ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, July 23, 2016

The importance of rhetoric

James Carville explains, in an email released by Wikileaks as part of the #DNCleaks in a note of unknown provenance:
Ideologies aren't all that important. What's important is psychology.

The Democratic constituency is just like a herd of cows. All you have to do is lay out enough silage and they come running. That's why I became an operative working with Democrats. With Democrats all you have to do is make a lot of noise, lay out the hay, and be ready to use the ole cattle prod in case a few want to bolt the herd.

Eighty percent of the people who call themselves Democrats don't have a clue as to political reality.

What amazes me is that you could take a group of people who are hard workers and convince them that they should support social programs that were the exact opposite of their own personal convictions.
- James Carville, Clinton strategist
What Carville is talking about is rhetoric. 80 percent of the people are limited to rhetoric; per Aristotle, they cannot be convinced by information. They can only be moved by an appeal to their emotions or appetites.

UPDATE: The Carville note appears to be a fake being passed around under cover of the DNCleaks; I thought it was a little strange that the wily Carville would come right out and say that. But whether he said it or not, it is true, moreover, it is true of Republicans as well. It is true of everyone and it has been true since Aristotle's day. Most people simply don't speak or think in terms of dialectic.

As for those who think Hillary Clinton is a shoe-in due to demographics, note that the DNC doesn't believe so. And this is a genuine day one DNCleak.

"HRC will go into gen election as vulnerable candidate. Clinton Foundation quid-pro-quo worries are lingering, will be exploited in general."

Translation: she sold out the USA while Secretary of State.

Labels: ,

70 Comments:

Blogger Philip Nelson July 23, 2016 4:43 AM  

Jesus...

Blogger random Earth dweller July 23, 2016 5:00 AM  

It's the central lesson of this campaign. Eye-opening for sure.

Blogger Reinhard Lohengramm July 23, 2016 5:03 AM  

Is this real? I couldn't find the original on Wikileaks so I searched around:

https://www.truthorfiction.com/james-carville-called-80-of-democrats-politically-clueless/

Anonymous Haven Monahan July 23, 2016 5:06 AM  

The last paragraph gives it away. There are no "hard workers" who vote Democrat and so I have trouble believing this is a real quote

Anonymous Bobby Farr July 23, 2016 5:10 AM  

Obvious fake

Anonymous VFM 8859 July 23, 2016 5:15 AM  

Coal miners have a reputation for both hard work and dem leanings

Blogger Unknown July 23, 2016 5:24 AM  

"Translation: she sold out the USA while Secretary of State."

Like she would do anything else. Loral rocket deal with China, remember? She, like her husband, is corrupt to the core.

Anonymous SciVo July 23, 2016 5:30 AM  

Wow. James Carville even thinks like an anthropomorphic ophidian. Once again, physiognomy is real.

Anonymous SciVo July 23, 2016 5:32 AM  

Oops, too easy to believe. Gosh-darned confirmation bias!

Anonymous RCFlyer July 23, 2016 5:41 AM  

Marginally on-topic but I'm seeing something interesting in the UK betting markets. (I made quite a bit on Trump in the primaries and re-invested the winnings into a Trump win in November.)

You'll recall the betting markets got Brexit spectacularly wrong, and a post-mortem showed that the exchange odds were being skewed by a minority of big fish placing bets on "Remain" while lots of small bettors were putting money on "Leave".

I'm seeing what looks like very similar betting behavior on Trump v Clinton. Currently Betfair is showing Clinton at about 70% chance to win, Trump 30%. And I see lots of small bettors throughout the day putting money on Trump, slowly driving his percentage up. Then once or twice a day, big fish will show up and put thousands or tens of thousands of pounds on Clinton, driving her percentages back up and Trump's down.

As with Brexit, I don't know the motivations here. Couple of theories:

1) Rich globalists know that media/pundits now use the betting markets as a data point for predicting outcomes. So they're deliberately dropping money on Clinton in the markets to help shape a narrative of inevitability.

2) Rich people living in a bubble who honestly believe Trump has no chance. I suppose this could be the case here in the UK, where press coverage of Trump is 90% extremely negative.

Anonymous Haven Monahan July 23, 2016 5:44 AM  

#6 -- Not really -- miners are one of the most "Republican" of occupations.

http://www.mining.com/if-youre-a-miner-youre-most-likely-a-republican/

Blogger SciVo July 23, 2016 6:16 AM  

RCFlyer wrote:As with Brexit, I don't know the motivations here. Couple of theories:

Some of both, which together provide social proof to confirm the bias of others who are betting on what they want to believe, because they're culturally cosmo and/or financially depend on the unilateral socioeconomic disarmament of the West.

