More Trumped up numbers

TurdBuffer said:

@Dhdawg says:

"If trump actually kills tpp that would be an example of him actually giving a shit about workers.
This deal sets a horrible future precedent, unless you're now okay with giving 7 million dollar handouts to every company threatening to outsource."

That's a fair marker to measure him by. Don't forget HRC was for it, until she was against it. Just like the Dakota Access pipeline, the Defense of Marriage Act, and a litany of other "former" positions.

Dem Guv Locke gave away the store to Boeing over a decade ago - and they moved to Chicago and Charleston anyway - so let's not pretend corporate blackmail is a partisan problem or issue.

she actually never came out against DAPL. why? because she's always the last one to the party.

I've been on record saying if Dems keep running shit candidates like her, they deserve to lose. Electing ellison to lead the DNC would be a good step in the right direction.

And when you talk about obama being an incrementalist, that's absolutely true. he's done some good things. but people elected him for radical change that he didn't deliver on, even with a supermajority in both houses for 2 years.

http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/jon-stewart-interview-alastair-campbell-barack-obama
I think what jon stewart says sums it up pretty well for me

dhdawg said:

TurdBuffer said:

@Dhdawg says:

"If trump actually kills tpp that would be an example of him actually giving a shit about workers.
This deal sets a horrible future precedent, unless you're now okay with giving 7 million dollar handouts to every company threatening to outsource."

That's a fair marker to measure him by. Don't forget HRC was for it, until she was against it. Just like the Dakota Access pipeline, the Defense of Marriage Act, and a litany of other "former" positions.

Dem Guv Locke gave away the store to Boeing over a decade ago - and they moved to Chicago and Charleston anyway - so let's not pretend corporate blackmail is a partisan problem or issue.

she actually never came out against DAPL. why? because she's always the last one to the party.

I've been on record saying if Dems keep running shit candidates like her, they deserve to lose. Electing ellison to lead the DNC would be a good step in the right direction.

And when you talk about obama being an incrementalist, that's absolutely true. he's done some good things. but people elected him for radical change that he didn't deliver on, even with a supermajority in both houses for 2 years.

http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/jon-stewart-interview-alastair-campbell-barack-obama
I think what jon stewart says sums it up pretty well for me

Disagree about Ellison, regardless of his abilities. That would be suicidal for the party in this climate. Still too soon. Nobody even knows Ellison, nationally, but they'll all know he's a Muslim in 24 hours. Dems would be wise to introduce him and let people get to know him first, but they're dems, so they won't. He's their Sara Palin. (Radical departure choice. Pseudo change agent.)

Agree about Obama, but he didn't do shit about the deficit spending, even with troop draw-downs. He outspent W by 3 tril? And for what? To make middle class people pay even more for healthcare in order to cover the uninsured? That's a hard sell to working folks and business owners when we see voluntarily underemployed squatters all over our city with their hands out, sucking up tax dollars that should be going to more worthy causes, like reducing the cost and impediments to healthcare.

dhdawg said:

he's not perfect (ellison) and I would have preferred someone like Warren or Sanders, but he's better than just another nancy pelosi / hillary clinton / harry reid business as usual dem

As a midwest guy, he's probably more moderate, centrist, and therefore acceptable than either Warren or Sanders. And with a name like Keith Ellison, we all know he's obviously white and fiscally conservative, which gets him no traction in Democratic circles.

dhdawg said:

TurdBuffer said:

dhdawg said:

he's not perfect (ellison) and I would have preferred someone like Warren or Sanders, but he's better than just another nancy pelosi / hillary clinton / harry reid business as usual dem

As a midwest guy, he's probably more moderate, centrist, and therefore acceptable than either Warren or Sanders. And with a name like Keith Ellison, we all know he's obviously white and fiscally conservative, which gets him no traction in Democratic circles.

people don't want moderate and centrist anymore. that's why hillary lost. Obama ran on change, that's why he won. He's very similar to sanders on economics and endorsed him.

As for the controversial comments he's made, I'm not defending them. But I think trump proved that people don't give a shit about stuff like that anymore. He's better than any other candidate the dems are throwing out there

I would not describe the so-called Progressive Left as moderate or centrist. They are the ones obsessed with bathrooms, genitalia, and the never ending alphabet soup expansion of rights and privileges from the original LGB, to LGBTQSRXXWYZABC - and on and on, so that nobody will have to go through life without a victim card to play. Most people just want to go to work, enjoy their time off with friends and family, and save some dough for retirement. They don't care at all where a gender-fluid person pisses or shits, so long as its private, and reasonably quiet, and they really, really want everyone to have a decent job and succeed in life so we can all thrive and pay less taxes. Obama caved to the outliers and fringes of his party, and the middle of country reeled it back by voting for Trump. That's my read of the election, anyway.