Wait until the Donald has to respond to his first mass shooting or terrorist atrocity. You'll soon be harking back to the good old days of Obama...
Nope, I want to base it on reality, not popularity.
Sassenach wrote:Wait until the Donald has to respond to his first mass shooting or terrorist atrocity. You'll soon be harking back to the good old days of Obama...
rickyp wrote:steveNope, I want to base it on reality, not popularity.
And what color is the sky in your world?
Without an objective metric of some sort this exercise is pointless.
bbauska wrote:Objectively, Mrs Clinton DID have classified material on her unauthorized server. Subjectively she says she was an idiot and didn't know what classified material is.
And why are people so mad at Hillary? If it wasn't email it would be something else--you know that right?
I can't think of a time when Obama has failed to take a partisan cheap shot instead of being a statesman
The peccadilloes of Hillary are simply not comparable to having a con man with little or no requisite knowledge and experience in the White House. Rationalism has left the building. The fact is that there was a tremendous amount of hatred directed towards Obama before he had done anything to be mad about.
You simply acknowledge Hillary's email fiasco and waive it away because it would "be something" so simply accept her incompetence and her obstruction of the law, ignore her ignorance and her lies simply because it would be "something else" anyways?
.I find it hilarious that three days ago the New York Times attempted to create reality by reporting on the front page that some poll showed Hilary will win the election by 82% to Trump's 14%