Hillary Clinton

Watch Matt Welch Talk Dem Debate Tonight at 8 p.m. ET on Kennedy

Hillary's roboticism, Webb's untapped potential, and the Democrats' lurch to the economic left

|

Tonight on Fox Business Network at 8 p.m. ET, I will panelize on Kennedy, attempting gamely to match wits with foxy/funny Red Eye co-host Joanne Nosuchinsky and soon-to-be Tom Woods debater Michael Malice, as we preview the Democratic presidential debate, analyze Hillary Clinton's robotics, talk about magazine boobies, and more.

Advertisement

NEXT: Rand Paul: 'Idiots in the Republican Party' Want War in Syria and So Does Hillary Clinton

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Based on a Scott Adam’s blog post.

    Old conspiracy theory: Bill Clinton encouraged Trump to run to help Hillary win.

    New conspiracy theory: Bill Clinton encouraged Trump to run to help Hillary lose. Because what does he gain from her winning? He has all the money and nookie he needs. Being in the White House would just mean more press attention on him, cramping his lifestyle.

    1. It seems moot to me since the GOP nominee is going to win, regardless of who it is. But I guess it’s possible that Bill would think that Trump is the only one who has a chance.

      1. In the past I would have thought that, but the Overton Window has shifted so far left, and mass immigration has changed the electorate. Just recently Jerry Brown signed a law that makes it easy for illegals to vote. But barring some massive errors by the GOP, yeah, it’s hard to see Hillary or Sanders or Biden or any other Democrat getting elected, for a host of reasons.

        1. I think there would have to be a split of the GOP vote or massive voter fraud for the Dems to win. While CA will definitely go for a Democrat, the rest of the country largely doesn’t want a commie or a witch as their president.

          1. Check voter id is racist

          2. How often in the past half century has the country elected a President with zero previous political experience?

            How badly do the swing states want another person named Bush?

            2016 is still the Dems’ to lose.

            1. Bush is a non-entity. As for presidents with zero previous political experience, the polls seemed to have shown so far that it can only help the Republicans.

              I think you might be underestimating how terrible the Dems’ nominees are perceived to be.

        2. I can see a President Hillary or Biden or even Sanders more than I can see a President Trump or Fiorina or Carson or Bush Part 3.

          I still feel about 80% confident the next prez will be a Democrat. The Repubs are just that pathetic.

          1. Not that Republicans aren’t pathetic, but I think the average centrist/independent voter is ready for a big change, and not in a Sanders direction. And I think Trump has a far, far better chance of winning both the nomination and the election than many people seem to think.

            Hillary is toast. They’ll try to drag her into office, but her health is bad, she has no political skills, an airliner full of baggage, and too much of the country distrusts her.

            Biden is toast: he’s a gaffe-master, also elderly, and too tied to Obama. Few want another 4 years like the last 8.

            Sanders: an elderly hippie socialist. He might get the nomination, but not the election. The country is fucked up these days, but it’s not that fucked up.

            1. You’re an idiot.

              Obama would beat Trump or any GOPer with over 300 EVs AGAIN.

              You sound like John – who is always wrong.

              1. Obama’s running again???

                Electing someone’s VP is not the same as electing them.

                1. Few want another 4 years like the last 8.

                  You’re off by about 53%.

    2. Old conspiracy theory: Bill Clinton encouraged Trump to run to help Hillary win.

      New conspiracy theory: Bill Clinton encouraged Trump to run to help Hillary lose.

      Something is not really a conspiracy theory when it makes that much sense.

      That being said the 2nd makes no sense at all. It makes a lot more sense that Bill would love to close out his final legacy as being the ‘first first dude’, roaming the halls of assorted DC government offices every night getting some good ol tushy squeeze on some young interns.

      I think it is not only plausible but highly likely that Bill encouraged Trump to run to sabotage the GOP and let Hillary win.

      I think he has underestimated both the stupidity of the GOP voters and just how terrible of a candidate that Hillary actually is.

      1. Well, read Scott Adams’ post. I think it’s a convincing case, and a number of things Bill has said recently have been distinctly unhelpful to Hillary.

        1. Not believable. Bill is a pretty well liked guy by most people, while Hillary is generally despised.

          If Bill wanted to Humiliate the beeatch, there’s a lot easier ways for him to do it. And really, what is the downside of him just leaving her?

          1. I don’t think he wants to humiliate her so much as not have his cushy lifestyle hindered by more press attention. It’s a lot harder to visit a billionaire’s Sex Slave Island when you are the First Spouse.

            1. Probably easier these days.

  2. Umm, not only no, but fuck no. I was barely able to bring myself to watch the 2nd GOP debate. The Dems have gone so far on retard that I just cannot do it.

    1. Apparently neither can the Reason staff by the looks of it.

    2. The Dems have gone so far on retard that I just cannot do it.

      Oh, come on, Hyperion. They’ll have cake.

  3. I hope somebody gets asked why the EPA is fighting pollution with SWAT teams.

    The Justice Department has reported that there are now 40 federal agencies with more than 100,000 officers authorized to carry guns and make arrests. They include the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Park Service.

    Because FYTW.

    1. Why do you hate the children?

    2. Heck, don’t the FDA and the Department of Education have their own SWAT teams? Why should the EPA be left out? Next up: the Bureau of Weights and Measures.

      1. I’m tellin’ ya – they’re all building their own little fiefdoms because nobody’s in charge and nobody gives a crap about the law and the Constitution any more and everybody knows it. When the Constitution and the law means whatever the guys with guns says it means, you damn well better be the guy with guys with guns. Why should the EPA have to run a proposed bust by the DoJ or any other higher-ups to get them to sign off on sending in the FBI when the EPA can have their own in-house FBI and the head of the EPA is then free to do whatever she wants? Is a president who routinely violates the Constitution and the law going to complain that the EPA is no longer following his orders? And so what if he does complain? What happened to Clapper when he lied to Congress and flat-out said that his job was to keep people safe by spying on them and if the law said he couldn’t spy on them well, sucks to the law, he was going to keep right on spying anyway. What’s going to happen shortly here when that 6-month extension the NSA got to continue the spying Congress said they weren’t supposed to be doing in the first place runs out? Is the NSA actually going to follow the law, and if they don’t is anybody going to say a word about it?

        1. That’s how bureaucracies operate.

    3. “Since when did we start going down this road of allowing agencies of government to engage in military-style operations?”

      Better get the FBI on this.

    4. It also revealed that seven of 10 EPA workers make more than $100,000 a year and that more than 12,000 of its nearly 16,000 employees were given bonuses last year despite agency budgets that were supposed to be constrained by budget caps and sequester cuts.

      Seven out of ten? Literally can’t right now.

  4. “Clinton seeks to move past email woes in Democratic debate”
    […]
    ” months of Republican criticism of her use of personal email and a private Internet server while in the Obama administration have shadowed her campaign and hurt her standing with voters. The Associated Press reported Tuesday that Clinton’s server was connected to the Internet in ways that left it somewhat vulnerable to hackers.”
    http://www.kxnet.com/story/302…..tic-debate

    Yep, it’s those darn rethuglicans! Has nothing to do with the fact that she’s a criminal, not at all!

    1. Somewhat vulnerable to hackers”? LOL

      The whole Hillary email thing has been fascinating to watch. It’s like a tutorial: How to Handle a Scandal in the Worst Possible Way by Lying, Blocking, and Obfuscating for What Seems Like Forever.

      1. “How to rely on a compliant media to push forward your narrative on your utterly complacent voters.”

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.