HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » WaPo Gives Hillary "3 Pin...

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:15 PM

WaPo Gives Hillary "3 Pinocchios" On Claim NY's Crime Guns Come from Vermont

Hillary Clinton’s claim that the ‘highest per capita number’ of crime guns in New York come from Vermont



Hillary Quote:

‘We’re a small, rural state, we have no gun laws.’ Here’s what I want you to know. Most of the guns that are used in crimes and violence and killings in New York come from out of state. And the state that has the highest per capita number of those guns that end up committing crimes in New York come from Vermont. So this is not, ‘Oh I live in a rural state we don’t have any of these problems.’ This is, you know what, it’s easy to cross borders. Criminals, domestic abusers, traffickers, people who are dangerously ill, they cross borders too. And sometimes they do it to get the guns they use.”

— Hillary Clinton, panel on gun violence, April 11, 2016
]

This Clinton campaign attack on Bernie Sanders’s gun record has been a week in the making.

A version of it surfaced in reports of a meeting Clinton held with New York Democratic leaders, ahead of the April 19 primary. Politico reported that on April 4 she privately told the leaders that Vermont shared blame for the guns being used in crimes in New York. Her critics responded quickly, noting Vermont is the source of a small number of crime guns found in New York. (Her campaign said it could not confirm her statement.)

Then, on April 5, her campaign manager Robby Mook made a similar but generalized point in a CNN interview: “I don’t think Senator Sanders has been sincere here in New York which is facing serious problems with guns being trafficked from Vermont and other states.” Mook listed Vermont as one of the states where guns tied to crime in New York originated, but did not directly blame Vermont.

Finally, on April 11, Clinton used a more refined version publicly — eliciting gasps from the audience. But this time, the words “per capita” appeared, signaling the campaign believed it had found the right data to support her argument.

So This is The Anatomy of a Talking Point.

Clinton has been using gun control to cast a significant difference between herself and Bernie Sanders, repeatedly pointing out pro-gun votes that Sanders cast in Congress. (See The Fact Checker roundup of everything you need to know about Sanders’s record on guns.) Now, Clinton is drawing attention to the flow of guns into New York from Vermont. What are the underlying facts

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/12/hillary-clintons-claim-that-the-highest-per-capita-number-of-crime-guns-in-new-york-come-from-vermont/
chio's

61 replies, 1635 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 61 replies Author Time Post
Reply WaPo Gives Hillary "3 Pinocchios" On Claim NY's Crime Guns Come from Vermont (Original post)
KoKo Apr 2016 OP
oasis Apr 2016 #1
Jack Bone Apr 2016 #10
oasis Apr 2016 #18
TeddyR Apr 2016 #29
oasis Apr 2016 #37
TeddyR Apr 2016 #39
oasis Apr 2016 #40
TeddyR Apr 2016 #41
oasis Apr 2016 #42
TeddyR Apr 2016 #43
oasis Apr 2016 #44
TeddyR Apr 2016 #45
oasis Apr 2016 #50
TeddyR Apr 2016 #53
oasis Apr 2016 #54
azmom Apr 2016 #60
Logical Apr 2016 #57
djean111 Apr 2016 #2
840high Apr 2016 #38
JonathanRackham Apr 2016 #3
giftedgirl77 Apr 2016 #4
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #7
kennetha Apr 2016 #8
KoKo Apr 2016 #30
giftedgirl77 Apr 2016 #13
fighting-irish Apr 2016 #47
senz Apr 2016 #58
Uponthegears Apr 2016 #5
kennetha Apr 2016 #6
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #12
kennetha Apr 2016 #20
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #27
azmom Apr 2016 #61
KoKo Apr 2016 #32
Kensan Apr 2016 #33
beam me up scottie Apr 2016 #46
realmirage Apr 2016 #9
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2016 #11
realmirage Apr 2016 #14
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2016 #15
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #16
realmirage Apr 2016 #17
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #24
fighting-irish Apr 2016 #48
kennetha Apr 2016 #21
KittyWampus Apr 2016 #23
senz Apr 2016 #59
Land of Enchantment Apr 2016 #19
KittyWampus Apr 2016 #22
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #25
TeddyR Apr 2016 #31
SummerSnow Apr 2016 #26
oldandhappy Apr 2016 #28
Octafish Apr 2016 #34
fighting-irish Apr 2016 #49
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #35
TeddyR Apr 2016 #36
seabeyond Apr 2016 #51
MFM008 Apr 2016 #52
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #55
senz Apr 2016 #56

Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:19 PM

1. Hillary's got some catching up to do with Bernie in the Pinocchio Derby.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:35 PM

10. she's giving it all she's got captain...


