Another reason Clinton is unelectable:

[Admiral Loinpresser]

the American people consider her not trustworthy. This meme is exacerbated every time she gets in touch with her "inner Carson."

In the latest example, Glenn Kessler of WaPo gives her two Pinnochios for recently claiming she tried to enlist in the Marines in 1975.

It’s fair to say The New York Times account, written by then-reporter Maureen Dowd, was highly skeptical. Dowd noted:

“At the time, Hillary Rodham was an up-and-coming legal star involved with an up-and-coming political star.”
“She had made a celebrated appearance in Life magazine as an anti-establishment commencement speaker at Wellesley College, where, as president of the student government, she had organized teach-ins on her opposition to the Vietnam War.”
“She was a Yale law school graduate who had worked on the anti-war Presidential campaigns of Eugene J. McCarthy and George McGovern.”
“Mrs. Clinton told friends that she had moved to Arkansas for only one reason: to be with Bill Clinton.”
The Clintons married on Oct. 11, 1975, in Fayetteville.


Dowd asked: “So, if she was talking to a Marine recruiter in 1975 before the marriage, was she briefly considering joining the few, the proud and the brave of the corps as an alternative to life with Mr. Clinton, who was already being widely touted as a sure thing for Arkansas Attorney General?”

Clinton’s spokesman at the time, Neal Lattimore, speculated (without any apparent evidence) that perhaps the law school graduate was thinking of joining the Judge Advocate General’s Corps.

(Update: A former Marine lawyer, who was actively recruiting for the JAG at the time, says it is “ludicrous” to suggest someone with Clinton’s skills would have been rejected. Since the draft had ended, “we were frantic for lawyers,” he said, declining to be identified. Neither age nor eyesight would have been issue, he added. Many of the newly recruited lawyers were at least 26 years old and eyesight was only an issue for pilots, he said. Some lawyers he worked with had glasses the “size of the bottle of Coke bottles.” Another Marine lawyer, who served between 1973 and 1978, confirmed this account, saying that one of the Marine lawyers he served with was a woman who weighed 200 pounds. “They desperately needed lawyers,” he said.)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/11/12/hillary-clintons-claim-that-she-tried-to-join-the-marines/

Whether she's mimicking Ben Carson or Brian Williams is hard to say, but it's not the first time. She also received a "pants on fire" rating from Politifact for claiming to have come under sniper fire.

"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

But that's not what happened, as demonstrated by CBS News video that shows Clinton arriving on the tarmac under no visible duress, and greeting a child who offers her a copy of a poem. The Washington Post Factchecker also turned a skeptical eye on Clinton's comments, reporting that a review of more than 100 news stories from the time documented no security threats to the First Lady.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/mar/25/hillary-clinton/video-shows-tarmac-welcome-no-snipers/

The GOP is salivating at the idea of running against HRC and for good reason. Only Bernie can credibly attack Trump or Carson for their constant lies.

[MohRokTah]

1. .

[Buzz Clik]

3. +1

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. 10

[Android3.14]

5. Your imoji

Looks like someone who has stopped, dropped and rolled because of a fire.

[Buzz Clik]

6. Aflame in a spontaneous burst of hilarity

[NurseJackie]

39. +1

That about covers it. Nothing more needs to be said.

[Fearless]

52. So you deny that she lied?

[DanTex]

2. Another reason Clinton will win.

Her haters are obsessed with things that nobody else cares about.

My favorite part of this primary season might be when Hillary haters pretend to care about "issues". Thankfully, if anyone ever believed that, we have OPs like this to clear up any confusion.

[Buzz Clik]

7. ouch

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. Looks like a swing and a miss from the seminal poster

[Buzz Clik]

13. ..

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. When all you have is a bat the whole world looks like a baseball.

EOM

[Buzz Clik]

18. When all you have is a whiffle bat...

.... you spend a lot of time looking for a whiffle ball.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. Touche

EOM

[Admiral Loinpresser]

11. I will forward your advice

to stick to the issues to HRC, David Brock, Claire McCaskill and the rest of her poop throwers.

