The Clinton Strategy

[DvlDog4WVU]

i was sitting at Green Bean having a strawberry smoothie and blueberry muffin watching some CNN waiting on my flight out of Kandahar this morning. The Clinton strategist or whatever she was supposed to be was talking about the world's reaction to the possibility of a President Trump. I just sat there in awe and came to the realization that the Clinton campaign might actually fall victim to Trump in the same manner the GOP field did.

Let's address the talking point of Trump for a second the media head had. She was talking about what amounts to a hypothetical, granted, most on here are in agreement of how we think Trump would be. The reality is that there are tangible results tied to Hillary from a foreign policy perspective and very few if any are good. On one hand, you have a hypothetical Trump. On the other, you have a proven foreign policy failure in Clinton. Do they really want to beat that drum?

Back to my original point. They are trying to use the same tired *** playbook against Trump that doesn't seem to have a real impact on him. If they don't stop trying to be what they are, he will end up dictating the dialogue over the next 6 months. This is going to be wacky.

 

[ThatNehlenFeelin]

On top of that her Poll #s are slipping.

 

[bamaEER]

6 months is a long time. In the mean time, Trump continues to step in it, this time he's needlessly pissing off David Cameron and Great Britain in general. Hopefully, the the voters can step back and see the **** storm he is. Hillary isn't a great choice, but Trump is the worst ever.

 

[TarHeelEer]

6 months is a long time. In the mean time, Trump continues to step in it, this time he's needlessly pissing off David Cameron and Great Britain in general. Hopefully, the the voters can step back and see the **** storm he is. Hillary isn't a great choice, but Trump is the worst ever.

You have yet to figure the Trump voters out. And unfortunately they're growing in number.

 

[bamaEER]

You have yet to figure the Trump voters out. And unfortunately they're growing in number.

It's not me that has to figure them out. They have to figure Trump out.

 

[EERs 3:16]

6 months is a long time. In the mean time, Trump continues to step in it, this time he's needlessly pissing off David Cameron and Great Britain in general. Hopefully, the the voters can step back and see the **** storm he is. Hillary isn't a great choice, but Trump is the worst ever.

I think Brits fired the first shot......

 

[EERs 3:16]

i was sitting at Green Bean having a strawberry smoothie and blueberry muffin watching some CNN waiting on my flight out of Kandahar this morning. The Clinton strategist or whatever she was supposed to be was talking about the world's reaction to the possibility of a President Trump. I just sat there in awe and came to the realization that the Clinton campaign might actually fall victim to Trump in the same manner the GOP field did.

Let's address the talking point of Trump for a second the media head had. She was talking about what amounts to a hypothetical, granted, most on here are in agreement of how we think Trump would be. The reality is that there are tangible results tied to Hillary from a foreign policy perspective and very few if any are good. On one hand, you have a hypothetical Trump. On the other, you have a proven foreign policy failure in Clinton. Do they really want to beat that drum?

Back to my original point. They are trying to use the same tired *** playbook against Trump that doesn't seem to have a real impact on him. If they don't stop trying to be what they are, he will end up dictating the dialogue over the next 6 months. This is going to be wacky.

Trump isn't going to back down and he's not afraid to come out swinging - that's going to be tough for the Dems to deal with. in the past when the DNC charged "you're a racist or your anti-woman" the RNC ran and hid and Trump isn't going to do that. I fully expect him to hold up the middle finger, point to facts, and trash the Clintons. And as an added bonus, he can tie Hillary to the Obama economy and strike a few good blows. So, get the popcorn ready, it's going to be a fun summer.

 

[TarHeelEer]

It's not me that has to figure them out. They have to figure Trump out.

Trump and Trump voters aren't going to change. Hillary won't be president. It will be Trump or some other Dem.

 

[op2]

Trump and Trump voters aren't going to change. Hillary won't be president. It will be Trump or some other Dem.

Dude, you need to get over this "some other Dem" thing. Unless Hillary has a heart attack or is hit by a meteor she's gonna be the Dem nominee.

There was an episode of ST:TNG where they were being sucked into something and every time they reversed engines they got sucked in harder. Finally they (actually Data) figured out that even though it was counterintuitive what they had to do was go full force forward with the engines. Somehow the laws of physics were working backwards so when they tried to go backwards they'd go forward and then they tried to go forward and it let them go backwards and they got free.

It's like that with Trump. The usual stuff against him doesn't work. Romney, a respected Republican, disses him and it only helps Trump because Romney represents the system. Obama speaks ill of Trump and it only helps Trump because the POTUS represents the system.

Maybe what the Dems need to go is get some people that the hard core Trump supporters really hate and get them to speak out in favor of Donald Trump. Imagine Michael Moore and Susan Sarandon going on all the shows to say how great Donald Trump is. It's be like the end of the South Park Chimpokomon episode where the parents pretended to like Chimpokomon and it made the kids not like Chimpokomon.

 

[mneilmont]

Dude, you need to get over this "some other Dem" thing. Unless Hillary has a heart attack or is hit by a meteor she's gonna be the Dem nominee.

There was an episode of ST:TNG where they were being sucked into something and every time they reversed engines they got sucked in harder. Finally they (actually Data) figured out that even though it was counterintuitive what they had to do was go full force forward with the engines. Somehow the laws of physics were working backwards so when they tried to go backwards they'd go forward and then they tried to go forward and it let them go backwards and they got free.

It's like that with Trump. The usual stuff against him doesn't work. Romney, a respected Republican, disses him and it only helps Trump because Romney represents the system. Obama speaks ill of Trump and it only helps Trump because the POTUS represents the system.

Maybe what the Dems need to go is get some people that the hard core Trump supporters really hate and get them to speak out in favor of Donald Trump. Imagine Michael Moore and Susan Sarandon going on all the shows to say how great Donald Trump is. It's be like the end of the South Park Chimpokomon episode where the parents pretended to like Chimpokomon and it made the kids not like Chimpokomon.

 

[TarHeelEer]

Dude, you need to get over this "some other Dem" thing.

You're condemning me to saying Trump is going to be president then.

 

[mneilmont]

Who do you really write for? How do they convert your thinking to the screen?

 

[op2]

You're condemning me to saying Trump is going to be president then.

I think Trump might win but I think Hillary has a better chance. But I don't see anyway Hillary gets replaced as the Dem nominee though.

 

[Mdeer]

I think Trump might win but I think Hillary has a better chance. But I don't see anyway Hillary gets replaced as the Dem nominee though.

Of course she won't . THE thinks he's a smart cat but he lacks common sense.

 

[bamaEER]

I think Trump might win but I think Hillary has a better chance. But I don't see anyway Hillary gets replaced as the Dem nominee though.

Tough call. She does have a lead, but it's slipping. And the swing states are up in the air.

 

[mneilmont]

I think Trump might win but I think Hillary has a better chance

Why would you think HE might win if SHE has a better chance? Do you find it necessary to cover both sides of the issue? Huh? Do you always feel so strongly - both ways?

 

[Airport]

6 months is a long time. In the mean time, Trump continues to step in it, this time he's needlessly pissing off David Cameron and Great Britain in general. Hopefully, the the voters can step back and see the **** storm he is. Hillary isn't a great choice, but Trump is the worst ever.

All of Europe and England have a Muslim problem. They have let them come into the country unfettered and they are reaping the consequences of socialism, no jobs for them, and large Muslim populations. The real **** storm is not recognizing the muslim **** storm that has been brewing over there and the problems it causes when you have 35% unemployment. Cameron and the English socialist are a problem.

 

[bamaEER]

All of Europe and England have a Muslim problem. They have let them come into the country unfettered and they are reaping the consequences of socialism, no jobs for them, and large Muslim populations. The real **** storm is not recognizing the muslim **** storm that has been brewing over there and the problems it causes when you have 35% unemployment. Cameron and the English socialist are a problem.

Muslims have always made up a large part of the population there and Britain's unemployment rate is 5.1%
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/unemployment-rate

 

[Airport]

Muslims have always made up a large part of the population there and Britain's unemployment rate is 5.1%
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/unemployment-rate

What is it in the muslim areas? It's 35% in Europe, which is a big problem. Is that unemployment rate dishonest like our 5% unemployment rate? Open borders doesn't work.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

It's 35% in Europe, which is a big problem.

UE rate in Europe is around 9%. Where do you come up with that nonsense? Even trainwreck Greece is below 35%. If Europe's UE rate ever hits 35%, we might as well all piss on the fire.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

Trump and Trump voters aren't going to change. Hillary won't be president. It will be Trump or some other Dem.

And the Dow will drop below 6000....Nostradomus, you're not

 

[Popeer]

On one hand, you have a hypothetical Trump. On the other, you have a proven foreign policy failure in Clinton. Do they really want to beat that drum?

I'd be interested to know which foreign policy failures can be tied to Clinton. With Trump, there will be no foreign policy unless you consider isolationism a foreign policy.

 

[Airport]

UE rate in Europe is around 9%. Where do you come up with that nonsense? Even trainwreck Greece is below 35%. If Europe's UE rate ever hits 35%, we might as well all piss on the fire.

This nonsense was what was said about the unemployment rate in the muslim only areas of Paris, Brussels when the **** hit the fan. The people commenting on it said that was a big contributing factor to disgruntled muslims. The unemployment rate for the slums where the muslims live was said to be 35%.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

I'd be interested to know which foreign policy failures can be tied to Clinton. With Trump, there will be no foreign policy unless you consider isolationism a foreign policy.

Ok, I'll bite, point to her successes as SoS

 

[Popeer]

Ok, I'll bite, point to her successes as SoS

No you don't -- you brought it up, you post the failures. I'm not here to argue whether they were or not, just looking for examples (other than Libya, which is pretty obvious).

 

[Mntneer]

6 months is a long time. In the mean time, Trump continues to step in it, this time he's needlessly pissing off David Cameron and Great Britain in general. Hopefully, the the voters can step back and see the **** storm he is. Hillary isn't a great choice, but Trump is the worst ever.

Voters don't give a rats *** about what David Cameron thinks.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

No you don't -- you brought it up, you post the failures. I'm not here to argue whether they were or not, just looking for examples (other than Libya, which is pretty obvious).

Libya was where I was going to start, Syria, Egypt, basically the entire Middle East and Northern Africa. What did she do that can be seen as a success for her as a SoS? I'm legitimately curious. Bin Landen? Does she get that one or does Obama? Let's say she does as well. What else?

 

[Popeer]

Libya was where I was going to start, Syria, Egypt, basically the entire Middle East and Northern Africa. What did she do that can be seen as a success for her as a SoS? I'm legitimately curious. Bin Landen? Does she get that one or does Obama? Let's say she does as well. What else?

Fair enough, but now I'd be interested to know what you think she (or Obama) should have done differently. I know Obama made the Big Speech in Egypt, but you do realize that he was continuing the policy of the two previous administrations of encouraging democracy in those countries (Bush's father was content to leave dictators alone). The difference between him and Bush II was that Bush thought it could be imposed from the outside by force -- out of which most of the current mess in the Middle East has grown -- while in the case of Egypt and Tunisia, we gave only public and diplomatic support before screwing up again in Libya with the use of force, but both approaches ended up with consequences we could have predicted but chose to ignore: in democracies, sometimes people get elected who don't like us and who may in fact be worse than the guys they replaced. Tunisia is the single case in North Africa that hasn't turned into a **** storm so far. Syria? If Clinton (and Obama) learned anything from the mess created in Libya, it was to keep out of internal conflicts where there are no good guys. Or maybe they should have just reneged on all that talk of support for democracy and backed Assad as Russia is doing, in the name of stability? And those countries would hate us worse than they do. As far as bin Laden goes, she was just a strap hanger on that operation.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Fair enough, but now I'd be interested to know what you think she (or Obama) should have done differently. I know Obama made the Big Speech in Egypt, but you do realize that he was continuing the policy of the two previous administrations of encouraging democracy in those countries (Bush's father was content to leave dictators alone). The difference between him and Bush II was that Bush thought it could be imposed from the outside by force -- out of which most of the current mess in the Middle East has grown -- while in the case of Egypt and Tunisia, we gave only public and diplomatic support before screwing up again in Libya with the use of force, but both approaches ended up with consequences we could have predicted but chose to ignore: in democracies, sometimes people get elected who don't like us and who may in fact be worse than the guys they replaced. Tunisia is the single case in North Africa that hasn't turned into a **** storm so far. Syria? If Clinton (and Obama) learned anything from the mess created in Libya, it was to keep out of internal conflicts where there are no good guys. Or maybe they should have just reneged on all that talk of support for democracy and backed Assad as Russia is doing, in the name of stability? And those countries would hate us worse than they do. As far as bin Laden goes, she was just a strap hanger on that operation.

Why are you talking about the Bush's? The left pretty much convinced us the Bush's were the worst thing to ever happen to this country. Seems off to carry on their policies.

 

[bamaEER]

Voters don't give a rats *** about what David Cameron thinks.

Britain is probably our closest ally. They sure as hell had better give a rats ***.

 

[Popeer]

Why are you talking about the Bush's? The left pretty much convinced us the Bush's were the worst thing to ever happen to this country. Seems off to carry on their policies.

Bush I's policy toward Saddam and Kadaffi and Assad and Mubarak was to leave them alone, work with them where we could or, if we couldn't in the cases of Saddam and Kadaffi, contain them via sanctions or other non-military solutions. The reality is that despite the political rhetoric, most administrations pretty much carry forward policies of their predecessors, especially when they agree with the policy if not the approach. That's how we ended up with Clinton's famous (or infamous) statement about a reset button with Russia - no more ridiculous than Bush's statement about looking in Putin's eyes and getting a sense of his soul. But engagement requires two willing partners, and Putin showed in Georgia in 2008 and in Ukraine that he isn't interested in engagement. Obama's Big Speech in Cairo was meant to do what Clinton and Bush II had talked about - "encouraging the spread of democracy" - just with words instead of bullets. But the reality is that the outcome in Egypt was only marginally better, if better at all, than the chaos we left behind in Iraq. And Obama has admitted that we helped create a **** storm - his own words - in Libya.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Bush I's policy toward Saddam and Kadaffi and Assad and Mubarak was to leave them alone, work with them where we could or, if we couldn't in the cases of Saddam and Kadaffi, contain them via sanctions or other non-military solutions. The reality is that despite the political rhetoric, most administrations pretty much carry forward policies of their predecessors, especially when they agree with the policy if not the approach. That's how we ended up with Clinton's famous (or infamous) statement about a reset button with Russia - no more ridiculous than Bush's statement about looking in Putin's eyes and getting a sense of his soul. But engagement requires two willing partners, and Putin showed in Georgia in 2008 and in Ukraine that he isn't interested in engagement. Obama's Big Speech in Cairo was meant to do what Clinton and Bush II had talked about - "encouraging the spread of democracy" - just with words instead of bullets. But the reality is that the outcome in Egypt was only marginally better, if better at all, than the chaos we left behind in Iraq. And Obama has admitted that we helped create a **** storm - his own words - in Libya.

Why do you keep talking about everyone BUT Hillary?

 

[Popeer]

Why do you keep talking about everyone BUT Hillary?

And why are you acting like Hillary came up with the administration's policies all on her own? The job of any secretary of state is to carry out the policies of the president that put them in the office. No doubt Hillary advised Obama and supported many of his policies, but it would be asinine to subscribe the failures solely to her as it would be to blame Colin Powell for the invasion of Iraq -- it wasn't like he told Bush and Cheney "hey, let's overthrow Saddam, and I'll gin up a Powerpoint to take to the UN to get them to go along, whaddaya say?"

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

And why are you acting like Hillary came up with the administration's policies all on her own? The job of any secretary of state is to carry out the policies of the president that put them in the office. No doubt Hillary advised Obama and supported many of his policies, but it would be asinine to subscribe the failures solely to her as it would be to blame Colin Powell for the invasion of Iraq -- it wasn't like he told Bush and Cheney "hey, let's overthrow Saddam, and I'll gin up a Powerpoint to take to the UN to get them to go along, whaddaya say?"

Post after post, and still nothing said pointing to a Hillary positive while she was SoS.

 

[dave]

Post after post, and still nothing said pointing to a Hillary positive while she was SoS.

She didn't start a war.....well nevermind.

 

[Mntneer]

Britain is probably our closest ally. They sure as hell had better give a rats ***.

And they will continue to be our closest ally.

It's idiotic to think a single man, in Trump, will suddenly derail that.

The left better wake up to what is happening with the voting public right now. Status quo in our politicians is not going to fly this cycle, no matter how much we may want it too. As much as it shocks us, many people are going to vote for Trump simply because it pisses off them "foreigners".

 

[dave]

And they will continue to be our closest ally.

It's idiotic to think a single man, in Trump, will suddenly derail that.

The left better wake up to what is happening with the voting public right now. Status quo in our politicians is not going to fly this cycle, no matter how much we may want it too. As much as it shocks us, many people are going to vote for Trump simply because it pisses off them "foreigners".

It also pisses off those self righteous PC stuff shirts who never miss a chance to tell everyone why they are such bad people

 

[Mntneer]

It also pisses off those self righteous PC stuff shirts who never miss a chance to tell everyone why they are such bad people

People are so pissed at the status quo, at the politically correct mentality running this country, that they are turning to anyone willing to call it out. Hence the success of Trump and Sanders.

 

[dave]

People are so pissed at the status quo, at the politically correct mentality running this country, that they are turning to anyone willing to call it out. Hence the success of Trump and Sanders.

That is exactly right and that is why all this analysis of trump has been wrong.

 

[bamaEER]

And they will continue to be our closest ally.

It's idiotic to think a single man, in Trump, will suddenly derail that.

The left better wake up to what is happening with the voting public right now. Status quo in our politicians is not going to fly this cycle, no matter how much we may want it too. As much as it shocks us, many people are going to vote for Trump simply because it pisses off them "foreigners".

But the fact that Trump is willing to publicly lock horns with OUR FRIENDS boldly illustrates he lacks the diplomatic tools we need as a country. He thinks the job is about him and his ego, but it's about us.