Hillary Wows the Crowd (and Her Critics) at Iowa Wing-Ding

[Frodo]

If someone with better luck than me can find and post a video of that speech here, that would be fantastic:

Hillary Clinton sways the doubters at Wing Ding:
She attacked her speech with a vigor Iowans — and even skeptical liberals — said they’d never seen from her before.

By Rachael Bade
8/15/15 12:56 AM EDT

You must be logged in to read this quote.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/clinton-wins-over-iowa-crowds-at-wing-ding-121391.html#ixzz3iti9h3sq

[dudeabides]

It's sad people care more about speeches than results. Let's remember her husband is a great orator and yet, he failed to destroy Iraq's WMDs, failed to rid the world of Bin Laden, caused the housing bubble, and was involved in multiple ethical issues.

[Landslide Lyndon]

This is no surprise really. Clinton became a much better campaigner towards the end of the 2008 primary.

Also, with Robby Mook at the helm it was clear from the beginning that she will run an unapologetically liberal campaign, just like the one Terry McAuliffe ran for governor of Virginia.

[okierepublican]

She definitely isn't running a center ground campaign. I guess she wants to get out the vote and hope the GOP punches it self in the face and nominates someone like a walker or Cruz that will allow her to occur the center as well. It isn't a bad strategy.

[Vega]

You gotta love American politics - the "Wing-Ding", lol.

[Frodo]

This is no surprise really. Clinton became a much better campaigner towards the end of the 2008 primary.

She owes a debt of gratitude then to Barack Obama (and now Bernie Sanders) for making her a better candidate than she would be otherwise.  And I am thankful this transformation is occurring much sooner than last time...  

[Adam Griffin]

Here's a link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbTKKGaG6FQ

She has good speechwriters but she's no good speaker IMO.

I like how 'Bernie2016TV' drastically lowered the volume on the audio as soon as the speaker introduced her to the audience so that you couldn't fully hear the applause and chants.

[Tender Branson]

A desperate attempt to appear lefty. But a wolf in sheep's clothing will remain one, no matter how much chalk she swallows to sway the voters.

Hillary will be re-defeated. It will become more obvious over the next months ...

[DrScholl]

Hillary is quite a formidable opponent. Calling out the entire Republican field is a smart move, because there is always the possibility that someone no one ever predicted could end up with the nomination.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Wow, fantastic.  Hopefully she continues to channel this energy. She really is a better candidate than last time. They really just need to help her break free from the bubble wrap and take some risks.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

It's sad people care more about speeches than results. Let's remember her husband is a great orator and yet, he failed to destroy Iraq's WMDs, failed to rid the world of Bin Laden, caused the housing bubble, and was involved in multiple ethical issues.

Hard to destroy something that doesn't exist.

[bobloblaw]

WMDs did exist in the 1990s

[Kingpoleon]

Here's a link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbTKKGaG6FQ

She has good speechwriters but she's no good speaker IMO.

Agreed. Only a very partisan person/group of people(*cough*AH.com*cough*) would call her charismatic. That said, I wish Martin O'Malley stopped his awkward pauses. It doesn't sound robotic like Hillary, but it looks nervous.

[136or142]

It's sad people care more about speeches than results. Let's remember her husband is a great orator and yet, he failed to destroy Iraq's WMDs, failed to rid the world of Bin Laden, caused the housing bubble, and was involved in multiple ethical issues.

I'm pretty sure George W Bush doesn't have a husband.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

WMDs did exist in the 1990s

Yes, they were destroyed in 1991.

[dudeabides]

It's sad people care more about speeches than results. Let's remember her husband is a great orator and yet, he failed to destroy Iraq's WMDs, failed to rid the world of Bin Laden, caused the housing bubble, and was involved in multiple ethical issues.

I'm pretty sure George W Bush doesn't have a husband.

I know you hate facts and the truth, but everything I said here is factual.

To those who are once again critical of me for stating the fact that Saddam had WMD, here is some (more) evidence:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

source: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/etc/arsenal.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Source: http://www.inquisitr.com/1309825/isis-in-iraq-find-saddam-husseins-wmd-stockpiles-of-chemical-weapons-george-w-bush-was-right/

[Cory]

It's sad people care more about speeches than results. Let's remember her husband is a great orator and yet, he failed to destroy Iraq's WMDs, failed to rid the world of Bin Laden, caused the housing bubble, and was involved in multiple ethical issues.

The lack of self-awareness is palpable.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I know you hate facts and the truth, but everything I said here is factual.

Post of the year.

[136or142]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Two obvious responses:
1.I know you are but what am I?
2.If you change the word 'everything' in that sentence to 'nothing' then it would be correct.

And just so nobody can accuse me of making joking comments rather than dealing with substance:
1.A WMD program that existed 10 years before the U.S illegally invaded Iraq are not actual WMD.
2.Nor is idle speculation as to what may have happened to the alleged WMD.
3.The 'small chemical stockpiles' were all degraded.

3 strikes and you're out.

[Kingpoleon]

It's sad people care more about speeches than results. Let's remember her husband is a great orator and yet, he failed to destroy Iraq's WMDs, failed to rid the world of Bin Laden, caused the housing bubble, and was involved in multiple ethical issues.

I'm pretty sure George W Bush isn't her husband.

Thank you. Now, Bush did good things. He lead the nation well after 9/11 and held it together. Only economic results were lacking.

Had Bush maintained a balanced budget, he would have had solid economic growth and stability, with possible stimuluses holding back the recession. His only fault was raising spending and cutting taxes, each medium-like, but combined it caused extreme economic instability and inflation that lead to the housing bubble.