Angry Democrats

[Kenny]

The following is just my personal opinion; I have no facts, to back anything up, just my personal opinion.

I believe if Joe Biden had run for president, he would have won. But I believe the democratic powers that be wanted Hilary to be the next president because they invested all those years in her becoming the first female president, so they decided it was her turn. But the problem with Hilary is that all of that time she spent in the political spotlight, she has accumulated too many skeletons in her closet, and too many people don’t like her. Bernie Sanders an admitted socialist, nearly took her out; how bad do you gotta be when you almost lose to a socialist?
Now we have all those winey liberals protesting, rioting, and raising hell because she lost, and they are trying to claim the “Glass Ceiling” got in the way, or that America is too bigoted to elect a female as president. I find that absurd; it has been proven that people will usually vote race over gender, so if America were too bigoted to put a woman in office, Obama wouldn’t have stood a chance! It’s not that America didn’t want to put a woman in office, they didn’t want to put THAT woman in office, and the Democrats refused to see that. So if those angry democrats want to blame somebody, quit blaming uneducated white men and blame themselves for picking an candidate that was proven over and over that nobody wanted, but they refused to acknowledge.
Your thoughts?


Ken

[RickD]

Democrats are ultimately to blame for Clinton not being president. Clinton didn't get enough votes.

Maybe because democrats couldn't vote for her.

Maybe the media and the democrat establishment was too overconfident with Hillary's chances, which lead to too many dems not voting.

[Katabole]

If the U. S. A. wanted to have their first female President, why didn't they vote for Jill Stein? What did Clinton have that Jill Stein didn't?

[RickD]

If the U. S. A. wanted to have their first female President, why didn't they vote for Jill Stein? What did Clinton have that Jill Stein didn't?

The backing of the establishment, the media in her back pocket...

[Kenny]

If the U. S. A. wanted to have their first female President, why didn't they vote for Jill Stein? What did Clinton have that Jill Stein didn't?

The backing of the establishment, the media in her back pocket...

Good point! And don't forget about "name recognition"; I guess everyone was supposed to remember Bill Clinton and just mindlessly vote for the other Clinton by default.

Ken

[Jac3510]

The following is just my personal opinion; I have no facts, to back anything up, just my personal opinion.

I believe if Joe Biden had run for president, he would have won. But I believe the democratic powers that be wanted Hilary to be the next president because they invested all those years in her becoming the first female president, so they decided it was her turn. But the problem with Hilary is that all of that time she spent in the political spotlight, she has accumulated too many skeletons in her closet, and too many people don’t like her. Bernie Sanders an admitted socialist, nearly took her out; how bad do you gotta be when you almost lose to a socialist?
Now we have all those winey liberals protesting, rioting, and raising hell because she lost, and they are trying to claim the “Glass Ceiling” got in the way, or that America is too bigoted to elect a female as president. I find that absurd; it has been proven that people will usually vote race over gender, so if America were too bigoted to put a woman in office, Obama wouldn’t have stood a chance! It’s not that America didn’t want to put a woman in office, they didn’t want to put THAT woman in office, and the Democrats refused to see that. So if those angry democrats want to blame somebody, quit blaming uneducated white men and blame themselves for picking an candidate that was proven over and over that nobody wanted, but they refused to acknowledge.
Your thoughts?


Ken

Please don't make me agree with you in the future. Creates too much cognitive dissonance -- doesn't comport with my reality.

If Dems don't want to lose again, their best bet is to get rid of the superdelegate system. Those individuals, just because of who they are, aren't in touch with the rest of the country. Therefore they can't see what's going on. You don't want them picking your candidate. Maybe they pick a good one, or a minimally acceptable one, but other times, they're going to pick a Hillary Clinton. And if I'm a Democrat (and by the grace of God, I'm not), I'm worried about them picking another bad one simply because the Democrat bench has been destroyed over the last decade. There's already talk of Tim Kaine being the next leader of the party. Very sad.

I do think if Joe Biden had run, things would have been different. I don't know if he would have won the primary, but if he did, he almost certainly would have won the election. I don't see Michigan or Pennsylvania picking Trump over Biden. But who else do you have now? There's just not a lot of up and coming talent. Granted, someone can come out of nowhere like Obama did, but that's unlikely for two reasons. First, Obama didn't exactly come out of nowhere. He gave an amazing convention speech the round before he was elected. I don't think there's anybody like that on the left from this time around. And second, Obama was and is a uniquely gifted politician (plus having the benefit of being the first black president). Again, I don't see anybody like that on the rise.

So whoever gets picked will need to come up organically and over the next several years. So the party structure needs to get out of the way and see who naturally comes forward. They they need to let the voters actually vote. If they don't do that, they'll likely produce another manufactured candidate and lose again.

[RickD]

Michelle Obama 2020!

[Philip]

There's already talk of Chelsea for the Senate - talk about clueless! I think the Clintons are now poison, even to staunch Democrats!

[Jac3510]

That could be a Trump tweet, Phil.

[edwardmurphy]

So if those angry democrats want to blame somebody, quit blaming uneducated white men and blame themselves for picking an candidate that was proven over and over that nobody wanted, but they refused to acknowledge.
Your thoughts?


Ken

If nobody wanted her then why did she win the popular vote?

[B. W.]

So if those angry democrats want to blame somebody, quit blaming uneducated white men and blame themselves for picking an candidate that was proven over and over that nobody wanted, but they refused to acknowledge.
Your thoughts?

Ken

If nobody wanted her then why did she win the popular vote?

We have the Electoral Vote. One basic reason for it was was to give voice to those who would be shouted down by any political party owning the large population urban areas voting block. It was set up as a check and balance system. Popular vote can be exploited and favor larger urban areas and disenfranchise lower populated regions leading to tyranny of a ruling elite who dictate its will on all with no recourse.

