|
Post by Merge on Mar 18, 2019 1:56:49 GMT
We run a moderate and risk the liberal base staying home, Do you really think the liberal base would stay home though? I don't. I see them coming out to vote. I'm watching the replace "the Republicans with Democrats" and the huge swing going on in Colorado right now. Colorado has voted blue in the last 3 presidential elections. Due to some policies that the democratic control government is putting in, I can see it going red if the Democratic candidate is too far left. Colorado doesn't have too many electoral votes, but it does have some. Hillary needed 38 more electoral votes to win. If the next person loses Colorado, that makes 45. Where are you going to pick them up? Which states are most likely to flip? What do those states want? I don't think this is about base or moderate or centrists this election because we've shown that we can win the popular vote. We need to win the electoral college. You're not wrong, but the thing is that the Trump GOP has radically changed the notion of what "too far left" is. Run a candidate who supports abortion rights, or who opposes a wall, or who wants to provide healthcare for everyone, or who supports any kind of environmental regulations, and suddenly they're a liberal extremist and people "can't" vote for them. But if they don't support those things, they're probably not going to get the Democratic nomination, KWIM? Even if we find the magical unicorn candidate who somehow walks that line, the right-wing smear machine will dig up a shoplifting conviction from 1976 and a speeding ticket from 1982 in which the candidate made a disparaging comment about the cop who pulled him over, and that will be that - moderates and anti-Trump conservatives will find they "can't" vote for him. I'm being a little facetious, of course, but dang - I am so over the folks who "couldn't" vote for Hillary based on smears that were proven to be false. I have zero hope that any of those people will show up for us in 2020. I think we are far better off being who we are, running a mainstream liberal, and turning out the folks who showed up for Obama in two consecutive elections.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Mar 18, 2019 2:20:28 GMT
. Run a candidate who supports abortion rights, or who opposes a wall, or who wants to provide healthcare for everyone, or who supports any kind of environmental regulations, and suddenly they're a liberal extremist and people "can't" vote for them. But if they don't support those things, they're probably not going to get the Democratic nomination, KWIM? I get that. When I talk about swinging far left, it is the all white men are bad. All white people suck. Men are bad. All minorities are good. All people who own guns are evil. All religions except Christianity are good. Christianity is only good at certain times and things. All rich people are greedy and should have to give up their money. All companies are greedy and need to have very strict regulations. Ranchers are inhumane and bad. Oil and gas industry is bad. Everybody should be 100% okay with everything right now. Those that don't agree with us are racist or sexist or whatever. The government should help everybody without regulation. We shouldn't ever elect a white male. That is what loses the middle.
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Mar 18, 2019 2:24:02 GMT
It’s basic math and the electoral collage. I think anyone who doesn’t actively vote against the candidate that can beat Trump is responsible for helping elect him. That means no sitting out or voting 3rd party. No matter the reasons, no matter how justified they feel. If they’re comfortable with that, okay. It’s their vote to do with as they please. But vote against him or it helps elect him. To pretend it is someone else’s fault they made the decisions they did, be it to not vote or vote for someone else, is ridiculous.
