What Should Hillary Do?

[donquixote99]

The thesis of this thread is that Trump is an unqualified disaster, and we must be desperately concerned that he stands in very possible striking distance of the presidency. Further, the contest is between Trump and Clinton--one of these two, and no other, will be the next president. The questions: why is the outcome still in doubt, and what should be done?

Step one: read a couple of columns by conservative pundits who seem to sincerely wish to help. First, this from Charles Krauthammer, who points out how easily and well the Trump campaign has succeeded in countering the "disqualify Trump" strategy of his opponents.

Hillary Sharpens, Trump Softens: Sept 16, 2016

OK, next up is Bill Kristol. The headline here states the thesis quite well:

"Risky To Bet On Disqualifying Donald Trump," Clinton Campaign Needs To Make A Positive Case For Hillary

Together these two make the case for what several here have been saying: attacking Trump won't work, a positive case for Hillary is needed. Agreed? If so, how shall it be made?

[Tom Joad]

There is no positive case for Hillary.

That's the problem.

[sheltiedave]

According to the State Department, Hillary Clinton, the most-traveled Secretary of State in history visited 112 countries during her four-year tenure, traversing 956,733 miles — enough to span the globe more than 38 times — and spending 401 total days on the road.

Trump cannot argue facts. Trump also cannot argue relationships, the only one he has is a fairly good one with Putin.

Rather than argue against Trump, Hilary should stress the years of dedicated service she has provided to childrens' issues, and as SOS.

If she wants to attack Trump, hit him up for his dreadful business practices. Take Atlantic City casinos, and compare /contrast how his businesses functioned in paying their bills vs. another similarly sized contract for another Atlantic City company. There is a reason Trump companies have a fifteen fold higher rate of liens and nonpayments and contested payments.

Trump's business practices are a huge piñata hanging in the air, and it baffles me that Hillary does not attack him at his pride and joy. He cares two figs about his political stances, but he dearly loves his billionaire shticht. Kick him in the balls, and turn him into a raging bull early in the debates.

[whell]

Originally Posted by sheltiedave

According to the State Department, Hillary Clinton, the most-traveled Secretary of State in history visited 112 countries during her four-year tenure, traversing 956,733 miles — enough to span the globe more than 38 times — and spending 401 total days on the road.

Trump cannot argue facts. Trump also cannot argue relationships, the only one he has is a fairly good one with Putin.

Rather than argue against Trump, Hilary should stress the years of dedicated service she has provided to childrens' issues, and as SOS.

If she wants to attack Trump, hit him up for his dreadful business practices. Take Atlantic City casinos, and compare /contrast how his businesses functioned in paying their bills vs. another similarly sized contract for another Atlantic City company. There is a reason Trump companies have a fifteen fold higher rate of liens and nonpayments and contested payments.

Trump's business practices are a huge piñata hanging in the air, and it baffles me that Hillary does not attack him at his pride and joy. He cares two figs about his political stances, but he dearly loves his billionaire shticht. Kick him in the balls, and turn him into a raging bull early in the debates.

Congratulations. I've never seen so many memes packed into a single post.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by sheltiedave

According to the State Department, Hillary Clinton, the most-traveled Secretary of State in history visited 112 countries during her four-year tenure, traversing 956,733 miles — enough to span the globe more than 38 times — and spending 401 total days on the road.

Yep, she has been a big player in the political establishment that the majority of voters are totally fed up with.

That's why she's going to lose.

[bobabode]

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...ucks/90525532/

Clinton campaign registers voters at taco trucks in Detroit.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

Yep, she has been a big player in the political establishment that the majority of voters are totally fed up with.

That's why she's going to lose.

Tom the destruction of the political establishment with all this naive nattering about transparency is what has made our politics so bloody insane. To start with the average American is not adult enough to cope with political transparency. As long as we have a two party system, as opposed to a no party system that the Framers wanted, we absolutely need the political machines. Otherwise there is absolutely no way to discipline the pols.

[sheltiedave]

Why thank you very much. Now back to the regularly scheduled discussion, avoiding putdowns. Whell, Trump can't name all the capitals in Europe. I was there for that bet, at a dinner ten years ago.

Trump has never served in the Senate. Hillary has, and she garnered the respect and friendship of many senators from both sides of the aisle.

Please refute the factoid I have read about Trump's lien rates in the casinos, or any of his publicized nonpayments and contested payments. Please point out his source of business loans for the past ten years.

Trump has a barest ephemeral grasp of international affairs, diplomacy, and use of military force. He has never held a single elected office in government service, and would not even be able to be elected to a condo association BOG, with his suave mien.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

The thesis of this thread is that Trump is an unqualified disaster, and we must be desperately concerned that he stands in very possible striking distance of the presidency. Further, the contest is between Trump and Clinton--one of these two, and no other, will be the next president. The questions: why is the outcome still in doubt, and what should be done?

Step one: read a couple of columns by conservative pundits who seem to sincerely wish to help. First, this from Charles Krauthammer, who points out how easily and well the Trump campaign has succeeded in countering the "disqualify Trump" strategy of his opponents.

Hillary Sharpens, Trump Softens: Sept 16, 2016

OK, next up is Bill Kristol. The headline here states the thesis quite well:

"Risky To Bet On Disqualifying Donald Trump," Clinton Campaign Needs To Make A Positive Case For Hillary
the
Together these two make the case for what several here have been saying: attacking Trump won't work, a positive case for Hillary is needed. Agreed? If so, how shall it be made?

Agree that a positive case must be made but considering the nature of corporate controlled media these days and their appetite for click bait headlines and the old 'if it bleeds it leads' mindset I don't think they have any intention of fulfilling their duties as the 'Fourth Estate'.

FWIW, here's an article I was just reading at The Atlantic. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...nsboro/500243/

[sheltiedave]

TJ, the majority does not really matter. In this election, the winner of the plurality of voters in the largest states will walk into the White House as the new president.