Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 40

Thread: Clinton 2016

  1. #1
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    2,206
    Post Thanks / Like

    Clinton 2016

    I posit that Hillary Clinton can only win the Presidential Election in 2016.

    Essentially for two reasons which I cannot see change that much in the following years.

    • On the Democratic side, she is virtually unopposed... Obama was a cultural phenomena that stole away her chance, but that kind of event only happens once in a blue moon.
    • On the Republican side, the next candidate will face the same problems Romney had... bending so far right to win primaries, and then not being able to pivot to the center for the general election and retain credibility.


    Barring she don't run, she will win.
    A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.
    - Wayne Gretzky

  2. #2
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,480
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    God help us if another Liberal manic wins the White House again. Especially one that doesn't see it as a big deal that 4 Americans were killed on her watch and due in part to her incompetency.
    I will no longer be replying to any post from a Liberal going forward. I will continue, as normal, to discuss topics and engage in intellectual exchanges with non-leftist

  3. #3
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Vandaler View Post
    I posit that Hillary Clinton can only win the Presidential Election in 2016.

    Essentially for two reasons which I cannot see change that much in the following years.

    • On the Democratic side, she is virtually unopposed... Obama was a cultural phenomena that stole away her chance, but that kind of event only happens once in a blue moon.
    • On the Republican side, the next candidate will face the same problems Romney had... bending so far right to win primaries, and then not being able to pivot to the center for the general election and retain credibility.


    Barring she don't run, she will win.
    I agree though I think Elizabeth Warren will give her a run for her money. I hoping the Republican side will provide as much entertainment as the 2012 election otherwise it's just going to be dull straight win. Maybe it would be a Clinton vs Palin election to add to the excitement but I bet it'll be Ryan.

  4. #4
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Where every life is precious
    Posts
    2,157
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Maybe it would be a Clinton vs Palin election to add to the excitement
    Can you imagine the campaign ads if that happened...?
    "As long as I have a voice, I will speak for those who have none".

  5. #5
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    Can you imagine the campaign ads if that happened...?
    I started thinking along the lines of a mud fight but then threw up in my mouth.

  6. #6
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,077
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    A very bold early prediction.

    No clue here. Hillary might get hit with health concerns, that's always a zinger in presidential candidates, though not always very decisive. I think she'd have a shot but so much can change in politics in that time frame. She would appeal to those on the left dissatisfied with Obama and she has the gravitas needed.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  7. #7
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    2,206
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Indeed, I like to pride myself with having a pretty good nose for these matters and I put my stake in the ground early this time around. I will of course defend this thread until such time it's no longer possible.
    A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.
    - Wayne Gretzky

  8. #8
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Clinton 2016

    Check this out: http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/20...nge-seek-pres/

    Schwarzenegger for President could be a game changer! Admittedly, I don't think he'll be a great president and he has been accused of being a RINO but come on - the Terminator for president!

  9. #9
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    1,926
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy View Post
    God help us if another Liberal manic wins the White House again. Especially one that doesn't see it as a big deal that 4 Americans were killed on her watch and due in part to her incompetency.
    At least she wasn't Command in Chief and order the invasion of two countries that posed no threat to us by using lies and fancy graphics so that military contractors and oil producers could have something to do.

    ---------- Post added at 10:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:29 AM ----------

    Warren can wait, she's doing real good as Senator.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  10. #10
    Senior Mod

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,289
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    At least she wasn't Command in Chief and order the invasion of two countries that posed no threat to us by using lies and fancy graphics so that military contractors and oil producers could have something to do.
    Ad hominem tu quoque. Someone else's failures have no bearing on her own failings. I am not sure whether it's incompetence, malfeasance, or callous disregard for American lives and our position within the world... but Benghazi still rests at her feet, which are distressingly way too far from the fire. Nobody has been held accountable in any meaningful way, and her only defense for propagating outright lies to the American public was, "At this point, what difference does it make?"

    It makes a lot of difference, and I think that difference will be used to hammer her up and down the polls if she has the audacity to run for the Presidency after the miserable failure she's made at the only other Administration level position she's had.
    -=[Talthas]=-
    ODN Senior Moderator

    ODN Rules

  11. #11
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,077
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    Ad hominem tu quoque. Someone else's failures have no bearing on her own failings. I am not sure whether it's incompetence, malfeasance, or callous disregard for American lives and our position within the world... but Benghazi still rests at her feet, which are distressingly way too far from the fire. Nobody has been held accountable in any meaningful way, and her only defense for propagating outright lies to the American public was, "At this point, what difference does it make?"
    The reason little has come of it is that the mistakes made were mostly just matters of judgement by hindsight. It was a difficult situation with no easy answers and considering what went down, the loss of life was not large. Not to say there isn't room for critique, but it was not incompetence or callous disregard for life. Decisions made in the heat of combat are rarely black and white.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  12. #12
    Senior Mod

