Hillary Clinton Paradox

[Raider5678]

6 hours ago, Ten oz said:

That includes the several million people stripped by our criminal justice system.

I've discussed this issue several times at national conferences, and the general consensus eventually came to the conclusion of no for numerous reasons. It's off topic, so if you want to discuss I'm more then willing to provide the opinions of hundreds of people around the country, but I lean towards it being a questionable idea as well. Not a terrible one, and probably one I'd support given caveats, but I'd need your specific opinion on this to decide if I supported your idea.

[Ten oz]

10 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

I've discussed this issue several times at national conferences, and the general consensus eventually came to the conclusion of no for numerous reasons. It's off topic, so if you want to discuss I'm more then willing to provide the opinions of hundreds of people around the country, but I lean towards it being a questionable idea as well. Not a terrible one, and probably one I'd support given caveats, but I'd need your specific opinion on this to decide if I supported your idea.

If a person is allowed to work, drive, have insurance, buy property, pay taxes, and etc why shouldn't they be able to vote? I see it as taxation without representation.

I started a thread on this topic in the past. You can elaborate there if you'd like. Here

 

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

I've discussed this issue several times at national conferences, and the general consensus eventually came to the conclusion of no for numerous reasons. It's off topic, so if you want to discuss I'm more then willing to provide the opinions of hundreds of people around the country, but I lean towards it being a questionable idea as well. Not a terrible one, and probably one I'd support given caveats, but I'd need your specific opinion on this to decide if I supported your idea.

Which national conferences?

 

[Ten oz]

On 10/21/2018 at 8:22 AM, Raider5678 said:

What can we do to prevent this cognitive bias from entering into politics?

 

On 10/21/2018 at 3:24 PM, Raider5678 said:

I've discussed this issue several times at national conferences, and the general consensus eventually came to the conclusion of no for numerous reasons. It's off topic, so if you want to discuss I'm more then willing to provide the opinions of hundreds of people around the country, but I lean towards it being a questionable idea as well. Not a terrible one, and probably one I'd support given caveats, but I'd need your specific opinion on this to decide if I supported your idea.

So we have addressed the issue of Felon disenfranchisement and at least agree that once out of prison everyone should allowed to vote. 

From gerrymandering, voter suppression, to felon disenfranchisement too often politicians are in a position to influence who gets to vote rather than vice versa. The result is the general public at large often feeling disconnected or that their votes don't matter. When people don't understand what is going on they aren't in a position to make informed decisions and biases become larger drivers. Just think about how crazy it is that Trump paid off a Pron star, won't show his taxes, was name a criminal co-conspirator to felonies by his former personal lawyer, has been has 19 pending sexual misconduct allegations, on tape saying "grab them by the", and etc yet people broadly feel it is Hillary Clinton with too much baggage to run in 2020. How does that make any sense. Years of Republican led investigations into Clinton's Emails and Benghazi led to no felon indictments. Meanwhile investigations into Trump have already led to 32 people being indicted yet it is Hillary Clinton who is damaged goods; it doesn't logically make any sense, 

[iNow]

Related to two primary discussion points here:

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/23/18004478/hack-gap-explained

Quote

But here’s the critical thing: Even though plenty of liberals are happy to be mad about the double standard, nobody important in progressive political commentary is actually mad about Trump’s troop visiting schedule. We’re mad that Trump is destroying financial and environmental regulation while trying to screw poor people out of health care and nutrition assistance, all while imprisoning children seeking asylum and undermining the international order. That’s important stuff, while Trump’s golfing — like Clinton’s emails — fundamentally isn’t.

And yet elections are swung, almost by definition, not by the majority of people who correctly see the scope of the differences and pick a side but by the minority of people for whom the important divisions in US partisan politics aren’t decisive. Consequently, the issues that matter most electorally are the ones that matter least to partisans. Things like email protocol compliance that neither liberals nor conservatives care about even slightly can be a powerful electoral tool because the decisive voters are the ones who don’t care about the epic ideological clash of left and right.

But journalists take their cues about what’s important from partisan media outlets and partisan social media.

Thus, the frenzies of partisan attention around “deplorables” and “lock her up” served to focus on controversies that, while not objectively significant. are perhaps particularly resonant to people who don’t have firm ideological convictions.

Meanwhile, similar policy-neutral issues like Trump’s insecure cellphone, his preposterous claim to be too busy to visit the troops, or even his apparent track record of tax fraud don’t get progressives worked into a lather in the same way.

This is a natural tactical advantage that, moreover, serves a particular strategic advantage given the Republican Party’s devotion to plutocratic principles on taxation and health insurance that have only a very meager constituency among the mass public.

 

Voter suppression in the US:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression_in_the_United_States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression#United_States

 

[CharonY]

23 minutes ago, iNow said:

But journalists take their cues about what’s important from partisan media outlets and partisan social media.

I think that meshes also very well with how emotive "reports" are propagated faster through social networks and eventually contaminate or even dominate the news cycle. 

[iNow]

On 10/23/2018 at 6:11 AM, Ten oz said:

Just think about how crazy it is that Trump paid off a Pron star, won't show his taxes, was name a criminal co-conspirator to felonies by his former personal lawyer, has been has 19 pending sexual misconduct allegations, on tape saying "grab them by the", and etc yet people broadly feel it is Hillary Clinton with too much baggage to run in 2020. How does that make any sense. Years of Republican led investigations into Clinton's Emails and Benghazi led to no felon indictments. Meanwhile investigations into Trump have already led to 32 people being indicted yet it is Hillary Clinton who is damaged goods; it doesn't logically make any sense, 

But her emails!! Meanwhile, back in the Trump White House:

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/2018/10/24/18020906/trump-cell-phone-china-russia-new-york-times

Quote

Chinese and Russian spies listening in on Trump’s cellphone calls

Trump continues to use unsecured cellphones

US intelligence and White House officials are increasingly concerned about President Donald Trump’s use of his official and personal iPhones to communicate with friends because of the risk that Chinese and Russian spies could be listening to Trump’s conversations.

White House aides have repeatedly warned the president that because his iPhones are not fully secure, they could be susceptible to tapping by Chinese and Russian intelligence. Yet Trump persists in using the phones instead of a more secure landline at the White House.

Current and former officials who spoke with the Times said that America’s intelligence agencies have determined that spies from both China and Russia have listened in on the president’s cellphone calls. Chinese spies in particular are monitoring Trump’s calls, the Times reports, to glean information and insights about the president’s thinking

 

Edited October 25, 2018 by iNow

[Ten oz]

On 10/24/2018 at 9:19 PM, iNow said:

But her emails!! Meanwhile, back in the Trump White House:

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/2018/10/24/18020906/trump-cell-phone-china-russia-new-york-times

 

And yet "her emails" is the sort of baggage Hillary Clinton's name carries. Even some Sanders supporters on the left complain about her emails and how they exposed a twist political scheme to win the primary. 

[Raider5678]

On 10/23/2018 at 6:11 AM, Ten oz said:

So we have addressed the issue of Felon disenfranchisement and at least agree that once out of prison everyone should allowed to vote. 

Correct.

Sorry, I was flying to Texas on the day you put this out, and I'm currently stranded in the airport and checked this thread again. Hence why I'm replying now.

 

In regards to the political baggage of Hillary Clinton.

Due to a series of propoganda campaigns from the Republican campaign against Hillary they've given her baggage from when she deleted the emails. We don't know what was in the emails, granted, and she hasn't been convicted, however the Republicans have driven the point home that her deleting them is a sign of guilt. Completely ignoring innocent until proven guilty, which should be a  crime IIMO but whatever. Anyways, her baggage is directly linked with politics and corruption. It casts an extremely negative light, especially with all the other potential candidates with less baggage. Trump I suspect will face a similar problem if he chooses to run for election, however I doubt it will affect him because the fake news campaigns held by Republicans have done a sufficiently good job at making sure the voters don't believe it.

To quote Trump:

"sad Sad SAD."

On 10/26/2018 at 7:32 AM, Ten oz said:

And yet "her emails" is the sort of baggage Hillary Clinton's name carries. Even some Sanders supporters on the left complain about her emails and how they exposed a twist political scheme to win the primary. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Hillary emails and the emails hacked from the DNC by Mr. Putin are two different incidents?

[Ten oz]

20 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Due to a series of propoganda campaigns from the Republican campaign against Hillary they've given her baggage from when she deleted the emails. We don't know what was in the emails, granted, and she hasn't been convicted, however the Republicans have driven the point home that her deleting them is a sign of guilt. Completely ignoring innocent until proven guilty, which should be a  crime IIMO but whatever. Anyways, her baggage is directly linked with politics and corruption. It casts an extremely negative light, especially with all the other potential candidates with less baggage. Trump I suspect will face a similar problem if he chooses to run for election, however I doubt it will affect him because the fake news campaigns held by Republicans have done a sufficiently good job at making sure the voters don't believe it.

Guilt with regards to what? Clinton checking emails via a smart phone and use of a personal account were an internal violation of protocol and she admitted to it. The issues was about using secure equipment and accounts. The manner in which emails were sent and received was the impetus for the official investigation and not the content of the emails. Republicans demanded seeing Clinton's emails but ultimately it was the device and account used which was the issue. Republicans just found complaining about the emails an effective rouse. The point that it was always an empty complaint was driven home when members of Trump's White House proceed to basically do that same thing and no one cares. 

44 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Hillary emails and the emails hacked from the DNC by Mr. Putin are two different incidents?

The DNC emails contained correspondence with Clinton's team. Baggage can be any number of things 

[Raider5678]

12 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

The DNC emails contained correspondence with Clinton's team.

Got it. Thank you.