Hillary Clinton Dismisses White Women Voters As Lost Cause While Calling For The End Of Civility Toward Republicans

225px-Hillary_Clinton_official_Secretary_of_State_portrait_cropThe Clintons are back.  Despite Democratic members belatedly (by about two decades) denouncing Bill Clinton for the host of women who accused him of sexual assault and rape and the growing unpopularity of Hillary Clinton, Democrats are again putting the couple on the campaign trail in one of the most critical midterm elections in history.  Just as the Democratic leadership does not seem to change, neither does the playbook or players. I just do not get it.  Hillary has already made headlines in distinguishing her husband’s sexually abusive history by saying these cases were “thoroughly investigated” even though the couple did everything possible to stop such investigations and Democrats remained largely silent despite corroborating evidence from these women.  In a remarkably uncritical and relatively passive interview, CNN’s Christiane Amanpour did not seem at all concerned about a strange claim by Clinton that she won the vote of women voters while dismissing white women as opposed to Democratic candidates or values. For those who are looking for a blue wave, the high-profile speaking tour of the Clintons cannot be good news given their continuing polarizing impact in polls.  As Democrats seeks to build on the MeToo anger in the aftermath of the Kavanaugh hearings, the Clintons remind voters of the obvious hypocrisy in how Democrats handled the Bill Clinton accusations.Here is the exchange on white women voters:

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN HOST: Last night, President Trump had a sort of ceremony for now Justice Kavanaugh at the White House, and he apologized on behalf the

American people for the immense amount of pain and harm that he said that the judge had been put through by this system.

What do you make of that and what message, including the president’s mocking of Christine Blasey Ford for her allegations, what message does that send to women? And remember, went for President Trump in 2016.

CLINTON: White women.

AMANPOUR: White women.

HILLARY CLINTON, 2016 DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT: White women. All women went for me. And look, White women have been voting against Democratic presidential candidates for decades now.  The White vote has only then won twice in the last 60 years. My husband being one of the two. Lyndon Johnson being the other. So, it’s not a surprise. It’s a disappointment but it’s not a surprise.”

Actually, it was a surprise to everyone other than Hillary Clinton since she was the first female Democratic nominee for president running against someone who was viewed as antagonistic to women’s rights with major controversies in the treatment of women.  Clinton seemed to treat it as expected that she would lose the vote of white women and dismissed them as a lock for Republicans. There is no evidence to support that.

After the election, Clinton alternatively blamed sexismracismself-hating womendomineering boyfriendsRussian hackersBernie Sanders, and of course, James Comey.  The most obvious reason is that Clinton remains a highly unpopular figure and was viewed as inauthentic on the campaign by many.  Many of us were critical when the Democratic establishment (and virtually every Democratic member of Congress) all but guaranteed the nomination of Clinton despite every poll showing her to be unpopular and the voters seeking an anti-establishment choice.

On the women’s vote, Clinton did best with African-American women. She carried 88% of African-American voters, but that was actually lower than Obama.  She had a serious problem in minority women simply not coming out for her in the same numbers.  Trump actually did better than Romney on hispanic voters.

To this day, Clinton has struggled to convince people it was not her but sexism or self-hating women or Russians despite polls showing that she would still lose to Trump and has actually gotten more unpopular.  This would not be particularly newsworthy if it were not for Democrats who continue to flock to the Clinton.  Even after many denounced Bill Clinton belatedly, they are still drawing adoring crowds and will once again be highly visible faces for the Democratic party.  Even if they turn away 2 to 5 percent of voters, that could be the difference for many races.

The one new component is Hillary Clinton declaring that Democrats must now drop civility toward Republicans.  That is a bit late given our rageful politics but it is hardly a principled position. I have criticized Trump for his uncivil and unpresidential comments but that is no license for principled people to drop the necessity of being civil.  It is little more than the child-like defense of “he did it first.”    In a curious suggestion of belated principle, Clinton assured voters that civility can be restored after Democrats come back into power.


