At this moment, this Presidency is not going well

[Third Party]

Sorry, I SAW and HEARD her-that's when I changed my vote!

Please post up video or at least direct quotes of this.

I'll wait.

Clinton admitted she's for 'open borders' in paid, private speech: WikiLeaks I can't do links so I copy and paste.

So, unless you were one of those banksters at that paid, private speech, you lied to us:

Sorry, I SAW and HEARD her-that's when I changed my vote!

BS-I saw her on video-read the GOD DAMN post I put out! You wanted proof you got it! Now SHUT UP!

No one so much as claims there is video of the speech. All there is are transcripts. So we don't really know.

And I am lying again, and lying about your lying.

Olde europe-on a good day

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The democrats can't

Nonsense.

 

[Olde Europe]

That's instructive.

[1] The last Democratic candidate for President winning the White vote, if I remember correctly, was Johnson. They were, in particular, losing the White vote in the South, with some districts going 90% GOP. That's to say, "alienate" isn't the term I would use for what was happening for half a century.

[2] Now, if the Dems alienated White voters, the result would be a decline in White votes for Democrats. A decline or increase of the White vote for Trump doesn't demonstrate anything in that context.


So, we have a point made by Mac that is at best hapless, and a counter by Joe that amounts to a non-argument at best, not addressing Mac's point. All that is then followed, allegedly, by [3], Mac's long-dead and decaying hobby horse. Neither, if we believe the account, is treating his opposite side with even the basic respect a debate would require, and, quite obviously, things are going nowhere, fast.

Um, wow. Thats what you took out of that exchange, making more excuses for Vichy Mac.

He made a FACTUALLY INCORRECT argument, and frankly, your counter proved my point even more. His point was that Democrats "recently" alienated white people. And no, they really hadn't. THey lost white people a long time ago. You kind of reinforced my point.

The GOP has been VERY CLEVER at getting stupid white people to vote against their own economic interests for years (and I plead guilty, because I voted for them a few times) . The point Stormy Mac was making was that Obama had done this, and they totally needed to suck up to the bigots by having sympathy for the hole they dug themselves into.

It doesn't help that the Democrats promote race pimps like Sharpton and Jackson...

There's no point in treating Mac with "respect" when he blatantly misstates facts, and keeps misstating them when corrected.

And that's while a debate is overdue on where the White voters were marching, and why, and what all this has to do with that most putrid of blossoms on the swamp of largely White rage and insanity, Trump, and his failing Presidency.

Again, Trump is an accident of history, largely because the Democrats foisted the most unlikable human being they could find on the electorate... And then told us all not to worry, she had it in the bag.

It really didn't matter where the putrid white people were "marching", they've been marching there since 1964. The problem was otherwise decent people figured, "Heck, I can show my displeasure with Hillary by voting for Jill Stein!"

But Vichy Mac will keep saying, "We need to elect more guys like Jim Webb!" You know, the putrid DINO who quit after one term.

This is why Democrats FAIL. They don't go in for the kill. Trump has fundementally transformed the country, for the worse, because he had no compunctions about appointing neanderthals and crooks to every judicial and executive post.

Meanwhile, Obama imposed Romney-Care Lite, everyone hated it, and he lost Congress in short order.

Let's cut this short, as I am done being used as the foil for you to carry out your vendetta against Mac, and to throw all that nonsense at me. You have the last word if you want it, but I am done.

Mac didn't make a "factually incorrect" argument. Just in light of the last five decades, it was somewhat puzzling, lacking in specifics, and incomplete. Hillary lost because of whites abandoning her in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan. Whether that was because Democrats alienated them, or because Trump activated resentments and abject stupidity to win them over, or for some other reasons, remains to be clarified.

That "most unlikable human being" started out in 2015 with an approval rating well into the 60s. Up until ten days before the election she had a solid 7 point lead. Then, Comey happened, her lead collapsed, so did the blue firewall, and still she won 3 million more votes than Trump. That, to repeat "most unlikable human being". You don't know Hillary - nobody does with the possible exception of Bill. The "Hillary" you "know" is the result of a lavishly funded smear campaign lasting for more than a quarter century. You seemingly fell for it, and you are far from the only one bereft of the critical faculties to resist.

What is it, in the end, about "unlikable" anyway? That's how little girls talk. Oh, and silly, hysterical tv pundits, paid to pander to the lowest common denominator, and you.

Trump is not an "accident of history". He's the inevitable consequence of politicking on the right that infested right-wing brains like prions, starting with the Southern Strategy, exploding under Gingrich, and festering during Obama's presidency until that feverish swamp swallowed the country. There is nothing accidental about it - it's just America revealing what it truly is. Of course, everyone deals with it the way they can - Mac would rather vote for GOP lite, you declare Trump an accident and hope for someone to "go in for the kill" (whatever that's supposed to mean), others think harassing MAGA-hat wearers and falling all over themselves heaping contempt on the other side is the way to go. I find all that about equally helpless and silly. I'd say, with a largely infantile, self-centered, ignorant, resentful and vindictive population, someone like Trump was to be expected, and that's particularly so since the warning shot in the form of Bush the Lesser wasn't heeded.

