Really? Pretty sure they did for a solid month.

pre wiki leaks HRC's likability and trust ratings were dog shit, after the leaks it was fresh dog shit instead of a dried old turd. No one found out anything about HRC or even the DNC from those leaks that they shouldn't have logically inferred.

But as i write this i realize i need to study up on which leaks came specifically through wikileaks and which didn't, as i may be failing to connect some dots.

overall though like i said the medium itself of wikileaks gives many people pause, its unverifiable information in some cases. I don't trust Assange at all, and i don't think many really do.

They'll release candygate, records showing Clinton clearly deleted emails about coordinating Halloween sweet purchases with her staff.

Commercials in Ohio for pro-hillary are almost all shedding light on things Trump has said in reference to women and then shows a bunch of families with their so precious daughters and says things like "IS THIS THE PRESIDENT WE WANT FOR OUR DAUGHTERS?????"

The clusterfuck will continue to get worse and worse lol.

I might start to enjoy using Trump quotes against Trump voters.. Just to show the bullshit ^^

I can't say for sure without months of polls on hand but i think its gonna have a nice bump for her. This cycle its been shown the longer the focus is on Trump the lower he dips, then if there's a newscycle on HRC it evens. Keep her name out of the news for another week and it will really start to hurt him.

Today on O'Reilly he was asked again and failed to pivot to "jobs, economy, ISIS" and instead wen't extensively over his history with this woman. Days after saying "i know this woman, she was the Miss Universe winner we had the most problem with of any ever." he tried to play it off as "I don't know this woman." like..... wut?

He can not run from the spotlight, he's incapable, and that's what loses him votes.

Got mail from my Union today telling me that Ted Strickland for Ohio Senator and Hillary Clinton are who I should vote for lol.

This post was edited by sir_lance_bb on Sep 29 2016 12:30pm

Clinton's campaign (HfA), her Super PAC (PUSA), and the DNC haven't ever focused on any one or two demographics, they have the resources (and the need) to focus on all of them simultaneously. Nothing's happened recently, they've been micro-targeting all of these demographics for over a year now: Republicans and Independents had a prominent slot at the DNC and HfA has launched several groups that are specifically designed to target and grow them to pull over the few persuadable voters, ads are micro-targeted to their audiences (PUSA specifically is making large transfers to state and local registration efforts to boost the non-white reg. voter drives), every battleground state runs as its own operation and is then even broken down further given the idiosyncrasies of the state. All of these things are happening at the same time, they don't switch tactics.

HfA/PUSA/DNC is still targeting African-Americans, Hispanics/Latinos, AAPIs, and other racial and religious minorities. They never had to do voter persuasion, they've been and will continue to focus on mobilization up until Election Day. Early Voting is starting, and the Democrats will attempt to "bank" votes by getting their voters to vote early so that their infrastructure can then focus on the remaining, fewer voters, in order to boost turnout as high as possible. That requires a lot of demographic-specific outreach, Spanish-language ads, targeted surrogate events, etc.

Well he's fucked then.

Try this one - “My fingers are long and beautiful, as, it has been well documented, are various other parts of my body.”