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,289
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    The reason little has come of it is that the mistakes made were mostly just matters of judgement by hindsight. It was a difficult situation with no easy answers and considering what went down, the loss of life was not large. Not to say there isn't room for critique, but it was not incompetence or callous disregard for life. Decisions made in the heat of combat are rarely black and white.
    On the contrary, it must have either been incompetence or a disregard for life that caused our Secretary of State to ignore repeated warnings about increased activity in the area and to refuse to grant requests for additional personnel and assistance in an area that was known by everyone else in the world to be getting more dangerous by the day. They had clear intelligence, just as the other nations who pulled out of the area did, that things were going badly, and she did nothing. They even withheld aid that could have been rendered at the time of the attacks because of the optics.

    My evidence that this was basically a purely political ploy is the fact that the entire administration, including Clinton, attempted immediately to deceive the American people about the nature of the attack from the word "go," when they had contradictory evidence the whole time that showed that what she was saying and what her department was telling others to say was an out-and-out lie. They couldn't bear to have a "terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9/11" hurting Obama's campaign efforts, and so they just wished it away.

    The preponderance of evidence points toward multiple intentional deceptions of the American people and either a total disregard for our men and women in that embassy or absolute incompetence.
    -=[Talthas]=-
    ODN Senior Moderator

    ODN Rules

  13. #13
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    1,926
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    Ad hominem tu quoque. Someone else's failures have no bearing on her own failings. I am not sure whether it's incompetence, malfeasance, or callous disregard for American lives and our position within the world... but Benghazi still rests at her feet, which are distressingly way too far from the fire. Nobody has been held accountable in any meaningful way, and her only defense for propagating outright lies to the American public was, "At this point, what difference does it make?"

    It makes a lot of difference, and I think that difference will be used to hammer her up and down the polls if she has the audacity to run for the Presidency after the miserable failure she's made at the only other Administration level position she's had.

    But it does matter since nothing was made of GW's failures which led to chaos in Iraq and how many dead? No, he was vigorously defended - "stay the course" - and re-elected.

    Hillary wasn't President and is certainly not responsible for those deaths, nor did she ever say it wasn't a big deal.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  14. #14
    Senior Mod

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,289
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    But it does matter since nothing was made of GW's failures which led to chaos in Iraq and how many dead? No, he was vigorously defended - "stay the course" - and re-elected.
    By making this statement, you have forever hereafter lost any right to disregard accusations of media bias from me and others that have been leveled at the mainstream media for their constant efforts to whitewash the Obama administration and all its hangers on. To continue to do so after you just cried foul about people glossing over someone you don't like would be the height of intellectual bankruptcy.

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX
    Hillary wasn't President and is certainly not responsible for those deaths, nor did she ever say it wasn't a big deal.
    Shifting the goalposts. She did ask, "what difference does it make?" in a Congressional hearing, after having been asked several times about why she and those in her department intentionally lied to the American people about what happened in Benghazi.

    She wasn't the President, but she does have authority to take action to defend the Embassies we keep all over the world. In fact, this is one of her primary tasks... the establishment and maintenance of diplomatic channels throughout the world. If she isn't responsible, then who is?
    -=[Talthas]=-
    ODN Senior Moderator

    ODN Rules

  15. #15
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,077
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    On the contrary, it must have either been incompetence or a disregard for life that caused our Secretary of State to ignore repeated warnings about increased activity in the area and to refuse to grant requests for additional personnel and assistance in an area that was known by everyone else in the world to be getting more dangerous by the day. They had clear intelligence, just as the other nations who pulled out of the area did, that things were going badly, and she did nothing. They even withheld aid that could have been rendered at the time of the attacks because of the optics.
    Heard of the sequester, budget cuts, smaller government? You get what you pay for. Being a diplomat is dangerous and in general the host country provides military security for the embassy in nearly every country. We do have guards and security but by and large for an attack of this scale the local forces are expected to show up. Mind you in Lybia there isn't much of a state in place. I'm not saying it wasn't a mistake, but it was not unusual or especially negligent. It is the way security generally works at embassies. They have a limited budget. We don't have military units from other nations at embassies in our capital and they tend not to appreciate them at embassies in theirs. There are exceptions of course and some security is provided but its not the kind that fights small scale battles typically.

    So a costly error in judgement, but not disregard for life.

