Log in

Sore loser

To talk about issues without using numbers is to not quantify, and really amounts to babble no better than gossip.

A simple question: How does Hillary Clinton receive, and acknowledged by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), a 2.9 million popular vote plurality in California; and then claim the Russians, their hacking caused her to lose the presidency? Obviously hacking, if any, did not affect the California voters.

The electoral college is the path to the presidency, and not by popular vote directly.

You must be a member to read this story.

Join our family of readers starting at $5 for your first month and support local, unbiased journalism.


Already have an account? Log in to continue.

Otherwise, follow the link below to join.

Please log in to continue

Log in
I am anchor

Sore loser

Posted

To talk about issues without using numbers is to not quantify, and really amounts to babble no better than gossip.

A simple question: How does Hillary Clinton receive, and acknowledged by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), a 2.9 million popular vote plurality in California; and then claim the Russians, their hacking caused her to lose the presidency? Obviously hacking, if any, did not affect the California voters.

The electoral college is the path to the presidency, and not by popular vote directly.

The DNC makes a false distinction, which actually has a difference, vis-à-vis, electoral vs. popular, and so used faulty logic.

The DNC is uncontrolled and “unhinged,” casting aspersions at President Elect Trump.

Simply put, Hillary continues to not take responsibility for her loss, much like a cheating spouse tries to continue “in the lie.” For which husband, former President Bill Clinton, also tried to not take responsibility.

Apparently there are many worried Democrats, Chicken Littles, running around that believe the nonsense of the DNC. And that by way of their own discredited logicians named “Dumb, Dumber and Dumbest,” led by John Podesta.

As the first female failed presidential candidate, she has attained a dubious distinction, her own self-inflicted notoriety, labeled as “sore loser.” And an old label, “nasty.” Perhaps “nasty sore loser.”

Share with others


Have an opinion on this story? Click here to send a letter to our editors.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here