Is it sad that Hillary can run a "silent campaign" in the age of information?

[The2ndAmendment]

Hilary can afford to run a "silent" campaign at the moment, she doesn't have any actual challengers yet.

lol she has plenty of challengers, Bernie Sanders and Warren are the first two that come to mind, but the MSM is belittling Sanders and only mentioning Warren enough to keep her on "reserve" in case something disastrous happens for Hillary.

Not to mention, she has many challengers, but it's establishment sycophants like yourself that think repeating "no challengers" and "inevitable" enough times will make it true. Ironically, for left--wing suckers, repeating something enough does make it true.

I love Bernie, but even he knows he's not a "challenger" to Hilary.

And no other candidate has actually started running yet.

He's not a challenger because Democrat HQ (Soros?) has instructed the MSM to not consider him a challenger. Although the Dems and Repubs select their candidates, the Repubs don't have the MSM on their side to severely limit the choices of those candidates. In that respect, Dems are alone.

Don't you think it's a bit odd that in this country of tens of millions of registered Democrats, that Hillary is the only option (can it even be called an option?)?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Hilary can afford to run a "silent" campaign at the moment, she doesn't have any actual challengers yet.

lol she has plenty of challengers, Bernie Sanders and Warren are the first two that come to mind, but the MSM is belittling Sanders and only mentioning Warren enough to keep her on "reserve" in case something disastrous happens for Hillary.

Not to mention, she has many challengers, but it's establishment sycophants like yourself that think repeating "no challengers" and "inevitable" enough times will make it true. Ironically, for left--wing suckers, repeating something enough does make it true.

I love Bernie, but even he knows he's not a "challenger" to Hilary.

And no other candidate has actually started running yet.

He's not a challenger because Democrat HQ (Soros?) has instructed the MSM to not consider him a challenger. Although the Dems and Repubs select their candidates, the Repubs don't have the MSM on their side to severely limit the choices of those candidates. In that respect, Dems are alone.

Don't you think it's a bit odd that in this country of tens of millions of registered Democrats, that Hillary is the only option (can it even be called an option?)?

It's fascinating how you come up with your interpretations of what's going on.

Bernie isn't a real challenger because he doesn't want to be a real challenger. He's not trying to win - if he was, I doubt I'd like him as much as I do. He can't raise the money required to run without compromising on everything that makes him great.

In terms of other potential challengers, we're still a long way off from election day. Other candidates will announce.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I'm also a little curious about what you mean by "the age of information".

Are you under the impression that the internet is lacking in "information" critical to Hilary?

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Hilary can afford to run a "silent" campaign at the moment, she doesn't have any actual challengers yet.

lol she has plenty of challengers, Bernie Sanders and Warren are the first two that come to mind, but the MSM is belittling Sanders and only mentioning Warren enough to keep her on "reserve" in case something disastrous happens for Hillary.

Not to mention, she has many challengers, but it's establishment sycophants like yourself that think repeating "no challengers" and "inevitable" enough times will make it true. Ironically, for left--wing suckers, repeating something enough does make it true.

I love Bernie, but even he knows he's not a "challenger" to Hilary.

And no other candidate has actually started running yet.

He's not a challenger because Democrat HQ (Soros?) has instructed the MSM to not consider him a challenger. Although the Dems and Repubs select their candidates, the Repubs don't have the MSM on their side to severely limit the choices of those candidates. In that respect, Dems are alone.

Don't you think it's a bit odd that in this country of tens of millions of registered Democrats, that Hillary is the only option (can it even be called an option?)?

It's fascinating how you come up with your interpretations of what's going on.

Bernie isn't a real challenger because he doesn't want to be a real challenger. He's not trying to win - if he was, I doubt I'd like him as much as I do. He can't raise the money required to run without compromising on everything that makes him great.

In terms of other potential challengers, we're still a long way off from election day. Other candidates will announce.

It's not my interpretation, it's plainly evident from merely glancing at CNN or MSNBC.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

I'm also a little curious about what you mean by "the age of information".