|
|
AmandaA
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,502
Aug 28, 2015 22:31:17 GMT
|
Post by AmandaA on Mar 18, 2019 2:47:34 GMT
Do you really think the liberal base would stay home though? I don't. I see them coming out to vote. I'm watching the replace "the Republicans with Democrats" and the huge swing going on in Colorado right now. Colorado has voted blue in the last 3 presidential elections. Due to some policies that the democratic control government is putting in, I can see it going red if the Democratic candidate is too far left. Colorado doesn't have too many electoral votes, but it does have some. Hillary needed 38 more electoral votes to win. If the next person loses Colorado, that makes 45. Where are you going to pick them up? Which states are most likely to flip? What do those states want? I don't think this is about base or moderate or centrists this election because we've shown that we can win the popular vote. We need to win the electoral college. You're not wrong, but the thing is that the Trump GOP has radically changed the notion of what "too far left" is. Run a candidate who supports abortion rights, or who opposes a wall, or who wants to provide healthcare for everyone, or who supports any kind of environmental regulations, and suddenly they're a liberal extremist and people "can't" vote for them. But if they don't support those things, they're probably not going to get the Democratic nomination, KWIM? Even if we find the magical unicorn candidate who somehow walks that line, the right-wing smear machine will dig up a shoplifting conviction from 1976 and a speeding ticket from 1982 in which the candidate made a disparaging comment about the cop who pulled him over, and that will be that - moderates and anti-Trump conservatives will find they "can't" vote for him. I'm being a little facetious, of course, but dang - I am so over the folks who "couldn't" vote for Hillary based on smears that were proven to be false. I have zero hope that any of those people will show up for us in 2020. I think we are far better off being who we are, running a mainstream liberal, and turning out the folks who showed up for Obama in two consecutive elections. I totally ageee with your assessment in those first two paragraphs. I live in a state where you could literally put Mr. Dog Shit (R) on a ballot and get votes. I had never identified as a “democrat”, but rather as an independent and a moderate who would vote for the best candidate. But apparently now that leans more democrat in most cases. And FTR, I voted for HRC. In the giant pool of R primary contenders, there was only one I would have picked over her if it came to it in the general. But I feel like the people you are describing in your last paragraph are the people in my state... not moderates who are open to reason and making intellectual choices. It didn’t matter who ran because they are Republicans period. That is not me and I don’t believe that is who peatlejuice was describing (but I don’t keep a spreadsheet or know enough about her to know where she lies politically so excuse me if I have gauged that wrong). Now I would vote for anyone over DT in 2020, even Mr. Dog Shit. But I sincerely hope that I am not put in the position to vote for Bernie or a few others. Absolutely they are better human beings than DT, but I have some serious issues with some of their policies and plans. There are plenty of others in the field I could support without qualms. I will also share that this moderate/independent DID show up and vote for Obama in two consecutive elections, so to assume that we are outside of the fray and not worth even considering does feel a little short sighted IMO. Because if by some miracle, of biblical proportions nonetheless, happens and DT gets primaried and loses... I will be looking at both candidates before me and making an educated choice.
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Mar 18, 2019 2:56:03 GMT
I disagree. We lost in some states because it was all about the minority and underprivileged voters. She lost a lot of white males and females because they felt alienated. Whomever is picked to run has got to appeal to 90% of people who are moderate to left. We can't win if any of them stay home en mass as trump supporters are die hard. I’ve never quite understood how they felt alienated...
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 6, 2024 17:52:22 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2019 2:57:27 GMT
Thank you for proving my point in that you don’t “get it” about trump. Bow out, stick your head in the sand. It’s your choice. You know what? I was going to just let you have your safe space, but fuck it, let's go, bitch. What is it you don't think I get about Trump? That he's morally bankrupt? That he has already sold our country to Russia's whims in hopes of building a tower in Moscow with his name on it? That his racist and incendiary remarks have triggered a civil war in our country? Yeah, news flash, I know that about him. I see that he's taken our car and driven straight towards the cliff. But I will always hold firm that voting for an extreme leftist will overcorrect the car and take us straight into the semi in the opposite lane. We have the ability to pull our car away from the cliff edge without slamming into the semi. Just because you are too short-sighted, too pessimistic, to see the world in anything but absolutes, doesn't mean the rest of the world has to see it the same way as you. But you know what? Go ahead, try and convince me why the semi is a better option than moderately correcting towards, say, the ditch. Without calling me stupid, avoidant or anti-American. I don't think you can actually even put together a case without relying on an insult or a bullying tactic. After your first sentence my first thought was to flip you off and be done with it. But I always like to voice my opinion, so here goes. 