4 ms·

Can someone explain why this is being heavily downvoted? Was something they said false?

by banads 6y ago

brianlweiner 6y ago
Probably the ludicrous notion that somehow Hillary Clinton is to blame for electing Donald Trump rather than the millions of people who voted for him despite overwhelming evidence of his lack of fitness for the office.
- AnimalMuppet 6y ago
  Millions of people also judged Hillary as being unfit for office. She was a horribly flawed candidate. (Not saying that Trump wasn't...) So, yes, Hillary in fact does deserve some of the blame. She was probably the only candidate the Democrats could have run who would have lost to Trump.
- undersuit 6y ago
  If the accusation is true then she certainly shares some of the blame.
- banads 6y ago
  That's not what I gathered from the comment. It seemed like they were saying that Hillary had desired to run against Trump, according to those leaked emails. Is it false that Hillary wanted to run against Trump, back when many (including myself) didn't think he had a chance?
SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
> Can someone explain why this is being heavily downvoted? Was something they said false? reply Yea man, I’ve given up caring. Emotions > truth. A one second search of “hillary pied piper” will lead to the Wikileaks archived emails, tons of discussion from Salon to Fox News to Vox to Breitbart. The truth isn’t important. Only the narrative. I don’t have an ironic username here, hiding undesirable facts is not a side effect of hyper polarization, this is by design of the vote system. Hide things that make you feel sad, you don’t want others to feel sad, do your duty and make the bad man go away. It’s why the first guy only eluded to it, you don’t want to risk your internet points! I knew the truth about how Hillary leveraging her media connections to get Trump billions in free coverage would be unpopular here. Maybe I should believe that a few hundred thousand in Russian purchased Facebook ads swayed people but billions in coverage from US media didn’t. I don’t care. I refuse the chilling effect.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
majormajor 6y ago
This whole subthread is a giant off-topic diversion. To be comparable to the original legislative situation here, Trump would've been introduced and controlled deliberately by Clinton. So instead we just have a thread which changes the subject to an un-needed not-connected tired blame-fest.
- javajosh 6y ago
  That's not true; the GOP is the actor in both cases, and in both cases put forward an extreme thing (in one case a person, in another case, a law). The point is not to be complacent with the intention behind the extreme law, and assume it won't pass, since the analogous thing happened. I think that's a pretty tight point, and on topic, but I would agree that most of this subthread is OT.

Can someone explain why this is being heavily downvoted? Was something they said false?

by banads 6y ago

Can someone explain why this is being heavily downvoted? Was something they said false?

Probably the ludicrous notion that somehow Hillary Clinton is to blame for electing Donald Trump rather than the millions of people who voted for him despite overwhelming evidence of his lack of fitness for the office.

AnimalMuppet 6y ago
Millions of people also judged Hillary as being unfit for office. She was a horribly flawed candidate. (Not saying that Trump wasn't...) So, yes, Hillary in fact does deserve some of the blame. She was probably the only candidate the Democrats could have run who would have lost to Trump.
undersuit 6y ago
If the accusation is true then she certainly shares some of the blame.
banads 6y ago
That's not what I gathered from the comment. It seemed like they were saying that Hillary had desired to run against Trump, according to those leaked emails. Is it false that Hillary wanted to run against Trump, back when many (including myself) didn't think he had a chance?

SV_BubbleTime 6y ago

> Can someone explain why this is being heavily downvoted? Was something they said false? reply Yea man, I’ve given up caring. Emotions > truth. A one second search of “hillary pied piper” will lead to the Wikileaks archived emails, tons of discussion from Salon to Fox News to Vox to Breitbart. The truth isn’t important. Only the narrative. I don’t have an ironic username here, hiding undesirable facts is not a side effect of hyper polarization, this is by design of the vote system. Hide things that make you feel sad, you don’t want others to feel sad, do your duty and make the bad man go away. It’s why the first guy only eluded to it, you don’t want to risk your internet points! I knew the truth about how Hillary leveraging her media connections to get Trump billions in free coverage would be unpopular here. Maybe I should believe that a few hundred thousand in Russian purchased Facebook ads swayed people but billions in coverage from US media didn’t. I don’t care. I refuse the chilling effect.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

majormajor 6y ago

This whole subthread is a giant off-topic diversion. To be comparable to the original legislative situation here, Trump would've been introduced and controlled deliberately by Clinton. So instead we just have a thread which changes the subject to an un-needed not-connected tired blame-fest.

javajosh 6y ago
That's not true; the GOP is the actor in both cases, and in both cases put forward an extreme thing (in one case a person, in another case, a law). The point is not to be complacent with the intention behind the extreme law, and assume it won't pass, since the analogous thing happened. I think that's a pretty tight point, and on topic, but I would agree that most of this subthread is OT.