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jack Bone (Reply #10)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:42 PM

18. Hill will be at a disadvantage if Bernie has a chat with the Pope.

He'd dare not lie to that guy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:14 PM

29. So it is ok if Hills lies

 

So long as she lies less than Bernie? Nice standard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #29)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:47 PM

37. Your guy is supposed to be the impeccable truth teller. What's up

with him?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #37)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 05:24 PM

39. Nice deflection

 

Is it or is it not ok if Hills lies?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #39)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 05:29 PM

40. Name one person you know who never lies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #40)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 05:32 PM

41. Another deflection

 

And not the point. Do you or do you not think that the leading Democratic candidate for presidential nominee should tell the truth at all times? Sure, she might sometimes be wrong, but should she purposely misstate issues?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #41)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 05:40 PM

42. Hillary's hired to get the job done for the American people by

any means possible. She's not running for Pope or Dalia Lama.

Politicians, union leaders, shop keepers, plumbers and bus boys sometimes don't tell the truth. If it doesn't interfere with production, not a big deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #42)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 05:48 PM

43. Wow

 

I didn't know that we were electing Machiavelli for president, but Machiavelli and Hills are a good comparison - the ends always justifies the means. I'm appalled, but not necessarily surprised, that you'd actively promote lies as a means to accomplish a political goal. Thought Dems were a bit more principled than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #43)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 05:54 PM

44. Which brings us back to Bernie's sizable Pinocchio accumulation. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #44)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 06:07 PM

45. So you agree that Hills is comparable to Machiavelli

 

Will do whatever it takes to be the nominee, and that lies are ok if they advance whatever your political agenda might be?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #45)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 07:03 PM

50. Hillary operates in her own fashion. She is unique.

She'll be a kick ass, no nonsense president. Some will be pleased, some won't, but prepare yourselves for eight years of amazement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #50)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 07:13 PM

53. You COMPLETELY ignored my question

 

Are you claiming Hills is unique because she lies? If she isn't indicted for deciding to expose national security secrets because she wanted the convenience of using her Blackberry, then yes, she might be the next president. As a lifelong Dem I'm certain we could do better though - Liz Warren, Biden, etc. We should be honest - Hills would beat Trump because he's an awful candidate and independents won't vote for him. Hills would lose to any Republican who wasn't a quack or far-right demagogue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #53)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 07:22 PM

54. Good thing for us House Speaker Ryan announced he won't run.

Hill, flaws and all, will be a cinch win against all the rest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #43)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 10:58 PM

60. Not Hill and her supporters. It's

how they roll. They take pride in their candidate's unscrupulous ways.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 09:16 PM

57. No one trusts her so I bet she is leading actually. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:20 PM

2. In other news, Hillary told yet another lie.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #2)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 05:10 PM

38. and another and another and another.........

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:21 PM

3. Is it the doings of the maple syrup cartel?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:21 PM

4. Lulz, so Clinton uses actual data & they get pissy.

 

don't get me wrong, this is an incredibly stupid talking point. But it's not blatantly false.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:28 PM

7. It's blatantly false. Statistics prove otherwise. I think three Pinocchio's equals a lie. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #7)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:33 PM

8. It's blatantly TRUE

by the fact checkers own admission.


Vermont does provide the highest per capita number of guns tied to crimes in New York. This point resonated with audience members, who gasped when she told them this factoid. But as much as the Clinton campaign may want to blame Sanders or his home state for the guns in New York, this is a misleading data point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kennetha (Reply #8)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:15 PM

30. The rest from Fact Checker:


The per capita calculation is skewed by Vermont’s small population (55 guns out of 626,562 people, or 8.78 guns per 100,000 people). When it comes to gun trafficking between states, the raw numbers indicate the actual volume of guns flowing out of a state, and the prevalence of dealers who may be selling guns that are tied to crime. If you take out the 55 Vermont-originated guns from all crime guns that came from outside of New York, the number of crime guns in 2014 would decrease to 2,556 from 2,611. That’s how much impact the flow of crime guns from Vermont has on the volume of crime guns in New York.

The number of crime guns in New York from Vermont is so small that it could even be attributed to one or two bad actors. Using the per capita measure of trafficked guns originating from Vermont is as pointless as counting guns trafficked per 100,000 head of cattle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #7)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:38 PM

13. Lol, well then your super politician has done nothing but spew bullshit

 

for like 2 weeks. How many time's did he get 3+ Pinocchios over the last 14 days? Such hypocrites.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #13)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 06:13 PM

47. Zero. Do you know why?

 

WaPo is owned by Bezos.