    My evidence that this was basically a purely political ploy is the fact that the entire administration, including Clinton, attempted immediately to deceive the American people about the nature of the attack from the word "go," when they had contradictory evidence the whole time that showed that what she was saying and what her department was telling others to say was an out-and-out lie. They couldn't bear to have a "terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9/11" hurting Obama's campaign efforts, and so they just wished it away.
    Your opinion about their motivation is not well supported by facts. That they gave the wrong information is well known, but I showed that that misinformation was common through the media and other outlets at that time. There was contrary and more accurate information out there but you don't always get things right, and that is not a great travesty.

    The preponderance of evidence points toward multiple intentional deceptions of the American people and either a total disregard for our men and women in that embassy or absolute incompetence.
    Not really, we had that debate and you were not especially convincing.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  16. Likes CowboyX liked this post
  17. #16
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    2,206
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    but Benghazi still rests at her feet, which are distressingly way too far from the fire. Nobody has been held accountable in any meaningful way, and her only defense for propagating outright lies to the American public was, "At this point, what difference does it make?
    You are mildly misquoting "what difference does it make at this point?" which was both a moment of exasperation and a way of saying where her present focus was. It was not an appreciation of the past, like you suggest.

    This very same exchange is touted as a good moment for her, and the jury is out: Republicans overplayed their hands in this inquiry. You acknowledge it yourself, when stating her feets are not close to the fire.

    Context is such a powerful thing: Jonhson's response, who was looking Clinton straight in the eyes... what was his reaction?

    OK, Thank you Madam Secretary.




    Context and video

    Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Madam Secretary. I'd like to join my colleagues in thanking you for your service sincerely, and also appreciate the fact that you’re here testifying and glad that you’re looking in good health.

    Clinton: Thank you.

    Johnson: Were you fully aware in real time -- and again, I realize how big your job is and everything is erupting in the Middle East at this time -- were you fully aware of these 20 incidents that were reported in the ARB[State Department Accountability Review Board] in real time?

    Clinton: I was aware of the ones that were brought to my attention. They were part of our ongoing discussion about the deteriorating threat environment in eastern Libya. We certainly were very conscious of them. I was assured by our security professionals that repairs were under way, additional security upgrades had taken place.

    Johnson: Thank you. Did you see personally the cable on -- I believe it was August 12th -- specifically asking for, basically, reinforcements for the security detail that was going to be evacuating or leaving in August? Did you see that personally?

    Clinton: No, sir.

    Johnson: OK. When you read the ARB, it strikes me as how certain the people were that the attacks started at 9:40 Benghazi time. When was the first time you spoke to -- or have you ever spoken to -- the returnees, the evacuees? Did you personally speak to those folks?

    Clinton: I‘ve spoken to one of them, but I waited until after the ARB had done its investigation because I did not want there to be anybody raising any issue that I had spoken to anyone before the ARB conducted its investigation.

    Johnson: How many people were evacuated from Libya?

    Clinton: Well, the numbers are a little bit hard to pin down because of our other friends --

    Johnson: Approximately?

    Clinton: Approximately, 25 to 30.

    Johnson: Did anybody in the State Department talk to those folks very shortly afterwards?

    Clinton: There was discussion going on afterwards, but once the investigation started, the FBI spoke to them before we spoke to them, and so other than our people in Tripoli -- which, I think you’re talking about Washington, right?

    Johnson: The point I’m making is, a very simple phone call to these individuals, I think, would’ve ascertained immediately that there was no protest prior to this. This attack started at 9:40 p.m. Benghazi time and it was an assault. I appreciate the fact that you called it an assault. But I’m going back to then-Ambassador [Susan] Rice five days later going on the Sunday shows and, what I would say, is purposefully misleading the American public. Why wasn’t that known? And again, I appreciate the fact that the transparency of this hearing, but why weren’t we transparent to that point in time?

    Clinton: Well, first of all, Senator, I would say that once the assault happened, and once we got our people rescued and out, our most immediate concern was, number one, taking care of their injuries. As I said, I still have a DS [Diplomatic Security] agent at Walter Reed seriously injured -- getting them into Frankfurt, Ramstein to get taken care of, the FBI going over immediately to start talking to them. We did not think it was appropriate for us to talk to them before the FBI conducted their interviews. And we did not -- I think this is accurate, sir -- I certainly did not know of any reports that contradicted the IC [Intelligence Community] talking points at the time that Ambassador Rice went on the TV shows. And you know I just want to say that people have accused Ambassador Rice and the administration of misleading Americans. I can say trying to be in the middle of this and understanding what was going on, nothing could be further from the truth. Was information developing? Was the situation fluid? Would we reach conclusions later that weren’t reached initially? And I appreciate the --

    Johnson: But, Madame Secretary, do you disagree with me that a simple phone call to those evacuees to determine what happened wouldn’t have ascertained immediately that there was no protest? That was a piece of information that could have been easily, easily obtained?

