50% Say Clinton Should Keep Running Even If Indicted

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub..._clinton_should_keep_running_even_if_indicted

HYPERLINK has full story/poll

snip

Most continue to believe likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is a lawbreaker, but half of all voters also say a felony indictment shouldn’t stop her campaign for the presidency. ...............................


Among Democratic voters, 71% believe Clinton should keep running,

end snip


There you have it. 71% of Democrat voters disregard the law and country secrets. Is party politics that more important than the law?

Apparently this is where we now are where Democrat voters must put party first.

I am not surprised by this given that Obama was twice elected and that Hillary is still a candidate

What's worse, the media supports her

Do you agree with the 71% of Democrat voters ?

 

And a while back another poll said over half of Democrats would still vote for Hillary even if proved she was selling influence.

And of course they reelected her husband even after his abuse of female subordinates and others over whom he had power became oublic knowledge and then committed perjury, obstruction of justice and witness tampering.

 

This is pretty amazing. We knew democrats were low on morals but really, 71 percent? If the poll questions pertained to what Madam Secretary has accomplished in her life then I wonder what the same 71 percent would respond with?

Hey Clinton voters, can you tell us why you support her? What do you base your support on?

 

ill try lets see here? oh shes a feminist like them.

 

A very good question.

The answer. From me. A fairly strong clinton supporter who has done so often on this forum is that in order to see the answer ask yourself;

Are you really 100% sure that all this stuff about clinton is actually 100% true?

Then realise that the reason most people do actually vote for for Clintons is that they think most of this stuff is grinned up bull.

What do you think ? Going to rant again that libs are stupid etc etc?

 

Hillary won't be indicted.

if she is, I will be flabergasted.

 

Does an indictment automatically mean guilty? No.

Is she innocent until proven guilty in a court of law? Yes.

Therefore, legally, why shouldn't she continue her campaign?

I mean I despise the woman, but until she is actually FOUND guilty of something in a court of law it doesn't matter legally what anyone else thinks.

 

So you're answering my question with your own question. Why do liberals support Clinton and what has she done to earn that support? She's seen by the majority of liberals as being untrustworthy and dishonest, so whatever's she has left for you to base your support on must be pretty strong

 

Since each side has roughly 48% of registered voters this is pretty horrifying news for the democrats. It means if she is indicted her turnout may be as low as the 60 percentile range and that rarely will win you an election.

And considering that out of that 48% each side has that on average only about 60% turn out to vote that means you can divide the democratic side by a further 29%.

And on top of that, democratic voting during the primaries has been anemic while republicans are setting records. I see almost no way that Hillary can win.

 

So they vote for her out of ignorance, that IS what you are saying here you know. And do they really believe the State Department IG and FBI are just "grinning up bull"?

Let me ask you this, with what we know and especially after this last report on top of it what does the weight of the evidence indicate?

 

While under indictment people frequently resign if only because they don't want to detract from something bigger.

 

Legally no, but in this case with this extensive an investigation and what we already no.......

In order to be LEGALLY sanctioned yes, in the court of public opinion as in a presidential campaign, no.

Legally she can but that is a moot point.

It matters with anyone with any intelligence or say so in the electing of our next President.

 

That doesn't refute anything I've said.

 

Your opinion.

And that is yours and any other person's choice. The same applies to Trump in that aspect regarding his Trump University.

The moot point is saying she shouldn't run because an indictment.

Notice the part where I said "legally"? Unless you have something to refute that, nothing you have said refutes anything I've said.

 

I'll take that to be that you stand with the 71% of your party

 

I don't have a party, but you still haven't refuted anything I said. If someone hasn't been found guilty legally, why shouldn't they run? Why can't you answer that question sec?

 

After a year long FBI investigation. If the FBI determines that charges are warranted, and the Justice Dept prosecutors decide they can successfully attain a conviction.

You still think it shouldn't matter to voters if Hillary is indicted?


That is pretty darn open minded of you.

 

I didn't say it shouldn't matter to voters, I said why shouldn't she still run if she isn't found guilty of anything yet?

 

Based on the evidence and nature of the investigation. Is and indictment enough to disqualify for President until cleared, with this investigation and the evidence we already have I say yes. What say you and why?

Nixon was never found guilty of a crime, he was never even indicted for a crime but he was disqualified from serving as President for FAR less than what we have here.

One deals with criminal acts, the other deals with civil acts and violations of the public trust in their capacity as a federal official. I don't recall the left demanding Bill resign when he was sued for sexual harassment or even after he committed felonies in a federal court.

And BTW I am not a Trump supporter.

No that is an EXTREMELY valid point because she will have to be spending a HUGE portion of her time defending herself, she could not hold a security clearance nor attend security briefings IOW she could not carry out the necessary functions of a President. Heck at this point she should not even be receiving the security briefings candidates normally receive and I wonder if the FBI and CIA are going to provide them at this point.

This is not nickle and dime stuff here, like some upset students in a real estate course.

Well the only time the "legal" system cares about what someone thinks is when they are on a jury, but then the legal system does not elect the President and we are talking about whether she should be elected as President even now but more so if she is indicted and is under indictment on election day.

Look we already know she has lied through her teeth about her use of the private server and her private email, there is NO excuse for her willful disregard and lack of respect for the LAW and the very strict rules regard government information. To put here into an even HIGHER position of the public trust dealing with our nations secrets again is utter folly.

 

Why should she still be running knowing what we already know. Malfeasance in office does NOT have to be criminal you know. Is the ONLY wrongdoing a high government official can commit is that which is criminal?

 

I don' think the math will go down like that

[video=youtube;E1lJ3tfQFpc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1lJ3tfQFpc[/video]

 

She's supported the political consensus that they agree generally with.

She doesn't have to have made many great achievements.

The stuff against her is mostly bull.

Do you see what I'm getting at? Most of your premises are denied both in detail and in general by those of whom you ask the question.

Tell me. Do you get what I'm saying?

 

Trumps being sued for fraud and audited, should he drop out?

 

I understand where your coming from.

Have you considered that most of the stuff against her could be mostly baloney?

As for the weight of evidence;

We had people here telling us over and over that Benghazi was a slam dunk. A smoking gun. That no right thinking person couldn't want her or of office.......look how that turned out. Not very well for her detractors.

But somehow you think after this report over emails she must now either her political career and/or her freedom.

You don't see any problem at all here?

 

The thread says that 50% of dems say Hillary should run even if indicted. That's not quite the same thing as being audited (wow...never heard of anyone going through that before) or being sued.