With a comfortable lead, Clinton begins laying plans for her White House agenda - Polidicks

[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/with-a-comfortable-lead-clinton-begins-laying-plans-for-her-white-house-agenda/2016/08/20/4f21cef4-65ce-11e6-96c0-37533479f3f5_story.html[/url] [quote]Hillary Clinton’s increasingly confident campaign has begun crafting a detailed agenda for her possible presidency, with plans to focus on measures aimed at creating jobs, boosting infrastructure spending and enacting immigration reform if current polling holds and she is easily elected to the White House in November. In recent weeks, as her leads over GOP nominee Donald Trump have expanded, Clinton has started ramping up for a presidency defined by marquee legislation she has promised to seek immediately. The pace and scale of the planning reflect growing expectations among Democrats that she will win and take office in January alongside a new Democratic majority in the Senate. While careful not to sound as if she is measuring the draperies quite yet, Clinton now describes what she calls improved odds for passage of an overhaul of immigration laws — the first legislative priority she outlined in detail last year — and what could be a bipartisan effort to rebuild the nation’s roads, bridges, airports, rail system and ports. She also could be immediately confronted with a choice about a Supreme Court vacancy that could set the tone for her relationship with Congress, and she plans to immediately champion new measures on campaign-finance reform and ending legal immunity for gun manufacturers.[/quote]

[QUOTE]a bipartisan effort to rebuild the nation’s roads, bridges, airports, rail system and ports. [/QUOTE] Good! American infrastructure is literally crumbling into dust due to lack of maintenance the last fifty years.

Comfortable lead of 6 whole points? Prior to any of the debates and months away from the election? I feel this laziness and disregard for the current race will be her undoing, of her many undoings. But that's fine by me. Shouldn't count your chickens before they hatch. Don't count your polls before they vote.

[QUOTE=Riller;50921624]Good! American infrastructure is literally crumbling into dust due to lack of maintenance the last fifty years.[/QUOTE] ...Which can be blamed because nobody wants to spend the money on something that is literally being held up by duck tape

[QUOTE=wystan;50921637]Comfortable lead of 6 whole points? Prior to any of the debates and months away from the election? I feel this laziness and disregard for the current race will be her undoing, of her many undoings. But that's fine by me. Shouldn't count your chickens before they hatch. Don't count your polls before they vote.[/QUOTE] "Oh no, the presidential candidate I don't like has actual [I]plans[/I] for what they want to do if they win! This is an outrage, campaigns should be based entirely on empty promises, any actual presidency-related thinking shall be done well after the election!"

[QUOTE=wystan;50921637]Comfortable lead of 6 whole points? Prior to any of the debates and months away from the election? I feel this [B]laziness [/B]and disregard for the current race will be her undoing, of her many undoings. But that's fine by me. Shouldn't count your chickens before they hatch. Don't count your polls before they vote.[/QUOTE] lmao working on your presidential plan is now lazy hey wystan, you working hard or hardly workin? heh

[QUOTE=wystan;50921637]Comfortable lead of 6 whole points? Prior to any of the debates and months away from the election? I feel this laziness and disregard for the current race will be her undoing, of her many undoings. But that's fine by me. Shouldn't count your chickens before they hatch. Don't count your polls before they vote.[/QUOTE] As opposed to gloating or being in denial about the facts, having a plan to execute your platform for when you actually assume the presidency is never a bad thing.

[QUOTE=Riller;50921662]"Oh no, the presidential candidate I don't like has actual [I]plans[/I] for what they want to do if they win! This is an outrage, campaigns should be based entirely on empty promises, any actual presidency-related thinking shall be done well after the election!"[/QUOTE] If you pulled that from my post you should try actually reading it again. Regardless of the candidate, it's foolish to just think because they have a lead in polls that means they should ignore the current race and start acting like the race is won, especially this early. But maybe the metaphor was lost on you, reading comprehension doesn't seem to come easily to you.

[QUOTE=wystan;50921676]If you pulled that from my post you should try actually reading it again. Regardless of the candidate, it's foolish to just think because they have a lead in polls that means they should ignore the current race and start acting like the race is won, especially this early. But maybe the metaphor was lost on you, reading comprehension doesn't seem to come easily to you.[/QUOTE] Having a plan for if you win is a bad idea? Fuck dude that's some flawed logic

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50921684]Having a plan for if you win is a bad idea? Fuck dude that's some flawed logic[/QUOTE] No, being presumptuous is.

[QUOTE=wystan;50921637]Comfortable lead of 6 whole points? Prior to any of the debates and months away from the election? I feel this laziness and disregard for the current race will be her undoing, of her many undoings. But that's fine by me. Shouldn't count your chickens before they hatch. Don't count your polls before they vote.[/QUOTE] As if the debates would help Trump.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50921684]Having a plan for if you win is a bad idea? Fuck dude that's some flawed logic[/QUOTE] I don't even fully agree with him but you completely missed the entire point of that post. Jesus your response was embarrassing to read.

[QUOTE=wystan;50921676]If you pulled that from my post you should try actually reading it again. Regardless of the candidate, it's foolish to just think because they have a lead in polls that means they should ignore the current race and start acting like the race is won, especially this early. But maybe the metaphor was lost on you, reading comprehension doesn't seem to come easily to you.[/QUOTE] Yeah no I just disagree entirely with your point. Having a plan, and laying it out this early, is very much a positive trait when compared to just yelling out "Less X, more Y!" as American politics tend to be all about. Especially a wise move when you're up against someone as inconsistent and disjointed as Trump; playing the role of calm and well-organized, experienced politician puts out an image of stability and reliability.

[QUOTE=wystan;50921676]If you pulled that from my post you should try actually reading it again. Regardless of the candidate, it's foolish to just think because they have a lead in polls that means they should ignore the current race and start acting like the race is won, especially this early. But maybe the metaphor was lost on you, reading comprehension doesn't seem to come easily to you.[/QUOTE] the "comfortable lead" bit is just the article's segue into the main subject, geez

[QUOTE=wystan;50921689]No, being presumptuous is.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't call it being presumptuous, when the "battleground states" are no comfortably in Hillary's pockets and the new battleground states are ones Trump shouldn't even be losing in the first place like Arizona and Georgia.

[QUOTE=Komodoh;50921700]I don't even fully agree with him but you completely missed the entire point of that post. Jesus your response was embarrassing to read.[/QUOTE] Not really. I get his point is don't count your chickens til they hatch. This isn't what she's doing.

[QUOTE=Riller;50921702]Yeah no I just disagree entirely with your point. Having a plan, and laying it out this early, is very much a positive trait when compared to just yelling out "Less X, more Y!" as American politics tend to be all about. Especially a wise move when you're up against someone as inconsistent and disjointed as Trump; playing the role of [b]calm and well-organized, experienced politician puts out an image of stability and reliability.[/b][/QUOTE] Yea good look with Hillary ever being able to give that image. But my point with the article is how they word it as [i]now[/i] that she has a comfortable lead they are going to start planning what she might actually do? It's foolish regardless of who you support. [editline]20th August 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=1nfiniteseed;50921707]I wouldn't call it being presumptuous, when the "battleground states" are no comfortably in Hillary's pockets and the new battleground states are ones Trump shouldn't even be losing in the first place like Arizona and Georgia.[/QUOTE] Basing this lead off something as tenuous as polls is equally a bad idea.

[QUOTE=wystan;50921637]Comfortable lead of 6 whole points? Prior to any of the debates and months away from the election? I feel this laziness and disregard for the current race will be her undoing, of her many undoings. But that's fine by me. Shouldn't count your chickens before they hatch. Don't count your polls before they vote.[/QUOTE] can you explain what you meant by "lazy"?

[QUOTE=wystan;50921713]Yea good look with Hillary ever being able to give that image.[/QUOTE] With Trump, the guy who gets provoked easily and flip-flops on every issue its pretty easy actually.

[QUOTE=wystan;50921713]Yea good look with Hillary ever being able to give that image.[/QUOTE] Against anyone else, I'd agree. Against Trump, a kid who just got banned from Rust could seem calm, experienced and well-organized. Unlike the primaries, she now only has one person she has to appear better than, and she's doing that pretty damn well. [quote]But my point with the article is how they word it as [i]now[/i] that she has a comfortable lead they are going to start planning what she might actually do? It's foolish regardless of who you support.[/quote] I still fail to see how it's foolish, but then again, I'm not well-versed in American politics. They might be much more impulsive and short-sighted than what I'm used to.

[QUOTE=wystan;50921713]Yea good look with Hillary ever being able to give that image. [/QUOTE] Ah yes, the former Secretary of State who is making plans for a modernized and improved America is clearly not a well-organized and experienced politician who is putting out an image of stability. [editline]21st August 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=wystan;50921713] Basing this lead off something as tenuous as polls is equally a bad idea.[/QUOTE] Bet you wouldn't say the same if it was Trump winning.

[QUOTE=wystan;50921713]Yea good look with Hillary ever being able to give that image.[/QUOTE] her opponent is a man who literally spazzed out in front of the camera and pretended to have a seizure in public just so he could mock somebody with a disability for that alone he is a disgusting person with a horrible image

[QUOTE=Riller;50921731]Against anyone else, I'd agree. Against Trump, a kid who just got banned from Rust could seem calm, experienced and well-organized. Unlike the primaries, she now only has one person she has to appear better than, and she's doing that pretty damn well. I still fail to see how it's foolish, but then again, I'm not well-versed in American politics. [b]They might be much more impulsive and short-sighted than what I'm used to.[/b][/QUOTE] This is a better way to put it. Typically these things are never decided until the very end, and it is a better idea to focus all one's energy to campaigning instead. Yes, have a rough plan of what you want to do and how you think you can accomplish this, both candidates have these. But I think any and all presidential candidates should be focused entirely on getting elected first.

[QUOTE=wystan;50921689]No, being presumptuous is.[/QUOTE] It looks like you were going to come up with a real response but you were too lazy so you said this instead

[QUOTE=MissZoey;50921747]Ah yes, the former Secretary of State who is making plans for a modernized and improved America is clearly not a well-organized and experienced politician who is putting out an image of stability. [editline]21st August 2016[/editline] Bet you wouldn't say the same if it was Trump winning.[/QUOTE] Ever single post I've made on this forum about polls is how not to trust them, I still said this when Trump was up over Clinton.

[QUOTE=wystan;50921637]Comfortable lead of 6 whole points? Prior to any of the debates and months away from the election?[/QUOTE] It's fairly comfortable. It's technically possible to eat away at a 7% lead, but no post-WW2 presidential candidate has ever managed to reverse such a lead this close to election day.

[QUOTE=wystan;50921713] Basing this lead off something as tenuous as polls is equally a bad idea.[/QUOTE] Remember when the Romney campaign operated on this same line of thinking? Do you need a history refresher?

Well they are receiving classified briefings and would have access to all the latest issues affecting Americans so anything like this is incredibly smart. When you're in the lead to the most powerful position in the world, if you enter the white house absolutely unprepared, your enemies are going to have a field day

[QUOTE=wystan;50921689]No, being presumptuous is.[/QUOTE] [I]Says the Trump supporter[/I] How's that apparent overwhelming minority support going for your candidate again? [editline]20th August 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=wystan;50921757]This is a better way to put it. Typically these things are never decided until the very end, and it is a better idea to focus all one's energy to campaigning instead. Yes, have a rough plan of what you want to do and how you think you can accomplish this, both candidates have these. But I think any and all presidential candidates should be focused entirely on getting elected first.[/QUOTE] If having a "rough plan" is good, why is having a more detailed plan some how bad?

[QUOTE=wystan;50921637]Comfortable lead of 6 whole points?[/QUOTE] says who