Blogger VD July 23, 2016 6:29 AM  

1) Rich globalists know that media/pundits now use the betting markets as a data point for predicting outcomes. So they're deliberately dropping money on Clinton in the markets to help shape a narrative of inevitability.

It is almost certainly this, since the media covers the odds and therefore, in the interest of shaping the desired Narrative, it is as important to bias the odds as it is to bias the polls.

Anonymous JAG July 23, 2016 6:36 AM  

This is essentially the same message that Gruber made about rank & file shitlibs concerning using lies, trickery, and other underhanded techniques to shove Obamacare on the rest of us. To borrow a phrase from the shitlib media itself, this is "fake, but accurate".

Anonymous RCFlyer July 23, 2016 7:02 AM  

Another interesting betting market tidbit - when Trump selected Pence as VP, there was a surge in pro-Trump bets until the big fish drove the odds back down again. Clinton's VP selection hasn't moved the needle at all.

Blogger Elocutioner July 23, 2016 7:03 AM  

Related: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/147595892021/how-persuaders-see-the-world

"Trump is trying to frame the election as Americans versus outsiders. To Trump, you’re either in the American category or you’re a threat to those who are, in terms of money or violence. You will note that Trump has avoided calling Clinton liberal. That category lost its power."

I think it a commenter here who pointed out that Trump doesn't use Dem vs Rep, but singles out Hillary and Obama and labels them as corrupt. He doesn't go after the big (stale) party affiliations. What exactly does "Republican" or "Democrat" mean? It ranges from 'I checked a box on a form' to 'this is a historic part of my family's identity.' The terms are also self-used interchangeably with liberal and conservative.

So that's quite the little sidestep - American or Corruptican.

Blogger Harsh July 23, 2016 7:09 AM  

80 percent of the people are limited to rhetoric

I'm surprised you think the percentage is that low.

Anonymous fred July 23, 2016 7:40 AM  

"As for those who think Hillary Clinton is a shoe-in due to demographics,"

Well she might or might not be, it's not clear, but her type (or more realistically, Huma Abedin's type) will certainly be a demographic shoo-in in just a few more years, as the mudslide becomes permanent, absent White secession (which will be necessary at the end of the day). Once Huma is permanent, and whites come to understand that the country their people built has been stolen from them and they will be permanently out-voted and milked as tax cattle, per the (((plan))), then we will all go happily tromping down the road to inevitable civil war. Coulda been avoided if anybody serious had a brain in their head, but it won't be. Trump is a mere traffic boop, he won't stop the mudslide and the civil war.

But Hitlery is not necessarily a shoo-in because of demographics; she's a shoo-in because she is a crook. This is going to be the most spectacularly stolen election you've seen in your lifetime.

"Just you try it on." -- J. Joyce

Blogger Orville July 23, 2016 7:41 AM  

You don't have to look any farther than the nearest marketplace, physical or virtual to see that emotion is the pivot to action and not reason. Even when reason is included in the pitch.

If you want to get clued in on this read Robert Cialdini's book "Influence" to find the five basic tools that get you to say yes regardless of the facts.

I'm almost to the point of thinking that reason is only useful as a cement to fix an idea in a person after they have been persuaded to accept based on emotion or rhetoric.

Best Tools For Men

Blogger Human Animal July 23, 2016 8:01 AM  

What amazes me is that you could take a group of people who are hard workers and convince them-

Phony compliment. Sounds like they're loyal or sympathetic to the 80%, instead of disgusted by them. So it was targeted at people who would want the respect of someone like Cairville and overcome their "cluelessness about political reality."

Demographics
The black vote can be 99% democrat, but if only 25% of it turns out, too bad. Ditto with the Eesbaneeks. And of course they want illegals voting. The illegals will be more likely to vote

Persuading is for people in bowties. They're all out to motivate the right people to turn out. Whites think America, so Trump wants Americans to think they have a stake in this.

Thinking it over, elections would look interesting if they rotated by demographic every four years: Men/women or White/Off-white/Brown/Other. If it's an all-women vote or all-black vote, a lot less money would get spent pretending to persuade, while aiming to motivate.

use the ole cattle prod in case a few want to bolt the herd.

Wonder if this was supposed to be code for "cops shot blacks to get out the black vote."

Anonymous Broken Arrow July 23, 2016 8:10 AM  

Millions of Millennials who are Democrats will never forget this about the DNC.

Anonymous fred July 23, 2016 8:23 AM  

@VD -- feel free to ignore this remark if you see fit, but it's just an aside which will maybe enhance your manner of thinking a little.....

You're given to making a sort of binary opposition between dialectical and rhetorical manners of thought (perhaps discourse is a better word, but I'm more interested in thought personally). Which produces some very useful insights. But I think you're cheating yourself of enhanced opportunity by excluding how many other manners of thought there are -- mystical, religious, lyrical, epical, dramatical. The basic test of the validity of a manner of thought is whether it can cough up reproducible results. It can be argued that true mystical thought (I don't mean New Age pap) or dramatic thought can do a thing like that.

You're very fond of Aristotle. Recall that his rough contemporaries were guys like Heraclitus, Alexander, Sophocles, Euripides and Aristophanes.

Just a little muffin for thinkin' bout, not a huge address to the Academy.

Anonymous Millenium July 23, 2016 8:27 AM  

@10: Mostly the former I suspect. (((These people))) used to manipulate polls to get the answer they wanted because they know there are some sheep who will always side with the perceived minority. This has led to polls being unreliable to the point of worthlessness but as polls have become unreliable people have noticed how accurate betting markets are.

However, there is a third alternative.

The game is rigged and the big betters know the outcome. I do not think it so far fetched that Brexit was rigged and was supposed to be remain but the big push by leave to use pen instead of pencil did not allow the riggers to manipulate the vote as much as they wanted. This would explain why there is no push for a revote - more people would use pens and the outcome would be far greater than 51% remain.

Anonymous Millenium July 23, 2016 8:32 AM  

That should read perceived majority, not minority.

Blogger LP9 Solidified in Gold! Rin Integra July 23, 2016 9:03 AM  

The worship of emotions has go to stop and it won't. Stateside is so far gone from logic, I dont know even I am infected with wrong headed thinking to re-program within myself.

(Last weekend I received a snarky, hurtful email about my mothers death. I didn't go on rhe or the emotional rhetorical mode. Or I hope I didn't, I just opted to expose a lie.

Purposefully slow, I replied back yesterday with "review items that reflect the person lied to you" and pictures. No grievances stated,the email was attached to the 4 family members plus the person in question. All 5 went emotional, called me cold, cruel and elusive. I reverted back to the archived evidence where I caught a lie and stated for them to deal with the liar and let moms death go. Only because Vox made it a point to cover the dia versus rhe and others around here have helped me drop the emotions and let go of grief could I have ever reached that place. Thank you.)

Blogger James Dixon July 23, 2016 9:05 AM  

> Not really -- miners are one of the most "Republican" of occupations.

Not in WV. They may vote Republican, but they're still registered as Democrats. I can't speak for the other states.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein July 23, 2016 9:06 AM  

Similar quote from Herman Goering [on foriegn policy instead of domestic policy]....

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein July 23, 2016 9:06 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous artaud July 23, 2016 9:14 AM  

"-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials"

I believe, if you reflect on the nature and circumstances of the 'Nuremberg trials', that the views or testimony expressed there by anybody, might be, um, uh, what's the word, maybe not accurate, maybe not trustworthy. I'm not wishing to defend Goering, but on the other hand, (or maybe on the gripping hand), I mean COME ON.

Blogger Ransom Smith July 23, 2016 9:17 AM  

I'm not entirely convinced The Lizard Queen will even be the one that's officially the nominee come the end of the Dem Convention.

The DNC Leaks won't be going away thanks to the internet. Not to mention the fact that the democratic leadership probably doesn't want to be humiliated.

My father keeps trying to convince me that they'll throw Biden out as a sacrificial lamb because he'll do better and make it less embarrassing. I'm not sure he doesn't have a point. Biden would probably make it a closer race.

Anonymous BGKB July 23, 2016 9:32 AM  

Is it fake because he is denying it? That would make all of HilLIARy's emales fake. If you think democrats wont brag about their wrongdoing meet the self proclaimed QUEEN OF TAX CHEATS who used patient info to apply in their name. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130717/12453623836/woman-who-bragged-that-she-was-queen-tax-fraud-facebook-gets-21-years-jail.shtml

There are no "hard workers" who vote Democrat and so I have trouble believing this is a real quote

Lots of slackers think they are hard workers especially if in a union. When women say equal work they mean equal effort.

