You Must VOTE For Hillary Before Hearing Her...

[Cow Poke]

...OK, so the Title is a bit Seerian.

But you must PLEDGE to vote for Hillary before you can attend her rally where she will try to convince you to vote for her. Or something like that.

Attendees at a Hillary Clinton campaign event in Cleveland, Ohio, were asked to sign a pledge promising to vote for the candidate before they were allowed into the venue.

pledge hillary.jpg

[JonathanL]

That sounds so incredibly stupid that I'm not sure if I believe even a libtard would pull something like that.

[Cow Poke]

That sounds so incredibly stupid that I'm not sure if I believe even a libtard would pull something like that.

Yeah, right? I'm looking for other sources.

[Cow Poke]

From her own website...

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/events/view/?id=375749

Uses the same language "Commit to Vote", but not sure yet if it's required BEFORE you enter.

[Sam]

Printout available on Clinton's campaign site:

Image 1441658678-001.jpg

Looks like an organizing pamphlet. Asking that the pledge be signed for entry to a rally, if true, would be a rather stupid move.

[Sam]

Well, if it's an organizing event, that's different than a rally and not surprising to request that campaign organizers commit to voting for the candidate.

[Cow Poke]

Well, if it's an organizing event, that's different than a rally and not surprising to request that campaign organizers commit to voting for the candidate.

It's still pretty stupid, Sam, given that a number of people who reportedly signed the pledge stated that they were voting for Sanders.

[Sam]

It's still pretty stupid, Sam, given that a number of people who reportedly signed the pledge stated that they were voting for Sanders.

"Fine print also states all supports must take the fifth"? There's nothing about that in the fine print.

It's not stupid to have an organizing event where the participants pledge to vote for the person they are purported there to organize for. If it were a rally, I'd agree with you. If it's an organizing event, then no.

[Cow Poke]

"Fine print also states all supports must take the fifth"? There's nothing about that in the fine print.

Maybe it's too fine for you to read it!

(Yeah, I saw that, too)

It's not stupid to have an organizing event where the participants pledge to vote for the person they are purported there to organize for.

OK, it's STUPID for Hillary to believe these kids will really honor it.

If it were a rally, I'd agree with you. If it's an organizing event, then no.

Do you know for a fact which it is?

[Cow Poke]

Sam, give me your personal information, and I'll sign you up for the event so you can get more info on it.

[Sam]

Maybe it's too fine for you to read it!

(Yeah, I saw that, too)



OK, it's STUPID for Hillary to believe these kids will really honor it.



Do you know for a fact which it is?

If it's the same event you linked to, it's an organizing event. Otherwise, no. If it was indeed a rally, I agree that a mandatory pledge for entry is stupid. But it appears to be the former.

[Cow Poke]

If it's the same event you linked to, it's an organizing event. Otherwise, no. If it was indeed a rally, I agree that a mandatory pledge for entry is stupid. But it appears to be the former.

So, what's she accomplishing by getting a bunch of teenagers and 20 somethings to sign a pledge when they don't have a clue where they are politically? It's stupid. And calling it an "organizing event" when it's simply an attempt to suck in the Millennials.... that's stupid as well.

It's not like she's gathering supporters and "organizing" them, Sam. It's a scam.

[Cow Poke]

If it's the same event you linked to, it's an organizing event.

Read the accounts of the actual event, Sam - no "organizing". Calling it an "organizing event" doesn't make it one. Please provide any proof whatsoever that it was, indeed, an "organizing event".

[Sam]

Read the accounts of the actual event, Sam - no "organizing". Calling it an "organizing event" doesn't make it one. Please provide any proof whatsoever that it was, indeed, an "organizing event".

You're the one who provided the link, CP. As to the "accounts of the actual event" ... well, you provided an account of the event claiming that the form's "Fine print also states all supports must take the fifth."

It's not something to get in the weeds about. If it was an organizing event, a commitment to vote for the candidate isn't unreasonable. If it was a "rally", a commitment to vote for the candidate as a barrier to entry is stupid. It's probably the former, based on the link you provided, but not particularly outrageous if the latter. Just stupid.

[Cow Poke]

You're the one who provided the link, CP.

I provided "a" link, Mr Charts n Graphs! I have since read much more on this.

As to the "accounts of the actual event" ... well, you provided an account of the event claiming that the form's "Fine print also states all supports must take the fifth."

And invited you to provide others - you're usually anxious to do that.

It's not something to get in the weeds about.

I'll take that as a tacit admission that you can't find anything to support the goofy notion it was actually an "organizing event", which was part of your own criteria for whether or not it was stupid.

If it was an organizing event, a commitment to vote for the candidate isn't unreasonable.

It wasn't.

If it was a "rally", a commitment to vote for the candidate as a barrier to entry is stupid.

So, yeah, it was stupid.

It's probably the former, based on the link you provided, but not particularly outrageous if the latter. Just stupid.

This is hilarious.... Mr Charts n Graphs wants to rely solely on a link I provided.

It was stupid.