Before I forget, you can stuff your "race pimp" slur up there where the sun doesn't shine. Unmistakably, there is racism seeping out of it, and I find it highly unbecoming. Also, and finally, I cannot possibly express how much I resent being made to defend Mac against unfair and baseless attacks - when, in fact, there is enough there realistically to criticize. If you need to get some resentments and bile out of your system, buy yourself a punching bag, or something.

The soap box is all yours.

 

[Thinker101]

That's instructive.

[1] The last Democratic candidate for President winning the White vote, if I remember correctly, was Johnson. They were, in particular, losing the White vote in the South, with some districts going 90% GOP. That's to say, "alienate" isn't the term I would use for what was happening for half a century.

[2] Now, if the Dems alienated White voters, the result would be a decline in White votes for Democrats. A decline or increase of the White vote for Trump doesn't demonstrate anything in that context.


So, we have a point made by Mac that is at best hapless, and a counter by Joe that amounts to a non-argument at best, not addressing Mac's point. All that is then followed, allegedly, by [3], Mac's long-dead and decaying hobby horse. Neither, if we believe the account, is treating his opposite side with even the basic respect a debate would require, and, quite obviously, things are going nowhere, fast.

Um, wow. Thats what you took out of that exchange, making more excuses for Vichy Mac.

He made a FACTUALLY INCORRECT argument, and frankly, your counter proved my point even more. His point was that Democrats "recently" alienated white people. And no, they really hadn't. THey lost white people a long time ago. You kind of reinforced my point.

The GOP has been VERY CLEVER at getting stupid white people to vote against their own economic interests for years (and I plead guilty, because I voted for them a few times) . The point Stormy Mac was making was that Obama had done this, and they totally needed to suck up to the bigots by having sympathy for the hole they dug themselves into.

It doesn't help that the Democrats promote race pimps like Sharpton and Jackson...

There's no point in treating Mac with "respect" when he blatantly misstates facts, and keeps misstating them when corrected.

And that's while a debate is overdue on where the White voters were marching, and why, and what all this has to do with that most putrid of blossoms on the swamp of largely White rage and insanity, Trump, and his failing Presidency.

Again, Trump is an accident of history, largely because the Democrats foisted the most unlikable human being they could find on the electorate... And then told us all not to worry, she had it in the bag.

It really didn't matter where the putrid white people were "marching", they've been marching there since 1964. The problem was otherwise decent people figured, "Heck, I can show my displeasure with Hillary by voting for Jill Stein!"

But Vichy Mac will keep saying, "We need to elect more guys like Jim Webb!" You know, the putrid DINO who quit after one term.

This is why Democrats FAIL. They don't go in for the kill. Trump has fundementally transformed the country, for the worse, because he had no compunctions about appointing neanderthals and crooks to every judicial and executive post.

Meanwhile, Obama imposed Romney-Care Lite, everyone hated it, and he lost Congress in short order.

And now they are trying to foist the second most unlikable human being they could find...go figure.

 

[Third Party]

That's instructive.

[1] The last Democratic candidate for President winning the White vote, if I remember correctly, was Johnson. They were, in particular, losing the White vote in the South, with some districts going 90% GOP. That's to say, "alienate" isn't the term I would use for what was happening for half a century.

[2] Now, if the Dems alienated White voters, the result would be a decline in White votes for Democrats. A decline or increase of the White vote for Trump doesn't demonstrate anything in that context.


So, we have a point made by Mac that is at best hapless, and a counter by Joe that amounts to a non-argument at best, not addressing Mac's point. All that is then followed, allegedly, by [3], Mac's long-dead and decaying hobby horse. Neither, if we believe the account, is treating his opposite side with even the basic respect a debate would require, and, quite obviously, things are going nowhere, fast.

Um, wow. Thats what you took out of that exchange, making more excuses for Vichy Mac.

He made a FACTUALLY INCORRECT argument, and frankly, your counter proved my point even more. His point was that Democrats "recently" alienated white people. And no, they really hadn't. THey lost white people a long time ago. You kind of reinforced my point.

The GOP has been VERY CLEVER at getting stupid white people to vote against their own economic interests for years (and I plead guilty, because I voted for them a few times) . The point Stormy Mac was making was that Obama had done this, and they totally needed to suck up to the bigots by having sympathy for the hole they dug themselves into.

It doesn't help that the Democrats promote race pimps like Sharpton and Jackson...

There's no point in treating Mac with "respect" when he blatantly misstates facts, and keeps misstating them when corrected.

And that's while a debate is overdue on where the White voters were marching, and why, and what all this has to do with that most putrid of blossoms on the swamp of largely White rage and insanity, Trump, and his failing Presidency.

Again, Trump is an accident of history, largely because the Democrats foisted the most unlikable human being they could find on the electorate... And then told us all not to worry, she had it in the bag.