Blogger Lazarus July 23, 2016 9:49 AM  

Ransom Smith wrote:My father keeps trying to convince me that they'll throw Biden out as a sacrificial lamb because he'll do better and make it less embarrassing. I'm not sure he doesn't have a point.

It seems rather far-fetched, BUT, wouldn't that be fun.
Biden is a lurker, alright. In the shadows. Hat pulled down. Cigarette butt dangling....

Anonymous grey enlightenment July 23, 2016 9:50 AM  

'Eighty percent' sounds like the low-information Obama and Sanders supporters. It has been my observation that those on the 'right' are smarter ,better-informed of the issues.

Blogger Diego Del Sol July 23, 2016 9:55 AM  

Carville is way too sharp to ever write that down and put his name on it removing deniability. I'm sure he talks that plainly to the big DNC donors, politicos and journalists he makes his living from/through though.

DNCleaks may affect a few people who claimed to be independent/undecided, but generally only idiots are in that category at this point. You're either for Trump and a chance to save the country or you're a parasite in some way, shape or form.

-posted using my new Brave browser

Blogger Nick S July 23, 2016 9:55 AM  

Democrats have spent decades deriding Republicans with every vicious epithet imaginable, keeping Republicans on the defensive and trying to appear like they were taking the high road by not stooping to the same tactics.

Along comes Trump who boldly proclaims Democrats are unscrupulous liars. You can't believe a word that comes out of their mouths. They lie about statistics. They lie about people. They lie about everything without compunction. And he has a ton of evidence to back his claim.

All of the sudden, progressives are uncool. They can't be trusted and all their hangers-on are falling away. The ensuing panic is a thing of beauty to behold.

Anonymous andon July 23, 2016 9:57 AM  

31. Anonymous BGKB July 23, 2016 9:32 AM

Lots of slackers think they are hard workers especially if in a union. When women say equal work they mean equal effort.


I don't even think they mean that. more like I was here and stood around as long as you were working, therefore....

Blogger Ransom Smith July 23, 2016 10:00 AM  

Lazarus wrote:Ransom Smith wrote:My father keeps trying to convince me that they'll throw Biden out as a sacrificial lamb because he'll do better and make it less embarrassing. I'm not sure he doesn't have a point.

It seems rather far-fetched, BUT, wouldn't that be fun.

Biden is a lurker, alright. In the shadows. Hat pulled down. Cigarette butt dangling....


The probably with Hillary is that she only polls well among libtards. Biden has that kind of dopey kind of "well, I like pie." kind of likability. It wouldn't shock me if the DNC is doing poling about alternative candidates. Just to see if Biden or anyone else gives them better numbers compared to The Lizard Queen.

Blogger Diego Del Sol July 23, 2016 10:34 AM  

@35
I love how Trump interacts with the media and is generally dismissive of them. "You know you're in the tank for Hillary. I know you're in the tank for Hillary. I'm not going to play your game like a good little cuckservative, so don't act like you're just asking questions 'cause the people want to know."

Blogger The Other Robot July 23, 2016 10:36 AM  

While 80% sounds close to one SD above the mean, I suspect that even more people are susceptible to rhetoric ... and I suspect that it is somewhat orthogonal to IQ and a separate ability (to resist and use rhetoric effectively, that is.)

Blogger Johnny July 23, 2016 10:39 AM  

I prefer the word emotion to the more heavy duty Freud words. More to the point and easier to understand.

Emotional appeals are not inherently illogical, but if properly done they tend to trump logic. (no Trump pun intended)

To shift directly to the political arena, I support Trump because our situation is dire and I favor much of what he wants to do. But what has become apparent to me is that his emotional appeal is one of confrontation. The big game is coming up, he is the coach, and he is ginning up support for our side.

The Democrat approach is slightly different. A mixture of handouts and envy. Less desirable because it does not stress any special effort. Republicans what to keep what they have, whereas the Democrats are simply entitled and should get the stuff. That wonderful word, entitlement.

Blogger Giraffe July 23, 2016 10:49 AM  

Hillary sold out the US while Sec. State. I'm sure the FBI is looking into that, right? Right?

Sometimes the sheepdogs are afraid of the wolves when the shepherd isn't around with his rifle.

Blogger Cail Corishev July 23, 2016 10:56 AM  

Everyone's susceptible to rhetoric, except for maybe a few people whose emotional function in the brain has been turned off by birth defects or brain damage.

But people who are capable of logic can recognize rhetoric and control their initial reactions to it while they consider it dialectically before deciding how to act.

The 80% are pretty much solely driven by rhetoric. They have no ability (or have never learned the habit) of saying, "Wait, is my instinctive feeling about this correct, or am I being fooled, perhaps by myself?" They go through their days completely driven by feelings: "I feel like eating this gallon of ice cream, so I will, while the rational part of my brain comes up with an excuse." "I feel like going home with this hot guy I just met, so I will, and my brain will think up good reasons tomorrow."

So if you want to convince the 80% of anything, you have to get them to feel the feelings that will produce the beliefs you want them to have, and that takes rhetoric. Once the feelings are in place, you can provide the dialectic to help them rationalize it, for the ones who need that.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein July 23, 2016 11:00 AM  

artaud wrote:"-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials"

I believe, if you reflect on the nature and circumstances of the 'Nuremberg trials', that the views or testimony expressed there by anybody, might be, um, uh, what's the word, maybe not accurate, maybe not trustworthy. I'm not wishing to defend Goering, but on the other hand, (or maybe on the gripping hand), I mean COME ON.


You misunderstood my point, Chief.

I wasn't pointing and sputtering "Nazi! Goering! Hitler!"

The Goering quote is one of the truest things any leader has ever said.

Blogger VD July 23, 2016 11:08 AM  

But people who are capable of logic can recognize rhetoric and control their initial reactions to it while they consider it dialectically before deciding how to act.

You would think. But theoretically capable and actually doing it are two entirely different things.

Blogger Orville July 23, 2016 11:24 AM  

Cialdini posits that a lot of these rhetorical tactics work on mental shortcuts we use instead of thinking it through. For instance, everybody is getting tats, why don't you have one? Works because of Social Proof. If everyone else is doing it, then it must be good, right? This is a mental shortcut. Sometimes we take the mental shortcut because of time pressures to decide.

Best Tools For Men

Blogger Johnny July 23, 2016 11:25 AM  

Then there is always Adolph Hitler, "How lucky for rulers that men do not think." And I think Voltaire, "History consists of the lies that we can agree on."

Blogger Johnny July 23, 2016 11:25 AM  

Then there is always Adolph Hitler, "How lucky for rulers that men do not think." And I think Voltaire, "History consists of the lies that we can agree on."

Blogger Revelation Means Hope July 23, 2016 11:37 AM  

Good thing America has a candidate that won't back off using Clinton's actual vulnerabilities because she has a magic vagina.

It is also very interesting, as Scott Adams points out, the Trump is not using the liberal conservative language.

I don't think anyone has both noticed this and realized the significance of it. It is a sea change in politics. Not too unexpected of a populist candidate, because it is one of his vulnerabilities that he is kind of both categories.

Once again, Trump's candidacy is moving the Overton window, in an unanticipated direction. The RNC couldn't adjust in time, and now the DNC is going to have the same trouble.

Blogger SemiSpook37 July 23, 2016 11:46 AM  

Elocutioner wrote:
"Trump is trying to frame the election as Americans versus outsiders. To Trump, you’re either in the American category or you’re a threat to those who are, in terms of money or violence. You will note that Trump has avoided calling Clinton liberal. That category lost its power."


This morning's post on her selection of Kaine is even more poignant: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/147847582386/clintons-vp-pick

"But the persuasion filter says the real reason men don’t like Clinton is that they can’t stand listening to her. Her speaking style reminds men of every bad relationship they have ever had with a woman. We’re all irrational sexists on some level, and Clinton sounds to many male ears like a disgruntled ex-wife, or perhaps your mom who had a really bad day. That’s a problem if you need the male vote."

While I won't take the mother comparison personally (because she still sounded infinitely better on a bad day that Clinton does on a good day), this is a very, very good point. It's probably more basic than the nationalist point that Trump's working on here: nobody in their right mind wants to be nagged to death, and Clinton would most likely be the ultimate nag. You put a globalist sellout nag in charge of a superpower that's considered to be at best in the ICU, and it puts the entire PLANET at risk. You can't make the argument that this is a great idea by any stretch of the imagination.

Philadelphia is going to devolve into chaos this week. It's going to make Chicago '68 look like a bed-wetting tantrum of an incontinent 4 year old.

