The Clintons Killed The Democratic Party

[unseenmorbidity]

There is no credible path through which Sanders was going to win the primary. This is self delusion. As for the Supreme Court, enjoy the upcoming ruling that guts unions through eliminating shop fees. I'm about 99% sure a Hillary Clinton appointee or Merrick Garland would have voted to uphold shop fees, but I guess as a 'true progressive' you're fine with unions being further decimated.

There was the non-rigged election path, but yah, that didn't happen.

Oh well if it's such an existential threat then it was definitely a good idea to help elect the guy who wants to subsidize carbon emitting fuels and remove subsidies for clean energy then. Did you think this through in even the slightest?

I didn't help to elect him. HRC won my state by a good margin. Like I said, 4 years of Trump + 4 years of a progressive is better than 8 years of HRC followed by a Republican winning the POTUS. Do you not get that? Trump was inevitable! If HRC had won, we were just delaying the next time the POTUS would switch to Trump. Hell, we got lucky that he is so incompetent.

I remember when people who thought we needed to already be at war with Germany wanted to vote for Charles Lindbergh in 1940. lol.

You must be old as fuck.

There is no way someone who has been paying attention to those conflicts since January would say Trump and Obama's approaches were 'basically' the same. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Obama expanded the wars from 2 to 7. Call me when Trump attacks another 5 additional countries to fight "terrorism".

I'm going to guess you're in your early 20's. I remember thinking the same way as you did before we had to endure eight years of GWB because people like me thought it was better to be ideologically pure than to be smart.

Obama was just GWB 2.0

He carried out the exact same policies...

Ideologically pure, ROFL! That is a good one... Anyone that isn't asininely corrupt is ideologically pure, I guess!

 

[hal2kilo]

It's not about burning it down. It's about weeding out the corruption on both sides, and taking over the democratic party. The difference between HRC and Trump was minimal. We will be far better off with 4 years of Trump and 4 years of Bernie vs 8 years of HRC.

The difference between you and me is that I am playing chess, and you are playing checkers.

Lost me on the bolded. Need to get your reality glasses fixed.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

Lost me on the bolded. Need to get your reality glasses fixed.

You need to stop watching the bullshit "news" on TV. Trump isn't any worse than any other GOP potus, which is a stones throw away from Obama and Clinton.

 

[Lash444]

You need to stop watching the bullshit "news" on TV. Trump isn't any worse than any other GOP potus, which is a stones throw away from Obama and Clinton.

Outhouse alt? Not too many people here are this oblivious.

 

[Thebobo]

Outhouse alt? Not too many people here are this oblivious.

Has to be someone's alt - I say that for Taj and slow as well.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

Has to be someone's alt - I say that for Taj and slow as well.

Not an alt...

What I find most amusing is that this community was so wrong about the 2016 election, yet still likes to pretend like it's opinions are gospel, and everyone else is an idiot. The fact you believe that you have any semblance of credibility remaining is quite frankly absurd.

Anyone involved in gas-lighting the coronation of HRC should be far too embarrassed to post on this forum. And when this Russiagate conspiracy bullshit is finally ends, they should just shut the fuck up for the rest of the universe.

 

[Thebobo]

Not an alt...

What I find most amusing is that this community was so wrong about the 2016 election, yet still likes to pretend like it has any semblance of credibility remaining.

All alts say that, the only way you can prove your not an alt is send me $100. That will prove to me that you're not an alt.

 

[woolfe9998]

I heard that if you take California out of the mix, then Trump and HRC actually came very close in the popular vote. I haven't actually looked at the numbers, because I don't give a shit, but it's an interesting thought.

EDIT: Looked it up.

California
D H. Clinton 61.6% 7,362,490
R D. Trump 32.8% 3,916,209

Difference = 3,446,281

2016 General
Clinton received 65,844,610 votes, or 48.2% of the total vote.
Trump received 62,979,636 votes, or 46.1% of the total vote.

Difference = 2,864,974

Without Ca, Trump actually wins the popular vote.

Yes, and I'm sure you'll find Clinton winning by an even wider margin if you take certain Trump voting states out of the equation. Under any number of hypothetical situations which weren't the actual reality of the election, outcomes would be different. But since CA is, you know, an actual state, and its voters are, you know, American citizens with voting rights, I fail to see the relevance of your hypothetical or why it was even worth the time you took to type it.

 

[fskimospy]

There was the non-rigged election path, but yah, that didn't happen.

Go ahead and explain that 'non-rigged' path to me. What combination of factors were going to swing the primary votes by 12+ points? Please be as specific as possible.

