Kind of pointless to cherry pick polls, no? Rasmussen has a well known Republican bias and is consistently one of the least accurate major pollsters.
Kind of pointless to cherry pick polls, no? Rasmussen has a well known Republican bias and is consistently one of the least accurate major pollsters.
MrPickins
Diamond Member
- May 24, 2003
- 9,125
- 792
- 126
This.
Regardless of which candidate you back, cherry picking polls is intellectually dishonest.
I think many democrats who support Hillary admit the email server casts her in a bad light. Same with the Clinton foundation. That doesnt make what she did illegal. But avg people see that pattern of behavior and view it unfavorably. That isnt spin.
ivwshane
Lifer
- May 15, 2000
- 33,739
- 17,390
- 136
It is spin when trivial things are spun by the media as negative. You know like how they refer to the email investigation as, "breaking news in the Clinton email scandal". Your ears have grown so accustomed to Clinton being associated with scandals that you are no longer capable of hearing the spin!
Except that it *is* spin. Repub propagandists can make any action "seem" improper, particularly when they've conditioned people to already be suspicious of the person in question. When people can't see the whole picture, the question isn't "what else is there?" but rather "What are they hiding?" It's all in the attitude & very few people examine their own attitudes at all. They just fly with 'em.
Having classified email pass through a private email server isnt trivial. Should I put you into the camp of fanatics who really believe what she is did is ok? Note, I didnt say illegal when you predictably face roll your response.
It's as if you imagine the spin-artists do their work and put a spin sticker on it so their audience won't get confused. eg:
"Having classified email pass through a private email server isnt trivial."
Clinton used a private server largely because of the shit-stirring that your friends are paid to do. Of course since it's their job, said friends need to cherry-pick something from that defensive maneuver to spin as negative. They were ostensibly hired because they're good at this job, making dummies think how they want.
Well, the worst thing that Comey, a very straight laced federal prosecutor, could say about it all was that Clinton & her aides were extremely careless w/ classified information at times.
That would have been true using State Dept servers or any others. It's not the server, it's the fact that information escaped from secured systems at all.
Which is all in the past, anyway. I doubt she'll make any mistakes in the future in that regard.
If I ran a private email server and conducted business through this server. And I passed sensitive internal business information, my employment status would be terminated immediately. We are on a tech site and none of you seem to understand tech. What she did was not trivial.
And did you just make the claim Clinton ran this private email server to get around freedom of information acts? Dont apply for her campaign. You would get her past Drumpf in the unfavorable ratings in under a week. Just go ahead and release that to the press as the reason for her private email server lol
Careless in the eyes of avg people clearly makes her unfavorable. That is not spin.
You don't seem to know much about how business works. She was in a high up enough position to be a decider on such matters, not a leaf node like yourself. It would also rather depend on the specifics of the internal info and nature of their passing, which you've been told doesn't matter and you readily comply.
This is similar to the climate scientists who didn't want to comply with the denialist dumbshits who kept harassing them. The same sort of spin professionals attached a -gate to that for your dummy audience counterparts in that case. Of course, dummies would never admit to consuming dummy literature, but it is what it is.
Last edited:
ivwshane
Lifer
- May 15, 2000
- 33,739
- 17,390
- 136
Would you say that the average person is more or less informed on the subject of handling classified information? Would you say the average person is more or less informed of how SoS do their job? Now if you were being honest, you'd know that the average person is woefully ignorant of such matters and their opinions and even awareness of such things is wholly formed by what public officials and the media present to them. They don't know if something is improper or a big deal unless they are told its a big deal and improper. A "scandal" that resulted in nothing happening that came about from an investigation that proved nothing after a previous investigation proved nothing after a previous investigation proved nothing after a previous investigation proved nothing after a previous investigation proved nothing after a previous investigation proved nothing after an initial investigation proved Clinton wasn't responsible for the death of four Americans nor was anyone else responsible except the terrorists and instead it was a culmination of a series of events that led their deaths of which things that might have prevented the situation from happening again have been implemented, is not a scandal, it's spin.
I know enough that setting up a private server with which to conduct official business is a big no no. I also know if I pass sensitive information that will get me fired. Do you believe executives would be exempt from this policy? It is shocking how little some of you understand about internal and external electronic communications.