Blogger Were-Puppy July 23, 2016 12:03 PM  

This was almost as good as the reports of that shooter in Munich yelling " I am a German!"

Carville can be a nasty piece of work, but he's great at rhetoric.

I'll never forget his quip about dragging a dollar through a trailer park

Blogger Were-Puppy July 23, 2016 12:07 PM  

@10 RCFlyer

Rich globalists
---

My WAG is this. Soros already made a killing on you guys pound, did he not? By which i mean, they wouldn't be above manipulating a betting pool.

They probably already see the writing on the wall for the EU, long term. I expect they will fight tooth and nail against Trump and their stupid North American Community.

Blogger Were-Puppy July 23, 2016 12:08 PM  

*for their North American Community

Anonymous St. Cecilia July 23, 2016 12:11 PM  

The supposed Carville note might well be a fake, but I heard him say substantially the same thing in an interview about ten years ago. He said, "People will say, 'I hate stupid people.' Well, I LOVE stupid people. Give me stupid people all day. I wouldn't have half what I do if it wasn't for dumb people."

Blogger LP9 Solidified in Gold! Rin Integra July 23, 2016 12:20 PM  

A fading meme or a quote one sees less and less is, 'truth is treason or a travesty in a place of deception', pre-sjw types and statsiders react to facts, logic and rational thought with culture shock because with the Evil that exists, the problems, all of it, take the deceived by surprise into a place of shock.

It was really interesting when his wife, if they are still married turned independent, left the GOP. She too is over and done with the neocons and (alleged, I think the email might be a truther or legit) Carville like mindsets. The email does read like condescension so it could be him.

Blogger The Other Robot July 23, 2016 12:26 PM  

But people who are capable of logic can recognize rhetoric and control their initial reactions to it while they consider it dialectically before deciding how to act.

You would think. But theoretically capable and actually doing it are two entirely different things.


I am not sure I agree with the premise.

In my opinion, rhetoric is primarily used to manipulate people and it seems to me that the ability to use rhetoric and resist the use of rhetoric is different to the ability to use logic.

As a result, I would not expect those who can use and understand logic to be able to resist rhetoric.

Blogger RobertT July 23, 2016 12:56 PM  

Fantastic post. However you found it out of 200,000 docs, way to go. But the way I read it, he may just be talking about throwing out enough free stuff. I'm not sure Dems are all that complicated.

By the way, I find HRC's voice grating. If many people feel the same way, the longer this campaign goes, the more she's going to drop. In the end, the only people who remain in her column will be those with something to gain. (i.e.) money.

Blogger RobertT July 23, 2016 12:56 PM  

Fantastic post. However you found it out of 200,000 docs, way to go. But the way I read it, he may just be talking about throwing out enough free stuff. I'm not sure Dems are all that complicated.

By the way, I find HRC's voice grating. If many people feel the same way, the longer this campaign goes, the more she's going to drop. In the end, the only people who remain in her column will be those with something to gain. (i.e.) money.

Blogger RobertT July 23, 2016 12:59 PM  

If I was Carville, I would claim it's a fake too. Who wouldn't? If the leakers say it's fake, then I may buy it. In any event, it makes a great story. Too bad it isn't gaining traction.

Blogger RobertT July 23, 2016 12:59 PM  

If I was Carville, I would claim it's a fake too. Who wouldn't? If the leakers say it's fake, then I may buy it. In any event, it makes a great story. Too bad it isn't gaining traction.

Blogger RobertT July 23, 2016 1:01 PM  

Remember: Obama gave away phones. HRC is going to give away college. The free stuff is stacked in the corner. Help yourself.

Blogger LP9 Solidified in Gold! Rin Integra July 23, 2016 1:40 PM  

55 we can withdraw our consent towards pre-sjw disorder spectrum typecasts. not sure how to define that...

Let us with the Lord's help of clarity resist rhetoric.

Anonymous Andrew E. July 23, 2016 2:25 PM  

As if the crumbling Clinton campaign didn't have enough problems. A delusional same-party-president who nobody listens to or respects anymore, world events spiraling down in confirmation of her opponent's worldview and her own party conceding that their decades long project of wiping out white America hasn't gotten as far as they hoped and were forced to stick Clinton with a white man running mate.