Now Look at this county level election result map, Democrat voters are clustered in major cities along the coast and do not represent the views of the USA but rather a ruling elite class who desire total absolute control and the dismantling of US Constitution and its Bill of Rights under the guise of changing into a living document geared toward a global govt concept.



No, Ed, Geographically the country does not agree with the democrat party or its philosophy of big Govt control over all aspects of life which is more in line with Communism that freedom of Representative Republic.

Let's face it, or 8 years we had to endure Obama and the left. 8 years before that George Bush's New Tone compromise polices which lead to Obama's win. Do you remember the - Kill Bush - Kill Bush Flash Games ? Or the book on how to do this. Remember the hate that the democrat left had toward Bush who was the best friend they had 2000-2008? They all went ballistic back then and are doing so again.

With Trump, we have a respite from the full brunt of the insanity of the Left. The battles are lining up and this is no time to rest but keep praying and seeking the last harvest of souls for Jesus Christ before the hammer of the left falls full force.

No, the USA does not want progressive liberalism enforced by elites to govern all aspects of our lives who sterotype people into classes and enforce their new kind of racism upon the rest of us.

Lastly

I wonder how much of the popular vote is based upon dead people voting democrat and Illegals voting without ID's, and multiple people bused in to vote multiple times, and how many voting machines switch votes fro Hillary? We do not know how many for sure but it happened. Taking that into consideration her popular vote may have been mucho less.

Also, Hilary Clinton did say this not so long ago; look it up on youtube if you like: “Rights have to exist in practice — not just on paper,” Clinton said. “Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will. And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed.”

She was not just speaking on abortion but giving clue the goals of all the left.

HRC claims a Christian faith yet promotes the premeditated and planned murder of the unborn proves she is not. Sorry, that is the way it is. Her policies of promoting division, deviant behaviors, discord show she never followed Jesus unless she can twist his words to further her goals...as she so revealed in that speech on abortion quoted above.
-
-
-

[Kenny]

So if those angry democrats want to blame somebody, quit blaming uneducated white men and blame themselves for picking an candidate that was proven over and over that nobody wanted, but they refused to acknowledge.
Your thoughts?


Ken

If nobody wanted her then why did she win the popular vote?

I suspect many who voted for Clinton were actually voting against Donald Trump, and many who voted for Trump were actually voting against Hillary Clinton. If there were someone on the ticket actually worth voting FOR, they would have won.

Ken

[edwardmurphy]

We have the Electoral Vote. One basic reason for it was was to give voice to those who would be shouted down by any political party owning the large population urban areas voting block. It was set up as a check and balance system. Popular vote can be exploited and favor larger urban areas and disenfranchise lower populated regions leading to tyranny of a ruling elite who dictate its will on all with no recourse.

Gotcha. So you're cool with urban voters being disenfranchised because you disagree with them. Not a whiff of hypocrisy there.

Now Look at this county level election result map, Democrat voters are clustered in major cities along the coast and do not represent the views of the USA but rather a ruling elite class who desire total absolute control and the dismantling of US Constitution and its Bill of Rights under the guise of changing into a living document geared toward a global govt concept.

First off, it's "Democratic" voters because they're members of the "Democratic" Party. Stop acting like a 5-year-old.

Second, [nonsense]. Seriously, your argument is pure idiocy. If the majority of the population votes one way then their votes reflect the position of the majority of the country. Hand waving them out of existence because you don't agree with them is asinine.

No, Ed, Geographically the country does not agree with the democrat party or its philosophy of big Govt control over all aspects of life which is more in line with Communism that freedom of Representative Republic.

Where does it say that geography has anything to do with anything? One hundred people is one hundred people, regardless of whether they're concentrated in half an acre or spread out over 10,000.

With Trump, we have a respite from the full brunt of the insanity of the Left. The battles are lining up and this is no time to rest but keep praying and seeking the last harvest of souls for Jesus Christ before the hammer of the left falls full force.

God, you're ridiculous.

I wonder how much of the popular vote is based upon dead people voting democrat and Illegals voting without ID's, and multiple people bused in to vote multiple times, and how many voting machines switch votes fro Hillary? We do not know how many for sure but it happened. Taking that into consideration her popular vote may have been mucho less.

Probably not much.

Also, where do you get the idea that if there are dead people on the rolls they're all voting for the Democrats? Let me guess - you assumed it based on no evidence whatsoever because it fits your paranoid persecution narrative?

[Kurieuo]

So if those angry democrats want to blame somebody, quit blaming uneducated white men and blame themselves for picking an candidate that was proven over and over that nobody wanted, but they refused to acknowledge.
Your thoughts?


Ken

If nobody wanted her then why did she win the popular vote?

I suspect many who voted for Clinton were actually voting against Donald Trump, and many who voted for Trump were actually voting against Hillary Clinton. If there were someone on the ticket actually worth voting FOR, they would have won.

Ken

Agree with Kenny, again, a lot of people also listen to the conspiracy stuff against him. How many times I heard Trump's a racist, xenophobe, homophobic, going to round up all immigrants, etc, etc. Just fear mongering. Untrue.

Also, I'd point out that popular counted vote isn't the same as popular cast vote. I heard millions of mail-in and absentee ballots aren't counted until after, though they won't make a difference in won states. I also hear they generally favour Republicans i.e., in CA 1/3 Dems, 2/3s Rep at last election.

[Kurieuo]

Soros is also known for stirring up trouble, I'm sure he has a big spoon helping stir the current unrest. Russia just issues an international arrest warrant for him, dead or alive apparently. Great news if true!