Hillary Clinton wants to deprogram MAGA?

[DaisyDay]

Nope. You would have had to miss all the other articles on just this topic to understand how widespread this acknowledgement is, back when Clinton was railroading Bernie Sanders, who should have been the candidate (and may have actually beaten Trump).

"Last week, at the 8th annual Women in the World Summit, Hillary Clinton linked her election loss to her success and ambition. She claimed, "the more successful and therefore ambitious a woman is, the less likable she becomes."
Clinton certainly had a likability problem during her presidential campaign, but it was due to her untrustworthiness, which she never overcame in the polls with the American public. With her email scandal looming large over her campaign, she saw her support drop. The email scandal and the ensuing investigation that plagued Clinton, along with the spotlight on the ethics of the Clinton Foundation, painted her as distrustful. Her likability had nothing to do with her ambition and success as a woman but with how she conducted herself when she held positions of power.
There are plenty of men and women (myself included) who are ready to see a female president in the White House. Unfortunately, Clinton wasn't the right person for the job."

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/thomas-jefferson-street/articles/2017-04-13/hillary-clintons-likability-problem-has-nothing-to-do-with-her-womanhood

"Labeling all of "us" a sexist mob like our beef with Hillary has to do more with her being a woman than our general fears about another moderate, left of center, establishment democrat in office isn't just unfair, it's a blinders-on-generalization to defend a flawed candidate. Proof of this is the simple fact that I and many Sanders supporters would vote for Elizabeth Warren if she were in the race over Hillary or Bernie. That's why there were dozens of petitions from thousands of progressive liberals urging her to run, and why there just as many now in hopes she becomes Sanders' vice president."

I Despise Hillary Clinton, And It Has Nothing To Do With Her Gender

Labeling all of "us" a sexist mob like our beef with Hillary has to do more with her being a woman than our general fears about another moderate, left of center, establishment democrat in office isn't just unfair, it's a blinders-on-generalization to defend a flawed candidate.

www.huffpost.com

Yeah, pure projection.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

There seems to be a lot of that about. Remember when people used to concede graciously? Ah, the good old days...

On that, we agree. Hillary never actually conceded. She just spoke words she didn't mean and went on to refute them every chance she has had for the past 4 years.

Now the last time we did see any gracious concession, back in 2012, Romney did concede to Obama.

 

[JustOneWay]

On that, we agree. Hillary never actually conceded. She just spoke words she didn't mean and went on to refute them every chance she has had for the past 4 years.

Now the last time we did see any gracious concession, back in 2012, Romney did concede to Obama.

Don't people actually TRY to find out the truth before posting here?
It isn't like this wasn't already posted here once!

Read Hillary Clinton's Concession Speech for the 2016 Presidential Election​

Read Hillary Clinton's Concession Speech for the 2016 Election

"This is painful and it will be for a long time."

time.com

"Last night, I congratulated Donald Trump and offered to work with him on behalf of our country. I hope that he will be a successful president for all Americans."

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Don't people actually to find out the truth before posting here?

Read Hillary Clinton's Concession Speech for the 2016 Presidential Election​

Read Hillary Clinton's Concession Speech for the 2016 Election

"This is painful and it will be for a long time."

time.com

"Last night, I congratulated Donald Trump and offered to work with him on behalf of our country. I hope that he will be a successful president for all Americans. This is not the outcome we wanted or we worked so hard for and I’m sorry that we did not win this election for the values we share and the vision we hold for our country."

As I stated, Hillary read words a day later, not the day she lost. I already acknowledged that.

And she continued to refute her words multiple times since, stating that the election was not on the level, that they didn't really know what happened there, and that Trump was an illegitimate President.

 

[JustOneWay]

As I stated, Hillary read words a day later, not the day she lost. I already acknowledged that.

And she continued to refute her words multiple times since, stating that the election was not on the level, that they didn't really know what happened there, and that Trump was an illegitimate President.

I understand that nothing Clinton did or does will satisfy you, but saying she did not concede is just a lie.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Don't people actually TRY to find out the truth before posting here?
It isn't like this wasn't already posted here once!

Read Hillary Clinton's Concession Speech for the 2016 Presidential Election​

Read Hillary Clinton's Concession Speech for the 2016 Election

"This is painful and it will be for a long time."

time.com

"Last night, I congratulated Donald Trump and offered to work with him on behalf of our country. I hope that he will be a successful president for all Americans."

Exactly: Don't people try to find out the truth, as I have stated and linked numerous times, as to how many times Hillary stated her election wasn't legitimate? As I stated, Hillary read words a day later, (not the day she lost.) I already acknowledged that.

And she continued to refute her words multiple times since, stating that the election was not on the level, that they didn't really know what happened there, and that Trump was an illegitimate President.

 

[DaisyDay]

I understand that nothing Clinton did or does will satisfy you, but saying she did not concede is just a lie.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Tell you what....if she drafts a law requiring this, I'll join you in objecting to it.

I doubt it.

Until then, this seems just a tongue in cheek comment, nothing more. She's entitled to her opinion, just like everyone else...why make more of it than that?

-- A2SG, believe me, I've heard MAGA people say worse things about her and democrats in general.....

I think this is a fair question....

Here's the answer I'd give.

Because ideas that are "floated" by Democrats 5-10 years ago are policy positions that Democrats are running on today.

Take race essentialism and racial hiring quotas 5-10 years ago. It got rebranded as "diversity, equity, and inclusion" and its practically a mainstay for the modern left and Democrats in general. Take a look at "support Palestinian freedom/decolonization/independence" and anyone can see the myriad forms of anti-semitic pro-violence demonstrations and protests across this country.

The left has a blindspot and deep seeded tolerance for its own fringe lunatics (see Antifa).

So why not just join the right now? Condemn this as a hideous idea, so anti-democratic that Hillary should be ashamed to have said it.

Because, again, the folks who can think for themselves have watched the great masses on the left buckle to peer pressure, shaming, threats of "cancelation" and mere rebranding of the worst ideas of our past as if they were onto something new and forward thinking.

I don't think we need to watch the division in this nation become any worse.

 

[DaisyDay]

The left has a blindspot and deep seeded tolerance for its own fringe lunatics (see Antifa).

"deep seated" (seeds are more often planted shallowly than deeply)

Antifa are antifascist, but does that make them "left"? I don't see more tolerance for Antifa from the left than tolerance for civil militias such are 3Percenters and Proud Boys on the right. In fact, I am unaware of lefties hiring Antifa for "security" as the right as done for the PBs and others like them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

"deep seated" (seeds are more often planted shallowly than deeply)

It's deep seated?

Antifa are antifascist, but does that make them "left"?

Well judging by those arrested....yes. There's lots of registered Democrats, children of Democrats, and I recall in one case of Antifa who assualted some marine veterans randomly on the street having direct ties to Democratic campaigns.

Here you go...

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

I don't see more tolerance for Antifa from the left than tolerance for civil militias such are 3Percenters and Proud Boys on the right. In fact, I am unaware of lefties hiring Antifa for "security" as the right as done for the PBs and others like them.

Well let's start off with what fascists do....

Sturmabteilung - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

The future SA developed by organizing and formalizing the groups of ex-soldiers and beer-hall brawlers who were to protect gatherings of the Nazi Party from disruptions from Social Democrats (SPD) and Communists (KPD), and to disrupt meetings of the other political parties.

So fascists use people to beat up political opponents and silence them.

I don't need to point out that Antifa does the same thing right?

This is part of the problem with the extremist left. They read the label but don't look in the box. Antifa= left wing fascists. Inclusive = we want to racially exclude people. And so on...

 

[stevil]

"deep seated" (seeds are more often planted shallowly than deeply)

Antifa are antifascist, but does that make them "left"? I don't see more tolerance for Antifa from the left than tolerance for civil militias such are 3Percenters and Proud Boys on the right. In fact, I am unaware of lefties hiring Antifa for "security" as the right as done for the PBs and others like them.

It is right wing propaganda, spread by right wing opinion show hosts and by right wing radio shock jockey's.
What the right are actually good at, is mischaracterisation, they come up with some nonesense about the left, like Antifa, like open borders, like socialism etc and they run that 24x7 across their channels and across all right wing propaganda networks.
Fox News says it, so a right wing supporter goes, Oh, Ok, maybe this is a thing.
They hear Hannity say it. Then Tucker, then Ingrahm, maybe Piro. They be like, Oh this is a big topic, how could those evil lefties be doing this to us.
Then they read it in Brietbart, then see it on OAN, then they hear it on all the talk back shows, then their family and friends and neighbours are all talking about it, then they see D Trump saying it, Jim Jeffries, Bannon, Alex Jones even the my Pillow guy, and then Guliani, etc, they get alerts on facebook, on instagram, on tic toc, all from right wing supporters saying what the left want.
So it must be true, right, it must be what the left wants.

But none of them asks anyone on the left, none of them seek sources showing what the Democratic party members are actually saying.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Conservatives disturbed by Clinton's call for 'deprogramming' Trump supporters: 'Pure authoritarianism'

Conservative social media users blasted former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after she floated the idea of "formally deprogramming" Trump supporters.

www.foxnews.com

At this point it seems hardwired.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

I stated accurately that she read the words of the speech written for her, a day later.

She just proceeded to say that her loss was illegitimate for years afterward.

 

[JustOneWay]

I stated accurately that she read the words of the speech written for her, a day later.

She just proceeded to say that her loss was illegitimate for years afterward.

Your comment was that she did not concede. She did regardless of saying whatever she said later. She did not take back the concession.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

You comment was that she did not concede. She did regardless of saying whatever she said later. She did not take back the concession.

Me, Post 192: "On that, we agree. Hillary never actually conceded. She just spoke words she didn't mean and went on to refute them every chance she has had for the past 4 years."

Let's say you apologized for something to someone, and then go on to say for years how you were actually wronged by this person, did you actually apologize? Or did you say words you didn't mean? I'm going to go with the latter.

The latter is the kind of thing politicians do...."mistakes were made", not "I did the wrong thing and I'm sorry".

 

[JustOneWay]

Me, Post 192: "On that, we agree. Hillary never actually conceded. She just spoke words she didn't mean and went on to refute them every chance she has had for the past 4 years."

Let's say you apologized for something to someone, and then go on to say for years how you were actually wronged by this person, did you actually apologize? Or did you say words you didn't mean? I'm going to go with the latter.

The latter is the kind of thing politicians do...."mistakes were made", not "I did the wrong thing and I'm sorry".

Nope. Sorry. She conceded. She did not take it back.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Nope. Sorry. She conceded. She did not take it back.

She read the concession speech and then REFUTED EVERY WORD FOR YEARS.

I'm going to call a spade a spade. My statement stands.

 

[JustOneWay]

She read the concession speech and then REFUTED EVERY WORD FOR YEARS.

I'm going to call a spade a spade. My statement stands.

No problem. You can wrongly believe what you want.

 

[DaisyDay]

She read the concession speech and then REFUTED EVERY WORD FOR YEARS.

This is simply nonfactual. It is clear that you have not listened to or read Clinton's speech.
Your specious claim that she had no hand in writing the speech is without merit, without evidence.

I'm going to call a spade a spade. My statement stands.

Sure, let it stand if that's what you really want. Here is an excerpt from her speech:

Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power and we don’t just respect that, we cherish it. It also enshrines other things; the rule of law, the principle that we are all equal in rights and dignity, freedom of worship and expression. We respect and cherish these values too and we must defend them.​

Your claim is that she has "REFUTED EVERY WORD FOR YEARS"; please show when and where she refuted the words above.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

This is simply nonfactual. It is clear that you have not listened to or read Clinton's speech.
Your specious claim that she had no hand in writing the speech is without merit, without evidence.

Sure, let it stand if that's what you really want. Here is an excerpt from her speech:

Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power and we don’t just respect that, we cherish it. It also enshrines other things; the rule of law, the principle that we are all equal in rights and dignity, freedom of worship and expression. We respect and cherish these values too and we must defend them.​

Your claim is that she has "REFUTED EVERY WORD FOR YEARS"; please show when and where she refuted the words above.

I don't know how many times it needs to be sourced. Obviously "refuted EVERY WORD" is hyperbole. She didn't refute and, but, or, for. or anything like that.

She did and still does refute her election loss, which is precisely the same thing; she refutes her concession speech. Just one of several examples, already previously sourced:

"You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you," she said to cheers on the Los Angeles stop of her "Evening with the Clintons" tour with her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

'You can have the election stolen from you,' Hillary Clinton warns 2020 Democrats

"You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you," Hillary Clinton said Saturday.

www.usatoday.com

Following her loss, Clinton notoriously alleged that the election was stolen from her, comparing it in a 2019 interview with CBS News to “applying for a job and getting 66 million letters of recommendation and losing to a corrupt human tornado.”


“He knows he’s an illegitimate president,” she said of Trump. “I believe he understands that the many varying tactics they used, from voter suppression and voter purging to hacking to the false stories — he knows that — there were just a bunch of different reasons why the election turned out like it did.”

Hillary Clinton: GOP has ‘plan to literally steal’ 2024 election

Hillary Clinton claimed right-wing Republicans “already have a plan” to steal the 2024 presidential election.

nypost.com

Oh...and the GOP is going to "steal" the 2024 election too, according to Hillary: “Right-wing extremists already have a plan to literally steal the next presidential election, and they’re not making a secret of it,” Clinton says in the Oct. 21 video from the progressive organization Indivisible.