What damaging stuff? If you’re gonna try to troll, do it competently, okay?

Not only do I think that, there’s actually some indirect evidence to back it up. Hillary Clinton had very high name recognition from being first lady, presidential candidate and then secretary of state. So at the start of the campaign last year she had enormous advantage among democrats.

Absolutely true, and it’s been irritating me to no end. I also voted for Hillary, and like Chappelle, I also don’t feel good about it. Part of the reason why is that her propaganda machine has the people who should be on my side, acting like irrational Tea Party nutters with…

I will try to reply honestly and to the best of my ability despite knowing full well that you probably won’t read all of it, and I’ll get a reply something along the lines of ‘nuhuh, you’re stupid’ or ‘you hate her because you’re a sexist.’ 

If you don’t think that dysfunction within the DNC and the corruption that the email leaks have exposed within Clinton’s inner circle are problems, you’re not paying attention.

And Trump doing so is horrible and it’s terrifying that that didn’t implode his entire campaign. But we don’t discount it just because he seemed to assume it was a private conversation despite being on mic.

I used to equivocate like that before I realized that Pence probably got the same deal that the Trumps were offering Kasich: IE, total control over policy.

Like I’ve said downthread: I already voted for Clinton by absentee ballot, but Trump being an absolute monster shouldn’t mean that we let establishment democrats off.

DNC corruption will always be ignored and accepted because “BUT WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER SIDE?”

Well, both Wasserman Schultz and Brazile are longtime members of the Clinton camp, although she did try to oust them. Not because they were unethical, but because Wasserman Schultz in particular was running a VERY dysfunctional ship at the DNC.

A newly revealed memo from a former aide to Bill Clinton details substantial overlap between donors to the nonprofit Clinton Foundation and the former president’s personal financial activities, a $30 million-plus enterprise described in the memo as “Bill Clinton, Inc.”

Well you see, Clinton being bad is a subjective value judgment I have made based on her hawkish foreign policy, her closeness with wall street, her cynical flip-flopping on marriage equality, the language used by her campaign surrogates during the primaries (particularly Chelsea’s denouncement of single-payer) and the…

Except I already voted for Hillary by absentee ballot because Trump represents the prospect of a Republican party abandoning their masks.

<sarcasm>You should know that disagreeing with the Democratic party’s action automatically means you support the GOP.</sarcasm>

The DNC leaks about trying to scuttle the Bernie Sanders campaign? The Podesta leaks about Hillary receiving debate questions in advance from Donna Brazil? The leaks that indicate a direct link between Clinton profits and their charitable foundation?

They’re both in trouble. But as a progressive, the DNC is a lot more important to me. The Republicans can go die in a fire for all I care, but dysfunction at the DNC is important and it’s been conspicuously ignored for years.

Brazile leaking the CNN debate questions, the campaign’s coordination with the Correct the Record super PAC, the Band and Gibson memos on the Clinton Foundation’s role in influence peddling, and her comments towards Wall Street? You’re living in bubble if you don’t think there’s damaging material in Poedesta’s emails.

Let me get this straight. The disgusting aspect of the leaked tape isn’t its contents, but the fact that it was leaked in the first place?

I dunno, the “maybe don’t take our children into a war zone where even UN convoys are bombed” is not that bad a tack . . .

I’d have a hard time taking my kids to an actively war ravaged place like Syria. I see his point. As an adult she can go where she wants - her person, her decision, but he does have equal say in where the kids go, no?