It really didn't matter where the putrid white people were "marching", they've been marching there since 1964. The problem was otherwise decent people figured, "Heck, I can show my displeasure with Hillary by voting for Jill Stein!"

But Vichy Mac will keep saying, "We need to elect more guys like Jim Webb!" You know, the putrid DINO who quit after one term.

This is why Democrats FAIL. They don't go in for the kill. Trump has fundementally transformed the country, for the worse, because he had no compunctions about appointing neanderthals and crooks to every judicial and executive post.

Meanwhile, Obama imposed Romney-Care Lite, everyone hated it, and he lost Congress in short order.

Let's cut this short, as I am done being used as the foil for you to carry out your vendetta against Mac, and to throw all that nonsense at me. You have the last word if you want it, but I am done.

Mac didn't make a "factually incorrect" argument. Just in light of the last five decades, it was somewhat puzzling, lacking in specifics, and incomplete. Hillary lost because of whites abandoning her in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan. Whether that was because Democrats alienated them, or because Trump activated resentments and abject stupidity to win them over, or for some other reasons, remains to be clarified.

That "most unlikable human being" started out in 2015 with an approval rating well into the 60s. Up until ten days before the election she had a solid 7 point lead. Then, Comey happened, her lead collapsed, so did the blue firewall, and still she won 3 million more votes than Trump. That, to repeat "most unlikable human being". You don't know Hillary - nobody does with the possible exception of Bill. The "Hillary" you "know" is the result of a lavishly funded smear campaign lasting for more than a quarter century. You seemingly fell for it, and you are far from the only one bereft of the critical faculties to resist.

What is it, in the end, about "unlikable" anyway? That's how little girls talk. Oh, and silly, hysterical tv pundits, paid to pander to the lowest common denominator, and you.

Trump is not an "accident of history". He's the inevitable consequence of politicking on the right that infested right-wing brains like prions, starting with the Southern Strategy, exploding under Gingrich, and festering during Obama's presidency until that feverish swamp swallowed the country. There is nothing accidental about it - it's just America revealing what it truly is. Of course, everyone deals with it the way they can - Mac would rather vote for GOP lite, you declare Trump an accident and hope for someone to "go in for the kill" (whatever that's supposed to mean), others think harassing MAGA-hat wearers and falling all over themselves heaping contempt on the other side is the way to go. I find all that about equally helpless and silly. I'd say, with a largely infantile, self-centered, ignorant, resentful and vindictive population, someone like Trump was to be expected, and that's particularly so since the warning shot in the form of Bush the Lesser wasn't heeded.

Before I forget, you can stuff your "race pimp" slur up there where the sun doesn't shine. Unmistakably, there is racism seeping out of it, and I find it highly unbecoming. Also, and finally, I cannot possibly express how much I resent being made to defend Mac against unfair and baseless attacks - when, in fact, there is enough there realistically to criticize. If you need to get some resentments and bile out of your system, buy yourself a punching bag, or something.

The soap box is all yours.

At the risk of being called a liar AGAIN, your Hillary explanation falls short. She was more of a wronged woman to me than a bad candidate. In fact, except for seeing and hearing her say open borders, I would have voted for her. Before anyone starts screaming "never happened", I could not find a full video of it, only the Chris Wallace debate where she does say it 16 seconds into the video after saying "I did not mean"-its possible I walked by the tv when she said it and caught the small part. If she runs in 2020, do you vote for her? I might, depending on what she says-or doesn't say.

 

[Westender]

Not that it really matters to some, but we're not really in a good place at the moment. Things could turn, and most of us continue to hope for the best. But, as of early morning, August 24, here we are:

The Economy
While the unemployment figures look very good on their face, they are clearly not translating to growth, especially at the cost of the exploding deficit that temporarily goosed the economy. GDP is currently at 2.1%, but we can certainly remain hopeful that it will reverse course and increase. There have been spotty signs that growth-push inflation may be ticking up, but the trade war is clearly effecting sentiment (not to mention data) at a terribly delicate moment. Right now, this is a decent economy, at best, with consumers lacking the resources to push it and their household debt above 2008 levels.

Trade With China
Our President doesn't appear to understand that China is paying attention. They realize quite well that he's trying to bully them into a trade deal, like an eight-year old boy trying to bully another child out of their lunch at the playground. Meanwhile, Trump exhibits zero (0) understanding of the fact that China can theoretically out-wait us here, since they don't have those pesky elections to worry about all that much if the populace gets pissed off. While anything is certainly possible, it's tough to imagine China making any long term commitments until after they see who they're dealing with in January of 2021.

International Relations
Our President has not only isolated himself and his country from the rest of the world with his actions, but also with his petulant behaviors. Even for those of us who have done all we can to lower our standards and expectations of his child-like behavior, the thought of this goofy, pointless dust-up with Denmark (Denmark!) makes us wonder if this man can get along with anyone outside his base. Meanwhile, the crazy fat kid in North Korea is shooting off rockets like he's in charge of the Fourth of July celebration at the park. Like China, the world is clearly looking ahead, with hope, to November 2020.

The Wall
Trump's signature, paranoid, shallow, hyper-simplistic election issue piece isn't exactly flying up with checks to pay for it coming in from Mexico. Even with the White House, House and Senate, this President wasn't able to do much more than slap up a few new two by fours to fix some areas of our existing wall. Any completely "new" wall is spotty at best, and now he's ready to steal cash from one place to placate his base with a few miles of a much less Trumpish wall here and there. Gee, great, so much for that idea. I guess "Build! The! Wall!" could still serve as a standby rally chant when needed.

Race
Well, examining this topic is most likely a waste of time here, since there are many on this board who are telling us that racism no longer exists, or it's fake news, or that if you don't show up to work wearing a white hood you can't be a racist. What a disaster. And minorities are supposed to ignore all of it, because the unemployment rate is down at the moment. While the sycophants continue to run interference for the President Who Doesn't Know Who David Duke is, the rest of the country and the rest of the world are simply not buying the bullshit. But it sure sounds good on talk radio.

The silver lining? By far the most "successful" component of the Trump years will probably turn out to be the courts. The SC is in good shape for them, and they now have the added bonus of hoping that Ruth is quickly ravaged by cancer and dies soon. Ditto (no pun intended) for the lower courts, the nominations of which don't make much news but sure look like Sean Hannity picked 'em.

Could the economy turn back up? Yes, definitely, hopefully, but some kind of GOOD trade deal with China is now pretty much mandatory for that to happen. The Courts are the Courts. They'll probably be able to gather enough Lego™ blocks to build enough of a wall somewhere to keep talk radio and the base happy. International Relations? Race Relations? Pffffft. Who cares. Fake news.
.

What the Democrats dont get is they made Trump and will make him their even worse nightmare in 2020. Go ahead with your open borders, free everything, white man bad orange man bad crap. You will run another loony tunes up there against Trump raising their hand for free healthcare for illegals (you idiots will rue the day you raised your hand for that, that is a irreversible mistake). The day America votes for all of that we will be done.

Of course, none of that has anything to do with my thread. It's just the standard, boilerplate talk radio talking points.

If you want to talk about the Democrats, sure: The party has completely lost its shit, and the hardcore Left refuses to admit that its devotion to PC, Identity Politics and general nastiness makes it partly responsible for the fact that this guy is in the White House to begin with.

But that's for a different thread.
.

I didnt mean to sidetrack because I agree that its not going smoothly and it probably never will again for any president. That being said he is still the only viable person running and thats sad. The Democratic party and Im a registered Democrat, is one nut job after another. Can you imagine what Trump would do to Elizabeth Warren in a campaign, he will eat her alive. Trump has to quit fighting with everybody, we are so screwed

 

[Olde Europe]

In fact, except for seeing and hearing her say open borders, I would have voted for her. Before anyone starts screaming "never happened", I could not find a full video of it, only the Chris Wallace debate where she does say it 16 seconds into the video after saying "I did not mean"-its possible I walked by the tv when she said it and caught the small part.

Thanks. That wasn't so hard, was it?

Oh, and learn how to zoom your browser display, will you? Your font size amounts to "yelling", and I, for one, find it onerous.

 

[Third Party]

In fact, except for seeing and hearing her say open borders, I would have voted for her. Before anyone starts screaming "never happened", I could not find a full video of it, only the Chris Wallace debate where she does say it 16 seconds into the video after saying "I did not mean"-its possible I walked by the tv when she said it and caught the small part.

Thanks. That wasn't so hard, was it?

Oh, and learn how to zoom your browser display, will you? Your font size amounts to "yelling", and I, for one, find it onerous.

Why couldn't you have said "you sat and saw it'? instead of you are LYING-nothing worse than being called a Liar in my experience-grounds to start fighting. Learn to ask before you accuse.

 

[Olde Europe]

Why couldn't you have said "you sat and saw it'? instead of you are LYING-nothing worse than being called a Liar in my experience-grounds to start fighting. Learn to ask before you accuse.

Look, you raised the impression Hillary had argued for millions of refugees flooding over the borders unhampered - to a bunch of bankers. That's the meaning of "open borders" in these days. You raised the impression you've seen and heard her make that speech. You've based your electoral decision, or so you say, on that single bit of information. So that was somewhat important.

And you, somehow, inexplicably, got it mostly wrong.

Learn to keep it truthful. Learn to be precise, and to be honest about what you know (or don't know), and try not to overstate things to make a point. Or otherwise, grow a chin that isn't out of glass, and learn to live with being called on the nonsense you perpetrate.

And yep, you may be a 280 pound prize fighter, and able to beat me to a pulp. Still wouldn't change the fact you lied. You materially misstated the facts for deceptive purposes. You've been called on it, and, to your merit, you corrected yourself.

Now, get over it already.

