Clinton Really? Did she just say that? What was she thinking?

Discussion in 'Hillary Clinton' started by 320 Years of History, Oct 23, 2016.

  1. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist / Universalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    18,309
    Thanks Received:
    2,419
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +6,098
    Dear Camp and 320 Years of History
    I generally accept and encourage the common courtesy of respecting the consent of the person starting the thread as having more say or ownership of the thread. However, if any person including them contradicts themselves, that invites correction even if it steers off topic, so that's an additional issue.

    I do think it is inviting distraction to ask if someone is a supporter of Clinton if that means veering off on a tangent.
    The question could be clarified by asking to compare responses of people who support or reject Clinton, but not to judge the person's reasons or motivations for that support or rejection which gets personal and veers off topic.

    320 Years of History
    I see it more sad than funny at this point. If I were Clinton I'd be crushed at all the work it takes just to come in second. I'd like to set up a whole system that Clinton can manage or govern that is on the equivalent level of VP or President of the Senate. If all the parties had reps similar to the Electoral College of each state, perhaps we could create an inclusive partisan Parliament where minority and diverse input objections grievances and proposed reforms can be received and processed into workable presentable solutions to govt. Maybe some kind of electoral senate, and Clinton could be in charge to help organize it and lead it so she and other candidates representing the minority vote have opportunity to work together demonstrate leadership develop reforms, and gain experience proving programs work before proposing legislation or running for higher offices.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist / Universalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    18,309
    Thanks Received:
    2,419
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +6,098
    I thought that was the point the Trump base was making.

    Why are both sides misreading each other as being negative? Both acknowledge the positive impact and traditions America has.

    What isn't agreed on is how govt and media are abused to promote dependence instead of independent self govt.

    One side believes socializing programs through govt is positive help for the people, the other side objects to this as causing dependence and killing America with unsustainable mismanagement and bureaucratic waste. One side blame rich corporations and depends on govt regulations as the solution, the other side argues its the dependence on govt enabling political abuse and corruption by corporate meddling.

    They're both right!

    So why not join together where we all agree to keep the good things about America, and team up to stop the corporate abuses of govt destroying America.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. 320 Years of History
    Offline

    320 Years of History Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2015
    Messages:
    6,060
    Thanks Received:
    810
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    Ratings:
    +2,550
    Yes. Running for President and coming in second is quite like doing so in a game of chess. LOL
     

Share This Page