Current Events > Has any Democrat ever seriously claimed it was "her turn"?

(+) Yeah! (+)

"It's her turn!" Is something I've only ever seen being said by conservatives ironically. Literally no one seriously thought the reason she should be president was because "it's her turn".
---

wasn't that her original campaign slogan and then they changed it? I thought Hillary herself came up with it

Zikten posted...

wasn't that her original campaign slogan and then they changed it? I thought Hillary herself came up with it

Citation needed
---

Its someone elses turn. Please Hilary for the good of the Democratic Party dont run again. We want to actually win.

Zikten posted...

wasn't that her original campaign slogan and then they changed it? I thought Hillary herself came up with it

It was "I'm with her"
---

Bleuets posted...

Its someone elses turn. Please Hilary for the good of the Democratic Party dont run again. We want to actually win.

Hillary running again is nothing but a conservative wet dream
---

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Zikten posted...

wasn't that her original campaign slogan and then they changed it? I thought Hillary herself came up with it

Citation needed

---

Manocheese posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Zikten posted...

wasn't that her original campaign slogan and then they changed it? I thought Hillary herself came up with it

Citation needed

Literally anyone can write anything they want and put it in a picture on the internet. Just because I make a picture that says "I'm GAY and i piss and shit everywhere. - Donald Trump" doesn't mean he actually said it
---

Claire Underwood did.

I feel this definitely was something said by some dems or at least supporters. It's not like 'blue wave' which was almost entirely said by right wingers
---

one of the biggest and most damaging strawmen in all of history tbh
---

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Manocheese posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Zikten posted...

wasn't that her original campaign slogan and then they changed it? I thought Hillary herself came up with it

Citation needed

Literally anyone can write anything they want and put it in a picture on the internet. Just because I make a picture that says "I'm GAY and i piss and shit everywhere. - Donald Trump" doesn't mean he actually said it

Dude she said it. Where do you think people got it from?

Nope, this was a strawman created by conservatives to demonize Hillary.

Which isn't really hard to do, so idk why they felt the need to make shit up.
---

NinjaBreakfast posted...

I feel this definitely was something said by some dems or at least supporters. It's not like 'blue wave' which was almost entirely said by right wingers

"Blue wave" was absolutely brought up all over the place by left-wingers earlier in the year. Around the time of the election, it was indeed mostly the right mentioning it.
---

DarkTransient posted...

NinjaBreakfast posted...

I feel this definitely was something said by some dems or at least supporters. It's not like 'blue wave' which was almost entirely said by right wingers

"Blue wave" was absolutely brought up all over the place by left-wingers earlier in the year. Around the time of the election, it was indeed mostly the right mentioning it.

It was brought up because it's what actually happened.
---

The Great Muta 22 posted...

DarkTransient posted...

NinjaBreakfast posted...

I feel this definitely was something said by some dems or at least supporters. It's not like 'blue wave' which was almost entirely said by right wingers

"Blue wave" was absolutely brought up all over the place by left-wingers earlier in the year. Around the time of the election, it was indeed mostly the right mentioning it.

It was brought up because it's what actually happened.

No, it wasn't. Aside from that literally nothing had happened at all several months before the election when the left were saying it; the result was hardly a blue wave. It was a blue drizzle at best, especially when taken in the context of that the party with the presidency rarely wins the midterms.
---

Uhh, blue wave was spammed all over reddit and the rest of the Internet by liberal groups.

I saw it like everyday for a year.
---

MARKINGRAM22 posted...

Dude she said it. Where do you think people got it from?

Made up nonsense on the internet.

I searched for Samuel Rosales-Avila, the reporter who apparently got this quote. The only links were about this very story, on outlets like NWOreport.me, and "the Daily Sheeple."

To wit: https://nworeport.me/2014/06/23/hillary-clinton-tells-reporter-she-deserves-to-be-president/

The National Report story quotes a neuroscientist and aging expert, Dr. Philip Kao, who chalks up the outburst to an early sign of dementia.

