Again:


Lying about policy = A-ok

Lying about personal stuff = Pathological

"I'm worth 10 billion dollars"

"The only woman I've ever insulted is Rosie McDonnell"

policy?

TRUMP isn't being held to politician standards by the public. He's being held to reality star standards.


Media tries to hold him to politician standards, but the Trumpeteers DGAF.

I'd disagree there. The media absolutely is not treating him like a politician. If like, Louie Gohmert was running and saying the **** Trump was saying, the Village would be murdering him instead of treating him as "a phenomenon" and ****.

Like, this is from a nonpartisan source, but look at how it's phrased:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/...ains-dominance

45-25 is Clinton's "lead shrinking", while Trump being up to 33 is "dominance".

The media, more than anything, wants a competitive race. They NEED a story. That is their bias above all else.

Another way of saying this:
Virgil Texas ‏@virgiltexas 2h2 hours ago
SANDERS: Hitler won an election in 1932
MEDIA: FIVE PINOCCHIOS

TRUMP: Brown people invented mange
MEDIA: Everyone's entitled to an opinion

Related to this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...n-an-election/

Which, after a bunch of people were like "Glenn, you're an idiot", added an update and linked something from Vox but didn't actually rewrite the terrible rest of the article.

P.S. Germany also held an election for dissolving the Presidency in 1934, and Hitler won that, too, but still.

Sanders gets his history nitpicked(while his point goes unaddressed), Trump literally just makes **** up constantly and it's like "Oh, that Trump, always making stuff up".

You actually believe this nonsense? Wow.

True or false bigpoppa: democrats go over every single thing that republicans say to see if they were lying

I wonder how much the internet has changed stuff. Like know they can emperically prove that stories with "trump" in the title get five times the clicks of a story with "bush" in the title, or whatver the number is, which is just far better metrics than number of total papers the NYT sells depending on cover story. has the "chase the story" bias gotten worse, or is it just same **** differnet medium

To be honest, the optics of this are so bad, I can't understand why she has any support.

Of course it has gotten worse. Newspapers could put a lot more depth in the rest of their articles and depend on the sensational front page to get it sold. People would still read most of those articles because you had bought the entire newspaper anyway. These days people only read what draws their attention with a headline. What makes it worse is that the headlines you get offered depend on what you clicked before so after a while you live in this world where all the news confirms what you already believed.

Look at the lol alternative your side is offering. Vlad the Impaler is more compelling.

I think mostly its that its completely obvious she'll take any position that maximizes her probability of getting elected. Granted pretty much all politicians do this, but Hillary doesn't seem to have any kind of core theme about what she wants to do as president. Trump wants to "make America great again". Cruz and Huckabee want to pander to religious right. Sanders wants to spread socialism. With Hillary there's just kind of a blank.

Plus there is carryover from Bill's presidency where a lot of hate was directed at her for getting involved in policy as a first lady. Some people have been hating on her for over 20 years so now they need a specific reason not to hate her instead of the other way around. Email and Benghazi just reinforce old feelings for some folks.

People been hating Hillary for 20 years wouldn't be voting for a Democrat come Nov anyway.

just lol at calling make america great again a core theme. shame on hilary for not having a totally vacuous tag line.

Than Hillary? I agree.

What is your best guess as to why a cabinet level official would use an email server kept in her house?

"It's your time"

No, I just don't care. They're all evil, so I'm going for entertainment.

You're begging the question. I've hopefully made it clear that I'm looking for actual substantive responses, not echo-chamber non-answers from people who assume things are the case without thinking about them critically.

So if you're having a convo with someone who doesn't blindly accept that Hillary only cares about getting elected, what do you say to convince them? What proof do you have of that?

Old feelings of irrational, un- or misinformed hatred? I'd agree with that.

lol this is sooooo wrong.

LOL what is this concern trolling **** from a gun nut? Jayhawk, the Democrats lost your vote with ****ing Brown vs. Board of Education, you can't seriously imagine that anyone buys this coming from you.


ikes in this thread, just in this thread, is there anyone who believes emailservergate is a BIG DEAL(for... reasons!) that was smart enough to not think Benghazi was a scandal? Because it kinda seems that emailgate, while it has crossover coverage into even the liberal Washington Post or whatever... it's not resonating with the Democrat base.

Hint 1: You weren't!


I'm not going to sit here and be lectured by ****ing Donald Trump voters about how email server security is The Issue of 2016.

[Guy who uses the n-word when he gets angry at blacks]

Gee, I can't understand why Hillary has ANY SUPPORT.

fly you've hated hillary for as long as you can remember and you're going to vote for her. Spew on brother.

Exactly. EXACTLY. A bunch of fancy pants liberals on this forum, I mean we're talking super geniuses, super libs, these are the guys that knew the CDC wasn't lying about Ebola and that George Zimmerman was a racist, these are people who were raised with like, values AND education. These forum regulars have a political comprehension basically akin to magic from the perspective of a Jayhawk or an ikestoys.

They still support Hillary. Even after learning about the emails.


Do you think I, someone who dislikes Hillary for being a center-right corporate pawn, am UNAWARE of "the optics" of emailservergate? I know as much about it as you'd expect a decently well informed liberal who reads and posts in this thread. So what about this particular scandal is going to flip me?

then:
lol fly agreed with me on accident