I also notice that you conveniently ignored the very real consequences of Trump being able to appoint a SCOTUS justice. Again, as a 'true progressive' you must be so happy that your choices are leading to the further decimation of unions.

I didn't help to elect him. HRC won my state by a good margin. Like I said, 4 years of Trump + 4 years of a progressive is better than 8 years of HRC followed by a Republican winning the POTUS. Do you not get that? Trump was inevitable! If HRC had won, we were just delaying the next time the POTUS would switch to Trump. Hell, we got lucky that he is so incompetent.

There are plenty of fools who think just like you, you're just emblematic of them and you're here. Gore won my state in 2000 as well, but had ~500 voters in Florida who voted for Nader been a little smarter we would have avoided GWB. As for Trump being inevitable, that's a ridiculous statement. If you're able to predict electoral outcomes four years out you shouldn't be wasting your time on ATPN, you could make a great deal of money as a political consultant. What's holding you back?

You must be old as fuck.

It was a joke, guy. I was pointing out how silly your reasoning is.

Obama expanded the wars from 2 to 7. Call me when Trump attacks another 5 additional countries to fight "terrorism".

Obama was just GWB 2.0

He carried out the exact same policies...

Ah yes, now I remember how GWB was known for his strict regulation of Wall Street and passing the largest expansion of the social safety net since the 1960's. I also remember how well GWB was known for increasing marginal tax rates on the very rich. He was totally all about that.

Seriously were you too young to pay attention during the GWB years? Were you asleep? What?

 

[unseenmorbidity]

Go ahead and explain that 'non-rigged' path to me. What combination of factors were going to swing the primary votes by 12+ points? Please be as specific as possible.

I don't need to speculate about that. I am not saying he would have won, but he would have had a good shot in a completely open and fair primary process.

You can't win a race that is rigged in your favor.
A small child could understand such a simple concept.

So to suggest the fact that she "won" the rigged primary is evidence that she would therefore have won a fair and open primary is absolutely fucking absurd! Completely devoid of any logic.

I also notice that you conveniently ignored the very real consequences of Trump being able to appoint a SCOTUS justice. Again, as a 'true progressive' you must be so happy that your choices are leading to the further decimation of unions.

HRC would have appointed a corproatist whore too. Why are you pretending that HRC wouldn't have put in a citizens united backing corrupt piece of shit!?

There are plenty of fools who think just like you, you're just emblematic of them and you're here. Gore won my state in 2000 as well, but had ~500 voters in Florida who voted for Nader been a little smarter we would have avoided GWB. As for Trump being inevitable, that's a ridiculous statement. If you're able to predict electoral outcomes four years out you shouldn't be wasting your time on ATPN, you could make a great deal of money as a political consultant. What's holding you back?

If you want to whine about the FPTP voting system, then petition them to change it. I am sure that will go well, lol!

It was a joke, guy. I was pointing out how silly your reasoning is.

What I find most amusing is that this community was so wrong about the 2016 election, yet still likes to pretend like it's opinions are gospel, and everyone else is an idiot. The fact you believe that you have any semblance of credibility remaining is quite frankly absurd.

Anyone involved in gas-lighting the coronation of HRC should be far too embarrassed to post on this forum. And when this Russiagate conspiracy bullshit is finally ends, they should just shut the *** up for the rest of the universe.

Ah yes, now I remember how GWB was known for his strict regulation of Wall Street and passing the largest expansion of the social safety net since the 1960's. I also remember how well GWB was known for increasing marginal tax rates on the very rich. He was totally all about that.

Seriously were you too young to pay attention during the GWB years? Were you asleep? What?

Obama's strict wall street regulations!? ROFL!!!

Is that why they're sucking his dick, and paying him millions in "speeches"?! ROFL!

What are you talking about the ACA?! The ACA is hot garbage. It's privatized taxation with no cost controls! A literal and figurative blowjob to the healthcare industry.

 

[fskimospy]

I don't need to speculate about that. I am not saying he would have won, but it would have had a good shot in a completely open and fair primary process.

You can't win a race that is rigged in your favor, so to suggest that she won the rigged primary, and would therefore win a fair and open primary is absolutely fucking absurd! Completely devoid of any logic. A small child could understand such a simple concept.

Well if you think it's likely she wouldn't have won a rigged primary then by all means let me know what mechanisms would have likely caused her to lose. As before, please be as specific as possible.

HRC would have appointed a corproatist whore too....

You're saying Clinton was likely to appoint someone who would have invalidated shop fees? What is this based on? If you look at Clinton's DW-NOMINATE first dimension score (economic issues) you will see she was one of the most liberal senators during her time in office. My guess is that this is based on nothing.

