Brazille considered replacing Clinton with Biden last September

[Anonymous]

Hillary's tribute to the Twin Towers following the 9/11 Memorial didn't go over so well with anyone but the most ardent kool-aider.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/brazile-i-considered-replacing-clinton-with-biden-as-2016-democratic-nominee/2017/11/04/f0b75418-bf4c-11e7-97d9-bdab5a0ab381_story.html?utm_term=.28559e513cbf

According to the article's summary of the book, Biden/Booker was who she would have gone with.

They would have won.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hillary's tribute to the Twin Towers following the 9/11 Memorial didn't go over so well with anyone but the most ardent kool-aider.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/brazile-i-considered-replacing-clinton-with-biden-as-2016-democratic-nominee/2017/11/04/f0b75418-bf4c-11e7-97d9-bdab5a0ab381_story.html?utm_term=.28559e513cbf

According to the article's summary of the book, Biden/Booker was who she would have gone with.

They would have won.

I agree. For many it would have been anybody but Trump save for Hillary.

[Anonymous]

I don't get this. What do you mean by she considered replacing Hillary with Biden? She doesn't have that power.

[Anonymous]

The knife is out.

It makes you wonder why the democrats push so hard on special counsel? Maybe they had a hidden agenda to trigger an investigation on Clinton/Podesda and finally bring her down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The knife is out.

It makes you wonder why the democrats push so hard on special counsel? Maybe they had a hidden agenda to trigger an investigation on Clinton/Podesda and finally bring her down.

No, dear, it's because we need to see just how bad the GOP/Trump treason was. If democrats get caught, too, but only one party appears to have courted the (illegal) help of an enemy.

[Anonymous]

I don't get this. She has run twice and lost. She isn't doing it again. Why does anyone think so? Or is this just to continue to have a scapegoat from the right?

[Anonymous]

This makes no sense. She couldn't do that. And Biden didn't want it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't get this. She has run twice and lost. She isn't doing it again. Why does anyone think so? Or is this just to continue to have a scapegoat from the right?

Of course. They elected the equivalent of the idiot angry uncle who yells at the tv from his recliner. So they need to deflect.

[Anonymous]

They still don’t get it

Biden and booker are neoliberal frauds

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The knife is out.

It makes you wonder why the democrats push so hard on special counsel? Maybe they had a hidden agenda to trigger an investigation on Clinton/Podesda and finally bring her down.

2+2 clearly equals 5 for this poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hillary's tribute to the Twin Towers following the 9/11 Memorial didn't go over so well with anyone but the most ardent kool-aider.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/brazile-i-considered-replacing-clinton-with-biden-as-2016-democratic-nominee/2017/11/04/f0b75418-bf4c-11e7-97d9-bdab5a0ab381_story.html?utm_term=.28559e513cbf

According to the article's summary of the book, Biden/Booker was who she would have gone with.

They would have won.

Their odds would not have been better than Clinton's. Believe me. I'm from Michigan. Trump voters actively wanted to vote for him...and Biden-Booker would not have been more appealing.

[Anonymous]

Brazille is looking more and more like a looney gadfly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hillary's tribute to the Twin Towers following the 9/11 Memorial didn't go over so well with anyone but the most ardent kool-aider.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/brazile-i-considered-replacing-clinton-with-biden-as-2016-democratic-nominee/2017/11/04/f0b75418-bf4c-11e7-97d9-bdab5a0ab381_story.html?utm_term=.28559e513cbf

According to the article's summary of the book, Biden/Booker was who she would have gone with.

They would have won.

Their odds would not have been better than Clinton's. Believe me. I'm from Michigan. Trump voters actively wanted to vote for him...and Biden-Booker would not have been more appealing.

It will likely be shown that some Michigan votes were manipulated.

[Anonymous]

Brazille likes to think she’s relevant to Democratic politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hillary's tribute to the Twin Towers following the 9/11 Memorial didn't go over so well with anyone but the most ardent kool-aider.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/brazile-i-considered-replacing-clinton-with-biden-as-2016-democratic-nominee/2017/11/04/f0b75418-bf4c-11e7-97d9-bdab5a0ab381_story.html?utm_term=.28559e513cbf

According to the article's summary of the book, Biden/Booker was who she would have gone with.

They would have won.

Their odds would not have been better than Clinton's. Believe me. I'm from Michigan. Trump voters actively wanted to vote for him...and Biden-Booker would not have been more appealing.

Biden would have visited Michigan and effectively courted blue collar voters in a way someone so mosh like Hillary never was able to do. But I’m not sure Uncle Joe wouldn’t have been chewed up by the right wing noise machine.