Rule.
Edit: I was trying to make a joke about how her new fondness for the number "34" was because "haha funny sex rule number" aka "rule34".
You are viewing a single comment
Edit: I was trying to make a joke about how her new fondness for the number "34" was because "haha funny sex rule number" aka "rule34".
Ughh…HRC is the whole reason we’re in this predicament in the first place
Yeah it's definitely her fault Americans are misogynists and rather vote for a sexual predator than a woman.
She encouraged trump to run & gave donations to him. He would not have even ran in 2016 if it were not for her and the DNC. It is her fault
It’s amazing more people aren’t aware of this.
I think that’s because it’s an inconvenient truth that neither D or R would like to acknowledge, and that it showcases how little of democracy there is left in the US. It’s just depressing af
Source?
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-2016-donald-trump-214428/
That sounds like bullshit. Definitely need a source.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-2016-donald-trump-214428/
I couldn't find anything in your source supporting your claim, did I miss it somehow? It did say they planned to use trump by "pumping him up" but not financially, and not encouraging him to run in the first place. It was a plan to make the less likely to win Republican candidates (there were several on their list) seem more likely to win to split the Republican vote. I also couldn't find any other article supporting your claim when I googled it but I might need better search terms.
I understand what you mean about it being a bad plan that backfired horribly. But blaming any single person (other than trump) for his run for presidency and win is disingenuous. She had a bad campaign, and the media spent too much time following his antics, and millions of Americans messed up by voting for a clown.
Nothing in there suggests donations. That was just a lie.
There's a saying about forests and trees that I think you should keep in mind.
Is that saying meant to cover baseless assertions about someone's actions? Hillary Clinton was involved in enough shady shit to not need to make stuff up. If someone says that she donated to her opposition's campaign they should have evidence to back that up. Otherwise they just give ammunition to people convincing others to ignore real, substantive criticisms against Trump.
That article mostly describes her campaign focussing on criticizing stronger and more likely candidates early on when the Republican nomination was still up for grabs. That just makes tactical sense. Otherwise you might as well also accuse her of being involved in a conspiracy to get Vermin Supreme in power too.
You can say the fact that Hillary is a woman contributed to her loss. You can even argue that it was enough to make the difference in Trump winning. But the main reason she lost is because she was still otherwise a weak candidate overall.
She did encourage him, on purpose, because she thought he would be easy to beat. Your source completely supports that, and that was unethical and foolish of her.
However I can't find any evidence that she or the DNC donated to him or his campaign.
Perhaps you can make a small adjustment to correct your comment to avoid the spread of misinformation!
Yes, it is. Because he's the reason they're that misogynist, and she helped his campaign.