What is National Report?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Report

National Report is a fake news website that posts fictional articles related to world events.[1][2] It is described by Snopes.com as a fake news site,[3] by FactCheck.org as a satirical site[4] and by The Washington Post as part of a fake-news industry, making profits from "duping gullible Internet users with deceptively newsy headlines."[5] The National Report describes itself as a "news and political satire web publication" and provides a disclaimer that "all news articles contained within National Report are fiction".[6] The disclaimer, however, is not printed on the main page, which instead claims that the website is "America's #1 Independent News Source."

Please stop posting bullshit on Gamefaqs dot gamespot dot com
---

NinjaBreakfast posted...

I feel this definitely was something said by some dems or at least supporters. It's not like 'blue wave' which was almost entirely said by right wingers

I get emails from people representing the left whenever there's something going on (elections and impeachment talk)and they certainly used the blue wave term.
---

Just anecdotally, I know I saw a handful of liberals with wave emojis in their Twitter names.
---

DarkTransient posted...

NinjaBreakfast posted...

I feel this definitely was something said by some dems or at least supporters. It's not like 'blue wave' which was almost entirely said by right wingers

"Blue wave" was absolutely brought up all over the place by left-wingers earlier in the year. Around the time of the election, it was indeed mostly the right mentioning it.

But the blue wave actually happened
---

People are still upset over the 2016 election? That was 2 years ago time to move on. I don't like it but Trump won time to focus on 2020.
---

Genocet_10-325 posted...

DarkTransient posted...

NinjaBreakfast posted...

I feel this definitely was something said by some dems or at least supporters. It's not like 'blue wave' which was almost entirely said by right wingers

"Blue wave" was absolutely brought up all over the place by left-wingers earlier in the year. Around the time of the election, it was indeed mostly the right mentioning it.

But the blue wave actually happened

No, it didn't. A very small victory, in an election that should've been theirs by a landslide based on which party usually wins the midterms relative to which one holds the presidency, is hardly a "blue wave".
---

DarkTransient posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

DarkTransient posted...

NinjaBreakfast posted...

I feel this definitely was something said by some dems or at least supporters. It's not like 'blue wave' which was almost entirely said by right wingers

"Blue wave" was absolutely brought up all over the place by left-wingers earlier in the year. Around the time of the election, it was indeed mostly the right mentioning it.

But the blue wave actually happened

No, it didn't. A very small victory, in an election that should've been theirs by a landslide based on which party usually wins the midterms relative to which one holds the presidency, is hardly a "blue wave".

Democrats winning back control of the house and winning the popular vote by 8.5 million is a small victory?

If you say so, lmfao
---

Genocet_10-325 posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

DarkTransient posted...

NinjaBreakfast posted...

I feel this definitely was something said by some dems or at least supporters. It's not like 'blue wave' which was almost entirely said by right wingers

"Blue wave" was absolutely brought up all over the place by left-wingers earlier in the year. Around the time of the election, it was indeed mostly the right mentioning it.

But the blue wave actually happened

No, it didn't. A very small victory, in an election that should've been theirs by a landslide based on which party usually wins the midterms relative to which one holds the presidency, is hardly a "blue wave".

Democrats winning back control of the house and winning the popular vote by 8.5 million is a small victory?

If you say so, lmfao

And exactly how often does the party without the presidency not win the midterms - usually both houses? It has happened, but it's rare.

And uh, yeah, 8.5 million - or about 2.5% of the US's population - is a really huge margin, totally.
---

DarkTransient posted...

in an election that should've been theirs by a landslide based on which party usually wins the midterms relative to which one holds the presidency,

That's not the only factor at play, though. We also saw senate races primarily in states won by Trump, with significantly more Democratic seats in play, and a heavily gerrymandered House map.

In terms of popular vote, this was as big a midterm landslide we've seen since 1986.

DarkTransient posted...

And uh, yeah, 8.5 million - or about 2.5% of the US's population - is a really huge margin, totally.

It's the biggest in a midterm election in US history.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

DarkTransient posted...

NinjaBreakfast posted...

