Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

If West Virginia and San Francisco had a love child.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

Every reporter and pundit should have to declare if they ever vacationed with a billionaire.

We know you aren’t a Democrat but since you seem confused let me help you.

A sufficient plurality of insane, greedy people can tank any democratic system ever devised, apparently.

The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.

You cannot shame the shameless.

“Joe Biden deserved better than he got from some folks in his own party.”

Even though I know this is a bad idea, I’m off to do it anyway!

You are so fucked. Still, I wish you the best of luck.

Wow, you are pre-disappointed. How surprising.

Balloon Juice, where there is always someone who will say you’re doing it wrong.

“But what about the lurkers?”

I am pretty sure Katy Tur wasn’t always such a bootlicking sycophant.

There are consequences to being an arrogant, sullen prick.

I’m sure you banged some questionable people yourself. We’re allowed to grow past that.

When the time comes to make an endorsement, the pain of NYT editors will be palpable as they reluctantly whisper “Biden.”

People really shouldn’t expect the government to help after they watched the GOP drown it in a bathtub.

Republicans: slavery is when you own me. freedom is when I own you.

“Loving your country does not mean lying about it’s history.”

Compromise? There is no middle ground between a firefighter and an arsonist.

Glad to see john eastman going through some things.

The next time the wall street journal editorial board speaks the truth will be the first.

Every day Vance writes another chapter in the book called “Worst VP Pick Ever”.

You are here: Home / Elections / Election 2016 / Hillary Clinton at CodeCon

Hillary Clinton at CodeCon

by | 295 Comments

This post is in: , , , ,

Hillary Clinton just wrapped up an interview at CodeCon. It went sorta like this:

I didn’t see the whole thing, but here are a few notable excerpts:

Will she run again? “No.”

On her future: “I’m not going anywhere, I have a big stake in what happens with this country. I am very unbroken about what happened because I don’t want it to happen to anyone else. I don’t want it to happen to the values and institutions that we care about in America. I’m going to keep writing and keep supporting people who are on the front lines…”

Democratic strategy going forward: “You’re absolutely right [Democrats] used to leave so many races uncontested, and we’re not going to do that anymore.”

On Russian interference in the election: “The Russians in my opinion could not have known how best to weaponize that information unless they had been guided by Americans.”

On who was directing Russian interference: “I’m leaning Trump.”

Here’s the full interview (trigger warning: The intro and outro music is “Roar”):

The interview will launch thousands of dude-bro hot takes to the effect that Clinton should sit down and shut up. Trump may have to invent more genuine frontier gibberish to express the proper levels of outrage. Me? I’m glad she’s laying it all out there. We need her voice.

PS: One amusing detail: In response to a question about how well she knew Trump, Clinton said she went to “his third wedding on a lark” and noted that she sat behind Shaquille O’Neal, so she “didn’t see anything.”

Reader Interactions

295Comments

  1. 1.

    ? Martin

    Thanks for posting that. I’m really looking forward to watching it later. I dig NFLTG Democrats.

  2. 2.

    Chris

    GAH! SHE’S CLEARLY GOING TO RUN AGAIN! SHE’S SUCKING UP ALL THE OXYGEN IN THE ROOM! SHE’S NOT REPENTANT! AWAY WITH HER, NOW!

    Just getting all that out of the way so the trolls needn’t bother.

  3. 3.

    DCrefugee

    We need her voice.

    Yes, we do, but we also need other voices from high-ranking Dems to be saying the same things over and over. Maybe I’m just not tuning in the right outlets, but I don’t see it coming from what would normally be the usual suspects.

  4. 4.

    dmsilev

    Will she run again? “No.”

    PROOF THAT LYING HILLARY IS GOING TO RUN AGAIN!1!

    (sorry)

  7. 7.

    WVblueguy

    Happy to see her come back in this mode. We need her help to bring the Democratic Party back together. The only way Bernie could help do that is change his registration to Democrat and I don’t see that happening. I hope the Trump Dudes jump all over this so we will know who they really are. The Bernie people who still think “crooked Hillary” just need to get on board and help save our country

  8. 8.

    maryQ

    My 13-year old daughter, who doesn’t talk about anything these days that is not school social stuff, pop star gossip, or Grey’s Anatomy, initiated a conversation about Hillary the other day. She asked me if Hillary would run again, and when I said no, she was visibly upset. She asked why, I did my best to explain. She kept saying “It’s not fair! She actually won! How come the worst person in the world gets to be President and she didn’t!” I was kind of blown away, given our recent topics of, um, “conversation”.

    She also said that she thinks that boys feel more free to act like a-holes (her word) now that Trump is president.

    Then she asked if Dad is going to get kicked out of the country.

  11. 11.

    David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch

    On Russian interference in the election: “The Russians in my opinion could not have known how best to weaponize that information unless they had been guided by Americans.”

    On who was directing Russian interference: “I’m leaning Trump.”

    She wouldn’t say this unless she’s seen credible evidence.

  12. 12.

    Corner Stone

    “You can’t let Trump and his allies be a diversion, they are a threat.” – Clinton.

    “If we all like the Paris Agreement, he may decide to get out of it not understanding one bit of it.”

    but what’s really stupid about it is they’re throwing out economic opportunities.”

  14. 14.

    Chris

    @maryQ:

    People who like Hillary aren’t exactly hard to find. You don’t get to that level as a national politician without developing a large constituency of people who like you – even Mitt Romney, who’s basically Charles Montgomery Burns without a personality, has one. So no surprise that such people are out there, or even that young people would pick up on that.

    It’s just that our national media’s decided to basically agree that such people don’t exist, that only Bernie, Trump, and the NeverTrump Republican candidates had a constituency worth talking about, and Hillary got to where she it through nepotism, theft, and Benghazi.

  16. 16.

    Thoroughly Pizzled

    Hillary is sucking the oxygen out of the room because she’s an oxygen-breathing animal. The Democratic Party must embrace its plant constituents if we are to maintain an acceptable level of oxygen.

  18. 18.

    PsiFighter37

    @David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch: I actually don’t think Trump would know how to weaponize it (he’s too stupid), nor would he be in the weeds. That said, I have little doubt that he gave the order to win at any cost (because he is ultracompetitive, and his rumored serial cheating in golf is legendary) and approved any number of of dealings with Russia.

  19. 19.

    maryQ

    @Chris: Yep. Its damn demoralizing, though. Every time she is in the public eye, me and my friends stand in awe of her strength and intelligence, and the fucking liberal media tells her to go away. As do so many of the men around me.

  21. 21.

    The Moar You Know

    She wouldn’t say this unless she’s seen credible evidence.

    @David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch: I’m sure she has. History is not going to be kind to the Obama presidency because of two huge failures in his last year of office – and they both have to do with Mitch McConnell.

    1. Scalia’s Eternally Republican Supreme Court Seat (that was worth immediately shutting down the government over)
    2. Caving to McConnell’s threats to “go political” when they bought the evidence of Russian hacking and interference to him before the election.

    I’ve read the Caro series on Johnson, and he got shit done, but McConnell upped that bar considerably. Nasty, evil, very effective motherfucker.

  22. 22.

    Corner Stone

    This right here is what is going to be the death of us and our nation. This stupid fucking sentiment from assholes like this motherfucker. Fuck you, assface:

    Jason Del Rey12:45:41 PM PDT

    An aside: I can’t help but feel like Clinton still has trouble acknowledging the mistakes her campaign made that made this race a tight one in the first place.

  23. 23.

    Hunter Gathers

    But she didn’t speak to the ‘economic anxieties’ of Wilmer and Twitler voters. And refused to tell Black voters to go fuck themselves. Therefore, she should sit down, shut up and let her Brogressive Betters take over.

  24. 24.

    PsiFighter37

    @Chris: Hillary has been named the most admired woman in America over 20 times, IIRC. When the history books have a little bit of perspective, and we are all long gone (or certainly older), she is going to be up there with the likes of Abigail Adams, Susan B Anthony, etc.

    I’m not her biggest fan, but there is no doubt that she has been the biggest inspiration for a generation (or more) of women in this country, lies be damned.

  25. 25.

    Corner Stone

    I shouldn’t be watching this on MSNBC I guess because I want to murder Ruth Marcus. This may become a problem.

  27. 27.

    Corner Stone

    Fuck Tom Perez. Why would I give him and the DNC money when they are touring with Sanders?

  28. 28.

    Hunter Gathers

    @The Moar You Know:The collective reaction to Obama getting involved in the election in that manner would have been ‘Thieving Nigger Tries To Steal Election For Nigger Loving Ball Busting Bitch’. Wilmer and Twitler would have fought over who got to say it first.

  29. 29.

    Chris

    @schrodingers_cat:

    @maryQ: The media is not liberal, its another lie spread by Rs to intimidate the media.

    Yeah, but it’s a widely believed lie and it’s honestly one of the very worst things about our current political scene. More or less everyone knows to distrust the media, but because they think of it as “liberally biased,” they assume that any stories they tell that make liberals look good are the ones that should be taken with a grain of salt, while any stories that make conservatives look good are rock-solid because Even The Liberal Media. Which is of course the whole point of bullying them into this behavior in the first place. It means even people who realize they’re being lied to and are trying to be skeptical have no idea where to start when looking for the facts, and usually end up sinking even deeper into the bubble the “liberal media” is working to create, even while thinking that they’re escaping it.

  31. 31.

    Corner Stone

    How can these two women sit there and flatly state misogyny was not a factor?

  32. 32.

    Morzer

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/house-intelligence-committee-subpoenas-mike-flynn-michael-cohen

    The House Intelligence Committee on Wednesday approved subpoenas for former national security adviser Michael Flynn and Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s personal attorney, as part of their investigation into Russia’s election interference. The committee also approved subpoenas for the two Trump allies’ companies, Flynn Intel Group LLC and Michael D. Cohen & Associates PC.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/31/politics/fbi-comey-testimony/index.html

    Fired FBI director James Comey plans to testify publicly in the Senate as early as next week to confirm bombshell accusations that President Donald Trump pressured him to end his investigation into a top Trump aide’s ties to Russia, a source close to the issue said Wednesday…
    Since his firing last month, dramatic accounts have emerged in the New York Times, CNN, and elsewhere about the tense confrontations with Trump that Comey memorialized in memos afterward. A week after he took office in January, Trump allegedly demanded Comey’s “loyalty” if he kept him on as FBI director, and he urged Comey to drop his ongoing investigation into Michael Flynn, Trump’s fired national security adviser, in a separate, one-on-one meeting.
    The source said that Comey is expected to stand by those accounts in his testimony.

