The Conservative Cave

Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: SVPete on April 24, 2017, 03:04:15 PM

Title: Clinton Camp Instituted ‘Loyalty Scores’ Following 2008 Loss
Post by: SVPete on April 24, 2017, 03:04:15 PM
Clinton Camp Instituted ‘Loyalty Scores’ Following 2008 Loss (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/21/clinton-camp-instituted-loyalty-scores-following-2008-loss/)
AMBER RANDALL
11:14 AM 04/21/2017
Quote
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton created “loyalty scores” to measure how loyal Democrats were to her after her failed 2008 campaign, according to a new book on her latest campaign failure.

Clinton had two staffers “toil” to rate every Democrat members of Congress  on a scale of one to seven — one being the most loyal — after she lost the Democratic nomination to Barack Obama in 2008. Her husband Bill Clinton then deliberately campaigned against the disloyal “sevens” in subsequent primary elections, and succeeded in getting some of them removed. Some of those who remained apparently took note, and were quick to endorse Hillary in 2016.

A paranoid, hyper-sensitive, vengeful shrew.
Title: Re: Clinton Camp Instituted ‘Loyalty Scores’ Following 2008 Loss
Post by: BlueStateSaint on April 24, 2017, 03:15:37 PM
Clinton Camp Instituted ‘Loyalty Scores’ Following 2008 Loss (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/21/clinton-camp-instituted-loyalty-scores-following-2008-loss/)
AMBER RANDALL
11:14 AM 04/21/2017
A paranoid, hyper-sensitive, vengeful shrew.

We sure dodged a bullet by electing President Trump!
Title: Re: Clinton Camp Instituted ‘Loyalty Scores’ Following 2008 Loss
Post by: Eupher on April 24, 2017, 05:14:36 PM
Clinton Camp Instituted ‘Loyalty Scores’ Following 2008 Loss (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/21/clinton-camp-instituted-loyalty-scores-following-2008-loss/)
AMBER RANDALL
11:14 AM 04/21/2017
A paranoid, hyper-sensitive, vengeful shrew.

Sorta sounds like Tricky Dick, except that Nixon wasn't half as dangerous as Hillary.
Title: Re: Clinton Camp Instituted ‘Loyalty Scores’ Following 2008 Loss
Post by: Adam Wood on April 24, 2017, 08:17:41 PM
Sorta sounds like Tricky Dick, except that Nixon wasn't half as dangerous as Hillary.
Beat me to it.  The very first thought that crossed my mind reading that was "Nixonian."
Title: Re: Clinton Camp Instituted ‘Loyalty Scores’ Following 2008 Loss
Post by: sneakypete on April 26, 2017, 09:23:00 AM
Of course they did. She worked for the Communist Party of America as a volunteer legal aide while in college,and she and all those around her in positions of authority are nothing but Soviets at heart.

Which is why she has so much rabid hatred for Russia these days. They are traitors to her cause because they dumped communism. To her,it is the equivalent of the Pope telling Priests they are now Rabbi's.
Title: Re: Clinton Camp Instituted ‘Loyalty Scores’ Following 2008 Loss
Post by: sneakypete on April 26, 2017, 09:25:20 AM
Beat me to it.  The very first thought that crossed my mind reading that was "Nixonian."

Think "Politburo" and you will be closer to the mark.

No matter how much anyone might hate Nixon,no one can call him a communist,or even a communist sympathizer. Which is why Bubbette! Clinton and all the other Commie Mommies of the 60's hated and demonized him so much.
Title: Re: Clinton Camp Instituted ‘Loyalty Scores’ Following 2008 Loss
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on April 26, 2017, 10:12:44 AM
It wasn't just petty and paranoid, it was strategic thinking that Machiavelli would endorse.  She succeeded in winning the party battle in the primaries based in no small part on long-term strategic moves like this, however repugnant her goals or her self may be.  But winning the party battle also left her too far out on the Left to win the Rust Belt states who had been on the losing end, or at least gotten nothing of value, in so many Obozo-era Progressive policies.
Title: Re: Clinton Camp Instituted ‘Loyalty Scores’ Following 2008 Loss
Post by: SVPete on April 26, 2017, 10:42:25 AM
It wasn't just petty and paranoid, it was strategic thinking that Machiavelli would endorse.  She succeeded in winning the party battle in the primaries based in no small part on long-term strategic moves like this, however repugnant her goals or her self may be.  But winning the party battle also left her too far out on the Left to win the Rust Belt states who had been on the losing end, or at least gotten nothing of value, in so many Obozo-era Progressive policies.

Adding to your thoughts, her hard-ball tactic gained her the endorsements that helped her win the party nomination, but I think it cost her the enthusiastic support that could have helped her in the several states that were close. People who are squeezed do what they have to do, but they don't love the one squeezing them.

Distancing herself from BHO was an all but certain lose-lose choice. Distancing herself from BHO risked losing a 90%+-loyal segment of the D base. OTOH, BHO had screwed over what had once been a very large and faithful segment of the D base, working people (all "colors", wage earners and small business owners), people from whom most of Hillary's peeps kept her isolated.

Hillary chose to mostly affirm BHO. The "black community" weren't Hillary-enthusiasts, and Trump got more black votes than Romney or McCain. The voters her campaign ignored and promised to keep screwing over (the way Obama did) rejected her.
Title: Re: Clinton Camp Instituted ‘Loyalty Scores’ Following 2008 Loss
Post by: MisterNatural on April 26, 2017, 05:01:00 PM
Rancid ****, just like Pelosi and Warren.