 

[Thinker101]

In fact, except for seeing and hearing her say open borders, I would have voted for her. Before anyone starts screaming "never happened", I could not find a full video of it, only the Chris Wallace debate where she does say it 16 seconds into the video after saying "I did not mean"-its possible I walked by the tv when she said it and caught the small part.

Thanks. That wasn't so hard, was it?

Oh, and learn how to zoom your browser display, will you? Your font size amounts to "yelling", and I, for one, find it onerous.

Bummer.

 

[Thinker101]

Not that it really matters to some, but we're not really in a good place at the moment. Things could turn, and most of us continue to hope for the best. But, as of early morning, August 24, here we are:

The Economy
While the unemployment figures look very good on their face, they are clearly not translating to growth, especially at the cost of the exploding deficit that temporarily goosed the economy. GDP is currently at 2.1%, but we can certainly remain hopeful that it will reverse course and increase. There have been spotty signs that growth-push inflation may be ticking up, but the trade war is clearly effecting sentiment (not to mention data) at a terribly delicate moment. Right now, this is a decent economy, at best, with consumers lacking the resources to push it and their household debt above 2008 levels.

Trade With China
Our President doesn't appear to understand that China is paying attention. They realize quite well that he's trying to bully them into a trade deal, like an eight-year old boy trying to bully another child out of their lunch at the playground. Meanwhile, Trump exhibits zero (0) understanding of the fact that China can theoretically out-wait us here, since they don't have those pesky elections to worry about all that much if the populace gets pissed off. While anything is certainly possible, it's tough to imagine China making any long term commitments until after they see who they're dealing with in January of 2021.

International Relations
Our President has not only isolated himself and his country from the rest of the world with his actions, but also with his petulant behaviors. Even for those of us who have done all we can to lower our standards and expectations of his child-like behavior, the thought of this goofy, pointless dust-up with Denmark (Denmark!) makes us wonder if this man can get along with anyone outside his base. Meanwhile, the crazy fat kid in North Korea is shooting off rockets like he's in charge of the Fourth of July celebration at the park. Like China, the world is clearly looking ahead, with hope, to November 2020.

The Wall
Trump's signature, paranoid, shallow, hyper-simplistic election issue piece isn't exactly flying up with checks to pay for it coming in from Mexico. Even with the White House, House and Senate, this President wasn't able to do much more than slap up a few new two by fours to fix some areas of our existing wall. Any completely "new" wall is spotty at best, and now he's ready to steal cash from one place to placate his base with a few miles of a much less Trumpish wall here and there. Gee, great, so much for that idea. I guess "Build! The! Wall!" could still serve as a standby rally chant when needed.

Race
Well, examining this topic is most likely a waste of time here, since there are many on this board who are telling us that racism no longer exists, or it's fake news, or that if you don't show up to work wearing a white hood you can't be a racist. What a disaster. And minorities are supposed to ignore all of it, because the unemployment rate is down at the moment. While the sycophants continue to run interference for the President Who Doesn't Know Who David Duke is, the rest of the country and the rest of the world are simply not buying the bullshit. But it sure sounds good on talk radio.

The silver lining? By far the most "successful" component of the Trump years will probably turn out to be the courts. The SC is in good shape for them, and they now have the added bonus of hoping that Ruth is quickly ravaged by cancer and dies soon. Ditto (no pun intended) for the lower courts, the nominations of which don't make much news but sure look like Sean Hannity picked 'em.

Could the economy turn back up? Yes, definitely, hopefully, but some kind of GOOD trade deal with China is now pretty much mandatory for that to happen. The Courts are the Courts. They'll probably be able to gather enough Lego™ blocks to build enough of a wall somewhere to keep talk radio and the base happy. International Relations? Race Relations? Pffffft. Who cares. Fake news.
.

Yep, not going well....going great.

 

[Third Party]

Why couldn't you have said "you sat and saw it'? instead of you are LYING-nothing worse than being called a Liar in my experience-grounds to start fighting. Learn to ask before you accuse.

Look, you raised the impression Hillary had argued for millions of refugees flooding over the borders unhampered - to a bunch of bankers. That's the meaning of "open borders" in these days. You raised the impression you've seen and heard her make that speech. You've based your electoral decision, or so you say, on that single bit of information. So that was somewhat important.

And you, somehow, inexplicably, got it mostly wrong.

Learn to keep it truthful. Learn to be precise, and to be honest about what you know (or don't know), and try not to overstate things to make a point. Or otherwise, grow a chin that isn't out of glass, and learn to live with being called on the nonsense you perpetrate.

And yep, you may be a 280 pound prize fighter, and able to beat me to a pulp. Still wouldn't change the fact you lied. You materially misstated the facts for deceptive purposes. You've been called on it, and, to your merit, you corrected yourself.

Now, get over it already.
So, you are back to calling me a liar! Save your lectures for someone who will listen-if we ever meet we will find out if you have a glass jaw-and your good cop bad cop routine with "to your merit" doesn't impress me-you don't get to judge people you don't know. But I will judge you on this-you think you are smarter than anyone else on this board, but you are not-learn some humility and I MAY forgive you. Otherwise, grab a lantern and go look for an honest man-but not in your mirror.

