January 12, 2016

It's not a big deal to me personally but someone saying

"how is Hillary going to control Bill from keeping his hands off the White House interns?"

I suspect from the Clinton campaign perspective that they feel it's now going to be a problem for some voters.

You know the GOP are going to stoke those thoughts and for the (often sexually hypocritical) religious right, they'll be hand-wringing at the pulpit, prayin' to their Lord to keep the sex heathen out of the White House!.

So sad. But it's like a wedge issue. Or like Benghazi. Scrape a few more points off Hillary.

January 11, 2016

I hope Bernie pulls ahead and then says "no"

Might serve up Hillary and her co-chair, Debbie, a little justice.

January 11, 2016

Washington Post and Mediate have picked it up

http://www.mediaite.com/online/if-clinton-foundation-is-now-subject-of-investigation-that-could-be-bad-legal-news-for-hillary/

http://www.mediaite.com/opinion/report-fbi-email-probe-now-investigating-potential-clinton-foundation-corruption/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/01/11/hillary-clintons-travails-mount/

Doesn't take a rocket scientist. Look at Clinton Foundation donors. Look at what happened during Clinton's time as
Secretary of State.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/clinton-foundation-donors_0_n_7441486.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-hillary-clinton-kept-her-wealthy-friends-close-while-at-state-department/2015/10/05/5cfbe884-6930-11e5-9223-70cb36460919_story.html

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/hillary-clinton-foundation-state-arms-deals

Shooting the messenger doesn't work if the messenger is delivering something of substance.

It remains to be seen if the FBI will find something of substance. Can't blame them for looking. But you can bet if the Condoleezza Rice Foundation was taking big donations and arm dealers were getting big contracts, folks around here would be all over it.

What the GOP will do even if she's innocent (and she very probably is) is damage her with innuendo. This is just part of the Clinton baggage Dems have to carry for her as a candidate.

January 11, 2016

That's the quote I thought of when I came into this thread

Hillary's real position on gun control is a weathervane pointing towards what will get her more votes at the time.

There's nothing different going on here. Once elected, all bets are off because Wall Street and lobbyists will dictate her position for re-election. That's how she's operated since she arrived in Washington.

January 11, 2016

Indeed. It's the Clinton campaign that's getting

nervous because Bernie has closed the gap in Iowa and overtaken her in NH.

Only 28% of Democrats polled in Iowa fairly recently think Hillary is trustworthy. The rest don't. That's not Bernie's fault. That's not the GOP's fault either.

If you want to talk about stagnating in the face of heavy ad spending, the Clinton campaign hasn't put much of a dent in the untrustwortrhy issue, have they?

January 11, 2016

For many, it won't matter where the candidate is from

- they'll go with the candidate they can trust.

Hillary may well be trying to be the most untrustworthy candidate ever elected president. And that's starting to look like it's going to be a really tough sell ....

January 11, 2016

A 1-2 win leaves the media on this race nothing to talk about except

how Hillary fell short and why folks are voting for Bernie for the first 20 days of the primary voting - when many start to tune in. It's major free advertising that is almost nothing but good for Bernie and almost nothing but bad for Hillary.

As a result, the downstream primary polls will tighten and at the very least, a competitive primary race is on.

Lose Iowa and it's much tougher for Bernie to make a race of it.

One other thing to keep in mind: Obama was decently ahead in NH and Hillary won in 2008. I think Blackbox.org documented some funny stuff happening with ballots. Whatever. Statement of the obvious as a reminder: leading in the polls doesn't count like an actual vote.

Bernie has to win both. He's now definitely in striking distance. No question about that.

Strongly recommended should Bernie pull it off

Go Bernie!!

January 9, 2016

Shhh

Democrats are not supposed to point out when Hillary is not being honest again!! ...

January 2, 2016

I've been surprised the Obama admin hasn't done more on this case

I've read a bunch of stuff on the case but I'm no expert so I'm not convinced he's innocent because of that. He may well be innocent. I just haven't got to the bottom of it.

But I have been left with a bad odor - something smells about this case. I just don't know it well enough to be sure what exactly that smell is.

January 1, 2016

If there is a car accident and someone dies, does that mean to you

that someone must die in every car accident? Because the facts are that although some people die in car accidents, a lot of people do not die in car accidents and people do not die in every car accident. Outcomes between life and death vary in car accidents.

Accident investigations often determine reasons based upon science as to why someone might die in a car accident and why someone else might not in a different car accident - usually because the circumstances were different in some way. Occasionally, it might just be luck ... "an inch more that way and they'd be dead!" So it goes with structural buildings when engineers look at what went wrong.

Not all buildings suffer structural failure due to fire. Some because they don't have faulty fire retardant like the WTC. Some because the jet fuel fire at the WTC burned hotter. Some because they didn't suffer the structural damage the WTC did when the jets slammed into it. Some because most structural steel towers are designed structurally differently than the WTC was for economical reasons to reach it's lofty height - where the walls were oriented more to bearing some/more of the load. Some because of the size of the WTC relative to other buildings.

Etc, etc, etc.

All these things and more determine whether a building will stand or fall in a fire. And the engineers don't rely on conspiracy theorists to arrive at their scientific conclusions!!

Since there is no way to know all those things yet for this Dubai hotel, then no one can provide a credible answer for some time to come - though one might make some good guesses as they get more info collected.

You have to look at ALL the factors as to why a building stands or falls much like the engineers did when they examined the cause of failure of the WTCs on 9/11. Nearly every situation is different. My father and I, both with structural engineering backgrounds, reviewed the thousand page plus report and thought it made perfect sense and was pretty well done. I'm well aware of wackos on the internet who saw it differently and there were scientific explanations for the exploding joints video but I did not see the conspiracy theorists present anything remotely credible.