From Social Media - and people wonder why Trump won...

[ABC]

I don't see Biden wacking Trump.

[Docwaukee]

9 hours ago, mtangelsfan said:

I don't think it had much to do with liberal policies either.  I think Sanders could have beaten Trump.

What I do think it was about is Liberal arrogance.  

it was arrogance of the entire political establishment.  It was actually an asset to Trump that he had little support from his own supposed party.  It further propagated the notion that he's not a politician.  By far the most important factor in his victory.  Sanders wasn't going to beat him.  Brad Pitt had a better chance.  The shock and confusion of his success and popularity was blinding to the point that no one recognized the indicators.  Enough people had become so disenfranchised and detached from the almost separate species we know as our political leadership that any candidate offering some semblance of not being the contrived, manchurian, pseud-representative became a legitimate option

Our system had evolved such that a collection of cats were representing and supposedly acting on behalf of a nation of dogs.  Then a dog threw his hat in the ring and regardless of that dog's massive and potentially dangerous shortcomings he seemed like the best choice for the sheer fact that he was a dog.  Because among a sea of cats, any dog'll do.   

[tdawg87]

18 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

it was arrogance of the entire political establishment.  It was actually an asset to Trump that he had little support from his own supposed party.  It further propagated the notion that he's not a politician.  By far the most important factor in his victory.  Sanders wasn't going to beat him.  Brad Pitt had a better chance.  The shock and confusion of his success and popularity was blinding to the point that no one recognized the indicators.  Enough people had become so disenfranchised and detached from the almost separate species we know as our political leadership that any candidate offering some semblance of not being the contrived, manchurian, pseud-representative became a legitimate option

Our system had evolved such that a collection of cats were representing and supposedly acting on behalf of a nation of dogs.  Then a dog threw his hat in the ring and regardless of that dog's massive and potentially dangerous shortcomings he seemed like the best choice for the sheer fact that he was a dog.  Because among a sea of cats, any dog'll do.   

There's a pussy joke in there somewhere.

[mancini79]

28 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

There's a pussy joke in there somewhere.

Just reach out and grab it.

[Tank]

[arch stanton]

3 hours ago, Dochalo said:

it was arrogance of the entire political establishment.  It was actually an asset to Trump that he had little support from his own supposed party.  It further propagated the notion that he's not a politician.  By far the most important factor in his victory.  Sanders wasn't going to beat him.  Brad Pitt had a better chance.  The shock and confusion of his success and popularity was blinding to the point that no one recognized the indicators.  Enough people had become so disenfranchised and detached from the almost separate species we know as our political leadership that any candidate offering some semblance of not being the contrived, manchurian, pseud-representative became a legitimate option

Our system had evolved such that a collection of cats were representing and supposedly acting on behalf of a nation of dogs.  Then a dog threw his hat in the ring and regardless of that dog's massive and potentially dangerous shortcomings he seemed like the best choice for the sheer fact that he was a dog.  Because among a sea of cats, any dog'll do.   

I like the analogy but I don't see Trump as a dog. A wolf, maybe but absolutely not a dog like the dogs who voted him in and I feel pretty strongly that they will all see his non-dogness sooner rather than later.

[Rico]

Trump actually received less votes than Romney did 2012.  So it's not like he was a great candidate himself, but Clinton had too much baggage.  As they say, Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line.  The Republican base came out for Trump just enough, and on the other side there was little enthusiasm for Clinton.  

[Spirit]

Yup.  Libs have no one to blame but themselves. 

 

 

 

[Jay]

17 hours ago, mtangelsfan said:

Cals is obsessed with penis size.  He's a flaciphile.

He's a vegan and should be dismissed as a homo.

 

[Stradling]

1 hour ago, Rico said:

Trump actually received less votes than Romney did 2012.  So it's not like he was a great candidate himself, but Clinton had too much baggage.  As they say, Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line.  The Republican base came out for Trump just enough, and on the other side there was little enthusiasm for Clinton.  

Yep, all this hate and protesting that is happening is really the fault of their own parties voters.  All they needed to get her elected is to have their people turn out again and vote. 

[Glen]

9 hours ago, calscuf said:

Biden could've won.

Biden/Trump debates would have been excellent.

I'm gonna miss Uncle Joe.

[Jay]

1 hour ago, Rico said:

Trump actually received less votes than Romney did 2012.  So it's not like he was a great candidate himself, but Clinton had too much baggage.  As they say, Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line.  The Republican base came out for Trump just enough, and on the other side there was little enthusiasm for Clinton.  

I don't remember anyone saying Trump is a great candidate, people held their noses and voted for him because they hate Clinton.

Trump did not do well in California, because it's obvious that the state was going to go to Clinton by 30 points or more. A lot of Repubs voted for Johnson or nobody because it just didn't matter. Even O.C. went for Hillary if you can believe that. So Trump suffered in the popular vote.

 

[NJHalo]

Not enough people are pointing their fingers at the POS in the White House. He is as much to blame as Hillary. From day one, Trump has said he was going to undo much of Obama's liberal policies. The silent majority has had enough. The givers are getting tired of giving, while the takers are used to their lifestyle of entitlements, and want more.

Obama set up the next Democrat candidate to fail, unless they distanced themselves from his policies. Crooked Hillary did not, and it was that as well as the enormous amount of baggage she carried into this election that helped do her in.

[Blarg]

17 hours ago, Blarg said:

Some of the women at work are not taking the election results well.

I expect this empty by 5 pm.

I was close, by 5pm it had only one layer of cookies on the bottom and the owner shamefully admitted to have eaten over half of them.

Obesity on the rise amongst Clinton voters post election, should be a headline.

[Tank]

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

Yep, all this hate and protesting that is happening is really the fault of their own parties voters.  All they needed to get her elected is to have their people turn out again and vote. 

I'd be interested in knowing how many of the protesters actually voted. I'm guessing not very many. The crowd strikes me as one of the anarchy crowds you'd see protesting a G8 summit.

[NJHalo]

 

[Thomas]

2 hours ago, Glen said:

I'm gonna miss Uncle Joe.

Diamond Joe >>> Uncle Joe

[Jay]

^^

Is the woman in that video an actress or is she legitimately batshit crazy?

 

[NJHalo]

I wouldn't call Katy Perry an actress.

 

Political Activist yes, actress no

[Rico]

5 hours ago, NJHalo said:

Not enough people are pointing their fingers at the POS in the White House. He is as much to blame as Hillary. From day one, Trump has said he was going to undo much of Obama's liberal policies. The silent majority has had enough. The givers are getting tired of giving, while the takers are used to their lifestyle of entitlements, and want more.

Obama set up the next Democrat candidate to fail, unless they distanced themselves from his policies. Crooked Hillary did not, and it was that as well as the enormous amount of baggage she carried into this election that helped do her in.

Obama would have won if he was allowed to run again.  Many are calling for Michelle to run in 2020.  It's really all about Clinton and how bad of a candidate she was.

[mtangelsfan]

I think you are right Rico, as long as he would have run the right kind of campaign.  Telling voters how horrible they are for considering voting for Trump try to show them how you are better and how you will make their lives better.  The middle class continues to take it up the butt, if anyone could convince them they are willing to stop that, they win.

[Adam]

All the Dems have to do is nominate a likable person. BC and BO = likable. AG, JK and HC = unlikable. They win easy if they nominate someone with charisma

[Jay]

44 minutes ago, Rico said:

Obama would have won if he was allowed to run again.  Many are calling for Michelle to run in 2020.  It's really all about Clinton and how bad of a candidate she was.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/442059/dont-blame-clinton-trump-2016-wouldve-beaten-obama-2012

Was Donald Trump just good enough to beat a bad Democratic opponent on Tuesday, or does he deserve far more credit? Could he, for instance, have competed with the vaunted Obama machine? The answer, somewhat shockingly, is yes. A review of vote totals in the past two elections reveals that Trump 2016 would have defeated Obama 2012 in the electoral college.

 

[Taylor]

19 minutes ago, Jay said:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/442059/dont-blame-clinton-trump-2016-wouldve-beaten-obama-2012

Was Donald Trump just good enough to beat a bad Democratic opponent on Tuesday, or does he deserve far more credit? Could he, for instance, have competed with the vaunted Obama machine? The answer, somewhat shockingly, is yes. A review of vote totals in the past two elections reveals that Trump 2016 would have defeated Obama 2012 in the electoral college.

You might want to click on that link again.

[Brandon]

14 minutes ago, Jay said:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/442059/dont-blame-clinton-trump-2016-wouldve-beaten-obama-2012

Was Donald Trump just good enough to beat a bad Democratic opponent on Tuesday, or does he deserve far more credit? Could he, for instance, have competed with the vaunted Obama machine? The answer, somewhat shockingly, is yes. A review of vote totals in the past two elections reveals that Trump 2016 would have defeated Obama 2012 in the electoral college.

 

this is unique. before i switched to msnbc for the lulz when it looked like trump had a chance i was watching cnn and they kept showing the various maps and comparing 2012 numbers to where trump was and trump did pick up a lot of areas that obama had/ or that romney didn't get.

that's why it was unique to watch unfold from the get go, because the maps shaped up well for trump right away and it shaped up as a possibility sooner than expected.