144 thoughts on “Hillary Clinton Dismisses White Women Voters As Lost Cause While Calling For The End Of Civility Toward Republicans”

  1. Oh yeah and completely off topic -and likely blasphemy to put in the same thread with those corrupt Clintons.

    Here’s to that jelly-backed, former astronaut and current candy arse, Scott Kelly, who apologized for invoking Sir Winston Churchill, whom we Americans have right to claim as half ours.

  2. I think Billary have changed sides. What Republican wouldn’t want this two-faced beast to be the visage of the Democrats Party just prior to the mid-term elections? And on public tour? It’s Captain Edward Smith as the spokesman for your shipping line; or Jerry Lewis as the poster-boy for serious theater; or Mrs. O’Leary’s cow subbing in for Smokey the Bear on those Forestry Service PSAs! So the foundation went belly-up, and who would still pay to keep these grifters alive and kicking? Why the Republicans of course. And Billary “don’t cares wheres the monies comes froms.”

    Long live Billary. They’re great for Republicans.

    1. Mespo,..
      – We posted almost simultaneously, each expressing the sincere wish😉😊😄 that Hillary will “be out there” saying more, doing more, “helping” the Democrats in any way that she can.

    2. mespo……laughin out loud……….and may I suggest Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Director of Racial Unity & Healing, as well as Permanent Community Liaison, B’nai B’rith.

      1. Yes, you certainly may. And noted. I’ve got “Big Daddy” Idi Amin handling kosher snacks on El Al, too. He’s pushing those great little chocolate drinks — the NetanYoohoos.

              1. Tabarrok………I was about to post this song…………great find……..the best of the old times

              1. Tabarrok………..thanks for posting! So funny…I watched it all…..They crack me up! But talk about “civility”…..an era we will never see again, sad to say.

  3. Strange obsession with Hilary Clinton. Why do you spend precious space on Clinton ignoring, say, the continued attack by Trump on Prof. Ford.

    1. Tyll van Geel,..
      – When Hillary Clinton gives interviews and makes the kind of statements she makes, it gets covered in the news.
      She’s been involved in politics for most of her adult life, has been well-known nationally for over 25 years, came close to being elected president, is married to a former president, and I just read that the two of them will be embarking on a 6 month $peaking tour.
      Those are some of the reasons that the media “spends precious space on Clinton”.
      If she chose to retire to private life and into obscurity, she could probably do so.
      Given her history and her interviews, book(s), statements, etc., it’s not hard to understand why she gets coverage.
      Hope to see a lot more of her😉.

    2. ontinued attack by Trump on Prof. Ford.

      You say that like it’s a bad thing.

      1. Tabs is crazily obsessed with Dr. Ford and some figment of his imagination he calls “Diane.” 👀 He seems to find her lurking everywhere. 👀

    1. DB Benson,..
      – I heard that Xu got a green card and has applied for a job as an IT specialist with Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

      1. David: I heard Xu got a green card and changed his name to Diane. He is now the webmaster for this blog and spies on Tabarrock. 👀👀

  4. The entire premise of the Democratic Party is based upon division. Happy people don’t need massive government assistance and benefit programs. They don’t seek out the government to make decisions for them from cradle to grave, and they don’t need a savior. People need to believe themselves oppressed victims for the Democrats to get votes.

    So Democratic rhetoric is the language of oppression. If a guy is rich, he stole that money from you. He didn’t build that. (Please ignore that his taxes actually paid for all of the infrastructure used by people who don’t pay a dime in taxes.) If you have problems, it’s not because of a single choice that you or your parents made. It’s an old white man’s fault. Gang shootings? White man’s fault. Forget all of us sharing a common American culture. Western culture is one of colonialization. The best culture is that of indigenous people, taking scalps and tearing the beating hearts out of victims. Western Judeo Christian culture is naturally bad. Prior to their meddling, everyone gave flowers and sang songs around a campfire. Rather than all of us sharing a common American identity, the Democrats Balkanize us into Native Americans, Caucasian, African-Americans, Asians, and on down the exhaustive list. Character isn’t what matters. The only thing that matters is where we fall on the victimhood valuation scale. Gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, religion, and politics all gauge if we matter or not. Not our common humanity or shared citizenship. Citizenship is a means to persecute the downtrodden. The country is no longer allowed to set standards for who and how many may come over. It is even deemed Islamophobic to set rigorous background checks on terrorist hot spots. When a female Democrat loses, it’s because men controlled their wives, wives were self-hating, or because the women who voted against her were white. Women aren’t allowed to think for themselves. If any woman is pro-life, Christian, Republican, fiscal conservative, or any of the above, there is no end to the savagery the Democrats will throw her way. They will mock her clothes, her beauty, her makeup, her intelligence, her manner of speaking, and just the fact that she converts O2 to CO2. They will harass her in restaurants and at public events. And God forbid that woman is an African American. No racial slur is too low.

