Ah, Hillary, going the Jeff Gannon route. Seems as though one of her staffers, planted someone in the audience at one of her most recent outings to toss in a nice softball question. Sounds sort of like pre screened audiences at Bush's events. Good lord woman! Haven't you learned anything by sitting by and watching the last Presidential election? You don't need to do this, you're smarter than this. Knock off the BS fer cryin' out loud.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

Scan down for the story. Hillary, this is not acceptable, not at all.

Why does this surprise you? Of all the Dems, Hillary is most like Bush.




/or is it that Hillary likes bush the most? :eek:

Why does this surprise you? Of all the Dems, Hillary is most like Bush.




/or is it that Hillary likes bush the most? :eek:

Don't worry, it doesn't really surprise me, I just thought that she might be smarter than that. Wrong again I am, and really, it still cracks me up when right wingers talk about how super liberal Hillary is. That notion is laughable, highly laughable. She's more right wing than some of the republicans running for President.

which is why most 'core' Dems don't really like her

which is why it is so funny to hear the neocon cabal call her a lefty

Why does this surprise you? Of all the Dems, Hillary is most like Bush.

+10000000000000000000000000000000

which is why it is so funny to hear the neocon cabal call her a lefty
That's two-fold. 1) They're preparing for the general election and getting their base to think of her as right-wing, and 2) They think they'll defeat her pretty easily in the generals so they want her to be the nominee, so they're trying to make her appeal to lefty dems.

Srsly, Republicans are so much better at this stuff than Democrats.

That's two-fold. 1) They're preparing for the general election and getting their base to think of her as right-wing, and 2) They think they'll defeat her pretty easily in the generals so they want her to be the nominee, so they're trying to make her appeal to lefty dems.

Srsly, Republicans are so much better at this stuff than Democrats.
Agreed for the most part, but I don't think she can be beat in the general, since most of the US are not good with the whole republican rule of the last 7 years or so. If Bush wasn't such an idiot, they'd be able to beat Hillary. Any other republican president aside from W, she wouldn't win.

Agreed for the most part, but I don't think she can be beat in the general, since most of the US are not good with the whole republican rule of the last 7 years or so. If Bush wasn't such an idiot, they'd be able to beat Hillary. Any other republican president aside from W, she wouldn't win.
Rudy would beat her. Fear sells, and no one sells it better than he does.

Rudy would beat her. Fear sells, and no one sells it better than he does.

I don't think that he would. There are a lot of religious folks out there who are saying that if they nominate Rudy, they'll find a 3rd party. Rudy won't win, he's a chump, and a one trick pony, that didn't even perform the trick. I think Rudy would be even worse than George W. He's talking about expanding Gitmo, and invading Iran, and torturing to his heart's content. I think, or I would hope, that after 8 years of Bush, the American people would be smart enough to NOT elect Rudy.

Run Rudy against Hillary, she'll kick his arse.

Ah, Hillary, going the Jeff Gannon route. Seems as though one of her staffers, planted someone in the audience at one of her most recent outings to toss in a nice softball question.

They did not plant someone in the crowd, rather they tried to prime a student who was in the crowd. That is slightly different, but in some important ways. No one was pretending to be something they were not, no one was inserted in the audience. No "fake" students here.

They tried to get students to ask specific questions and then tried to make sure those students were called on. So they planted questions in the audience, not people.

Trash it for what it is at least.

They did not plant someone in the crowd, rather they tried to prime a student who was in the crowd. That is slightly different, but in some important ways. No one was pretending to be something they were not, no one was inserted in the audience. No "fake" students here.

They tried to get students to ask specific questions and then tried to make sure those students were called on. So they planted questions in the audience, not people.

Trash it for what it is at least.

Since it is the questions that are the whole point, ain't it purty much the same thang?

Since it is the questions that are the whole point, ain't it purty much the same thang?

No. If they planted a person, they WOULD get the question. But trying to plant a question with a non campaign person does not mean you are sure to get the question, after all that student could have asked anything when called on.

It's bad, it's unneeded, it is manipulative, no doubt. But we should be harsh on this one for what they did, not what they did not do.

No. If they planted a person, they WOULD get the question. But trying to plant a question with a non campaign person does not mean you are sure to get the question, after all that student could have asked anything when called on.

It's bad, it's unneeded, it is manipulative, no doubt. But we should be harsh on this one for what they did, not what they did not do.

A planted question is still a planted question, irrespective of the membership cards the asker may or may not hold.

How fine can you split a hair?

This is the problem with legacies- they never feel that they have to play by the same rules as the rest of us- after all, they've got an "in".

"Don't worry, guys, dad was a '94- I'm a shoe in!"

A planted question is still a planted question, irrespective of the membership cards the asker may or may not hold.

How fine can you split a hair?

Pretty doggone fine I expect, I think he's a hair-splitter by trade. :)

A bunch of BS! They all plant, anything to get a advantage. Get real!

They did not plant someone in the crowd, rather they tried to prime a student who was in the crowd. That is slightly different, but in some important ways. No one was pretending to be something they were not, no one was inserted in the audience. No "fake" students here.

They tried to get students to ask specific questions and then tried to make sure those students were called on. So they planted questions in the audience, not people.

Trash it for what it is at least.

I stand corrected, but as you said somewhere in here, I think, it is still very uncalled for. Planting questions, is not much better, if at all, than planting people. It's still setting up the candidate to answer softball questions, or questions that they want to answer, as in this case.

A bunch of BS! They all plant, anything to get a advantage. Get real!

And it's always wrong, no matter who is doing it. George Bush has never been asked a hard question in his entire time in office, and if and when he does get asked one that might be tough, he avoids, obfuscates, and then dodges it completely, and makes fun of a blind guy in the audience who is wearing his sunglasses (he did that once). Bush's campaign was famous for sorting out audience members to make sure that only supporters were allowed into his events. Hillary hasn't gone that route, yet, and I would hope that she doesn't. Anyway, anytime it's done, it is wrong, and they need to knock it off.

How fine can you split a hair?

Planting a person requires falsifying or at the least misrepresenting identity.

Planting a question requires a small amount of information be exchanged.

It is hardly a fine hair.

I am not saying planting a question is a good thing, I consider it a fundamentally bad thing. But the deception is mild compared with planting a person, as in the case of the FEMA faux press conference recently.

wingers talk about how super liberal Hillary is. That notion is laughable, highly laughable.

She's not a liberal, she is a Socialist.

And it's not funny in the least.