[Gateway] Reporter David Shuster posted to Twitter Sunday evening that operatives in the Democratic Party have told him an emergency meeting by the Democratic National Committee is being considered to replace presidential nominee Hillary Clinton on the heels of her case of pneumonia allegedly causing her to collapse Sunday morning at the 9/11 15th anniversary commemoration at Ground Zero in New York City. Diazepam administered to rear quarter remotely from a Rigby .416
Clarification from dem operatives @HillaryClinton pneumonia: Expect emergency DNC meeting to CONSIDER replacement. #HillarysHealth
#5
Any switch would kill the Democrats chances at this point. Ballots are printed, a switch would confuse the hell out of their dumber voters and they will need every vote.
#6
All Dems that are considering to vote to replace her please report to the suicide prevention ward ASAP.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
09/12/2016 13:53 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Kaine, Hilda's running mate has been mentioned in the media. He is about as left as Obama. I'd say Hillary too but she seems like she is in it for the money. Kaines radical roots. There is Bernie but he seems like a long shot--he was treated pretty shabby by the DNC and Hillary the first time around. And there is Joe Biden.
h/t Instapundit
The presidential election was over the moment the word "deplorable" made its run out of Hillary Clinton’s unguarded mouth. As the whole world now knows, Clinton told a Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender fundraiser Sept. 10, "You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the ’basket of deplorables.’ Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic -- you name it. And unfortunately, there are people like that, and he has lifted them up."
Hillary is road kill.
She apologized, to be sure, but no-one will believe her: she was chilling with her home audience and feeling the warmth, and she said exactly what she thinks. The "Clinton Cash" corruption scandals, the layers of lies about the email server, health problems, and all the other negatives that pile up against the former First Lady are small change compared to this apocalyptic moment of self-revelation.
You can’t win an American presidential election without the deplorables’ vote. Deplorables are America’s biggest minority. They might even be the American majority. They may or not be racist, homophobic and so forth, but they know they’re deplorable. Deplorable, and proud. They’re the median family whose real income has fallen deplorably by 5% in the past ten years, the 35% of adult males who deplorably have dropped out of the labor force, the 40% of student debtors who deplorably aren’t making payments on their loans, the aging state and local government workers whose pension funds are $4 trillion short. They lead deplorable lives and expect that their kids’ lives will be even more deplorable than theirs.
Americans are by and large forgiving people. They’ll forgive Bill for cavorting with Monica "I did not have sex with that woman" Lewinsky in the Oval Office and imposing himself on any number of unwilling females. They might even forgive Hillary for losing tens of thousands of compromising emails on an illegal private server and then repeatedly lying about it in a way that insults the deplorable intelligence of the average voter. But the one thing you can’t do is spit on them and tell them it’s raining. They’ll never forgive you for that. They’re hurting, and they rankle at candidates who rub their faces in it. From your mouth to the ear of G*d, David. But I'm not optimistic. It's the Fed bureaucracy which counts the votes. And we know they won't let a bunch of deplorables to contradict their betters.
#1
As I said yesterday, it was a "dog whistle" to fire up the Democrat voter base. I suspect that there's a few, more... circumspect, efforts being made as well.
#2
It's the Fed bureaucracy which counts the votes.
Last time I checked, it was the state and specifically local residents that counted the votes. Even in the (in)famous 2000 race, the locals had to do it again by county in Florida.
And if it was a 'dog whistle' it only points out clearly the bigotry, hate, and intolerance of the Left's base. If you don't agree with them, you're not 'stupid' you're the enemy to be stereotyped and eliminated.
#4
Like Hugh Hewitt said in one of his books, we have to win so BIG that it would be impossible to tilt the results by cheating. A toss up state will do Democratic because of fraud. A pro-Trump landslide state can't be tilted by fraud.
So win by a landslide, purge the federal bureaucracy of the true believers. And hopefully enough states will ride the coat tails to make a difference in local politics.
Embarrass the main stream media with a landslide with make McGovern/Nixon look like a photo finish.
#5
From what I've read today she could be replaced and even though ballots are printed the electoral votes to her would still be counted for her replacement.
Of course the confusion of folks looking for Biden or Sanders on a ballot and only finding Clinton would be massive and ensure the Democrats lose, and further that the dumber ones are convinced it was stolen because of the ballot mix-ups.
#7
A very subtle dog whistle indeed, like "Hey! Fido! Come smell my ass."
Posted by: regular joe ||
09/12/2016 14:04 Comments ||
Top||
#8
From what I've read today she could be replaced and even though ballots are printed the electoral votes to her would still be counted for her replacement.
Technically, you do not vote for the candidate, but a roster of Electors who have committed to vote for the candidate when the Electoral College convenes to cast their ballots. Gee, those stupid white (and sometimes slave-holding) founders may have been on to something. Listen to the silence on the Left that has for years talked about doing away with the College and just go with a direct vote.
Hillary Clinton appeared on Channel 2 News late last week. She had the opportunity, once and for all, to distance herself from the views of Max Blumenthal, George Soros and her other far-left anti-Israel supporters, and to offer a change of course from President Barack Obama. Needless to say, she didn’t. Tell me please, just how could it be any more 'clear ?'
Clinton did little more than repeat her often-mentioned but even more often-violated platitude regarding the unbreakable bond between the United States and Israel. She failed to note how she single-handedly broke that bond in 2009 when she took office as US secretary of state and unilaterally ripped up the written commitment of George W. Bush ‐ a promise made by the president to prime minister Ariel Sharon in connection with Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza ‐ recognizing that the US no longer expected Israel to contract to the indefensible armistice lines of 1949.
She also failed to note how she broke that bond again just a few months later when she demanded that Israel immediately freeze any and all construction within Judea and Samaria, notwithstanding that the Palestinians were offering nothing in exchange for such a drastic concession. Oddly enough, she took great credit in the interview for implementing this freeze, something even Democrats now consider to be a mistake.
She also failed to note how she broke that bond again just a few months later when she demanded that Israel immediately freeze any and all construction within Judea and Samaria, notwithstanding that the Palestinians were offering nothing in exchange for such a drastic concession. Oddly enough, she took great credit in the interview for implementing this freeze, something even Democrats now consider to be a mistake.
Clinton did not, because she could not, attempt to defend her well-established record of favoring the Palestinians against the Israelis. Clinton offered no explanation for the receipt of massive payments from theocratic Arab nations by the Clinton Foundation and herself personally, and did not attempt to distinguish her policies and practices from those of Barak Obama. Indeed, she hailed those policies and promised to continue them.
Clinton took great pride in her role in achieving a nuclear agreement with Iran. Notwithstanding her acknowledgment that Iran is the world’s chief state sponsor of terrorism, she inexplicably proclaimed that the world is a safer place now that Iran has been enriched by billions of dollars, has acquired sophisticated anti-ballistic missiles and has been granted an unrestricted runway to nuclear capability.
According to Clinton, we are all better off for having traded billions of dollars and crippling sanctions for a piece of paper adopted by a rogue nation that, even if fully complied with, makes Iran a nuclear power in a decade.
...Because she has no record of achievement on Israel, her remarks to Yonit Levi, by necessity, focused on her criticism of Donald Trump. If there is still a line that can be crossed in American politics, she crossed it. Clinton accused a full half of Donald Trump’s supporters ‐ roughly a quarter of the population of the United States ‐ of being "deplorable."
[Breitbart] Earlier this week on Fox Business Network’s "Cavuto: Coast to Coast," Home Depot co-founder Bernie Marcus said to his fellow Republicans if you’re not behind Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, you’re electing Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.
Marcus said, "If you’re going to stay neutral, you might as well vote for her because your lack of vote for Donald means she’s going to get elected anyway."
He added, "When I listen to Hillary Clinton and I listen to the economists who never in their life ever hired a human being or trained a human being, I say, I don’t know the world that they belong in. I know that when you have high taxes that you kill off jobs. Killing off jobs means hurting America. It means hurting the economic wealth of America ‐ and that’s not good for anybody."
#1
Had you purchased the Marcus model ten years ago you would have paid $37.22 per share.
The Market was off for the week, but Friday that same share of Home Depot sold for $127.74. You decide who knows more about business and prosperity. I'll go with Bernie Marcus.
#3
I've voted FOR a candidate twice, '80 & '84. Every other time I've voted against a candidate.
This year will be more of the same. Trump was my 4th choice at best a year ago but he has never been behind any Democrat.
I agree. Trump may be a scumbag, but he's our scumbag. (No irony intended). Hillary was in the bribe-taking biz even before she was a pol. Why would anyone elect her for dogcatcher, let alone the White House?
#5
Can somebody please explain this concept to The National Review online? I stopped frequenting that site when so many of their writers inexplicably declared that they were too "moral" to vote for Trump, while disregarding that such a position works in the favor of electing the most immoral political wretch I've ever witnessed in the form of Hillary Clinton.
[NationalPost] For eight straight terms, from 1981 to 2013, either a Bush or a Clinton was president, vice-president or secretary of State, and both families put up candidates for their parties' presidential nominations this year. There has never been anything remotely like such a co-regency in U.S. history, and it is not based on spectacularly good performance in office. Change must come. Trump is not an ideal personification of political change. But anyone who doesn't see what is happening, as Sen. Marco Rubio said when he was bombed in the Republican primary of his home state of Florida by Trump by nearly a million votes, has "failed to see the tsunami." RTWT
[FoxNews] Last month, I retired from the State Department after 25 years of public service as a Foreign Service officer. As the Deputy Chief of Mission for Libya, I was the last person in Tripoli to speak with Ambassador Chris Stevens before he was murdered in the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on our Benghazi post. On this, the fourth anniversary of the Benghazi tragedy, I would like to offer a different explanation for Benghazi’s relevance to the presidential election than is usually found in the press.
#1
If Mrs. Clinton was unable to fulfill her security obligations to the federal employees she was legally obligated to protect as secretary of state, how can we trust her with the security of our entire country? I won’t.
But it is her turn! Not to mention, Trump is a vulgarian with anti-progressive views!
[DAWN] ’THEY are not us, they are them.’ These days, this is the narrative in vogue in Pakistain. But, suddenly, the interior minister evoked an outdated narrative, drawing comparisons that blur the line between our enemy and us: ’The enemy looks like us.’
Pakistain’s Senate echoed with this phrase after the minister uttered it once again in his concluding remarks in a debate on the country’s recent security turmoil. He was explaining the reasons behind the slow progress on investigations into last month’s suicide kaboom in Quetta. By saying that the enemy looks likes us and lives within us, he perhaps wanted to explain that even the enemy eats and sleeps like us. However, a clean conscience makes a soft pillow... he failed to impress the enraged opposition leaders, who understood similarities between ’us’ and the ’enemy’ in their own way.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
09/12/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[NationalPost] For eight straight terms, from 1981 to 2013, either a Bush or a Clinton was president, vice-president or secretary of State, and both families put up candidates for their parties' presidential nominations this year. There has never been anything remotely like such a co-regency in U.S. history, and it is not based on spectacularly good performance in office. Change must come. Trump is not an ideal personification of political change. But anyone who doesn't see what is happening, as Sen. Marco Rubio said when he was bombed in the Republican primary of his home state of Florida by Trump by nearly a million votes, has "failed to see the tsunami."
[FoxNews] Last month, I retired from the State Department after 25 years of public service as a Foreign Service officer. As the Deputy Chief of Mission for Libya, I was the last person in Tripoli to speak with Ambassador Chris Stevens before he was murdered in the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on our Benghazi post. On this, the fourth anniversary of the Benghazi tragedy, I would like to offer a different explanation for Benghazi’s relevance to the presidential election than is usually found in the press.
[DAWN] ’THEY are not us, they are them.’ These days, this is the narrative in vogue in Pakistain. But, suddenly, the interior minister evoked an outdated narrative, drawing comparisons that blur the line between our enemy and us: ’The enemy looks like us.’