    Everything they say is divisive. Even about the law. Something as simple as an unfounded accusation of sexual assault, easily disproven because her story changed multiple times and all of her named witnesses said they have no idea what she’s talking about, is a weapon to Democrats. In a reasonable, lawful society, accusations are proven before acted on. Democrats ignore avalanches of evidence against Keith Ellison et al for sexual assault, and seize on an unfounded allegation like a hand grenade with the pin pulled out to throw at an enemy. A rational society can easily distinguish between proven and disproven allegations. Not Democrats.

    I have become increasingly appalled at the divisive, hateful tactics of the Democrats. In my mind, they stand for hatred, intolerance, injustice, and increasingly, Socialism, that driver of mass murder. I long for the days when the only difference between Republican and Democrat was whether one can thrive with Big Government or Small. Democrats will not recognize that Republicans merely believe that the way to success is individual rights and limited government. They brand dissent from the Single Party evil. And I am darn tired of my beliefs being called evil, “ist”, “phobe”, etc. by the mainstream media, and by Hollywood, who gave an Oscar and a standing ovation to a convicted pedophile who ran from justice.

    Enough already.

    The only way to regain any civility is for Democrats to lay down their hatred and divisiveness. I have little hope that will happen. It is, after all, effective.

    1. This post is good enough and true enough that I’m sure somewhere dems are already queuing up the “Karen S’ist” phobia buzz.

  5. Darren, politics was Jimmy Carter’s 3d career. He was a satisfactory engineer and naval officer and a satisfactory agribusinessman. He was a f/t politician for < 12 years in a very long life. Now look at the consequential presidential candidates of our time and look at what they were doing in lieu of political life.

    1. Fledgling law practice (Ted Kennedy, Paul Tsongas, Tom Harkin, Barack Obama)

    2. Ordinary law practice (Walter Mondale, Richard Gephardt, Michael Dukakis, John Kerry, Joseph Biden)

    3. Mid-Law associate (Jerry Brown, Gary Hart, Joseph Lieberman)

    4. Fledgling academic, law faculty (Bill Clinton, Barack Obama)

    5. Skeevy law practice (John Edwards, Hellary)

    6. Professional blabbermouth (Jesse Jetstream)

    7. Small town Newspaper publisher (Paul Simon)

    8. Small business, health clubs and restaurants (Bob Kerrey)

    9. Professional athlete (Bill Bradley)

    10. Newspaper reporter (Al Gore)

    11. Physician (Howard "Yeeargh' Dean)

    12. Military officer, flag rank (Wesley Clark)

    13. Miscellaneous wage employment (Bernie Sanders).

    The people of real accomplishment on this list would be Gen. Clark, Bob Kerrey, and, on a lower plane Paul Simon and Howard Dean. You could certainly argue that Lieberman, Hart, and Brown had better things to do with their life than get involved in public life (though only Lieberman was all that far along in his legal career). Paul Simon is dead and all of the remainder are now over 70; Brown and Hart are over 80. Among them, only Clark and Kerrey were more capable men in their prime than was Jimmy Carter.

        1. No, commenter “Joseph Jones” is a vicious anti-semite. Carter is merely biased and obtuse.

    1. Tabarrok……….Don’t forget that Jimmy Carter has been teaching a Southern Baptist Sunday School class since he was a teen-ager……That “job” has influenced everything else he has done in his adult life.

  6. “Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and they’re the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.” – Cuomo

    “You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about,” Clinton told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour. “That’s why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again.” – Clinton

    I live in NY. Please, please let a liberal party politician come to my door looking for my support. Oh, the fun I will have telling them to get the hell off my property.

