'Nobody likes him' - Hillary Clinton bashes Bernie Sanders

[wwest5829]

9 hours ago, GeorgeCross said:

 

says the woman who couldn't beat Trump in an election 

 

 

 

While I did not vote for her (nor The Donald), she did beat Trump by approximately 3 million votes. Yes, he was made POTUS by the Electoral College but ... she did beat Trump. Such is recorded by history.

Edited January 22, 2020 by wwest5829

[Katipo]

......says the woman who lost to Donald Trump ????

[Ramen087]

1 minute ago, wwest5829 said:

While I did not vote for her (nor The Donald), she did beat Trump by approximately 3 million votes. Yes, he was made POTUS by the Electoral College but ... she did beat Trump. Such is recorded by history.

This is incorrect. Total votes has not elected the President of the USA since the process of the electoral college was established in the late 1700’s. There are times when the total amount of votes has coincided with the results of the electoral college; it happens quite often. However, electoral votes are the only determinant factor in the electing of the POTUS. Every candidate for President knows the rules, and campaigns according to them. To suggest or assert anything else is nothing but ‘sour grapes’.

[Tounge Thaied]

18 minutes ago, Ireland32 said:

Well she Won Popular Vote , why are you in Denial, it’s Cult -like

See Ramen087's Post. 

[wwest5829]

6 minutes ago, Ramen087 said:

This is incorrect. Total votes has not elected the President of the USA since the process of the electoral college was established in the late 1700’s. There are times when the total amount of votes has coincided with the results of the electoral college; it happens quite often. However, electoral votes are the only determinant factor in the electing of the POTUS. Every candidate for President knows the rules, and campaigns according to them. To suggest or assert anything else is nothing but ‘sour grapes’.

The Donald is the 5th POTUS not elected by the popular vote. That is the recorded history because the popular vote has been the determining factor in the election of 40 Presidents of the USA. (Yes, the Electoral College vote did confirm this but that is the history).

[Ramen087]

28 minutes ago, Ireland32 said:

She won the popular vote Clueless 

The popular vote doesn’t determine who is elected POTUS. It hasn’t for more than two centuries. Please read my post in this thread posted a short while ago. 

[Boon Mee]

Well, guess what. DJT is about to roll over that like a cheap suit.

Handwriting is obviously on the wall boys so deal with it! ???? 

[Ramen087]

6 minutes ago, wwest5829 said:

The Donald is the 5th POTUS not elected by the popular vote. That is the recorded history because the popular vote has been the determining factor in the election of 40 Presidents of the USA. (Yes, the Electoral College vote did confirm this but that is the history).

Trump was elected by the electoral college. Winning the most votes in the electoral college is the sole determining factor to hold the Office. You don’t need to win the popular vote to be elected. The electoral college does not confirm the popular vote. Most times the popular vote and electoral college go the same candidate, but it signifies nothing except to those who for some insane reason think the popular vote is more meaningful than the electoral college. 

Edited January 22, 2020 by Ramen087

[DJ54]

Run the govt with job description. No party line <deleted>... if you don’t do the job given correctly and effective. 1 week severance pay for 

each year and give the boot.... 

[alex8912]

32 minutes ago, Ramen087 said:

Trump was elected by the electoral college. Winning the most votes in the electoral college is the sole determining factor to hold the Office. You don’t need to win the popular vote to be elected. The electoral college does not confirm the popular vote. Most times the popular vote and electoral college go the same candidate, but it signifies nothing except to those who for some insane reason think the popular vote is more meaningful than the electoral college. 

And they will never shut up about it like a 5 year year old wanting something. Yet if Hillary won the electoral college and not popular vote he would be silent. ???? 1000 % guaranteed. We would also be in a horrible mess by now btw. 

[alex8912]

56 minutes ago, wwest5829 said:

While I did not vote for her (nor The Donald), she did beat Trump by approximately 3 million votes. Yes, he was made POTUS by the Electoral College but ... she did beat Trump. Such is recorded by history.

What history? She lost. Nothing recorded. 

[alex8912]

2 hours ago, LarryLEB said:

WRONG!  Time for some fact checking:

• Hillary received 65,853,514 votes in 2016.
• Obama received 65,915,795 votes in 2012.
• Obama received 69,498,516 votes in 2008.

