The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Red Dreams said:
the point being made is she should never have been nominated with all her negatives. And after she was, she should have had a message. not just demonise Trump.
Click to expand...
That is a single point of many which contributed to the outcome.

Anyhow, I was simply addressing your false accusation that they never take responsibility. They have for their part.

Meanwhile, all these other points that won him the election have turned out to be <gasp shock horror> lies.
 
Nikhil said:
You know what I meant. She didn't articulate to the electorate what she would do as President. Most of what she eventually said policy wise was policies she adopted as a compromise after Bernie agreed to endorse her in return for a progressive platform. If you are running for the Presidency, you must sell to the public what your presidency would look like. She spectacularly failed to do that, both this time and when she ran in 2008. That was another total mess of a campaign.



The DNC and Hillary don't know the meaning of the word "responsibility".
Click to expand...
They seemed to last night.
 
senorgregster said:
That is a single point of many which contributed to the outcome.

Anyhow, I was simply addressing your false accusation that they never take responsibility. They have for their part.

Meanwhile, all these other points that won him the election have turned out to be <gasp shock horror> lies.
Click to expand...

its not a fasle accusation.

"Those who did not vote for her were deplorable" sound familiar?

There is a difference between admitting failure in tactics and being an honest candidate, which she was not.

EDIT:

We are not discussing Trump here.

We are discussing how the DNC's candidate lost to a shattered party's candidate it was forced to accept, thereby surrendering every branch of power to a broken party.
 
afrocentricity said:
In the Trump thread? Anyway, you are so anti-Clinton I keep thinking you are pro Trump... You're not pro Trump are ya?
Click to expand...

fair point.

I meant me and what @senorgregster were discussing, which was Hillary.

No. I am not for that clown Trump. But before the election I thought Hillary would win. Mine was a protest vote against the corrupt system. In my state, Minnesota, she barely won btw. So I should not feel too guilty.

EDIT:

The tragedy is Obama lost big too. His landmark legislation will now be unravelled.

If there is a lesson to be learnt, listen to the voter. Not force feed a rotting candidate.
 
The DNC for the most part is beginning to realise they made a huge mistake Not listening to the voters. It is moving towards Keith Ellison.
There still is a token resistence from the corporate side of the party, which I fear will live to fight another day. Politics is all about money.

But if Ellison prevails, he will help nominate a populous candidate who will definitely win in 2020.
 
Red Dreams said:
The DNC for the most part is beginning to realise they made a huge mistake Not listening to the voters. It is moving towards Keith Ellison.
There still is a token resistence from the corporate side of the party, which I fear will live to fight another day. Politics is all about money.

But if Ellison prevails, he will help nominate a populous candidate who will definitely win in 2020.
Click to expand...

There are no populist candidates other than Sanders and I doubt he will run again at 78. Liz Warren could run but she's no spring chicken either. I would prefer someone who is not in politics to run.
 
Red Dreams said:
its not a fasle accusation.

"Those who did not vote for her were deplorable" sound familiar?

There is a difference between admitting failure in tactics and being an honest candidate, which she was not.

EDIT:

We are not discussing Trump here.

We are discussing how the DNC's candidate lost to a shattered party's candidate it was forced to accept, thereby surrendering every branch of power to a broken party.
Click to expand...
My last word since this is the trump thread. Her team admitted responsibility for their failures. You said they never would. They did so it is a false accusation in my mind.
 
Raoul said:
There are no populist candidates other than Sanders and I doubt he will run again at 78. Liz Warren could run but she's no spring chicken either. I would prefer someone who is not in politics to run.
Click to expand...

Before 2008, who even really thought of Obama. Ok he gave that speech in 2004. But even then, whoever thought he could win in 2008.
I have mentioned Gabbard. I'm sure there will be others. Ellison and the progressives will find someone who appeals to the vast majority.
Personally I want to see someone who appeals to all sections. Not go for strategy,. But seriously appeal to all people. Obama did that. But it was first step.

We need to keep focus and not surrender to corporate America.
 
langster said:
No need for the insult was there? You also couldnt be more wrong about being entitled but nvm.

And no, I don't wonder why he won, I've said many times why he won and it was down to a myriad of reasons. I just think it's sad, and will end in epic failure and ultimately the people who need the most help will lose the most.
Click to expand...
I'm beginning to think that is what it will take to turn this thing around. Some serious hurt so they realize what they've elected. I hope I'm wrong in both regards and he's just an asshole.
 
Agree with most of you that Clinton was not compelling tho, most of the votes for her were against the other guy I'm guessing...
 
Keeps It tidy said:
Seriously? You are going to say that after this election?
Click to expand...

Yes. I swear by it.

I have addressed why Hillary lost. Remember Trump won by default.
She lost to a cartoon charater.

This was a gimee election...and she lost on paper thin margins. He fluked it.

Minnesota where I stay comes in immediately after poll close each election for the Democratic candidate. It took 15 or so hours to come in for Hillary.

The Democrats lost a lot more than just the Presidential election.

We really are in unchartered territory.

EDIT:
The damage that may happen to this country and the rest of the world can only be guessed at.

Climate Change is the biggest issue. Tbh I thought we did too little too late with the Paris agreement. Now it may all be sped up.
 
Last edited:
Raoul said:
There are no populist candidates other than Sanders and I doubt he will run again at 78. Liz Warren could run but she's no spring chicken either. I would prefer someone who is not in politics to run.
Click to expand...

Isn't this a bit of a slippery slope, though? Someone in the most powerful political job should ideally have a strong grasp of economics, foreign and domestic policy etc, and how to run a nation. For as much as Obama was often strong on popularity, there's no doubt he was a competent statesman and knew how to do his job. That could be said for most Presidents, good or bad.

If the US goes down this road then they'd essentially find themselves in a position where their President is basically a media figurehead while the VP runs the country, as may happen in this case. If it goes down that path then there's a horribly undemocratic situation where the most powerful political figure in the country, policy wise at least, is basically there because the role has been handed to them by Kanye West or Tom Hanks or whoever else decides to run. It sounds like a horrendously incompetent way to run a government.
 
Red Dreams said:
Yes. I swear by it.

I have addressed why Hillary lost. Remember Trump won by default.
She lost to a cartoon charater.

This was a gimee election...and she lost on paper think margins. He fluked it.

Minnesota where I stay comes in immediately after poll close each election for the Democratic candidate. It took 15 or so hours to come in for Hillary.

The Democrats lost a lot more than just the Presidential election.

We really are in unchartered territory.

EDIT:
The damage that may happen to this country and the rest of the world can only be guessed at.

Claimate Change is the biggest issue. Tbh I thought we did too little too late with the Paris agreement. Now it may all be sped up.
Click to expand...

The fact she lost to a cartoon character who at times seemed to be trying to lose on purpose shows for this election the typical campaign might not have mattered at all.
 
Red Dreams said:
Before 2008, who even really thought of Obama. Ok he gave that speech in 2004. But even then, whoever thought he could win in 2008.
I have mentioned Gabbard. I'm sure there will be others. Ellison and the progressives will find someone who appeals to the vast majority.
Personally I want to see someone who appeals to all sections. Not go for strategy,. But seriously appeal to all people. Obama did that. But it was first step.

We need to keep focus and not surrender to corporate America.
Click to expand...

There are obvious no Obama type people out there, not even close. He's a once in a generation type political actor. Gabbard is way too inexperienced and frankly there are no other candidates out there that I can think of.

Also, people are obviously living in a delusional fantasy world if they think people like this have a snowballs chance in hell against Trump.

Personally, if Gavin Newsome wins the Governorship, I think he should run. He is progressive, photogenic, and in his political prime.

In terms of out of the box options - Mark Cuban would be great.
 
@Raoul

The point about someone outside of politics is not good.

I have said before you need someone who has either experience of being in the legislature or knows how government works.

There are people in government who want to serve.

Its a matter of finding the right person.
 
Not that I want to speak for @langster but we are all entitled to the odd meltdown. After all, there is only so much stupid one person can take; and he has bravely manned this thread for months.
 
Keeps It tidy said:
The fact she lost to a cartoon character who at times seemed to be trying to lose on purpose shows for this election the typical campaign might not have mattered at all.
Click to expand...

He was not trying to lose on purpose. Lets be clear. He did not Care if he lost. He could always go back to his business. He resonated with people who had been ignored.
 
Red Dreams said:
@Raoul

The point about someone outside of politics is not good.

I have said before you need someone who has either experience of being in the legislature.

There are people in government who want to serve.

Its a matter of find the right person.
Click to expand...

I used to think that way but I've changed my view. It helps to have familiarity with how government works, but if they are proven at a high level in whatever they did before, then that counts for a lot.
 
Cheesy said:
Isn't this a bit of a slippery slope, though? Someone in the most powerful political job should ideally have a strong grasp of economics, foreign and domestic policy etc, and how to run a nation. For as much as Obama was often strong on popularity, there's no doubt he was a competent statesman and knew how to do his job. That could be said for most Presidents, good or bad.

If the US goes down this road then they'd essentially find themselves in a position where their President is basically a media figurehead while the VP runs the country, as may happen in this case. If it goes down that path then there's a horribly undemocratic situation where the most powerful political figure in the country, policy wise at least, is basically there because the role has been handed to them by Kanye West or Tom Hanks or whoever else decides to run. It sounds like a horrendously incompetent way to run a government.
Click to expand...

Plus with how expensive a Presidential Campaign is only a billionaire or a celebrity could afford to run.
 
Red Dreams said:
He was not trying to lose on purpose. Lets be clear. He did not Care if he lost. He could always go back to his business. He resonated with people who had been ignored.
Click to expand...

Do not agree with that one bit. His base were definitely not people who were "ignored".
 
Keeps It tidy said:
Plus with how expensive a Presidential Campaign is only a billionaire or a celebrity could afford to run.
Click to expand...