  7. JT does not even pretend anymore, throwing out the ole HRC card is always good. Maybe next week HRC will wear miss-matching shoes with her outfit and you can always bet JT will be on the case.

  8. Why do Democrats cling to the Clintons?

    One reason I believe rests with the fact that the Democratic party on the federal level is akin to a wayward ship lost at sea and the captain is missing in action. The party lacks at least a focal figurehead in leadership and has some internal issues such as tribalism. It is also trying to come to terms with its defeat in the last presidential election. Plus, it has invested itself so heavily in attacking President Trump that it hasn’t managed to groom a new leader.

    So in this vacuum of sorts, along comes opportunist Hillary Clinton. The party is in such a crisis of leadership it will listen to anyone with a potential to deliver them from the anger and fear in which they reside. So, they tolerate a charlatan such as her.

    The oddity is that the Clintons (in their actual practice) represent EVERYTHING that liberals profess they loathe. But because they lack a unifying figurehead they are willing to forego their sense of right and wrong for anyone willing to take the wheel.

    1. I had a conversation here about a year ago with the regular liberals that they needed to rebuild their party now, dump the Trump tirades, and get behind a strong speaker with a decent record. Just common sense, really. They haven’t done any of those things and will be screaming to the sky again in November. Demonstrating long-term madness isn’t the best way to get a majority…

      1. Slohrrs……I did the same thing, starting back when I left the party in 2008, after 40 yrs. My belief was that the party needed to start over…that they were too corrupt to survive….Like you in 2017 I suggested to whatever Dem friends I had left…that the party as they knew it, was gone. And any remnants were not worthy of saving….etc

    2. ‘Everything liberals loath’, Darren? The Clinton’s stand tall for comprehensive healthcare, women’s rights and environmental conservation; everything Republicans loath.

      1. Oh lets see.

        * They are the 1% by every definition
        * They led us into elective wars, especially in the case of the Libyan Conflict, and thousands of civilians died in the strife.
        * They use their political position for financial gain.
        * Bill Clinton has had numerous sexual impropriety accusations and Hillary Clinton attacked and blamed the accusers.
        Liberals claim to want fair elections, yet the Clintons were instrumental in rigging a primary election to out a legitimate competitor, viz Bernie Sanders.
        * They exposed the United States to espionage by placing sensitive data onto a home brew e-Mail server (crafted so that the Clintons could control the information contained thereon) Then engaged in deception, denial and cover-up to evade responsibility.

        The Clintons hand you table scraps and talking points only to secure your loyalty to cast ballots for them, pay them tribute in the form of election contributions, speaking fees or book deals and you gobble it up as if it were a delicacy. The Clintons only proffer to support these ideas because they have found that they receive the most support if they cover these issues. The Clintons care about women? What a joke. Yeah if you consider them as a means to fulfill Bill’s sexual appetite or someone for Hillary to blame when she loses the election then yes, the Clintons value women dearly.

        Find better people to champion your cause. And maybe your cause will have better credibility with others.

        As for the environment like you I value protecting the environment. and at least with me to such a degree that I consider it to be a religious tenet. I don’t want scoundrels such as the Clintons involved. They turn away average people and they politicize environmental stewardship which hurts the movement, all for their own personal gain.

        Remember the Clintons were against gay marriage before they were for gay marriage, which of course coincided when they perceived it was more politically advantageous to them to claim to champion the gay marriage issue. In actuality they either did not care about gays or had no respect of them to begin with. It was just a useful cause for their ambition.

        You need to have leaders who ACTUALLY believe in what they promise. That way you know where they stand and they will soldier on in difficult times. Fully expect the Clintons to abandon you when you are no longer useful. Just look at what happened after Hillary Lost the election and she sent her underling out to dismiss her loyal followers at the election campaign gala. It was almost like “go away and come back tomorrow.”. That is what the Clintons are about.

        1. The Clinton’s led us into an ‘elective war in Libya’..?? Where are you getting that, Darren??

          Momar Quadafi was dictatator of Libya for 40 years. And during those decades in power, Quadafi violently suppressed several rebellions. But the Libyan people finally rose up in a popular rebellion amid the Arab Spring. That posed a dilemma for Obama; whether or not to back Quadafi.

          The Arab League wanted Quadafi gone. The French and British were more than willing to provide air support for Libyan rebels. The United States only provided AWACs and intelligence. Our role was fairly limited. Qaddafi could have taken exile. But like a fool he tried to hang in and wound up dead.

          Therefore, it’s a bold-faced lies to say the Clinton’s led us to war in Libya. That claim, in fact, comes from memes posted by Russian trolls. Is that where you saw it, Darren?

          1. PH,..
            Gaddafi was major sponsor of terrorism until 2003.
            He then renounced international terrorism, gave up his WMD programs, and improved Libyan-U.S. relations.
            That’s one thing you failed to mention.
            Gadaffi was on the verge of crushing the last uprising when the U.S., under the guise of “protecting civilians with a ‘no fly zone’ “, launched an all-out air assault.
            That U.S. air power is what turned the tide. It was used to not only wipe out/ ground Gaddafi’s air force, but to attack his artillery, ground forces, supply the insurgents with intel, etc.
            You fail to mention any of this, and that is one hell of an oversight, and historical revisionism, on your part.
            To say that “Our role was fairly limited” is ridiculous.
            Hillary was widely reported to be one of the more hawkish members of the Obama Administration when it came to overthrowing Gaddafi, but go ahead and stick with your fantasy that she was just along for the ride.
            If you liked the results in Libya, you must have been thrilled with the aftermath of Gulf War II.
            These kinds of ventures complicate efforts to invite pariahs like N. Korea’s Kim into the international community.
            It was said that the lesson for Gaddafi was that cooperation with the U.S. can be more dangerous than confrontation.
            A leader like Kim is going to look at the “Libyan model” that Bolton stupidly mentioned and wonder how safe his regime is, how valid any guarantees are.

            1. Tom Nash – wasn’t Hillary’s quote “We came. We saw. He died. Cackle, cackle, cackle.

            2. Tom, we weren’t flying bombing missions in Libya. Where are you getting that???? And how long is ‘long enough’ in the career of a dictator??? Was the U.S. supposed to back Quadafi against his own people????

            1. And of course you don’t at all believe that the Obama Administration with Secretary Clinton was not instrumental in facilitating this military intervention in Libya. Worked out really well didn’t it? Libya was for months partially controlled by a terrorist organization while Libya posed no credible military threat to the United States. I thought war-hawking was something liberals detested? Nope, that was rhetorical. Even here you are pressing the case for war in Libya. All this hype about how much of a war monger Presidents bush where but if a Clinton or an Obama pursues an elective war wooo hooo, them’s fightin’ words.

              If politicians want to fight an elective war let it by fought by them alone. My guess is they wouldn’t have the guts to step out of their ivory tower to begin with.

              1. PH,
                I tried repeatedly to respond to your last comment to me in place
                .. It wp
                ould not post and I lost my reply. I’m not going to bother retyping it.
                You are so estranged from the facts of the military actions against Gaddafi, the factions involved in the uprising, the regional/ tribal conflicts in Libya, the aftermath and consequences of dislodging Gaddafi, and other factors that I’m not going to waste any more time trying to give you a remedial review of what happened.
                How long should Saddam have been left in power?
                If you’re going to pose bullsh!t questions like “were we supposed to back Gaddafi, or “how long is l ong enough in the care of a dictator”, then you must like the “Mubarek must go, Assad must go, Saddam must go, Gaddafi must go” interventionist crew like Hillary, McCain, and Graham.

          1. It’s irrelevant to the topic. Try to get out of the habit of deflection. It facilitates bad behavior on behalf of politicians you support since it allows them a free pass to continue.

            Under that practice no matter what the Clintons, or any other bad actors for that matter, are never held accountable because there is an excuse that someone else is worse. Its exactly akin to excusing the behavior of a petty thief because there was a Bernie Madoff out there. The better approach is to hold both accountable.

            But continue to cling to the notion that the Republicans are worse. Allow your favorite political party, if it is in fact the Democrats, free reign to engage in bad behavior. Just don’t expect others to view your approach with admiration. Do you want to champion the cause of corruption or do you want to side with a legitimate effort to reform the party for the better. Just remember you are the company you keep.

      2. Where did you hear Republicans loath those things PH?
        What they loath is spending 100-500 times more those things cost for catastrophic unsustainable results by low IQ government parasites to sustain a lifetime civil service welfare system with zero accountability to taxpayers and the people those programs are supposed to serve. They loath endangering said people and depriving them of most of the services and safety net protections by a system that rewards government wonks and middle mangers with promotions and bonuses for engineeting, rigging and running a system of manipulation and cover up coding and accounting that denies critical services people who have every right to and a desparate need for.

  9. Hillary Clinton is an enabler and a complicit co-conspirator in the serial rape and molestation crimes of her husband, Bill Clinton.

    “If Comey had indicted Hillary Clinton, Comey would have convicted Obama.”

    – Andrew C. McCarthy III
    National Review

    Lisa Page to Peter Strzok, “POTUS wants to know everything we’re doing.”

    Lisa Page to Congress, “The texts mean what the texts say.”

    “President Barack Obama used a pseudonym in email communications with Hillary Clinton and others, according to FBI records made public Friday.”

    “In an April 5, 2016 interview with the FBI, Huma Abedin was shown an email exchange between Clinton and Obama, but the longtime Clinton aide did not recognize the name of the sender.”

    “Once informed that the sender’s name is believed to be a pseudonym used by the president, Abedin exclaimed: ‘How is this not classified?'” the report says. “Abedin then expressed her amazement at the president’s use of a pseudonym and asked if she could have a copy of the email.”

    – Politico

    Hillary Clinton is a co-conspirator in the Obama Coup D’etat in America.


    [tree-zuh n]


    1. the offense of acting to overthrow one’s government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
    2. a violation of allegiance to one’s sovereign or to one’s state.
    3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

    Hanged, Drawn and Quartered For High Treason

    To be hanged, drawn and quartered was from 1352 a statutory penalty in England for men convicted of high treason, although the ritual was first recorded during the reign of King Henry III (1216–1272). A convicted traitor was fastened to a hurdle, or wooden panel, and drawn by horse to the place of execution, where he was then hanged (almost to the point of death), emasculated, disemboweled, beheaded, and quartered (chopped into four pieces). The traitor’s remains were often displayed in prominent places across the country, such as London Bridge. For reasons of public decency, women convicted of high treason were instead burned at the stake.

    The severity of the sentence was measured against the seriousness of the crime. As an attack on the monarch’s authority, high treason was considered a deplorable act demanding the most extreme form of punishment.

    What did Christopher Wray know and when did he know it?

    If Christopher Wray DID NOT KNOW of the FBI/DOJ/Intel “deep state” Obama Coup D’etat in America, he is incompetent.

    If he DID KNOW, he is corrupt.

    1. The people-loving communists in China, Russia, North Korea and Cuba are building up their military power to dominate the land, sea and space. Are they going to love us to death? Geez, America initiated its “Progressive” journey into communism during “Crazy Abe” Lincoln’s “Reign of Terror” and continued it through comrades and General Secretaries Woodrow Wilson, Lyndon Johnson and Barry Soetoro.


    Professor Turley seems to think that Democrats are somehow obliged to apologize for the Clinton’s. This is one those ‘stupid traps’ that conservatives set for liberals. Like the mere mention of Bill Clinton’s name should make liberals run like thieves. What pretentious nonsense!

    At least 19 women have complained about sexual assaults by Donald Trump who boasted, on tape, about grabbing women by their private parts. Trump is an anti-intellectuaul whose entire campaign was based on racist sentiments
    But liberals are supposed to run from the Clinton’s..??

    Just last night, in Iowa, Trump was leading a crowd chanting “lock her up”. During the debates, two years ago, Trump got up in Hillary’s face and threatened to jail her. So one can understand why Hillary isnt feeling too civil towards Republicans. Any party that embraces a leader like Trump is seriously dysfunctional.

    This morning, in “USA Today”, Trump signed an op-ed piece claiming Democrats want ‘open borders’ and ‘Venzuela-style socialism’. These are utterly stupid lies intended for utterly stupid Americans. I agree with Hillary; civility is totally strained at this point.

    1. And clinton got 2.8 million more votes than Trump. Only the electoral college installed El Presidente in the White House. Herr Trump LOST the election for popular vote

        1. That’s because Comrade Hillary did not know she needed to win the EC votes. She insists on a do-over….and placing in concentration camps all white women so that they can not vote, and Christians, and men, and Latinos, and Asians, and……Bill Clinton 🙂

          1. Charlie – how many national elections had the smartest woman in America been through? How could she not know she needed to win the votes of the Electoral College?

            1. PC Schulte,…
              You asked “How could she not know she needed the votes of the Electoral College?”.
              Have you learned nothing about thiamine deficiencies?!?😉
              Maybe she did know that at one time, but couldn’t remember it when it was really important.

    2. At least 19 women have complained about sexual assaults by Donald Trump who boasted, on tape, about grabbing women by their private parts.

      Is this the newest talking point?

      1. “Is this the newest talking point?”

        A pack of gay men want to grab Tabarrok by the balls to give him some joy in his otherwise meaningless, empty existence.

      2. Incorrect. He stated that when you’re famous, they will “let” you grab their girl bits. Other famous men have agreed that he is correct on that point.
        The women who have complained – like Ford I would ask – where’s your proof? Notice how Roy Moore’s accusers melted back into the woodwork as soon as the election was over? Ford has stated that she’s done, and will not pursue her accusations any further. Hmmmm.

    3. Trump signed an op-ed piece claiming Democrats want ‘open borders’ and ‘Venzuela-style socialism’. These are utterly stupid lies intended for utterly

      Democrats do want open borders. (Or they’re too stupid to understand the logic of the stances they’ve been taking for 30 years).

  11. Here you are, harping on Hillary Clinton when just last night, Fatso led a chorus of “lock her up” aimed at Senator Dianne Feinstein. Oh, and he also claimed that party boy Bart was “proven innocent”. Nikki Haley jumped ship before the midterms. These things are much bigger political news than anything Hillary Clinton had to say, and, no, you’re not going to sway any voters with harping about Hillary Clinton, so it’s just red meat to the Trumpsters.

    Jon: are you officially on the payroll of the RNC?

    1. Anonymous – it is not unusual for people to leave administrations at the end of two years. Only the President and Vice President are locked into terms of office. Everyone else has free will.

      1. Just HOW many people have left THIS Administration? A record number. Rachel Maddow has a board listing all of them, which she updates every time there’s another departure. It now takes up 2 walls on her set when it is displayed. Too many to list here.

        More importantly, WHY did she leave? She was viewed as someone with some semblance of common sense and dignity. No official reason was given, but this Administration is constantly undergoing turnover of key people and not filling positions in agencies where institutional knowledge is critical. But then, why should they care, really? Who cares if government does a good job for citizens? Who cares if American government is viewed as ad hoc and unstable? Who cares whether a judge lies his way onto the Supreme Court? Who cares whether a U.S. President brags about grabbing womens’ genitals and gets elected anyway due to an archaic rule that actually allows the loser of the popular vote to “win” anyway? Who cares that he lied about attendance at his inauguration, that he praised white supremacists, that he lies constantly and alienates U.S. allies? What matters is that a fat, misogynist, egomaniac racist draft dodger and tax evader is saluted by brave members of the military and flown around the country at the expense of taxpayers to lead rallies and chants of “lock her up” directed against a sitting U.S. Senator. And you wonder why members of the U.N. laughed out loud at Trump when he started bragging about how great he thinks he is.

        1. Anonymous – did Rachel Madcow have a board(s) for the people who left the Obama administration?

          1. Never saw one, but then, it wasn’t needed because there was stability under President Obama. Departures under the current regime are literally historic.

            1. Anonymous – since no one, including Trump, expected him to win, he really did not have a line up ready to go in case he won. Hillary had a bull pen ready to go. Trump just started throwing people in and then when they did not work out, firing them. That gave him the time to find the people he wanted.

