AsburySkinsFan Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 27 minutes ago, Larry said: History. Which says that, the day she takes office, the entire GOP will move two miles further to the right. Thus once again redefining where the new center is. Four years from now, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz will be considered moderates. The Glenn Beck effect...move so far to the Right that Bill O'Reilly looks reasonable. :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 2 minutes ago, tshile said: I'll be curious to see how that compares to the no ground game, spend money making hats plan Trump has employed Right now Trump is losing in Washoe County, NV that generally at best is tied for Democrats heading into Election Day. Early voting in FL is a bit more interesting. There's a huge surge in GOP districts but most of them are 2012 voters and the Dems have a bigger new registered voter lead. That's why I imagine Dems are holding huge rallies in FL to GOTV to compete with greater GOP enthusiasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 Hopefully a Hillary win will lead to a legitimate secession effort among southern states. Call it whatever. The Republic of Texas and their territories. We'd lose the majority of the federally dependent states and retain the majority of our tax revenue. We'd substantially downsize our military overnight since a huge chunk of that population is from the South. I wouldn't even try to get the new southern country to retain any of the national debt they caused. The United States could keep it but we'd be in a position to completely pay it down in the matter of a couple decades. You're talking about the potential for trillion dollar surpluses. It would just have to be known that once they seceed, those states are not welcome back. They can have their bigotry and their alternate reality. They'll instantly be a third world country and won't have any real way to get back on track. Maybe since they'll have no minimum wage or labor laws, Nike will move all their factories from Indonesia to the southern states and hire tens of thousands of people at $1.50/hr. Hell this actually sounds like a nice way to get really cheap goods and food in the US, all manufactured/grown for pennies in the south. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebluefood Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 47 minutes ago, Zguy28 said: Is she left wing now? I seem to recall some folks on here claiming she was too far to the right or a centrist with hawkish tendencies. Are we finally embracing the truth? While her platform has taken a leftward shift on certain issues (as has the Democratic Party as a whole) I don't think I'd classify her as left-wing. Dr. Stein is the only one of the "four" running on a decidedly left-of-center platform (Green New Deal emphasizes, in part, socialized health care, full employment, a dramatic shift toward renewable energy, and the closing of foreign military bases). http://gpus.org/organizing-tools/the-green-new-deal/ I know I've posted some stuff about him before in this thread but if you want some real deal lefty stuff, here's the Social Party USA's platform for 2016: http://www.rev16.us/spusa-platform/ Their President/VP ticket (Mimi Soltysik and Angela Walker, respectively) are running on it. The American Left is weak and scattered but it wasn't quite destroyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 10 minutes ago, bearrock said: Nobody should be naive about this. A vote for someone other than Clinton is essentially a vote in favor of Trump and vice versa. So a vote for neither is a vote in favor of both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 15 hours ago, visionary said: I think it was a poor decision to cite the threats as the reason for calling it off. Even if true, all that does is embolden people to do that kind of thing next time, because now they've seen that it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 7 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said: So a vote for neither is a vote in favor of both? A vote for neither is the same thing as voting for Trump. You don't get to sit on the fence and pretend there was no option other than Trump. There will be no consolation that Clinton=Trump. There is something we each can do and the only right thing to do is stop Trump. I know he will not go away even after, I know that the GOP will offer more years of bullheaded and obtuse opposition, and I know that the Rightwingnuts will continue to believe any number of insane conspiracies and keep hurtling headlong into anti-intellectualism. But by God at least Trump won't sit behind that desk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 He is pretty bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 1 minute ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said: He is pretty bad. Beats the alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebluefood Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 3 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said: A vote for neither is the same thing as voting for Trump. You don't get to sit on the fence and pretend there was no option other than Trump. There will be no consolation that Clinton=Trump. There is something we each can do and the only right thing to do is stop Trump. I know he will not go away even after, I know that the GOP will offer more years of bullheaded and obtuse opposition, and I know that the Rightwingnuts will continue to believe any number of insane conspiracies and keep hurtling headlong into anti-intellectualism. But by God at least Trump won't sit behind that desk! And I understand this sentiment, I really do. I was talking to a friend of mine about this yesterday and I empathize with it. As much as I loathe both candidates on an ideological standpoint, Sec. Clinton is the stronger candidate of the two by far and I hope she and the Democratic Party are serious about renewing their commitment to addressing issues closer to the root of economic and social inequality. Am I crazy about either candidate? No. I'm not even that scared of a Trump Presidency because he, and his following, are not going away. The alt-right and their "friends" are back out in the sunlight and it's going to take a lot to push them back out. This isn't going away and what's going to follow, win or lose, isn't going to be pretty. But I cannot say Clinton is an inferior candidate. She's a candidate for the status quo and while the status quo, by and large, sucks, it's a demon I know and it may give us on the left some breathing room to get ourselves together and get ready for the mid-terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 11 minutes ago, Bliz said: I think it was a poor decision to cite the threats as the reason for calling it off. Even if true, all that does is embolden people to do that kind of thing next time, because now they've seen that it works. Looking into this I found a Guardian article which makes the whole story look pretty shady. Probably why no mainstream outlet had touched it before yesterday (I saw a politico piece on the presser being cancelled). Here is their new story about the presser which has a link to the old story in it:https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/02/donald-trump-rape-lawsuit-13-year-old-cancels-public-event Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barney B Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 2 hours ago, Gibbs Hog Heaven said: Oh, as a political mind I wouldn't disagree. Her being fit for office I sure as heck would however which would stop me from voting. Of the presidents we've had since say, Kennedy, whose record do you think would've stood up the the level of scrutiny that Hillary's has met? And who would you say was the most honest? I'd say Carter, and then probably Ford. You know who had the most indictments of any administration ever? Reagan. The lists of squeaky clean presidents and most effective presidents don't have much in common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 11 minutes ago, Barney B said: The lists of squeaky clean presidents and most effective presidents don't have much in common. Except Obama. Blackest, most hated president by the GOP but they couldn't find any dirt to sling on him and he's done a fantastic job pres. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 14 minutes ago, twa said: Beats the alternative. Not really. Do you really want to see America run like a Trump Casino or watch him hire the best people to run the USA like his Trump U staff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 7 minutes ago, Burgold said: Not really. Do you really want to see America run like a Trump Casino or watch him hire the best people to run the USA like his Trump U staff? Brace yourself....false equivalency is coming. That or emails...let's see which he chooses. Hmmm possible third options?? Maybe a pollyanna hope that Trump will suddenly change on d he's the most powerful person on the plant. Good god let that sink in for a moment....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 Just now, AsburySkinsFan said: Brace yourself....false equivalency is coming. Well, it wouldn't be entirely unfair. My comment was pretty snarky Sincere, but snarky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 2 minutes ago, Burgold said: Well, it wouldn't be entirely unfair. My comment was pretty snarky Sincere, but snarky Want to be scared...read my edit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 11 minutes ago, Burgold said: Not really. Do you really want to see America run like a Trump Casino or watch him hire the best people to run the USA like his Trump U staff? I don't want one with the press in her pocket and minions that cover for her. You must have a stronger gag reflex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 I just read Erick Ericksons recent articles, and respect the hell out of him. I think that "conservative media" (talk radio, right wing blogs) are more so biased and in the tank for Trump (although it is really who will advance their "conervative political agenda") than they claim cnn, foxnews, and msnbc are --- I am talking about Bain Capital talk radio and Salem Communications (townhall, redstate, etc.) I think the people that post here are way more objective and "independent". The consevative argument for Trump (see Falwell, Tony Perkins) is "political power is very important at imposing our agenda, and we care most about political power." Maybe it has been that way for awhile - maybe they should try to break up the GOP over this, but it seems antithetical to many consevative values. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 29 minutes ago, Barney B said: Of the presidents we've had since say, Kennedy, whose record do you think would've stood up the the level of scrutiny that Hillary's has met? And who would you say was the most honest? I'd say Carter, and then probably Ford. You know who had the most indictments of any administration ever? Reagan. The lists of squeaky clean presidents and most effective presidents don't have much in common. Oh heck, Politics is full of underhand, corrupt people the World over. Too much power and money afoot for that never not to be the case. Even ones that are effective and make good decisions. Still doesn't make it right though does it? Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 Just now, twa said: I don't want one with the press in her pocket and minions that cover for her. You must have a stronger gag reflex. Well, I survived the G W Bush years... the gag reflex is pretty good. It's pretty laughable that people think she has the press in her pocket. Seems the press is happily on Clinton's trail right now and enjoying snapping at her. Meanwhile, Trump's trials are coming up. Have we heard a peep? Mind you, the press isn't for Trump either, but they just seem to be rumor mongers and easily distracted. They all salivate at the latest Pavlovian Bell pull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 What if 2016 has just been one long viral marketing scheme for Black Mirror? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebluefood Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 15 minutes ago, Burgold said: Not really. Do you really want to see America run like a Trump Casino or watch him hire the best people to run the USA like his Trump U staff? The only positive I see from a Trump Presidency is that that the kind of right-wing authoritarianism he's promoting is more in the open and more obvious - making it an easier target to hit. The biggest challenge with Clinton, from an ideological standpoint, is that her platform and motives are more nuanced (I've heard some people say "opaque" and I'm inclined to agree with that, too). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 Remember the last time a Republican set loose an army of schizophrenics on our streets it was only Reagan closing the mental hospitals? Ahhh man, good times................ "Stay on point Donny, stay on point, everytime you actually say what you're thinking they notice you're ****ing insane, we can't have that right now......." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 Just now, thebluefood said: The only positive I see from a Trump Presidency is that that the kind of right-wing authoritarianism he's promoting is more in the open and more obvious - making it an easier target to hit. The biggest challenge with Clinton, from an ideological standpoint, is that her platform and motives are more nuanced (I've heard some people say "opaque" and I'm inclined to agree with that, too). Okay, I don't want to go here because I don't think it's fair, but... The worst logic I hear from the right is that if Trump gets elected they can control him. It's what you hear from guys like Ryan all the time. This is the exact same logic that the Germans used when Hitler came in third. They thought if they installed him they could control him and minimize him. Instead, it empowered him and he took over. Now, I do not think Trump is Hitler. I do not think Trump is Hitler. But I think those who believe that they can control him and he will just sit in the corner and let Pense run the country and be a lap dog to a Republican led Congress haven't been paying attention. Trump is all ego. Trump needs attention, power, control. There's no way he would just smile and nod. If you give this man power he will use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.