U.S. Elections 2016: It's Not A Lie, If YOU Believe It

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Regardless of the "fairness" of it.  Given the perception of her opaqueness shouldn't she be playing things out in the open as much as possible?

[Boris the Blade]

31 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 I can't buy that. If she was one of the more honest politicians around, she would have been honest about it. Not sure how this lends itself to sexism. Her campaign has been lying about her health. 

"It's the heat that's bothering her. It's just seasonal allergies". 

 

 The truth would've been far less damaging, methinks. Now it smells like they are trying to cover up a serious health issue. 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/opinion/campaign-stops/all-politicians-lie-some-lie-more-than-others.html?_r=0

That link shows that she is, so you would be denying a fact.
It is a fact that she is one of the most honest politicians, that is not up for debate. Lying here and there does not take away from that, especially when compared to other politicians that lie much more. Also, the heat could have bothered her. So you just jump to conclusions? Good to know. 

Also, my comment about sexism has to do with the view of her being dishonest, which is not the case. 25 years of a smear campaign to paint her as a dishonest women has a lot to do with sexism among other things. 

[mormont]

4 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Regardless of the "fairness" of it.  Given the perception of her opaqueness shouldn't she be playing things out in the open as much as possible?

Whenever she's done that, people have used what she reveals to attack her anyway. Damned if she does, damned if she doesn't.

Seriously, at this stage in the cycle it's plain that this is a race between one candidate who benefits from not having the usual rules applied to him, and one that gets held to them all. We're sat here discussing how Clinton should be more open about her health issues: meanwhile, Trump ducked questions about his health by getting some patsy to sign a clearly bogus letter (that was almost certainly written by Trump himself) telling all sorts of outrageous and absurd lies about his health. We fret about how Clinton is so old at 68, but don't talk about the fact that she's younger than Trump and has a better life expectancy. We worry about what a gaffe it is for her to insult Trump's supporters while he merrily insults everyone in sight. We agonise about Clinton's lack of transparency while Trump lies and lies and lies. (He's not even a very plausible liar. He's rubbish at it.)

Is the fact that Clinton is a woman the only factor in this? No, certainly not. Is it completely irrelevant, then? I doubt it. I think gender roles undeniably play a part. But it is what it is. No point in complaining about it. Clinton needs to get the focus back on Trump as soon as possible. Luckily, that's where Trump likes it.

[Boris the Blade]

Just now, mormont said:

Whenever she's done that, people have used what she reveals to attack her anyway. Damned if she does, damned if she doesn't.

Seriously, at this stage in the cycle it's plain that this is a race between one candidate who benefits from not having the usual rules applied to him, and one that gets held to them all. We're sat here discussing how Clinton should be more open about her health issues: meanwhile, Trump ducked questions about his health by getting some patsy to sign a clearly bogus letter (that was almost certainly written by Trump himself) telling all sorts of outrageous and absurd lies about his health. We fret about how Clinton is so old at 68, but don't talk about the fact that she's younger than Trump and has a better life expectancy. We worry about what a gaffe it is for her to insult Trump's supporters while he merrily insults everyone in sight. We agonise about Clinton's lack of transparency while Trump lies and lies and lies. (He's not even a very plausible liar. He's rubbish at it.)

Is the fact that Clinton is a woman the only factor in this? No, certainly not. Is it completely irrelevant, then? I doubt it. I think gender roles undeniably play a part. But it is what it is. No point in complaining about it. Clinton needs to get the focus back on Trump as soon as possible. Luckily, that's where Trump likes it.

Pretty much how I view it. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

1 minute ago, Harakiri said:

That link shows that she is, so you would be denying a fact.
It is a fact that she is one of the most honest politicians, that is not up for debate. Lying here and there does not take away from that, especially when compared to other politicians that lie much more. Also, the heat could have bothered her. So you just jump to conclusions? Good to know. 

