The Hillary Thread II

[Jason]

Why are we still talking about Hillary? She's yesterday's news. It's almost as if some people want to keep her as today's news instead of certain other politicians...

Buzz is she plans to be the Democrat candidate for 2020.

[laklak]

they're more than just buzzed if they think that's a possibility, they're fucking blistered.

[Forty Two]

Why are we still talking about Hillary? She's yesterday's news. It's almost as if some people want to keep her as today's news instead of certain other politicians...

Buzz is she plans to be the Democrat candidate for 2020.

Last time I checked, also, she's still a fairly prominent, newsworthy and discussion-worthy person, despite being both a total toolbag, and also a loser Presidential candidate.

[pErvinalia]

Why are we still talking about Hillary? She's yesterday's news. It's almost as if some people want to keep her as today's news instead of certain other politicians...

Buzz is she plans to be the Democrat candidate for 2020.

Surely she's not that stupid. Oh wait...

[pErvinalia]

Why are we still talking about Hillary? She's yesterday's news. It's almost as if some people want to keep her as today's news instead of certain other politicians...

Buzz is she plans to be the Democrat candidate for 2020.

Last time I checked, also, she's still a fairly prominent, newsworthy and discussion-worthy person, despite being both a total toolbag, and also a loser Presidential candidate.

Yeah right, it's got absolutely nothing to do with Republicans desperate attempts to divert attention away from the retard they elected as President.

[Forty Two]

What attention is being diverted? This is one thread on this board. There about 10 about Donald Trump, and new ones pop up all the time.

You'll be fine if there is one thread that relates to Hillary and let's people break her balls here and there. I know you like to pretend you're sort of objective, but this kind of thing proves you're not.

[pErvinalia]

I'm saying it reflects the wider Republican tactic of using Clinton as a red herring. Something which you also seem unable to stop doing in threads about Trump.

[Forty Two]

How about Clinton has her own issues, and own reasons to be mocked, which have nothing to do with Trump or Republicans, and there is nothing with raking them over the coals. Both sides, obviously, use attacks on their opposition to divert attention from their own defalcations. Of course that occurs.

But, again - this is one thread about Hillary, and there are plenty about Trump and Republicans. No shortage at all. What's the problem, again?

[JimC]

The weird thing is, she is not having any political impact at the moment, she has no official US office, so why does she need a thread? During the election, sure, but now?

[Svartalf]

people will hate and need a bash thread regardless of the fact that she's , for the time being, a private person rather than a public figure...

[laklak]

Don't let that fool you, she's lulling you into a sense of security before she sucks the marrow out of your bones.

[pErvinalia]

How about Clinton has her own issues, and own reasons to be mocked, which have nothing to do with Trump or Republicans, and there is nothing with raking them over the coals. Both sides, obviously, use attacks on their opposition to divert attention from their own defalcations. Of course that occurs.

But, again - this is one thread about Hillary, and there are plenty about Trump and Republicans. No shortage at all. What's the problem, again?

Trump is president. Clinton isn't a serving politician. One is the most influential person in the world, the other has very little, if any, influence.

[Forty Two]

How about Clinton has her own issues, and own reasons to be mocked, which have nothing to do with Trump or Republicans, and there is nothing with raking them over the coals. Both sides, obviously, use attacks on their opposition to divert attention from their own defalcations. Of course that occurs.

But, again - this is one thread about Hillary, and there are plenty about Trump and Republicans. No shortage at all. What's the problem, again?

Trump is president. Clinton isn't a serving politician. One is the most influential person in the world, the other has very little, if any, influence.

Threads may only persist if they involve Presidents or other serving politicians? Nobody else is newsworthy or involved in politics or current events? The existence of a single thread depends on the influence of the person under discussion?

By the way, this thread was created in December 2016 and was a continuation thread from the original Hillary thread which was started in August 2016, by me. Nobody else had thought to create a Hillary thread, although there were other threads created to mock and criticize other candidates. The first thread was "tied off" in December, 2016. So this one was created to continue the discussion.