    Clinton: But, Senator, again—

    Johnson: Within hours, if not days?

    Clinton: Senator, you know, when you’re in these positions, the last thing you want to do is interfere with any other process going on, number one—

    Johnson: I realize that’s a good excuse.

    Clinton: Well, no, it’s the fact. Number two, I would recommend highly you read both what the ARB said about it and the classified ARB because, even today, there are questions being raised. Now, we have no doubt they were terrorists, they were militants, they attacked us, they killed our people. But what was going on and why they were doing what they were doing is still unknown --

    Johnson: No, again, we were misled that there were supposedly protests and that something sprang out of that -- an assault sprang out of that -- and that was easily ascertained that that was not the fact, and the American people could have known that within days and they didn’t know that.

    Clinton: With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator. Now, honestly, I will do my best to answer your questions about this, but the fact is that people were trying in real time to get to the best information. The IC has a process, I understand, going with the other committees to explain how these talking points came out. But you know, to be clear, it is, from my perspective, less important today looking backwards as to why these militants decided they did it than to find them and bring them to justice, and then maybe we’ll figure out what was going on in the meantime.

    Johnson: OK. Thank you, Madame Secretary.


    Source:http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...nce-does-it-m/
    A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.
    - Wayne Gretzky

  18. Likes JimJones8934, CowboyX, Sigfried liked this post
  19. #17
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    1,926
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    By making this statement, you have forever hereafter lost any right to disregard accusations of media bias from me and others that have been leveled at the mainstream media for their constant efforts to whitewash the Obama administration and all its hangers on. To continue to do so after you just cried foul about people glossing over someone you don't like would be the height of intellectual bankruptcy.
    I wasn't talking about media bias, I was talking about your bias and of those like you who parrotted "you can't support the troops with supporting the mission" and other crap like that.

    ---------- Post added at 05:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:42 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    Shifting the goalposts. She did ask, "what difference does it make?" in a Congressional hearing, after having been asked several times about why she and those in her department intentionally lied to the American people about what happened in Benghazi.
    It's correcting a misquote, not shifting the goalposts.

    ---------- Post added at 05:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:44 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    She wasn't the President, but she does have authority to take action to defend the Embassies we keep all over the world. In fact, this is one of her primary tasks... the establishment and maintenance of diplomatic channels throughout the world. If she isn't responsible, then who is?
    ah, the people who killed them are responsible for killing them. Although I feel bad for them and their families, they knew the risks.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  20. Likes JimJones8934 liked this post
  21. #18
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    I can't believe that you guys are debunking yet another phony scandal without me but nice job so far.

    Talthas: exactly what do you mean when you say "Benghazi still rests at her feet,". Please proceed (g'vnor) but be precise ...

  22. #19
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,242
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by JJ
    Talthas: exactly what do you mean when you say "Benghazi still rests at her feet,". Please proceed (g'vnor) but be precise ...
    I think it means that she was in charge of protecting those assets, and she failed. She failed in the face of direct requests for more help, and she failed by removing help when she was asked for more. Then having an attack occur which those decisions directly relevant to.

    None of those decisions are "controversial", or under dispute as to if they occurred or not.
    I apologize to anyone waiting on a response from me. I am experiencing a time warp, suddenly their are not enough hours in a day. As soon as I find a replacement part to my flux capacitor regulator, time should resume it's normal flow.

  23. #20
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    2,206
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Clinton 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    None of those decisions are "controversial", or under dispute as to if they occurred or not.
    Monday morning quarterbacking doesn't involve elements that are under dispute, but rather is an inclination to see events that have already occurred as being more predictable than they were before they took place.
    Many inquiries has found no evidence compelling enough to shake the impression that Republicans do not suffer from a severe case of hindsight bias where it involves Clinton's behavior.
    A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.
    - Wayne Gretzky

 

 
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 2016: Obama's America.
    By KevinBrowning in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: September 8th, 2012, 09:30 PM
  2. Only Clinton could go to North Korea
    By Dionysus in forum Member Contributed News
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: August 6th, 2009, 12:25 PM
  3. Obama vs Clinton: Who's smarter?
    By Trendem in forum Politics
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: April 27th, 2008, 04:48 PM
  4. Clinton wants MI and FL delegates to count
    By daman in forum Politics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: February 15th, 2008, 05:10 PM
  5. Clinton for UN Secretary?
    By Snoop in forum International Affairs
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: February 1st, 2005, 08:04 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •