Tagged: Hillary Clinton Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • feedwordpress 04:01:55 on 2016/10/23 Permalink
    Tags: , , Hillary Clinton, , ,   

    We must do better against Hillary than we did against Obama 


    Warning: preg_match_all(): Compilation failed: invalid range in character class at offset 7 in /homepages/23/d339537987/htdocs/ec/wp-content/themes/p2/inc/mentions.php on line 77

    Before we talk about Hillary Clinton, let’s talk briefly about Donald Trump. I’m not in the camp that believes he’s definitely going to lose the election despite all of the media indicators such as polls and buzz. That doesn’t mean I’m calling this election rigged, but I’m also not going to fall victim to the experience and common sense that told us long ago Trump couldn’t win the nomination, either. This is a weird election year, so dismissing Trump before the fat lady sings is foolish.

    With that said, let’s discuss the more likely scenario: President Hillary. Mark Levin is calling for preparations for impeachment. He’s right, but that cannot be our only recourse against the disastrous liberalism she will attempt to rain down on the country. Impeaching anyone, especially a President, is extremely difficult. While some plan for that attempt, let’s take a look at the other things conservatives must do to save the country from Hillary.

    2018 starts November 9th

    As Captain America said in Avengers: Age of Ultron, “You get killed… walk it off.”

    It doesn’t matter what happens in the Senate, House, and in state races on November 8th. Take a breath, eat a burger, wrap yourself in good ol’ American patriotism and get to work the next day. If the GOP retains a majority in Congress, pretend like it’s on the verge of dissolving. We have to push forward with our conservative philosophies intact in order to defend America and the righteous cause of freedom. Hillary is going to try to take those freedoms away. The left will try to take majorities or expand on the ones they already have.

    This election cycle has been physically and emotionally draining. Take a short breather and then get back in the ring.

    Do not accept the bending and breaking Congress did for Obama

    In Obama’s first term, we were told early on that we needed to have majorities in order to fight him, so we won the GOP the House in 2010. We were then told it wasn’t enough, that we needed the Senate as well, so we gave them a majority in the Senate in 2014. What have they done in two years with a majority in both chambers? Nothing. We have seen no difference in Obama’s policies. Spending has increased. The Republican-controlled Congress gave Obama everything he wanted.

    Regardless of who controls Congress after the election, it’s imperative for conservatives to impede Hillary’s liberal efforts with every ounce of their being. Senator Ted Cruz shut down the government over Obamacare without a majority in 2013 and then helped the Senate take the majority a year later. That is the type of leadership that will be needed to halt Clinton’s moves.

    It’s important to understand that Clinton is left of Obama in many areas, but she’s to the right of him in others. Republicans should not impede every move. They simply need to impede the liberal moves. Does that mean I expect Clinton to have some conservative perspectives? No. Of course not. But then again, I didn’t expect Obama to have any, either, and he did from time to time. TPP, for all its flaws, was conservative in principle even if it turned out to be Obamatized when the details were revealed. We have to oppose for the sake of America, not simply to stop Hillary. In the rare circumstance where she wants to do something good, the GOP (and America) should support her.

    Don’t worry. It won’t happen often.

    Be bold

    Conservatives have a tendency of being bold when it counts the most. When they’re opposing liberals, they fight as hard as they can. However, they also tend to go partisan when it comes to less-than-conservative issues. We have to be bold and conservative across the board. That means when Mitch McConnell does nothing to stop the giveaway of the internet, we need him to know we disapprove. When Congress sends a spending bill through that pays for every liberal program under the sun, we need to give them hell over it. When they let people like John Koskinen get away with their crimes without impeachment because they fear election attacks, we must prove their theory wrong.

    It’s hard for conservatives to ever vote against the GOP because they’re almost always to the right of Democrats. However, we have absolutely no leverage over them. They know we’ll vote for them and reluctantly support them because the alternative is worse. We need to be able to pull them to the right or else. That’s why it’s time to…

    Build a new party

    Conservatives need a party of their own. There are rumors of other parties being built. That’s great. Let’s unite. We have one that is growing and vibrant today even though it won’t officially launch until after the election.

    If the Republicans know that we’ll support conservatives whether they run for the GOP or not, we’ll have leverage. We’ll select the conservatives in races and support them all the way through. If they get the GOP nomination, we’ll support them. If they don’t get the GOP nomination, we’ll let them run under our umbrella and still support them. This is an important concept to understand because it gives the GOP an incentive to support the conservative. We must stand tall and stick with the conservative no matter what. If the GOP loses an election or two over split votes, they’ll quickly learn that the only way to consolidate the vote is by supporting the conservative.

    That’s an oversimplified variation of the strategy, but it should make sense.

    The only way we can survive the wave of liberalism that is flooding the country is if we unite behind our righteous conservative philosophies. Hillary Clinton will be a disaster, but we can make it through her term just as we made it through Obama. We didn’t come out unscathed and there will be damage done over the next four years regardless of who wins the Presidential election, but if we stand strong behind our beliefs, we’ll be able to move America back in the right direction.

     
  • feedwordpress 20:01:08 on 2016/10/16 Permalink
    Tags: , , Evan McMullin, , Hillary Clinton, , , Princess Bride   

    Millions of voters have fallen for Dread Pirate Roberts’ trick (and why I won’t) 


    Warning: preg_match_all(): Compilation failed: invalid range in character class at offset 7 in /homepages/23/d339537987/htdocs/ec/wp-content/themes/p2/inc/mentions.php on line 77

    In the classic movie, The Princess Bride, we find our hero trying to save his love from the hands of the evil Vizzini. He challenges him to a battle of wits where Vizzini must discern which cup has poison and which is safe. Then, both will drink and the winner is the one not dead. The trick was on him, though. Both cups were poisoned. Wesley, aka Dread Pirate Roberts, had developed a tolerance for the poison, so regardless of which cup Vizzini chose, he would die and Wesley would live.

    That’s the Presidential election of 2016 in a nutshell. The difference is that a few members of the political class and the media will be able to survive the poisonous choice of Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. The rest of us are doomed to liberalism, incompetence, corruption, and potential destruction regardless of who wins. Hillary is more liberal than Trump. Trump is more incompetent than Hillary (and please don’t point to the real estate empire he was born into as proof that he’s not incompetent). Both are corrupt. Both give us a smorgasbord of directions from which our destruction can come once they’re in the Oval Office.

    I am not voting for either candidate. I will not support either candidate. I will oppose both candidates. Trump supporters will say that this means I’m supporting Hillary. Hillary supporters will say that this means I’m supporting Trump. Both are wrong. Our nation was built on the dissent against the choices given to pre-revolution patriots by the ruling class. Those patriots, many of whom died fighting for the birth of the nation while others became the leaders who carried us through those formative years, did so against the call of the masses. People often forget or never learned that the American Revolution was not popular before it started. There wasn’t a massive uprising of the mighty majority to make it happen. Most Americans, unhappy as they may have been with the circumstances, would have preferred to work within the British system rather than oppose. This changed once the revolution started gaining traction, but if it were up to the masses, we would have ended the 18th century under the rule of the King.

    These stories – The Princess Bride, election 2016, and the American Revolution all come together to help us see one clear path forward. Americans who are unhappy with the binary choice forced upon us should look outside of those choices without fear of wasting their efforts or votes. They shouldn’t drink from either poison cup. They shouldn’t bow down to the voice of the masses. Today, a large majority of Americans are firmly in Hillary’s camp or Trump’s camp. A good number of those people in the camps are there unwillingly, but they’re not going to leave out of fear for the other camp being stronger as a result. They carry the spirit of those against the American Revolution in their hearts; dissent at this point would be destructive in their opinions. I’m not saying this to insult them. The lukewarm supporters on both sides are doing what they think is right, but they’re still doing it out of fear. They fear the other side winning just as many unhappy subjects of King George feared going to war with England.

    We have two choices to make. The first choice is easy: we need a new conservative party. Join it. Regardless of who wins, we cannot sit around and wait for this travesty to repeat itself next election, and the election after that, and after that, and…

    The second choice is harder. Do we simply avoid the Presidential election? Do we vote for down ballot conservatives but skip the top of the ticket? Do we endorse and support a third party candidate?

    I have looked at and spoken to 3rd-party conservatives. Right now, the only one who has any chance at all is Evan McMullin. His path is nearly impossible, but not completely impossible. We asked members of the new party if they thought we should endorse and the volume of replies was absolutely shocking. Regardless of how that plays out, we must speak directly to McMullin before endorsing. Most questions can be answered by simply watching his interviews and reading articles about him, but the question we haven’t had answered is: Does he have a real strategy to win this thing? If he can’t win, we won’t endorse. That’s not a question of whether or not he has the potential to win. We need to know if he has the strategy to win. The only way to know this is to hear it from his mouth.

    Regardless of what happens with or without McMullin, it’s easy for me to say that I will not be voting for either major party candidate. They are disasters. Both sides are trying to put their cups closer to me, but I won’t drink from either. Suicide just isn’t my thing. As Vizzini said, “I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.”

     
  • feedwordpress 13:44:03 on 2016/09/26 Permalink
    Tags: , , , , Hillary Clinton, Lester Holt, ,   

    The Liberal Agenda will be Crafted by Debate Questions as Much as (or more than) the Answers 


    Warning: preg_match_all(): Compilation failed: invalid range in character class at offset 7 in /homepages/23/d339537987/htdocs/ec/wp-content/themes/p2/inc/mentions.php on line 77

    Some are reporting that there could be 100 million people watching the first debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Moderator Lester Holt will be alone in his duties of asking the questions. We’ll all be paying attention to the answers, but the questions themselves are actually equally or more important.

    This size of an audience gives mainstream media the opportunity to determine what we feel is important. Sorry to be the one to tell you this, folks, but that’s how the system works. Coverage is given to the items that the “powers that be” want covered. I’m not suggesting any conspiracy theories, here. It’s very well documented that the media contorts the sentiment of the nation around particular subjects through ongoing coverage of those items while stifling interest in other items based upon lack of coverage. It’s a classic case of the tail wagging the dog; they don’t simply listen to what we want them to report, but they also have a hand in reporting what they want us to see.

    Holt is coming in with one major advantage: he’s a registered Republican. This means that the cards are already in play to counter any arguments that Trump was treated unfairly. This was done intentionally, not just for Trump’s sake but also for the sake of the overarching agenda itself. After watching Matt Lauer get skewered from both sides, they felt that Hold would be the least controversial host. They don’t want him in focus. They want the questions in focus.

    This is when they have the biggest possible stage to craft the narrative.

    Keep in mind that this is neither nothing new nor is it even that nefarious. It’s an ongoing battle between mainstream media and alternative media to keep our attentions in the wrong directions. Alternative media plays its part in highlighting the strange things that really shouldn’t be a concern while mainstream media keeps it simple by keeping our focus on the things they want us to see. This isn’t universal; there are plenty of smaller or alternative media sources that do a nice job, but unfortunately for the sake of pageviews they tend to lean towards crazy more often than not.

    What’s the moral of the story? Watch the debate with discernment. Don’t just watch the answers carefully. Pay attention to the questions. There has been so much happening in the world the last year that we’ve become very easy to distract. This is their prime opportunity to keep the distractions coming.

     
  • feedwordpress 07:31:24 on 2016/08/29 Permalink
    Tags: David Seaman, , Hillary Clinton, huffington post, ,   

    HuffPo Terminates Journalist, Deletes Story Questioning Hillary’s Health 


    Warning: preg_match_all(): Compilation failed: invalid range in character class at offset 7 in /homepages/23/d339537987/htdocs/ec/wp-content/themes/p2/inc/mentions.php on line 77

    Communist-style state-run journalism is alive and well in the United States. We’ve seen the Trumpeters at Breitbart and Drudge make a mockery of their “conservatism” by hopping on the Trump train hard. We’ve seen CNN this week fire Dr. Drew after he questioned Hillary Clinton’s health. Now, Huffington Post has joined the attack on dissenting views by terminating David Seaman and removing his stories that also questioned Hillary’s health.

    For the record, I am not a Donald Trump supporter. I’m also not a Hillary Clinton supporter. Lastly, I’m not one who has bought in fully to Clinton’s failing health conspiracy theory. With that said, I’m also not blind to the fact that her coughing and odd behavior should warrant an independent health evaluation (which, to me, should be a requirement for every Presidential and Vice Presidential candidate, but I digress).

    With all of the appropriate disclaimers out of the way, let’s look at the censorship occurring at the Huffington Post. This isn’t the first time it’s happened. They censored a review of Vaxxed and have been prolific in their use of Orwellian comment controls. They’ve deleted many stories in the past, though this one is arguably the most perplexing since it addresses an issue that’s vibrant right now. Whether you believe that Hillary is in good health or not, it’s valid to question it.

    For posterity, we will post the article that was deleted. We do not own the rights to the article and if Seaman would like us to take it down, I’d gladly do so and link to wherever he ends up posting it instead. I just don’t want it to be lost in the dungeons of HuffPo’s trash folder for nobody to see. After the article, I’ll continue with my commentary as well as show a video with the journalist’s reaction.

    Hillary Clinton’s Health Is Superb (Aside From Seizures, Lesions, Adrenaline Pens)

    Hillary Clinton: Stronger Together. How strong? Well, the great woman’s health is excellent, superb even. Her heart and mind one hundred thousand times stronger than the strongest beams of steel that built our great American cities more than a century ago. Her soul a shining exemplar of selflessness, service, and humility, her footing sound… wait, are we talking about the same person here?!

    The same Hillary Clinton who recently became the latest unintentional star of YouTube, with a truly endless upload stream of videos purporting to show Hillary Clinton wildly seizing up when several reporters begin questioning her at once? Yes, the same Hillary Clinton who became the star of this Paul Joseph Watson video, attracting 3,554,177 views since it was uploaded on August 4th:

    I realize some readers might be wondering after watching Paul Watson’s video… how is she strong, or healthy, after seeing all that?

    Look guys, I need to keep my job and platform. A lot of people read the Huffington Post and AOL properties. We all know what happens when you speak a little too much truth about the Establishment-beloved Clintons.

    Just ask longtime broadcaster Dr. Drew Pinsky. “CNN has canceled Drew Pinsky’s HLN show, Dr. Drew On Call, just eight days after Pinsky made comments on a radio show questioning the health of Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. Pinsky’s show, which is six years old, will air for the last time Sept. 22,” The Daily Beast reported.

    But what do you think? Is Hillary Clinton strong and wise and healthy? If so, why does Paul Watson and the team at Infowars want to hurt her feelings? They should know better over there: Americans are allowed to vote for anyone they want this election season, and support anyone they want, so long as that person is Strong Hillary Clinton.

    Stronger Together. Together, Stronger. Or something.

    The Huffington Post editorial staff has full control over their website. If they don’t like a story, it’s within their power to remove it. No law was broken and journalistic standards of ethics were arguably maintained. However, the article isn’t spewing out wild accusations. The video referenced in the article has millions of views and over 40K likes. This was not an article that was removed because the site wants to maintain a journalistic standard. It was removed because they didn’t like what it implied. It was removed because they believe at least one of three things:

    1. Hillary is totally healthy and questions about her health are reproachable
    2. Tim Kaine is healthy enough and would make a great President if Hillary had to step down for her health
    3. Hillary’s glorious light of approval might dim on the site if they allowed the article to live

    If you’re a publication that lives and breaths on opinions, there are better ways to handle a situation like this. The best thing to do is to post an editor’s note. It can be bland saying that the views expressed in the article belong solely to the author and do not represent the opinions of AOL, the Huffington Post, or its editors. They could have been more harsh and said that they completely disagree with the author’s assessment but for the sake of journalistic integrity they’ve allowed the post to remain. Instead. they took China Road. They didn’t like it so they removed the story and terminated the author.

    On the scale of journalistic integrity, I’ve always held HuffPo somewhere in the middle. This incident pushes them down to the realm of bottom feeders.

    Here’s Seaman’s reaction. Warning: strong language is used here, kiddos, because this guy is as upset as they get right about now.

     
  • feedwordpress 07:55:39 on 2016/08/09 Permalink
    Tags: , , , Hillary Clinton, , , SCOTUS, ,   

    To Save SCOTUS, Trump Must Lose Bigly 


    Warning: preg_match_all(): Compilation failed: invalid range in character class at offset 7 in /homepages/23/d339537987/htdocs/ec/wp-content/themes/p2/inc/mentions.php on line 77

    Arguably the most prominent argument made by pro-Trump conservatives is that Hillary Clinton will load up the Supreme Court with activist liberals if she’s the President. This is partially true, but there’s a more important thing to consider: the scenarios. Let’s look at those scenarios to understand why the best-case-scenario among likely outcomes in this election cycle for the Supreme Court is if Trump loses by a huge margin.

    First, we have to understand the dynamic behind how Supreme Court Justices make it to the bench. It’s a three-step process that starts with the President and ends with a vote by the Senate. The process is detailed nicely by Paul Caputo. The important thing to note is that control of the Senate by a particular ideology will have a huge impact on the confirmation of Supreme Court Justices today and going forward. It didn’t used to be that way; even originalist Antonin Scalia was confirmed 97-0 in a day when Senatorial decorum character rather than ideological reasons for blocking a nominee. Today, decorum will only play a small role. Character will still be an issue, but partisanship will be the deciding factor.

    In other words, for a President to get an extreme ideologue in one direction or another such as Clarence Thomas or Ruth Bader Ginsberg, he or she would need the Senate to be controlled. Otherwise, we’ll see Justices in the ideological center such as Anthony Kennedy, a Reagan appointee who is technically a Republican but whose voting record puts him slightly left of center.

    With that understood, let’s look at the scenarios:

    1. Tight Race to the End: It doesn’t matter who wins if the polls are close going into election day. The way the Senatorial map is currently aligned, the risk of Trump being elected will propel Democrats to vote in fear and many Independents will “hedge their bets” on Trump by voting for the Democrat in their Senate races. Illinois (Mark Kirk) and Wisconsin (Ron Johnson) are currently very much at risk while five other Republican-controlled seats are considered toss-ups by 270towin.com. By comparison, only Harry Reid’s seat is considered a toss-up for the Democrats and no other Democratic Senate seats are even at risk.
    2. One Candidate Leading Heavily: Unless Hillary “Teflon” Clinton can somehow have something stick to her that would compel voters to switch to Trump, the chances are high that she would be the candidate that is heavily favored if either candidate would be. Then again, this is a crazy election year, so discounting Trump leading big going into election day is not impossible. This being a year where voters are going against the other candidate rather than for their own party’s candidate, it’s very likely that a big lead in either direction would yield a Senate majority for the opposite party. If Hillary is winning big, it could be enough for the GOP to retain the Senate. If Trump is winning big, the Senate will be controlled by the Democrats in a big way.

    Now, the argument by Trump supporters would be that the risk of losing the Senate is even more incentive to push for him to win. If we’re playing the odds, that’s simply not the case. The electoral map itself heavily favors Clinton. Again, she can have a major misstep, but let’s be honest. She’s made it through pretty much every scandal over the last two decades with barely a scratch on her armor of deceit. If we couldn’t take her down with Benghazi or the email scandal, we’re probably not taking her down at all. As such, the lack of understanding by average Americans of how the electoral college works means that the worst-case-scenario is Trump staying close in national polls to scare control of the Senate into Democrats’ hands while Hillary wins the actual election. That would yield conservatives’ worst nightmare: President Hillary and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer turning the Supreme Court into a liberal mess.

    Let’s say that the polls are close and Trump wins. Some would say, “Yay!” The GOP would lose the Senate in that scenario, but at least we’ll have his list of conservative judges to throw at them until they confirm one, right? Wrong. Trump is a deal-maker. He hates losing. He’s also a liberal on most issues outside of immigration (sorry, Trump fans, but it’s true). His magical list of conservative judges is paper. If there’s one thing he’s proven in his life and particularly throughout the election process, it’s that he’ll change his mind whenever it suits him. Lastly and most importantly, it was completely under-reported that Trump will be adding names to his list of 11 conservative Justices:

    Trump also said he’s planning to add to his list of possible Supreme Court justices.

    “I’m actually going to expand it by three or four very soon,” he said, calling the candidates “fabulous.”

    There is one hole open in the Supreme Court today and the potential for two or three more over the next two Presidential terms. Why would he need to add names to a list that already has 11? How many does he need?

    If he wins the Presidency, he will probably lob one of the names at the Democrats in the Senate, determine that they won’t confirm a staunch conservative, and then he’ll find another Anthony Kennedy or worse. It shouldn’t shock anyone that in order to make a deal with the Democrats, he’ll even give them an activist liberal in exchange for other considerations. That’s Trump. It’s his modus operandi. He makes deals. That’s what he does.

    The best way to prevent an activist liberal Justice is to retain the Senate. The only possible way for the GOP to retain control of the Senate is if Trump is losing very badly going into election day. Otherwise, Schumer will by working very closely with the liberal Democratic President from New York regardless of which candidate wins.

     
  • feedwordpress 23:01:52 on 2016/08/04 Permalink
    Tags: , , Hashtags, Hillary Clinton, , , ,   

    #HillaryAccomplishments Trends on Twitter with Hillaryous Results 


    Warning: preg_match_all(): Compilation failed: invalid range in character class at offset 7 in /homepages/23/d339537987/htdocs/ec/wp-content/themes/p2/inc/mentions.php on line 77

    It needed to happen. The media refuses to point out that a person who has spent nearly over two decades in Washington DC has accomplished pretty much nothing, but the people know the truth (some of us, at least). Now with it trending on Twitter, we get to see just how people feel about Hillary Clinton’s lack of substance.

    Here are some of the winners from this trending topic:

    The saddest part is that these are just from the last hour or so since the hashtag started trending. Seriously, folks. She’s done nothing of note other than marry a bad person and staying out of jail.

     
  • feedwordpress 00:23:32 on 2016/07/11 Permalink
    Tags: , , , Hillary Clinton, ,   

    After Orlando, Benghazi Report, Email Travesty, and Dallas Shooting, Trump Should be Demolishing Hillary. He’s Not. 


    Warning: preg_match_all(): Compilation failed: invalid range in character class at offset 7 in /homepages/23/d339537987/htdocs/ec/wp-content/themes/p2/inc/mentions.php on line 77

    Pundits often like to look at the past and make comparisons, particularly in Presidential elections. They don’t always look at the circumstances, so we’ll do that before getting to the meat of the issue. I’ll keep it short to keep my blood pressure at bay.

    In 2012, President Obama maintained a solid lead on Mitt Romney through the majority of the general election cycle for one reason and one reason only: Obama’s weak point was Obamacare and Romney was the absolute wrong candidate to take him on. The GOP declawed itself that year by nominating the one candidate who had no credibility attacking something that he indirectly helped create.

    In 2008, John McCain was an old white guy going against a young minority following an unpopular Republican incumbent with a running mate that only inspired the most faithful Republicans. The cards were stacked against him from the start.

    This year, the cards are all stacked in the GOP’s favor. Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee is a huge benefit for Republicans. Actions taken by the Obama administration that need correcting give us another leg up. Lastly is the news: it’s nearly all in our favor. We learned in 2004 that this can be a very powerful motivator; George W. Bush probably would have lost if John Kerry had been trusted to fight terrorism and the Middle East wars.

    Orlando’s terrorist attack favors the GOP. The failures of the Benghazi report favors the GOP. The fact that Hillary is not getting indicted is great news for the GOP (if we’re willing to play that card properly). Then, there’s the Dallas shooting which highlights the failures of the left to handle racial tensions the right way. All of this means that the GOP candidate should be walloping ANY Democrat, let alone someone as completely unelectable as Hillary.

    We have almost all of the cards. They have one. They have the Trump card. The left, which should be giving up on the Presidency and focusing on creating a check and balance campaign to win the Senate, is positioned to sweep everything because of Trump. In a year when we could have finally had a conservative in the Reagan camp leading the country, the GOP was overrun by low-information voters.

    Sad!

    Image credit: Gage Skidmore

     
  • feedwordpress 22:39:22 on 2016/07/04 Permalink
    Tags: , , , Hillary Clinton, ,   

    Hillary has the Second Highest Candidate Unfavorable Rating Ever 


    Warning: preg_match_all(): Compilation failed: invalid range in character class at offset 7 in /homepages/23/d339537987/htdocs/ec/wp-content/themes/p2/inc/mentions.php on line 77

    Any other year, this would be a headline that Republicans would be cheering over and sharing with all of their liberal friends. Unfortunately, Hillary Clinton’s dismal 33% unfavorable rating is only the second worst in the 60 years that Gallup has surveyed with this question. The worst is her Republican nemesis. Donald Trump’s unfavorable is 42%, To put it into perspective, it’s almost double what Mitt Romney had in 2012 and is more than double what John McCain had in 2008.

    As the LA Times points out, getting an unfavorable rating means getting the lowest or second-lowest rating on a 10-point scale. In other words, it wasn’t just people saying they disapprove of him. They assigned him a favorability number of either 1- or 2-out-of-10.

    There are many of us who would rate both of them as a 1 on a 10 pt. scale and that’s a huge dilemma, particularly for conservatives. When we’re faced with a liberal liar and a liberal scoundrel as our two options, we’re forced to try to discern the lesser of two evils. Unfortunately, I can’t see myself ever willfully voting for a liberal even if both options fit the bill.

    Here’s how the poll results came out:

     

    Highly Favorable and Highly Unfavorable Ratings of Major Party Presidential Nominees, 1956-2016

    Based on U.S. adults; Ranked by % highly favorable

     

    Nominee Highly favorable Highly unfavorable
    % (+4 to +5) % (-4 to -5)
    1956 Oct 18-23 D. Eisenhower 57 4
    1964 Oct 8-13 L. Johnson 49 5
    1960 Oct 18-23 J. Kennedy 43 5
    1984 Sep 21-24 R. Reagan 43 18
    1976 Sep 24-27 J. Carter 42 5
    1972 Oct 13-16 R. Nixon 41 11
    1968 Oct 17-22 R. Nixon 39 8
    1960 Oct 18-23 R. Nixon 37 8
    2008 Oct 23-26 B. Obama 37 22
    2012 Oct 27-28 B. Obama 36 24
    2004 Oct 22-24 G.W. Bush 34 23
    1956 Oct 18-23 A. Stevenson 34 16
    1980 Oct 10-13 J. Carter 31 17
    2012 Oct 27-28 M. Romney 30 22
    1976 Sep 24-27 G. Ford 29 9
    1968 Oct 17-22 H. Humphrey 29 11
    1984 Sep 21-24 W. Mondale 28 15
    2008 Oct 23-26 J. McCain 28 20
    1992 Oct 23-25 B. Clinton 27 15
    1980 Oct 10-13 R. Reagan 26 16
    1992 Oct 23-25 G.H.W. Bush 25 18
    2004 Oct 22-24 J. Kerry 22 22
    2016 June 14-23 H. Clinton 22 33
    1972 Oct 13-16 G. McGovern 21 20
    1964 Oct 8-13 B. Goldwater 17 26
    2016 June 14-23 D. Trump 16 42
    2016 nominees are presumptive; Dates for all years except 2016 are final pre-election; No data for 1988, 1996 and 2000
    GALLUP

     

     
  • feedwordpress 21:03:14 on 2016/07/02 Permalink
    Tags: , , , , Hillary Clinton, James Comey, ,   

    Hillary Clinton and the Need for “The Untouchables” 


    Warning: preg_match_all(): Compilation failed: invalid range in character class at offset 7 in /homepages/23/d339537987/htdocs/ec/wp-content/themes/p2/inc/mentions.php on line 77

    In the movie The Untouchables, FBI prohibition officer Eliot Ness played by Kevin Costner had to form an autonomous squad of agents who could pursue Al Capone without risk of being corrupted. This dramatized retelling of real events highlights a time in law enforcement history when such things were required, but we’re well beyond the need for such a task force today, right? In a world with the Clintons, “untouchables” are exactly who we need.

    This is not going to be a conspiracy theory article. We’re not going to bring up any of the mysterious deaths that have surrounded the Clintons over the decades nor will we discuss the apparent suppression of information perpetrated by those in the press, law enforcement, and the highest ranks of government in efforts to protect them. The current issue dogging them is Hillary’s use of a private email server.

    As with every other past Clinton scandal, this one appears to be heading in the direction of non-accountability. There’s only one thing that can prevent that from happening at this point. We need untouchables to take the investigation from where it is today and walk it all the way through to indictment and trial. Whether she gets convicted or not will (hopefully) be dependent on the facts of the case, but the FBI needs to do everything it can to make sure that it gets that far if they feel the evidence warrants it.

    For us, we need to be aware of the different forces that are out to derail them.

    Mainstream Media

    Today, Hillary was interviewed by the FBI for 3.5 hours. The media is already spinning it:

    The meeting means the investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server for official business as secretary of state is coming to an end.

    Technically, the statement by CNN could be true. In a criminal investigation, evidence is gathered and then the suspect is usually brought in for questioning, but based upon the answers there can be more investigation required afterwards. At this point, left-wing mainstream media will do everything it can to downplay the importance of the investigation altogether.

    The Justice Department

    Almost every conservative news outlet rejoiced at the statement by Attorney General Loretta Lynch that she would accept the recommendations of the FBI in this investigation. What these same news outlets (and pretty much everybody else) missed is that her statement was simply a bone tossed in a different direction to diffuse the bad press they were receiving after the “secret” meeting with Bill Clinton earlier this week.

    At no point has the Justice Department indicated they wouldn’t accept the recommendation of the FBI. Those rejoicing need to see this for what it really is: misdirection. Nothing changed. Bill meeting with Lynch was not a miscalculation. It was exactly what they need to do in order to get the information they needed and deliver the message they wanted to the Attorney General. They were fully aware there would be bad press and they new that it could be mitigated, but the risks were worth taking. They diffused the bad press with Lynch’s proclamation that was read by some as her removing herself from the equation, but no such thing happened.

    The Justice Department will still decide whether or not there’s an indictment. They cannot be trusted, which is why we need the FBI to truly step up.

    The Untouchables

    This investigation is unlike any in history. It has implications that will affect the whole world. Many references by conservative media indicate that FBI Director James Comey is trustworthy and honorable. I don’t know enough to pass judgment but I trust those who seem to trust him, so let’s assume it’s true. If so, he has been working to make sure that this investigation is handled properly and without undue influence from anyone.

    The problem is that there are other humans involved. Where there are humans, there is the potential for corruption. The scope of this investigation means that there are those within it who the Clintons can influence. This is why the public eye and the voice of the people is so important today.

    Nearly all of the information available to the public indicates that Hillary Clinton lied multiple times about her emails. It points to a very high likelihood that national security was put at risk as a result of Hillary’s decisions. Lastly, the political pressure that is being placed on the FBI in general and Comey in particular means that as much pressure in the opposite direction must be applied. We need to let them know that we will not accept anything short of an indictment without very clear evidence that she doesn’t deserve it, evidence that we haven’t seen yet. If she’s not indicted and no evidence is presented about why she wasn’t, we’ll know the FBI was influenced.

    The point is this: stop rejoicing. Hillary Clinton is a deceptive, manipulating corrupter of everything she touches. Until there’s an indictment, it’s the duty of every patriotic American to let them know that we’re watching and that we won’t accept the kind of political maneuvers that turned the Benghazi investigation into a nothingburger.

    Al Capone had people killed, suppressed information, bullied enemies, and committed countless crimes, but he was eventually brought down by something mundane – tax evasion. Will the Clinton’s similar tale of corruption and alleged evils end with their downfall through an equally mundane crime?

     
  • feedwordpress 00:47:04 on 2016/06/29 Permalink
    Tags: , , , , Hillary Clinton, Libya, ,   

    Benghazi Must Not Be Brushed Aside 


    Warning: preg_match_all(): Compilation failed: invalid range in character class at offset 7 in /homepages/23/d339537987/htdocs/ec/wp-content/themes/p2/inc/mentions.php on line 77

    Hillary Clinton should have been removed from office within a month after Benghazi. Then, she should have been thoroughly investigated along with anyone in the State Department, CIA, and U.S. military who allowed it to happen as it did.

    I’m saying these words from a perspective of limited information. We only know what we’re allowed to know and the rabbit hole goes deeper than any of us likely imagine. Someone is being protected (other than Hillary) and there is an active cover-up in play as we speak. The fact that the Benghazi report reveals tidbits of wrongdoing is just a ploy by the government to make us believe that their investigation was comprehensive.

    There won’t be a slap on the wrist. One of the primary perpetrators of the acts that led to the death of four Americans is likely going to become President of the United States unless Donald Trump can be removed from the nomination. The President will brush it aside as an unfortunate footnote that could have derailed his reelection campaign. The media will tell us that the issue is dead. Politicians on both sides of the aisle will use it to prop up their pulpits for a day or two before letting it fade into the footnotes of some Wikipedia pages.

    This cannot be allowed to stand. The American are being sold a story that hides the real corruption behind this incident. It should never have happened. I’m not just talking about the attack itself. I’m not talking about the lack of a response that allowed it to continue. I’m talking about the actual events that led to the incident. Why were defenses in one of the hotbeds of hatred towards Americans so insufficient? No, it wasn’t carelessness by the administration or lack of funding by the Republicans in Congress. This was deeper. There’s a conspiracy here and we’re never going to be told about it, not for several decades at least.

    At this point, the powerlessness of a people that is subservient to our public servants will prevent any further information from coming out. Conspiracy theory sites will continue spreading rumors. Judicial oversight groups will request more information. At the end of the day, nothing more of substance will come of it. It’s up to American patriots to keep up the pressure and keep the story alive. We cannot let the government brush this aside in our minds. By the time you’re reading this, it’s probably old news. We’re told to move along to the latest news. In this particular situation, the news must remain fresh even when others would have it stagnate.

    Keep asking questions. Do not accept the report as an answer. We deserve to know what was really going on. Incompetence and poor judgment are in play with nearly every government action, yet people usually don’t die as a result. In this case, there is more to the story. Don’t let it get buried with the bodies of those four men who served a country that wants to forget them.

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
esc
cancel