Are you under the impression that the internet is lacking in "information" critical to Hilary?

Remember, this post came from someone who said "there are no leftist americans."

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I'm also a little curious about what you mean by "the age of information".

Are you under the impression that the internet is lacking in "information" critical to Hilary?

Remember, this post came from someone who said "there are no leftist americans."

I'm not sure how you think repeating a joke that you don't understand is going to help your argument.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Hilary can afford to run a "silent" campaign at the moment, she doesn't have any actual challengers yet.

lol she has plenty of challengers, Bernie Sanders and Warren are the first two that come to mind, but the MSM is belittling Sanders and only mentioning Warren enough to keep her on "reserve" in case something disastrous happens for Hillary.

Not to mention, she has many challengers, but it's establishment sycophants like yourself that think repeating "no challengers" and "inevitable" enough times will make it true. Ironically, for left--wing suckers, repeating something enough does make it true.

I love Bernie, but even he knows he's not a "challenger" to Hilary.

And no other candidate has actually started running yet.

He's not a challenger because Democrat HQ (Soros?) has instructed the MSM to not consider him a challenger. Although the Dems and Repubs select their candidates, the Repubs don't have the MSM on their side to severely limit the choices of those candidates. In that respect, Dems are alone.

Don't you think it's a bit odd that in this country of tens of millions of registered Democrats, that Hillary is the only option (can it even be called an option?)?

It's fascinating how you come up with your interpretations of what's going on.

Bernie isn't a real challenger because he doesn't want to be a real challenger. He's not trying to win - if he was, I doubt I'd like him as much as I do. He can't raise the money required to run without compromising on everything that makes him great.

In terms of other potential challengers, we're still a long way off from election day. Other candidates will announce.

It's not my interpretation, it's plainly evident from merely glancing at CNN or MSNBC.

No, it's your interpretation. You don't speak for what is "plainly evident", only what you personally think you see.

 

[Clementine]

Gee, did FauxNoise send out a talking points memo telling all of the extremist rightwingers to call it a "silent campaign"?



And you swallowed the bait?



Ask yourself this question. In this day and age how can it be a "silent campaign" if her every move is not only announced beforehand and the media is following her around constantly?

Just because she isn't an "attention whore" on every single topic du jour that the GOP clown college is obsessed with getting their soundbytes out to the media doesn't mean that she is obliged to do the same.

Some things are better left unsaid. Hillary is smart enough to know when not to speak.

Too bad you can't say the same for the rest of your clowns.

Do liberals need everything explained to them? She is avoiding the media like the plague and only allowing brief staged appearances. Hillary isn't answering questions unless a liberal reporter gets prior approval. She has answered only a few softball questions and calls it campaigning. Meanwhile, Bill is out there trying to do damage control and if the posters here are any indication, she intends to let others do the heavy lifting for her.

Will she agree to debates at some point? I am betting the left will see to it that an ultra-liberal moderator runs it to ensure that Hillary isn't put on the spot or asked anything embarrassing. I am thinking her emails, Benghazi and the billions of dollars unaccounted for during her stint as Sec of State will be off limits.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I am thinking

That will be a first!



If you are so naive as to believe that none of those topics would come up in either primary or general debates then you really don't have a clue.

And in case you missed it the emails and Benghazi have been answered already.

I haven't heard of your imaginary "billions of dollars unaccounted for during her stint as Sec of State" so why don't you provide a link?

 

[bripat9643]

So I'm not alone in my thoughts. I googled "Hillary running a silent campaign" because I noticed that she is incredibly quiet, letting the leftist media propel her campaign through "inevitability." I have never seen nor heard anything more sycophantic nor reminiscent of "Dear Leader" syndrome of communist nations. The Main Stream Media has Chosen Hillary for the Oval Office, and she doesn't have to do anything except HIDE in order to get in the White House.

