Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on June 01, 2016, 02:14:43 PM
-
Why should she? Zero accountability. Her true believers don't care. And she is still likely to win.
Could Clinton go entire primary cycle without a press conference?
Published June 01, 2016
FoxNews.com
Hillary Clinton is getting called out by her campaign rivals – on both sides of the aisle – for not holding a press conference all year, part of what they maintain is a “scripted” approach by the Democratic presidential front-runner even as she comes close to locking down the nomination.
“I think there’s a lot of frustration among the media about her accessibility,” Jeff Weaver, campaign manager for Democratic rival Bernie Sanders, told Fox News on Wednesday.
The former secretary of state long has faced accusations of being closed off to the press, and maintains she wants to speak with the media. So far this year, aside from doing interviews, she has engaged reporters from time to time on the trail – the candidate answered some questions from reporters during a stop in Minneapolis in early March and another in Lexington, Ky., last month.
But her last substantial press conference was held Dec. 4 in Fort Dodge, Iowa – and even that involved a session with a small group of reporters.
That means the Democratic candidate, who nearly has earned enough delegates to clinch the nomination, hasn’t held an event approaching a formal press conference since voting began. With the primary elections mostly wrapping up next Tuesday, Clinton is poised to go the entire season without a formal press conference unless one is scheduled soon.
Presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump pointed out Clinton’s record on this front after being criticized Tuesday over his spirited press conference in New York – where he lashed out at his media critics and even called one journalist a “sleaze”
Clinton told CNN on Tuesday, when asked about not holding a press conference in months, that “we will” hold one.
“I believe that we do and we should answer questions. Of course, I'm going to,” Clinton said.
She defended her record with the press, saying she’s done “nearly 300 interviews just in 2016 and I believe that it's important to continue to, you know, speak to the press as I'm doing right now.”
But Trump has held several extended and freewheeling press conferences this year, including on big election nights. Tuesday’s bout at Trump Tower -- called to detail the list of veteran groups receiving donations from a Trump-hosted fundraiser after questions were raised about the money – was just the most contentious.
Sanders, too, has held campaign press conferences including one Wednesday in California.
Weaver told Fox News that the Vermont senator holds sessions with reporters “all the time.”
“The secretary has a much more scripted program,” he said.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/06/01/could-clinton-go-entire-primary-cycle-without-press-conference.html?intcmp=hpbt1
-
repubs ran a blowhard douche, so she can win by appearing only slightly less douche-y.
this week we learned Trump waited 2 months to pay a charity, and only after WPost ran an expose on it. We also learned his trump school was shady as shit.
this week, we learned hilary hasn't done enough press conferences to make her haters happy.
-
Hillary doesn't do full blown press conferences because she is always accessible to the press and does small press briefings ALL THE TIME...she has no need to do the big Press conferences ....besides people already know everything there is to know about her
-
Hitlery cant do a press conference because she knows it will be dominated by questions of her crimes, lies, scandals, etc.
She figures let Trump take the heat for his bs while possibly her own criminality blows over.
-
Hillary doesn't do full blown press conferences because she is always accessible to the press and does small press briefings ALL THE TIME...she has no need to do the big Press conferences ....besides people already know everything there is to know about her
Agreed. Her positions on almost all the issues are very well known and have been for a long time. She speaks to the press and the public routinely in venues like Meet the Press, with campaign/political reporters, or even in Congressional investigations/testimony. No one in America is saying "I'm undecided and need to know more about where Clinton is on the issues... she needs to speak to reporters more often."
::)
-
Agreed. Her positions on almost all the issues are very well known and have been for a long time. She speaks to the press and the public routinely in venues like Meet the Press or with other campaign/political reporters. No one in America is saying "I'm undecided and need to know more about where Clinton is on the issues... she needs to speak to reporters more often."
::)
Oh really? Which issues would that be?
-
-
-
-
plus just about EVERY event these days is filled with protesters and hecklers and of course, attendees beating the shit out of protesters.
she starts talking, you'll have 5 people screaming benghazi.
-
-
-
Agreed. Her positions on almost all the issues are very well known and have been for a long time. She speaks to the press and the public routinely in venues like Meet the Press, with campaign/political reporters, or even in Congressional investigations/testimony. No one in America is saying "I'm undecided and need to know more about where Clinton is on the issues... she needs to speak to reporters more often."
