2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf you take action based on a newspaper headline, you might not be qualified for President
of this country. A qualified person knows that headlines are oftentimes provocative. Meant to get clicks.
A qualified person would, upon seeing a troubling headline, take time to read the actual article and gather more facts before responding and taking action.
A qualified person who failed to do those things would apologize once he realized his mistake.
Our country deserves a well informed, responsible leader who waits for all the facts before taking action or making irresponsible statements. The last thing we need is someone who is ill informed and impulsive, like Trump.
brooklynite
(94,588 posts)Joob
(1,065 posts)Or was the vote on Iraq not incompetent
Or the Panama Trade Agreement, TPP
Or supporting a system that allows these legal loopholes until recently, in fact still uses Superpacs, still gets funneled money through the people she swears she'll fight. How's that not incompetent.
How about we dig deeper, when she was against the Civil Rights Act when she was younger?
Poor security on emails, not incompetent?
Her judgement, is not so great. She's a follower, not a leader. She'll make the right choice after it's trending.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)And the opposite of what she describes going to the convention in Florida. What bullshit.
riversedge
(70,239 posts)I was wondering where to post this tweet--and there you are!
DemsAgainstBernie ?@DemsAgainstBern 2h2 hours ago
Hillary said Bernie hadn't done his homework, not that he's unqualified. After Bernie quoted a WaPo headline as a HRC quote, she has a point
Armstead
(47,803 posts)I suppose her campaign staff and surrogates who have been saying nasty things are separate from the ever-so-correct legalistic candidate.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,330 posts)... be qualified to be President.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)member of Congress with someone flying off the handle over a news item that hadn't been vetted. Seriously?
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,330 posts)One cost hundreds of thousands of lives, turned Iraq in to a unstable nightmare on earth, un stabilized the Middle East, created ISIS, cost trillions of US dollars, killed 5,000 service members, and wounded countless others.
The other is a fart in a skillet.
These people knew
This is who tricked her
Hell, even 1994 Cheney knew.
https://m.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)and scream for war.
She voted for leverage. She could not have been more clear that negotiating leverage was EXACTLY why she voted as she did. As did many others. That vote had horrible consequences, but neither Hillary or Kerry would have ever taken advantage of the power that was given to them. Bush, or rather Cheney, did. And the lie that prompted her vote was a deliberate one. She did not vote for war.
I wouldn't have made that choice, obviously you wouldn't have either. But up to that point, those who did still expected the POTUS to act in the best interest of the United States. They still expected the executive to act with honor. They quickly learned they were mistaken, and many, including Hillary, became outspoken critics of the abuse of power that the exec had been given.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,330 posts)2000 plus constituents were murdered by Iraq/Saddam Hussein?
OMG
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)brooklynite
(94,588 posts)Hassin Bin Sober
(26,330 posts)Jitter65
(3,089 posts)to make light of this tough decision is shameful. Furthermore, no one know how much those who voted for that war suffer pain from their vote. She made a decision based on the information she was told and information she searched out. She was wrong and later said her vote was a mistake. Dropping the bomb on Japan was a mistake also. People are fallible. Hillary did not take her vote lightly. It is easy for armchair generals and armchair politicians to criticize when they are not faced with real tough challenges. 9/11 was a game changer for many..
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,330 posts)Everyone with half a brain (and not running for office) knew exactly what was going on.
The neon cons and PNACers wanted a war in Iraq before 9/11.
Yeah 9/11 was a game changer all right. Bush and Cheney said "nine eleven Iraq" so many times, they had 67% of the US population believing Iraq was responsible for 9/11. Some leaders on our side had the intestinal fortitude to stand up to the bull shit and others didn't want to be caught on the wrong side of a ticker-tape homecoming parade for our quick and easy wonderful little war.
Yeah, she admitted her "mistake" - great. But this thread is about Sanders not being qualified for President because he said mean things about HRC at a rally.
A little perspective is needed, IMO.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)silenttigersong
(957 posts)On a hit piece.Does Hillary Clinton think Sen.Sanders is stupid?Then her surrogates trot out the sexism card ,it is like the"Emperors new Cloths"dirty tricks, and the media enables it,they love fights.
anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)He should know better, having been peddling talking points about free stuff without any substance behind them for months. Always dig a bit deeper before throwing your support behind a candidate, or believing a headline.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)NUMBER 12 WILL MAKE YOU CRY
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)Hillary is known as being the least trustworthy by the American people in poll after poll. Who do you think people are going to believe? Poor Hillary, a known liar, coming up with yet another lie to lie her way into the nomination. Yea, sounds like a winning plan.
jillan
(39,451 posts)disqualifying your candidate, you have every right to act.
When the Hillary campaign sends out talking points to media on talking points to attack that candidate, you have every right to act.
But go right ahead and cherry pick what lead up to this.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)you're fighting fire with fire.
Avalux
(35,015 posts)If so, what did you think of the way he handled the horrid swiftboating?