Who will liberals blame if Trump wins the election.

[Moonbeam]

You're comparing a black person to a mule and I'm the racist!? Some self awareness may do you some good.
Some whites are further back than some blacks in this "race" how can you apply the same head start to people who don't need it? Life isn't fair but the sooner we start treating everybody equally the better. This is a pretty simple concept.
Just because you're insane doesn't mean you know what you're talking about. I don't care what race you or anybody else is, results is what counts. If individuals need a break because they came from a tough spot, then that's fine. Applying this break along racial lines is by definition, racist.

As expected..... Some day maybe it will dawn on you that the reason people call you a liar etc is because you really do have no personal integrity, the last thing you would expect behind your facade.

 

[Jhhnn]

Ourselves, there is nobody else to blame. If the dems cannot unify against drumpf who the fuck can they unify against?
The dem party appears to be more fractured than the gop, and they're pretty fucked up.

Please. Hand wringing over the state of the Democratic is overblown, largely a construct of sensationalist media. It's an attempt to claim symmetry between the parties that isn't real.

By the time we get to the election, I figure that Dems & a majority of independents will be more than eager to kick Trump's ass at the voting booth. That's despite all the hoopla & attempts from his supporters to bandwagon him into the Presidency. They'll be going on about meaningless polls 5 months out & blah, blah, blah, trying to convince themselves that they can win.

Trump is the candidate of the insurgent Repub base. Period. What they love about him everybody else rightfully despises. He's grossly unqualified to have the most powerful position in the world. Most of us already know that.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Please. Hand wringing over the state of the Democratic is overblown, largely a construct of sensationalist media. It's an attempt to claim symmetry between the parties that isn't real.

By the time we get to the election, I figure that Dems & a majority of independents will be more than eager to kick Trump's ass at the voting booth. That's despite all the hoopla & attempts from his supporters to bandwagon him into the Presidency. They'll be going on about meaningless polls 5 months out & blah, blah, blah, trying to convince themselves that they can win.

Trump is the candidate of the insurgent Repub base. Period. What they love about him everybody else rightfully despises. He's grossly unqualified to have the most powerful position in the world. Most of us already know that.

I hope you're right, I just know it's important to get out there and vote, complacency or ambivalence will lead to a drumpf presidency.

 

[Jhhnn]

I hope you're right, I just know it's important to get out there and vote, complacency or ambivalence will lead to a drumpf presidency.

Agreed. The opportunity to kick Trump's ass is an eagerly awaited opportunity that thinking Americans won't pass up. I want him to go down like Barry Goldwater.

 

[buckshot24]

As expected..... Some day maybe it will dawn on you that the reason people call you a liar etc is because you really do have no personal integrity, the last thing you would expect behind your facade.

Where did I lie? Are you saying you didn't compare black people to inferior animals (for speed)?

 

[buckshot24]

Agreed. The opportunity to kick Trump's ass is an eagerly awaited opportunity that thinking Americans won't pass up. I want him to go down like Barry Goldwater.

NeverTrumpers call Trump an east coast liberal and liberals can't stand him. Do you liberals consider Trump a liberal?

 

[Moonbeam]

Where did I lie? Are you saying you didn't compare black people to inferior animals (for speed)?

That is only one of the lies you create. I'm saying that you and your racism turned something I said which was totally different into a racist statement only in your racist mind. Now I realize you are too deeply bigoted to understand what I really said but I'll explain it for my own reasons anyway. In a speed race a faster animal would beat a slower one bet if the task were pulling a load the better suited to that task would win. Mules are not inferior to horses nor are black people mules. Statistically black culture, because of centuries of prejudice, offers fewer advantages to black children than white culture does for whites. That does not mean there are not many disadvantaged whites or many advantaged blacks. We are talking statistics. Your insistence that everybody be judged as if they all had equal advantage mates yor a programmed idiot. You are even well known here as an exceptional exponent of the idiot class. Naturally it's not a result of a low IQ but of your inculcated bigotry. You clearly belong to some form of Satanic religion.

 

[Moonbeam]

Liberals think Trump didn't have a chance just like conservatives thought too.

 

[sportage]

Occurred to me, it's still not too late for Obama to impose onto himself a third term.
Just like republican Obama haters always believed Obama would do.

But now, Obama haters just might want to reconsider, no?
Obama granting himself dictatorship and just staying put,
right in the old Whitehouse?

If you are republican establishment and really really REALLY hate Obama, but just cannot believe your dismal predicament THIS election cycle,
another four years of Obama just might be your answer?