::)
Good points
-
Good points
People want to know about her lies on Benghazi and and looming criminal indictment as well as whether she really in fact did off Vince Foster.
-
What does it mean for her to claim a position, though? She'll stand like a zombie and frown "I am for the middle class." But then she'll work to undermine them, so...
Which is it?
She's a dangerous flake, at best.
-
People want to know about her lies on Benghazi and and looming criminal indictment as well as whether she really in fact did off Vince Foster.
Stop making a fool of yourself. Please.
Our friend Ken Starr spent 5 years and about 70 million dollars investigating both Clintons and came up empty.
Foster own sister said this was nonsense:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/vince-foster-was-my-brother-donald-trump-should-be-ashamed/2016/05/26/95c684f2-233f-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html
And now somewhat chastened even Trump is backing away from the Foster nonsense:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/05/26/trump-says-vince-foster-should-not-be-mentioned-on-campaign-trail-unless-new-info-surfaces/
-
What does it mean for her to claim a position, though? She'll stand like a zombie and frown "I am for the middle class." But then she'll work to undermine them, so...
Which is it?
She's a dangerous flake, at best.
Perhaps, but one thing we know she won't do: she won't take the country into a totally unnecessary war killing thousands of U.S. servicemen, wounding tens of thousands, overloading the VA system, and wasting 2-3 trillion dollars... plunging our economy into a great recession. On the continuum of who or what is "dangerous" I'll take her over Trump any day (or Bush, Rubio, Cruz, Fiorina, etc).
-
Perhaps, but one thing we know she won't do: she won't take the country into a totally unnecessary war killing thousands of U.S. servicemen, wounding tens of thousands, overloading the VA system, and wasting 2-3 trillion dollars... plunging our economy into a great recession. On the continuum of who or what is "dangerous" I'll take her over Trump any day (or Bush, Rubio, Cruz, Fiorina, etc).
She voted for Iraq war remember?
-
She voted for Iraq war remember?
trump supported the war too. he also said he was against it. Taking both sides on every issue keeps everyone happy.
(http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x89/edwardbayntun/gifs/ArnieRave.gif)
-
She voted for Iraq war remember?
Lots of people voted for the war. That is not the same as initiating it based on your own agenda... which is exactly what Bush/Cheney did. If you had family members serving in the military or deployed over seas you would not be so quick to see their lives thrown away.
By the way, why you back on this board? Didn't you run away crying to the moderators that you were being picked on after promising to leave? Or was that someone else? ::)
-
Perhaps, but one thing we know she won't do: she won't take the country into a totally unnecessary war killing thousands of U.S. servicemen, wounding tens of thousands, overloading the VA system, and wasting 2-3 trillion dollars... plunging our economy into a great recession. On the continuum of who or what is "dangerous" I'll take her over Trump any day (or Bush, Rubio, Cruz, Fiorina, etc).
Oh, no. I absolutely disagree. She is a neo-con, and we have that very evil "philosophy" to blame for 99% of the problems in this country, including the scams masquerading as war.
She's a troublemaker, man. A guy like you should have been backing Bernie over her, especially if you want to beat Trump (as you say).
-
Yeah, the GWB administration was delivered straight from Hell. Cannot disagree one bit. Pure evil.
-
Oh, no. I absolutely disagree. She is a neo-con, and we have that very evil "philosophy" to blame for 99% of the problems in this country, including the scams masquerading as war.
She's a troublemaker, man. A guy like you should have been backing Bernie over her, especially if you want to beat Trump (as you say).
Gays love her because she is a lezbo. No other reason.
-
Gays love her because she is a lezbo. No other reason.
No, I mean that he is intelligent (clearly) and there is absolutely NO legitimate reason to back Hillary.
-
No, I mean that he is intelligent (clearly) and there is absolutely NO legitimate reason to back Hillary.
There is - gays like Bay love her because they see her as a persecuted nasty ass ugly lezbo. its not issues at all.
-
There is - gays like Bay love her because they see her as a persecuted nasty ass ugly lezbo. its not issues at all.
Lmao, yeah. She's going to present that card at some point, I'm pretty sure.
-
Lmao, yeah. She's going to present that card at some point, I'm pretty sure.