Very much so. It's a completely ridiculous idea. I mean, if it's something very closely tied to politics (important economic business position or political analyst maybe) I could perhaps understand it, but the possibility of handing the most powerful political position in the world to someone who isn't an actual politician should deeply worry people. Because said person is often going to be hugely incompetent, or will just be handing the reins to someone unelected (for the Presidential position) below them.
 
Raoul said:
I used to think that way but I've changed my view. It helps to have familiarity with how government works, but if they are proven at a high level in whatever they did before, then that counts for a lot.
Click to expand...

fair point. Why did Obama succeed?

He was law professor, had experience in the Illinois legislature, only a two year senator. Untainted.

Its a delicate balance.

But we have to keep trucking.

Must not let corporations win.
 
Keeps It tidy said:
Do not agree with that one bit. His base were definitely not people who were "ignored".
Click to expand...

some months before the elections, I saw he had a path to victory. A very long shot..through the Rust Belt states. That was the Only path he had. These people suffered through NAFTA and other trade agreements.

EDIT:

The moment you demonise people, you have already lost.
To call all those people racists.

I ask. Why do you want to be President of a nation when you do not respect or want to help All the people.
 
Cheesy said:
Very much so. It's a completely ridiculous idea. I mean, if it's something very closely tied to politics (important economic business position or political analyst maybe) I could perhaps understand it, but the possibility of handing the most powerful political position in the world to someone who isn't an actual politician should deeply worry people. Because said person is often going to be hugely incompetent, or will just be handing the reins to someone unelected (for the Presidential position) below them.
Click to expand...

I agree. But, I guess it is the result of generations of politicians who spent most of their careers in government/politics campaigning that they were not like other politicians. Generations of politicians with degrees from elite universities and law degrees trying to portray themselves as someone you just want to have a beer with. Politicians campaign for positions in Government campaigning against Government.
 
Red Dreams said:
fair point. Why did Obama succeed?

He was law professor, had experience in the Illinois legislature, only a two year senator. Untainted.

Its a delicate balance.

But we have to keep trucking.

Must not let corporations win.
Click to expand...

Obama certainly didn't succeed in politics because he was a law professor, community organizer, or state senator. He succeeded because he had a unique talent for communicating his views with audiences.
 
Look. I know people who work with Ellison and Franken.
But I have stayed away from all the political machinery. I am very interested in politics.History especially.

I am not even a registered Democrat though I have been asked obviously.

This cycle I got a call from the local DFL party asking for donations. I gave the last two cycles. This time I told straight out I was not donating for a party that nominated a Hillary...and in that fashion.

When my wife and I went to vote, our names were challenged.

We had our voter registration cards.

So we were forced to show our IDs. First time it happened. We always vote in the same place.

We voted after that. But as I was walking out I remembered the call.

Both parties are businesses.
 
Last edited:
Red Dreams said:
some months before the elections, I saw he had a path to victory. A very long shot..through the Rust Belt states. That was the Only path he had. These people suffered through NAFTA and other trade agreements.

EDIT:

The moment you demonise people, you have already lost.
To call all those people racists.

I ask. Why do you want to be President of a nation when you do not respect or want to help All the people.
Click to expand...

Ask the President elect that. He won while demonizing large swaths of the American public. But, I forgot calling out racism is worst than actual racism now my bad.
 
Raoul said:
Obama certainly didn't succeed in politics because he was a law professor, community organizer, or state senator. He succeeded because he had a unique talent for communicating his views with audiences.
Click to expand...

True. He succeeded with the audience. But he knew what he wanted to do when he got in office. His knowledge of the law and government obviously helped.

Sanders was nowhere near as great a talent as Obama. But he resonated with many people because he had a strong honest message. He also knew how the system worked.
 
Raoul said:
There are obvious no Obama type people out there, not even close. He's a once in a generation type political actor. Gabbard is way too inexperienced and frankly there are no other candidates out there that I can think of.

Also, people are obviously living in a delusional fantasy world if they think people like this have a snowballs chance in hell against Trump.

Personally, if Gavin Newsome wins the Governorship, I think he should run. He is progressive, photogenic, and in his political prime.

In terms of out of the box options - Mark Cuban would be great.
Click to expand...

It will be one of

Gavin Newsom
Tulsi Gabbard
Mark Cuban
Michael Bloomberg
Liz Warren
 
Raoul said:
There are obvious no Obama type people out there, not even close. He's a once in a generation type political actor. Gabbard is way too inexperienced and frankly there are no other candidates out there that I can think of.

Also, people are obviously living in a delusional fantasy world if they think people like this have a snowballs chance in hell against Trump.

Personally, if Gavin Newsome wins the Governorship, I think he should run. He is progressive, photogenic, and in his political prime.

In terms of out of the box options - Mark Cuban would be great.
Click to expand...

Cuban is another businessman.

Newsom probably. But what does he really believe in. We really cannot look into the future.

But if we listen to the voters, we will have a good idea of what their needs are. Then we may find a match.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.