You got what you deserve, Republican Party...

[Weltall]

... What? Of COURSE I care about this! Her Iraq vote always has been the biggest negative about Hillary for me. I'm just willing to support her anyway because I believe that she would not have made that decision with all the intelligence the Bush Administration had, that the Senate was lied to by the Bush Administration in an effort to get them to support a disastrously bad war Bush & co. were determined to start, and that she only voted that way (and again, Kerry, Biden, and more all voted the same way!) as a political maneuver to not oppose something they all thought was going to be a political negative to vote against.

Bernie Sanders had access to no more intelligence than Clinton did, and he made the right decision because the war was a moral wrong and a political disaster waiting to happen regardless of how valid the administration's intelligence was on the subject of Hussein's supposed weapons of mass destruction. Sanders understood that, and exercised better judgment when it came up for a vote. The base assumption that Clinton was more qualified than Sanders on the issue of foreign policy is debunked by that example alone. Sanders reasoned out what the consequences would be before it happened and that is a crucial element of leadership Hillary Clinton exercises too infrequently to make me comfortable. You better believe that a hypothetical Secretary of State Bernie Sanders would have never set up a private email server to handle official State Department correspondence and classified materials, because how on earth could that have possibly sounded like a good idea?

High-ranking ex-government officials give paid speeches ALL THE TIME, and it's not corruption. Not in any way. It's just making money by giving a speech, and if you can get paid for that, why not?

I can count on one finger the number of people who honestly felt like Hillary Clinton was done with her political ambitions when she gave those speeches. It's the guy who seriously just stated that these speeches are never done for nefarious reasons or political favors but probably forgot to add "except when Republicans do it".

Let's forget the gifts from Wall Street execs. Or how Prince Muhammad of Saudi Arabia claims that his country is funding 20% of Clinton's election expenses.



Myseriously, 'hackers' 'hacked' the news site which posted this report and planted it there. The 'true' story is that the amount was 'undisclosed'. Nonetheless, the alleged progressive candidate (representing the alleged progressive party) is being funded, in part, by an 'undisclosed' amount of donations from everyone's favorite progressive desert kingdom that definitely doesn't also fund global Islamic terror organizations.

I'm sure they have only the purest of intentions.

I think it would be hard for her to switch sides on TPP now, after running for president opposing it.

I think it would be the easiest thing in the world for her to do, and the non-Fox News media will never seriously grill her about it. The Fox News media won't grill her too hard on that particular issue since they are fine with her cooperation on that particular issue.

Don't say something this absurd, it's totally ridiculous.

I wasn't being literal, but you have an unusual number of blind spots for this candidate.