Face it guys, it would be a lot better and more probable than hoping for some right wing republican savior riding in on a white horse at the last minute to save your day.
And it would be better than your wishful thinking for some republican to run third party in hopes of stoping Donald AND Hillary Trump.

Yep! It's Obama 2016.
Because, the clock is running out.
And the other choices really do SUCK!

 

[FrankRamiro]

Blame? Hell, aside from his anti-immigration rhetoric I think Trump might actually more honestly liberal than Hillary who seems Nixon like in her politics. If they weren't trying to appeal to the base of their respective parties, each at core would likely do a better job being the standard bearer for the opposite party as that seems where their true heart is.

(aside from his anti-immigration rhetoric!)

My ass! because Trump wants the existent emigrations laws to be enforced,that's anti-Emigration rhetoric?

 

[feralkid]

(aside from his anti-immigration rhetoric!)

My ass! because Trump wants the existent emigrations laws to be enforced,that's anti-Emigration rhetoric?

English?

 

[sportage]

Better question.
WHO will the REPUBLICANS blame???

Watching the Trump protesters in the streets Tuesday night in New Mexico, one only need wonder and ask that if Donald should be elected is this going to be the status quo for the next 4 years?
When was the last time the general public marched, rioted, protested a sitting president, and on a regular basis?
If Donald is elected, I doubt Donald will do that famous "Pensilvania walk" to the Whitehouse.
Hell, not only will he remain in his bullet proof government provided limo, Donald will need military air support overhead.
Of maybe Donald will just use his own Trump helicopter and land right on the Whitehouse lawn?

Usually after the nation elects a new president, people celebrate.
This could be the first time mass rioting breaks out in every major city nation wide.

And I find it damn hilarious to watch republicans "try" to rally around Donald Trump.
As if the worse of Donald is behind them.
Let me say that again...
AS IF THE WORSE OF DONALD IS BEHIND THEM.
Absolutely gut busting hilarious...
Don't you republicans guys and gals realize, candidate Donald Trump is just getting started?
Embrace Donald or not, you still have a full 5+ months of Donald to suffer through.
The worse of Donald behind you? HARDLY....
U aint seen nothin yet.

So pass the popcorn, recline back, put your feet up, and witness the most shocking presidential election of your lifetime. Something to be talked about for generations to come.
That is, if we survive for generations to come.
And one thing everyone MUST realize, that under a President Donald Trump administration America can no longer make fun of Kim Jong-un.

 

[buckshot24]

That is only one of the lies you create. I'm saying that you and your racism turned something I said which was totally different into a racist statement only in your racist mind.

You compared black people to an inferior breed for a specific task. I don't think black people are inferior for any task. But I'm the racist? You're either insane or an idiot.

Now I realize you are too deeply bigoted to understand what I really said but I'll explain it for my own reasons anyway.

Projecting doesn't take away the fact that you compared black people to mules. You did that, not me. I don't believe black people are inferior for anything. A mule can never compete with a race horse for speed no matter how much you help it.

In a speed race a faster animal would beat a slower one bet if the task were pulling a load the better suited to that task would win.

So your comparison is that black people are better suited for certain tasks? Yup, that's pretty racist and idiotic.

Mules are not inferior to horses nor are black people mules.

Just inferior for certain tasks?

Statistically black culture, because of centuries of prejudice, offers fewer advantages to black children than white culture does for whites.

I know plenty of white people who were given crap to start with and plenty of black kids who had a head start in comparison. Why should we give a hand to kids who don't need it and a handicap to kids that can't bear it? Because of their skin color? Pretty racist.

That does not mean there are not many disadvantaged whites or many advantaged blacks. We are talking statistics. Your insistence that everybody be judged as if they all had equal advantage mates yor a programmed idiot.

So if you are a disadvantaged white, you're screwed? If you're a black kid who doesn't need the help, you get it anyway.

I just find it fascinating that you are calling me a racist and a bigot because I want to treat everybody equally.

You are even well known here as an exceptional exponent of the idiot class. Naturally it's not a result of a low IQ but of your inculcated bigotry.

Treat people equally! "You bigot!" You're an insane person.

You clearly belong to some form of Satanic religion.

Because I want people to be treated equally I am Satanic? Simply stunning.

If any person is disadvantaged I think they should get some kind of hand up. Not just certain races.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Hi M,
Just popped in and say your thread.

If the worst the Republicans have to offer win it will be because the Democrats will have put forward the worst they had to offer. For months polls which have been more accurate than not have shown Bernie would beat Hillary in a match with Trump. Blacks picked the one candidate who didn't stick their neck out for them. Women picked the candidate who disrespected them when Bill was under fire. Dems supported a hawk, someone who's credibility approaches Cheney, and the powers that be wanted someone wall street and billionaire friendly and yes the press has played it's part.

Naturally this will be the fault of the Republicans.

I've always believed these "liberal" Democrats to be more or less the same in how they act when it comes down to it. This election vindicated that belief, sadly.

 

[Moonbeam]

Hi M,
Just popped in and say your thread.

If the worst the Republicans have to offer win it will be because the Democrats will have put forward the worst they had to offer. For months polls which have been more accurate than not have shown Bernie would beat Hillary in a match with Trump. Blacks picked the one candidate who didn't stick their neck out for them. Women picked the candidate who disrespected them when Bill was under fire. Dems supported a hawk, someone who's credibility approaches Cheney, and the powers that be wanted someone wall street and billionaire friendly and yes the press has played it's part.

Naturally this will be the fault of the Republicans.

I've always believed these "liberal" Democrats to be more or less the same in how they act when it comes down to it. This election vindicated that belief, sadly.

Maybe when the live at home millennials have to share their basements with their own kids a revolution will build.

 

[fskimospy]

Hi M,
Just popped in and say your thread.

If the worst the Republicans have to offer win it will be because the Democrats will have put forward the worst they had to offer. For months polls which have been more accurate than not have shown Bernie would beat Hillary in a match with Trump. Blacks picked the one candidate who didn't stick their neck out for them. Women picked the candidate who disrespected them when Bill was under fire. Dems supported a hawk, someone who's credibility approaches Cheney, and the powers that be wanted someone wall street and billionaire friendly and yes the press has played it's part.

Naturally this will be the fault of the Republicans.

I've always believed these "liberal" Democrats to be more or less the same in how they act when it comes down to it. This election vindicated that belief, sadly.

Hey Hayabusa! There's no particularly good reason to think that those polls showing Sanders doing better than Clinton are representative of what would actually happen if he were the nominee.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/24/u...-trump-wouldnt-be-prudent-to-assume-that.html

 

[Painman]

Who was the first person in your family to vote Republican? Probably your father or grandfather, right?

This is beneath you, Vic.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Hey Hayabusa! There's no particularly good reason to think that those polls showing Sanders doing better than Clinton are representative of what would actually happen if he were the nominee.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/24/u...-trump-wouldnt-be-prudent-to-assume-that.html

Looking at favorability ratings may have you think otherwise. Both parties have not put forward candidates with such high disapproval in decades, if ever. One will certainly win, but there is no "mandate" as such, just someone who is seen as bad from the start, but beat the other bad guy.

In some ways it might be best if Trump did win, not because I like the guy, heaven forbid, but it might lead to the collapse of both parties or at least their leadership. They all pretty much need to go. I'd have voted for Bernie, but now I'll stay home. Some will say "well that gives up your right to complain", but given a choice between two evils that claim does not hold water. I am being denied the choice of even a tolerable candidate.

Interesting times.

 

[fskimospy]

Looking at favorability ratings may have you think otherwise. Both parties have not put forward candidates with such high disapproval in decades, if ever. One will certainly win, but there is no "mandate" as such, just someone who is seen as bad from the start, but beat the other bad guy.

I agree that both Trump and Clinton are historically disliked but I wouldn't be surprised if that tends to be the rule rather than the exception going forward. Sanders is likely strongly benefitting from the fact that no one on either side has bothered to attack him as no one sees him as a threat.

What's funny is that Hillary was extremely popular not that long ago. Her favorability ratings among Republicans spiked as soon as she stopped being a presidential candidate and then tanked again as soon as she became one again. It's not like she changed who she was, it's just that Republicans liked her when she wasn't a threat. That's the nature of our negative partisanship.

In some ways it might be best if Trump did win, not because I like the guy, heaven forbid, but it might lead to the collapse of both parties or at least their leadership. They all pretty much need to go. I'd have voted for Bernie, but now I'll stay home. Some will say "well that gives up your right to complain", but given a choice between two evils that claim does not hold water. I am being denied the choice of even a tolerable candidate.

Interesting times.

I remember thinking that it might be better if Bush won in 2000, that way people would see how shitty he really was and that would change opinions long term. That's why I voted for Nader. Man was that wrong.

 

[Painman]

Looking at favorability ratings may have you think otherwise. Both parties have not put forward candidates with such high disapproval in decades, if ever. One will certainly win, but there is no "mandate" as such, just someone who is seen as bad from the start, but beat the other bad guy.

In some ways it might be best if Trump did win, not because I like the guy, heaven forbid, but it might lead to the collapse of both parties or at least their leadership. They all pretty much need to go. I'd have voted for Bernie, but now I'll stay home. Some will say "well that gives up your right to complain", but given a choice between two evils that claim does not hold water. I am being denied the choice of even a tolerable candidate.

Interesting times.

Once upon a time, I blasted you. Now, I'm with you.

 

[sm625]

Who will liberals blame? Lt. Col. Steve Cogswell. Lt. Col. David Hause. Air Force Maj. Thomas Parsons. Hell there is a long frickin list, and I mean a long frickin list of people liberals have no idea about even though they damn well should. It is disgusting really, how much ignorance is allowed to fester.

 

[Painman]

>It is disgusting really, how much ignorance is allowed to fester.

IF ONLY THE GODDAMN FUCKIN LIBRULS WOULD COME TO HEEL

'Cos all those guys defended "Liberty and Freedom"

 

[blankslate]

Who will liberals blame? Lt. Col. Steve Cogswell. Lt. Col. David Hause. Air Force Maj. Thomas Parsons. Hell there is a long frickin list, and I mean a long frickin list of people liberals have no idea about even though they damn well should. It is disgusting really, how much ignorance is allowed to fester.

that's ignorance.

I would blame DWS for hiding the democratic debates on nights when people either went out or watched sports.

either malicious or plain dumb, I haven't decided which yet.


______________

 

[blankslate]

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/281147-dems-discuss-dropping-wasserman-schultz

Interesting news about DWS....

Democrats on Capitol Hill are discussing whether Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz should step down as Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairwoman before the party’s national convention in July.

Democrats backing likely presidential nominee Hillary Clinton worry Wasserman Schultz has become too divisive a figure to unify the party in 2016, which they say is crucial to defeating presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump in November.

Wasserman Schultz has had an increasingly acrimonious relationship with the party’s other presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders, and his supporters, who argue she has tilted the scales in Clinton’s favor.
“There have been a lot of meetings over the past 48 hours about what color plate do we deliver Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s head on,” said one pro-Clinton Democratic senator.

The lawmaker said senators huddled on the chamber floor last week to talk about Wasserman Schultz’s future and estimated that about a dozen have weighed in during private conversations.

“I don’t see how she can continue to the election. How can she open the convention? Sanders supporters would go nuts,” said the lawmaker, who requested anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the discussions.

The Tea Party "endorsed" her....
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/house-races/281233-tea-party-group-endorses-wasserman-schultz

The Tea Party Express on Wednesday taunted Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) by “endorsing” her reelection bid.

“While both Wasserman Schultz and [Tim] Canova share extreme liberal views that are damaging to American prosperity, the scales tip for us to endorse Wasserman Schultz because conservatives and the Tea Party have thrived during her tenure as [Democratic National Committee] DNC Chairwoman,” Executive Director Taylor Budowich said in a statement.

{monads}“By continuing to press for a far-left agenda, Americans have rallied to Tea Party supported candidates across the country,” he added.

The Florida Democrat faces a primary challenge from Canova, a law professor who thinks an anti-incumbent wave could help him win. Wasserman Schultz has come under fire as the head of the DNC, and The Hill reported Tuesday that Democrats are fiercely debating her handling of their presidential primary.

“Her blatant partiality towards [Democratic presidential front-runner] Hillary Clinton against Bernie Sanders has led to an acrimonious Democratic Party contest, and a likely contentious Democratic Convention. Why give up a good thing by having Wasserman Schultz defeated now?” asked the Tea Party Express, picking up on that theme.

A super-PAC founded by GOP strategist Karl Rove also offered backhanded support for Wasserman Schultz’s bid on Tuesday.

“Congresswoman and DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz has played a critical role over the past several years in the massive Republican gains we have achieved at the state level, in the U.S. House of Representatives and in the U.S. Senate,” American Crossroads President and CEO Steven Law said in a statement.

Thanks Wasserman....


______________________

 

[Jhhnn]

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/281147-dems-discuss-dropping-wasserman-schultz

Interesting news about DWS....



The Tea Party "endorsed" her....
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/house-races/281233-tea-party-group-endorses-wasserman-schultz


Thanks Wasserman....




______________________

So, the Teahadis attack DWS for her far left agenda and accuse her of rigging it for Hillary at the same time.... Wouldn't DWS favor Bernie if she had a far left agenda?

It's mindless meme repetition & sloganeering. We get so much of it from that quarter that it seems to make sense to some people.