Some comments:

1.  Nationwide, Hillary received 2,868,686 votes more than Trump.
2.  In California, Hillary received 4,269,978 votes more than Trump. 
3.  In the rest of the country, Trump received 1,401,292 votes more than Hillary.

Conclusion:  Let Hillary be President of California!

Thank you. But he will never shut up about this wrong fact. Also the population in the USA has grown enormously since just the 50’’s and 60’s so of course the voting population will get higher and higher in the 20’s. DUH.  

[ThaiFelix]

9 hours ago, ezzra said:

Like her or not, the US doesn't need, want or even ready for an old socialist dreamer geezer, maybe some despot rejims in S. American can use him...

You would have to check with the CIA for their plans first.  They could have decided on a "democratically elected" leader already lol

[metisdead]

A post using a trolling representation of Hillary Clinton's name has been removed. 

[mogandave]

8 hours ago, thasoss said:

and why should it be changed

So the left does not need to bother with flyover country. 
 

 

[phkauf]

1 hour ago, alex8912 said:

And they will never shut up about it like a 5 year year old wanting something. Yet if Hillary won the electoral college and not popular vote he would be silent. ???? 1000 % guaranteed. We would also be in a horrible mess by now btw. 

Clinton spent time campaigning in "Safe States" like California and NY in order to run up the popular vote in case the situation you described occurred. There was considerable thought that Trump would win the popular vote and she win the Electoral Vote - that's the only rational explanation for her going to Safe States and skipping Wisconsin and barely going to other mid-western states. It's her and her advisers fault, but in true Clinton form they deny all responsibility.

This whole thing is just a setup for her to be in position at the Democratic Convention when nobody has enough votes to win the nomination outright. She hopes to ride in as the savior of the Democratic Party and steal the nomination. 

Look at 2016 - the Clinton Machine cleared the field for her except for Bernie, who they have no control over since he's technically an Independent. Even with that, he still gave her a run and she had to resort to all sorts of dirty tricks to beat him. For 2020, people were not going to lay down for her again so this is the path they will take. And Trump will get re-elected by an even greater margin in the Electoral Vote than last time.

[sucit]

That may be the best compliment she could have given him.

 

This is ammunition for Bernie. Trust me. He would have to be an idiot to not use this. 

 

The current people in power who are involved in endless wars while income inequality is worse than its ever been, those people don't like Bernie? Why don't they like him? They see their gravy train disappearing. 

[androokery]

8 hours ago, xylophone said:

I never was a great follower of American politics although now that this corrupt clown is president I have taken more of an interest, but what has been of great interest to me is why Hillary is hated so much (no this is serious, I really don't know) and for someone to be described as despicable and evil to the core, then she must have done something very wrong.........what may I ask.

As for Bernie, well I do believe he is too old to be elected and he seems too far left (for me) as well as open to fits of ranting and raving.

So without taking up too much space (bullet points will do) why is Hillary despicable and evil to the core?

A little off track perhaps, but in some ways related to Bernie's situation.
 

Just guessing here, but people who hate Hillary and "sort of" like Trump, probably have problems with Hillary being a woman in power who is not very attractive...

[alex8912]

13 minutes ago, phkauf said:

Clinton spent time campaigning in "Safe States" like California and NY in order to run up the popular vote in case the situation you described occurred. There was considerable thought that Trump would win the popular vote and she win the Electoral Vote - that's the only rational explanation for her going to Safe States and skipping Wisconsin and barely going to other mid-western states. It's her and her advisers fault, but in true Clinton form they deny all responsibility.

This whole thing is just a setup for her to be in position at the Democratic Convention when nobody has enough votes to win the nomination outright. She hopes to ride in as the savior of the Democratic Party and steal the nomination. 

Look at 2016 - the Clinton Machine cleared the field for her except for Bernie, who they have no control over since he's technically an Independent. Even with that, he still gave her a run and she had to resort to all sorts of dirty tricks to beat him. For 2020, people were not going to lay down for her again so this is the path they will take. And Trump will get re-elected by an even greater margin in the Electoral Vote than last time.

Well that’s a pretty cool angle there. Something to think about. She really has picked an interesting time to come out against Bernie right now just before Iowa and New Hampshire. ????

[sucit]

2 hours ago, Ramen087 said:

This is incorrect. Total votes has not elected the President of the USA since the process of the electoral college was established in the late 1700’s. There are times when the total amount of votes has coincided with the results of the electoral college; it happens quite often. However, electoral votes are the only determinant factor in the electing of the POTUS. Every candidate for President knows the rules, and campaigns according to them. To suggest or assert anything else is nothing but ‘sour grapes’.

I don't think that is accurate. It is not sour grapes. 

 

The system was set up in part to be a deterrent to say a Hitler type figure gaining momentum in the general populace. It is a fail safe because electoral votes can actually go to the person who does not win the state. They wanted the system to elect the person who got the popular vote, but this was the best compromise they could come up with. 

 

I would agree they all know the rules before they start, but in my opinion the system was set up in an attempt to elect the person who gets the popular vote. 

[Isaan sailor]

For once, I agree with Hillary.  Bernie needs to return to Moscow, where he got married.

[sucit]

12 minutes ago, alex8912 said:

Well that’s a pretty cool angle there. Something to think about. She really has picked an interesting time to come out against Bernie right now just before Iowa and New Hampshire. ????

Easy to predict. Her and everything she represents is put at risk if Bernie is president. 

 

She has even gone as far as to say she may not endorse him against Trump as well. Another thing that would be easy to call beforehand.

 

These are some of the lowest people on earth. If you look into Bill Clinton's speaking fees, there was a dramatic increase while Hilary was secretary of state. It is so obvious in so many ways how these people grease the wheels for their corporate friends, and Bernie represents a threat to that. Bernie is not funded by corporations, he is funded by people. 

Edited January 22, 2020 by sucit

[rabas]

11 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

She got the most votes from American citizens at the last election.

That should tell you something very profound about American politics, but it doesn't.

 

[rabas]

11 minutes ago, sucit said:

Easy to predict. Her and everything she represents is put at risk if Bernie is president. 

 

She has even gone as far as to say she may not endorse him against Trump as well. Another thing that would be easy to call beforehand.

The image is breathtaking. Hillary endorsing Trump.

 

[Slickrick]

Hillary is not relevant.  You dreamers, keep dreaming.

[alex8912]

3 hours ago, sucit said:

Easy to predict. Her and everything she represents is put at risk if Bernie is president. 

 

She has even gone as far as to say she may not endorse him against Trump as well. Another thing that would be easy to call beforehand.

 

These are some of the lowest people on earth. If you look into Bill Clinton's speaking fees, there was a dramatic increase while Hilary was secretary of state. It is so obvious in so many ways how these people grease the wheels for their corporate friends, and Bernie represents a threat to that. Bernie is not funded by corporations, he is funded by people. 

I always found it both interesting and funny that her and Bill went to Trumps wedding. 

[lannarebirth]

4 hours ago, rabas said:

The image is breathtaking. Hillary endorsing Trump.

 

Everytime she opens her mouth and inserts herself in the current campaign, that is what she is effectively doing. The only question is, is that by design or just pure egomania/arrogance/bitterness?

 

[Scott]

Off-topic, troll posts and replies removed.  

 

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, sucit said:

I don't think that is accurate. It is not sour grapes. 

 

The system was set up in part to be a deterrent to say a Hitler type figure gaining momentum in the general populace. It is a fail safe because electoral votes can actually go to the person who does not win the state. They wanted the system to elect the person who got the popular vote, but this was the best compromise they could come up with. 

 

I would agree they all know the rules before they start, but in my opinion the system was set up in an attempt to elect the person who gets the popular vote. 

Try again. The electoral college was set up to prevent states with large numbers of people being able to elect presidents that the rest of the country did not want. That situation existed in 2016 when only the coasts were solidly for Clinton and almost all the other states did not want her. If it were a popular vote, the coasts would dominate the center indefinitely just from population alone.

The USA is about ALL the states, not just a few.

[scorecard]

20 hours ago, ezzra said:

Like her or not, the US doesn't need, want or even ready for an old socialist dreamer geezer, maybe some despot rejims in S. American can use him...

Nothing wrong with taregted socialist policies. Highly desired and works well in many countries and promotes sharing and support for each other, nothing wrong with that.