I feel this definitely was something said by some dems or at least supporters. It's not like 'blue wave' which was almost entirely said by right wingers

"Blue wave" was absolutely brought up all over the place by left-wingers earlier in the year. Around the time of the election, it was indeed mostly the right mentioning it.

But the blue wave actually happened

No, it didn't. A very small victory, in an election that should've been theirs by a landslide based on which party usually wins the midterms relative to which one holds the presidency, is hardly a "blue wave".

Democrats winning back control of the house and winning the popular vote by 8.5 million is a small victory?

If you say so, lmfao

And exactly how often does the party without the presidency not win the midterms - usually both houses? It has happened, but it's rare.

And uh, yeah, 8.5 million - or about 2.5% of the US's population - is a really huge margin, totally.

Trump won by the skin of his teeth in the electoral college and lost the popular vote by 3 million, yet he considers it a massive blowout of a victory
---

When there were only two serious candidates in the Democratic primaries they at least implied it.
---

Antifar posted...

That's not the only factor at play, though. We also saw senate races primarily in states won by Trump, and a heavily gerrymandered House map.

Hilarious that even when the Democrats win, they're still determined to whine about "rigging" for the fact that they didn't get a bigger margin.

If y'all spent even half as much time on actually improving the faults in your party rather than whining that everything's rigged against you, you might get an actual blue wave next time.
---

The story about her screaming it at a reporter is fiction and I've never seen it anywhere outside of an alt-right conspiracy tinged context. Never happened, I don't even like Hillary Clinton and that doesn't sound like the type of gaffe she would make.

Outside of that, the only references to "her turn" or "my turn" in the context of Hillary that I've seen are a fielded campaign slogan that was never actually used, and Michelle Obama says that Hillary "waited her turn and helped out while waiting" (check it out on youtube and read the comments to see how sexist/racist republicans are, it's horrifying)
So, odds are, probably not. Just another example of how ridiculously strong and echo-chambery the right wing meme machine from 2016 was
---

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Trump won by the skin of his teeth in the electoral college and lost the popular vote by 3 million, yet he considers it a massive blowout of a victory

...a 15% margin is "by the skin of his teeth"? That's a hell of a lot more than the 2.5% margin in the house vote that you're claiming was a massive victory.
---

Love how you guys are letting fake news spreaders define the rules of the argument in such a way that it completely distracts from the main discussion and ruins the opportunity to hold a flame to the feet of all these liars.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Trump won by the skin of his teeth in the electoral college and lost the popular vote by 3 million, yet he considers it a massive blowout of a victory

...a 15% margin is "by the skin of his teeth"? That's a hell of a lot more than the 2.5% margin in the house vote that you're claiming was a massive victory.

...youre seriously comparing EC margins to popular vote margins? Why not compare popular vote to popular vote?

+8.5 million, and -3 million
---

DarkTransient posted...

I'm going to pretend gerrymandering doesn't exist and Wisconsin lame duck Republicans didn't undemocratically limit the powers of their replacements.

---

DarkTransient posted...

Hilarious that even when the Democrats win, they're still determined to whine about "rigging" for the fact that they didn't get a bigger margin.

I am not a Democrat, but the fact that legislative maps have drawn in many states to Republican benefit is plainly obvious. It's how Wisconsin's legislature is under GOP control despite Democrats getting 54% of the votes.

In North Carolina, this election took place using a district map that has been ruled unconstitutional and will have to be replaced.
https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article217814710.html

DarkTransient posted...

...a 15% margin is "by the skin of his teeth"? That's a hell of a lot more than the 2.5% margin in the house vote

It is massively disingenuous to compare the margin for electoral vote with a margin in votes, which you are measuring not against the number of voters, but total population. I believe you know that. The Democrats won the popular vote by 8.6%, for the record.
---

Webmaster4531 posted...

DarkTransient posted...

I'm going to pretend gerrymandering doesn't exist and Wisconsin lame duck Republicans didn't undemocratically limit the powers of their replacements.

The latter is wrong, but has nothing to do with the election results themself.

