I've seen a lot of the mentally challenged Trumptards talk about fans and supporters of Hillary Clinton in this forum, however, I can't for the life of me think who these "fans" are.

From my observations, nobody here likes Hillary Clinton.

I could be wrong, though - there's always a first time.

So, who here is a Clinton fan?

I'm curious.

For the record, I'm not a fan. Never liked her at all.

Yes we know youre not a fan of her, because being a fan would be holding a positive value towards someone or something.

It is not positivity that animates you, nor most who identify as "on the left" but rather negativity towards those you identify as "on the right".  That is, you support anything that your ideological enemies oppose. 

The prime directive of the 2017 western left is "if they like it, we must destroy it".

Yes, I went wrong by engaging with you.  The content of that reply however, was spot on.

... wrote on Jun 28^th, 2017 at 2:10pm:


Yes, leftards, Honky did say this.

We pay our respects to elders past and present, no?

No not me - She is a lot better than Trump but only average at best.

Mortdooley wrote on Jun 29^th, 2017 at 12:02am:



Yeah, not like he was shooting them off at an empty Syrian air base or anything.

Once again, the Texuun educated, everybody

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 28^th, 2017 at 11:40am:


Shouldn't you have said "Raise your Zimmerman frames"

I'm not a fan of her Hawk military agenda, but I saw Hilary in an interview on the Project once. Very engaging and charismatic, a great sense of humour, keen intelligence, a fun person to be with. I was impressed.

It's a pity Hillary can't present this to crowds. Hillary acknowledges that she can be brittle and uncomfortable in front of audiences. She's the reverse of Trump, who is a great public agitator, but not so appealing in person - certainly not to interviewers and journalists, anyway.

When the Washington Post interviewed Trump when he was on his way to winning the primaries, they were shocked. Their article was restrained and benign, but in private, the journalists who met and spoke with Trump were astonished at his bizarre and inept answers. His facts were wrong. He fudged. He tried to cover up his ignorance of the most basic foreign and domestic policies.

They had never met a candidate with such ignorance of policy and government process, his huge conflicts of interest, or even basic world facts. They were agog at his take on the world, and as they said, every answer came back to Trump. They could not consider supporting such a self-indulgent candidate.

Hilary was the opposite. Vast knowledge and intimate experience in some of the most seismic recent world events. In contrast to Trump, it was not about Hillary at all.

I'm hardly a fan, but Hillary was a candidate who genuinely engaged and stood for people. Trump was a candidate who has always surrounded himself with bodyguards, who avoids talking to members of the public - "losers" - and if he has to shake someone's hand, grimaces and wipes himself afterwards.