 I think it's denial to bring up the fact that she's one of the most honest politicians ever when confronted with a situation where she has told a bald-faced lie. I didn't jump to any conclusion. Her campaign straight up lied about the state of her health.

[Swordfish]

7 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

It was her campaign on Sunday that stated she felt overheated, and pointed out she attended the ceremony for 90 minutes. But they had known since Friday she had pneumonia.

And now a cancelled California trip which surely would have made less news if they had been a bit more upfront about it.

 

Yeah.  I'm not sure how anyone can spin this as anything but a disaster, considering you have a candidate that people already dislike and don't trust.

Especially on the heels of her spending the last few weeks calling Trump a conspiracy theorist for raising concerns about her health.

This is a blunder of Clintonian proportions.

 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

4 minutes ago, mormont said:

Whenever she's done that, people have used what she reveals to attack her anyway. Damned if she does, damned if she doesn't.

Seriously, at this stage in the cycle it's plain that this is a race between one candidate who benefits from not having the usual rules applied to him, and one that gets held to them all. We're sat here discussing how Clinton should be more open about her health issues: meanwhile, Trump ducked questions about his health by getting some patsy to sign a clearly bogus letter (that was almost certainly written by Trump himself) telling all sorts of outrageous and absurd lies about his health. We fret about how Clinton is so old at 68, but don't talk about the fact that she's younger than Trump and has a better life expectancy. We worry about what a gaffe it is for her to insult Trump's supporters while he merrily insults everyone in sight. We agonise about Clinton's lack of transparency while Trump lies and lies and lies. (He's not even a very plausible liar. He's rubbish at it.)

Is the fact that Clinton is a woman the only factor in this? No, certainly not. Is it completely irrelevant, then? I doubt it. I think gender roles undeniably play a part. But it is what it is. No point in complaining about it. Clinton needs to get the focus back on Trump as soon as possible. Luckily, that's where Trump likes it.

 I agree, but the problem here is there's no way in hell that I'm voting for Trump under any circumstance. It's simply not going to happen. I'm at a place where I feel I have to cast a begrudging vote for Hillary, and now she does something that makes me that much more reluctant to vote for her. It's frustrating.

[Boris the Blade]

5 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 I think it's denial to bring up the fact that she's one of the most honest politicians ever when confronted with a situation where she has told a bald-faced lie. I didn't jump to any conclusion. Her campaign straight up lied about the state of her health.

How am I in denial when I am using facts to back up the claim she is one of the more honest politicians around? Politifact has the numbers to back it up, or did you purposely ignore that? You did jump to a conclusion, you think her health issues are more serious than what the doctor said.  

[Swordfish]

7 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

 

 

 

Quote

How am I in denial when I am using facts to back up the claim she is one of the more honest politicians around? Politifact has the numbers to back it up, or did you purposely ignore that? You did jump to a conclusion, you think her health issues are more serious than what the doctor said.  

That will happen.  When you lie about it for three days, people tend to not necessarily trust the things you say about it anymore.  Why would they?

It's really not that complicated.

 

 

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

8 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 I agree, but the problem here is there's no way in hell that I'm voting for Trump under any circumstance. It's simply not going to happen. I'm at a place where I feel I have to cast a begrudging vote for Hillary, and now she does something that makes me that much more reluctant to vote for her. It's frustrating.

Mormont, ME,

Exactly, many are willing to cast reluctant votes for Sec. Clinton.  Why be opaque and increase people's reluctance in such a way that it could suppress turn out.  Turn out is the only way I see Trump winning this race.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

4 minutes ago, Harakiri said:

How am I in denial when I am using facts to back up the claim she is one of the more honest politicians around? Politifact has the numbers to back it up, or did you purposely ignore that? You did jump to a conclusion, you think her health issues are more serious than what the doctor said.  

 You respond to a situation in which she and her campaign have told an obvious lie with she's one of the most honest politicians around? That's a little odd to me.When I catch someone in an obvious lie, my first reaction is not going to be to give them a pass.