😀 First, if the Republicans were to primary trump with a serious contender then I would be looking at this election entirely different. But that does not appear to be the case. So I’m looking at it trump vs Democrat. Second, there is no question the Democrats are leaning more to the left. Having said that, I doubt that we will chose Sanders as our nominee. The reason, he couldn't beat someone with the baggage that Hillary had, so it’s doubtful he can beat the gang that is currently running. Some of whom are leaning more left then others. But say the Democrats chose Sanders and he was to win. So what? Realistically what do you think would change policy wise? Not much. And the reason why is Congress has become the most dysfunctional government body around. And they have been since they removed the word “compromise “ from their vocabulary. President Bush only got stuff done in the aftermath of 9/11 when people rallied around him as president. President Obama barely got the ACA through, even with a majority in both the House and Senate. Not only were Republicans against the ACA, so were the Blue Dog Democrats. trump got his tax cut, but couldn't get a clean repeal of the ACA, even with a majority in the House and Senate. From now until after the 2020 not much else will get done. Congress really only legislate if there is a crisis. And it will continue that way until both sides start to compromise again. And you can only do so much with an Executive Order. I’m not a fan of Sanders or his vision for America. But one thing I’m sure of and that he honestly feels his vision is the best way to help all Americans. The best path to steer The United States down. And that is the big difference between trump and all previous president and all those who chose to run for President. While all these individual have a vision for America, trump has a vision on benefiting himself. Either by putting more money in his pocket or taking actions that make him look good. That tweet I posted earlier where he called the CEO of GM and all but demanded she keep the plant open. He doesn’t care about those lost jobs, but how it will make him look. And then there is the wall, he is ignoring all the drugs that have been stopped from entering the country through legal ports of entry and on the ocean and keeps saying the wall is needed to stop those drugs. He promised that wall would be built , and even though there is enough proof out there a wall along the entire Southern Border would not be beneficial in solving the real problems at the border, he is going to get that wall no matter what because it will make him look good. And to do that, he is willing to take steps and manufacture an “emergency “ to get what he wants, just to make him look better. Then there is lack of intelligence. His discounting what our own intelligence community is telling him. His I believe Putin, I believe MSB, I believe Kim Jong over our intelligence community. Getting rid of generals that dare disagree with him. I get that all those around a president serve at his pleasure, but trump is getting rid of people for the simple reason they are smarter then he is, meaning they know what they are talking about and trump doesn’t, and he knows he doesn’t understand what they are talking about. So he gets rid of them and replace them with yes men. Again to make him look good, at least in his own mind. Its these characteristics that he displays and the belief that he makes decisions based on how it benefits him monetarily , or massage his ego or stamp down his insecurities, decisions that affect all of us, is why he is a threat to this country and why he must be replaced. And as such we should all work together to eliminate this threat, and once we are successful, we can go back to our own corners and once again we can debate the best path forward for the country. And who best can do it. So no, I don’t understand why there has to be conditions met before voting for the Democratic Nominee. I’m just wondering why the threat is being discarded. Why there is this I don’t like trump, but...
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Mar 18, 2019 3:17:58 GMT
Sounds just like the "I can't vote for Hillary because....." People couldn't vote for the intelligent flawed candidate so they allowed the uninformed, narcissistic, infantile flawed candidate to win instead. Hope you enjoy another 4 years of Trumpism, white nationalism, Trump making bank on this 394839 golf trips, his embarrassing daily tweets, his conspiracy with a foreign government, his lies, etc. and MOST IMPORTANTLY enough far right wing fringe judges to set back women's rights, minority rights, LGBTQ rights, disability rights, etc. FOR 30-40 YEARS!!! Then make sure there is a presidential candidate that people who aren't so far to the left will support. But to completely discount those people will be why there is another four years of Trump. You can't just blame people like peatlejuice if you aren't willing to take her honest opinion at face value and instead blame her. If the democrats put up a candidate that turns off the independents and the moderates can get behind, it is just as much their fault. I think that merge’d original post that sparked all of this anger was basically saying that the question is if there is such a candidate in the first place? If moderates wouldn’t vote for Hillary who is moderate compared to many, and has the experience) over trump, who is going to be the candidate that they WILL vote for? I think it is too soon to be having as much bickering as there has been in this thread lately. We haven’t even gotten very far into the primaries and people are already so angry over who “may” be the nominee. How about we settle down and try to work together rather than against? Between some people’s obsession with AOC and other’s anger over Bernie, it is kind of irritating.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Mar 18, 2019 3:24:25 GMT
