Talk:Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11: 14 days

Hillary Clinton Supreme Court candidates was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 2 February 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

United States: Presidential elections High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections.

Politics: American Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force.

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

2010s Mid‑importance

	2010s portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject 2010s, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2010s on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.2010sWikipedia:WikiProject 2010sTemplate:WikiProject 2010s2010s articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

A fact from Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 April 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign began with a road trip from New York to Iowa in a customized Chevrolet Express van?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2015/April.

Wikipedia

Pizzagate

What controversy? Foaming-at-the-mouth rabid conspiracy story erupting into a Twitter/Instagram/4Chan/Reddit projectile vomiting fest by the usual the "Clinton bodybag" crazies two days before the election and culminating in a Jones fan shooting up a pizza parlor full of customers and staff with an AR-15 assault rifle on December 5, 2016, to "investigate". And the editor who added this gem didn’t even bother to add a source; the reference is a link to an abstract for an article on "Fake News: A Legal Perspective" in the Journal of Internet Law. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 16:57, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fundraising

The context of the cherry-picked, biased quotes from the Washington Post:

As she makes her second White House bid, Hillary Clinton is raising money in a dramatically different environment than her past campaigns. Since then, the Supreme Court has made it easier for wealthy individuals, corporations and unions to spend huge, unregulated sums on political activity.
She has shown a willingness to embrace the new fundraising techniques. This fall, her campaign set up a joint fundraising committee with the Democratic National Committee and 32 state committees that can accept up to $356,100 per year from an individual donor — the first 2016 candidate to pursue such a tactic. And, unlike Sanders, she has sanctioned big-money super PACs working on her behalf, including one coordinating directly with her campaign.
That has given the senator from Vermont an opening.

Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 17:14, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Job Offer to Seth Rich from the Hillary Clinton Campaign

Irrelevant conspiracy-theory drivel

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hello, My efforts to add factual information and sources on "the job offer from the Hillary Clinton campaign to Seth Rich" (in the Seth Rich Murder article) have been rebuffed. Is it permissible to discuss it here for possible addition to Hillary Clinton Presidential Campaign, 2016? I understand that many people don't know about it, or believe that it is a conspiracy theory, but it is documented, and the source is Seth Rich's parents.

A video from Seth Rich's father:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3741754/Father-murdered-DNC-staffer-reveals-son-join-Hillary-Clinton-presidential-campaign-punching-hole-ugly-rumor-Wikileaks-source.html

"He had just been asked to join the Clinton campaign, four days before he was murdered." (and then later) "He had just found out that they wanted him."

I was told by an editor of the other article that dailymail could not be used as a Wikipedia reference, but the video is of Seth Rich's father making the above quotes.

Add this to the undisputed reference:

His parents informed The Washington Post:

"On the day he was murdered, Seth was excited about a new job he had been offered on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign." and continued "To those who sincerely want to get to the bottom of Seth’s murder, we don’t hold this against you."

reference: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/were-seth-richs-parents-stop-politicizing-our-sons-murder/2017/05/23/164cf4dc-3fee-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?utm_term=.c5b01406666e

and this fact was then reported on CNN:

"Before Rich died, he had been offered a new job on Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign"

reference: https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/24/us/seth-rich-dnc-wikileaks-theories/index.html

can this ever be included in either the "People" or "Controversies" section of this article? StreetSign (talk) 03:46, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There was a discussion on this that was closed with this edit. Now you're WP:FORUMSHOPPING. That's not going to be an effective technique. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:12, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No one disputes that Seth Rich received a job offer from the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign four days before he was murdered. And it is documented. There are sections within this article on "People" and "Controversies" that contain facts that are less significant than a murder. Seth's own parents considered the job offer significant. So why shouldn't it be included? Just the fact. "On the day he was murdered, Seth was excited about a new job he had been offered on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign." No speculation. No theory. The truth plus documentation should be an effective technique. StreetSign (talk) 16:18, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because the murder and a job offer have absolutely nothing to do with each other. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:51, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was his parents who made the connection: His parents informed The Washington Post: "On the day he was murdered, Seth was excited about a new job he had been offered on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign." I believe that there were other documented connections. I will find the references. StreetSign (talk) 20:03, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You linked to an article in WaPo where his parents begged people to stop politicizing their son's murder – which appears to be exactly what you are doing. There is no known connection except in the minds of conspiracy theorists; and this isn’t a conspiracy site. O3000 (talk) 20:22, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Finding more sources. "Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton spoke privately for five minutes with the parents of the slain Seth Rich" and "his father said he had learned three days before his July 10 death that he would switch jobs from the party to the Clinton campaign" and "Hillary Clinton was “extremely warm and comforting” and seemed to know a lot about Seth" reference: http://www.omaha.com/columnists/kelly/kelly-before-speech-hillary-clinton-meets-with-parents-of-slain/article_abbc7d16-bf88-5641-9b98-4f650ef24ee0.html Significant findings to follow. StreetSign (talk) 20:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC) "Seth had been walking around, calling friends, family and his girlfriend, pondering the broader picture of what the job change would mean," his parents said. reference: https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/24/us/seth-rich-dnc-wikileaks-theories/index.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by StreetSign (talk • contribs) 21:06, 4 March 2018 (UTC) from https://web.archive.org/web/20161003131327/https://crimewatchdaily.com/2016/09/30/exclusive-murdered-dnc-staffers-family-friends-set-record-straight/[reply]

"He had just found out he was going to go to work for the Clinton campaign doing data analysis and helping getting people out to vote," said Seth's parents say he got the offer but tragically never had the chance to accept. They found the beginnings of his letter of acceptance in a draft email on his computer. Seth had only typed two lines, and his parents are sharing it with us.

"'All my life I wanted to be in a position that I can make a difference.' That resonates with me because that is the heart of what my son would have said, and working on Hillary's campaign, he would be making a difference," said Mary Rich, Seth's mother. There are more sources. StreetSign (talk) 21:18, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So, he never went to work for the campaign, which is what this article is about. So, it's irrelevant. O3000 (talk) 21:24, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone wishes that Seth Rich got the chance to get to work for the campaign, but the fact he did not is unrelated to this article. Dave Dial (talk) 22:24, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Hillary Clinton Testimony to House Select Committee on Benghazi.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:08, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Russian disinformation campaign network, add here?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/17/russian-disinformation-network-said-have-helped-spread-smear-us-ambassador-ukraine

X1\ (talk) 01:35, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion

Request received to merge articles: Planned presidential transition of Hillary Clinton into Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign; dated: {November/2024}. Proposer's Rationale: Spinoff articles are made when they're so unwieldy that we can't centralize the information. Nothing suggests that the page for this planned transition, which will not be happening, is going to contain this much information. Someone, probably in good faith, jumped the gun when making a page. Discuss a merge here. (UTC) Batong1930 (talk) 20:44, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, the standalone article isn't notable and the content can easily fit in this article without becoming unwieldy. Stonkaments (talk) 16:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Enough here for own article. Parent article is long as is. SecretName101 (talk) 05:30, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge Much of the content at the planned presidential transition is simply unencyclopedic, routine news coverage and speculation for an event that didn't take place. AusLondonder (talk) 12:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. No reason to have a separate page for something that never will exist, better put in the campaign article as an extension of the campaign planning. JParksT2023 (talk) 19:02, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]