I guess we have to elect her into the White House in order to see what's inside (assuming she doesn't delete what's inside!)!!!

Anyway, after I googled it, I noticed that many articles just went up in the last few days on the same topic! Woah. This is sickening. Liberoids are a marxist cancer on this nation.

Jerry Seib Hillary Clinton s Silent Campaign

Noonan Hillary s Running A Silent Movie Of A Campaign The Daily Caller

Jerry Seib Hillary Clinton s Silent Campaign

Every time Hillary gets in front of the cameras her favorability ratings go down. The more people see of her, the less they like her.

 

[bripat9643]

She can hide for a while, but sooner or later she is going to have to answer some real questions.

yesterday she said she wants her e-mails to be released-----------then why did you destroy them, you lying bitch?

She never destroyed any government emails.

God, what an unbelievable sucker you are!

 

[OKTexas]

Gee, did FauxNoise send out a talking points memo telling all of the extremist rightwingers to call it a "silent campaign"?



And you swallowed the bait?



Ask yourself this question. In this day and age how can it be a "silent campaign" if her every move is not only announced beforehand and the media is following her around constantly?

Just because she isn't an "attention whore" on every single topic du jour that the GOP clown college is obsessed with getting their soundbytes out to the media doesn't mean that she is obliged to do the same.

Some things are better left unsaid. Hillary is smart enough to know when not to speak.

Too bad you can't say the same for the rest of your clowns.

Yep, she's smart enough to keep her mouth closed because virtually every time she opens it her favorable numbers fall.

 

[OKTexas]

She can hide for a while, but sooner or later she is going to have to answer some real questions.

yesterday she said she wants her e-mails to be released-----------then why did you destroy them, you lying bitch?

She never destroyed any government emails.

She was conducting official businees through personal emails on her personal server while officially in a work capacity. How naive are you? Lol.

Your ignorance of how email actually works is your problem.

If you send an email to the state dept from your personal server they have a copy of it on the government servers even if you delete it from your personal server.

So it is utterly irrelevant what she used to send emails because there is a copy of every single email "conducting official business" that she ever sent and/or received to/from the state dept on the government servers.

You're assuming all her emails went to government servers, have you got any proof they did?

 

[bripat9643]

She can hide for a while, but sooner or later she is going to have to answer some real questions.

yesterday she said she wants her e-mails to be released-----------then why did you destroy them, you lying bitch?

She never destroyed any government emails.

She was conducting official businees through personal emails on her personal server while officially in a work capacity. How naive are you? Lol.

Your ignorance of how email actually works is your problem.

If you send an email to the state dept from your personal server they have a copy of it on the government servers even if you delete it from your personal server.

So it is utterly irrelevant what she used to send emails because there is a copy of every single email "conducting official business" that she ever sent and/or received to/from the state dept on the government servers.

You're assuming all her emails went to government servers, have you got any proof they did?

No one could possibly that stupid. These turds all know that Hillary destroyed all the incriminating evidence. They are just reinforcing the narrative. They don't give a damn about the truth.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

She can hide for a while, but sooner or later she is going to have to answer some real questions.

yesterday she said she wants her e-mails to be released-----------then why did you destroy them, you lying bitch?

She never destroyed any government emails.

She was conducting official businees through personal emails on her personal server while officially in a work capacity. How naive are you? Lol.

Your ignorance of how email actually works is your problem.

If you send an email to the state dept from your personal server they have a copy of it on the government servers even if you delete it from your personal server.

So it is utterly irrelevant what she used to send emails because there is a copy of every single email "conducting official business" that she ever sent and/or received to/from the state dept on the government servers.

You're assuming all her emails went to government servers, have you got any proof they did?

No one could possibly that stupid. These turds all know that Hillary destroyed all the incriminating evidence. They are just reinforcing the narrative. They don't give a damn about the truth.

This is why I have them on ignore.

 

[Derideo_Te]

She can hide for a while, but sooner or later she is going to have to answer some real questions.

yesterday she said she wants her e-mails to be released-----------then why did you destroy them, you lying bitch?

She never destroyed any government emails.

She was conducting official businees through personal emails on her personal server while officially in a work capacity. How naive are you? Lol.

Your ignorance of how email actually works is your problem.

If you send an email to the state dept from your personal server they have a copy of it on the government servers even if you delete it from your personal server.

So it is utterly irrelevant what she used to send emails because there is a copy of every single email "conducting official business" that she ever sent and/or received to/from the state dept on the government servers.

You're assuming all her emails went to government servers, have you got any proof they did?

Private emails that didn't go to government servers are no business of anyone else.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

She can hide for a while, but sooner or later she is going to have to answer some real questions.

yesterday she said she wants her e-mails to be released-----------then why did you destroy them, you lying bitch?

She never destroyed any government emails.

She was conducting official businees through personal emails on her personal server while officially in a work capacity. How naive are you? Lol.

Your ignorance of how email actually works is your problem.

If you send an email to the state dept from your personal server they have a copy of it on the government servers even if you delete it from your personal server.

So it is utterly irrelevant what she used to send emails because there is a copy of every single email "conducting official business" that she ever sent and/or received to/from the state dept on the government servers.

You're assuming all her emails went to government servers, have you got any proof they did?

Private emails that didn't go to government servers are no business of anyone else.

They are if they involve official business. I've seen reprimands because of that.

 

[OKTexas]

She can hide for a while, but sooner or later she is going to have to answer some real questions.

yesterday she said she wants her e-mails to be released-----------then why did you destroy them, you lying bitch?

She never destroyed any government emails.

She was conducting official businees through personal emails on her personal server while officially in a work capacity. How naive are you? Lol.

Your ignorance of how email actually works is your problem.

If you send an email to the state dept from your personal server they have a copy of it on the government servers even if you delete it from your personal server.

So it is utterly irrelevant what she used to send emails because there is a copy of every single email "conducting official business" that she ever sent and/or received to/from the state dept on the government servers.

You're assuming all her emails went to government servers, have you got any proof they did?

Private emails that didn't go to government servers are no business of anyone else.

What about the emails sent to foreign countries or non-government advisors, they may have been captured by their servers but how do we get to them to confirm she turned over everything as required by law?

 

[Derideo_Te]

She never destroyed any government emails.

She was conducting official businees through personal emails on her personal server while officially in a work capacity. How naive are you? Lol.

Your ignorance of how email actually works is your problem.

If you send an email to the state dept from your personal server they have a copy of it on the government servers even if you delete it from your personal server.

So it is utterly irrelevant what she used to send emails because there is a copy of every single email "conducting official business" that she ever sent and/or received to/from the state dept on the government servers.

You're assuming all her emails went to government servers, have you got any proof they did?

Private emails that didn't go to government servers are no business of anyone else.

They are if they involve official business. I've seen reprimands because of that.

Private emails are private. They don't involve official business.

Official business emails are different to private emails.

No one can be reprimanded for using their private email server to send their private emails.

No one can be reprimanded for using their private email server to send official business emails to government departments. That happens all the time as individuals interact with the government. How many emails have you sent to your representatives from your private email?

 

[Derideo_Te]

She never destroyed any government emails.

She was conducting official businees through personal emails on her personal server while officially in a work capacity. How naive are you? Lol.

Your ignorance of how email actually works is your problem.

If you send an email to the state dept from your personal server they have a copy of it on the government servers even if you delete it from your personal server.

So it is utterly irrelevant what she used to send emails because there is a copy of every single email "conducting official business" that she ever sent and/or received to/from the state dept on the government servers.

You're assuming all her emails went to government servers, have you got any proof they did?

Private emails that didn't go to government servers are no business of anyone else.

What about the emails sent to foreign countries or non-government advisors, they may have been captured by their servers but how do we get to them to confirm she turned over everything as required by law?

So now you are scraping the bottom of the barrel in desperation. That says volumes.