  33. 33.

    SiubhanDuinne

    So glad you linked to the entire interview! Many thanks.

    I heard about 10 minutes of it in the car (MSNBC), but came in well after it had started, and then Nicole Wallace (I think) cut away from the HRC event so she could announce and discuss “breaking news” that had actually “broken” several hours earlier.

    Anyhow, I loved what I had the opportunity of hearing and look forward to watching the entire thing. Thank you again for the link, Betty.

  35. 35.

    Thoroughly Pizzled

    @Corner Stone: Why do they all assume that it wouldn’t have been close if not for Hillary? Trump was an unconventional candidate, but still the embodiment of the last half-century of Republicanism. His supporters are insanely loyal. Hillary won all of the debates.

  36. 36.

    Captain C

    @Corner Stone:

    Agreed

    An aside: I can’t help but feel like Clinton still has trouble acknowledging the mistakes her campaign made that made this race a tight one in the first place.

    I can’t help but feel like a lot of Wilmer supporters, cosplay leftists, low info people, and general assholes still have trouble acknowledging not only their own mistakes but their own willful purity pony fuckups in this race.

  39. 39.

    Betty Cracker

    @PsiFighter37: Agreed about Trump being too personally stupid but authorizing the collusion. My money is on rodent-faced Jared, who was apparently insufferable at The Observer yammering on about “the digital.” If we ever get to the bottom of this (an open question), the digital targeting shop will yield up the dirt, IMO.

  40. 40.

    Archon

    @The Moar You Know:

    History won’t be kind to Obama because he wasn’t cynical enough about the number of people that would choose party over country???

    I think not.

  41. 41.

    Thoroughly Pizzled

    @Captain C: I still feel guilty over what happened, and everything I did during the election was with the goal of defeating the Republicans. I can’t imagine how horrible I would feel if I took a bunch of counterproductive actions under the assumption that they wouldn’t end up mattering.

    Why haven’t we gotten interviews with Jill Stein voters in Michigan?

  42. 42.

    Captain C

    @Corner Stone: Well…I think the Wilmer tour was to mollify the Wilmerbots and -bros, and also to give the rest of us a good look at the man behind the myth. I do wish he’d voluntarily go out to pasture, though, he’s way past his usefulness date.

  43. 43.

    ruemara

    @Corner Stone: Pay. Checks.

    I just spent 10 collective minutes pointing out to Bernistas on the twitters that Bernie saying that African Americans were happy racism is over because America elected a black man was not a good move for him. They spent way too much time demanding I prove he said, then said the context was what I was missing, when I said here’s the context and the whole thing does not make it better, they demanded I understand the context of another interview which disproved what he said which I also totally made up. Plus why can’t I acknowledge that what he said was reasonable & logical, is it because I just don’t like Bern? Woo. Yeah, these folks are worthless. Don’t consider them allies in any struggle. This is a cargo cult of stupid on par with Trumpistas.

    @Thoroughly Pizzled: Like a puddle in a drought, most have dried up.

  45. 45.

    Betty Cracker

    @PsiFighter37:

    When the history books have a little bit of perspective, and we are all long gone (or certainly older), she is going to be up there with the likes of Abigail Adams, Susan B Anthony, etc.

    Yes. And I hope she knows that.

  46. 46.

    David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch

    @The Moar You Know:

    I’ve read the Caro series on Johnson, and he got shit done

    did you miss the chapter on when the republicans stole two of his supreme court nominations in 1968?

    did you miss the chapter on when he failed to disclose intercepts showing Nixon had committed treason with regards to Viet Nam?

    Some of you guys are blithering idiots.

  47. 47.

    D58826

    @maryQ: What I still find hard to understand (as a clueless male) is that 53% of the white college educated suburban women voted for a man who bragged about the kind of sexual harassment that they have to deal with every day in their professional lives.

  49. 49.

    Matt

    I was not a big Hillary supporter, but I voted for her, #nootherchoice, but what you highlight her saying is the part of Hillary I like, no-nonsense, intelligent and brassy. I wish she was our DNC chair. She needs to get on the air more often and shred Trump into pieces on a more frequent basis. Also I’m happy she’s not running agAin, I think her and Bernie need to come together to support someone new in the party to lead us into the future .

  50. 50.

    debbie

    Best part of the interview:

    “The Russians in my opinion could not have known how best to weaponize that information unless they had been guided by Americans.”

    About time someone said this as bluntly as Clinton did.

  51. 51.

    Patricia Kayden

    @schrodingers_cat: And that ploy has worked beautifully as the MSM bends over backwards to avoid the liberal label. Fox News is then left free to be as hardcore rightwing as possible.

  52. 52.

    Will

    She should stay off TV. Plenty of ways she could do good in the world. She would have been a great President, but she is not good at politics.

    This is both incorrect and self serving. They had a Joint Fundraising Agreement with the DNC that set money aside for the campaign. HFA designated where that money would go it was not available to the DNC. DNC had plenty of problems but it’s not like HFA was propping it up. They used the DNC for their own ends and it continued to muddle along. https://twitter.com/Recode/status/870002306233778176

    I don’t see any recaps about policy, particularly health care, which is the key issue of the day. Contrast with John Kerry in 2005. http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/03/16/john.kerry/index.html

    I think Kerry should have stayed off TV also but at least he touched on the key issues of the day in a constructive way, Social Security, Iraq. Losing candidates for President do not make good messengers for the party to move forward.

    That’s my unpopular take. FWIW I voted for her proudly and would have supported her in the primary (I moved and didn’t register in time). I think we need new leaders and she should find a different avenue to help in the world.

  54. 54.

    D58826

    @Captain C:

    An aside: I can’t help but feel like Clinton still has trouble acknowledging the mistakes her campaign made that made this race a tight one in the first place.

    The country is about 47% GOP and 47% democratic. The race is won or lost in that remaining 6% and she came away with 3 million more votes than Der Fuhrer.

  55. 55.

    ? Martin

    @Corner Stone: I can’t help but feel like white men still have trouble acknowledging the mistakes our culture have made that made this race a tight one in the first place.

  56. 56.

    Captain C

    @Thoroughly Pizzled:

    I can’t imagine how horrible I would feel if I took a bunch of counterproductive actions under the assumption that they wouldn’t end up mattering.

    Judging by my Facebook feed, some of them are still in denial.

    Others think that in the now-inevitable Revolution, everything will turn out how they want and only people they don’t like will get hurt or killed. Because revolutions always turn out that way.

  57. 57.

    Patricia Kayden

    @debbie: Secretary Clinton called Trump “Putin’s Puppet” during one of the debates so she’s been raising the alarm about the Russian interference issue for a long time now. Would love to see Congressional Democrats getting more aggressive about calling out the Trump regime. They’re still a little too polite for my taste.

  58. 58.

    Craig McMahon

    So I see HRC is going to insist on existing and occasionally even speaking out loud, which is sure to draw many level-headed, fair discussions into her campaign, her place in the Democratic Party, and What Went Wrong. Recently, among some of her alumni, an open letter written by one of her organizers in Florida has been making the rounds, (I won’t link directly lest I anger the WP Gods, but it was published on Medium by an Alicia Ness). It’s pretty heavy on the sackcloth-and-ashes view of what constitutes “proper” post-election behavior on Secretary Clinton’s part, and I thought it merited a response.

    Since the response is some 5000 words long, I didn’t want to just dump in the comments and hope it didn’t get eaten. I was wondering if anyone might like to read it.

    I promise I’m not a troll or a crank or coming here with any ulterior agenda. I just lurk here a lot (don’t post much, but when I do, it’s under my own name) and enjoyed the catharsis of snark.

    If you or anyone else is interested, I can send it via email attachment to wherever most convenient for you, or try to post it here. My email is FirstnameLastname4 (at) gee mail dot com

    Cheers!

  59. 59.

    LurkerNoLonger

    @Will: Hi Will, did you read this part of Betty’s post? “The interview will launch thousands of dude-bro hot takes to the effect that Clinton should sit down and shut up.”

  60. 60.

    tobie

    @ruemara: I will never forget when he said this in a debate with Hillary (who cleaned his clock in every debate):
    “What we will do is say, instead of giving tax breaks to billionaires, we are going to create millions of jobs for low-income kids so they’re not hanging out on street corners.”

  62. 62.

    Mike in NC

    @Patricia Kayden: So just today CNN fires Griffin for a silly tasteless stunt, and CBS yanks Pelley to send him back to ’60 Minutes’. Your liberal media in action this week and it isn’t even Wednesday night. The corporate media sure wants those tax cuts.

  64. 64.

    Patricia Kayden

    @Will: Well thankfully she’s not listening to your advice. She’s welcome to be on my t.v. every dang day. We need all hands in the resistance to defeat Trump’s agenda and she is trying to do her part. If she was in the same league as clueless Palin, I would agree that she should go away but she’s clearly not.

  67. 67.

    Roger Moore

    @D58826:

    What I still find hard to understand (as a clueless male) is that 53% of the white college educated suburban women voted for a man who bragged about the kind of sexual harassment that they have to deal with every day in their professional lives.

    They voted based on race rather than gender.

  68. 68.

    stinger

    @Matt:

    her and Bernie need to come together to support someone new in the party to lead us into the future .

    That’s be great, if only Bernie were IN THE FUCKING PARTY.

  69. 69.

    ? Martin

    Just to be clear, even if the US pulls out of the Paris Agreement, California will still meet the goals as our policies are in some ways more ambitious than the US commitment laid out.

    Our $2.7T GDP, higher than that of France with half as many people is evidence that environmental policies don’t kill jobs or growth.

  71. 71.

    geg6

    I love her. Twelve years ago, I would have laughed in your face if you said I would say that. I didn’t have CDS, but I was “meh” about her. And in 2008, she infuriated me. But over the years, she grew and she grew on me to the point that I had no intention of voting for anyone else. And apres les deluges, I am thoroughly, madly in love with her. She has no more fucks left to give and neither do I.

  72. 72.

    Patricia Kayden

    @Mike in NC: Yet CNN has open bigots from the Right on its platform running their mouths every day (i.e., Roger Stone, Joe Walsh, Jeffrey Lord). By firing Kathy Griffin, CNN has sent a clear message to the left — we better not joke about their President or else.

    P.S. Where are all the “free speech” enthusiasts from the Right to defend Ms. Griffin?

  73. 73.

    Roger Moore

    @Thoroughly Pizzled:

    I can’t imagine how horrible I would feel if I took a bunch of counterproductive actions under the assumption that they wouldn’t end up mattering.

    Why do you think so many people are still trying to lay the whole of the blame on Hillary? It’s because they’re trying to avoid admitting their own role in putting trump in charge, especially to themselves.

  74. 74.

    Mike J

    NBC News‏Verified account @NBCNews 37 minutes ago
    JUST IN: The House Intelligence Committee issued 7 subpoenas today, 4 on Russia investigation and 3 on unmasking, NBC News confirms

  75. 75.

    Enhanced Voting Techniques

    @Thoroughly Pizzled:

    Why do they all assume that it wouldn’t have been close if not for Hillary? Trump was an unconventional candidate, but still the embodiment of the last half-century of Republicanism. His supporters are insanely loyal. Hillary won all of the debates.

    Hillary had a real problem with the Union Workers because of Bill Clinton and NAFTA . Trump BS’d them infrastucture and they looked at Hillary and thought “NAFTA part 2,…”. it was those rust belt states that did it for Trump. Plus I know a lot of people didn’t like her running because it smacked of nepotism.

    Knowing it was Trump now (and remember everyone expected the GOP to run !Jeb!) Biden would have done the best against him in my opinon. Biden got that blue collar vibe and would have just laughed off Trump’s bluster and that’s Trump’s real vunerability – being made look like a pompus joke.

  76. 76.

    debbie

    Trump’s most blatant lie to date:

    Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 11h11 hours ago

    Kathy Griffin should be ashamed of herself. My children, especially my 11 year old son, Barron, are having a hard time with this. Sick!

  77. 77.

    geg6

    @Roger Moore:

    That. And the fact that many men will always blame the woman. Men never fuck up; they’re always victims of circumstances. But having a vagina often seems to mean that the vagina holder and only the vagina holder must take sole responsibility for any and all mistakes and losses. In politics or any other realm you care to name.

  78. 78.

    randy khan

    @Will:

    She should stay off TV. Plenty of ways she could do good in the world. She would have been a great President, but she is not good at politics.

    Respectfully (well, as respectfully as I can say this), this is stupid. She actually is pretty good at politics at all sorts of levels. She carefully built alliances in the Senate when she first went there (starting with Senator Byrd) so that she could get things done, she came within a hair’s breadth of beating one of the best politicians this country has seen in eons in 2008, she crushed Sanders in the Democratic primary in 2016, and she won the popular vote by 3 million in the 2016 general election. Her nomination speech was excellent, and gave her a big bump in the polls; her debate performances (outside of maybe the first 15 minutes of the first debate) were masterful and also gave her big bumps in the polls. None of these things are characteristic of people who are bad at politics.

    You want bad at politics? Try Scott Walker, or Rick Perry, or Chris Christie, or Jeb! Bush. Try Martin O’Malley, whose politics were just a skoosh to the right of Bernie Sanders and who was a two-term governor, and who couldn’t get even a sniff from voters in the Democratic race.

    Yes, she lost the general election, by the tiniest of freaky margins, and yes, her campaign wasn’t perfect. But nobody runs a perfect campaign. That doesn’t make her bad at politics; it merely means she lost when she could have won. I mean, really, next you’re going to be telling me that the Falcons are bad at football because they lost the Superbowl.

    And I’m fine with her being in the public eye if she’s going to be like she was today, or in the Wellesley speech. She’s way smarter than the average bear, and understands our predicament better than nearly anyone. Her voice is helpful, not a hindrance.

  79. 79.

    Patricia Kayden

    @Hunter Gathers: Secretary Clinton is smart enough to understand that minorities are the Democratic base and that it doesn’t make sense to piss them off given that the vast majority of White voters aren’t voting for Democrats. Good luck to any Democratic presidential contender who can’t figure this out.

  80. 80.

    geg6

    @debbie:

    So I guess he’s given humble apologies to Malia and Sasha Obama for the things he said about their father?

  81. 81.

    martian

    62 million Americans voted for a racist perv who boasted about assaulting women to be their president. When the fuck is it going to be their fault Trump is president instead of Hillary Clinton’s? Tens of millions of moral imbeciles. I think Hillary Clinton’s biggest mistake was in thinking that Americans are better than we actually are.

  82. 82.

    Turgidson

    @Will:

    I think we need new leaders and she should find a different avenue to help in the world.

    Finding new leaders, and HRC providing leadership in whatever ways she thinks will help the cause/resistance, are not mutually exclusive aims.

    Hillary Clinton is the first woman to win a major party’s nomination, and went on to win the popular vote with room to spare. She ran on the most liberal major party platform in history. She’s a former Senator and Secretary of State and by most accounts was pretty good in both jobs. This notion that she should go live alone in the wilderness like Thoreau is the stupidest fucking shit I’ve heard this year that didn’t come from Hair Furor’s administration.

  85. 85.

    Will

    @Patricia Kayden:
    My advice might not be the best but she does have plenty of hacks advising her. They do her a disservice.

    Particularly whoever fed her this nonsense about the DNC data sucking. https://twitter.com/rubycramer/status/870002842660204544

    DNC had/has lots of problems like I said but I’m not pleased to see her shitting on people who worked their asses off for her. Don’t see how that helps us oppose Trump’s agenda. But YMMV.

  87. 87.

    bystander

    @Mike in NC: I can only hope that Pelley’s absence means when we can finally get more in depth coverage of the latest bounce house accident and waterslide mishap.

    Pelley was being very hard hitting and I was happy to bypass crappy ABC and weak NBC. Now I’m guessing CBS will morph into a crappier ABC.

    Clinton’s denial of running again is clearly because she’s paving the way for Chelsea to run.

  88. 88.

    Turgidson

    @Mike J:

    Oh great. I bet one of the “unmasking” subpoenas is to Susan Rice and the GOP chuckleheads will find some bullshit narrative to use to smear her again, just for old times sake.

  91. 91.

    Amaranthine RBG

    On Russian interference in the election: “The Russians in my opinion could not have known how best to weaponize that information unless they had been guided by Americans.”

    I wonder if Trump also taught them to spell maskirova when he was schooling the Russians about how to run this counterintelligence and propaganda campaign?

    But, seriously, can we just pause a moment and reflect on the idiocy of any theory that presumes that Trump is the _smart_ one?

  92. 92.

    Shana

    @David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch: Caro hasn’t got to those years yet. He’s only up to the point when Kennedy was killed and Johnson had a couple of years in office.

    Now, let us all pray to whatever we pray to, that Caro lives long enough to finish the series.

  94. 94.

    Hal

    Hillary Clinton should do what Al Gore, John McCain, John Kerry and Mitt Romney all did and away never to be seen again! Oh wait.

    Also, am I really supposed to believe 11 year old Barron Trump thought that photo was real?

  96. 96.

    Tazj

    @randy khan:

    I’m fine with her being in the public eye if she’s going to be like she was today, or in the Wellesley speech

    I agree. Yes, we need new voices and candidates in the Democratic party, but I don’t think her speaking out hinders that at all.

  98. 98.

    debbie

    @geg6:

    I didn’t see that brought up, but amongst the bots I found this:

    Patricia Arquette‏Verified account @PattyArquette 8h8 hours ago

    Replying to @realDonaldTrump

    Agreed.It was disturbing. You know what is more disturbing? The world you will leave Barron & your grandkids because of climate change.Sick

    It appears to be a legit account.

  99. 99.

    Will

    “she should go live alone in the wilderness”

    @Turgidson:
    Not even close to what I said. I’m not going to respond at length to a straw man fallacy.

  100. 100.

    Patricia Kayden

    @Will:

    HillaryClinton on DNC in 2016: “It was bankrupt. It was on the verge of insolvency. Its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong.”

    How are you so sure that this is not true? Why do you find it personally upsetting that Secretary Clinton has expressed her opinion about the DNC’s condition? I don’t get your anger about this. I have no idea if what she’s claiming about the DNC is true but it really doesn’t bother me at all.

  101. 101.

    Nick Fury's Eyepatch

    The hot takes, they were predicted. And so they came. So many hot takes.

  102. 102.

    Patricia Kayden

    @Hal: Funny how we never heard about the impact of seeing their father lynched in effigy for eight straight years had on Malia and Sasha. Just saying.

  103. 103.

    JMG

    @Patricia Kayden: Dave Weigel, who has the proper reporter’s skepticism about ALL pols, noted that Tom Perez, Obama cabinet officer, said almost the same thing during the DNC chairman race.

  104. 104.

    bystander

    @Hal:

    Also, am I really supposed to believe 11 year old Barron Trump thought that photo was real?

    I think it was when Melania put her black Poping weeds on and danced around the apartment that Barron got the funny feeling in the pit of his stomach. Like he does when Melania’s masseur Dmitri shows up for her evening massage.

  105. 105.

    Will

    @randy khan:
    She’s good at building certain sorts of relationships. That’s a form of politics but not the type I was referring to (electoral).

    She was well suited to the Presidency I think and also was good at building relationships with people in the Senate as you point out.

    However she is not our answer moving forward anymore than it makes sense to field the exact same Falcons team next year and the year after because they came close to winning.

  106. 106.

    Miss Bianca

    @Will: In other words, HRC should “sit down and shut up”? Are you sure you were proud to vote for her?

  107. 107.

    bystander

    Wretched Getchen is saying that one of the subpoenas is for Samantha Powers.

  108. 108.

    ruemara

    @tobie: I nearly had fumes coming out of my ears. And that was when I gave up on him. Now these fuckers are out here calling me a republican for saying this is not good in any context. Fuck them. Fuck morons with roses in their names and fuck their Zerg swarm behavior on twitter.

  109. 109.

    Mike J

    @tobie:

    Three subpoenas on “unmasking”? What the heck.

    Look, the Republicans committed treason and the Democrats found out about it. Nobody is innocent here.

  111. 111.

    Turgidson

    @Will:

    You just did! Boom, roasted.

    Seriously.

    https://newrepublic.com/minutes/142933/republicans-delighted-hillary-clinton-back

    From Jeet Heer, who I don’t normally consider to be a shallow-minded dudebro type. And he’s hardly the only one who advised HRC to go be quiet after she gave a commencement address at her own fucking alma mater. You said she should stay off TV. How exactly does she even do that? When she speaks in any relatively public setting, it will probably be noticed and at least discussed on TV.

    So you and Heer may not have literally told her to get off the grid and go live in the woods. But given that Hillary Clinton is the most famous woman on the planet, your suggestion isn’t all that far off as a practical matter.

    She’ll always be pissing off someone no matter what, and she knows this. Hopefully she’s out of fucks to give and does what she thinks is right.

  112. 112.

    geg6

    @tobie:

    They’re going for a triple play of Hillary’s Benghazi testimony. Not consciously but that may well be the result.

  113. 113.

    Corner Stone

    @Mike in NC:

    Trump hiding behind an 11 year old child whom he rarely sees. Impressive whining!

    Not sure what to say about parenting, but is there any indication he has even seen his 11 yr old in almost a month?

  114. 114.

    dm

    “The Russians in my opinion could not have known how best to weaponize that information unless they had been guided by Americans.”

    Why would she think this? For one, I think a lot of the weaponized information (e.g., the output of those “Macedonian teenagers”) just responded to the market for bullshit that is the right wing. For another, I think a lot of the blame lies with Cambridge Analytica (e.g., the targeted ads on Facebook), a British firm (mind you, one backed with Mercer money, which was hired for the campaign by Jared Kushner…).

    Oh, wait — maybe she thinks it because she read this article in Forbes (trigger warning: it’s a Kushner tongue-bath).

  116. 116.

    Will

    @Patricia Kayden:
    I used to work with voter data and know the people at the DNC who were working on these things. I also gave some advice to some people on the HFA data team as they were working through some of the issues that cropped up with voter data.

    While there were some problems (missing registration data, vote history, etc.), as you might expect when dealing with 50 different states, it’s not like the DNC’s data was a burning dumpster.

    I highly doubt she was intimately involved in those issues so she is probably parroting something some hack advisor told her. That’s irritating to me when she could be lending her voice to much more impactful things.

  117. 117.

    Corner Stone

    @randy khan:

    She seemed to have a lot of specific facts to support her claim. And you?

    It’s interesting because if you follow the links our comrade Will provides for his backup, they are just quotes from the Q&A. Not any actual data relevant to anything.

  118. 118.

    Corner Stone

    @Will:

    I highly doubt she was intimately involved in those issues so she is probably parroting something some hack advisor told her. That’s irritating to me when she could be lending her voice to much more impactful things.

    HRC displayed a mastery of facts, data and context during her session. Don’t you think it’s more than a little demeaning to boldly state she didn’t understand some piece of data but rather “parroted” what someone else told her to repeat?

  119. 119.

    Patricia Kayden

    Clinton: “NYT covered my emails as if they were Pearl Harbor.”

    So glad that she is specifically calling out NYT for their lopsided coverage of the email server (non) issue.

  121. 121.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @The Moar You Know: I’ve read the Caro series on Johnson, and he got shit done,

    with massive Democratic majorities, the specter of a martyred president behind his every appearance, and a whole lot of what would now be (and then was) considered corruption. So comparing Obama and LBJ is totes apples to apples.

    and as smart as Johnson was, he vastly underestimated the amount of time racial resentment would dominate American politics

  123. 123.

    Will

    @Turgidson:
    I think there’s a difference from ending up on TV like she did with the Wellesley speech and going out of her way to do interviews.

    Don’t you?

    My point is not that she should hide, but that she should not be seeking the spotlight. If it finds her at times be that as it may, but she should try to let new leaders have their chance to shine.

  125. 125.

    Patricia Kayden

    @Will: OK. I assume she didn’t spend an inordinate amount of time on that issue but I understand your personal interest in her criticism.

  126. 126.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Will: @Will: If it finds her at times be that as it may, but she should try to let new leaders have their chance to shine.

    anyone who’s eclipsed by a graduation speech or an interview at a tech conference doesn’t exactly sound like an unstoppable Wunderkind

  127. 127.

    FlipYrWhig

    @Enhanced Voting Techniques:

    Hillary had a real problem with the Union Workers because of Bill Clinton and NAFTA

    This makes no sense to me. NAFTA passed in 1993. Notwithstanding, union workers voted for Bill in 1996 but then, 20 years later, SNAP goes the mousetrap on Hillary? Union workers didn’t dislike Hillary Clinton because of some time-delayed response to Bill and NAFTA. They disliked Hillary Clinton because they “didn’t trust her,” IOW, they thought she was a ball-busting feminist shrew who steals and lies. How much longer do we need to kiss the butts of “union workers” who were on the wrong side of Vietnam 50 years ago and got excited about Reagan 36 years ago? If they want to vote for Republicans, that’s kind of on them, and they can figure out how stupid that is in their own good time.

  128. 128.

    Peale

    @Will: in 2008 and 2012, Dems actually had a technological advantage. In 2016, they now appear to be about 10 years behind. One of those items has to do with data. Another has to do with social media. And combining the two. i think we do need to question why that happened.

  129. 129.

    dm

    More on how Cambridge Analytica may be in the cross-hairs of the investigation.

    Insight into the level of scrutiny the company faces here in the U.S. also came Monday May 15 during an interview with Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, on the Pod Save America podcast, which is hosted by former Obama administration officials.

    During the conversation, Tommy Vietor, a former spokesman for the National Security Council, asked Warner this question:

    Vietor : One thing I’ve heard about the focus of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation into the Russian hacking is that the sophistication and the preciseness of the targeting is something that’s being looked at closely. Specifically that Russian bots were targeting Clinton voters at the precinct level to suppress their vote with fake news, and that that level of expertise would require data from a targeting firm, like Cambridge Analytica, for example.

    Is that true? And can you tell us anything about the nature of these Russian hacks that I’m hearing about?

    Warner: When you see some of the explanation and some of the fact that it appears that, for example, women and African Americans were targeted in places like Wisconsin and Michigan, where the Democrats were too brain dead to realize those states were even in play … It was interesting that those states seem to be targeted where the bots — where they could could create a lot of these fake Twitter and Facebook accounts, could in fact overwhelm the targeted search engines that would end up saying on your news feed, you suddenly got stuff that “Hillary Clinton’s sick” or “Hillary Clinton’s stealing money from the State Department.”

    I get the fact that the Russian intel services could figure out how to manipulate and use the bots. Whether they could know how to target states and levels of voters that the Democrats weren’t even aware really raises some questions. I think that’s a worthwhile area of inquiry.

    How did they know to go to that level of detail in those kinds of jurisdictions?

    Vietor : I wonder if they just asked Jared [Kushner] like Trump does with all of his questions. We’ll find out.

    Warner : We’ll find out. More to come on that.

    Much more in the Newsweek article. The “Pod Save America” podcast is excellent, by the way (along with its sister podcasts, Pod Save the People and Pod Save the World).

  130. 130.

    rp

    My guess is that the Rs and Ds on the committee cut a deal — we’ll issue some on the election interference if we can also issue some on unmasking. I take that as a win — the unmasking is meritless and won’t go anywhere.

  131. 131.

    Baud

    @FlipYrWhig: I think union workers are still a net plus for us, even though a high percentage of them are GOP or unreliable voters.

  132. 132.

    Betty Cracker

    @Amaranthine RBG: I’d rather pause and consider the idiocy of a person who would assume that “Trump” signifies that he personally defined the algorithms and automated the content delivery rather than implicating his campaign for taking advantage of this gift that dropped into their laps. ?

    @Turgidson: Thank you! Christ on a pony…

  133. 133.

    Patricia Kayden

    @Mike in NC: And are we to believe that when he was cussing and encouraging violence at his Nazi rallies, there were no children in attendance? I will have to assume that with such a foul-mouthed father, Bannon is used to the crudeness demonstrated by Kathy Griffin.

    Sasha and Malia survived much worse in my opinion.

  135. 135.

    NoraLenderbee

    I am so tired of men (and others) who think it is their business to tell HRC what to do, and to disapprove of her when she ignores them. Fuck off already.

  136. 136.

    Corner Stone

    @rp:

    the unmasking is meritless and won’t go anywhere.

    That is a hilarious take. The unmasking is by design included to drown out everything else. It will be the only thing that survives the committee.

  137. 137.

    JerryRich

    There is no question in my mind that He, Trump will try to throw Ms. Clinton and President Obama in jail. Sessions would be 100% behind this, but there are (currently) too many Justice Department roadblocks to proceed. I personally think such an attempt would be a fatal blow to this “administration”, so bring it on.

  138. 138.

    FlipYrWhig

    @Baud:

    I think union workers are still a net plus for us

    Yeah, the black and latino ones, like SEIU and AFSCME.

  139. 139.

    David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch

    Michael Blackman‏ @MBlackman37

    Barron Trump watching Kathy Griffin’s photo shoot is the closest he’s come to seeing his father in years.

    44 replies 133 retweets 553 likes

    It’s funny, cuz it’s true.

  142. 142.

    Aleta

    Clinton has broken trail for new leaders in law and policy making and politics all her adult life, and is still breaking it. It’s unfortunate that trail still has to be broken (as Trump and Pence and their cohorts have proved), but we need her out there and we’re lucky she’s able to stand the abuse. I hope it will look clearer to us in the future how much she and Warren accomplished for others to come.

  143. 143.

    Baud

    @FlipYrWhig: I don’t have the stats at my fingertips, but I think union workers are disproportionately Dem compared to nonunion workers.

  144. 144.

    dm

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: I read it as a comparison between Senator Lyndon Johnson and Senator Mitch McConnell, not President Johnson and President Obama, but it took a double-take for exactly the reasons you spell out.

  145. 145.

    Turgidson

    @Will:

    Is she going out of her way to give interviews? How many has she given since the election? She talked with Rebecca Traister for her big piece in NYMag, and obviously did CodeCon. Have there been more than one or two others? Have they unfairly diverted the spotlight from deserving younger liberals and Democrats?

    Seems like she’s already doing things the way you’d like to see. HRC keeping a public profile does not stop new figures from emerging. In fact, she might be able to help that process along.

  149. 149.

    David Anderson

    @Will: the key issue of the day is the Russian co-opting our government. Everything else is a detail

  153. 153.

    NR

    Oh look. Another (mostly) reasonable post about Hillary Clinton speaking in an entirely reasonable way, and yet again the comments are an absolute shitshow.

    I don’t know what Hillary Clinton did to deserve (some of) her supporters.

  155. 155.

    Jeffro

    @Baud:

    I wish she had said the NYT is garbage.

    I wish she had said it was utter. fucking. garbage. Shake things up!

  156. 156.

    JerryRich

    @Hunter Gathers:

    The collective reaction to Obama getting involved in the election in that manner would have been ‘Thieving Nigger Tries To Steal Election For Nigger Loving Ball Busting Bitch’. Wilmer and Twitler would have fought over who got to say it first.

    Stronger language would have been used, although you and I could not think of any.

  157. 157.

    Mike J

    @rp: Huggybear says word on the street is that Nunes issued the unmasking subpoenas without consulting the Democratic members.

  158. 158.

    bupalos

    I’m glad for those that find Clinton an inspiring person, we can use more inspired people. And for those who believe she can be an effective politician to move the ball forward for truly progressive policies, I hope that’s right and I’ll try to see her glass as half full more. But at the risk of more “DUDEBRO! SEXIST! TROLL! WILMERBOT”s, I’ve spent enough time arguing and working against some of the DLC’s ‘third way’ tilt especially on environment/energy that it isn’t coming naturally to me until she’s got some of this supposed second act on tape instead of just projected out in theory.

    I listened to most of this interview and I hear a lot of (very, very justified) defensive tick-tock and explaining how Republicans cheat and lie and have all the unfair advantages. Yeah, that’s right, they do. They have to, because we’re the party with policies that are more popular and better aimed at actual human flourishing almost across the board, while they’re doing a filthy circus act holding on to a shabby patchwork party of racists, revanchists, and rich people that get up to work everyday against the idea of basic humanity. OUR offense should be our ideas- proclaiming them, expanding them, working for them, sticking to them. Actually believing in them. “It takes a village” is a deep idea that we badly need. It’s offense. “There’s the guy that sucker-punched me” is defense. I hope her second act involves more of the former and less of the latter.

  159. 159.

    Jeffro

    @dm: it’s almost like some Americans…guided the Russians…as to how best to ‘weaponize’ the bots and #fakenews…hmmm…

  160. 160.

    different-church-lady

    The interview will launch thousands of dude-bro hot takes to the effect that Clinton should sit down and shut up

    Fuck ’em.

    Fuck ’em sideways.

    With a rusty garden tool.

    In the left nostril.

  162. 162.

    Corner Stone

    @Baud: Of course it’s ok. That’s the point. I don’t see Will or et al say Biden should keep his mouth shut, stay out of the way and let new blood come lead the D party.

  163. 163.

    Will

    @<a href="#comment-6405421">Corner Stone:
    I don’t think anyone “told her” to repeat it. I think someone said it to her or in front of her, probably covering their own ass but who knows why.

    Point is, she said it and she’s giving the wrong impression about the real state at play with Democratic data. Of course it needs to get better but it’s not a steaming pile of crap either.

    Do you think she personally researched the DNC’s voter data that they get from states and independently came to the conclusion it was garbage? Of course she is repeating something someone told her. That someone is wrong.

    I fail to see how any discussion of this helps us oppose Trump’s agenda. My opinion is that she should stay out of the limelight but if she doesn’t she should at least be more judicious in pushing narratives that are productive.

  164. 164.

    Craig McMahon

    @The Moar You Know: Funny you should mention Caro! I’m just starting his second LBJ. What struck me, at least about the first, is Caro’s frothing, red-hot hatred and disgust for his subject. I really enjoyed the book, actually, and thought it was well done and well researched and all that, but you can practically still see the spittle flecks on the printed page.

    It occurred to me that it resembled a sort of pre-CDS. For Caro, (at least in the first of the series, I’m only a couple of chapters into book 2, right about when LBJ goes active Navy for WWII) nothing LBJ does can be good. It must be in the service of his frigid, unceasing, merciless ambition. Extremely successfully director of a New Deal program? AMBITION, DOESN’T COUNT. 80 hour weeks as a low-paid Congressional staffer making sure widows and veterans got their pensions? AMBITION, DOESN’T COUNT. A goddamn heroic effort to advance rural electrification in his dirt-poor Hill Country homeland, which hated him and his family? AMBITION, DOESN’T COUNT.

    I’m not saying LBJ was some kind of saint, but he did an awful lot of good at a very early age. Caro tends to write about LBJ’s fearsome ability to win influential peoples’ support and move up the ranks through excelling at his job with disgust, whether it’s being obsequious to the Speaker of the House as a young Congressman or whether it’s badgering money for volleyball nets and baseball equipment for his impoverished Mexican students as a teacher in Cotulla. For Caro, though, it’s “clear” that since LBJ was doing good things in the service of his own ambition, none of those things count for much.

    I think HRC is vastly more good-hearted than LBJ, and vastly less corrupt, but the similarity between how their respective actions get described and the actual results they got over the years is striking. It’s an interesting dynamic–it seems that for some people, motivation is really, really important. I don’t want to belittle that point of view, but it is frustrating.

    “Sure, HRC went undercover to expose racist admissions practices in private schools, but she had already expressed interest in running for office to friends at that point, and had already worked in politics, so DOESN’T COUNT.”

    “Sure, HRC was instrumental in getting SCHIP passed, but it was only after she FAILED at SINGLEPAYER.”

    “Sure, HRC figured out through researching disparities in Census figures and school enrollment figures that a lot of kids with disabilities didn’t have access to public education, and worked on the IDEA Full Funding Act of 2003 when she was a Senator, but she was planning on running for President so all of those disabled kids didn’t REALLY benefit from the legislation.”

  165. 165.

    p.a.

    Stupid Griffin. She should have put his head in a reticle or on a target and shot an AR at it. That’s socially acceptable. Apparently.

  166. 166.

    Baud

    @Corner Stone: Gotcha. And you are correct, sir.

    The most important reason Hillary should stick around is that it gives is a nice litmus test for who we can rely on going​ forward.

  167. 167.

    MomSense

    @geg6:

    I’m with you. I Fucking love her.

    ETA: Both of my older boys have already texted me with quotes from this appearance. They love her, too. My middle kid was involved in the Paris Accords so he is particularly furious right now.

  168. 168.

    ? ?? Goku (aka Junior G-Man) ? ?

    @Will: Why should anyone believe you are who you say you are? You could be just some bullshiter. Anyway who really cares what she said about the DNC? It’s all insider baseball stuff. The real story about the election is that it was stolen.

    She’s not running again and I think it’s stupid to talk about what she did or did not do right during the campaign. She campaigned hard in Pennsylvania, a state similar to Wisconsin and still lost it.

    Why don’t we talk about the culpability of voters who voted for Trump, James Comey, and Russian interference instead?

  170. 170.

    Corner Stone

    @bupalos:

    that it isn’t coming naturally to me until she’s got some of this supposed second act on tape instead of just projected out in theory.

    She is 70 years old. She’s spent literally 40 fucking years in public service and serving others including women and children around the world.
    But you let us know when she scores enough notches on her bedpost to qualify for your approval.

  171. 171.

    Barbara

    @Will: She should do anything she wants. She doesn’t owe any of us anything. She won the popular vote and there are lots of places and people who will be motivated to vote in the midterm to support her even though she won’t be running. This bullshit of men telling women what they “should” do is what should stop.

  172. 172.

    dm

    @Jeffro: Yeah, I started out thinking, “Nahh, no need to think the Russians needed help…” (which I think is still basically true), but came around to “…but it sure looks like they got some” after reviewing the current state of play with Kushner/Cambridge Analytica.

  173. 173.

    JPL

    I was just called for a poll, and pretty sure that it was either a democratic or republican poll. I actually voted in both primaries before, although it’s been awhile since I voted in a primary and declared republican. It was pretty balanced except several questions asked about Trump. They went through the ads that were being played on the local stations, and except for the ones attacking Handel on women’s healthcare, I said they didn’t make a difference to me.
    Then came a list of names where you had to say favorable or unfavorable. Obviously Trump again and of course, Price, but Sonny Perdue’s name was thrown in. That one surprised me. I simply said he was okay, but truthfully he’s not a factor. I even asked if they meant Senator Perdue.. nope.
    Sorta makes me think it was a republican poll about the sixth. Of course, I said Ossoff.

  174. 174.

    Will

    @Corner Stone:
    Biden should stay out of the limelight too. If he gave this same interview I would be criticizing him too in the same terms.

    Losing presidential candidates are bad messengers but here the message is the real problem. If she wants to oppose Trump’s agenda she should actually do it. Health Care!

  175. 175.

    sdhays

    @Will:

    Do you think she personally researched the DNC’s voter data that they get from states and independently came to the conclusion it was garbage? Of course she is repeating something someone told her. That someone is wrong.

    If you’re going to make this argument, you had better be prepared to back it up with credible links or being able to credibly say, “I worked for the DNC in their voter targeting department and know exactly what the data was like”. Whatever “someone” told her that the DNC’s voter data was bad is likely in a much better position to know the quality of that data than “someone” on the internet saying otherwise.

  177. 177.

    Corner Stone

    @Will:

    My opinion is that she should stay out of the limelight but if she doesn’t she should at least be more judicious in pushing narratives that are productive.

    Sometimes a slip is more than just a slip, eh comrade?

  178. 178.

    different-church-lady

    @Jeffro:

    FIGURE ONE: Understand the procedure now? Just stop a few of their machines and radios and telephones and lawn mowers…throw them into darkness for a few hours and then you just sit back and watch the pattern.
    FIGURE TWO: And this pattern is always the same?
    FIGURE ONE: With few variations. They pick the most dangerous enemy they can find…and it’s themselves. And all we need do is sit back…and watch.

  179. 179.

    Baud

    @Will:

    Biden should stay out of the limelight too. If he gave this same interview I would be criticizing him too in the same terms.

    Biden made a speech just the other day. I missed your comment here. Gotta link to it?

  180. 180.

    Corner Stone

    @Will:

    Do you think she personally researched the DNC’s voter data that they get from states and independently came to the conclusion it was garbage? Of course she is repeating something someone told her. That someone is wrong.

    I actually watched all the Recode Q&A. And, yes, I have no problem believing she went to great lengths to understand different facts and context regarding what happened with the election.

  182. 182.

    different-church-lady

    @Will: EVERYBODY’S fucking data sucked in 2016. It was a Berserker election. Nate Silver was the only one who had an inkling something weird was up.

