If you have terrible taste.

Yeah, I am not going to debate with genocide deniers who ran to Wikipedia to find a fringe opinion, all the while ignoring all UN reports and respected medical studies.

What is hilarious is that they remember nothing about the Iraq sanctions, the repeal of Glass-Steagall, NAFTA, DOMA, Welfare reform…

My point is that Hillary respects Albright probably as much as she respects Kissinger. Pondering what she will do in office is terrifying.

Apparently Trump doesn't have a monopoly on white supremacist supporters. The dead brown people in Iraq under sanctions and in the Libya war of aggression (5 years ago!) should be forgotten, because they make the Clintons look bad.

Remember that time Hillary bragged about supporting a coup in Honduras? And then she edited it out of her memoir after the new regime started assassinating protesters, causing refugees to flee to the US? So funny!

They're not selling out, they are politicians and think she isn't as awful as Trump. It doesn't mean they are not lying when they mention all the wonderful things Hillary will work for.

Sanders needs to campaign after November to organise a movement against the awful things Hillary will do in the White House, starting with TPP and a new major foreign war.

Is he privileged like the hundreds of thousands of brown people who had the privilege of dying under the sanctions or the bombs of the Clintons in Iraq and Libya?

Bill Clinton's Secretary of State

500,000+ dead brown children, but who cares about them. You are denying a genocide. I have to say, it is quite amazing: who said Trump had a monopoly on white supremacists? Clintonistas will deny 500,000+ dead brown children ever existed if it makes their candidate look bad.

Says one of the 15 (and counting) people who immediately upvoted Velociraptor's crazy connect-the-dots-with-your-crayon PUTIN conspiracy theory.

You have to be kidding me… I took a look at your link and it isn't even a medical study, but a polemical "review" of actual, serious research by a fucking professor of Economics.

There are a few hyper-partisan and even deluded people in here, but I have to say I didn't expect straight up war crimes denial.

It seems to be a common Clintonista symptom to go through my history, and write about it. That is the second time in two days. As if you couldn't comprehend that someone disliked Hillary, the second most unpopular candidate ever. Do you ever talk to people outside the Clinton bubble?

If only you and your low-educated upvoters had access to Internet and could look up "Clinton net wealth"… The AVClubbers will have to wait until Samantha Bee covers that topic to find out!

You sure answer a lot of my posts, except the one where I asked you if the Clintons pocketing $100 million was corruption. Talk about evading a "serious" argument. (Obviously, it is impossible to debate with someone as partisan as you are at the moment and for the next four months).

There is a 1% chance Clinton and her neocons advisers will indeed nuke Russia. But there is also a 1% chance Trump won't be impeached before he decides to nuke China.

Yes, like Tim Kaine, another corporate tool. Whatever happened to that guy?

As if by tomorrow (or tonight, judging by the comments) "PUTIN did it!!!" won't be the consensus among Clintonistas. And how am I supposed to respond to some half-assed conspiracy theories and innuendos?