Hillary Rodham Clinton: 2016 Democratic Presidential Nominee

[DollEyes]

20 hours ago, Advance35 said:

Well I've had it.  This Comey mess was the limit for me.  I pray god Hillary wins so that I can be bought 4 years before this place goes completely to Soddom and Gamora.  I am getting myself out of here.   Who knows what will crawl out in 2020.   HRC just needs to get in White House and then I can get myself to another part of the world.   Absolutely disgusting.   I hope the Republican's rot in hell.

And the FBI will never NOT make my skin crawl.

Re the last part, since the Orange Hitler is a Republican now,  Hell won't have them. 

[proserpina65]

14 hours ago, clb1016 said:

Apparently, now his campaign is tweeting out to voters that if they've already voted early for Clinton, they can change their votes.  I swear I'm not making this up; just saw this on Maddow's show.

Apparently there are a few states which allow an early voter to cancel their submitted ballot, but only up to 7 days before the election, if I understood what I was reading correctly, so too late.

[Advance35]

Well all Polls should be taken with a grain of salt just to avoid complacency but this seems reputable.   I'm still telling everyone I know susceptible to vote.  

John Harwood ‏@JohnJHarwood 3h3 hours ago

non-partisan pollster on Clinton lead: "data says 6 and steady"

0 replies 459 retweets 747 likes

John Harwood ‏@JohnJHarwood 3h3 hours ago

top Dem pollster #2 on approx Clinton edge over Trump: "2-6 IMHO"

0 replies 76 retweets 133 likes

John Harwood ‏@JohnJHarwood 3h3 hours ago

top Dem pollster on Clinton edge: "could get tighter because partisanship such a driver of vote choice, but she's holding steady"

0 replies 143 retweets 334 likes

John Harwood ‏@JohnJHarwood 3h3 hours ago

top GOP pollster: "Johnson continuing to trend down. Clinton holding steady lead of about 5 points"

 

The Human Resources Manager in my offices is a registered Republican and she said she is voting Clinton, because the race is a little too close for comfort and her husband who hasn't voted in YEARS is going to vote as well, and he is voting for Clinton.  She also said her Grandson's are voting for Hillary even though they don't like her because it's "Humanity v. Donald Trump".

[MulletorHater]

Interesting article by NYT's Frank Bruni about how Secretary Clinton (i.e., President Elect--yeah, I said it!) gets under Drumpf's skin, as well as the skin of her male critics.  Someone else stated a few days ago that what's really driving this brand of hate is that Hillary is a woman who knows how to use power to her advantage and it pisses people off.  Even though the GOP is threatening 4 years of gridlock if she's elected, I don't think they'll get away with it.  They've already been left with egg on their faces because of Benghazi(!), which is why J. Edgar Comey threw this Hail Mary pass.  She didn't curl into a ball and die when Slick Willy's women were Drumpf's guests at the second debate.  So, now they're throwing everything at her, including the kitchen sink, the shit-stained toilet and Drumpf's skidmarked drawers.  While it is said that the people around her are more subdued and worried, she is still exuding confidence.

Frankly, I don't know how she does it.  My own husband would have punched Puffy Cheeto right in his bloated orange face by now, and I would have gotten in a few good kicks at his tiny little testicles myself.  But, Hillary is like the energizer bunny...she just keeps going, and going, and going.

Hillary's Male Tormenters

[HumblePi]

2 minutes ago, proserpina65 said:

Apparently there are a few states which allow an early voter to cancel their submitted ballot, but only up to 7 days before the election, if I understood what I was reading correctly, so too late.

I live in Connecticut and this was on the front page of our local newspaper this morning; "Voters' remorse? State allows do-overs". I was surprised because I really had no idea about this. It's a quirk in our State's election laws. It's not so simple, but it's allowable and it works like this. If a person submits an application for an absentee ballot to their town or city, then they will be able to vote in early election.  If they cast an early ballot and change their mind, they have to notify officials in their city or town that they will be able to vote on Nov. 8th and the absentee ballot gets cancelled. This year, there has been a dramatic increase in registered voters 2.8 million compared to 1.6 million in 2012 at. There's also been a dramatic increase in requests for absentee ballots. The deadline for cancelling their absentee ballot is 10 a.m. on election day! In the past, absentee ballots were requested by people that would be out of the State on election day, but it seems that the increase in absentee ballot requests are coming from people who just haven't made up their minds and are actually waiting until Nov. 8th to make a choice. As the headline said, it sounds more like a case of voter remorse after having cast an early vote that's causing the increase in requests for absentee ballots.

[proserpina65]

Just now, HumblePi said:

I live in Connecticut and this was on the front page of our local newspaper this morning; "Voters' remorse? State allows do-overs". I was surprised because I really had no idea about this. It's a quirk in our State's election laws. It's not so simple, but it's allowable and it works like this. If a person submits an application for an absentee ballot to their town or city, then they will be able to vote in early election.  If they cast an early ballot and change their mind, they have to notify officials in their city or town that they will be able to vote on Nov. 8th and the absentee ballot gets cancelled. This year, there has been a dramatic increase in registered voters 2.8 million compared to 1.6 million in 2012 at. There's also been a dramatic increase in requests for absentee ballots. The deadline for cancelling their absentee ballot is 10 a.m. on election day! In the past, absentee ballots were requested by people that would be out of the State on election day, but it seems that the increase in absentee ballot requests are coming from people who just haven't made up their minds and are actually waiting until Nov. 8th to make a choice. As the headline said, it sounds more like a case of voter remorse after having cast an early vote that's causing the increase in requests for absentee ballots.

Wow, that's kinda crazy.  I think what I was reading mentioned Michigan, maybe?

[HumblePi]

Just now, proserpina65 said:

Wow, that's kinda crazy.  I think what I was reading mentioned Michigan, maybe?

States with early voting

As of November 2016, the following 34 states (plus the District of Columbia) permitted no-excuse early voting in some form:[1]

Alaska

Arizona

Arkansas

California

District of Columbia

Florida

Georgia

Hawaii

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

Iowa

Kansas

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Minnesota

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada

New Jersey

New Mexico

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

States with in-person absentee voting

In some states, a voter may be able to vote early if he or she provides some reason for being unable to vote on Election Day. This practice is known as in-person absentee voting. As of November 2016, the following five states permitted in-person absentee voting:

Note: The reasons a voter may give for voting in-person absentee vary significantly from state to state. For example, the South Carolina State Election Commission lists 16 separate criteria qualifying an individual to vote absentee. Meanwhile, the Missouri Secretary of State lists six. For more information, consult the relevant state election agency or local election official.

Kentucky (see here for details about absentee voting requirements)[2]

Mississippi(see here for details about absentee voting requirements)[3]

Missouri (see here for details about absentee voting requirements)[4]

New York (see here for details about absentee voting requirements)[5]

South Carolina (see here for details about absentee voting requirements)[6]

Virginia (see here for details about absentee voting requirements)[7]

States without early voting or in-person absentee voting

As of November 2016, the following seven states did not permit early voting or in-person absentee voting:[1]

Alabama

Connecticut

Delaware

Michigan

New Hampshire

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

States with all-mail voting

As of November 2016, the remaining three states (Colorado, Oregon, and Washington) used all-mail voting systems, thereby eliminating the need for early voting.

[proserpina65]

Okay, so maybe not Michigan.  It was early when I was reading it, so . . .

Maryland's used early voting for several years now - I love it.  But they don't let us change our minds; once your vote's been submitted, that's it.

Edited to note that it was Minnesota, according to Snopes.  Which is more reliable than the National Enquirer, but not infallible.

Edited November 2, 2016 by proserpina65

[backformore]

Because Trump has been going on and on about changing votes, I wonder if somehow they think that the earlier vote WON'T be thrown out, and people's votes may actually both be counted.   So they're not "changing their minds", they're trying to get away with voting twice.  

Just a thought.  Because, as I said before - it's not very likely that people are sure enough about a candidate to vote EARLY for Hillary - then go to a Trump rally (AFTER voting for Hillary?)  and be so convinced they want to vote for Trump.   NO - there's something "rigged"  about what he's saying.

[Padma]

I saw some coverage of early voting where Trump supporters--staying the required 100 feet from the polling place--were screaming at people they thought looked like Hillary voters (read: minorities and college educated). "How many Syrian refugees are YOU going to sponsor?" was the shout which I thought was a little esoteric.

They were two or three women, loud and aggressive but legally there. Just like the ones who harass women going into Planned Parenthood clinics.  The ONLY reason for doing it of course is to intimidate people and keep Hillary supporters from voting when they see on tv what they'll be up against at the polls. 

I'm proud to think that the idea of Democrats being encouraged and organized to harass and shout at likely Trump supporters who are just trying to vote simply would not happen.  (If it did, though, you can bet Trump would make the most of it in a negative way.  He is really, really good at dirty politics. I guess after the way he ran his business it shouldn't be a surprise, but it is. And, of course, he's emboldened by the knowledge the media lets him get away with nearly everything.)

[BW Manilowe]

11 hours ago, Padma said:

He was also great this morning on Morning Joe to a very cold group. I described it in the MJ thread because he was so good--even read them something from "1984" about training people with "hate exercises" that could then be directed wherever the leader wanted. The MJ group greeted this with stony silence, so Weld observed, "I think that's like a Trump rally". Then went on to describe how good she was as a choice and the importance of defeating Trump. Love him!

Thanks for sharing that! I had given up that they would ever do that! Great--because it builds excitement when people see others really Do share their feelings.

I so wish we were voting tomorrow. The next 7 days will be excruciating.  (Again, I don't know how Hillary stays so calm and steady through it all. I really do feel confident that she has good people, is a strong leader, and can handle anything.)

She might be so calm because she's already been through this, this far into the process anyway, when her husband ran for election & re-election. Having experience with/knowledge of how it goes helps, I would think.

[backformore]

2 minutes ago, Padma said:

I saw some coverage of early voting where Trump supporters--staying the required 100 feet from the polling place--were screaming at people they thought looked like Hillary voters (read: minorities and college educated). "How many Syrian refugees are YOU going to sponsor?" was the shout which I thought was a little esoteric.

I would call the police and report harassment.   It's illegal to harass people, no matter how far you are from a polling place.  intimidating people to keep them from voting is so contrary to our democracy, it's frightening.

[Padma]

11 minutes ago, backformore said:

Because Trump has been going on and on about changing votes, I wonder if somehow they think that the earlier vote WON'T be thrown out, and people's votes may actually both be counted.   So they're not "changing their minds", they're trying to get away with voting twice.  

Just a thought.  Because, as I said before - it's not very likely that people are sure enough about a candidate to vote EARLY for Hillary - then go to a Trump rally (AFTER voting for Hillary?)  and be so convinced they want to vote for Trump.   NO - there's something "rigged"  about what he's saying.

He's definitely hinting as much as he can to vote twice. He did it in Colorado speeches too with all that "mail in and another at the polls" talk. There was no reason to mention it otherwise, but he knows he can't just come out and say, "If you can think of any possible way to vote for me more than once, it's your patriotic duty to save our country and do it!" 

I'm surprised that, with all his talk about the 1.8 million dead who are still registered and the 2.4 million who are registered in two states, that he's not focusing on dirty voting tricks with those groups to get him more votes (esp. in 'snowbird" state like Florida). But, then again, maybe he is. Bannon and Stone are very sleazy characters. It wouldn't surprise me at all if they have some dishonest voting tricks up their sleeves.

If there's anymore negative info about Trump coming out, it had better drop today. It's getting kind of late....

Edited November 2, 2016 by Padma

[starri]

I'm starting to wonder if Bill Weld is going to say "fuck it" and vote for Hillary instead of his own ticket.

[millennium]

Another complaint I have about Hillary's campaign is that she had made zero attempt to connect with the core of Trump's base: men.  

I have seen Hillary ads featuring women, mothers, girls, Gold Star parents, former nuclear silo sentries, Hollywood celebrities, etc. -- but I have yet to see a single ad featuring a strong male figure, one who would have credibility with Trump's base, speaking out on behalf of Hillary Clinton or condemning Trump.  

There are many accusations of Hillary being the victim of misogyny in this campaign but she hasn't done much herself to show she cares about men.   Her unspoken message seems to be: I care about everyone but men.  Or maybe it's more of a defeatist attitude: men are a lost cause.   Which leaves Trump free to recruit the male vote without resistance.   It blows my mind that I can see this but the people running her campaign can't.

Hillary's campaign leaves the impression that it's a movement of women, people of color, illegal immigrants and special interest groups.    Men need not apply.   But she NEEDS men, the same way Trump needs women, people of color, etc.   Trump is confident he can squeak by without courting the groups he's shut out but Clinton should have been smarter than that.   She should have reached out to everyone, including men, husbands and fathers.   And in my opinion, she failed big-time.

Also from what I can see she has made little effort to address the very real concerns of America's aging population and the challenges facing the Baby Boomer generation in the near future.  Trump has a lot of them in his pocket and why?  Because he wants to establish a white patriarchal government -- the same kind many of the elderly grew up in and still romanticize.   Hillary has not tried to make many inroads with them either.   

Edited November 2, 2016 by millennium

[ChromaKelly]

1 minute ago, millennium said:

Another complaint I have about Hillary's campaign is that she had made zero attempt to connect with the core of Trump's base: men.  

I have seen Hillary ads featuring women, mothers, girls, Gold Star parents, former nuclear silo sentries, Hollywood celebrities, etc. -- but I have yet to see a single ad featuring a strong male figure, one who would have credibility with Trump's base, speaking out on behalf of Hillary Clinton or condemning Trump.  

There are many accusations of Hillary being the victim of misogyny in this campaign but she hasn't done much herself to show she cares about men.   Her unspoken message seems to be: I care about everyone but men.  Or maybe it's more of a defeatist attitude: men are a lost cause.   Which leaves Trump free to recruit the male vote without resistance.   It blows my mind that I can see this but the people running her campaign can't.

Hillary's campaign leaves the impression that it's a movement of women, people of color, illegal immigrants and special interest groups.    Men need not apply.   But she NEEDS men, the same way Trump needs women, people of color, etc.   Trump is confident he can squeak by without courting the groups he's shut out but Clinton should have been smarter than that.   She should have reached out to everyone, including men, husbands and fathers.   And in my opinion, she failed big-time.

I never thought about this. She could have run an ad featuring men, "I'm a husband, a father...etc and I'm voting for Hillary because..."

[millennium]

1 minute ago, ChromaKelly said:

I never thought about this. She could have run an ad featuring men, "I'm a husband, a father...etc and I'm voting for Hillary because..."

Yes, that is exactly what I haven't seen.

[Darian]

She has run ads featuring men. Lots. They're sometimes focusing on a specific issue, like racial justice or early education, because, really, you want Hillary to promise men they'll make the same money as a woman? That they will be able to make their own reproductive choices? That Trump is dangerous because he says to grab them by their cocks? The ads featuring men are out there, and I've seen them (and in MA, you don't see many). Of course there are going to be more ads aimed at those Trump is specifically promising to discriminate against. 

[Janet Snakehole]

I have seen an ad that implies that a man is voting as a father. Granted, it is because he is a father of three girls.

[BW Manilowe]

George P. Bush (Jeb's son, who's apparently the Texas Land Commissioner) says his grandfather & uncle--Presidents Bush 41 & 43--could "potentially" vote for Hillary, but he doesn't know. He, however, is supporting Trump.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/11/02/bush-could-potentially-vote-clinton/93159658/

Edited November 2, 2016 by BW Manilowe
To correct a mistaken job title.

[clb1016]

I've also seen ads (here in NYC) featuring a man who has 3 daughters, and one with a man who has a granddaughter, saying they don't want these girls to grow up in Trumpworld.  So, basically, men addressing a women's issue.

[ExplainItAgain]

Yeah, I've seen those ads with the father saying he's voting for HRC because of his daughters. I live in NC so we get deluged with ads. I've seen a big increase in Trump ads in the last 2 weeks. Before that, it was all HRC and the senate races.

[Kitty Redstone]

I usually don't pay attention to ads at all, especially political ads because there are so damn many of them, but there are at least two ads running here featuring men.  One is a man once responsible for nuclear weapons who says he wouldn't trust Cheetos with the key, and another man (a Republican) who said he doesn't want his daughters to grow up in a country where they aren't valued. 

HRC has done plenty of outreach to men - men who care about women and equal rights, men who are immigrants, men of color, men who care about having a responsible person representing them, etc.  Just because she isn't pandering to angry white men worried about their privileges slipping away doesn't men she isn't speaking to men.

[scriggle]

This is what really pisses me off about the media and their coverage of this election.

Trump’s history of corruption is mind-boggling. So why is Clinton supposedly the corrupt one?

Quote

The big difference is that there are an enormous number of reporters who get assigned to write stories about those issues regarding Clinton. The story of something like the Clinton Foundation gets stretched out over months and months with repeated tellings, always with the insistence that questions are being raised and the implication that shady things are going on, even if there isn’t any evidence at a particular moment to support that idea.

When it comes to Trump, on the other hand, we’ve seen a very different pattern. Here’s what happens: A story about some kind of corrupt dealing emerges, usually from the dogged efforts of one or a few journalists; it gets discussed for a couple of days; and then it disappears. Someone might mention it now and again, but the news organizations don’t assign a squad of reporters to look into every aspect of it, so no new facts are brought to light and no new stories get written.

The end result of this process is that because of all that repeated examination of Clinton’s affairs, people become convinced that she must be corrupt to the core. It’s not that there isn’t plenty of negative coverage of Trump, because of course there is, but it’s focused mostly on the crazy things he says on any given day.

[Padma]

1 minute ago, clb1016 said:

I've also seen ads (here in NYC) featuring a man who has 3 daughters, and one with a man who has a granddaughter, saying they don't want these girls to grow up in Trumpworld.  So, basically, men addressing a women's issue.

I've seen that one too. I'd hoped that on 'the coasts" we just weren't seeing what the rest of America was.

That's a great point about the need to address white men specifically, working class men and seniors.  Too late now, but the lack of ads doing that is actually shocking. Especially since she's got a lot of macho men supporting her--military, older Reagan guys, experts across the government, many crossover Republicans, labor leaders etc.

I know they have surrogates like Biden but that's hardly enough.

Also a failure is to get out the message about Trump blocking the union in his LV hotel. They voted it in, he's taken them to court again and again to prevent unionizing. In a battleground state. Why don't they ever mention this?

He's is so flawed and his opponents have never fully exploited his incredible deficits.  Look at how Trump has used the basic non-story of her emails.  If he had an opponent like himself, wow! He'd already be 50 pts ahead.

So disappointing.

[millennium]

33 minutes ago, Kitty Redstone said:

 

HRC has done plenty of outreach to men - men who care about women and equal rights, men who are immigrants, men of color, men who care about having a responsible person representing them, etc.  Just because she isn't pandering to angry white men worried about their privileges slipping away doesn't men she isn't speaking to men.

Which makes more sense?  To keep griping about angry white men and their privilege so that they stick with a candidate they themselves may find dubious or reprehensible?  Or to try to win them over?

Today I saw survey results on CNN explaining why Trump is either leading or close behind Hillary in the battleground states.  51% of the people surveyed in these states think Trump is more trustworthy on the economy.   The world markets crash every time something goes wrong for Hillary, but these people believe Trump is their savior.   How about ads showing working class men worried about their jobs and their family's futures talking about the promises Donald Trump makes but they can't trust him given his own record of bankruptcies and cheating small businesses?   Or because the world economy doesn't trust him.   How about ads featuring middle class fathers saying they're worried their kids won't be able to go to college, that college is going to become an exclusive privilege for the wealthy, because Trump wants to quash government college loans?   How about some guy worried what's going to happen to his aging parents in Trumpworld?  Or some guy who owns a small business but is worried he will lose his business because Trump wants to impose a 33% tax rate on small businesses?   How about just some young man saying he can't respect Trump because Trump has been caught in so many lies -- more lies than any presidential candidate in history?

There's a range of possibilities, but to dig in your heels and say "because angry white men" rules out opportunities to make inroads where none exist now.

Edited November 2, 2016 by millennium

[Kitty Redstone]

There's no need to snipe. 

Perhaps her campaign doesn't believe she can win them over because there are huge ideological divides between the men supporting Trump and the men supporting Hillary.  No ad campaign is going to cover that.

[Darian]

1 minute ago, millennium said:

Keep griping about angry white men and their privilege.   Makes so much more sense than trying to win them over.

My privileged white husband was won over by her platform and outreach. He's never felt slighted. I can't think of a single male friend who feels left out  by her campaign. Really. It's so odd to me. She talks about healthcare and jobs and the economy and equality, which are about us all, and, yes, women because there's an actual war against us and a candidate who thinks sexually assaulting us and objectifying even the underage among us as just dandy. But then I don't see what Kitty said as "griping." I do think men who feel slighted because Hillary has done fewer ads featuring men (but there are plenty and they do NOT all focus on women's issues by any means) probably fit Kitty's description. 

[LoneHaranguer]

16 hours ago, FilmTVGeek80 said:

And, pray tell, what exactly where these supposed lies? Please let's not be all Trump?Comey here and throw out vague innuendo.

The one that comes to mind immediately because of its persistence is the one concerning people coming into this country illegally from Mexico. All he did was object to the Democratic claim that we didn't have to be concerned because they're all just good people looking for work, pointing out that there were criminals coming in too. Somehow that turned into him being a racist who said "Mexicans are rapists". He said no such thing. He wasn't even commenting on Mexicans in general. But, that hasn't stopped Clinton herself from repeating the lie. I'm a little hazy about most of the older lies since they've been abandoned, some because they weren't about Trump. I vaguely recall one about Muslims because CNN ran a segment to "correct the record" with a clip showing that the claim about Trump had no basis in fact. Current lies include saying that Trump wants to punish women who have abortions. He only wants to punish women for having illegal abortions, and not all that much at that (see his MSNBC Town Hall for more).

17 hours ago, KerleyQ said:

What Trump did was issue new bonds to his creditors for the difference, instead of acknowledging the forgiven portion of the debt.  So he gave them bonds that were "worth" $40 million but, in reality, they were worthless.

How he pushed the income into the future is irrelevant. He took advantage of a provision to provide fairness in taxation. Without provisions like that, you have an unfair system that rushes to grab a share of your successes, but isn't keen on sharing in your failures; witness how long it's taking for him to work off a big loss. Eventually, some of his successful investments will pay off, and the IRS will get its share, or he'll die and the estate taxes will take an even bigger chunk.

[HumblePi]

31 minutes ago, millennium said:

Another complaint I have about Hillary's campaign is that she had made zero attempt to connect with the core of Trump's base: men.  

I have seen Hillary ads featuring women, mothers, girls, Gold Star parents, former nuclear silo sentries, Hollywood celebrities, etc. -- but I have yet to see a single ad featuring a strong male figure, one who would have credibility with Trump's base, speaking out on behalf of Hillary Clinton or condemning Trump.  

There are many accusations of Hillary being the victim of misogyny in this campaign but she hasn't done much herself to show she cares about men.   Her unspoken message seems to be: I care about everyone but men.  Or maybe it's more of a defeatist attitude: men are a lost cause.   Which leaves Trump free to recruit the male vote without resistance.   It blows my mind that I can see this but the people running her campaign can't.

Hillary's campaign leaves the impression that it's a movement of women, people of color, illegal immigrants and special interest groups.    Men need not apply.   But she NEEDS men, the same way Trump needs women, people of color, etc.   Trump is confident he can squeak by without courting the groups he's shut out but Clinton should have been smarter than that.   She should have reached out to everyone, including men, husbands and fathers.   And in my opinion, she failed big-time.

Also from what I can see she has made little effort to address the very real concerns of America's aging population and the challenges facing the Baby Boomer generation in the near future.  Trump has a lot of them in his pocket and why?  Because he wants to establish a white patriarchal government -- the same kind many of the elderly grew up in and still romanticize.   Hillary has not tried to make many inroads with them either.   

I think Hillary's strategy was to create a diverse coalition of voters that will enable her to win. These are the groups that Donald Trump has alienated, most particularly, women. Hillary Clinton is clearly focusing more on nonwhites, who provide outsize shares of the delegates needed to win the nomination. Her political message, events and surrogate speakers have been geared largely to blacks and Hispanics, from denouncing gun violence and police abuses to promising improvements in immigration and education. Hillary Clinton is doing better among basically every group of voters except for white men without a degree. It could boil down to the very basics fact that white men may not be as offended or put-off by Trump's comment about grabbing a woman's genitals or kissing whoever he feels like kissing. It could be that white non-college educated men are carrying hatred for her simply because she is a strong woman. Maybe they hold grudges against her for her emails or Benghazi and use that as their only reason for distrusting her. One white male voter actually said; "I don’t like family dynasties: since 1988, the winners of our presidential elections have been named Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Obama and Obama. Do we need another Clinton?"

As for the baby boomers, of which both she and Donald Trump are, they are an older generation that historically votes Republican. The best example I can give of their politics during their years as college-age people is that Trump was an elite millionaire and avoided the draft into the army during Vietnam with 5 different deferments. “I thought it was ridiculous,” he said. “I thought it was another deal where politicians got us into a war where we shouldn’t have been in. And I felt that very strongly from Day 1.” But he has also said;  “I’ll never forget; that was an amazing period of time in my life,” he said in the interview, on Fox 5 New York. “I was going to the Wharton School of Finance, and I was watching as they did the draft numbers, and I got a very, very high number.” Hillary Clinton was an activist and spoke up against the Vietnam war and led protests against it. She didn't accept this war laying down or throwing a basketball around a college basketball gym as Donald was doing.

Today, baby boomers are the most pessimistic generation. There's been a tug-of-war messaging between Trump and Clinton for the baby boomer votes. Donald Trump pledges to build a wall and Hillary Clinton's mantra is “instead of building walls, we need to be tearing down barriers” and this is clearly a call to the women, blacks, Latinos and LGBT Americans who are the beneficiaries of the movements for social and economic justice that the ’60s spawned. The non-college educated white men have a large number or gun rights activists and still believe that Hillary Clinton is going to take their guns away which is totally not true. But that's in their heads because that's what Donald wants inside their heads, a threat to their gun ownership. Pure propaganda.

[HumblePi]

28 minutes ago, KerleyQ said:

That seems like such a confusing process, especially the way people are using it.  So they're requesting an absentee ballot because they don't have their minds made up yet and want to wait and vote on election day?  Then why the absentee ballot?  Why not just show up on election day?  

 

The intention of an absentee ballot was intended so that anyone who could not physically be inside the state on the day of the election could still have their vote cast. I don't have a problem with that at all. I do have a problem if people are using their absentee ballot in the way not intended and that's only because they can't make up their minds. If it was up to me there would be no going back. Cast an absentee ballot and that's it, no changing your mind on election day. The people that work on election day are busy enough, then to have people walking in that had already voted in early voting via an absentee ballot walk in and say they're present and want to delete their absentee ballot. That's just insane and it shouldn't be that confusing. Everyone gets a vote, one vote. So, make up your damned mind because it's not going to be revoked because you're a damned fool that had more than a year to make a decision and still couldn't make that decision two weeks before the election?  That's just bullshit.

[millennium]

11 minutes ago, HumblePi said:

I think Hillary's strategy was to create a diverse coalition of voters that will enable her to win. These are the groups that Donald Trump has alienated, most particularly, women. Hillary Clinton is clearly focusing more on nonwhites, who provide outsize shares of the delegates needed to win the nomination. Her political message, events and surrogate speakers have been geared largely to blacks and Hispanics, from denouncing gun violence and police abuses to promising improvements in immigration and education. Hillary Clinton is doing better among basically every group of voters except for white men without a degree. It could boil down to the very basics fact that white men may not be as offended or put-off by Trump's comment about grabbing a woman's genitals or kissing whoever he feels like kissing. It could be that white non-college educated men are carrying hatred for her simply because she is a strong woman. Maybe they hold grudges against her for her emails or Benghazi and use that as their only reason for distrusting her. One white male voter actually said; "I don’t like family dynasties: since 1988, the winners of our presidential elections have been named Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Obama and Obama. Do we need another Clinton?"

As for the baby boomers, of which both she and Donald Trump are, they are an older generation that historically votes Republican. The best example I can give of their politics during their years as college-age people is that Trump was an elite millionaire and avoided the draft into the army during Vietnam with 5 different deferments. “I thought it was ridiculous,” he said. “I thought it was another deal where politicians got us into a war where we shouldn’t have been in. And I felt that very strongly from Day 1.” But he has also said;  “I’ll never forget; that was an amazing period of time in my life,” he said in the interview, on Fox 5 New York. “I was going to the Wharton School of Finance, and I was watching as they did the draft numbers, and I got a very, very high number.” Hillary Clinton was an activist and spoke up against the Vietnam war and led protests against it. She didn't accept this war laying down or throwing a basketball around a college basketball gym as Donald was doing.

Today, baby boomers are the most pessimistic generation. There's been a tug-of-war messaging between Trump and Clinton for the baby boomer votes. Donald Trump pledges to build a wall and Hillary Clinton's mantra is “instead of building walls, we need to be tearing down barriers” and this is clearly a call to the women, blacks, Latinos and LGBT Americans who are the beneficiaries of the movements for social and economic justice that the ’60s spawned. The non-college educated white men have a large number or gun rights activists and still believe that Hillary Clinton is going to take their guns away which is totally not true. But that's in their heads because that's what Donald wants inside their heads, a threat to their gun ownership. Pure propaganda.

I worked for many years as an ad agency copywriter.   Successful campaigns leave no buyer behind.   Hillary, in her efforts to woo the diverse coalition of voters, has pretty much left men behind.    Who knows, if she hadn't, if she had tried to show white men that their concerns were as valid as the illegal aliens trying to get amnesty, for example, maybe she wouldn't be in the pickle she's in now.   

30 minutes ago, Kitty Redstone said:

There's no need to snipe. 

Perhaps her campaign doesn't believe she can win them over because there are huge ideological divides between the men supporting Trump and the men supporting Hillary.  No ad campaign is going to cover that.

You are right about sniping.   I edited my post before I saw your message.

Edited November 2, 2016 by millennium

[HumblePi]

Just now, millennium said:

I worked for many years as an ad agency copywriter.   Successful campaigns leave no buyer behind.   Hillary, in her efforts to woo the diverse coalition of voters, has pretty much left men behind.    Who knows, if she hadn't, if she had tried to show white men that their concerns were as valid as the illegal aliens trying to get amnesty, maybe she wouldn't be in the pickle she's in now.   

I think that even if Hillary Clinton promised every non-college educated white male in this country a job for the rest of their lives, free healthcare for their families and a secure retirement plan, that there's that element of male voters that STILL wouldn't vote for her. I am 100% convinced that even if she parted the Red Sea, made the moon turn rainbow colors, or convinced Kim Jong-Un to go see the Pope in order to be converted to Catholicism...... and, have it televised on all three national networks, they would argue "she lies and I can't trust her".  So truthfully, why waste time, energy and resources chasing a section of the electors that are never, and I mean NEVER EVER going to vote for Hillary Clinton?

[Darian]

9 minutes ago, millennium said:

  Who knows, if she hadn't, if she had tried to show white men that their concerns were as valid as the illegal aliens trying to get amnesty, for example, maybe she wouldn't be in the pickle she's in now.   

 

Which specific-to-white-men concerns? 

[millennium]

4 minutes ago, HumblePi said:

I think that even if Hillary Clinton promised every non-college educated white male in this country a job for the rest of their lives, free healthcare for their families and a secure retirement plan, that there's that element of male voters that STILL wouldn't vote for her. I am 100% convinced that even if she parted the Red Sea, made the moon turn rainbow colors, or convinced Kim Jong-Un to go see the Pope in order to be converted to Catholicism...... and, have it televised on all three national networks, they would argue "she lies and I can't trust her".  So truthfully, why waste time, energy and resources chasing a section of the electors that are never, and I mean NEVER EVER going to vote for Hillary Clinton?

I think you're generalizing a bit.   Certainly she wouldn't win them all over.   But she might win some.   And in this election, some counts.

Men may be stubborn but they're not all stupid.   Trump has wet dreams about "secret Trump voters" who don't want to admit they're voting for him but will pull his lever on election day.   Maybe Hillary would have cultivated some "secret Hillary voters" if she had made a determined effort to infiltrate his demographic by talking to those voters like they are real people she cares about.  Trump has made it seem like Hillary cares more about Muslim refugees than middle class white men -- and given the low priority Clinton has given white men, I can understand why many might believe Trump.

8 minutes ago, Darian said:

Which specific-to-white-men concerns? 

I gave examples of some on the previous page.

[clb1016]

5 minutes ago, millennium said:

Men may be stubborn but they're not all stupid.   Trump has wet dreams about "secret Trump voters" who don't want to admit they're voting for him but will pull his lever on election day.   Maybe Hillary would have cultivated some "secret Hillary voters" if she had made a determined effort to infiltrate his demographic by talking to those voters like they are real people she cares about.  Trump has made it seem like Hillary cares more about Muslim refugees than middle class white men -- and given the low priority Clinton has given white men, I can understand why many might believe Trump.

12 minutes ago, Darian said:

I'm not so sure I buy into the secret Trump voters idea.  His supporters don't seem to be particularly shy about expressing themselves--loudly.  Perhaps there are more secret Hillary voters who are just reticent about expressing their thoughts out loud because they don't want to get into a fight--verbal or physical.

[Pixel]

3 minutes ago, clb1016 said:

I'm not so sure I buy into the secret Trump voters idea.  His supporters don't seem to be particularly shy about expressing themselves--loudly.  Perhaps there are more secret Hillary voters who are just reticent about expressing their thoughts out loud because they don't want to get into a fight--verbal or physical.

I don't know if I buy into either, and I always go back to this: If you are ashamed to admit you are voting for someone, have you asked yourself why you're voting for them?

[millennium]

8 minutes ago, clb1016 said:

I'm not so sure I buy into the secret Trump voters idea.  His supporters don't seem to be particularly shy about expressing themselves--loudly.  Perhaps there are more secret Hillary voters who are just reticent about expressing their thoughts out loud because they don't want to get into a fight--verbal or physical.

I think Hillary voters also lack many of the insecurities that make being part of Trump's mob so appealing to his voters, so they may not feel it necessary to publicly identify.

Edited November 2, 2016 by millennium

[Nidratime]

Quote

Perhaps there are more secret Hillary voters who are just reticent about expressing their thoughts out loud because they don't want to get into a fight--verbal or physical.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were a number of secret Hillary voters (women) who won't say so in order to keep peace in the family.

[millennium]

1 minute ago, Nidratime said:

I wouldn't be surprised if there were a number of secret Hillary voters (women) who won't say so in order to keep peace in the family.

That's so sad, and probably true.

[Janet Snakehole]

3 minutes ago, millennium said:

I think Hillary voters also lack many of the insecurities that make being part of Trump's mob so appealing to his voters, so they may not feel it necessary to publicly identify.

This is me. Call me a coward, but I also keep quiet with a lot of people to keep the peace. I am not going to change their minds, they won't change mine.

[Darian]

18 minutes ago, millennium said:

I gave examples of some on the previous page.

I went back and still am not sure which you mean (the aging population? She wants to protect our safety net...that's good for men and women). And I showed you the ads you haven't seen, but we have and which are all over social media featuring men of all ages, and not always speaking to women's issues. It's fine. I tried and just don't see what you do. It happens. 

[millennium]

Just now, Darian said:

I went back and still am not sure which you mean (the aging population? She wants to protect our safety net...that's good for men and women). And I showed you the ads you haven't seen, but we have and which are all over social media featuring men of all ages, and not always speaking to women's issues. It's fine. I tried and just don't see what you do. It happens. 

I have seen many Hillary ads, but not the ones you describe.

[KerleyQ]

10 minutes ago, Pixel said:

I don't know if I buy into either, and I always go back to this: If you are ashamed to admit you are voting for someone, have you asked yourself why you're voting for them?

I can only speak for myself, but I know that I haven't put up a sign in my yard or a bumper sticker on my car because I don't want to deal with what some of Trump's more overzealous supporters might decide to do in response.  People who know me know how I'm voting, but I'm not really eager for some stranger with a hair trigger temper to decide to make an example of me or my property.  So I don't think that people who aren't being super vocal about voting Hillary are ashamed as much as just wary of a group whose candidate has been revving them up to be violent for months.  

[Darian]

12 minutes ago, Janet Snakehole said:

This is me. Call me a coward, but I also keep quiet with a lot of people to keep the peace. I am not going to change their minds, they won't change mine.

I won't call you a coward. I have nothing to lose. Well, I did lose one friend, but he was of the "Hitlery" ilk and the breaking point was him using a gay slur. So, that's a good thing. There was tension with some Bernie friends, but I was thoughtful toward them and they're back. But I won't lose family of close friends if I go all out publicly for Hillary, and I don't blame anyone who doesn't. I am in one of those many famous secret Hillary Facebook groups and even with almost nothing to lose, it still took me awhile to be as open as I am now. It's got to be a personal choice. I wish we all could be out there loud and strong, because so much is at stake, but it's not the only thing at stake. And even if if is just peace of mind, you have to do what is right for you. So take care of yourself. I'll be loud for us both, because I can afford to be. And you can be here part of the conversation, which I value so much!

Edited November 2, 2016 by Darian

[Darian]

1 minute ago, millennium said:

I have seen many Hillary ads, but not the ones you describe.

I didn't describe them. I linked to two, and there are more. I didn't link to more, because I figured the links might not get clicked and I didn't want to waste more time. I think the ones I linked to were men talking about equal justice and early education. I chose them at random and could have chosen more. I simply look at Hillary's YouTube channel, and recognized some of those you haven't seen because I've seen them on TV. And as I said, here in Massachusetts, we don't even get many ads for Hillary. I think any men who feel slighted because of the supposed lack of outreach want to feel that way. Just my opinion. 

[starri]

4 minutes ago, millennium said:

I have seen many Hillary ads, but not the ones you describe.

I don't have cable, nor do I live in a swing state, so the only advertising I've seen has been online, but I would assume they're targeting their online ads to specific demographics.  Most of what I've seen has been stuff that, for better or worse, an urban-dwelling, white collar gay man would care about.

[HumblePi]

3 minutes ago, millennium said:

I think Hillary voters also lack many of the insecurities that make being part of Trump's mob so appealing to his voters, so they may not feel it necessary to publicly identify.

Hasn't this always been the foundation, the very core of Donald Trump's campaign for the past two years? The way he has run his campaign will be taught in future high school and college courses as "The Art of Political Fear Mongering".  His campaign has been based on inaccuracies, misstatements and fictitious information. He played right into the minds of people because they already harbored insecurities, fear, hatred and mistrust, particularly of politicians. That's why they like Trump because he's not a politician. Those basic insecurities of any population is what has driven and motivated dictators, presidents and rulers throughout history. People that don't have those insecurities are the ones that will lean towards hope and change and things that are put out there that are offer a promise of positive change. People only need negativity to fight an adversary. It's not good enough to send an army of men with a gun, it's certainly to their advantage when that army is loaded up with anger, hatred and animosity for the enemy. Donald Trump made the majority of us 'the enemy'.

[Morrigan2575]

7 minutes ago, starri said:

I don't have cable, nor do I live in a swing state, so the only advertising I've seen has been online, but I would assume they're targeting their online ads to specific demographics.  Most of what I've seen has been stuff that, for better or worse, an urban-dwelling, white collar gay man would care about.

As an Aside: I was surprised that I saw the same HRC ads when I visited AZ that were playing in NJ.  I thought they were have been a little different

Edited November 2, 2016 by Morrigan2575

[Kitty Redstone]

3 minutes ago, Darian said:

I think any men who feel slighted because of the supposed lack of outreach want to feel that way. Just my opinion. 

I agree.  HRC's platform and ads are directed to people she wants to attract - people who are concerned about the economy, about security, about college expenses, about healthcare, about hard-fought for equal rights, about citizenship, about responsible decision makers ... and who aren't bigots, misogynists, and all-around haters.  If men don't see themselves in any of that, then that is not her problem.  I'm glad she's not wasting time and money trying to reason with unreasonable people.