    ETA: And even Silver was late to catch on.

  183. 183.

    Will

    @? ?? Goku (aka Junior G-Man) ? ?:
    I answered Patricia’s question honestly. You don’t have to believe me and I have no stake in proving it to you.

    She’s not running again and I think it’s stupid to talk about what she did or did not do right during the campaign. She campaigned hard in Pennsylvania, a state similar to Wisconsin and still lost it.

    I actually agree with this, although it overstates how similar those states are.

    Why don’t we talk about the culpability of voters who voted for Trump, James Comey, and Russian interference instead?

    This is a good idea if you think this will actually persuade or motivate people to vote for Democrats. I find it dubious and would rather talk about issues that are clear winners for us like the GOP’s wretched Trumpcare bill.

  184. 184.

    Craig McMahon

    @Will: “her absolute right and mine to criticize.”

    I’m sorry in advance for the vitriol, but I can’t fucking stand this attitude. I may have missed a few comments here and there (I run toward long-windedness and I just left another comment) but is anyone saying you don’t have the right to criticize?

    The gist of the responses to you are that your criticisms are dumb, not that they shouldn’t be allowed. No one is censoring you, they’re saying your analysis is bad.

    The knee-jerk response of “I have the right to say stupid shit!” when called on stupid shit is as common as it is tiresome. It smacks of the same “you’re censoring us by not buying our paper!” shit the NYT tried to pull when people protested the hiring of Bret Stephens by canceling subscriptions.

    I was a lukewarm HRC supporter when I went to work for the campaign last July, right before the convention. Actually, I wasn’t even a “Democrat.” I was one of those obnoxious “well, I vote Dem every time, but actually joining a party is so gauche” type assholes. Working to elect her during this shitshow of an election made me see just how fantastic she was, and I’m embarrassed I ever said stuff like “meh, she’s the least-bad option of this cycle’s crop.” As far as I’m concerned, she’s earned the right to be our party’s elder stateshuman and when she has something to say, I’m going to fucking listen.

    (before I get in trouble for being an “independent,” I of course switched my registration after I got hired and have remained one since, in stark contrast to other newly-minted Democrats whose names rhyme with Flanders. And I’ll keep being an active one!)

  186. 186.

    ? ?? Goku (aka Junior G-Man) ? ?

    @Will:

    This is a good idea if you think this will actually persuade or motivate people to vote for Democrats. I find it dubious and would rather talk about issues that are clear winners for us like the GOP’s wretched Trumpcare bill.

    Why not both?

  188. 188.

    George

    Jesus, can people stop qualifying their feelings for Clinton with phrases such as “she did have many flaws,” and “her campaign did make mistakes,” and “she wasn’t perfect,” and so forth?

    She was a great candidate for the times, full stop. In a country that didn’t have such misdirected media, a good chunk of the electorate that would have felt at home in early 20th century fascist Europe, and a pointy-shouty primary opponent who really wasn’t even a Democrat, she would have coasted to victory and led from the center-left, which would have been completely acceptable.

  189. 189.

    different-church-lady

    @Craig McMahon:

    The knee-jerk response of “I have the right to say stupid shit!” when called on stupid shit is as common as it is tiresome.

    QFT. With extreme prejudice.

  190. 190.

    JPL

    @George: That’s how I feel. If the media didn’t cut away from her speeches, folks would know that she had plans, and those plans didn’t include the russians.

  192. 192.

    Will

    @Craig McMahon:

    This was meant as a pithy statement. Perhaps this was lost in the brevity but I think your point is the same as mine. Sure it’s her absolute right to give an interview. That’s a stupid argument.

    It’s my absolute right to criticize her also. That would be a stupid argument if it were all I was saying. I have more detailed objections.

    It’s also your absolute right to think that my criticism is dumb and to say so. I’d like it if you would say why they are dumb so we can actually have a constructive discussion (I had one with Patricia). But it’s your right to decide whether or not to do so.

  193. 193.

    different-church-lady

    @George: Actually she was a terrible candidate… for a country that was hell-bent to go on a self-destructive hate-binge. And she was never going to do what she needed to do to win that country.

    In fact, no decent person would.

  195. 195.

    Will

    @? ?? Goku (aka Junior G-Man) ? ?: Both would be OK with me. Did she talk about Trumpcare? If she did it puts the interview in a better light.

    My main critique is pushing narratives like DNC data sucked is a missed opportunity to talk about things that actually matter, while shitting on people who worked hard for her.

  197. 197.

    satby

    @Corner Stone: Word.@Craig McMahon: double word.

    All points of view aren’t equally valid or worth bothering about. And Secretary Clinton owes no one but herself, she’s more than earned the right to speak out wherever and whenever she wants.

  198. 198.

    bupalos

    @Corner Stone:

    She’s spent literally 40 fucking years in public service and serving others including women and children around the world.
    But you let us know when she scores enough notches on her bedpost to qualify for your approval.

    Hmmm. Well I already do approve of her, the question for me is one of whether I’m naturally comfortable seeing her as a real moving force in the party going forward. And I certainly could become so, but again, this speech here kind of lines up with my idea of how that is less likely to happen – defense, defense, defense.

  199. 199.

    Will

    @Baud:
    Biden should not run. His chance to run was 2016 and he passed on it.

    The speech was a commencement speech like Hillary’s Wellesley speech. I didn’t know he gave it but I won’t criticize it nor will I criticize the Wellesley one.

  201. 201.

    LurkerNoLonger

    @rp: Well put. I was trying to think of a way to say this same thing, but my brain didn’t want to cooperate.

  202. 202.

    Amaranthine RBG

    Compare:

    @Amaranthine RBG: I’d rather pause and consider the idiocy of a person who would assume that “Trump” signifies that he personally defined the algorithms and automated the content delivery rather than implicating his campaign for taking advantage of this gift that dropped into their laps. ?

    With:

    On Russian interference in the election: “The Russians in my opinion could not have known how best to weaponize that information unless they had been guided by Americans.”

    Even given the muddle caused by the phrase “implicating his campaign for taking advantage of this gift,” you are asserting something very different to what Clinton asserted.

  203. 203.

    nightranger

    I like that she is going loud. I hope she keeps it up. Repubs love to hater her so I want her out there as much as possible pissing them off even more. She is teflon now. There is nothing that they can do to her now that she is not in public office. Meanwhile, everytime she talks, there are heads exploding on the other side.

  204. 204.

    Craig McMahon

    @Will: I’ll repeat my opinion on this subject:

    As far as I’m concerned, she’s earned the right to be our party’s elder stateshuman and when she has something to say, I’m going to fucking listen.

    I’m not really interested in having a “discussion” with you about this point. I know, I know, this will elicit a “well, I TRIED to have a reasonable discussion and I wanted to be constructive, and I’m JUST SAYING” and I really just don’t care.

    To sum:
    I’m not interested in a reasonable discussion about Hillary going away, I’m not interested in a reasonable discussion about “race realism,” and I’m not interested in a reasonable discussion about Deflategate. Why? Because in my experience, anyone who wants to have a reasonable discussion about any of those things devolves in a goalpost-moving JAQoff.

  206. 206.

    George

    @Origuy: You don’t think Barron has seen his father since the Easter egg roll at the White House? What, was Putin there disguised as the Easter bunny?

  207. 207.

    JPL

    @different-church-lady: Interesting comment, and thank you. Earlier while speaking to a son, I mentioned that during this time, it’s important to remember that common decency wins. I then send, why isn’t Ossoff attacking the republican candidate for her lies.
    So there you go.

  208. 208.

    SFAW

    I am APPALLED that she did not apologize for, nor beg forgiveness for, her E-MAILS!!! And Goldman Sachs!!! And Alinksy!!! And other stuff too horrific to mention! Like Auschwitz! And Krakatoa!

    usw.

  210. 210.

    SFAW

    @different-church-lady:

    FIGURE ONE: Understand the procedure now? Just stop a few of their machines and radios and telephones and lawn mowers…throw them into darkness for a few hours and then you just sit back and watch the pattern.
    FIGURE TWO: And this pattern is always the same?
    FIGURE ONE: With few variations. They pick the most dangerous enemy they can find…and it’s themselves. And all we need do is sit back…and watch.

    Thank FSM I don’t live on Maple Street!

  211. 211.

    Will

    @sdhays:
    This recap notes the interview “quickly turned into a post-mortum.” Don’t see how this helps the “Resistance.”
    https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/31/clinton-code-conference-dnc-bad-data/

    “I mean, [the DNC] was bankrupt. It was on the verge of insolvency. Its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it.” -Clinton

    There aren’t links about DNC data. Not sure what that story would even be…”DNC Data Has Its Flaws But Is Still Valuable” is not exactly a great basis for a story. The whole thing is too inside baseball. However, the “I injected money into DNC” was linked to this statement and was also demonstrably wrong.
    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/clinton-fundraising-leaves-little-for-state-parties-222670

    HFA used the DNC and state parties as fundraising vehicles, but they controlled how those funds were spent. They did not inject money in, that part of the statement is false. The other part of the statement is also false per my own knowledge.

    I don’t particularly care if you believe me. My point is independent of that. Namely:

    “What good does it do for opposing Trump’s agenda to talk about how DNC data sucked?”

    Also…

    “Does it help us win to be revisiting an election season that most people would like to forget?”

    This interview turned into a post-mortum which anyone could predict would happen. That is always going to happen to Presidential losers. That’s why she is a bad messenger at this time.

  214. 214.

    joel hanes

    @D58826:

    53% of the white college educated suburban women voted for a man who bragged about the kind of sexual harassment

    1. It’s not true that only males can by misogynists.
    2. Because of the stolen SCOTUS seat, fundagelical Protestant and Roman Catholic preachers across the nation called on the faithful anti-abortion single-issue voters to vote for the R, not for the man, and they did so in droves. I think this alone explains Iowa’s 10% shift from Obama to Trump
    3. Some women are just as tribalistic about their Republican identification as any man.

  215. 215.

    patroclus

    The Democratic party wasn’t “bankrupt” in 7/16 – that’s a legal term which applies to an actual filing, which, if it happened, we would certainly have heard about it. More likely, it didn’t have much “cash on hand.” And it also wasn’t “insolvent” – that’s a legal term which means “the inability to pay debts when and as they become due,” which, if it happened (the DNC stiffing someone), we would also have heard about it. So, Hillary wasn’t particularly precise in her whining and it really isn’t the DNC’s responsibility to fund Presidential campaigns post McCain-Feingold (which limited so-called “soft money,” i.e., contributions to parties) anyway. Now, I voted for her in the primaries and the general and I usually defend her, but her imprecise whining on this issue I’m not going to defend. I’m pretty sure she went to Yale Law and she should know what “bankruptcy” is – at the least, she’s engaging in hyperbole here and I’m not sure why. She can say what she wants, but blaming her loss on the DNC’s fundraising (when she raised a lot of money for her campaign herself) sounds odd.

  216. 216.

    Will

    @Craig McMahon:
    Your prerogative. Not cool to paint me with this brush though.

    I’m not interested in a reasonable discussion about “race realism”

    You can disagree with me but I haven’t made this personal with anyone, including a candidate I voted for and cried when she lost.

  217. 217.

    Aleta

    @Will: About new leaders: When you see a woman with HRC’s political beliefs who has advanced in science, politics, arts, you can be pretty sure that she’s been working for others in her field to also achieve and lead for years. Since at least the 60s, that commitment is part of the work and thought process of many feminist women who’ve been able to advance. HRC has done so much more than others to give access and opportunities to young leaders that the complaint seems weak.

  218. 218.

    Calming Influence

    @MomSense:

    “My middle kid was involved in the Paris Accords…”

    Whoa. It appears, MomSense, that you know how to raise up some good citizens. Congrats, and hope you’re spreading that knowledge around liberally.

  219. 219.

    Origuy

    @George: Huh? I said Barron was at the White House for the Easter Egg Roll. I don’t know if he’s been back since Easter Monday. He and Melania were supposed to move to DC after school let out, but I haven’t heard–and am not particularly interested–if he’s been there since. I know Trump hasn’t been back to NYC since the inauguration.

  221. 221.

    different-church-lady

    @Craig McMahon:

    I know, I know, this will elicit a “well, I TRIED to have a reasonable discussion and I wanted to be constructive, and I’m JUST SAYING”…

    Sealioning: it’s not just for breakfast anymore.

  222. 222.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    don’t wanna soil Betty’s anniversary thread with trump, but it’s like he’s baiting the R’s in congress just to see how much he can do so, and I think he’s right that he can do whatever he wants. For now.

    The Trump administration is moving toward handing back to Russia two diplomatic compounds, near New York City and on Maryland’s Eastern Shore, from which its officials were ejected in late December as punishment for Moscow’s interference in the 2016 presidential election.
    Then-President Barack Obama said Dec. 29 that the compounds were being “used by Russian personnel for intelligence-related purposes,” and gave Russia 24 hours to vacate them. Separately, Obama expelled from the United States what he said were 35 Russian “intelligence operatives.”
    Early last month, the Trump administration told the Russians it would consider turning the properties back over to them if Moscow would lift its freeze, imposed in 2014 in retaliation for U.S. sanctions related to Ukraine, on construction of a new U.S. consulate on a certain parcel of land in St. Petersburg.

  223. 223.

    different-church-lady

    @Will: Apparently the DNC data was right about everything except the results of the fuckin’ elections.

  224. 224.

    Craig McMahon

    @Will: I didn’t mean to paint you as a “racial realist” or a person who thinks Goodell has a leg to stand on re:Deflategate. However, on rereading my post, I should have made that more clear.

    Those were three examples of things I’m not interested in rational discussions on. Only the HRC one applies to your comments in this thread. I sincerely apologize for not expressing that more clearly.

    To anyone reading: I disagree vehemently with Will’s thoughts on HRC’s post-election doings, but I did not mean to imply he holds any racist views or otherwise impugn his character.

  225. 225.

    Will

    @Aleta: I have no doubt. One example is research and advocacy she did on special education in the 70s. Thousands of things like that she has done. She should keep doing things for good. The interview she did today wasn’t constructive.

    That’s my point.

  227. 227.

    Citizen Alan

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    as smart as Johnson was, he vastly underestimated the amount of time racial resentment would dominate American politics

    In LBJ’s defense, I suspect he failed to anticipate the extermination of the liberal Republican as a concept within less than 25 years. Certainly he never anticipated when he signed the Civil Rights Act that the GOP that helped him pass it would someday become a white supremacist organization.

  228. 228.

    cckids

    @Hal:

    Also, am I really supposed to believe 11 year old Barron Trump thought that photo was real?

    Yes, he of “great with the Cyber” abilities. Also, my 11-year-olds (male or female), wouldn’t have done the “Mommy, Mommy!” bit. Sounds as though he’s four.

  231. 231.

    Mnemosyne

    @Will:

    Did she talk about Trumpcare? If she did it puts the interview in a better light.

    So, just to be clear, you’re complaining about what Hillary said in an interview that you didn’t even bother to watch?

  232. 232.

    SiubhanDuinne

    I’m just starting to watch the full video. Does anyone know who the interviewers are? I don’t recognise either of them. (The man’s name is Walt, apparently.)

  233. 233.

    Will

    @Mnemosyne:

    No I didn’t watch it. I didn’t watch Suicide Squad either but I know it was bad. If she talked about Trumpcare it didn’t break into the press coverage.

    The problem is as a losing Presidential candidate, she will always be asked about the election. If she is not prepared to steer the conversation away toward good issues she should not do interviews where she will be asked about the election.

    Here she injected a new story that shits on good people at the DNC who worked hard for her. And she was incorrect to boot.

  234. 234.

    SFAW

    @Mnemosyne:

    So, just to be clear, you’re complaining about what Hillary said in an interview that you didn’t even bother to watch?

    As movie critic Leonard Pinth-Garnell used to opine: “I heard that was good.” [Disclaimer: I don’t think it was actually LP-G who said it, but I seem to remember someone not unlike him doing that.]

  236. 236.

    different-church-lady

    @Will:

    I didn’t watch Suicide Squad either but I know it was bad.

    Not only that, but you can probably tell us in detail exactly how it was bad.

  237. 237.

    Barbara

    @Will: Who appointed you arbiter of all things good and constructive? Literally, your nonstop nitpicking of what Clinton should and should not do hits me like fingers being dragged across a blackboard.

  238. 238.

    Corner Stone

    @Will: For all we know you work for Tom Bonier. Who is he to say anything about anything?
    Here, let me try:
    “The DNC is the warmest, kindest, most gentlest data operations unit I have ever known.”
    /D Boner

  239. 239.

    Corner Stone

    @Will:

    No I didn’t watch it. I didn’t watch Suicide Squad either but I know it was bad. If she talked about Trumpcare it didn’t break into the press coverage.

    Aaaaannnnd scene!

  240. 240.

    different-church-lady

    @SiubhanDuinne:

    I’m just starting to watch the full video.

    Why are you bothering? According to this ongoing lecture we’re getting, you can know everything about it without having watched it at all.

  241. 241.

    SiubhanDuinne

    @Will:

    The problem is as a losing Presidential candidate, she will always be asked about the election.

    Fuck you. John McCain has been a perennial guest on the Sundays for the past eight years, and except for (maybe, I don’t remember) one or two desultory questions right after the November 2008 election, he has NEVER been asked about the election he fucking lost. Fuck you.

    Oh, I forgot to mention. Fuck you.

  244. 244.

    Applejinx

    @Will:

    Here she injected a new story that shits on good people at the DNC who worked hard for her. And she was incorrect to boot.

    I did say that the Code interview was a good thing because it was going to bring out the real Hillary. Sounds like that’s what happened.

    For what it’s worth, I’m pretty sure the DNC is actually less popular than Hillary, so if it’s a fight between the DNC and Hillary, she’s liable to come out on top. I don’t know what she proposes to do with that, but it’s not like people are going to side with the DNC over her.

  245. 245.

    Mnemosyne

    @Will:

    No I didn’t watch it. I didn’t watch Suicide Squad either but I know it was bad.

    Yes, because a national election that was stolen with the help of a foreign power is just as important as a comic book movie.

    But I guess that, for a white dudebro like yourself, it’s all the same. It’s not like you’re going to suffer much under Trump as long as you keep wearing your Hillary hatred on your sleeve.

  246. 246.

    Will

    @SiubhanDuinne: @different-church-lady: @Corner Stone:

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/31/politics/hillary-clinton-recode-loss/
    Point to me one thing in this recap that is helpful to the Democratic Party and the cause of the Resistance. If she did talk about anything good in the interview it is being swallowed up by the rehashing of the campaign season.

    Apparently none of you have ever formed an opinion about something without directly experiencing it.

    A: “Here’s a some chocolate mousse made with moose shit.”
    B: “Sounds great! I’ve never had moose shit, must try it to find out if I like it!”

  247. 247.

    Mnemosyne

    @Will:

    Here she injected a new story that shits on good people at the DNC who worked hard for her. And she was incorrect to boot.

    Of course, you have no way of knowing if that actually happened since you didn’t bother to watch the interview before you got your panties in a twist.

    But why should you bother your beautiful mind with the facts when you can get pre-emptively pissed off about something somebody else told you she said?

  248. 248.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @Applejinx:

    I don’t know what she proposes to do with that,

    I am sure it will be something nefarious – at least in your eyes.

  249. 249.

    different-church-lady

    @Will:

    A: “Here’s a some chocolate mousse made with moose shit.”

    Nothing revealing about this analogy. Really! Nothing at all!

  250. 250.

    Mnemosyne

    @Will:

    Point to me one thing in this recap that is helpful to the Democratic Party and the cause of the Resistance.

    Gee, it’s almost like you think CNN is going to report what she said honestly despite the fact they’ve been dropping to their knees for Trump for at least a year.

    People like you are why fake news works. You hear what you want to hear and never bother to check out the actual facts for yourself.

  251. 251.

    different-church-lady

    @Mnemosyne:

    But why should you bother your beautiful mind with the facts when you can get pre-emptively pissed off about something somebody else told you she said?

    Which, ironically, is pretty much what he’s accusing Clinton of doing.

  252. 252.

    Uncle Ebeneezer

    @Corner Stone: Right?!! Isn’t this sort of wonky attention to detail kind of what she’s famous for? Pretty sure Obama, Bill or both mentioned this in their convention speeches.

  253. 253.

    Will

    @Mnemosyne:
    Call me names all you want.

    How many doors have you knocked on, or calls have you made?

    How many months of your life have you spent lobbying for the Affordable Care Act?

    Do you have a spouse with pre-existing conditions? A parent? A child?