[DanTex]

15. I wasn't advising, just pointing out hypocrisy.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

21. Point away, kettle. n/t

[Skidmore]

14. +1

[DianeK]

16. if no one cares about honesty and integrity anymore...

then we are a nation that is truly in trouble! What causes us not to care about leadership with integrity? My guess would be drugs..prescription or otherwise

[Admiral Loinpresser]

22. +1 n/t

[NurseJackie]

41. I doubt their sincerity...

Yes, indeed many are obsessed with the things that nobody cares about. But I believe their obsession is not out of any serious or genuine concern. Instead, they do these things, and say these things, because it's all they've got to hang their hat on. Everytime I see one of those venomous posts, it reminds me of what a strong candidate Hillary is. As annoying as they are, their behavior is in fact very reassuring.

[Fred Sanders]

8. Yeah, the GOP is "salivating" over running against Clinton, hence two Congressional Committees

dedicated to taking down the candidate they would love to run against? And it would be TWO Clintons they would be running against, do not forget that! Guess who the other one is!

Quite the logical paradox in the "no one trusts Clinton so she should not be the candidate" fallacy.

Liberals are evidence-based thinkers, am I right?

But the GOP thank you for the effort.

[Buzz Clik]

10. Judging by the debates, they don't even recognize that Sanders announced.

[Fred Sanders]

12. This OP made me laugh a lot.....it is why I love DU! Many laughs, some learning.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

19. Here's a little bit of logic.

They think she has a good chance to win the nomination, so of course they are attacking her. If they have any smarts, they will drop Benghazi like a hot potato and stick to the emails, where they have made progress.

It's simply a battle of liars. Clinton will do or say anything to get elected and they will do or say anything to bring her down. Assuming Bernie passes her nationally after New Hampshire, as President Obama did, they will train their guns on him.

[Fred Sanders]

25. If you deign to advise the GOP as to how to take down Clinton....maybe you're on the wrong site?!

As an aside, a little bit of logic is as dangerous* and less than useless as a little bit of learning.

*dangerous to intelligence

[Admiral Loinpresser]

26. Advising the GOP is as effective as advising crocodiles. n/t

[Betty Karlson]

23. Maybe that's why the MSM are so much in favour of Clinton:

they want the Democratic nominee to be unelectable. The MSM are very pro-GOP, and boy can they strategise!

[Admiral Loinpresser]

24. I think the Corporate Controlled Media

are OK with HRC, given her neoliberal policies on Wall Street, "free trade," etc., but I agree they would definitely prefer an Establishment GOP candidate.

The only place where they have a clear bias for her is against Bernie, because he is a real threat to the oligarchy.

[Fred Sanders]

27. The GOP should drop all their investigations and attack Sanders to ensure Clinton wins!

Except they are not, are they? Sanders is no threat to the GOP but The Clintons in the WH, again, scares them into insanity. Look at what President Clinton The First did to their economic theories and did so much else, laid the GOP to waste for 8 years.

The GOP want Clinton to win is the argument.....all evidence to the contrary.

Please carry on with the fact-free conclusions.....what difference does it make?

[restorefreedom]

28. they will crawl through a blizzard or a firestorm to vote against her

the repubs are itching to run against her. she won't be able to win a ge

[underpants]

34. The Democratic nominee is going to win the GE

Aside from access to the OFA database (which dominates the real discussion in this) the GE is gerrymandered for Dems. Counting all votes per state gives us a huge advantage. Add in the demographics and the last two landslide wins are more than understandable, they should expect.

Overestimate the "energy" of the Repubs was one of the internal fatal flaws of the Romney campaign - including their media....well THE MEDIA.

My comments here have nothing to do with the current laughingstock crowd of their candidates either.

[restorefreedom]

37. i agree thst dems have an advantage

in a natl election. plus, most people are left on the issues that the rw loons keep harping about....marriage equality, access to paid birth control, etc.

but if hillary is the nom, underestimating the unbridled hatred for her in rw circles would be a huge mistake. they HATE her and will take glee in voting against her.

[redstateblues]

42. The prospect of a Socialist in the White House

would ensure a huge GOP turnout

[bahrbearian]

44. 1/3 of which would vote for Bernie

[restorefreedom]

45. the socialist bogeyman is dead

the only people who fear that term would never vote dem anyway.

[1StrongBlackMan]

29. This Thread made me laugh ...

a lot, and out loud. Thanks.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

31. Me too.

My wife and I had a good laugh about the Democrat's Ben Carson. We also had a good hoot when DWS squirmed and sputtered trying to deflect from another of her patron's gaffes.

[notadmblnd]

30. I don't care how anyone tries to paint it. If HRC wins the nomination, we'll have another Republican

In the White House in 2016.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

32. +1 n/t

[Thinkingabout]

33. The reason why Clinton will be elected is because first she will secure a delegate count of which

will not need any of the superdelegates to give her the nomination. She is right on the issues, is not wanting to add taxes to the low income people. they already have a burden making ends meet without more money being removed. A tax which will not be paid by the 1% who has capital gains, royalties, dividends and interest.

[Fred Sanders]

35. The closer Clinton moves towards the leftist positions of Sanders the more his fans cry foul!

Understandable.....not in the sympathetic sense of the word, more in the "I get the concern" sense.

To me, any moving to the left is applause-worthy and it should be to those genuinely holding more leftist positions. If folks do not "trust" her, well, what ya gonna accomplish about thst with that - except to collaterally assist the animals opposed to the Democratic Party in the one one one final battle?

"Genuinely" is the key word.

[Thinkingabout]

40. Clinton has had her positions for a long time, these issues is not a trademark of Sanders.

Not enough taxes on citizens to pay for Sanders programs, more debt.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

36. Bernie's tax policy is completely progressive.

The small tax on working people will be more than offset by the elimination of health care premiums, as demonstrated by Gerald Friedman's thoroughly documented, published analysis.

[Thinkingabout]

38. Provide the link. Sanders who has said he is going to tax the rich, instead he is taxing hard

Working people. What is he thinking?

[Admiral Loinpresser]

46. Friedman's analysis:

Executive Summary

The Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act, HR 676, introduced into the 113th Congress by Rep. John Conyers Jr. and 37 co-sponsors, would establish a single authority responsible for paying for medically necessary health care for all residents of the United States.

Under the single-payer system created by HR 676, the U.S. could save an estimated $592 billion annually by slashing the administrative waste associated with the private insurance industry ($476 billion) and reducing pharmaceutical prices to European levels ($116 billion). In 2014, the savings would be enough to cover all 44 million uninsured and upgrade benefits for everyone else. No other plan can achieve this magnitude of savings on health care.

Specifically, the savings from a single-payer plan would be more than enough to fund $343 billion in improvements to the health system such as expanded coverage, improved benefits, enhanced reimbursement of providers serving indigent patients, and the elimination of co-payments and deductibles in 2014. The savings would also fund $51 billion in transition costs such as retraining displaced workers and phasing out investor- owned, for-profit delivery systems.

Health care financing in the U.S. is regressive, weighing heaviest on the poor, the working class, and the sick. With the progressive financing plan outlined for HR 676 (below), 95% of all U.S. households would save money.

http://pnhp.org/blog/2013/07/31/friedman-analysis-of-hr-676-medicare-for-all-would-save-billions/

[Thinkingabout]

48. Sanders said he was going to tax the rich, his tax proposal is not going to tax the rich, they do

not get incomes. it will be the working Americans. Guess he needs to stop the "tax the rich", it is tax the low income. he wants to provide free tuition to everyone, oh yes Donald Trumps kids needs free tuition.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

50. Do you really believe that? n/t

[redstateblues]

43. Maureen Dowd? LOL

When your source for attacking HRC is the career Hillary hater Maureen Dowd you're running on fumes. Who's next -Trey Gowdy?

[Admiral Loinpresser]

47. Plus Andrea Mitchell, Glenn Kessler and Politifact.

CCM reporters are, of course, often problematic. But the tarmac video is undisputed and Hillary's marine enlistment story is dubious on it's face.

[Thinkingabout]

49. As is Sanders claim of $350,000 net worth which has been changed in the last few months to

$800,000, he has been in Congress for twenty five years, dubious.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

51. Too bad he'll never be able to afford one of Hillary's mansions. n/t