A record number of Americans now dislike Hillary Clinton

[Publicus]

 

Some of us over on this side haven't ever thought of Hillary Clinton as personable, although her friends say that she's a regular gal in small private conversations in the home or vacationing at a lake in Arkansas or where ever.

 

HRC graduated from Wellesley College which is historically a women's four year institution known for turning out generations of grande dames at a hefty price tag in any dollar terms.  Wellesley is the most Republican town in Massachusetts and the college there is nestled among estates in suburban Boston.

 

Potus Bubba was easy to like and easy to laugh at or to cuss out when he was at his most earnest. They met at Yale Law School which has given us quite a few famous stiffs too, John Kerry among 'em.

 

None of 'em however are wild or radical, nor are they completely erratic, undisciplined,  ignorant and immensely dangerous as Potus. 

[stander]

Clinton, talks constantly about her fears that families of illegal immigrants will be separated. She doesn't talk about the American families who have been permanently separated from their loved ones because of a preventable death caused by an illegal immigrant.

[stander]

Between 30 and 40 per cent of Americans say they have a ‘highly unfavorable’ opinion of Clinton.

Barry Goldwater (the Republican candidate in 1968) and George McGovern (the Democrat in 1972), who are usually cited as the most disastrous presidential nominees of all time, scored 20 and 26 per cent respectively!!

[Publicus]

34 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

OFF TOPIC.

You don't even address the fact that millions and milllions of Americans don't like and don't trust HRC and won't vote for her.

 

Which is off topic in your opinion, Nixon who another poster first referenced or Trump also previously referenced in the thread.

 

Clinton and Nixon are opposites yet what you say about Clinton being hated by millions of Americans is also true of Nixon (long before he ran for Potus). 

 

Nixon btw was not so much a crook as instead exhibiting an absolute disregard of the Constitution ("If the president does it, then it isn't wrong.").

 

Only Trump would be worse in this respect. There are a large number of people who don't like HRC personally or who distrust her, but that will vote for her because they know she isn't going be either pushed around nor is she going to fly off the handle. 

 

As with many a grande dame of society, she rose with her husband then went on to become her own person. Hillary succeeds because, if nothing else, she is inclusive.

[stander]

Clinton’s many advisers and strategists struggle to keep her unpopularity in check, so they must be dreading the upcoming presidential debates, because the more people see of Clinton, the less they like. 

[Linzz]

28 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

Some of us over on this side haven't ever thought of Hillary Clinton as personable, although her friends say that she's a regular gal in small private conversations in the home or vacationing at a lake in Arkansas or where ever.

 

HRC graduated from Wellesley College which is historically a women's four year institution known for turning out generations of grande dames at a hefty price tag in any dollar terms.  Wellesley is the most Republican town in Massachusetts and the college there is nestled among estates in suburban Boston.

 

Potus Bubba was easy to like and easy to laugh at or to cuss out when he was at his most earnest. They met at Yale Law School which has given us quite a few famous stiffs too, John Kerry among 'em.

 

None of 'em however are wild or radical, nor are they completely erratic, undisciplined,  ignorant and immensely dangerous as Potus. 

 

Yes but that was all back then. The issue is now. Past performance is not necessarily a measure of future intent. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Hillary says there is lots of smoke but no fire. I think where there is smoke there is always fire. Both candidates could prove dangerous, except Trump can and does often change his mind. Hillary can't ever because she is beholden to too many interest groups, bought and paid for.

[khwaibah]

[AlexRRR]

Dont worry guys we didn't have much to choose from in AU as well....its like a barren wasteland out there....

[stander]

The Clintons have been sucking the teat of the American taxpayer for their entire lives, while lining their pockets.

http://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/746254?ns_mail_uid=27172567&ns_mail_job=1684764_09012016&s=al&dkt_nbr=4dyn6esz&section=Newsfront&keywords=report-bill-clinton-tax-dollars-foundation&year=2016&month=09&date=01&id=746254&aliaspath=%2FManage%2FArticles%2FTemplate-Main&oref=news.newsmax.com

[jadee]

I don't think it's a case of more Americans hating Hilary, it's just that they've just started polling people about it. She's always been hated by a sizable portion of the population. Trump's smartest move yet is attacking Hilary with '08 Obama commericals - 'She'll say anything and change nothing'. 

[Scotwight]

3 minutes ago, jadee said:

I don't think it's a case of more Americans hating Hilary, it's just that they've just started polling people about it. She's always been hated by a sizable portion of the population. Trump's smartest move yet is attacking Hilary with '08 Obama commericals - 'She'll say anything and change nothing'. 

