Trumped

[Thomas]

[Angels#1Fan]

4 minutes ago, Thomas said:

So in your world Albert Pujol's signing wasn't shitty because the Josh Hamilton one was worse?

In my world people that think Hillary was a shitty candidate just hate her (they even think she murdered Vince Foster), so they are willing to say anything no matter if the facts don't back up the rhetoric.

The election can be analyzed forever but when the final is written on the subject the conclusion on why Clinton lost won't support the right-wing notion that she was a "shitty candidate".

[Glen]

For those that say they voted for Trump because Hillary was the other choice: who could the democrats have run that would have made you change your vote from Trump?

[Jay]

2 minutes ago, Glen said:

For those that say they voted for Trump because Hillary was the other choice: who could the democrats have run that would have made you change your vote from Trump?

Chuck Schumer... he's dreamy.

 

[Thomas]

10 minutes ago, Angels#1Fan said:

In my world people that think Hillary was a shitty candidate just hate her (they even think she murdered Vince Foster), so they are willing to say anything no matter if the facts don't back up the rhetoric.

The election can be analyzed forever but when the final is written on the subject the conclusion on why Clinton lost won't support the right-wing notion that she was a "shitty candidate".

Okay cool so you can address the facts I brought up, right? 

2nd least popular candidate (behind Trump) in modern American history
Polled less trustworthy than Trump
Struggled against a socialist quasi-Democrat in a Democratic primary
Was in a FBI investigation during a presidential contest
Lost substantially in the EV.
Won an entirely too close popular vote to what should have been easily considered the worst candidate on a major American ticket ever and that includes Wallace.
Lost the female white vote to Trump

Please list Democrats, past or present, besides Hillary that would have lost to Trump.



 

[the dude abides]

49 minutes ago, Tank said:

shot in the dark here, but i'll bet he's white.

And speaks with a kiwi accent.

[Glen]

4 minutes ago, Thomas said:

Okay cool so you can address the facts I brought up, right? 

2nd least popular candidate (behind Trump) in modern American history
Polled less trustworthy than Trump
Struggled against a socialist quasi-Democrat in a Democratic primary
Was in a FBI investigation during a presidential contest
Lost substantially in the EV.
Won an entirely too close popular vote to what should have been easily considered the worst candidate on a major American ticket ever and that includes Wallace.
Lost the female white vote to Trump

Please list Democrats, past or present, besides Hillary that would have lost to Trump.



 

 

 

Hillary was indeed a terrible candidate.  However, some of what you mentioned above could also be the result of her being in the public political eye for 20+ years and the constant attacks on her (justified or not, there are plenty of either to choose from) during that time.  

Hillary's VP choice - Kaine, I had to look it up - would have lost to Trump.  Schumer (the democratic version of Kasich, perhaps, and Kasich couldn't even make it out of the primaries against Trump) probably would have lost to Trump.  Sanders (I know, not a democrat until last year) probably would have lost to Trump. Jim Webb probably would have lost.  Chafee?  Who knows.  Point is, plenty of democrats could have lost to him.  Let's not forget the article you posted a week or so ago.

[Thomas]

1 minute ago, Glen said:

Hillary was indeed a terrible candidate.  However, some of what you mentioned above could also be the result of her being in the public political eye for 20+ years and the constant attacks on her (justified or not, there are plenty of either to choose from) during that time.  

Well of course. Were the Democratic leaders somehow unaware of this prior to anointing her? Of course anointing her was probably another mistake. They didn't want their candidate to be made vulnerable during "friendly fire" and instead just gave America another reason to dislike her.

[Make Angels Great Again]

Thomas forgot to mention Hillary has had more scandals than one should think possible.

[Thomas]

3 minutes ago, Glen said:

Hillary's VP choice - Kaine, I had to look it up - would have lost to Trump.  Schumer (the democratic version of Kasich, perhaps, and Kasich couldn't even make it out of the primaries against Trump) probably would have lost to Trump.  Sanders (I know, not a democrat until last year) probably would have lost to Trump. Jim Webb probably would have lost.  Chafee?  Who knows.  Point is, plenty of democrats could have lost to him.  Let's not forget the article you posted a week or so ago.

Would any of these candidates polled as unlikable as H. Clinton? The POTUS race is a popularity contest.  What would have made any of these candidates as toxic as her? What would sour the limited undecideds against them? Would a FBI investigation pop up for any of them?

[Thomas]

4 minutes ago, Make Angels Great Again said:

Thomas forgot to mention Hillary has had more scandals than one should think possible.

Most of the "scandals" were political theater. I was trying to present a list that was indisputable even among partisan left.

[Blarg]

1 hour ago, Angels#1Fan said:

The Nation as a whole voted for Hillary Clinton by a large margin!

That's where the people live in 2017, this isn't 1785 anymore and the country doesn't need to fear white land owners getting together and swaying the election.

Donald Trump is the minority president (he represents the minority of voters that elected him) and the vote proves it.

Let me ask you something,  since you are obviously on the left and would probably be characterized as a social liberal politically. That would mean you would support the more down trodden in society and try to lift them up, improve their situation and help them be productive instead of dependent on government handouts. Basic needs,  a good job, a home, good schools, etc... 

Now tell just what NAFTA and TPC does for those people, outsourcing their jobs to third world countries? Because that is what your candidate represented,  more poverty, shutting the blue collar worker out of any stable manufacturing industry. 

So instead of being a champion of the people you really were being selfish about your own income inequality, living a life that 2/3 of America can't  join in on. That's not being a social liberal,  that is a cutthroat capitalist.

Somewhere you lost your ethical compassion following a party going down a road you were sure you weren't going to take 

[Jay]

4 minutes ago, Thomas said:

Most of the "scandals" were political theater. I was trying to present a list that was indisputable even among partisan left.

But the scandals are a primary reason for her unpopularity.

 

[Thomas]

4 minutes ago, Jay said:

But the scandals are a primary reason for her unpopularity.

You can spend a thread many times even this one arguing the merits of her scandals. Pointing at polls saying she's really unpopular. Much less ambiguous.

[Adam]

1 hour ago, Tank said:

shot in the dark here, but i'll bet he's white.

Black

[Jason]

12 minutes ago, Thomas said:

Would any of these candidates polled as unlikable as H. Clinton? The POTUS race is a popularity contest.  What would have made any of these candidates as toxic as her? What would sour the limited undecideds against them? Would a FBI investigation pop up for any of them?

The fact that Trump won makes the case that Americans are sick of the political status quo. When the term "scumbag politician" was used an image of Hillary popped into people's head and that was a huge factor.

[Glen]

19 minutes ago, Thomas said:

Would any of these candidates polled as unlikable as H. Clinton? The POTUS race is a popularity contest.  What would have made any of these candidates as toxic as her? What would sour the limited undecideds against them? Would a FBI investigation pop up for any of them?

 

 

 

Couldn't you also apply that argument to the republican primaries?  The only truly "toxic" candidate they had on the level of Hillary was Cruz.  Yet, Trump smashed them all.  Why should we believe any democrat besides Hillary would have fared any better against Trump?  As you've pointed out, he connected with a large segment of the voting population that has felt ignored for, let's say, the last eight years or so.  The democrats totally missed out on that vote.  Seriously, who do you think could have beat Trump on the democrat side?

When will the rhetorical questions end?

[Adam]

Tony Villar

[Jason]

4 minutes ago, Glen said:

 

Couldn't you also apply that argument to the republican primaries?  The only truly "toxic" candidate they had on the level of Hillary was Cruz.  Yet, Trump smashed them all.  Why should we believe any democrat besides Hillary would have fared any better against Trump?  As you've pointed out, he connected with a large segment of the voting population that has felt ignored for, let's say, the last eight years or so.  The democrats totally missed out on that vote.  Seriously, who do you think could have beat Trump on the democrat side?

When will the rhetorical questions end?

In all seriousness, I think Bernie may have had a good chance.

[the dude abides]

Sheila Jackson Lee.

[Glen]

I think Trump would have destroyed him.  Bernie is such an easy target.  

[Thomas]

1 minute ago, Glen said:

 

Couldn't you also apply that argument to the republican primaries?  The only truly "toxic" candidate they had on the level of Hillary was Cruz.  Yet, Trump smashed them all.  Why should we believe any democrat besides Hillary would have fared any better against Trump?  As you've pointed out, he connected with a large segment of the voting population that has felt ignored for, let's say, the last eight years or so.  The democrats totally missed out on that vote.  Seriously, who do you think could have beat Trump on the democrat side?

When will the rhetorical questions end?

He didn't smash them all. Though God knows the Republican bench was awful he took advantage of the exceptionally large field on name value and an exceptional ability to attract attention to win many delegates when only attracting 25-30% of the voters and by the time the Republican field withered to a reasonable number it was too late. And seriously when Ted Cruz is your savior you're kind of boned.

I really think you could pick a Democrat out of a hat and they would have won. As long as it wasn't the one that was both the conservative anti-christ while simultaneously being the one that kept many on the far left disengaged and allowed Trump to be the savior to the common man. 

[gotbeer]

16 minutes ago, Glen said:

 

Hillary was indeed a terrible candidate.  However, some of what you mentioned above could also be the result of her being in the public political eye for 20+ years and the constant attacks on her (justified or not, there are plenty of either to choose from) during that time.  

Hillary's VP choice - Kaine, I had to look it up - would have lost to Trump.  Schumer (the democratic version of Kasich, perhaps, and Kasich couldn't even make it out of the primaries against Trump) probably would have lost to Trump.  Sanders (I know, not a democrat until last year) probably would have lost to Trump. Jim Webb probably would have lost.  Chafee?  Who knows.  Point is, plenty of democrats could have lost to him.  Let's not forget the article you posted a week or so ago.

IMO.  Any democrat that would have run against Trump would have lost.  And it's not because of the candidate.  It's because of the DNC platform.  The DNC turned their backs on the working class.  They took them for granted and thought they could shit on their porch, and still get their votes.  They kept stroking California and New York because they had more people, and forgot this isn't a popularity contest. 

And it's just going to get worse for the democrats.  How are they going to go back to those working class people, after they shit on their porches and are constantly whining about the new president.  When the new president, for the first time since I can remember, is doing exactly what he promised.  Which includes bringing jobs to those shit covered working class people?  Just IMO, but right now, all these shitshow protests, and whining politicians trying to take the ball home, would just be telling me, this isn't my party anymore.  But look, that other party I hate, is telling me I'm important, and my idea of working for a living and having a good job is important to them.  That other side doesn't give a shit how I feel, but they want to give me a legit shot at having 3 squares a day and a roof over my head and have money left over so that I can have the luxury of having my feelings hurt.

[Jason]

1 minute ago, Glen said:

I think Trump would have destroyed him.  Bernie is such an easy target.  

My reasoning is that I know a lot of Bernie supporters that voted Trump after he got screwed by Clinton. As looney as Bernie sounds at times, he isn't a hardline politician. 

[gotbeer]

6 minutes ago, Adam said:

Tony Villar

No Italians allowed.  But if he was Mexican.....