Zero credibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #13)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 09:20 PM

58. Lol, have some Hillary

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:24 PM

5. WOW

 

THREE Pinocchio's from the Hillary shill WaPo????

That's like ONE HUNDRED from a REAL newspaper!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:26 PM

6. I don't know how you lie by telling the truth. Can someone explain that?

This is presuming that Americans are too dumb to understand the difference between absolute numbers and per capita numbers and are too dumb too realize that when you say the Vermont exports more guns per capita than does any other state that statement leaves it COMPLETELY OPEN what the absolute numbers are. That is, that applies nothing whatsoever about the number of guns that Vermont ships to New York nor anything about the percentage of the total guns that come from out of state come from Vermont in particular.

Is a politician supposed to assume that Americans have like a third grade education on average or something.

Straight from the fact-checkers own mouth:

Vermont does provide the highest per capita number of guns tied to crimes in New York. This point resonated with audience members, who gasped when she told them this factoid. But as much as the Clinton campaign may want to blame Sanders or his home state for the guns in New York, this is a misleading data point.


It's astounding that a true statement is a called a lie.

Sure it's not the complete truth. But anyone who understands the meaning of 'per capita' should just know right away that it couldn't possibly be the complete truth. It explicitly leaves too many questions explicitly open for that. With even a modicum of thought, one would naturally ask the question. But in absolute terms, how much does Vermont contribute to the flood of guns.

The response would be a small trickle, cause it's a small state.

But then the follow up would be. But if all states ship guns at the RATE that Vermont does, given its population, NY York would be even more flooded with guns than it already is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kennetha (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:38 PM

12. I think that 262 guns out of 245,749 come from Vermont. That's about 1/10 of 1%.

 

It's considered insignificant. Just another Hillary misstatement. She won't speak to fracking but wants to make up some crap about guns. She won't talk about Social Security.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:46 PM

20. A truth is never a misstatement

Per capita numbers may not be the most relevant numbers, but they are not irrelevant. And she spoke a truth, by the fact checkers own admission.

What the fact checker should have said is not that it was a lie -- it was not. But that it is not the most helpful piece of information possible.

THat's an entirely different matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kennetha (Reply #20)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:07 PM

27. 262 guns is negligble. Clinton is trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

 

I assume you read what Black Lives Matter wrote about her:

“Make no mistake, Hillary Clinton's efforts to push these policies (Crime Bill and cutting safety nets) resulted in the continued destruction of Black communities and the swift growth of our mass incarceration crisis.”


That's significant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kennetha (Reply #20)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 11:01 PM

61. Her intention was to mislead. In my book,

that's lying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kennetha (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:18 PM

32. You left out this:

from the article:

The per capita calculation is skewed by Vermont’s small population (55 guns out of 626,562 people, or 8.78 guns per 100,000 people). When it comes to gun trafficking between states, the raw numbers indicate the actual volume of guns flowing out of a state, and the prevalence of dealers who may be selling guns that are tied to crime. If you take out the 55 Vermont-originated guns from all crime guns that came from outside of New York, the number of crime guns in 2014 would decrease to 2,556 from 2,611. That’s how much impact the flow of crime guns from Vermont has on the volume of crime guns in New York.

The number of crime guns in New York from Vermont is so small that it could even be attributed to one or two bad actors. Using the per capita measure of trafficked guns originating from Vermont is as pointless as counting guns trafficked per 100,000 head of cattle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kennetha (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:30 PM

33. So you realize this was a distortion...

Most people hearing this during the debate probably didn't even register the words "per capita" at all. They heard...highest number of guns tied to crimes in NY. That caused the audience to "gasp" at the realization that Bernie is from the state that's apparently responsible for a huge portion of crime in NY. How could he possibly condone this? Won't somebody think of the children?

So if 2 guns came from Wyoming, would that state be the new per capital champion, and we could all go back to hating Dick Cheney again?

Seriously, though. I laughed when you admitted in your own post that..."it's not the complete truth." But the biggest kick was your last sentence. That took quite a bit of mental gymnastics to infer that scenario was even remotely possible. I think that last sentence would have had just as much relevance if you had said...."If people's farts smelled like roses, we'd all walk around like dogs sniffing everyone's butts."