If you want to whine about the FPTP voting system, then petition them to change it. I am sure that will go well, lol!

Irrelevant. I'm talking about your (and people who think like you)'s decision to not vote for vote for an incompetent like Jill Stein instead of voting for Clinton. It's exactly this sort of short-sighted thinking that gave us Trump.

What I find most amusing is that this community was so wrong about the 2016 election, yet still likes to pretend like it's opinions are gospel, and everyone else is an idiot. The fact you believe that you have any semblance of credibility remaining is quite frankly absurd.

You're just ranting now. Nobody thinks their opinions are gospel, but your opinions are (at least so far) entirely emotion and rant based. I've asked you repeatedly to back up what you're saying and instead you just rant more.

Anyone involved in gas-lighting the coronation of HRC should be far too embarrassed to post on this forum. And when this Russiagate conspiracy bullshit is finally ends, they should just shut the *** up for the rest of the universe.

Conspiracy bullshit? Oh jesus, you're a Russia truther?

Obama's strict wall street regulations!? ROFL!!!

Is that why they're sucking his dick, and paying him millions in "speeches"?! ROFL!

Maybe you can explain why Wall Street donated overwhelmingly to his opponent in 2012 after donating a majority to him in 2008 then. I'm sure it's because they loved him so much. rofl indeed.

What are you talking about the ACA?! The ACA is hot garbage. It's privatized taxation ffs! A literal and figurative blowjob to the healthcare industry.

The ACA has insured tens of millions of people who were either too poor to afford it or too sick to get it. As a cancer survivor it's the single most consequential piece of legislation passed in my lifetime. The fact that you think you're so 'progressive' but sneer at the government providing real help to millions of people who couldn't afford it because the mechanism isn't what you would prefer is disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[Thebobo]

What I find most amusing is that this community was so wrong about the 2016 election, yet still likes to pretend like it's opinions are gospel, and everyone else is an idiot. The fact you believe that you have any semblance of credibility remaining is quite frankly absurd.

Anyone involved in gas-lighting the coronation of HRC should be far too embarrassed to post on this forum. And when this Russiagate conspiracy bullshit is finally ends, they should just shut the *** up for the rest of the universe.
.

Shmigba, your one weird person. You have a thought process that is very strange. "We" don't speak as a "community" we speak as individuals. You expect people to hide in a hole because they got an election wrong? lol why? Have your never been wrong?

 

[Starbuck1975]

Why is that relevant? It does show why the electoral college is a pretty bad idea though.

Its relevant if you want to win elections within the system the Founding Fathers devised

 

[woolfe9998]

OP is a typical example of extremist mentality in action. Everyone and everything which doesn't meet a perfect ideological purity test is exactly the same as being entirely on the opposite side of the political spectrum. To the OP, you're either a "true progressive" or you're a raging right winger. There is no in between.

Also to the extremist, facts do not matter. So, for example, the fact that Clinton voted with Sanders 92% of the time in the Senate apparently doesn't stop him from concluding that Clinton is as bad or worse than Trump. This massive disconnect with reality is precisely why people like the OP aren't worth the time to debate.

You guys can keep trying to talk sense into him if you want. Good luck with that.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

Well if you think it's likely she wouldn't have won a rigged primary then by all means let me know what mechanisms would have likely caused her to lose. As before, please be as specific as possible.

This question doesn't even make sense...

She "won" a rigged primary.

That is not evidence that she would have won a fair and open primary.

You're saying Clinton was likely to appoint someone who would have invalidated shop fees? What is this based on? If you look at Clinton's DW-NOMINATE first dimension score (economic issues) you will see she was one of the most liberal senators during her time in office. My guess is that this is based on nothing.

Liberal, my ass... Voting record doesn't mean dick when your never voting on anything remotely progressive. HRC is one of the biggest sellouts in history. The clintons control the DNC, because of their vast money and connections to money.

Irrelevant. I'm talking about your (and people who think like you)'s decision to not vote for vote for an incompetent like Jill Stein instead of voting for Clinton. It's exactly this sort of short-sighted thinking that gave us Trump.

Jill Stein isn't incompetent. That's what the man on TV told you to think. HRC is incompetent in most areas. The areas she is competent are the ones that will fuck you over.

Sorry, but worrying about Trump is the shortsighted view. I am thinking several elections in the future, and you are scared shitless of the pussygrabber in chief.

You're just ranting now. Nobody thinks their opinions are gospel, but your opinions are (at least so far) entirely emotion and rant based. I've asked you repeatedly to back up what you're saying and instead you just rant more.

You and everyone like you were dead wrong.

I was right.

Now, you think you are right again, and everyone else is dumb.

When Russiagate is exposed as complete bullshit as the investigation wraps up, then will you stfu and listen to the people that were right or will you keep grasping for straws!?

Conspiracy bullshit? Oh jesus, you're a Russia truther?

Russiagate conspiracy theory!

Maybe you can explain why Wall Street donated overwhelmingly to his opponent in 2012 after donating a majority to him in 2008 then. I'm sure it's because they loved him so much. rofl indeed.

They buy both sides... Seriously, how fucking naive and ignorant are you exactly!?

The ACA has insured tens of millions of people who were either too poor to afford it or too sick to get it. As a cancer survivor it's the single most consequential piece of legislation passed in my lifetime. The fact that you think you're so 'progressive' but sneer at the government providing real help to millions of people who couldn't afford it because the mechanism isn't what you would prefer is disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Insurance isn't healthcare.

Good for you, but that doesn't change anything I said that you blatantly dismissed. This legislation also hurts millions of people, but you don't give two fucks about those people, do you!?

Obama could have passed real healthcare reform, but chose not to, because he is a corporatist tool.

 

[soundforbjt]

Its relevant if you want to win elections within the system the Founding Fathers devised

Yes, because all ideas from 200+ years ago are still valid.

 

[Starbuck1975]

California is an "outlier" state.
1. It's a donor state so it helps finance all the leachy welfare states
2. It's the most populous state.
3. It's the 3rd largest state.

There is absolutely no reasons why California should have more say than Mississippi, Tennessee or Kentucky (welfare states with a fraction of the population).


Summary: Populous states who help fund the US should shut up and read the provided pamphlet. Maybe buy the 3 wolves howling at the moon in t-shirt from the catalog.

Yet CA is sh!tting itself over changes to the federal tax code because the rest of the country is currently subsidizing CA's inflated cost of living.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Yes, because all ideas from 200+ years ago are still valid.

The Constitution is as valid today as the day it was written

 

[IronWing]

Yet CA is sh!tting itself over changes to the federal tax code because the rest of the country is currently subsidizing CA's inflated cost of living.

Bullshit. I live in one of the welfare states and I know damn well my state is propped up by California and the cities.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Why would you even mention this, unless you KNEW that it was an issue? I didn't mention it. The fact you have to bring it up like it isn't something to be concerned about, is proof that you realize that it IS a problem.

I meant it as a reply to your post telling me the whole world is against Trump and saying voting for him is wrong. Our place in the world is just fine, and the whole world is not saying that. Maybe in your bubble that is the case, but not in reality.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

OP is a typical example of extremist mentality in action. Everyone and everything which doesn't meet a perfect ideological purity test is exactly the same as being entirely on the opposite side of the political spectrum. To the OP, you're either a "true progressive" or you're a raging right winger. There is no in between.

Also to the extremist, facts do not matter. So, for example, the fact that Clinton voted with Sanders 92% of the time in the Senate apparently doesn't stop him from concluding that Clinton is as bad or worse than Trump. This massive disconnect with reality is precisely why people like the OP aren't worth the time to debate.

You guys can keep trying to talk sense into him if you want. Good luck with that.

The only purity test I have is to not be bought by big money interests.

How fucking sad is it that that is now labeled "extreme" by so called democrats!?

 

[woolfe9998]

Its relevant if you want to win elections within the system the Founding Fathers devised

The original point under discussion had to do with Clinton winning the popular vote, where it was [stupidly] pointed out that she wouldn't have won the popular vote if California didn't exist or wasn't part of the United States. We all already know that Clinton lost the election because we have an electoral college and her popular vote total was padded with excessive margins in non-swing states. We don't need a lesson in 7th grade civics about how the EC works.

 

[soundforbjt]

The only purity test I have is to not be bought by big money interests.

How fucking sad is it that that is now labeled "extreme" by so called democrats!?

Then what are you doing to change it? Are you organizing voters in your area? Are you planning on running for office? Or are you bitching on a tech forum?

 

[feralkid]

Not an alt....

"Not an alt...not an alt...you're the alt."

"He denied it. He denied it. He totally denied it."

 

[woolfe9998]

The only purity test I have is to not be bought by big money interests.

How fucking sad is it that that is now labeled "extreme" by so called democrats!?

The fact that you actually believe that a dem candidate with one of the most progressive voting records in the Senate is no worse than Trump is precisely why you are an extremist.