So no, I don’t understand why there has to be conditions met before voting for the Democratic Nominee. I’m just wondering why the threat is being discarded. Why there is this I don’t like trump, but... I hate Trump with every ounce of my being. There is not one redeemable quality about him. But no matter what *I* think, I want to win more than anything. I feel this country needs Trump gone. He is ruining the country both inside and with the world. Hell, he is ruining the world. So, really, we are on the same side. We just look at getting there differently. I care about 270 electoral votes not going to Trump and how are we going to get there. I am glad the field is large and diverse and hopefully, we get a good candidate. FTR I thought Hillary would have been a great president. She was a Senator and Secretary of State. She already had diplomatic connections and relationships. Much of the world respected her. And she had the unique experience of having live in the White House and observe the job. She understood the dedication and time given to the job (that any half-ass president would have, so 45 excluded). I felt she would have been one of the most qualified people on day one to every have stepped into that role had she won it. I understood why people had their reservations about her and sometimes I bought into the hype myself, but there was never a doubt in my mind that she would have been a better president. And I am still flabbergasted that he won, but I live in an area that has a lot of Trump supporters, so I guess there is that.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 18, 2019 3:32:56 GMT
. Run a candidate who supports abortion rights, or who opposes a wall, or who wants to provide healthcare for everyone, or who supports any kind of environmental regulations, and suddenly they're a liberal extremist and people "can't" vote for them. But if they don't support those things, they're probably not going to get the Democratic nomination, KWIM? I get that. When I talk about swinging far left, it is the all white men are bad. All white people suck. Men are bad. All minorities are good. All people who own guns are evil. All religions except Christianity are good. Christianity is only good at certain times and things. All rich people are greedy and should have to give up their money. All companies are greedy and need to have very strict regulations. Ranchers are inhumane and bad. Oil and gas industry is bad. Everybody should be 100% okay with everything right now. Those that don't agree with us are racist or sexist or whatever. The government should help everybody without regulation. We shouldn't ever elect a white male. That is what loses the middle. Do you know of a candidate who says these things? I don't. I have read a lot of Trumpers who SAY Democrats believe those things, but I've never heard a Democratic candidate espouse views anywhere close to that. I'm not sure how we can draw moderates if we're expected to overcome the beliefs of folks who listen to the right wing smear machine.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 6, 2024 17:52:22 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2019 4:31:22 GMT
Connie Schultz... ”And while Democrats, activists, and progressive intellectuals have railed against the evils of wealth concentration and income inequality, they have paid scant attention to a more pernicious, salient, and politically roiling problem: the concentration of opportunity in America."
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 6, 2024 17:52:22 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2019 4:48:39 GMT
So no, I don’t understand why there has to be conditions met before voting for the Democratic Nominee. I’m just wondering why the threat is being discarded. Why there is this I don’t like trump, but... I hate Trump with every ounce of my being. There is not one redeemable quality about him. But no matter what *I* think, I want to win more than anything. I feel this country needs Trump gone. He is ruining the country both inside and with the world. Hell, he is ruining the world. So, really, we are on the same side. We just look at getting there differently. I care about 270 electoral votes not going to Trump and how are we going to get there. I am glad the field is large and diverse and hopefully, we get a good candidate. FTR I thought Hillary would have been a great president. She was a Senator and Secretary of State. She already had diplomatic connections and relationships. Much of the world respected her. And she had the unique experience of having live in the White House and observe the job. She understood the dedication and time given to the job (that any half-ass president would have, so 45 excluded). I felt she would have been one of the most qualified people on day one to every have stepped into that role had she won it. I understood why people had their reservations about her and sometimes I bought into the hype myself, but there was never a doubt in my mind that she would have been a better president. And I am still flabbergasted that he won, but I live in an area that has a lot of Trump supporters, so I guess there is that. I want to win as well. But what should have been a slam dunk of getting trump out has become more of a complex issue then it should be. To me these conditions some are demanding are counterproductive to the endgame. An endgame that benefits us all. I’m not a fan of the current direction of the Democratic Party for a lot of reasons. Having said that, I will be there front and center to vote for whoever the nominee is. And if we successfully get trump out, then in 2022 all bets are off and I will voice my displeasure with the direction the party is heading, even more then I do now, and back it up with my vote. I agree Hillary was the most qualified person to run for President in a long time. Those emails were much ado about nothing. There is no such thing as a completely secured server. Any email that is sent is at risk. Just ask the newest member of the gang running for President, Beto the former hacker. 😀
|
|
|
Post by LavenderLayoutLady on Mar 18, 2019 9:59:57 GMT
The tweets! 😮
I just don't think I can live through the stress of another 4 years of Trump. It's all too much.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 6, 2024 17:52:22 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2019 12:53:04 GMT
What a sad country we have become where a congressperson is joking about turning bullets on fellow americans as the enemy.
