in the world could anyone disagree with his policies and his administration. A racist is what they just gotta be.

Oh and just because you don't agree with my remarks doesn't make them wrong. It just means that you think your right and anyone disagreeing with you is wrong and racist to boot.

Your a hoot Candycob and at least good for a laugh.

 

[candycorn]

Your the ignorant one and yep you keep accusing everyone of being racist. And no I didn't bring up race. Shit ingot. I like that and it definetly applies to you.

I called him half black, which he is.

And accused the Dems of throwing Hillary under the bus because of it. Pure racism.

Doesn't mean I'm racist. Just means you think anyone using the term black is racist because my God how in the world could anyone disagree with his policies and his administration. A racist is what they just gotta be.

Oh and just because you don't agree with my remarks doesn't make them wrong. It just means that you think your right and anyone disagreeing with you is wrong and racist to boot.

Your a hoot Candycob and at least good for a laugh.

You're not wrong just because you disagree with me.....but because you are ignorant of the facts. You're a racist probably because of either your poor upbringing or lazy researchers like yourself gravitate toward easy answers.

 

[Claudette]

Oh and you know what the facts are.

You were with the DNC when they decided to throw Old Hillary under the bus and go with Obama??

They saw a black man who could possibly the first black POTUS and decided that they would rather support that premise than Hillary being the first woman president which she might very well have been.

I'm sure you were right there and offered your advice on the matter.

If it makes you feel better to call me a racist then by all means feel better about yourself.

You certainly deserve it being the fine upstanding idiot that you are. LOL

 

[candycorn]

Oh and you know what the facts are.

Yes shit-brains; I do.

You were with the DNC when they decided to throw Old Hillary under the bus and go with Obama??

No, because no such decision was made.

They saw a black man who could possibly the first black POTUS and decided that they would rather support that premise than Hillary being the first woman president which she might very well have been.

On what planet do you and people like you live? The DNC did not appoint Obama as their nominee any more than the RNC appointed McCain. Democratic voters and Republic voters voted for these gentlemen.

After Super Tuesday when, if your fair tale about party influence were true, Obama should have routed Clinton...right? The delegate counts were 359 for Obama in the March-June window vs 309 for Clinton. Not only was the Party not a factor, the Party benefited from having two gold medal worthy opponents but only one medal to award.

Clinton's problem was that between February and Super Tuesday, she won zero primaries. In 11 of those contests she polled with less than 40 percent of the vote. In a winner-take-all, losing by 1% means the same as losing by 100% however in the DNC, the rules were that you received a proportional representative to the total popular vote so these showings where she was getting 40% or below really hurt when she could have (and should have) been making more of an impact.

Again, facts...they don't lie. I know you don't like to see your child-like argument destroyed but it is what it is...you're full of shit bitch.

I'm sure you were right there and offered your advice on the matter.

As someone who voted for Hillary, I doubt it but then again, facts are something you discount since a fact is only a fact if it fits into your world view.

If it makes you feel better to call me a racist then by all means feel better about yourself.

You earned the term and I bet you wear it proudly.

 

[JoeB131]

Hillary's biggest problem is her own party. She's not "liberal" enough. She's not going to sail into the convention unopposed....

Meh, not so much. There's really not a huge clamoring for a more liberal candidate right now.

 

[Rank Your Leader]

Hillary is Old? and Barry is fresh that time? IMHO

 

[whitehall]

Hillary never was a star except in the imagination of the left and the liberal media who never saw a democrat they didn't like. The former enabler of her pervert husband is real women's worst enemy. Her campaign to elect democrat senators became downright laughable when she tried to convince Americans that republicans were at war with women when she was campaigning against a woman and a Veteran to boot. Hillary is a phony has-been who is propped up on a bubble created by the liberal media.

 

[rightwinger]

Hillary is Old? and Barry is fresh that time? IMHO

You are not a very good poster