 I don't know that her health condition is more serious than what any doctor stated (I haven't read anything from a doctor regarding Mrs. Clinton's state), but I do know it is more serious than she and her campaign had previously made it out to be. And let's be frank, that video looked pretty fucking serious, did it not?

  

[IheartIheartTesla]

Said a conservative " Antibiotics can take care of pneumonia. What's the cure for an unhealthy penchant for privacy that repeatedly creates unnecessary problems? ". Oh wait, that was David Axelrod.

Now I, and I presume most people here are quite sympathetic to Clinton, it can be a grueling schedule and touching all those babies (aka germ vectors) cant make it easy not to pick up something along the way. In fact, I'm surprised more politicians dont get sick on the campaign trail. However, it is frustrating that a relatively small 'scandal' is now a full blown one. Why, I have seen some concern-trolling about how Clinton hugged a child on Sunday, and then went to her daughter's place, who also has children, thereby putting all these children at risk ("will someone please think of the children?")

I hope people are right when they say this wont hurt Clinton, but in a 3 point race, its a bit of a risky proposition to say it wont matter in the long run. Anyway, I am happy to be wrong, but her campaign cant afford too many more missteps from now onwards. Its unfair when you look at Trump and his gaffes, but life isn't fair.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

This "Hillary Clinton is the most honest politician, ever" reminds me of the "Hillary Clinton is the most qualified candidate for President, ever" stuff from a while back.

[Mudguard]

9 minutes ago, Harakiri said:

How am I in denial when I am using facts to back up the claim she is one of the more honest politicians around? Politifact has the numbers to back it up, or did you purposely ignore that? You did jump to a conclusion, you think her health issues are more serious than what the doctor said.  

That NYTimes article doesn't come close to proving that Clinton is one of the most honest politicians around.  As stated in the NYTimes article:

Quote

We don’t check absolutely everything a candidate says, but focus on what catches our eye as significant, newsworthy or potentially influential. Our ratings are also not intended to be statistically representative but to show trends over time.

The article makes clear that the percentages that are listed don't reflect how often a person lies, but instead merely reflects that of the limited statements that were fact checked, this percentage was found to be lies.  The fact checkers aren't checking all statements or even a statistically representative selection of statements, so you can't determine who's a bigger liar from this article.

[Mudguard]

40 minutes ago, mormont said:

Whenever she's done that, people have used what she reveals to attack her anyway. Damned if she does, damned if she doesn't.

I hear this excuse as a justification for Clinton's secrecy, but when has she been proactively transparent and been attacked for what's she's revealed?  Do you have any examples?  

As far as I can tell, the biggest negative issues she's been facing have resulted from her lack of transparency, like her handling of her emails and her ties with the Clinton Foundation while she was Secretary of State.  Her unwillingness to provide her Wall Street speech transcripts also was an issue in the primary, and may crop up again in the general.  

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

 I don't mean to be picking on you Harakiri, in fact I hope you're right. I just find some of the support for Hillary in the wake of this lie to be a bit puzzling. For instance, I'm a big fan of comedian Patton Oswalt's Twitter feed. He's a big Hillary supporter. I probably agree with his stances like 99.5% of the time, and I enjoy his comedic lambasting of Trump. In light of this Hillary health scare, he posted this...

 

Now while there is some validity to this thought, it's pure spin in reaction to what just happened. It doesn't address the lie or the lack of transparency. It's the sort of thing I expect to see from the other side. I can't say I care much for it when people I like and respect do it. That's all I'm trying to say. 

[Kalbear]

What did she lie about, though? She never said that she doesn't have pneumonia or an illness. She simply didn't disclose it. That's not lying. 

[Swordfish]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

What did she lie about, though? She never said that she doesn't have pneumonia or an illness. She simply didn't disclose it. That's not lying. 

You have to be kidding, here, right?

 

 

[Boris the Blade]

1 hour ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 You respond to a situation in which she and her campaign have told an obvious lie with she's one of the most honest politicians around? That's a little odd to me.When I catch someone in an obvious lie, my first reaction is not going to be to give them a pass.

 I don't know that her health condition is more serious than what any doctor stated (I haven't read anything from a doctor regarding Mrs. Clinton's state), but I do know it is more serious than she and her campaign had previously made it out to be. And let's be frank, that video looked pretty fucking serious, did it not?

  

One, where did they lie? How do you know the heat didn't bother her Sunday? Two, I was pointing that out and directing it at how the public views her as dishonest even though she is no where near dishonest as the ignorant and sexist general public thinks she is and how she is actually pretty honest. Nope, the video didn't look fucking serious since a few hours later she was walking out of her daughters place totally fine talking to the press. Also, at this point with all the lying Trump gets away with and is never challenged on by the media, I really don't give a flying fuck about Clinton not be totally up front, even more so because when she is upfront she still gets shit.

1 hour ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

This "Hillary Clinton is the most honest politician, ever" reminds me of the "Hillary Clinton is the most qualified candidate for President, ever" stuff from a while back.

I found that she is the most honest politician ever thing to be pretty funny, even more so since I never said it haha. 
 

1 hour ago, Mudguard said:

That NYTimes article doesn't come close to proving that Clinton is one of the most honest politicians around.  As stated in the NYTimes article:

The article makes clear that the percentages that are listed don't reflect how often a person lies, but instead merely reflects that of the limited statements that were fact checked, this percentage was found to be lies.  The fact checkers aren't checking all statements or even a statistically representative selection of statements, so you can't determine who's a bigger liar from this article.

The statistics present in the politifact are still a good example. So you can try to play it down all you want, it still has some validity to it.
 

1 hour ago, Mudguard said:

I hear this excuse as a justification for Clinton's secrecy, but when has she been proactively transparent and been attacked for what's she's revealed?  Do you have any examples?  

As far as I can tell, the biggest negative issues she's been facing have resulted from her lack of transparency, like her handling of her emails and her ties with the Clinton Foundation while she was Secretary of State.  Her unwillingness to provide her Wall Street speech transcripts also was an issue in the primary, and may crop up again in the general.  

How about Trumps unwillingness to provide his tax returns? The biggest negative issues she faces are a gullible public that has fallen for a 25 year smear campaign from the right mixed with sexism among other things.
 

1 hour ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 I don't mean to be picking on you Harakiri, in fact I hope you're right. I just find some of the support for Hillary in the wake of this lie to be a bit puzzling. For instance, I'm a big fan of comedian Patton Oswalt's Twitter feed. He's a big Hillary supporter. I probably agree with his stances like 99.5% of the time, and I enjoy his comedic lambasting of Trump. In light of this Hillary health scare, he posted this...

 

Now while there is some validity to this thought, it's pure spin in reaction to what just happened. It doesn't address the lie or the lack of transparency. It's the sort of thing I expect to see from the other side. I can't say I care much for it when people I like and respect do it. That's all I'm trying to say. 

Why shouldn't she get support? She didn't lie to anyone. Not being upfront is not the same thing as lying. Also, how do you know the heat didn't have that impact on her yesterday? Clinton is pretty much criticized for everything she does, transparent or not. It's just the way this country is. The media and even the general public lets Trump get away with bigoted bullshit, flat out lies, not being transparent with his finances and even his health, but Clinton, omg, she is so dishonest. I am convinced that if she gave the media and general public a daily update about how soft or hard her shit is people would still think she isn't transparent enough.

[Kalbear]

4 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

You have to be kidding, here, right?

 

No, I'm asking. What did she lie about with respect to pneumonia? As far as I can tell she simply didn't tell people she had it. No one asked her if she was ill on Friday, and she didn't say 'no, I'm fine'. 

You have to be kidding about her lying, right?