        2. Anonymous;
          Haley left because she and her military husband are a million in debt and she needs more money. It’s that simple. Try reading instead of blathering. The local SC newspaper has the story.

    2. Nikki Haley jumped ship before the midterms.

      Nope. Still onboard until after the midterms.

      Speaking of the electoral college and the Senate: I’ve been trying to find actual quotes from the Democrats complaining about them when they held the House and had a nearly veto-proof 59 vote majority in the Senate 10 years ago. It would seem the Democrats really like our political institutions, that is as long as they aren’t losing. 🙂

    3. Anonymooch…….It is my humble conjecture, and fervent hope, that Nikki Haley is going to be in place to fill Lindsay Graham’s Senate seat, which he will vacate in order to replace Sessions as AG……………….. after the midterms.

  12. Why do the Clintons persist in thinking people like them? They are delusional! They want to lose to the R’s again, I see.

    1. Jack – the best thing for the Republicans is for the Clintons to campaign for the Democrats. 😉

      1. PC Schulte,..
        – I would say that would be the second thing.
        The best thing would be to nominate her again for a 2020 run.
        I’ve advocated that to those here who have stated that Hillary was “cheated” out of a win in 2016; of course, I’ve just recommend that 2020 “do over” only in the spirit of fairness😉☺.

        1. Tom Nash – given that her popularity numbers have gone down since she was defeated I think a do over is only fair. 😉 And the Republicans can run the many reasons she lost the last time. Just run them 24/7 on all media. She will be lucky if she gets Bill’s vote.

    2. One reason I suppose is when a person is surrounded in their inner circle with yes men and ass kissers some individuals tend to eventually believe they are magnificent and have ability beyond what they actually command. With most politicians or those in leadership roles I suppose this environment is common. The reality often is that those who kiss butt are less effective employees or more commonly, ladder climbers wanting to ride the coat tails of their master. Moreover there unfortunately seems to be an endless supply of these dolts conniving their way into the master’s favor.

      Some in high position with these yes men recognize them for what they are and simply find them useful and take advantage of their loyalty for they can be conveniently disposed of as fall guys or sin eaters and despite how unjustified it might be, these victims can be relied upon to kiss their master’s feet all the way until they assume room temperature. Its rather pathetic I recognize but they chose their own demise so…..good for them I guess.

      1. Darren Smith – the job of the court jester has been abandoned. It was the jester who could tell the king the truth without fear of reprisal. And after the wrestling match in the WH, Dick Morris won’t tell them the truth either.

  13. Rand Paul is right. The Dems will stop at nothing to coalesce power


    “Rand Paul warns of ‘assassination’ peril after Kavanaugh confirmation: ‘I really worry someone is going to be killed’”

    “Following the bitterly partisan, acrimonious confirmation battle over Associate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., warned in an interview on Tuesday that heated political rhetoric has the potential to turn deadly.

    “I fear that there’s going to be an assassination,” Paul told a Kentucky radio show. “I really worry that somebody is going to be killed, and that those who are ratcheting up the conversation … they have to realize they bear some responsibility if this elevates to violence.”

    Paul’s wife, Kelley, revealed in a Breitbart News interview on Friday that she sleeps with a “loaded gun by my bed,” has updated her home’s security system and has “deadbolts all around my house.” Kelley also wrote an op-ed published by CNN in which she called on Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., to tone down his rhetoric; in June, Booker suggested his supporters “get up in the face of congresspeople.”

    The Kentucky senator reiterated his wife’s criticism on Tuesday. “When people like Cory Booker say get up in their face … What he doesn’t realize is that for every 1,000 persons who want to get up in your face, one of them is going to be unstable enough to commit violence,” Paul said.”

    1. Becky,..
      I agree with your comments about the need to “tone it down”.
      Especially certain members of Congress who have been some of the worst offenders.
      BTW, is the rumor true that Sen. Booker is considering Kirk Douglas as his 2020 running mate, assuming that Kirk is still available?

  14. Hey Hillary! This guy here makes me proud of my whiteness. Son of a Texan, Scots/Irish music genes, and simply the best of the best.

Comments are closed.