|
|
casii
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,461
Jun 29, 2014 14:40:44 GMT
|
Post by casii on Mar 18, 2019 13:02:16 GMT
The tweets! 😮 I just don't think I can live through the stress of another 4 years of Trump. It's all too much. I was rewatching West Wing yesterday and got weepy. I'd take the fiction over the dumpster fire in the White House now. Could the Dems possibly play political money ball to win? Maybe the baseball people could teach them some strategy.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 18, 2019 13:05:39 GMT
What a sad country we have become where a congressperson is joking about turning bullets on fellow americans as the enemy. WOW......... And there is no call out on him!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 6, 2024 17:52:22 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2019 13:56:19 GMT
The King has spoken. Now snap to it..
trump.
”General Motors and the UAW are going to start “talks” in September/October. Why wait, start them now! I want jobs to stay in the U.S.A. and want Lordstown (Ohio), in one of the best economies in our history, opened or sold to a company who will open it up fast! Car companies.....”
”are all coming back to the U.S. So is everyone else. We now have the best Economy in the World, the envy of all. Get that big, beautiful plant in Ohio open now. Close a plant in China or Mexico, where you invested so heavily pre-Trump, but not in the U.S.A. Bring jobs home!”
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 6, 2024 17:52:22 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2019 13:59:24 GMT
trump...
”Joe Biden got tongue tied over the weekend when he was unable to properly deliver a very simple line about his decision to run for President. Get used to it, another low I.Q. individual!”
Like I said, trump knows he isn’t the brightest bulb on the street, otherwise he wouldn’t make comments like this.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 18, 2019 14:25:34 GMT
trump... ”Joe Biden got tongue tied over the weekend when he was unable to properly deliver a very simple line about his decision to run for President. Get used to it, another low I.Q. individual!” Like I said, trump knows he isn’t the brightest bulb on the street, otherwise he wouldn’t make comments like this. We all could make a rather long list of his flubs! Covfefe anyone?
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 18, 2019 14:34:56 GMT
You're not wrong, but the thing is that the Trump GOP has radically changed the notion of what "too far left" is. Run a candidate who supports abortion rights, or who opposes a wall, or who wants to provide healthcare for everyone, or who supports any kind of environmental regulations, and suddenly they're a liberal extremist and people "can't" vote for them. But if they don't support those things, they're probably not going to get the Democratic nomination, KWIM? Even if we find the magical unicorn candidate who somehow walks that line, the right-wing smear machine will dig up a shoplifting conviction from 1976 and a speeding ticket from 1982 in which the candidate made a disparaging comment about the cop who pulled him over, and that will be that - moderates and anti-Trump conservatives will find they "can't" vote for him. I'm being a little facetious, of course, but dang - I am so over the folks who "couldn't" vote for Hillary based on smears that were proven to be false. I have zero hope that any of those people will show up for us in 2020. I think we are far better off being who we are, running a mainstream liberal, and turning out the folks who showed up for Obama in two consecutive elections. I totally ageee with your assessment in those first two paragraphs. I live in a state where you could literally put Mr. Dog Shit (R) on a ballot and get votes. I had never identified as a “democrat”, but rather as an independent and a moderate who would vote for the best candidate. But apparently now that leans more democrat in most cases. And FTR, I voted for HRC. In the giant pool of R primary contenders, there was only one I would have picked over her if it came to it in the general. But I feel like the people you are describing in your last paragraph are the people in my state... not moderates who are open to reason and making intellectual choices. It didn’t matter who ran because they are Republicans period. That is not me and I don’t believe that is who peatlejuice was describing (but I don’t keep a spreadsheet or know enough about her to know where she lies politically so excuse me if I have gauged that wrong). Now I would vote for anyone over DT in 2020, even Mr. Dog Shit. But I sincerely hope that I am not put in the position to vote for Bernie or a few others. Absolutely they are better human beings than DT, but I have some serious issues with some of their policies and plans. There are plenty of others in the field I could support without qualms. I will also share that this moderate/independent DID show up and vote for Obama in two consecutive elections, so to assume that we are outside of the fray and not worth even considering does feel a little short sighted IMO. Because if by some miracle, of biblical proportions nonetheless, happens and DT gets primaried and loses... I will be looking at both candidates before me and making an educated choice. "...moderates who are open to reason and making intellectual choices." Yeah, sure, they exist. But I find that many self-described moderates, who like to think they are above the fray and not swayed by partisanship, will parrot things about Hillary Clinton having sold Uranium to Russia or having taken "pay for play" money from foreign governments to the Clinton Foundation - both of which are easily shown to be false. We've seen those folks right here on this board. So forgive me if I'm skeptical about the the reasoning, intellectual moderate. While I know they exist, just like they exist among people with a declared political preference, I don't think they are any less likely than anyone else to be swayed by false information, particularly if it confirms a bias they already have. There is also the issue of self-identified moderates being partisans who are afraid to express their partisan views one way or the other for fear of ostracization from their social group. This phenomenon, called preference falsification, is believed to have played a large part in the discrepancy between polling numbers and outcome in the 2016 election. People intended to vote for Trump but didn't want to admit it. And indeed, I think that trend continues. Trump's approval numbers are low, but I think would probably be higher if a lot of self-described moderates were honest. They like him and intend to vote for him again, because they're not really moderates. They just don't want to admit that they agree with him. And that's why I'm highly skeptical when anyone suggests we need to move to the center to win the next election. There is no substantial center. There are a lot of people who don't like to admit they've already chosen a side.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 6, 2024 17:52:22 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2019 14:53:14 GMT
Kevin Kruse...
”The RNC Deputy Finance Chairman who's under investigation for money laundering is a different guy from the RNC Deputy Finance Chairman who pleaded guilty in a federal fraud case and they're both different from the RNC Finance Chairman who's accused of rape and sexual misconduct.”
As someone noted, only the best people.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 6, 2024 17:52:22 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2019 15:03:10 GMT
PolitiFact
TPMTPM.. “GOP’s New Tactic In NC-09: Blame Special Election On Democrats?”From the article.. “The North Carolina GOP is taking an interesting tack in its attempt to purge the stain of candidate Mark Harris’ alleged involvement in an absentee ballot scheme that tainted the 9th District race: saying that the Democrats forced a redo special election.” “A fundraising email from last week opens with all-caps text proclaiming “We have HORRIBLE news, and we wanted you to hear it from us first: DEMOCRATS have forced a SPECIAL ELECTION in North Carolina and the race is TIED!” This is a bizarre claim for a number of reasons. First of all, Republicans, including the then-candidate Mark Harris, joined the Democrat Dan McCready in calling for the redo election. Second, the Republicans on the Board of Elections voted with the Democrats to provide a unanimous decision to hold a new election. Third, the race can hardly be tied — the filing period ended just last week for candidates to throw their names into the ring. PolitiFact has a good rundown of the depth of the falseness of this claim. The NC GOP is currently fundraising for whoever becomes the party’s nominee, and the field is somewhat crowded (Harris has already bowed out). Ten Republicans have filed, including state Sen. Dan Bishop (R-NC), the brains behind the notorious “bathroom bill” that gained national attention in 2017. Dan McCready, the original candidate, is still running for the Democrats.“
|
|
AmandaA
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,502
Aug 28, 2015 22:31:17 GMT
|
Post by AmandaA on Mar 18, 2019 15:32:16 GMT
@merge I think you and I must have a fundamental disagreement over who the “moderates” are. From my perspective, I see a large group that falls in the center- rejecting both the far left and the far right. Like me for example.... I am pro choice, want to see healthcare fixed, and don’t care who you want to marry. I also don’t think the answer is ever to tax the hell out of people and I have seen privatization and a reduction in bureaucracy work positively in our local government. So I am neither fully R or D, and I will pull either lever. In such a strong two party system where people are expected to be one or the other, it can be difficult to categorize a voter like me. The fact that Obama was able to carry Indiana in 2008 should be some proof that “we” are not a total aberration in politics.
The people who you describe as parroting the fake HRC lines or so easily being swayed by false information to me are not moderates or the folks who really are up for grabs. They are still the right, now how far right I don’t know. But my point is that there is still a gray area in the middle of the political spectrum. And I think a lot of people in that gray area took a chance in 2016- maybe they had an HRC baggage bias, maybe they just pulled the R lever because that is how they have typically voted, or maybe they were naive enough to think that DT and his kind of change might work for them. Now I disagree with a lot of that logic personally, but I am willing to bet that some of them might now too in hindsight. So yes, I think we would agree that there will always be people you will never sway with a democratic candidate even if it was the freaking Pope. But I think there are plenty of good, reasonable, and smart people that will look more seriously at voting for a Democrat in 2020 after this dumpster fire. My hope is that the party can find a candidate who can bring some portion of those middle ground folks into the mix and work on compromise and priorities that matter to the say 2/3 of our country starting on the left and working right. If Obama was able to do that, then I am hopeful another candidate can. I can’t help but look at the way our country is right now... With a leading party who has basically said “to hell with the rest of you we are only going to work towards what we want” and think that it is starting to sound like some Democrats are suggesting the same approach. Maybe it is fighting fire with fire, but the blowback could be huge if that strategy doesn’t work. I don’t know how far center a democratic candidate needs to be in order to be successful with that block in the current times, but to not even try to put together a platform and a message to reach those voters feels foolish to me. Like I have already said, I will vote for whomever is running against DT in 2020. But my hope is that the Democrats will try to bring together as many supporters around a good candidate as they possibly can, be it from the center or the left, to try and help our country recover from this administration. I personally think that this very unique time in our history calls for a new playbook in this election.
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Mar 18, 2019 16:20:40 GMT
I get that. When I talk about swinging far left, it is the all white men are bad. All white people suck. Men are bad. All minorities are good. All people who own guns are evil. All religions except Christianity are good. Christianity is only good at certain times and things. All rich people are greedy and should have to give up their money. All companies are greedy and need to have very strict regulations. Ranchers are inhumane and bad. Oil and gas industry is bad. Everybody should be 100% okay with everything right now. Those that don't agree with us are racist or sexist or whatever. The government should help everybody without regulation. We shouldn't ever elect a white male. That is what loses the middle. Do you know of a candidate who says these things? I don't. I have read a lot of Trumpers who SAY Democrats believe those things, but I've never heard a Democratic candidate espouse views anywhere close to that. I'm not sure how we can draw moderates if we're expected to overcome the beliefs of folks who listen to the right wing smear machine. I think *We* are argueing unnecessarily. And it’s not going to help. How about this, I refuse to vote for Trump, there is not one D candidate declared ( yet ) that I won’t vote for. I will vote against Trump. BUT no I can’t say I’ll vote D no matter who they run simply because we aren’t there yet and, well, I couldn’t believe the R’s would pick Trump. So I can’t make blanket statements giving any group carte Blanche. I won’t ever even consider voting for a person simply because of the party they *use* to run for office to forward thier agenda. I will use my critical thinking skills and vote conscientiously for either the direction I want the country to go in OR against Trump or against anyone like him no matter what initial the choose to run under, be it R, D, G, L or whatever After so many people stupidly voted Trump simply because he was running under the guise of R and spending 2 years complaining how stupid they were to not take Trumps lack of qualifications or character into consideration and just blindly voting, I’m not going to promise to do the same stupud thing with a different letter before it. I would then be just as stupid as those people were in 2016. Trust me I will never be that stupid, I wasn’t then, I won’t be in 2020. And if I/we survive that long I won’t be that stupid in 2024. I will go, begrudgingly to vote in 2020 and vote for Bernie or Warren if I have to. They do have the best interest of us as a democracy as a whole at heart and I WILL be voting against Trump. But if somehow y’all pull some freaking asshat with no character out if a hat and choose them next summer then I can’t make any promises. Right now with the candidates announced I will vote D. But no I’m not going to check my brain at the door and stop using critical thinking skills just because the letter is D and not R.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 18, 2019 16:39:39 GMT
Kevin Kruse... ”The RNC Deputy Finance Chairman who's under investigation for money laundering is a different guy from the RNC Deputy Finance Chairman who pleaded guilty in a federal fraud case and they're both different from the RNC Finance Chairman who's accused of rape and sexual misconduct.” As someone noted, only the best people. THREE down, how many more to go? Oh wait, is one of them still sitting?
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Mar 18, 2019 16:43:22 GMT
Btw has anyone seen Steve King’s latest tweet? The one about civil war?
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 18, 2019 16:51:35 GMT
What a sad country we have become where a congressperson is joking about turning bullets on fellow americans as the enemy. Washington (CNN)Rep. Steve King, whose history of making racist remarks has recently come under scrutiny, shared a Facebook post over the weekend that boasts red states would "win" a fight against blue states — and that they have "8 trillion bullets." "Wonder who would win..." the Iowa Republican wrote in a post Saturday, adding an emoji with a smirk. Attached to the post is a photo depicting Democratic-leaning states engaged in a fight with Republican-leaning states. The photo's caption reads, "Folks keep talking about another civil war... One side has about 8 trillion bullets, while the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use," an apparent reference to Democrats' support of gender-neutral bathrooms.Among the collection of states colored blue is King's home state of Iowa, which he has represented in Congress since 2003. ** www.cnn.com/2019/03/18/politics/steve-king-facebook-meme-states-fight/index.htmlKing talking about the BULLETS they/GOP have............ His talk of civil war is another threat to our safety! He and dt will get some of us killed! Sooner than later!
|
|
casii
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,461
Jun 29, 2014 14:40:44 GMT
|
Post by casii on Mar 18, 2019 16:53:59 GMT
Btw has anyone seen Steve King’s latest tweet? The one about civil war? Yes, he's a horrible person and I'm disappointed (again) that Republicans aren't holding him accountable.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 6, 2024 17:52:22 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2019 17:10:19 GMT
Newsweek...
”Vladimir Putin signed two “fake news” bills, approved last week by the Russian government.
The first bill penalizes websites that “insult” authorities
The second bill forbids "false information of public interest, shared under the guise of fake news”
That kind of fits trump to a t. He does both.
|
|
flute4peace
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,757
Jul 3, 2014 14:38:35 GMT
|
Post by flute4peace on Mar 18, 2019 17:47:37 GMT
Newsweek... ”Vladimir Putin signed two “fake news” bills, approved last week by the Russian government. The first bill penalizes websites that “insult” authorities The second bill forbids "false information of public interest, shared under the guise of fake news” That kind of fits trump to a t. He does both. I give Trump 24 hours to demand this happen here.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 18, 2019 17:52:40 GMT
|
|