Complaints about the former literally come down to "I hate that the way the districts are laid out isn't in a way that gives us an advantage." If you were really opposed to gerrymandering, you'd be calling for abolishing voting districts and the like altogether, not changing them. You just want them gerrymandered in a way that favors the party you like.
---

Antifar posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Hilarious that even when the Democrats win, they're still determined to whine about "rigging" for the fact that they didn't get a bigger margin.

I am not a Democrat, but the fact that legislative maps have drawn in many states to Republican benefit is plainly obvious. It's how Wisconsin's legislature is under GOP control despite Democrats getting 54% of the votes.

In North Carolina, this election took place using a district map that has been ruled unconstitutional and will have to be replaced.
https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article217814710.html

DarkTransient posted...

...a 15% margin is "by the skin of his teeth"? That's a hell of a lot more than the 2.5% margin in the house vote

It is massively disingenuous to compare the margin for electoral vote with a margin in votes, which you are measuring not against the number of voters, but total population. I believe you know that. The Democrats won the popular vote by 8.6%, for the record.

Yeah, he seems to think the entire US population including children voted lol
---

DarkTransient posted...

Complaints about the former literally come down to "I hate that the way the districts are laid out isn't in a way that gives us an advantage."

Setting aside sheer partisan advantage, they are laid out in a way that unconstitutionally reduces the voting power of racial minorities.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Webmaster4531 posted...

DarkTransient posted...

I'm going to pretend gerrymandering doesn't exist and Wisconsin lame duck Republicans didn't undemocratically limit the powers of their replacements.

Yes, Republicans are corrupt. Democrats wish they were as corrupt so the Republicans are okay being corrupt. That makes perfect sense to a Republican.

---

Antifar posted...

MARKINGRAM22 posted...

Dude she said it. Where do you think people got it from?

Made up nonsense on the internet.

I searched for Samuel Rosales-Avila, the reporter who apparently got this quote. The only links were about this very story, on outlets like NWOreport.me, and "the Daily Sheeple."

To wit: https://nworeport.me/2014/06/23/hillary-clinton-tells-reporter-she-deserves-to-be-president/

The National Report story quotes a neuroscientist and aging expert, Dr. Philip Kao, who chalks up the outburst to an early sign of dementia.

What is National Report?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Report

National Report is a fake news website that posts fictional articles related to world events.[1][2] It is described by Snopes.com as a fake news site,[3] by FactCheck.org as a satirical site[4] and by The Washington Post as part of a fake-news industry, making profits from "duping gullible Internet users with deceptively newsy headlines."[5] The National Report describes itself as a "news and political satire web publication" and provides a disclaimer that "all news articles contained within National Report are fiction".[6] The disclaimer, however, is not printed on the main page, which instead claims that the website is "America's #1 Independent News Source."

Please stop posting bullshit on Gamefaqs dot gamespot dot com

Lollllllll
---

DarkTransient posted...

Complaints about the former literally come down to "I hate that the way the districts are laid out isn't in a way that gives us an advantage." If you were really opposed to gerrymandering, you'd be calling for abolishing voting districts and the like altogether, not changing them. You just want them gerrymandered in a way that favors the party you like.

People bitch about the way these districts are laid out because multiple courts across the country have determined they were drew in an unfair advantage, and being that they were drawn in 2010 when the Republicans were ridding the Tea Party surge, many of them were drawn in a way that favorites Republicans. This isn't even an opinion, this is factually what happened and has been determined in court rooms across the fucking country. I don't give a damn if maps are drawn in a way that, if fair, helped out Republicans. But it's fucking factual evidence that they weren't which is why states like PA were forced to redrawn their map. And, surprise, the Democrats preformed better when they were more fair.

But you know what, none of this matters. The 2020 census is right around the corner and the gains that Democrats had in the 2018 midterms, and likely will continue to have in the next cycle, will make this all irrelevant anyways. That's why the midterms were disastrous for the GOP and why you saw people, like Paul Ryan, who saw the writing on the wall, get out while they could before they lost. That's why you've also seen the shady tactics engaged by the GOP in Wisconsin to strip power away from the Democrats before they take office. They all know what is about to happen, and like rats on the Titanic, they are scurrying away and jumping ship.
---

is this a joke?
---