There are many, many threads about the President and nobody is complaining about their existence. Nobody is demanding that they be merged together so they don't have to look at them. There is nothing wrong with having 10 threads about Trump and one about Hillary, but it's a bit silly to suggest that Hillary Clinton doesn't even merit discussion on a single, general thread.

Fuck, somebody started a thread in the News section about a peacock which damaged a liquor store, doing $500 in damages. Are you on that thread bemoaning its lack of news worthiness? Or, is Hillary's worthiness now below that of animals destroying a modest amount of property? You yourself started a thread in the New, Current Events and Politics section about things Australia apparently does better than the Netherlands. Do we need that thread? You also created another thread called "Straya" about Australia. Not sure why "we" needed a second thread after that about how Straya beats the Netherlands, but you seemed to think there was no impropriety in creating multiple threads about it.

Why don't you just, for the love of bog, participate in the threads you like, and quit mucking up threads with your bellyaching? Nobody forces you to read them. There is no "we" here that "needs" threads on given topics. There are only individuals here who have differing interests and enjoy talking about different things.

Don't get me wrong, you can do as you please. But there is something really weird about someone who spends most of their time on a discussion board, as you do, trying to ruin threads you don't like. Maybe it would be good to have an omnibus thread about topics that people think are done or not worthy of threads on Rationalia. Then you could rail against threads that don't interest you to your hearts content.

[Forty Two]

Don't let that fool you, she's lulling you into a sense of security before she sucks the marrow out of your bones.

If she sucked, Bill might have been able to stay out of a fair bit of controversy.

[pErvinalia]

How about Clinton has her own issues, and own reasons to be mocked, which have nothing to do with Trump or Republicans, and there is nothing with raking them over the coals. Both sides, obviously, use attacks on their opposition to divert attention from their own defalcations. Of course that occurs.

But, again - this is one thread about Hillary, and there are plenty about Trump and Republicans. No shortage at all. What's the problem, again?

Trump is president. Clinton isn't a serving politician. One is the most influential person in the world, the other has very little, if any, influence.

Threads may only persist if they involve Presidents or other serving politicians? Nobody else is newsworthy or involved in politics or current events? The existence of a single thread depends on the influence of the person under discussion?

Did I say any of this?

By the way, this thread was created in December 2016 and was a continuation thread from the original Hillary thread which was started in August 2016, by me. Nobody else had thought to create a Hillary thread, although there were other threads created to mock and criticize other candidates. The first thread was "tied off" in December, 2016. So this one was created to continue the discussion.

What does that have to do with you still generating content long after Hillary has disappeared?

There are many, many threads about the President and nobody is complaining about their existence. Nobody is demanding that they be merged together so they don't have to look at them. There is nothing wrong with having 10 threads about Trump and one about Hillary, but it's a bit silly to suggest that Hillary Clinton doesn't even merit discussion on a single, general thread.

Its not silly when there's a general trend on the right to use Hillary as a red herring to distract from the disaster that Trump is.

Fuck, somebody started a thread in the News section about a peacock which damaged a liquor store, doing $500 in damages. Are you on that thread bemoaning its lack of news worthiness?

No, because that thread isn't part of an effort to distract from the incompetence of the most powerful person in the world. This is pretty simple stuff. Even you should be able to understand it.

Or, is Hillary's worthiness now below that of animals destroying a modest amount of property? You yourself started a thread in the New, Current Events and Politics section about things Australia apparently does better than the Netherlands. Do we need that thread? You also created another thread called "Straya" about Australia. Not sure why "we" needed a second thread after that about how Straya beats the Netherlands, but you seemed to think there was no impropriety in creating multiple threads about it.

Your dishonesty is staggering. You know very well why these events are totally unrelated to you constantly going on about Hillary to distract from Trump.

Don't get me wrong, you can do as you please. But there is something really weird about someone who spends most of their time on a discussion board, as you do, trying to ruin threads you don't like. Maybe it would be good to have an omnibus thread about topics that people think are done or not worthy of threads on Rationalia. Then you could rail against threads that don't interest you to your hearts content.

God you are a whiner. I'm not trying to ruin anything other than your disingenuousness.