2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe AMOUNT of $ taken in by the Clintons has not been raised in a townhall, a debate, or interview.
Why?
Why hasn't questions over the timing of speech fees and consulting fees and business before the State Dept EVER been raised?
Can you imagine if Bernie had done this. It would be breaking news and continuously scrolling on the bottom of the screen.
And about those young voters. It is because they do their research and do not rely on the mainstream media that they are not voting for Clinton.
Update: When you are out strike up a conversation with someone about the $675,000 speech income from Goldman Sachs (that was reported for a time) and watch their face when you clue them in to the real dollar amounts (plus the consulting income) that the Clintons have raked in. The expression on their faces is priceless.
dchill
(38,441 posts)It's not a talking point.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)and very selective in what they choose to see.
Blue Meany
(1,947 posts)have acted as virtually part of her campaign, creating a very distorted picture of the campaign and the histories of the candidates. I have seen this pattern of Republican media distortion for years, and it is easy to spot. But after this campaign, there are a lot of news sources and commentators that I know longer feel I can trust, and I wonder how much I may have been misled in the past.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)AgerolanAmerican
(1,000 posts)same group as lobbyist patrons
they're on the same team - not our team