3 ms·

That is a false choice that the Clinton campaign would love for you to believe. In actuality, the FBI investigation alone would have derailed any other candidat

by grej 11y ago

That is a false choice that the Clinton campaign would love for you to believe. In actuality, the FBI investigation alone would have derailed any other candidate, now this... For all the talk about Trump being teflon, it sure seems Hillary has the some of the same "teflon-ness" Sanders has won 7 out of the last 8 primaries and yet Clinton, with all her legal baggage and ethical issues, is still the presumed frontrunner.

maxerickson 11y ago
His required take of the remaining delegates has increased after several of those primaries/caucuses. So he has won the supposed coin flips that the media talks about and lost ground when you analyze the delegate counts.
yolesaber 11y ago
I was talking about this with a friend last night. Think of all the scandals the Clintons have endured - from Whitewater to Travelgate to Lewinsky to Benghazi...and yet nothing has impeded them. That either means they are in fact predominantly innocent (I think we can rule this out, mostly...) or that they are just such masters of politic and influence that they are able to fend off any investigations into them. Seriously, Clinton lied about cheating on his wife on national television and yet people still love him. They are a very intriguing couple. I eagerly await a Caro-esque look at their role in US history.
burkaman 11y ago
It's not "presumed", she is literally the frontrunner by definition, with more votes and more pledged delegates. You're still winning a race even if someone is catching up.
HelloMcFly 11y ago
Clinton leads in pledged delegates, superdelegates, and the popular vote. Her presumption as the front-runner is factual and earned. Take away the superdelegates and she's still clearly the frontrunner.
jonknee 11y ago
> In actuality, the FBI investigation alone would have derailed any other candidate, now this... In actuality the investigation would never have happened for any other candidate. The Clintons are scrutinized far more than any other American politicians. (The email scandal came out of the ridiculous Benghazi investigations that the GOP kept running again and again.)

by grej 11y ago

maxerickson 11y ago

His required take of the remaining delegates has increased after several of those primaries/caucuses. So he has won the supposed coin flips that the media talks about and lost ground when you analyze the delegate counts.

yolesaber 11y ago

I was talking about this with a friend last night. Think of all the scandals the Clintons have endured - from Whitewater to Travelgate to Lewinsky to Benghazi...and yet nothing has impeded them. That either means they are in fact predominantly innocent (I think we can rule this out, mostly...) or that they are just such masters of politic and influence that they are able to fend off any investigations into them. Seriously, Clinton lied about cheating on his wife on national television and yet people still love him. They are a very intriguing couple. I eagerly await a Caro-esque look at their role in US history.

burkaman 11y ago

It's not "presumed", she is literally the frontrunner by definition, with more votes and more pledged delegates. You're still winning a race even if someone is catching up.

HelloMcFly 11y ago

Clinton leads in pledged delegates, superdelegates, and the popular vote. Her presumption as the front-runner is factual and earned. Take away the superdelegates and she's still clearly the frontrunner.

jonknee 11y ago

> In actuality, the FBI investigation alone would have derailed any other candidate, now this... In actuality the investigation would never have happened for any other candidate. The Clintons are scrutinized far more than any other American politicians. (The email scandal came out of the ridiculous Benghazi investigations that the GOP kept running again and again.)