 

[Third Party]

In fact, except for seeing and hearing her say open borders, I would have voted for her. Before anyone starts screaming "never happened", I could not find a full video of it, only the Chris Wallace debate where she does say it 16 seconds into the video after saying "I did not mean"-its possible I walked by the tv when she said it and caught the small part.

Thanks. That wasn't so hard, was it?

Oh, and learn how to zoom your browser display, will you? Your font size amounts to "yelling", and I, for one, find it onerous.

Bummer.

After that he called me a liar again-what a two face.

 

[Thinker101]

In fact, except for seeing and hearing her say open borders, I would have voted for her. Before anyone starts screaming "never happened", I could not find a full video of it, only the Chris Wallace debate where she does say it 16 seconds into the video after saying "I did not mean"-its possible I walked by the tv when she said it and caught the small part.

Thanks. That wasn't so hard, was it?

Oh, and learn how to zoom your browser display, will you? Your font size amounts to "yelling", and I, for one, find it onerous.

Bummer.

After that he called me a liar again-what a two face.

Not sure how it works but "liar" and/or "racist" seem to be the go to words when ya got nothing.

 

[Third Party]

That's instructive.

[1] The last Democratic candidate for President winning the White vote, if I remember correctly, was Johnson. They were, in particular, losing the White vote in the South, with some districts going 90% GOP. That's to say, "alienate" isn't the term I would use for what was happening for half a century.

[2] Now, if the Dems alienated White voters, the result would be a decline in White votes for Democrats. A decline or increase of the White vote for Trump doesn't demonstrate anything in that context.


So, we have a point made by Mac that is at best hapless, and a counter by Joe that amounts to a non-argument at best, not addressing Mac's point. All that is then followed, allegedly, by [3], Mac's long-dead and decaying hobby horse. Neither, if we believe the account, is treating his opposite side with even the basic respect a debate would require, and, quite obviously, things are going nowhere, fast.

Um, wow. Thats what you took out of that exchange, making more excuses for Vichy Mac.

He made a FACTUALLY INCORRECT argument, and frankly, your counter proved my point even more. His point was that Democrats "recently" alienated white people. And no, they really hadn't. THey lost white people a long time ago. You kind of reinforced my point.

The GOP has been VERY CLEVER at getting stupid white people to vote against their own economic interests for years (and I plead guilty, because I voted for them a few times) . The point Stormy Mac was making was that Obama had done this, and they totally needed to suck up to the bigots by having sympathy for the hole they dug themselves into.

It doesn't help that the Democrats promote race pimps like Sharpton and Jackson...

There's no point in treating Mac with "respect" when he blatantly misstates facts, and keeps misstating them when corrected.

And that's while a debate is overdue on where the White voters were marching, and why, and what all this has to do with that most putrid of blossoms on the swamp of largely White rage and insanity, Trump, and his failing Presidency.

Again, Trump is an accident of history, largely because the Democrats foisted the most unlikable human being they could find on the electorate... And then told us all not to worry, she had it in the bag.

It really didn't matter where the putrid white people were "marching", they've been marching there since 1964. The problem was otherwise decent people figured, "Heck, I can show my displeasure with Hillary by voting for Jill Stein!"

But Vichy Mac will keep saying, "We need to elect more guys like Jim Webb!" You know, the putrid DINO who quit after one term.

This is why Democrats FAIL. They don't go in for the kill. Trump has fundementally transformed the country, for the worse, because he had no compunctions about appointing neanderthals and crooks to every judicial and executive post.

Meanwhile, Obama imposed Romney-Care Lite, everyone hated it, and he lost Congress in short order.

Let's cut this short, as I am done being used as the foil for you to carry out your vendetta against Mac, and to throw all that nonsense at me. You have the last word if you want it, but I am done.

Mac didn't make a "factually incorrect" argument. Just in light of the last five decades, it was somewhat puzzling, lacking in specifics, and incomplete. Hillary lost because of whites abandoning her in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan. Whether that was because Democrats alienated them, or because Trump activated resentments and abject stupidity to win them over, or for some other reasons, remains to be clarified.

That "most unlikable human being" started out in 2015 with an approval rating well into the 60s. Up until ten days before the election she had a solid 7 point lead. Then, Comey happened, her lead collapsed, so did the blue firewall, and still she won 3 million more votes than Trump. That, to repeat "most unlikable human being". You don't know Hillary - nobody does with the possible exception of Bill. The "Hillary" you "know" is the result of a lavishly funded smear campaign lasting for more than a quarter century. You seemingly fell for it, and you are far from the only one bereft of the critical faculties to resist.

What is it, in the end, about "unlikable" anyway? That's how little girls talk. Oh, and silly, hysterical tv pundits, paid to pander to the lowest common denominator, and you.

Trump is not an "accident of history". He's the inevitable consequence of politicking on the right that infested right-wing brains like prions, starting with the Southern Strategy, exploding under Gingrich, and festering during Obama's presidency until that feverish swamp swallowed the country. There is nothing accidental about it - it's just America revealing what it truly is. Of course, everyone deals with it the way they can - Mac would rather vote for GOP lite, you declare Trump an accident and hope for someone to "go in for the kill" (whatever that's supposed to mean), others think harassing MAGA-hat wearers and falling all over themselves heaping contempt on the other side is the way to go. I find all that about equally helpless and silly. I'd say, with a largely infantile, self-centered, ignorant, resentful and vindictive population, someone like Trump was to be expected, and that's particularly so since the warning shot in the form of Bush the Lesser wasn't heeded.

Before I forget, you can stuff your "race pimp" slur up there where the sun doesn't shine. Unmistakably, there is racism seeping out of it, and I find it highly unbecoming. Also, and finally, I cannot possibly express how much I resent being made to defend Mac against unfair and baseless attacks - when, in fact, there is enough there realistically to criticize. If you need to get some resentments and bile out of your system, buy yourself a punching bag, or something.

The soap box is all yours.

Judging others again I see. Why don't you try talking with people instead of at them? And if you try real hard, I'm sure you can use less words, blowhard.

 

[Third Party]

In fact, except for seeing and hearing her say open borders, I would have voted for her. Before anyone starts screaming "never happened", I could not find a full video of it, only the Chris Wallace debate where she does say it 16 seconds into the video after saying "I did not mean"-its possible I walked by the tv when she said it and caught the small part.

Thanks. That wasn't so hard, was it?

Oh, and learn how to zoom your browser display, will you? Your font size amounts to "yelling", and I, for one, find it onerous.

Bummer.

After that he called me a liar again-what a two face.

Not sure how it works but "liar" and/or "racist" seem to be the go to words when ya got nothing.

Or if he is trying to make himself feel superior.

 

[tycho1572]

Trumps presidency is actually going better than expected!

Aside of all the financial gains voters are enjoying under Trump, we’ll soon be learning just how corrupt and dangerous our political system had become under obama.

We’ll soon be getting an unbiased look into how democrats tried denying voters their choice, and why democrats can’t be trusted.

I hope everyone involved with this nonsense is eventually prosecuted. That includes obama and everyone working directly under him.

 

[Care4all]

You've kinda got that backwards. I mean yes, something similar to that was said, but you got the order backwards. That sentiment was expressed after years of republican obstructionism and leaks about how they determined to block every single Obama initiative even if they thought it was a good idea and secret back room meetings on inauguration night.

bullshit, Newt and the GOP worked with clinton and got things done, the dems refused to work with Bush and are refusing to work with Trump.

the only obama ideas that were blocked were his stupid socialist attempts to destroy this country.

THE Dems worked with Bush the last 2 years of his 8 years, when they got control back of both houses in Congress.... why are you saying they didn't?

Dems alone passed Bill Clinton's financial plan to get the USA back on track, including the tax hike on the top level.
2 years later when Gingrich became speaker and repubs won the house, Clinton had the line item veto, so Gingrich worked with Clinton on cutting the spending legislation.

its funny how every o

You've kinda got that backwards. I mean yes, something similar to that was said, but you got the order backwards. That sentiment was expressed after years of republican obstructionism and leaks about how they determined to block every single Obama initiative even if they thought it was a good idea and secret back room meetings on inauguration night.

bullshit, Newt and the GOP worked with clinton and got things done, the dems refused to work with Bush and are refusing to work with Trump.

the only obama ideas that were blocked were his stupid socialist attempts to destroy this country.

THE Dems worked with Bush the last 2 years of his 8 years, when they got control back of both houses in Congress.... why are you saying they didn't?

Dems alone passed Bill Clinton's financial plan to get the USA back on track, including the tax hike on the top level.
2 years later when Gingrich became speaker and repubs won the house, Clinton had the line item veto, so Gingrich worked with Clinton on cutting the spending legislatio


its funny how every one of you libs want higher taxes on the "evil" rich, unless of course those rich are members of the dem party, the media, or the hollyloony cult. The top income earners are already paying the bulk of the tax burden, the lower half is paying nothing. What you fools dont get is that if you tax the rich and corporations, they will simply move out of the country and take their money and businesses with them.

the ignorance of the left has no limits.

its funny how every one of you libs want higher taxes on the "evil" rich, unless of course those rich are members of the dem party, the media, or the hollyloony cult. The top income earners are already paying the bulk of the tax burden, the lower half is paying nothing. What you fools dont get is that if you tax the rich and corporations, they will simply move out of the country and take their money and businesses with them.

the ignorance of the left has no limits.

the corporate tax rate was 35%, cngress was going to give them a tax break down to 28%, but the corporations were lobbying hard to bring the rate down to a magical 25%, that's what they wanted.... that was their Heaven on Earth....

but Trump, and the GOP brought the corporate tax rate down to 21%....AND MADE THEIR TAX BREAK PERMANENT.

WHY DID THEY DO THAT? Why oh why oh why did they give them a tax break even lower than what they considered UTOPIA?

Trump said we would have 4% gdp growth from it..... how's that working out? This would pay for the tax cuts.... how is that working out?

 

[Crepitus]

bullshit, Newt and the GOP worked with clinton and got things done, the dems refused to work with Bush and are refusing to work with Trump.

the only obama ideas that were blocked were his stupid socialist attempts to destroy this country.

THE Dems worked with Bush the last 2 years of his 8 years, when they got control back of both houses in Congress.... why are you saying they didn't?

Dems alone passed Bill Clinton's financial plan to get the USA back on track, including the tax hike on the top level.
2 years later when Gingrich became speaker and repubs won the house, Clinton had the line item veto, so Gingrich worked with Clinton on cutting the spending legislation.

its funny how every o

bullshit, Newt and the GOP worked with clinton and got things done, the dems refused to work with Bush and are refusing to work with Trump.

the only obama ideas that were blocked were his stupid socialist attempts to destroy this country.

THE Dems worked with Bush the last 2 years of his 8 years, when they got control back of both houses in Congress.... why are you saying they didn't?

Dems alone passed Bill Clinton's financial plan to get the USA back on track, including the tax hike on the top level.
2 years later when Gingrich became speaker and repubs won the house, Clinton had the line item veto, so Gingrich worked with Clinton on cutting the spending legislatio


its funny how every one of you libs want higher taxes on the "evil" rich, unless of course those rich are members of the dem party, the media, or the hollyloony cult. The top income earners are already paying the bulk of the tax burden, the lower half is paying nothing. What you fools dont get is that if you tax the rich and corporations, they will simply move out of the country and take their money and businesses with them.

the ignorance of the left has no limits.

its funny how every one of you libs want higher taxes on the "evil" rich, unless of course those rich are members of the dem party, the media, or the hollyloony cult. The top income earners are already paying the bulk of the tax burden, the lower half is paying nothing. What you fools dont get is that if you tax the rich and corporations, they will simply move out of the country and take their money and businesses with them.

the ignorance of the left has no limits.

the corporate tax rate was 35%, cngress was going to give them a tax break down to 28%, but the corporations were lobbying hard to bring the rate down to a magical 25%, that's what they wanted.... that was their Heaven on Earth....

but Trump, and the GOP brought the corporate tax rate down to 21%....AND MADE THEIR TAX BREAK PERMANENT.

WHY DID THEY DO THAT? Why oh why oh why did they give them a tax break even lower than what they considered UTOPIA?

Trump said we would have 4% gdp growth from it..... how's that working out? This would pay for the tax cuts.... how is that working out?

One of the first things we need to undo in 2021.

 

[tycho1572]

THE Dems worked with Bush the last 2 years of his 8 years, when they got control back of both houses in Congress.... why are you saying they didn't?

Dems alone passed Bill Clinton's financial plan to get the USA back on track, including the tax hike on the top level.
2 years later when Gingrich became speaker and repubs won the house, Clinton had the line item veto, so Gingrich worked with Clinton on cutting the spending legislation.

its funny how every o

THE Dems worked with Bush the last 2 years of his 8 years, when they got control back of both houses in Congress.... why are you saying they didn't?

Dems alone passed Bill Clinton's financial plan to get the USA back on track, including the tax hike on the top level.
2 years later when Gingrich became speaker and repubs won the house, Clinton had the line item veto, so Gingrich worked with Clinton on cutting the spending legislatio


its funny how every one of you libs want higher taxes on the "evil" rich, unless of course those rich are members of the dem party, the media, or the hollyloony cult. The top income earners are already paying the bulk of the tax burden, the lower half is paying nothing. What you fools dont get is that if you tax the rich and corporations, they will simply move out of the country and take their money and businesses with them.

the ignorance of the left has no limits.

its funny how every one of you libs want higher taxes on the "evil" rich, unless of course those rich are members of the dem party, the media, or the hollyloony cult. The top income earners are already paying the bulk of the tax burden, the lower half is paying nothing. What you fools dont get is that if you tax the rich and corporations, they will simply move out of the country and take their money and businesses with them.

the ignorance of the left has no limits.

the corporate tax rate was 35%, cngress was going to give them a tax break down to 28%, but the corporations were lobbying hard to bring the rate down to a magical 25%, that's what they wanted.... that was their Heaven on Earth....

but Trump, and the GOP brought the corporate tax rate down to 21%....AND MADE THEIR TAX BREAK PERMANENT.

WHY DID THEY DO THAT? Why oh why oh why did they give them a tax break even lower than what they considered UTOPIA?

Trump said we would have 4% gdp growth from it..... how's that working out? This would pay for the tax cuts.... how is that working out?

One of the first things we need to undo in 2021.

Are you going to continue whining and crying when he wins another term?