the deluded liberal mindset will cause them to ignore, deny, attack, and attempt to deceive others. I do not believe it will make a bit of difference in the elections.. The elections have already been decided either because the lines are clearly drawn already or because the rigging is already in place
So Trump will finally get out now, right?
- Thread starter UCFKnight85
- Start date
The funny thing is ... the Millennials are starting to realize this.
The difference between 2016 ... and 1992?
Americans being against mud-slinging and including a 3rd party to avoid the common left v. right rhetoric ...
From 1992 ...
'The experiment was a great success, by many accounts, because the presence of voter-questioners compelled the candidates to dispense with insults and focus on matters most important to the lives of people in the audience. Check out these press accounts from the day after
'Oh, how far the town hall debate has fallen'
- https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...0/oh-how-far-the-town-hall-debate-has-fallen/
Americans being against mud-slinging and including a 3rd party to avoid the common left v. right rhetoric ...
From 1992 ...
'The experiment was a great success, by many accounts, because the presence of voter-questioners compelled the candidates to dispense with insults and focus on matters most important to the lives of people in the audience. Check out these press accounts from the day after
- With the audience at an unprecedented town-hall debate demanding that the presidential candidates stop slinging mud, President George Bush, Democrat Bill Clinton and independent Ross Perot last night were pushed into the most serious discussion of the campaign about the economic, education and health care issues that divide their candidacies. (Newsday)
- The three presidential candidates, admonished by citizen questioners to avoid mud-slinging, largely stuck to the issues Thursday night in their second nationally televised debate. (Dallas Morning News)
- A group of undecided voters, chosen to be inquisitors, disdained mud slinging and forced the three presidential candidates to stick to pressing domestic issues in a historic debate Thursday. As a result, the White House aspirants were compelled to be more specific than they have been, but their answers were predictable with no surprises. (UPI)'
'Oh, how far the town hall debate has fallen'
- https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...0/oh-how-far-the-town-hall-debate-has-fallen/
Sorry, very poor WiFi quality here. Sometimes there's a double-post when the browser doesn't get confirmation, then reconnects later. I usually catch them and delete them when his happens.
I don't think I will see the current state of the Republican Party win a national election again I my lifetime and I'm not that old. The demographics have shifted and there are just too many people that fall for the free stuff BS. If you make decent money the Democratic Party is not so bad, just make sure you have a very good CPA and you can get around any rule they set up. Trump was right, they won't hurt themselves and the 1%, they are not republicans.
Ah yes- your tired defense of Trump. "Anyone would have lost!"
Despite the fact that every single poll had Rubio or Kasich easily beating Clinton. But I know you Trump people don't dig facts or polls so ok.
This was the most assured victory for an R since Reagan in 1984 and people like you helped nominate the one sociopath who could screw that up. Good job!
Does that in any way compare to Hillary calling me every ism, ist and phobe in the book? She literally hates half the country.
You do realize using those type of words incorrectly is no different than calling someone a n***** or using gay slurs right?
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
Look up the word CONSENT and get back to me. People are pissed because he admittedly committed sexual assault. Bill Clinton is not running, so that comparison is not valid. Comparing the shit Trump has said to "locker room talk" is asinine and frankly insulting to most men. Can you not see the difference between "locker room talk" and how the freaking leader of the free world is supposed to act?
She doesn't want to allow torture camps for you. (Mike Pence does for me)
*Cue someone saying she does.
173 - Rubio
161 - Kasich
If these guys were your winners, why did they lose so badly in 48 out of 50 states. He'll Rubio could not even win his own state.
All the more reason to vote for Trump:
Ideally this costs her a few votes of sane people who don't want to share the same vote w that shïthead.
Ideally this costs her a few votes of sane people who don't want to share the same vote w that shïthead.
Sorry but I have to call BS on this. I've looked around can't find anything that connects Mike Pence to what you describe as reeducation camps for gays. If you've got something to link, I would like to see it.
No problem:
He also seemed to advocate government funding for organizations that encourage gays to renounce their homosexuality.
The "Pence Agenda" supported "an audit to ensure that federal dollars were no longer being given to organizations that celebrate and encourage the types of behaviors that facilitate the spreading of the HIV virus."
"Resources should be directed toward those institutions which provide assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behavior," the site said.
http://www.businessinsider.com/mike-pence-seems-to-have-history-of-opposing-gay-rights-2015-3
I think I already answered it- due to imbeciles like you. All of the dumbasses who hailed Trump as the next great thing; the same people who will produce the largest margin of defeat in a general election since Reagan went HAM in 1984.
Rubio or Kasich would have easily won a general election against Hillary. Those are the exact polls I'm referencing. The problem is that the sane, rationale people like them were drowned out by the lunatics lining up behind Trump.
Which is why, when Trump loses by 10% in a month, I'm going to make sure you own every bit of it.
Trump has been accused of rape a couple times, including his ex-wife (Bill = Trump)
Bill and Trump have used their power (political vs money and fame) to abuse women (Bill = Trump)
How are they different? BTW, Bill is not running, it is Hillary who is running. She could be seen as another victim of Bill's womanizing.
You have already been disqualified from this conversation and now you're doubling down on ignorance.
So easy to say when it can't be proven. His long before the democratic media wing finds crushing things on anyone else and they could. If Trump was not running the middle class white vote would go to Hillary instead of Trump so you would swap out that vote for the typical republican vote. If a clean white guy like Romney could not win, no way any typical republican could win. I've been saying it since 2012, no republican can win a national election with the makeup of the US demographic as well as the media. Face the facts 85, too many freeloaders instead of providers now.
BTW the Wikileaks proved I was right in supporting Rand. That's the kinda guy who the Dems don't want to see in a general. But cucks keep on keepin on w shîtheads like Ted Cruz & Paul Ryan.
http://reason.com/blog/2016/10/10/democrats-were-worried-about-rand-pauls
http://reason.com/blog/2016/10/10/democrats-were-worried-about-rand-pauls
Why did they lose their primary? Because they weren't running against Hillary. In a race against Hillary, they'd win.
.
Romney being a Mormon was a bigger issue than you apparently realize. A lot of people didn't vote for him because of it. (though they didn't vote for Obama either)
.
Kasich ran a campaign on the issues and couldn't get noticed over all the mudslinging. Such a shame.
Im not convinced Rubio/Kasich just walk to victory against Hillary. Yes she starts from behind, but put them head to head in an election cycle and who knows. For one thing, if this is anyone but Trump - I would imagine less mudslinging and more focus on the issues and you know....respectful political debates.
If the campaign shifted that way and both candidates can actually run on policy, then it's much more of a toss up. It would be easy to imagine a scenario that Rubio would get lit up in the debates too. And as he is showing now, he has no spine and who knows how that plays out if he is the candidate over the last few months.
Im not saying she wins - but its not some slam dunk that you claim it is just because of polls during the primaries.
If the campaign shifted that way and both candidates can actually run on policy, then it's much more of a toss up. It would be easy to imagine a scenario that Rubio would get lit up in the debates too. And as he is showing now, he has no spine and who knows how that plays out if he is the candidate over the last few months.
Im not saying she wins - but its not some slam dunk that you claim it is just because of polls during the primaries.
Hillary would lose to Kasich, Rubio, Romney, Bush, and possibly Cruz. The only person I don't think she would have lost against was fat boy Christie.
The Republican Party was thrown a softball but was completely blindsided by an ignorant orange buffoon that talks tough but literally cannot back up any of his policies.
possibly. and again she would have started as the underdog. pretty sure Obama was an underdog 8 years ago from the outset too.
its easy to say now that it wouldve been a cakewalk beucase of all the negativity but i think its safe to say the campaign wouldnt have been as negative all around had any other candidate run....except for Christie maybe.
Really? Previous to Trump stealing her thunder, she was the most unliked candidate in modern history. Her unfavorable have been in the 55-60% range for pretty much 2 years. It took a lunatic like Trump to make her seem more likeable, and she's still hardly liked by anyone.
It wouldn't have been a blowout but either Rubio or Kasich would have easily won by 3-4%.
They were both polling very well amongst women, white college educated voters, and Hispanics. At least way, way better than Trump.
yeah it's the argument the board was having during the primaries. the general election voter base is different than primary protest votes. This Trump mess was easy to predict.
I think Rubio and Kasich definitely would have beat Hillary. Rubio would have gotten near 40% with Hispanics(he would have unveiled an immigration reform plan once he survived the primaries so Hillary would have a harder time framing the Republican nom as anti-immigrant once he did this and being Cuban American) and done the best with suburban women in the field.
I think Cruz would have still lost a General Election and Jeb would have been a toss up bc it would have turned to who is worse another Bush or Clinton debate.
Again, i am definitely saying shes the underdog here. But she would have had the opportunity to run a policy campaign and appeal to the democratic causes without all of the ridiculous Trump noise. There would definitely be an opportunity there to gain traction once she was the nominee. An uphill battle, but the race would probably be 1-2% and now the 3-4% once the democratic base settled down.
And remember, Obama's approval rating has only gone up and she could ride that wave. (In fairness, that could be partially due to the perception of the next president and everyone now realizing how good we have it. But still....it's positive momentum).
Ice you can't compare Obama's poll climb in 2012 to Hillary. She simply is terrible at campaigning and not likable/relateable like Obama is.
The RNC screwed this up big time by not burying Trump during the primary with all the dirt. They didn't need the crazy alt right voters to win. Suburban Women and not a total loss with Hispanics would have been enough to get back the White House vs a candidate with as much corruption allegations as Hillary
The RNC screwed this up big time by not burying Trump during the primary with all the dirt. They didn't need the crazy alt right voters to win. Suburban Women and not a total loss with Hispanics would have been enough to get back the White House vs a candidate with as much corruption allegations as Hillary
So can we admit I was right about Pence and that he hates my people? I pointed out facts and then the issue was dropped.
Another thing Hillary wouldn't be able to attack Marco on with his love of foam parties
Not comparing them...just saying the democratic base has recently rallied from behind. Not saying she would obviously do it and definitely agree she has half of his likability if I'm generous. But if the campaign was able to focus on credentials and issues, she could (not would...could) gain some momentum. Just one example would be Obamacare as a decisive issue instead of pointless e-mail and Benghazi "scandals"