On top of all that, there is seriously something wrong with Clinton herself. WTF?

https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/756791777810608128

Anonymous SciVo July 23, 2016 2:59 PM  

andon wrote:I don't even think they mean that. more like I was here and stood around as long as you were working, therefore....

They don't even mean that. It would be an improvement if they counted watching out for mountain lions as work.

They don't mean working as many hours. They don't mean having the same job title. They don't even mean working in the same industry.

The way they get the ~70% number is by comparing everyone who works 32+ hours a week.

That's it. That's their criteria. Anyone who refers to the "gender pay gap" unironically is a commie by implication, whether they realize it or not.

Anonymous Spartacus xxxxx July 23, 2016 3:39 PM  

Andrew E. wrote:On top of all that, there is seriously something wrong with Clinton herself. WTF?

Yeah, definitely To Be Sampled Material. The comments are a hoot- 'human suit malfunction'; 'compulsive crook disorder'. But some of her smiling expressions are almost attractive, unlike practically every other picture of her.

Blogger G-S. July 23, 2016 5:04 PM  

Translation: she sold out the USA while Secretary of State

I don't believe so. She is not a strong campaigner and three victories in a row for a party are rare. She lost to Obama, and if we are to be believed, he is incompetent, so she must be even more incompetent. (Doesn't say much about McCain or Romney either). If Trump loses, then he would be losing to one of the weakest candidates on historical record.

Blogger Teri July 23, 2016 5:54 PM  

I've been trying to make the case that folks are tired of being lectured, after eight years of it. And they'd like to be allowed to have fun again

Anonymous BGKB July 23, 2016 6:16 PM  

Anyone who refers to the "gender pay gap" unironically is a commie by implication, whether they realize it or not.

I have been assured many times that male nurses earn more & that it has nothing to do with being willing to work at locations employees got raped in the parking lot, working overtime to cover pregnancies, more male traveler nurses, calling off less, cashing in unused PTO or ability to be on your feet longer. In places that offer incentive pay do women automatically ask if coming in for extra hours counts as incentive pay.
https://news.nurse.com/2015/08/10/nurses-speak-out-about-gender-pay-gap/

"The AANA and the profession, as a whole, would like to see this gap eliminated, because there’s no acceptable reason for there to be such imbalance in the pay scales.”

https://news.nurse.com/2015/08/10/nurses-speak-out-about-gender-pay-gap/

Blogger Harold July 23, 2016 7:15 PM  

Annual compensation numbers in any occupation paid by the hour are a farce. I work in a 24/7 job. Can't leave until relieved. If someone calls out sick, you go by the overtime list, and start scrolling down it. There are very few women in the field. I've worked at the same place as 2 of them. On a yearly basis, the women made less. They rarely, if ever, came in for overtime, and their unscheduled call-outs were great pay boosters for the rest of us. A mere one hour extra of overtime a week is 3.75% extra pay. And each call out generates 8 hours of overtime. It adds up quick to a big difference in annual compensation, when we're all paid by the exact same available to everyone wage schedule.

Blogger Lazarus July 23, 2016 9:29 PM  

Ransom Smith wrote:he DNC Leaks won't be going away thanks to the internet.

AND, Sanders is complaining. Now the DNC can do a mea culpa, excoriate the race results, and spring Biden

Blogger Terri Hanley July 31, 2016 11:21 AM  

HEY MORON "VD": Your "Story" -- you quoted FOX NEWS Sunday as the DNC?? Did you do ANY actual review or reading before you wrote this crap?

Your snarky comment was a FOX comment, NOT the DNC:

"As for those who think Hillary Clinton is a shoe-in due to demographics, note that the DNC doesn't believe so. And this is a genuine day one DNCleak.

"HRC will go into gen election as vulnerable candidate. Clinton Foundation quid-pro-quo worries are lingering, will be exploited in general."

Translation: she sold out the USA while Secretary of State."

NO, that "DNC email" statement?: was a summary TRANSCRIPT of a Fox News Sunday panel -- the Fox host Wallce, as a lob to a Fox News "analyst". It's in the damn Subject line, genius....

http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2016/04/24/trump-new-top-adviser-talks-pivoting-to-traditional-campaign-debbie-wasserman/

You have no business posting ANY political commentary, you didn't even identify the source? Did you even READ the email? At all?

This is the kind of sh!t "reporting" and commentary I'm sick of. You are wasting time and attention spans with lazy BS.
But hey -- god forbid anyone in this country let actual facts or information get in the way of your rush to an "opinion"!!

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts