THE DECLINE OF HILLARY CLINTON: THE DYNAMICS (She has only one way to go. And it isn't up.)

The Hotline ^ | 6.4.06 | The Hotline staff, annotated by Mia T

[Mia T]

ping

[Mia T]

ping

[Mia T]

fyi

[Mia T]

fyi

[Brian Allen]

<< The woman is power mad .... >>

And the power lust is but a noxious weed.

That flourishes only in the vacant lots of empty minds.

[Her mean-spiritedness and maliciously and malevolently malignant madness will in the end eat itself -- and will thus see to both its own and its host's destruction. WARNING: Shield your children, it will not be pretty]

[Brian Allen]

Every morning when Missus Clinton, the most stupid, the ugliest and therefore the least well "qualified" schlotternisch slattern in all of Human History to have pursued the sex-worker career path, wakes from sleep, she raises herself on one elbow, looks all around and says:

"Is this all there IS?"

[And that's before the poor bastard sees herself in the mirror, even -- or the look on the face of whomever first bids her Good day]

[potlatch]

She can use her karate kick on them!

[Luke Skyfreeper]

Just trying to help.

It's marketing. It's presenting things to people rather than to search engines. If people can't read it, they won't.

Another point: for every person like myself who dares to voice such a comment, there are probably dozens who won't. So multiply me by 50, that's how many people you're losing through very ineffective presentation.

It's content you want to get through, not format or presentation. :-)

[Luke Skyfreeper]

Incidentally, i'm not the only person to comment on this in this thread:

There may be some good stuff in here, but the pics and links and what not are very off-putting (IMHO).

So multiply 2 x 50 = 100, that's how many people you've lost (give or take, the actual number's not the point.)

This is why this thread only has 50 comments instead of, say, 150.

[devolve]

"So what about what Hillary said today against the
amendment to ban homosexual marriages Tony?"

[potlatch]

LOL, whatta mouth on him!! Looks great!

[Czar]

David Gregory makes a perfect Lucy.

If only he was as smart...

[Mia T]

Thanx for taking the time to comment. I am sure there are others who share your view.
OTOH, the "search engine," i.e., google position, suggests that there are others who do not.

my rationale

[WorkingClassFilth]

"[Hillary is a] dull, midlevel technocrat (and I use that word loosely), whose zipper-hoisting ("charm") can take her no higher." -- Nina Burleigh

All true, no doubt, but it would be a a strategic mistake to elevate the opinion of one of her supporters beyond the utility of general insult and denigration. The danger lies in thinking that what she is, is all she can become. I prefer to view her as a very real and very substantial Golem. Just remember that Count Dracula was little more than a minor aristocrat in a remote and mountainous region. His embodied evil, however, took him farther than his earthly talents, titles or charm ever could.

[Mia T]

Just to keep things straight about that quote: those words are mine, not Nina Burleigh's. They reflect her sentiment, however.

I do agree with you. We must remain ever vigilant. Her--their--evil is boundless.

[Luke Skyfreeper]

Search engines don't read articles, PEOPLE read...

Oh, never mind. I can see I'm totally wasting my breath.

[Seadog Bytes]

=:- )

[jla]

Read later but bump now

[angkor]

more worried about her sneaking in via the Vice-Presidential route.

I think we've reached the tipping point on Hitlery. The leftist media and the MSM are both talking about her dismal chances. The weight is shifting to Gore.

There's no love lost between Gore and the Clintons. How could there be? We're talking about 8 years of living in their shadow?

If there's any truth to the rumor that Gore has become extremely wealthy from Google options (he was hired on as a consultant there in 2001), and that he could mount a campaign from his own pocket, then it's all over for Hill. She doesn't have the heart or the wallet of the Democrat Party. She's toast.

Even worse for her, Mark Warner is a much more telegenic, palatable, and charismatic VP candidate than she could ever be, and he's even wealthier than Gore is rumored to have become (Warner founded the extremely profitable Columbia Capital high tech VC firm in Alexandria VA).

So you enbd up with two viable candidates (not good, viable), with no love for or need of the Clintons, with wads of their own cash to throw at a late-term nomination run, and no desperate need for the Rat/Clinton/Ickes money machine.

IMHO it's already midnight for Hitelry.

[Mia T]

Search engines don't read articles, PEOPLE read...

Oh, never mind. I can see I'm totally wasting my breath.

Google position is determined by some super secret algorithm that includes and is directly related to the number and quality of eyeballs viewing the web page.

A high-traffic web page read by all the Google elites will necessarily achieve a most excellent Google position. While the converse is not necessarily true, i.e., it is theoretically possible to achieve a high position and not be read, such a result is, in my view, highly unlikely.

I don't believe threads that are unreadable can consistently achieve a Google position in the top ten.

Is it your position that a thread that is 'unreadable' can--in the real world--achieve position:

• 1/ 8,030,000 gets? (keywords 'hillary' and 'nuclear')
  
• Or 4/3,570,000? (keywords 'clinton ignored terrorism')
  
• Or 2/8,060,000? (keywords 'clinton' and 'united 93')
  
• Or 7 and 10/3,210,000? (keywords 'hillary' and 'rape')
  
• Or 6/3,470,000? (keywords 'hillary fraud')
  
• Or 7/2,220,000? (keywords 'hillary' and 'racism')
  
• Or 1,2,6 and 7/7,550,000 (keywords 'kill 'em tomorrow')
  
• Or 1 and 2/5,630,000 (keywords 'miss hillary')
  
• Or 1, 2, 4 and 8/152,000 (keywords 'clinton albright nobel')
  
• Or 1, 2 and 3/182,000 (keywords 'deconstructing clinton')
  
• Or 2/328,000 (keywords 'dysfunctional presidency')

 

My goal is to help to get the word out, and I think search-engine success is a necessary part of the equation.
It not only measures success. It heightens it.