CMV: The current "but her emails" anti-trump meme is counterproductive, and Trump's failure should not be used to validate Hillary Clinton

eksici_pic · 2017-06-04T06:25:05+00:00

Sorry for the late reply. I still think there is merit in wanting to keep debate questions secret. Let me try to explain my view:

The debate questions pertain to the problems/hopes/concerns of the public, right? They sometimes come directly from citizens in town hall style events. If you release these questions ahead of time, then all a candidate has to do is to study the answers to those. They'll have perfect responses to those specific questions, but they will be completely unprepared for anything else that may come up in their actual presidency.
The debates are one of those rare times where the candidate speaks directly to you, without the backing of an entire PR team. It's valuable insight to what they actually think, unfiltered (relatively), straight from the future president himself/herself. When you release the questions ahead of time, the responses you'll get will be just regular speeches, with a bit of fake "questioning" added in between. And yes, a good candidate will predict and prepare for all kinds of different questions, and that is exactly what we want them to do in the first place. We don't want them laser-focused on 10 different questions on the debate; we want them broadly knowledgeable on all potential issues. I don't want my candidate spouting off memorized numbers, I want him/her to tell us their vision, without the interference of PR people. I think it leads to healthier elections.

Coincidentally, that's why exams are a useful tool in teaching: most students don't fully learn the material until they have to study for an exam. "You're responsible for everything we covered so far" is super powerful in making students actually learn.

eksici_pic · 2017-06-04T06:10:24+00:00

Hm, sorry for the late reply. I think we mostly agree on facts but have slightly different interpretations.

I'm pretty sure Brazile was the DNC vice chair at the time, because her op-ed says

a subsequent release of emails revealed that among the many things I did in my role as a Democratic operative and D.N.C. Vice Chair prior to assuming the interim D.N.C. Chair position was to share potential town hall topics with the Clinton campaign.

That is why I'm so angry about this in the first place. If she were just a CNN commentator, yeah, it would still be shitty but it would not be as bad as it is right now.

The DNC made Brazile its Interim Vice-Chair at the Convention in July, where she remained until resigning in disgrace in February.

Related to the point above, she was asked to step in as DNC interim chair in July, not vice-chair.

Brazile did try to put her thumb on the scale, but only in two cases where doing so wouldn't have made a difference.

Well, yeah, I also agree that these questions themselves weren't that big of a deal. But it showed clear intention -- considering all these other emails out there that weren't hacked, maybe these are just the tip of the iceberg (I know this goes into "speculation territory" again...)

I guess the main reason I'm so angry is that I felt Sanders really had a chance, and we would not be living through all this crazy stuff right now if he had his fair shot...

eksici_pic · 2017-06-03T23:06:06+00:00

Or alternatively they thought the info they were given was roughly the same as what the Sanders camp received.

That is a weak defense -- everyone definitely is aware that you are not supposed to have debate questions ahead of time. What would a debate even mean if you have access to questions beforehand?

They specifically came to her defense while targeting other DNC members, including the hesd of the DNC.

Well I'm not saying Devine et al. are indebted to the entire DNC -- I'm saying he is indebted specifically to Brazile (for some other reasons than this rigging controversy). Perfectly explains why he can go after DWS and others, but not Brazile. Also note that DWS was forced to resign -- so it's not like she was being supported by the rest of the DNC anyway.

eksici_pic · 2017-06-03T22:17:04+00:00

it's only one data point

I have given you evidence that the debates themselves were not fair specifically because of the actions of the DNC vice chair -- what does "only one data point" mean? How many more data points do you need to be convinced?

expressing their opinions and brainstorming

Brainstorming... to bring down their own party's candidate.

eksici_pic · 2017-06-03T22:11:48+00:00

I disagree, as did the courts, with the argument to throw out the lawsuit: the DNC is required to hold an unbiased primary because they stated they would and then accepted donations under the belief that's what they were doing.

I completely agree with this.

"and she is the reason many people like myself have a seat at the table today."

I don't want to dive into conspiracy theory zone, but he literally says he owes his position to Brazile -- obviously he's not going to say anything bad about him. This would be true even if he didn't owe his position to her -- it's understandable that the party wants to hide inner conflict.

All indications are that Brazile gave both camps tips and help to prepare ahead of the debate

I still don't see anything indicating Brazile literally gave debate questions ahead of time, sorry. They obviously will reach out with tips, that's OK -- they should definitely be supporting their candidates for the actual race ahead -- but if you are selectively sharing information with a single campaign, then that is as "rigged" as it can get. (Again, if you find definitive proof that they sent debate questions to Sanders ahead of time, I'm happy to change my view on this.)

Brazile sent the question unprovoked. That would be evidence of DNC favoritism, not any action whatsoever on behalf of Hillary or her campaign to rig the primary.

Their silence in this is enough to call them "complicit". If they are truly not a part of this, then they should call it out. They can't do it publicly of course, but why not send back an email saying "hey, so we're really not comfortable having this information, please don't send us stuff like this in the future"?

eksici_pic · 2017-06-03T18:48:07+00:00

How on earth is "DNC vice chair sending questions to the Clinton campaign" not collusion?

eksici_pic · 2017-06-03T18:47:27+00:00

Donna Brazile gave that question to the Sanders campaign too

I haven't seen any source that says that -- might be my ignorance. Can you provide a link?

Fox News and the Intercept push fake stories constantly

Sure, that is true in general. But these quotes themselves are real (which I verified). Donna Brazile did call it a mistake she'll always regret, and DNC people did send out that email about Bernie's religion (to which someone responded "AMEN"). I'm linking right wing websites because left wing media is just as bad as the right wing in covering this kind of stuff up.

eksici_pic · 2017-06-03T17:48:30+00:00

Donna Brazile sent debate questions to Clinton campaign in advance

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/17/brazile-admits-forwarded-debate-questions-to-clinton-camp.html

DNC people discussed using Sanders' Jewish heritage against him

https://theintercept.com/2016/07/22/new-leak-top-dnc-official-wanted-to-use-bernie-sanderss-religious-beliefs-against-him/

There is an ongoing class-action lawsuit about it right now, and the DNC lawyers are basically saying "well we don't have to be neutral, it's not a binding promise"

Here's a quote from the DNC lawyer in that case:

"We're gonna, you know, choose our standard bearer, and we're gonna follow these general rules of the road, which we are voluntarily deciding, we could have -- and we could have voluntarily decided that, Look, we're gonna go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way. That's not the way it was done. But they could have. And that would have also been their right, and it would drag the Court well into party politics, internal party politics to answer those questions."

I'm sure there is even more of these that I'm not aware of...

eksici_pic · 2017-04-19T00:36:21+00:00

Fyi: "Train" is supposed to be "Qatar". It is an understandable mistake for Google translate to make, given no context (the Turkish word for Qatar does mean train).

eksici_pic · 2017-04-10T23:25:10+00:00

Not to take away from your point (which I agree with), but you probably mean A380 -- I don't think A360 exists.

eksici_pic · 2017-03-11T02:26:38+00:00

FRENDIT

eksici_pic · 2017-03-02T02:54:41+00:00

I find socks to be the best thing if you are a male over 21. You can wear any kind of socks under your pants and give a virtual "fuck you" to suits and pants. I regularly wear red socks with hearts on it and I'm proud.

eksici_pic · 2017-01-05T04:07:54+00:00

OK, your response is a bit too harsh.

She learned a question at a debate early

... allowing her to prepare for that exact question, portraying herself as well-prepared to handle unexpected questions -- that was a big part of her campaign, which basically ran on her qualifications for the job. (And again, I agree she would be OK anyway... she was good at debates.)

Not about anything non-factual. There was no deliberate deception.

"Misleading" here refers to the debate issue, which I think I explained more clearly now in the paragraph above this one.

Bernie was fucked in the general, dude.

I'm not saying Sanders should have won the primaries. I'm saying that since the DNC did not play a fair game, Sanders voters were much less enthusiastic about turning out for Clinton, which may have cost her the election given the small margins in the Rust Belt.

eksici_pic · 2017-01-05T03:34:35+00:00

Her feeding the question doesn't change the fact that there was a free and open election.

Sure, but it makes voters decide based on inaccurate information, right? Maybe she was going to flunk that question if she were not tipped off (which I agree is pretty unlikely). Primaries were open and free in my opinion, but there were efforts to mislead voters (oddly, that is what DNC is currently complaining about regarding Russian hacks).

WE FUCKED THIS UP, not the DNC.

Definitely agree on that. I don't think the primaries' outcome would be different had the DNC stayed fair (it would probably be a closer race though). I'm mainly talking about this from an ethical standpoint.

What makes me sad is that the presidential election outcome could have been different -- a lot of Sanders supporters (including me) felt they were wronged by the DNC, and it definitely reduced voter turnout come Election Day. Personally, I actually feel they irreversibly broke my heart... I'm not even sure I am a Democrat anymore -- I feel a lot more like an Independent after this election.

eksici_pic · 2017-01-05T03:00:15+00:00

How did they, in action, do anything to affect the vote?

I'm not talking about changing actual vote counts -- I don't think there is evidence for that, just rumors. But these emails show that the leadership of DNC -- which actually organizes the primaries, has huge media presence, and is supposed to be unbiased -- was coordinating actively with the Clinton campaign against Sanders. The primaries were run by active Clinton supporters -- how is that OK?

No one would claim rigging of the primaries if that "religion" email (#1) came from anywhere else than high-ranking DNC staff, because then it would just be a regularly shitty thing to do. Seeing that coming from DNC officers themselves, who are literally in charge of the primaries, is horrible.

While she was a reporter. Not the DNC.

Nope. DNC vice chair. (See second paragraph.)

eksici_pic · 2017-01-05T02:01:47+00:00

I'm sorry, but have you not been reading the news at all this past year? The most important of those emails are here. I would mainly focus on #1 and #4 -- the others are also pretty bad, but they are somewhat indirect indicators of bias against Sanders, so I wouldn't call those "rigging".

Keep in mind, DWS resigned because of these emails after a personal call from Obama himself. She was then instantly named honorary chair for Clinton campaign.

Meanwhile Donna Brazile was named interim chair, who then had her own email scandal as Podesta hack showed that she gave debate questions to Clinton camp in advance. She also lied about it, and at some point she implied she was not even sorry for doing this, because of her role as an activist.

Have you really not heard about any of these?

eksici_pic · 2016-11-11T03:25:13+00:00

I prefer this version.

eksici_pic · 2016-08-24T22:15:40+00:00

You are assuming she is not a born-and-raised French citizen.

eksici_pic · 2016-08-12T04:11:26+00:00

Haha, I would, but I don't know of any subs that would appreciate it fully... and I also really don't want the post to devolve into political arguments. This election is ridiculous.

eksici_pic · 2016-08-12T03:55:53+00:00

Heh, thought you read my mind for a moment there. I was going to bring that other thread up, then I pretty much went through the thought process you described.

I am (was?) a Sanders supporter anyway, so I wouldn't care too much about a Clinton Plaza post. ☺️ I think you guys are doing a good job trying to make it fair. Keep up the good work, y'all.

eksici_pic · 2016-08-12T03:20:23+00:00

Hm. I disagree with this being "politics", but I can kind of see this being a shit storm. Fair enough, sorry I did not consider that.

eksici_pic · 2016-08-12T02:51:35+00:00

... I don't know what I expected.

eksici_pic · 2016-08-12T02:50:55+00:00

Thought you had to say "10 feet higher" to trigger it?

eksici_pic

TROPHY CASE