/End sarcasm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kennetha (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 06:11 PM

46. The guns per capita is spin and about as relevant as the cow per capita ratio.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:33 PM

9. I like Hillary but I think this

Was a mistake and she should correct it. If only Bernie supporters were evolved enough to pay attention to their candidate's flaws as well. Blind devotion is scary

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to realmirage (Reply #9)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:37 PM

11. Real devotion to any candidate is scary

 

There, I fixed it for you. That is inclusive of both parties

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:39 PM

14. Agreed

People of every party, and supporters of every candidate are doing it. It's dangerous

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to realmirage (Reply #14)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:40 PM

15. Yes. Yes it is

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to realmirage (Reply #9)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:40 PM

16. Sanders fans support him because of his positions on issues. The same isn't true for Clinton fans.

 

Just ask them about any issue. They either don't know what Clinton's position is or don't care. How about fracking? Or the TPP? or medical marijuana? or Prisons for Profits. Or continued war?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #16)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:41 PM

17. You just proved my point rhett

That is a ridiculous statement. Go to the Hillary group and you'll be amazed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to realmirage (Reply #17)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:50 PM

24. And you proved my point. They will not discuss issues outside of their protected bubble.

 

I have started many, many OP's about issues and they never, ever respond on the issue. So you are saying that they discuss the issue of fracking in the Hillary Group? I will have to go see that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to realmirage (Reply #17)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 06:16 PM

48. Or banned.

 

No thanks. I'd rather wash my hair with hydrochloric acid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #16)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:47 PM

21. Silliness extraordinaire

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #16)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:49 PM

23. His positions are nothing but that. Insubstantial posturing. The editorial board debacle

 

proves that.

He's literally nothing more than an empty suit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #23)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 09:31 PM

59. His positions are clear, detailed, practical & realistic. Writes them himself, too.

 

He has had these up since last summer:

https://berniesanders.com/issues/

https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-bernie-pays-for-his-proposals/

and it's cool, because Bernie doesn't change his positions every five minutes.

Although it's nice that Hill came round to the $15 minimum wage after all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:43 PM

19. The Truth Shall Set You Free....


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:48 PM

22. How many does Sanders get for voting for the CRIME BILL he trashes his opponent for?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #22)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:52 PM

25. Speaking of that Black Lives Matters has something to say:

 

Here are some important points made by Black Lives Activist Ashley Williams:

“Here's the truth: the Clinton legacy has left our prisons bursting at the seams. Real lives have been destroyed as a result. It is an indisputable fact that millions of Black people were locked up for drug crimes and provided the bodies for the expansion of the prison industry.

The 1994 Crime Bill that she so vigorously defended not only expanded incarceration, but stripped funding for college education from prisoners. The Clinton legacy allowed for policies that prevented anyone convicted of a felony drug offense from receiving food stamps or income assistance. Clinton-led welfare reform fundamentally ripped apart the social safety net.”


“Make no mistake, Hillary Clinton's efforts to push these policies resulted in the continued destruction of Black communities and the swift growth of our mass incarceration crisis.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #22)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:15 PM

31. What does that have to do with Hills' lies?

 

Are you trying to justify her lies on this issue? I thought you'd prefer a candidate who is trustworthy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:03 PM

26. And she knows this how?

WTF?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:09 PM

28. WOW

Did not think Washington Post had the guts to say anything against clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:32 PM

34. Three Pinocchios?

That's a lot of Pinocchios!!!



That's just a down payment of Pinocchios for the Johnathan Capehart crapola.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #34)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 06:17 PM

49. Downpayment of 0.01%, indeed.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:45 PM

35. OUCH!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:46 PM

36. Most people believe that Hills is untrustworthy for a reason

 

Last edited Tue Apr 12, 2016, 05:26 PM - Edit history (1)

And this is another example of why her unfavorables are through the roof. The only saving grace is that Trump is even less well-liked. Still trying to figure out how the party of Roosevelt, Kennedy and Obama ended up with one of the most disliked and least trustworthy (according to polls) politicians ever as the establishment nominee for president. A lot of Republicans probably wonder how they ended up with Trump. Two different issues thought - Hills is the establishment candidate for Dems despite the fact that she is untrustworthy/disliked, while Trump is the anti-establishment candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 07:05 PM

51. Clinton got her first Pinocchios. I expect her to straighten up. Sander is at what, 17? 20?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 07:07 PM

52. Some MSNBC guy said

technically she is right. Was it Howard Dean?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 09:05 PM

55. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 09:16 PM

56. Dirty, dirty, dirty, dirty, dirty.

 

She's gone negative ever since she lost that string of primaries.

They sure worked hard on this one, tweaking and redoing. Hope it backfires.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread