Politico: 'Who knows? She could implode totally'

[LiberalElite]

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/hillary-clinton-2016-democrat-alarmed-by-emal-scandal-115814.html

"Three days into the rolling controversy over Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email address as Secretary of State, Democrats are showing signs of stress.

In interviews with more than three dozen Democratic activists, donors, and officials from across the country — including many in the influential presidential nominating states of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina — some were scathing in their criticism over the revelations, while others admitted to being unnerved."

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

1. Sun could explode and we could all die, too

The right wants to destroy Hillary...

That is all anyone needs to know.

[Maedhros]

5. Um...no.

There are plenty of things we need to know about Hillary's policies before we should vote for her.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

6. What could you learn about her position that would make you vote for someone else

in the November election?

[L0oniX]

8. How dare you even suggest we should know more. She is the oligarchy pick for 2016 ...damn it!

[still_one]

2. politico was started by a bunch of regeanites, and rebukes, and their insight as usual is full of

shit

[LiberalElite]

7. Can you please enlighten me

as to what sites were started by the wrong people, e.g. reaganites and which were started by the right ones? No, I didn't forget the sarcasm thingy - I mean it sincerely, - because I've posted links and then been told it's from the bad guys so it's no good. Guess I haven't been paying attention.

Despite posting on a basically political discussion board, I'm just not as into politics as a lot of people here so I don't know.

[aspirant]

10. It's a silly game.

Fox news and Druggie Limbaugh started the criticism and then they figured out if THEY claim a link is repub your argument implodes without them having to invest time in actual debate.

Solution; Ignore the slinky linky and just write IMO. Quoting another person's article is just their opinion and your opinion is just as valuable.

[LiberalElite]

11. Ah. Ok Thank you.

[aspirant]

13. Look at the reply you got.

No debating, just trying to label you as a RWer. Check out his/her profile and you'll see he/she posts at the HRC Group, any bias there? HRCG has banned 37 DUers including 2 of our hosts.

Don't let them run you around in circles until the main point is lost in all the confusion. You can Google the repub rag sites and find that they support the Iraq War and the TPP. Then check out HRC stances and BINGO you have a match. See how easy it is?

Step above this foolery, no more looking over your shoulders. Read the information, assimilate it and present your opinion from your heart. People will feel it and if they have similar thoughts, they will respond.

Happy Trails

[Enthusiast]

14. Me too.

Banned I mean.

[still_one]

12. Here are some links

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Ryan


http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rachel-maddow-says-politico-is-effectively-the-romney-campaigns-campaign-newsletter/

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

3. The only way she 'implodes' is if

someone comes across a 'smoking gun' email. And I've got to think that no such email was going to be allowed to get handed over to State or anyone else if indeed it ever existed. They can't just play the 'she mighta' game and expect this to sink her. They'd have to actually find something. 'She mighta' indeed, but without proof, it's just another another thing to slide off the Teflon Clintons.

[valerief]

4. Says the RW rag. nt

[hopemountain]

9. i have a true respect for the way she handled the press conference today

beginning with a rebuke of the 47 traitors.
she served the president and our nation well as secretary of state.
it is ridiculous how the rethugs want blood and her personal emails - sheesh. for all of our sake, they better not get them. every appointed member of someone's cabinet is vetted for integrity and honesty to reflect the standards of the elected commander & chief. we know what liars the bush administration turned out to be & it is a reflection of their entire administration. however, president obama's administration has shown otherwise & i expect she has proven herself as sos under president obama.

hope she has some competition at the primaries and a debate - because i do see her as a war hawk and a wall street/corporate supporter and i want to hear from her on issues of war, wall street, the environment, social security, education, etc. because i consider myself a socialist democrat.

however, if she wins the primary, i will vote for her. i will NEVER give my vote away to a candidate from another party again if it means giving my vote to a lying, repiglican, again.

[Cosmic Kitten]

15. Do you accept her "convenient" explanation?

I found her explanation wanting.
Poor Hillary couldn't handle TWO devices?
Maybe if she had a staff to carry her books
and dial her phones she wouldn't be so burdened?

Maybe it's just the demands of office are too much?
Maybe asking one person to keep their personal
and professional emails separate is a bridge to far?

Maybe such laziness, entitlement and colossal arrogance
is unworthy of the office of President?

I know MANY people who have far more demands
put upon them to keep their jobs, beyond keeping
their email sorted, or having two phones!

Hillary doesn't seem to want to be President?
Anyone who can't be trusted or have the motivation
to sort business from pleasure communications
is NOT presidential material!

[hopemountain]

18. yes i do & this is why:

based on her stellar service as secretary of state. period.

i am not as cynical as some people about every f'in detail of someone's personal emails. - it is not my business as long as she was doing a good job. what could they possibly be hiding? her discussion with confidants about whether to run for president? personal opinions about members of congress, other dept staff, or even our president? discussions or considerations are part of the process in decision making and it is none of our business until a final decision is made and put into action in some way.

what is wrong with our country? too many people and systems to not trust. yet, some trust is necessary for progress with any process.
in addition, too many people are relying on msm and what others say. i think there is great value and validity to knowing one's own truth and being able to recognize by instinct. lots of people have lost touch with acknowledging and valuing their instincts - a critical component of creativity and progress. at the age of 3 i could recognize dangerous people or places. i learned to listen to that part of me and trust it.

[Cosmic Kitten]

16. The article raises legitimate concerns.

It's interesting how the pro-Hillary folks
are dismissive and patronizing towards
the general electorate.

[hopemountain]

19. patronizing vs dismissively condescending judment

it's interesting how anti hillary folks do not look in the mirror.

[Eleanors38]

17. She's a slow leaky freighter in submarine waters even without her device Accts. nt