    I have plenty of skin in the game. I’m more priveleged then some but I’ve worked my ass off for Democrats. Can you say the same? If so then thank you. If not then you should put some of your own skin in before you call names.

  254. 254.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Applejinx: For what it’s worth, I’m pretty sure the DNC is actually less popular than Hillary,

    Good god, you drooling, jibbering, mewling, typing lunatic. You actually think people who aren’t Wilmer Cultists have opinions about the DNC?

  256. 256.

    Will

    @Mnemosyne:

    LMAO you call me a dudebro and then say this.

    Of course, you have no way of knowing if that actually happened since you didn’t bother to watch the interview before you got your panties in a twist.

  257. 257.

    SiubhanDuinne

    @Will:

    @Mnemosyne:
    Call me names all you want.

    How many doors have you knocked on, or calls have you made?

    Mnem put all the rest of us to shame last fall, spending hours on a bus travelling to another state, getting people registered.

    Just go away now, mkay?

  261. 261.

    different-church-lady

    HE HAS BEEN UNFAILINGLY POLITE, AND YOU TWO HAVE BEEN NOTHING BUT RUDE!

  262. 262.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Will: I did exactly ten percent more than you, with twice the effectiveness, and I have precisely 37.8% more skin in the game than you, anonymous internet sancti-troll.

    Now fuck off.

  263. 263.

    SiubhanDuinne

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    People didn’t ask Bob Dole either.

    I don’t think they did.

    Sadly, my most lingering memory of Bob Dole will be of the Shitgibbon’s Inauguration, when Barack Obama caught sight of Bob and Liddy, bounded over to them, greeted them both warmly, and spent a minute or two talking with them. A minute later, the newly inaugurated president saw them, gave a desultory nod of the head, and went on his way. If I had ever had a doubt in my mind about Trump’s essential vulgarity, I lost it at that moment.

    Link to video.

    ETA: Had the sequence reversed, but the essentials remain the same.

  264. 264.

    SiubhanDuinne

    @Will:

    I don’t even know what the fuck point you’re trying to make here.

    Nor do I especially want to.

  265. 265.

    patroclus

    @Applejinx: What’s weird is that when Wilmer and his bros make up nonsensical claptrap about the DNC, most BJ commentators let him (and them) have it with all the rhetoric they can. But when Hillary does it (there was no “bankruptcy” or “insolvency”), BJ commenters just let it slide… It seems to me that Hillary is following Wilmer’s lead here, and I don’t like it when either of them do it.

  266. 266.

    Will

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:
    I think you like to call names online and share videos and put up a yardsign and think that’s “helping.”

    Did you knock on one door? Maybe you did. No way I could know one way or the other.

    If you didn’t do what you could then you know it and maybe you should make up for it next time. That’ll show me, huh?

  267. 267.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @SiubhanDuinne: Bob Dole inserting himself into the last election was so effing sad. To think that endorsing trump will in all likelihood be the last thing he does as an American politician.

    My mom, whose kind of wishy-washy about politics but has always voted Dem (at least for president) said she liked Ford but picked Carter because she sensed that Dole was rotten. I always had the opposite impression, that there was some core of decency that got lost in partisanship. But coming out of retirement, extreme retirement, to endorse trump…

  268. 268.

    Mnemosyne

    @Will:

    I’m sorry, you couldn’t be arsed to actually watch the interview you were criticizing and I’m rude for pointing out that you couldn’t be bothered to gather some actual facts before deciding that Hillary Clinton should shut up and sit down like a good little girl while the menfolk talk?

  269. 269.

    petesh

    @Will: I DID watch the interview. I found it so compelling it kinda messed up my work day (which is about to continue). Part of it was about media coverage: she didnt like it. She had statistics about the amount of time TV news spent on policy (way, way less than in previous elections). Amazingly, CNN did not focus on that. She had useful and insightful things to say about the Democratic base. Remarkably, that brief summary did not cover that. She had the most cogent and coherent brief summary of what we know and suspect about the Trump/Russia connection, including Wikileaks and Guccifer (by name). She was sharp, funny and, in everything I know about, accurate. So what on earth is your problem?

    You seem to be projecting your own ideas onto a fantasy of what she said. You come across very foolish.

  271. 271.

    SiubhanDuinne

    @SiubhanDuinne:

    Just a note, I’m midway through the interview video and I still don’t have the faintest clue who these people are. Are they famous? Ought I to recognise them?

  272. 272.

    Will

    I’m off. I’ve learned not to participate in comments past #200, it gets nasty.

    I work my ass off every election for Democrats and have earned the right to my opinion on what is helpful to the cause. If you want to feel like you’re better than me prove it and get out there and work your asses off.

    Goodbye! :)

  273. 273.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Will: I think you have never knocked on one single door except to say ‘trick-or-treat’ as you walked the neighborhood on Hallowe’en, friendless and alone, hoping to get a box of raisins.

    When you were twenty-eight.

    Now crawl up your own ass and die there.

    Or don’t, I don’t really care.

  274. 274.

    petesh

    @Will: Hey, everyone, Will goes away after about 150 posts he didn’t make. Of course, this has nothing to do with the fact that he’s getting his ass handed to him. Buh-bye.

  275. 275.

    patroclus

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: I agree with your Mom. Dole was rotten back in the late 60’s and 70’s; especially the way he weaponized the abortion issue (Bill Roy??) and blamed Democrats for every single war the U.S. was ever involved in. He mellowed a bit over the years, but when he was partisan, he was very partisan.

    The reason he and McCain aren’t constantly questioned about why they lost is because they both lost big and it’s not (and wasn’t) really an ongoing issue like the Russian interference issue that is currently being covered up. But they also deflected better than Hillary does, with sardonic and gallows humor and they didn’t go out of their way to blame the RNC the way Hillary lambasted the DNC today.

  276. 276.

    SiubhanDuinne

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    I know. I really, really wish he hadn’t done that. But I do agree there is a core of decency to the man, and I’d prefer to focus on that during what are likely the last years of his life than on his misguided sense of Party über Alles in 2016. I didn’t vote for him in ’96, certainly, but neither do I bear any great animus toward him.

  278. 278.

    patroclus

    @Mnemosyne: Sure I watched it. My guess is that she’s currently working on her book and has just gotten through the chapter on what went wrong. When Churchill was working on his memoirs, he was much the same – re-litigating a lot of old issues. I think she should move on (and I’m sure she will). I think she would have been far more effective by saying stuff like, “Imagine if the minimum wage had been raised by now” or “imagine if Congress had passed free community college for all” or “imagine if Medicare for all was the law of the land by now.” You know – issues. Let everyone else debate the Russia thing and what went wrong.

  282. 282.

    different-church-lady

    @petesh:

    Will goes away after about 150 posts he didn’t make.

    I’d hate to see the thread with 150 posts he did make.

  285. 285.

    randy khan

    @SiubhanDuinne:

    Walt Mossberg, longtime tech columnist for the Wall Street Journal, who left a few years back to create Re/Code, which sponsored this event.

    Kara Swisher, who was on Mossberg’s team at the WSJ, and is his partner in Re/Code.

    They are like unto gods in the tech community. Mossberg, who’s about to retire, for a long time was the most influential tech writer in the world, and still is very important.

  288. 288.

    Mnemosyne

    @patroclus:

    Here’s a direct quote from the transcript that Bill Arnold kindly linked to above:

    Mossberg: So, we’re going to talk a lot about tech and politics and tech in our country, your views on it. We were talking backstage and I think this was the first election where tech sort of got weaponized in a way that directly affected the outcome of the election … and I know you have stuff to say about it. But I have to ask you first, discounting all those outside forces which were obviously very important, what misjudgement did you make, and your staff, that thinking about it was something serious and that you wish you had done the opposite?

    So when she is specifically asked about the election, she’s supposed to refuse to answer the question? And when, at a technology conference, they ask her about the technology she used during her campaign, she’s supposed to refuse to answer that, too?

  290. 290.

    Paula

    @Paula: @Paula: @Turgidson:

    This notion that she should go live alone in the wilderness like Thoreau is the stupidest fucking shit I’ve heard this year that didn’t come from Hair Furor’s administration.

    Yes.

  291. 291.

    J R in WV

    @Will:

    Do you think she personally researched the DNC’s voter data that they get from states and independently came to the conclusion it was garbage? Of course she is repeating something someone told her. That someone is wrong.

    You are wrong. I presonally worked the phones into Ohio using the DNC callling DB day after day. That systems gave you a name, address, phone number, age, voter registration of the next person you were supposed to call.

    Time after time, I reached a good democrat who was being called over and over – which is a total waste of every call after the one where they tell they are solid Clinton voters. Which is the fist thing a caller does after completing a call, on 1 to 5 scale, how solid a democrat vote is thie person you called. So we don’t waste time calling people repeatedly who have already told us how true blue Dems they are.

    I called one guy who was working for the campaign… how likely to be a trump voter was that? how much money was wasted on calls to people working for the party?
    I called one lady who had kids and grandkids rounded to vote Clinton, she told me I was the 5th caller.

    So my personal knowledge of the DNC data system is that it was badly broken, built to waste the time of Dem workers and to piss off people planning to vote Dem.

    It was NOT capturing the voting intentions of people we called correctly, it was not providing the best possible phone numbers of people to call, other than quickly throwing up a phone number with a person’s name and address, it did nothing. The second or third time I called someone again, I knew the phone bank effort was deliberately knifed in the back either by Berners, by Russian hackers, by contractors actually working for the Republican party, someone had it broken internally. Who was I gonna call?

  292. 292.

    Camembert

    DWS was grossly incompetent.

    HRC’s partisans definitely have reason to loathe Obama.

  293. 293.

    a thousand flouncing lurkers (was fidelio)

    @David Canadian Anchor Baby Koch: There’s a reason Robert Caro called one of the volumes of his Johnson biography Master of the Senate. Johnson’s (fuck you, LBJ–just for you, Raven) management of the Senate as Majority Whip and the Majority Leader was legendary. His control was waning by the late 1960s, but his old connections there were one of the principal reasons the Civil Rights legislation he put forward was passed. I’m positive McConnell has studied Johnson’s Senate career carefully.

  294. 294.

    Camembert

    “deliberately knifed in the back either by Berners”

    FFS, children. The Berners tried to warn the DNC that they were not doing IT right, and the DNC responded in its inimitable fashion.

Comments are closed.