How many heads will explode...

pawz said:

show previous quotes

HardlyClothed said:

creepycoug said:

HardlyClothed said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

creepycoug said:

HardlyClothed said:

creepycoug said:

Pitchfork51 said:

HardlyClothed said:

Swaye said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I can't see any way he doesn't.

I mean aside from the totally obvious democrat move which is run a decent moderate candidate.
Which there is about 0 chance of them doing.

All the Dems have to do is run a moderate, just as you suggest. They will trot out Pocahontas or some other socialist and get drubbed. LRR

This is garbage poltical analysis.

Hillary lost because the progressive base didn’t turn out for her.

The Dems lost hundreds of seats during the Obama years because he did shitty Republican health care reform and expanded our forever wars in the Middle East.

Hillary was the center-left establishment moderate who pandered to “moderate” Republican voters instead of the liberal base, and it failed spectacularly.

A democrat from the left-wing of the party would have trounced Trump.

Oh my God.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

They are gonna do it too.



They still don't fucking get it. It's insane.


Hillary losing and trump winning had fucking zero to do with her platform or policies.

Sort of. It had to do w/ policies in that Hillary ran a campaign on policies that ranged from marginally important to retarded.

She thought she could get elected with the Berkeley vote. And she almost did, until yet another bit of info "leaked" questioning her integrity. That was one thing Obama didn't have to carry ... nobody really believes the birthers - even Bannon calls that crowd "fringe".

What the hell are you talking about? Hillary spent the entire campaign trying to reach out to moderate Republicans instead of making concessions the progressive base.

Ok man. I guess the rest of us missed it. Remember, it's not just the candidate ... it's what the candidate's party is doing.

If you don't remember bathrooms, deplorables, e-mail servers, gay marriage! and Obamacare, then I just can't help you.

Oh, I'm well aware that Hillary isn't nearly as liberal in real life as she pretends to be, but her public face is all about that other shit. Yeah, she was centrist relative to Bernie, who actually lets people call him a socialist w/o fighting back. Compared to him, I see your point.

You have a lot of work to do before you convince me that she lost because not enuff bleeding hearts turned out to vote. We all know that was reported, and likely played a part, but I'm pretty suspect about placing too much emphasis on precise statistics concerning things that "didn't happen." Know what I mean?

The Hillary and the entire party blew it. Just admit it and move on.

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/991786317091454976

This is correct.

If you can’t put together how our political shift (in both parties) towards unfettered capitalism is and has been failing the majority of working class people since the 1980’s and the resulting failure of neoliberalism in the Democratic party then you don’t truly understand why Hillary lost.

Dude. You. Are. Presuming. Too. Much.

Do you REALLY think that moderate democrats are contemplating the implications of "unfettered capitalism" and musing about "neoliberalism"? Axe Sledog if he knows what those words mean, and you'll get an idea of who fs this is.

I suppose you think that Joe Lunchbox reads Das Kapital and Wealth of Nations on his smoke breaks.

And we haven't moved towards unfettered capitalism. Read a Dickens novel if you want to know what that really looks like.

Trump's policies most closely mirror classic Democratic populism ... the kind of shit that is popular with unions and blue collar, lower middle-class working stiffs. You know, protectionism, tarriffs, "America first" and all that shit. There is nothing unfettered about it, unless you're choosing to just focus on the tax cut.

Of course I don’t think Joe Lunchbox has a nuanced understanding of the labor theory of value but he’s not stupid enough to see that his material interests have been damaged by both political parties for the last 30+ years.

This.

This is why Hillary lost; because everybody with a half-a-brain knew she was for the status quo.

creepycoug said:

show previous quotes

dnc said:

PurpleThrobber said:

I hated Obama because he needed that weak ass lefthanded crossfaced excuse for a jump shot slapped up into the third row.

So that's two votes for "I only hated the white half of him".

Got it.

I hated both halves because elitism.

oregonblitzkrieg said:

The wave of anger that Trump surfed to victory isn't just a domestic phenomenon. For years Europe and Canada have been testing grounds for the globalist agenda of socialism, open borders and police state crackdowns on free speech. People with half a brain hate all that shit--especially in America, the nation that is the gold standard of freedom.

People have been paying attention. They saw how Merkel's open border policies led to the invasion of Europe by people from cultures that are incompatible with the values of the West. Now terrorist attacks are happening there every few weeks. They don't want that here. They know that Germany has strict gun control laws and that Merkel sends goons to raid homes of people who've posted the 'wrong' opinion about government policies on facebook. They know tech companies are willing accomplices in these crackdowns. They know that comedians are receiving 5 figure fines in Canada just for telling jokes. They see so called 'hate speech' laws for what they really are -- a doorway to government despotism. People HATE THAT SHIT. Democrats have been pimping this all for a long time, and the more they double down on the radicalism, the more people will wake up, recognize the threat and neutralize it permanently.

Trump is the atomic bomb that we? the people have dropped on their fucking asses. And the regressive left still haven't learned the lessons of Trump's election because they really have regressed, to the point that they've become ignorant and stupid--the same accusations they level against the other side. They are still underestimating the sheer level of rage, intelligence, awareness and the will of the opposition to preserve the America that was created by our founders. Democrats haven't learned their lesson, and really I hope they never do, because the American experiment won't survive much longer under their leadership.

HardlyClothed said:

show previous quotes

creepycoug said:

HardlyClothed said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

creepycoug said:

HardlyClothed said:

creepycoug said:

Pitchfork51 said:

HardlyClothed said:

Swaye said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I can't see any way he doesn't.

I mean aside from the totally obvious democrat move which is run a decent moderate candidate.
Which there is about 0 chance of them doing.

All the Dems have to do is run a moderate, just as you suggest. They will trot out Pocahontas or some other socialist and get drubbed. LRR

This is garbage poltical analysis.

Hillary lost because the progressive base didn’t turn out for her.

The Dems lost hundreds of seats during the Obama years because he did shitty Republican health care reform and expanded our forever wars in the Middle East.

Hillary was the center-left establishment moderate who pandered to “moderate” Republican voters instead of the liberal base, and it failed spectacularly.

A democrat from the left-wing of the party would have trounced Trump.

Oh my God.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

They are gonna do it too.



They still don't fucking get it. It's insane.


Hillary losing and trump winning had fucking zero to do with her platform or policies.

Sort of. It had to do w/ policies in that Hillary ran a campaign on policies that ranged from marginally important to retarded.

She thought she could get elected with the Berkeley vote. And she almost did, until yet another bit of info "leaked" questioning her integrity. That was one thing Obama didn't have to carry ... nobody really believes the birthers - even Bannon calls that crowd "fringe".

What the hell are you talking about? Hillary spent the entire campaign trying to reach out to moderate Republicans instead of making concessions the progressive base.

Ok man. I guess the rest of us missed it. Remember, it's not just the candidate ... it's what the candidate's party is doing.

If you don't remember bathrooms, deplorables, e-mail servers, gay marriage! and Obamacare, then I just can't help you.

Oh, I'm well aware that Hillary isn't nearly as liberal in real life as she pretends to be, but her public face is all about that other shit. Yeah, she was centrist relative to Bernie, who actually lets people call him a socialist w/o fighting back. Compared to him, I see your point.

You have a lot of work to do before you convince me that she lost because not enuff bleeding hearts turned out to vote. We all know that was reported, and likely played a part, but I'm pretty suspect about placing too much emphasis on precise statistics concerning things that "didn't happen." Know what I mean?

The Hillary and the entire party blew it. Just admit it and move on.

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/991786317091454976

This is correct.

If you can’t put together how our political shift (in both parties) towards unfettered capitalism is and has been failing the majority of working class people since the 1980’s and the resulting failure of neoliberalism in the Democratic party then you don’t truly understand why Hillary lost.

Dude. You. Are. Presuming. Too. Much.

Do you REALLY think that moderate democrats are contemplating the implications of "unfettered capitalism" and musing about "neoliberalism"? Axe Sledog if he knows what those words mean, and you'll get an idea of who fs this is.

I suppose you think that Joe Lunchbox reads Das Kapital and Wealth of Nations on his smoke breaks.

And we haven't moved towards unfettered capitalism. Read a Dickens novel if you want to know what that really looks like.

Trump's policies most closely mirror classic Democratic populism ... the kind of shit that is popular with unions and blue collar, lower middle-class working stiffs. You know, protectionism, tarriffs, "America first" and all that shit. There is nothing unfettered about it, unless you're choosing to just focus on the tax cut.

Of course I don’t think Joe Lunchbox has a nuanced understanding of the labor theory of value but he’s not stupid enough to see that his material interests have been damaged by both political parties for the last 30+ years.

CirrhosisDawg said:

show previous quotes

salemcoog said:

HardlyClothed said:

creepycoug said:

HardlyClothed said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

creepycoug said:

HardlyClothed said:

creepycoug said:

Pitchfork51 said:

HardlyClothed said:

Swaye said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I can't see any way he doesn't.

I mean aside from the totally obvious democrat move which is run a decent moderate candidate.
Which there is about 0 chance of them doing.

All the Dems have to do is run a moderate, just as you suggest. They will trot out Pocahontas or some other socialist and get drubbed. LRR

This is garbage poltical analysis.

Hillary lost because the progressive base didn’t turn out for her.

The Dems lost hundreds of seats during the Obama years because he did shitty Republican health care reform and expanded our forever wars in the Middle East.

Hillary was the center-left establishment moderate who pandered to “moderate” Republican voters instead of the liberal base, and it failed spectacularly.

A democrat from the left-wing of the party would have trounced Trump.

Oh my God.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

They are gonna do it too.



They still don't fucking get it. It's insane.


Hillary losing and trump winning had fucking zero to do with her platform or policies.

Sort of. It had to do w/ policies in that Hillary ran a campaign on policies that ranged from marginally important to retarded.

She thought she could get elected with the Berkeley vote. And she almost did, until yet another bit of info "leaked" questioning her integrity. That was one thing Obama didn't have to carry ... nobody really believes the birthers - even Bannon calls that crowd "fringe".

What the hell are you talking about? Hillary spent the entire campaign trying to reach out to moderate Republicans instead of making concessions the progressive base.

Ok man. I guess the rest of us missed it. Remember, it's not just the candidate ... it's what the candidate's party is doing.

If you don't remember bathrooms, deplorables, e-mail servers, gay marriage! and Obamacare, then I just can't help you.

Oh, I'm well aware that Hillary isn't nearly as liberal in real life as she pretends to be, but her public face is all about that other shit. Yeah, she was centrist relative to Bernie, who actually lets people call him a socialist w/o fighting back. Compared to him, I see your point.

You have a lot of work to do before you convince me that she lost because not enuff bleeding hearts turned out to vote. We all know that was reported, and likely played a part, but I'm pretty suspect about placing too much emphasis on precise statistics concerning things that "didn't happen." Know what I mean?

The Hillary and the entire party blew it. Just admit it and move on.

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/991786317091454976

This is correct.

If you can’t put together how our political shift (in both parties) towards unfettered capitalism is and has been failing the majority of working class people since the 1980’s and the resulting failure of neoliberalism in the Democratic party then you don’t truly understand why Hillary lost.

Dude. You. Are. Presuming. Too. Much.

Do you REALLY think that moderate democrats are contemplating the implications of "unfettered capitalism" and musing about "neoliberalism"? Axe Sledog if he knows what those words mean, and you'll get an idea of who fs this is.

I suppose you think that Joe Lunchbox reads Das Kapital and Wealth of Nations on his smoke breaks.

And we haven't moved towards unfettered capitalism. Read a Dickens novel if you want to know what that really looks like.

Trump's policies most closely mirror classic Democratic populism ... the kind of shit that is popular with unions and blue collar, lower middle-class working stiffs. You know, protectionism, tarriffs, "America first" and all that shit. There is nothing unfettered about it, unless you're choosing to just focus on the tax cut.

Of course I don’t think Joe Lunchbox has a nuanced understanding of the labor theory of value but he’s not stupid enough to see that his material interests have been damaged by both political parties for the last 30+ years.

Great. So what is going to motivate these people to switch back to voting Democrat? All Democrats do is promote victimology and free shit for the poor. Joe Lunchbox doesn’t want his hard earned tax dollars to pay for that shit and feels these people should get off their ass and get a real job.

Trump lost the popular vote, but. he loves the poorly educated joe lunch box

I thought I told you to increase revenue or I am going to shut you down.

2001400ex said:

show previous quotes

salemcoog said:

2001400ex said:

salemcoog said:

HardlyClothed said:

creepycoug said:

HardlyClothed said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

creepycoug said:

HardlyClothed said:

creepycoug said:

Pitchfork51 said:

HardlyClothed said:

Swaye said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I can't see any way he doesn't.

I mean aside from the totally obvious democrat move which is run a decent moderate candidate.
Which there is about 0 chance of them doing.

All the Dems have to do is run a moderate, just as you suggest. They will trot out Pocahontas or some other socialist and get drubbed. LRR

This is garbage poltical analysis.

Hillary lost because the progressive base didn’t turn out for her.

The Dems lost hundreds of seats during the Obama years because he did shitty Republican health care reform and expanded our forever wars in the Middle East.

Hillary was the center-left establishment moderate who pandered to “moderate” Republican voters instead of the liberal base, and it failed spectacularly.

A democrat from the left-wing of the party would have trounced Trump.

Oh my God.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

They are gonna do it too.



They still don't fucking get it. It's insane.


Hillary losing and trump winning had fucking zero to do with her platform or policies.

Sort of. It had to do w/ policies in that Hillary ran a campaign on policies that ranged from marginally important to retarded.

She thought she could get elected with the Berkeley vote. And she almost did, until yet another bit of info "leaked" questioning her integrity. That was one thing Obama didn't have to carry ... nobody really believes the birthers - even Bannon calls that crowd "fringe".

What the hell are you talking about? Hillary spent the entire campaign trying to reach out to moderate Republicans instead of making concessions the progressive base.

Ok man. I guess the rest of us missed it. Remember, it's not just the candidate ... it's what the candidate's party is doing.

If you don't remember bathrooms, deplorables, e-mail servers, gay marriage! and Obamacare, then I just can't help you.

Oh, I'm well aware that Hillary isn't nearly as liberal in real life as she pretends to be, but her public face is all about that other shit. Yeah, she was centrist relative to Bernie, who actually lets people call him a socialist w/o fighting back. Compared to him, I see your point.

You have a lot of work to do before you convince me that she lost because not enuff bleeding hearts turned out to vote. We all know that was reported, and likely played a part, but I'm pretty suspect about placing too much emphasis on precise statistics concerning things that "didn't happen." Know what I mean?

The Hillary and the entire party blew it. Just admit it and move on.

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/991786317091454976

This is correct.

If you can’t put together how our political shift (in both parties) towards unfettered capitalism is and has been failing the majority of working class people since the 1980’s and the resulting failure of neoliberalism in the Democratic party then you don’t truly understand why Hillary lost.

Dude. You. Are. Presuming. Too. Much.

Do you REALLY think that moderate democrats are contemplating the implications of "unfettered capitalism" and musing about "neoliberalism"? Axe Sledog if he knows what those words mean, and you'll get an idea of who fs this is.

I suppose you think that Joe Lunchbox reads Das Kapital and Wealth of Nations on his smoke breaks.

And we haven't moved towards unfettered capitalism. Read a Dickens novel if you want to know what that really looks like.

Trump's policies most closely mirror classic Democratic populism ... the kind of shit that is popular with unions and blue collar, lower middle-class working stiffs. You know, protectionism, tarriffs, "America first" and all that shit. There is nothing unfettered about it, unless you're choosing to just focus on the tax cut.

Of course I don’t think Joe Lunchbox has a nuanced understanding of the labor theory of value but he’s not stupid enough to see that his material interests have been damaged by both political parties for the last 30+ years.

Great. So what is going to motivate these people to switch back to voting Democrat? All Democrats do is promote victimology and free shit for the poor. Joe Lunchbox doesn’t want his hard earned tax dollars to pay for that shit and feels these people should get off their ass and get a real job.

Just like all Republicans do is sell lies. Like Obamacare will crater the economy. Tax cuts will increase revenue. Democrats are taking your guns. Planned Parenthood is selling aborted babies. Etc.

I thought I told you to get back there and change the fryer oil.

And it’s clear in your case that Planned Parenthood failed us, just when we needed them most. So fuck them.

Didn't think you had a response. I'm just glad that deficits don't matter anymore and we can use U3 unemployment and stock market values again as a measure of the economy.

allpurpleallgold said:

@HardlyClothed post more.

Swaye said:

show previous quotes

HardlyClothed said:

allpurpleallgold said:

@HardlyClothed post more.

I prefer lurking to posting but the misunderstanding of the American left and its divisions briefly drew me out of my cave

Get an avatar or kill yourself.

TurdBuffer said:

show previous quotes

HardlyClothed said:

TurdBuffer said:

HardlyClothed said:

Swaye said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I can't see any way he doesn't.

I mean aside from the totally obvious democrat move which is run a decent moderate candidate.
Which there is about 0 chance of them doing.

All the Dems have to do is run a moderate, just as you suggest. They will trot out Pocahontas or some other socialist and get drubbed. LRR

This is garbage poltical analysis.

Hillary lost because the progressive base didn’t turn out for her.

The Dems lost hundreds of seats during the Obama years because he did shitty Republican health care reform and expanded our forever wars in the Middle East.

Hillary was the center-left establishment moderate who pandered to “moderate” Republican voters instead of the liberal base, and it failed spectacularly.

A democrat from the left-wing of the party would have trounced Trump.

I liked Bernie at first. But he became a Sawant-like one-trick-pony way early, and steadily went downhill from there. His Free College for Everyone idea proved he was already suffering from senility and dementia.

And Trump would've slaughtered him in TV in the debates. That's Trump's home field.

You followed the 2016 election and actually thought: 1. Trump was good in the debates, and 2. The debates matter to voters

Moron

Television matters to voters. Hillary is always bad on TV and widely reviled anyway, so all Trump had to do was remain standing to steal swing-voters from her. And it worked spectacularly for him.