You do know Hillary was a Senator from NY in 2001 and she was tracked then.  This is the 2nd time she has run for President.  Here is some tracking data.  http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating

 

If the current trend continues only 20% of Americans will like her by election time.  

[stander]

According to a recent Gallup poll, the words Americans feel best describe her are: ‘dishonest’, ‘liar’, ‘poor character’, and ‘don’t trust her’.

 

"Familiarity breeds contempt; familiar liars breed disgust."

[Prbkk]

2 hours ago, stander said:

Between 30 and 40 per cent of Americans say they have a ‘highly unfavorable’ opinion of Clinton.

Barry Goldwater (the Republican candidate in 1968) and George McGovern (the Democrat in 1972), who are usually cited as the most disastrous presidential nominees of all time, scored 20 and 26 per cent respectively!!

 

Goldwater ( who turned out to be not such a bad fellow in his many years in The Senate,  after a rocky start) was the candidate in '64.  The biggest ratbag of them all, Richard M Nixon, was the (successful ) candidate in 1968.

[Steely Dan]

HRC has now gone 260 days without a press conference. At this rate she will try to go the full distance with 'no comment' as her manifesto. The press must be burning the midnight oil to try and anticipate and attempt damage limitation for the eagerly awaited Wikileaks releases.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-25/assange-says-wikileaks-preparing-new-clinton-release-will-be-significant-presidentia


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[Chicog]

3 hours ago, khwaibah said:

 

 

Keep clinging on....

 

Polling Data

Poll	Date	Sample	MoE	Clinton (D)	Trump (R)	Spread
RCP Average	8/22 - 9/1	--	--	46.1	42.0	Clinton +4.1

[212Roger]

On 9/1/2016 at 11:34 AM, Jingthing said:

Clever. 

Did you make that up yourself. 

 

 

I must admit, I stole the phrase from Alex Jones/Info wars.

[Jingthing]

2 hours ago, Steely Dan said:

HRC has now gone 260 days without a press conference. At this rate she will try to go the full distance with 'no comment' as her manifesto. The press must be burning the midnight oil to try and anticipate and attempt damage limitation for the eagerly awaited Wikileaks releases.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-25/assange-says-wikileaks-preparing-new-clinton-release-will-be-significant-presidentia


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

She's got a solid lead.

Smart move to just let trump hang himself.

It's working.

[Scott]

An inflammatory post has been removed.  

[Boon Mee]

8 hours ago, Steely Dan said:

HRC has now gone 260 days without a press conference. At this rate she will try to go the full distance with 'no comment' as her manifesto. The press must be burning the midnight oil to try and anticipate and attempt damage limitation for the eagerly awaited Wikileaks releases.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-25/assange-says-wikileaks-preparing-new-clinton-release-will-be-significant-presidentia


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

What really galls most honest people who have a smidgen of ethics themselves is the recognition that Crooked Hillary has absolutely no shame whatsoever at all. Will say anything to anyone to get elected. 

[khwaibah]

7 hours ago, Chicog said:

 

 

Keep clinging on....

 

Polling Data

Poll	Date	Sample	MoE	Clinton (D)	Trump (R)	Spread
RCP Average	8/22 - 9/1	--	--	46.1	42.0	Clinton +4.1

 

RCP Average

8/22 - 9/1

--

--

41.4

38.2

7.8

3.1

Clinton +3.2

[Sphere]

The Donald's latest tweet.....

 

[tomwct]

The Republicans don't need to do anything! Lying Crooked Hillary has done it all by herself! Go Trump!

[Boon Mee]

We wonder why there's now a record number of Americans who don't like Crooked Hillary and then another lie of hers pops up.

To wit:

 

Hillary Clinton Told FBI That State Dept. Did Not Train Her on Protecting Classified Information

 

"Hillary Clinton told FBI questioners numerous times that she did not receive the various guidance documents and training sessions from State Department officials that employees get to ensure they protect and preserve their official emails and computer documents."

 

https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/02/clinton-denies-getting-training-guidance-email/

 

She lied.  Again...

 

[Steely Dan]

What really galls most honest people who have a smidgen of ethics themselves is the recognition that Crooked Hillary has absolutely no shame whatsoever at all. Will say anything to anyone to get elected. 

Not to mention the media running interference for her. Twitter have been deliberately tinkering with account settings to stop Wikileaks from trending. If the democrats didn't have a stranglehold on the media Hillary would have been toast ages ago, eating breakfast from behind bars too no doubt.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[Si Thea01]

CNN news this hour.  FBI releases their report into the Clinton Emails.  6 dozen were classified.  There also appears to be another problem.  During her interview she told the investigators 39 times that she could not recall.  Is this a sign she is suffering from amnesia or is unable to provide a truthful answer.  The latter comes to mind.

 

However, the biggest fabrication came when she told the investigators she did not know about the letters used in referring to the status of classified documents.  According to reports, it is a pre-requisite that people holding high government positions are made familiar with the classification procedures and she now says she didn't know the full process.  Either she is a super liar, totally incompetent or both.  

 

 

 

 

Edited September 3, 2016 by Si Thea01

[ClutchClark]

14 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

We wonder why there's now a record number of Americans who don't like Crooked Hillary and then another lie of hers pops up.

To wit:

 

Hillary Clinton Told FBI That State Dept. Did Not Train Her on Protecting Classified Information

 

"Hillary Clinton told FBI questioners numerous times that she did not receive the various guidance documents and training sessions from State Department officials that employees get to ensure they protect and preserve their official emails and computer documents."

 

https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/02/clinton-denies-getting-training-guidance-email/

 

She lied.  Again...

 

 

 

And when did the excuse, "I was ignorant of that", become a legitimate defense anyway? 

 

It was her responsibility to know. It is absolutely an integral part of her job description.

[Boon Mee]

 

https://twitter.com/JaredWyand/status/771792390340374528/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

 

Say Goodnight Irene...

[khwaibah]

Trump catches up to Clinton, latest Reuters/Ipsos poll finds

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-catches-up-to-clinton-latest-reuters-ipsos-poll-finds/ar-AAiqD1b?li=BBnb7Kz

[Publicus]

 

Same time period as the Reuters/Ipsos poll. This one is a Suffolk University/USA Today poll.

 

Hillary Clinton Edges Closer To 50% Support As Trump Treads Water In New Poll

 

Democrat Hillary Clinton leads Republican Donald Trump by 7 points nationwide, according to a Suffolk University/USA Today poll of voters likely to cast ballots in the November presidential election. Clinton (48 percent) led Trump (41 percent), with 9 percent undecided in the two-way ballot test.

 

In a four-way scenario that includes Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party nominee Jill Stein, Clinton maintained a 7-point advantage, 42 percent to Trump’s 35 percent; Johnson was at 9 percent; Stein, 4 percent; with 10 percent undecided.

 

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/09/01/hillary-clinton-edges-closer-50-support-trump-treads-water-poll.html

 

 

People can argue specific poll vs specific poll from among even the reputable and reliable polling organisations. Each poll cited here (Reuters and USA Today) for instance shows HRC as not liked and Donald Trump as not liked, and each poll shows HRC as hurting on the trust issue same as each one shows Trump hurting on the trust and confidence issue as Potus. Each poll includes likely voters, self-defined.

 

This poster has already presented more than one post detailing how the LA Times poll is by the paper's own statement experimental using unusual and unorthodox methods and predicates. The Times and its polling partner together state unequivocally the test of the reality of their poll will occur only after the election is decided. While that's true of any poll, the LA Times poll is throughout an "innovative" polling instrument.

[Publicus]

14 hours ago, Linzz said:

 

Yes but that was all back then. The issue is now. Past performance is not necessarily a measure of future intent. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Hillary says there is lots of smoke but no fire. I think where there is smoke there is always fire. Both candidates could prove dangerous, except Trump can and does often change his mind. Hillary can't ever because she is beholden to too many interest groups, bought and paid for.

 

My post concluded with now, the present, as I wrote:  None of 'em however are wild or radical, nor are they completely erratic, undisciplined,  ignorant and immensely dangerous as Potus. 

 

Your post does not address these vital facts and factors. Trump is a wildman and radical who predicates his campaign on exclusion and race, national origin, religion, mass government police forces and actions, social upheaval and disorder and worse. Donald Trump is an ignoramus megalomaniac. 

 

The post refers to glib and trite expressions and I quote:

 

Power corrupts

and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Hillary says there is lots of smoke but no fire.

I think where there is smoke there is always fire.

 

You even throw in a statement attributed to HRC that she hasn't made. Gotta do better than that over there on the political-cultural fringe right that wants to overturn everything to remake America into the 1950s again. When Joe McCarthy ran freely and wildly -- destructively.