At this point in the game, I am not convinced the people attending Trump rallies weren’t paid agitators. Nothing about Trump is straightforward
Spend some time on Reddit, Imgur, or similar platforms and you’ll see he had no need to pay anyone to jump on his bandwagon. Heck, there’s a sexual predator in Alabama getting the RNCs support.
1 Like
Franken’s out. So who’s next?
Yes, even then. At the risk of sounding like a broken record that is exactly the reasoning that Republicans are using to put a known child molester in the Senate.
Also, the long-term viability of the Democratic Party will be stronger if it demonstrates the ability to stand by its own convictions at times like these. One of the reasons Trump was able to eke out an electoral college victory was the ongoing narrative “Hillary and the Dems are just as bad.” That’s a much easier argument to make if the Republicans can point to Democrats who got a pass on sexual assault just because the party needed their votes.
6 Likes
I am not a US citizen and the last time I visited the US was 2002. Given the current state of play if I never travel to the US again, that is fine with me. I don’t think it’s my responsibility or my particular skill set to work toward Constitutional amendments.
As someone who has a Graduate Degree in American Studies I am interested and relatively knowledgable on US politics and as a Citizen of the world I am concerned so I try my best to spread a bit of information…
1 Like
Real question: Why have these people stopped going to his rallies? Mission accomplished?
Real answer: they haven’t
My question is why is Trump still having election rallies and why do people keep going to them? Heck, his last rally had 15K attendees.
2 Likes
Why don’t they attend the inauguration or the lighting of the Christmas Tree? I am confused.
Why do they carry a torch for racial supremacy and vote against their own interests? Who knows? All I know for sure is that Cult45 apparently operates on some lizard brain level which I don’t seem to have access to.
1 Like
Can’t afford to travel.
And there were more then 15K at the inauguration.
The average Trump voter has a annual income of $70 000. They can afford to travel, just fine
5 Likes
I’m trying to say that Clinton was very vulnerable to the types of attacks the Trump campaign ran. Proof - she, the better candidate, lost. This has nothing to do with the merits of Clinton, whether she is human or otherwise. It has to do with having too many leverage points to tear her down. And I have no idea what you mean by “Golden Boy”. I have no such idol, but clearly you carry bias against somebody.
This has nothing to do with likability. It has to do with vulnerability to Trumps lies and campaign tactics. Talk to some Trump voters. He’s “breaking every rule in every book”? They don’t see it. For the most part they are still behind him.
Clinton will lose again. Democrats are crazy to try it.
3 Likes
2 Likes
Given the way Trump plays the game everyone has too many leverage points to tear them down. Would anyone have thought that he will be the last man standing out of the 17 GOP candidates? No. That wasn’t even on the cards early 2016.
Everyone is vulnerable when they are up against a narcissistic sociopath. Sanders would have been as vulnerable as Clinton, just with different trigger points.
The question, at this stage, is not how or what Trump voters see.
They are a f***ing lost cause.
The question at this stage is what do the other 75-80% who are not Trump voters do? How do they make sure that the rules are adhered to that the system of government is maintained and strengthened. They need to unite to set against the sociopath.
The endless: but Clinton, but likability, but emails, but vulnerability. “Oh but Sanders would have made it all different”–doesn’t help. One. bit.
You are dealing with someone who has set out to destroy the system and you have to respond by strengthening the system.
Sermon over.
1 Like
I’d click like here, but I’m too busy clicking “buy now with 1-click” over there.
1 Like
I’m not convinced that the Democratic Party has a long term future right now, but Newt Gingrich has made a pretty good case for your point of view. That said, I’m certain there are going to be situations when a morally compromised person is going to hold the balance of power and we’ll all just have to hold our noses and tolerate them.
I’m not personally losing my Congressional representation, I live in Debbie Dingle’s district, but I’m still pissed about it all. The accusations and the immediate effect of Conyer’s resignation. If The Govinernd appoints a Democrat, it’ll be a Festivus miracle.
2 Likes
No. I disagree. Clinton was hamstrung by cultural expectations of the way a women reacts to men. If she fights she is a “bitch”, if she shrugs it off Trump claims it is true. One thing Trump is very skilled at is mistreating women. Republican candidates were limited by sharing the same philosophical positions as Trump, which left them with a contest of personality which they lost. A Democratic candidate free to fight and punch back would have more success against Trump than Clinton.
I disagree. Generally all the things that Trump attacked Sanders over were things that Sanders wore proudly. Trump is put in a position of criticizing Sanders in a way that builds up Sanders positions. Trump is in a highly ineffectual position against Sanders or other liberal candidate. And Sanders had none of the “scandals” false or otherwise in his history that Trump pounded on.
I think that was a distinctly Clinton message - “Deplorables” - that clearly did not work for her. Sanders efforts to talk to their needs and hopes is a better approach, even if it only swings a percentage of Trumps diehards.
No - what does not help one bit is making the same mistakes all over again. Its not Clinton this, Clinton that - its STOP fucking talking about Clinton! She’s history. Don’t go there. Move on.
You don’t strengthen the system by returning to the broken system. The Dems have to clean house and we go into 2018 with a populist liberal movement.
7 Likes
This attitude might hint at why you’re not winning many converts to your argument. The way you use language implies that you are in possession of the holy truth, while the rest of us mere fools misguidedly follow myths.
Facts:
-
Hillary Clinton lost. There are multitude reasons why, some beyond her control, some because she possessed too much control. Whatever. She lost. To Turnip. That’s beyond embarrassing.
-
In failing to nominate a candidate capable of beating a brazenly dishonest, cartoonish billionaire rapist, the Democrats not only set our country back but put the entire planet in significantly greater danger of catastrophe.
The response to these facts should not be circling the wagons, yet that is exactly what the DNC and Clinton have been doing for the last year. If they continue to tread those waters for the next three years, you can damn well guarantee a second Trump/Pence term.
I think it’s pretty clear that technocratic liberalism is not a winning national strategy in the US. If the Democratic Party, which on its best days polls equal with Turnip, holds any hope for a return to signicance and the chance to lead us away from this morass, perhaps dropping the veneer of intellectual superiority is a good place to start.
That said, AFAIC the party can go crawl off a cliff. IMO they’ve already become ‘those who make peaceful revolution impossible.’
5 Likes
[it turns out that standing FOR something is a lot more politically important than merely standing AGAINST Trump]
well, duh. why do you think dictators win plebiscites?
2 Likes