She already is - she said the other day people tell her they wont vote for her because she is a woman. GMAFB
People wont vote for her because she is a C U NT! and a lying snake and pos reptile scumbag
-
Oh, no. I absolutely disagree. She is a neo-con, and we have that very evil "philosophy" to blame for 99% of the problems in this country, including the scams masquerading as war.
She's a troublemaker, man. A guy like you should have been backing Bernie over her, especially if you want to beat Trump (as you say).
"She's a troublemaker"? That is your thoughtful critique? I hope you can do better... in life... if not on this board.
President Obama respected her enough to place her in his cabinet and he will certainly support her candidacy. That is good enough for me.
As for Senator Sanders? No. Not even close.
Sanders has not raised money for Democratic races; he does not have a constituency within Congress; despite his thirty plus years in public life only one Senator has recently endorsed him. That is very telling! Without supporters in Congress there is no way he could execute the “revolution” he repeatedly talks about. Even his talk is problematic. “Free college” is one example. As we all know: NOTHING IS FREE. What he is really talking about is subsidized (public) education. All the money to fund that education cannot and would not come from taxing Wall Street; eventually we would all pay higher taxes to enable the “free” college that Sanders casually mentions—and he should say so. By the way, college should not be free. Students should have financial skin in the game. Certainly, no one should be graduating with six figure debts for an undergraduate degree, but when you think about what young people are willing to borrow for a new car, I see nothing wrong with a student loan of $10k or $20k. I graduated with more than that (since paid it off) and see nothing wrong with reasonable student loan debt.
The real problem with Sanders’ candidacy is that he, himself, is not versed in any of the details on how to execute the revolution he is calling for--despite his long tenure in Congress. For example, when specifically asked in interviews how he would break up the banks... what that would look like... how it would ripple through our economy... contingencies for unintended consequences... etc. he spoke haltingly, stammered . . . and ultimately could not answer the question. This is one of the central pillars of his campaign, but he can not talk about it in any meaningful detail; all he offers is generalities. The real world does not work that way. You have to be able to drill down into the nitty gritty... Sanders has never demonstrated a capacity to do that. I get his avuncular appeal; he has not been under public assault from the GOP for the last 25 years so he appears pristine, but the man simply has not done his homework and is nowhere near ready to serve as President. I would support both Martin O'Malley (Maryland Governor) and Jim Webb (Senator from VA) ahead of Bernie Sanders.
-
President Obama respected her enough to place her in his cabinet and he will certainly support her candidacy. That is good enough for me.
Um, what?
-
And Sanders knows he has the power of the pulpit. That is perhaps the strongest tool to be had, under direction of the right person.
-
So your choice is to have someone who will communicate the truth versus someone who will run from it.
Which will it be?
-
Lots of people voted for the war. That is not the same as initiating it based on your own agenda... which is exactly what Bush/Cheney did. If you had family members serving in the military or deployed over seas you would not be so quick to see their lives thrown away.
By the way, why you back on this board? Didn't you run away crying to the moderators that you were being picked on after promising to leave? Or was that someone else? ::)
False.
-
Um, what?
Right? Obama respected Hillary? Uh, no.
-
Right? Obama respected Hillary? Uh, no.
Maybe he's trying to break the record for the most 'wrong' in a single post.
-
It really surprises me to see so many people like BayGBM and Prime being dragged along, unaware of their surroundings, by a party that's completely out of control. You guys have abandoned the ideas that make a true liberal, just because your TV and favorite internet sources have told you to do it.
In other words, you've allowed the bad guys to butcher the definition and you've helped turn it into an undesirable thing.
And now you're about to put Hillary in the WH.
-
Maybe he's trying to break the record for the most 'wrong' in a single post.
That's what partisans do. Lots of blind spots.
-
Hilary finally got on the mic today. Attacked trump pretty harshly. I bet repubs regret egging her into speaking. I don't think anyone has attacked Trump as aggressively as Hilary did today.
-
People want to know about her lies on Benghazi and and looming criminal indictment as well as whether she really in fact did off Vince Foster.
I don't know who is crazier, you or Trump...really odd timing that you came back to Getbig at the same time when Trump is at his craziest!!!!! ;D ;D
-
BTW, of course Obama will endorse Hillary. He was GWB Administration II and she'll be III. That's the problem.