Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	How bad Hillary's campaign was
Date:	2/19/2018 12:03:22 PM

According to left wing nuts, despite spending a record $1.2B, having thousands of people working on her campaign and a govt media complex squarely on her side, Hillary was defeated by 13 Russians and a couple of hundred grand in Facebook videos.  That is quite a feat.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	How bad Hillary's campaign was
Date:	2/19/2018 4:15:14 PM

Just think, your hero won by 77,000 total votes in Wisc, Mich, and Penn. 40,000 vote change and she would be President. But, he won and all he does is make a fool of himself and our country. I had hoped for more from him...expecting he would grow up one elected. Your expectations are so low with Trump that whatever he ccomplished is a big deal. You and your fellow deplorables need to set a higher bar for those you support.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	How bad Hillary's campaign was
Date:	2/19/2018 4:59:44 PM

The thing that bothers me is that this assumes that people are so influenced by what they read on social media.  

Trump won because people liked his perspective on the economy and the immigration issue.  The people of this country are tired of handing over their hard earned dollars for social entitlement handouts to people that don't want to work.  It came down to who wanted a continuation of the Obama years and policies and who wanted someone to pay attention to the economy and illegal immigrants taking over our country.  I think the Russians had less effect than the voting than the media is giving them credit for.  

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Don't blame us for the low bar
Date:	2/19/2018 5:09:14 PM (updated 2/19/2018 5:10:35 PM)

Given your party gave us Hillary, I would have voted for the town drunk if he was my other choice.  Goofy, you worry about the fact that your party's two main choices were a geriatric socialist and a geriatric, corrupt, incompetent and thorougly unlikable socialist.  Fact is, you picked the loser and we picked the winner.  And the winning total was 306 to 232.  That he was smart enough to win those states just makes you and your hero Hillary look even dumber.  But hey, she crushed him in California!  Hahahahahaha

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	How bad Hillary's campaign was
Date:	2/19/2018 5:27:06 PM

Yeah, think about it.  They spent at the absolute high end 0.17% of what Hillary spent to lose.  And if you want to really get a laugh check out what Podesta is out there saying.  He thinks the amount is not what's important but that they focused on the states that Hillary narrowly lost.  Even the network babe at cnnBS wasn't buying that and asked him how it was that they knew which states to focus on while their campaign didn't.  It is utterly hilarious watching him twist in the wind.  He must enjoy humilitating himself on TV because he does it so well.

The fact is that no one thought Trump was going to win.  Hillary didn't, Obama didn't, the scumbag policital appointees and their left wing minions like Strozk and Page didn't, Trump didn't, MartiniMan didn't and the Russians certainly didn't.  They just wanted to disrupt our political system no matter who won.  They just didn't imagine in their wildest dreams that Democrats, left wing nuts and the govt media, but I repeat myself, would take it this far.  The laughter and the vodka are flowing at the Kremlin with the useful idiots we have here in this country.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	How bad Hillary's campaign was
Date:	2/19/2018 5:37:17 PM

Just shows you how easily it was for the Russians to control the deplorable minds. Weak minds and weak President with new indictments against his chioce of staff. Pathetic but seems to be the stabdard for the Right. Remember, you and I did not suport Trumpster in the Primary....but the Russian played mind games with you in the General  election.

Name:	lakngulf -	Reply
Subject:	How bad Hillary's campaign was
Date:	2/19/2018 6:23:10 PM

GF, have you lost your mind?   Please read Hound's analysis above.  She is spot on.  Enough voters were disgusted that we sought an alternative to GOP status quo and DEM corruption and hypocrisy.  Please stay up with us on this.  I mean like "how easy it was for the Russians..."  You and the mainstream media need to get a clue.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	How bad Hillary's campaign was
Date:	2/19/2018 7:50:00 PM

"DEM corruption and hypocrisy" What has changed??? The corruption in Trump's first year is the worse than Nixon.I thought he was going

to select the best....even you have to admit he packed his administration with a bunch of bozos. Flynn, Mucchi, Brannon, Porter, and the list goes on. Price resigned and Pruitt maybe next.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Are you OK?
Date:	2/19/2018 8:55:35 PM

That last post was more incoherent than usual. Indictments against his "choice of staff"?  Weak President?  13 little Russians overcame thousands of Hillary campaign staff and over a billion spent to trick me into voting for Trump?  Do you even listen to yourself?  You might want to get into see a doctor. I'd schedule it soon.  With Medicare it could take weeks to find a doctor that takes it and can treat virile TDS. 

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	How bad Hillary's campaign was
Date:	2/19/2018 8:58:31 PM

You should have left out that last part about Obama. Historians have little credibility to start with and Presidential ones even less so. But moving Obama up given his track record shreds what little credibility they had......which wasn't much in the first place. 

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Sorry I Was Assuming To Much
Date:	2/19/2018 10:41:16 PM

My response dude was to Lakngulf and his reference to Dem corruption. Every week, it seems someone is quitting working for Trump becsuse of illegal or unethical behavior. You just want to hide your head in the sand and dwell on gays at he Olympics. I too would be inclined to call it incoherent if I were in your shoes. 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	How bad Hillary's campaign was
Date:	2/19/2018 10:56:42 PM (updated 2/19/2018 11:00:04 PM)

MM is correct, Hillary ran a historically terrible campaign, but inspite of that fact plus the additional fact of Russian influence she still received 2.8 million more votes from the American people than the dog squeeze now sitting in the Oval Office.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Bogus II
Date:	2/19/2018 11:55:26 PM

So well respected presidential historians are rating Trump who has been in office just over a year, with other Presidents who served full terms and in most cases 2 terms.  I find that hard to believe.  Talk to me at the end of his presidency.  You must really be stupid and your logic is ridiculous.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Sorry I Was Assuming To Much
Date:	2/20/2018 12:04:21 AM

I see a lot of accusations, but very little validity and no indictments other than Manafort -who appaently led a very unethical life before the campaign.  

This is Washington and if you can't find any skelatons in anyone's closet, then they are either dead, or not doing anything.  

When I was in the Pentagon, I had a pretender accuse me in an email of "making a mess of an important national security initiative".  Apprently the number 3 guy at the Pentagon didn't agree with him, because I was awarded the Defense Excpetional Service Medal for my work and he recieved nada.  Additionally, I was able to make an etensive copy-to response to his email, explaining that if he had come to the meetings he was invited to, we might have had the benefit of his extensive experince.  

My point is this - in Washington someone is always saying something about those that are getting things done.  I'm sorry you don't understand Washington culture.  No one that matters takes these accusitions seriously and when you see someone leave, it's usually because they don't want progress to get bogged down in the rumor mill.  It's called down but not out.  

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	How bad Hillary's campaign was
Date:	2/20/2018 8:59:36 AM

Yup and since her terrible campaign didnt bother to do the electoral math and focused on that Dem blue wall in california she lost to dog squeeze - so what does that make her besides sub dog squeeze?  What is below dog squeeze?  not much... other then Hillary.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Watch it
Date:	2/20/2018 11:22:11 PM

My dogs are offended by the term "dog squeeze" and are threatening to sue.  Not very politically correct of you.  

Hilary was a mean, bitter woman who had no business running for President.  The book she published after the election is a clear indication of her real personality.  And a year later, she just can't let it go - just like John McCain.  Hilary and Obama may have thought that she was uniquely qualified, but the truth is she had no experience in economics and in her "claim" of being so savy in international affairs and diplomacy has been disproved time and again.  Every thing she touched she was a failure while at State.  People should be horrified that this is what we've come to.