Rather depends on the situation, like someone using their personal email if the corp one keep getting hacked or whatever to make everything public, and the competition feed cherries to the press. Appears you're extrapolating limited leaf node info into situations where it might or might not apply, and you don't really care because you were told no to since that would be spin.
rockyct
Diamond Member
- Jun 23, 2001
- 6,656
- 32
- 91
Rasmussen was an outlier in 2012 and it's an outlier right now. She has definitely lost a few points, but if the election were today, she would win.
Funny, I distinctly remember a news reporter saying that on election eve in 2000.
shortylickens
No Lifer
- Jul 15, 2003
- 80,287
- 17,082
- 136
Maybe she'll get her comeuppance on Comedy Central:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...y-the-giant-douche-and-the-turd-sandwich.html
South Park will be slamming them both.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...y-the-giant-douche-and-the-turd-sandwich.html
South Park will be slamming them both.
Let me take a minute break from beating this dead horse.....
The person responsible is the head tech from State who connected the severs. Should gave told Hill or anyone else in campaign, No! That was his job. Bill said go ahead? Doesn't Matter, Hill threatened with a gun? Doesn't matter. He (or she) had a responsibility.
Now I must return to beating dead horse and of course resume beating Wife.
The person responsible is the head tech from State who connected the severs. Should gave told Hill or anyone else in campaign, No! That was his job. Bill said go ahead? Doesn't Matter, Hill threatened with a gun? Doesn't matter. He (or she) had a responsibility.
Now I must return to beating dead horse and of course resume beating Wife.
I'm not an irrational Hillary hater, but I'm not a fan and it pains me I have to vote for her. Setting up that server WAS bad judgement by just continuing the "status quo". Now ..do I think all the endless committee's, special prosecuters and the waste of millions of taxpayer $$$ were warrented...hell NO!
I think she has severe failings and is more a "meeting/management" type than a true leader. She has certainly proven to be a poor campaigner over the years.
That being said, I've voting for her because of her positions on paper. Because the Republicans have gone completely "we believe in a different version of reality" batshit insane and there's hardly anything on that side I can support anymore. As I've gotten older and less anger filled.
I think she has severe failings and is more a "meeting/management" type than a true leader. She has certainly proven to be a poor campaigner over the years.
That being said, I've voting for her because of her positions on paper. Because the Republicans have gone completely "we believe in a different version of reality" batshit insane and there's hardly anything on that side I can support anymore. As I've gotten older and less anger filled.
First
Lifer
- Jun 3, 2002
- 10,518
- 271
- 136
Huh? Don't know what world you're living in, but most businesses use private servers and (frankly) far more insecure means of email communication than the one HRC used between 2009 - 2013. And depending on the context, absolutely not would a business fire an employee for passing sensitive internal documents over a private email server, especially if it were by accident or it didn't originate it from the sender as was the case with HRC. Frankly, if you're in IT and build email servers as I do, I'm not sure how you could believe otherwise.
The actual private email server itself is a luxury Congress affords each and every representative, it ain't exactly uncommon. And executives are frequently exempt from various IT security policies, are you serious? It's bad they're exempt, but it's common in private businesses. And (shock horror!) it happens in gov't too. Having many clients in all sorts of industries over the years, I can tell you first hand the C suite folks live by different rules. The fact that HRC got poor advice to set up a private email server doesn't actually say anything about Clinton herself, other than she's a technological laymen like 95% of our elected officials in Congress.
Also, ironically, we currently have no reason to believe her private email server was hacked (at least not yet publicly known), while we know with 100% certainty all her emails would have been hacked had she used the State Department email system between 2009 and 2013. So the whole notion of her using a private email server is itself still just media-driven hysteria. It's her reaction to the email crisis that has been amateurish and awful.
Most business use private email servers in they own or rent them. Most businesses dont have employees setup their own private email servers and conduct business related communication. I dont know for who you build email servers. But I would like to know which companies have you build servers for individual employees and then let those employees manage said servers and pass business sensitive information through them. And yes I am in IT. And yes I have built email servers among many other duties required of me. And I have gone through several legal retention and communication policy projects. I am somewhat versed in legal requirements of containing and capturing business related email.
And yes many companies would fire if somebody sent business sensitive content. Or what they would deem classified. They would have to just for liability reasons. An HR director sending employees SS numbers via their private email account? What could go wrong?
Which companies exempt their executives from company wide electronic communication policies?
It is a legitimate question of our media to ask a presidential nominee about sending state department email communication through her own email server. Communication which happened to include classified information. To think the media should just move on is quite frankly insane.
Talk about spin. afaik Clinton never made the claim she used a private email server because the state department kept getting hacked.
I was using an analogy. You'll probably do better in these discussions once you figure out how those work.
First
Lifer
- Jun 3, 2002
- 10,518
- 271
- 136
Well yes, most employees aren't millionaires or public figures or C suite executive types such as Hillary Clinton. And no, I would guess based on my experience a good portion (maybe 15%-20%) of C suite execs use their own homebrew servers.
As am I, having clients in all the highly regulated industries such as legal services, healthcare, accounting and financial services. All smaller firms 10-500 users. And yes, most entry level employees are of course not going to set up their own servers, but if a C suite exec did so without IT permission, in many businesses it would merely be accepted, frowned upon or both. And yes in some businesses it would be firable, especially if it were a rogue employee who set it up without regard for security. Which is why I said it depends on the context. So if the private server were properly patched, encrypted at rest with a modern suite and encrypted in transit via digital certs, and has various litigation hold and retention software (dirt cheap now, included for free with Office 365), most businesses would either let it go or have IT come in and start managing it. To say it's a blanket firing is absolutely inaccurate. Depends who you are (unfortunately).
If the private email met the conditions above, literally nothing would go wrong. It would comply with all statuary data obligations and would be defensible in court. I'm not an attorney so I'll defer to those who are here, but securing data ain't rocket science, there are a ton of free, built-in tools available and other very inexpensive solutions for IDS/IPS, AV, etc.
Um, a lot of them. Well for one, and like I keep saying, context matters. If the private server follows the electronic communication policies of the internal systems mandated by IT, not only has the exec not broken the law they haven't even necessarily broken their own firm's policies, depending on said firm. I'm not even sure how you think that's debatable, C suite folks constantly use their own homebrew setup. There's nothing inherently risky about it unless you've contracted it out to an utterly incompetent person (I have no idea whether Pagliano was competent or not). Seems like he had some decent experience though he subcontracted retention to some other firm I believe.
They shouldn't move on, but they should better inform themselves. They certainly shouldn't project any potential technical flaw in her email server as some sort of indictment of her competence or something, that's just ignorant nonsense. So far, as is typical in all media left or right, much of the coverage has been entirely non-specific regarding the actually security implemented on the private server. That's a giant omission, as hypothetically you would agree there is literally nothing controversial about a private email server that mimics a state sanctioned government email server, if that were the case. And we still don't really know much about the homebrew server, other than it used Windows Server and Exchange, had OWA access, was encrypted properly (except for I think the first few weeks of her term in Feb. 2009), etc.
Repubs need to concoct continuous scandals & stir the shit to stay relevant, because their economic policy certainly isn't. They're still selling the old trickle down snake oil behind the usual wedge issues as if they hadn't crashed the economy, enriched the financial elite & held on to it for dear life with 8 years of obstructionism. Now they're trying to deny responsibility for the bigotry & fear revealed among their base by the Trump candidacy. They pandered to it for decades, never dreaming that it would boil over like this.
She seems to carry some charisma among women. It can be easily overlooked from a male perspective. She's been involved in a lot of campaigns, rarely on the losing side.
Not just on paper but in real life. She's promoted & defended the Democratic agenda for over 40 years. Given her way, ordinary Americans will get a bigger piece of the pie one way or another than Repub policy would ever allow. We need that, particularly in small town America, the land that the Job Creators forgot.
TheGardener
Golden Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 1,945
- 33
- 56
Yep. Her criminal behavior is a vast right wind conspiracy. The FBI is all wrong about her irresponsibility.
Nixon offenses were a pittance compared to Hillary Allison Capone Clinton.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter