Old Thread About Election Consequences

RBG is trying to hang up but it's likely she may be moving on soon as well.  The Court could EASILY go 6-3.  


And all I can think about are the knuckleheads on the local BernieBot FB page who were glowing with excitement over the fine showing of Jill Stein and the future of the Green Party.

Forest.  Trees.  


One choice.  One.   It was EASY.


To quote Wendy: SHEESH




sbenois said:

One choice.  One.   It was EASY.

Yup.  They did everything they could to make it that way and the result was a fundamentally unelectable candidate, the one woman on the planet who couldn't beat a bright orange poop fire.  Thanks guys.

(and for the record, I voted for HRC, the ham sandwich with the rotten meat and the moldy bread, because she had a D after her name.  I'd do it again if I had to)


spontaneous said:
Russia interfered. This is KNOWN and there is evidence of this. They did this by hacking emails and also with fake news (the real kind, not Trump’s labeling of legit news as fake when he doesn’t like what he hears). What isn’t proven is that Trumps campaign was directly involved.  Important difference


I’m a Bernie supporter, I voted for Clinton.  Not every Bernie supporter is an idiot asshat

 I voted for her too, and so did lots of Bernie supporters. And he campaigned for her, despite the fact that she and the DNC screwed him. She later blamed him for her loss, revealing herself to be a nasty and divisive person. 


But, the Russian interference, stated as though fact, has really not provided real evidence. The FBI never even looked at the DNC servers. They just read a report from a company hired by the DNC. They are not credible. 


For those scolding NJ residents for not voting for Hillary may I point out that she carried NJ?  It doesn't matter who people here voted for, it would have had no effect on the result. 


sbenois said:
RBG is trying to hang up but it's likely she may be moving on soon as well.  The Court could EASILY go 6-3.  


And all I can think about are the knuckleheads on the local BernieBot FB page who were glowing with excitement over the fine showing of Jill Stein and the future of the Green Party.
Forest.  Trees.  


One choice.  One.   It was EASY.


To quote Wendy: SHEESH




 There comes a point when all the excuse making in the world does not cover up the fact that she was a lousy candidate.   Pedigree, so to speak, can only carry you so far.  She clearly thought her you know what does not smell.  She was disdainful of half the electorate and made no secret of it.

No point in going over the mountain of baggage......apparently the "one candidate"thinking overlooks her many transgressions

Blame,  you want blame..........look to the DNC who decided the contest a long time ago.

And three cheers for the various other candidates who kept the true spirit of Democracy alive.


author said:


sbenois said:
RBG is trying to hang up but it's likely she may be moving on soon as well.  The Court could EASILY go 6-3.  


And all I can think about are the knuckleheads on the local BernieBot FB page who were glowing with excitement over the fine showing of Jill Stein and the future of the Green Party.
Forest.  Trees.  


One choice.  One.   It was EASY.


To quote Wendy: SHEESH
 There comes a point when all the excuse making in the world does not cover up the fact that she was a lousy candidate.   Pedigree, so to speak, can only carry you so far.  She clearly thought her you know what does not smell.  She was disdainful of half the electorate and made no secret of it.
No point in going over the mountain of baggage......apparently the "one candidate"thinking overlooks her many transgressions
Blame,  you want blame..........look to the DNC who decided the contest a long time ago.
And three cheers for the various other candidates who kept the true spirit of Democracy alive.

 This coming from someone who posted that the Trump Foundation was more honest and did more charitable work than the Clinton Foundation.

Clearly, you live in Bizarro land.


terp said:
For those scolding NJ residents for not voting for Hillary may I point out that she carried NJ?  It doesn't matter who people here voted for, it would have had no effect on the result. 

 It doesn't make their choice any less extraordinarily stupid.


terp said:
For those scolding NJ residents for not voting for Hillary may I point out that she carried NJ?  It doesn't matter who people here voted for, it would have had no effect on the result. 

 This is the well-known "free rider" problem.  They wanted to mock us for 4 years, saying, "I didn't vote for her", but also not wanting Trump to actually be, you know, President.


drummerboy said:


author said:

sbenois said:
RBG is trying to hang up but it's likely she may be moving on soon as well.  The Court could EASILY go 6-3.  


And all I can think about are the knuckleheads on the local BernieBot FB page who were glowing with excitement over the fine showing of Jill Stein and the future of the Green Party.
Forest.  Trees.  


One choice.  One.   It was EASY.


To quote Wendy: SHEESH
 There comes a point when all the excuse making in the world does not cover up the fact that she was a lousy candidate.   Pedigree, so to speak, can only carry you so far.  She clearly thought her you know what does not smell.  She was disdainful of half the electorate and made no secret of it.
No point in going over the mountain of baggage......apparently the "one candidate"thinking overlooks her many transgressions
Blame,  you want blame..........look to the DNC who decided the contest a long time ago.
And three cheers for the various other candidates who kept the true spirit of Democracy alive.
 This coming from someone who posted that the Trump Foundation was more honest and did more charitable work than the Clinton Foundation.
Clearly, you live in Bizarro land.

 https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-clinton-foundation-is-dead-but-the-case-against-hillary-isnt/


author - The article is dated 1/19/17 and Investor's Business Daily is owned by Bill O'Neill who is extremely conservative. At this stage you are beyond ridiculous.


Please don't tel me that is all taken out of context or from a right wing publication

Some have called Maplewood Village Bizarro  land but the air is the same as everyone breathes and the sidewalks are pretty firm.

I have slept in caves in Scotland and numerous beaches in Greece buy the Village is a pretty orthodox place

There are Hillary detox sessions starting next week at the Adult School



drummerboy said:


terp said:
For those scolding NJ residents for not voting for Hillary may I point out that she carried NJ?  It doesn't matter who people here voted for, it would have had no effect on the result. 
 It doesn't make their choice any less extraordinarily stupid.

 Consequences do not matter?


Please explain, the consequence of BBs (or anyone else) who did not go to polls, or voted for JS, here in NJ.


HRC received all of NJ's electoral votes.


Q:  What is the consequence of those New Jerseyans who could not pull the lever for HRC?


A:  Nil consequences: because HRC received  all the votes from NJ's electoral college members.


Let me know what I am missing.




we've been through this before.  I voted for HRC.  I phone banked to get out the vote.  But scolding people for their vote (or non vote) is wrong. No candidate is entitled to anyone's vote.  If there were progressive voters who didn't come out for Clinton, it's the fault of the candidate herself and the DNC for not effectively communicating to those voters.  Any candidate for office who is successful will tell you that they need to earn people's votes.

But beyond that, polls show that Sanders voters came out for Hillary in better numbers than Hillary's primary voters came out for Obama in '08.  No candidate ever gets all the voters who came out for their primary opponent.  So that should have been baked into the campaign strategy and compensated for with GOTV efforts.  Shaming those voters post hoc does nothing constructive.

With so few votes in three states tipping this election, people can choose to place blame in a multitude of places -- Comey's investigation, fake news, media bias, campaign strategies, etc.  


ml1 said:
we've been through this before.  I voted for HRC.  I phone banked to get out the vote.  But scolding people for their vote (or non vote) is wrong. No candidate is entitled to anyone's vote.  If there were progressive voters who didn't come out for Clinton, it's the fault of the candidate herself and the DNC for not effectively communicating to those voters.  Any candidate for office who is successful will tell you that they need to earn people's votes.
But beyond that, polls show that Sanders voters came out for Hillary in better numbers than Hillary's primary voters came out for Obama in '08.  No candidate ever gets all the voters who came out for their primary opponent.  So that should have been baked into the campaign strategy and compensated for with GOTV efforts.  Shaming those voters post hoc does nothing constructive.
With so few votes in three states tipping this election, people can choose to place blame in a multitude of places -- Comey's investigation, fake news, media bias, campaign strategies, etc.  

 Interesting polls.   Interesting and very true statement that it is wrong to scold any one for their vote.

There is so much work to be done.  Learn from the past.........don't get bogged down it.


cramer said:
author - The article is dated 1/19/17 and Investor's Business Daily is owned by Bill O'Neill who is extremely conservative. At this stage you are beyond ridiculous.

 You would find fault with the Bible if it criticized HRC.

Also............I am AUTHOR...........never found it necessary to color between anybody's lines.


I hope your conscience is clear when females have to travel hundreds of miles to get abortions, and in many cases won't be able to afford to do that. 


author said:
 Interesting polls.   Interesting and very true statement that it is wrong to scold any one for their vote.
There is so much work to be done.  Learn from the past.........don't get bogged down it.

Afterwards, they did try to scold the Germans who voted Nazi. But it was said they were GOOD Germans, let us not scold them. 


cramer said:
I hope your conscience is clear when females have to travel hundreds of miles to get abortions, and in many cases won't be able to afford to do that. 

 I favored the candidate who could have prevented that........he was not the anointed one and actually would have shaken things up.

When you vote for a woman who started life as a young Republican............as a matter of fact since she and I are the same age I will bet that she worked to elect Barry Goldwater...but anyway you get a candidate who considers half the country beneath her station.


author said:


cramer said:
I hope your conscience is clear when females have to travel hundreds of miles to get abortions, and in many cases won't be able to afford to do that. 
 I favored the candidate who could have prevented that........he was not the anointed one and actually would have shaken things up.
When you vote for a woman who started life as a young Republican............as a matter of fact since she and I are the same age I will bet that she worked to elect Barry Goldwater...but anyway you get a candidate who considers half the country beneath her station.

 Well if Trump gets his way you can continue this argument across the prison yard.


https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/benjamin_franklin_137311


Jeffrey Toobin predicts that Roe v. Wad will be overturned and abortion will be illegal in 20+ states in 18 months. A lot of hope is being placed on Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski to oppose any   nominee who would overturn Roe v. Wade, but there are 5 Democrats who come from states that voted for Trump who have to be concerned, e.g., Mancin, Heitkamp, et. al. 

I think the one panelist who says that the SC won't be asked to take Roe v. Wade head-on but that we will see its death by a thousand cuts is probably right. 

https://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2018/06/27/lead-panel-1-live-jake-tapper.cnn


author said:
 I favored the candidate who could have prevented that........he was not the anointed one and actually would have shaken things up.
When you vote for a woman who started life as a young Republican............as a matter of fact since she and I are the same age I will bet that she worked to elect Barry Goldwater...but anyway you get a candidate who considers half the country beneath her station.

I wouldn't say that.

Clinton went undercover to examine race in Southern segregated academies. That took courage and commitment. I know you're one of our very brave ferocious keyboard warriors, but would you have what it takes to do the same? I haven't seen it.

That's one of the things Republicans and segregationists hate her for. Have you ever done anything in your life to get Republicans riled up against you?

Its so easy to criticize and condemn those who have stood and fought.  

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/28/us/politics/how-hillary-clinton-went-undercover-to-examine-race-in-education.html

She played a critical role in getting CHIP through, as attested by Sen Edward Kennedy.

"The children's health program wouldn't be in existence today if we didn't have Hillary pushing for it from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue," Kennedy told The Associated Press. 

btw - it was Republican Trent Lott who tried to kill it. He was very concerned about the budget deficit.

You're constantly harping on Clinton, like a bitter old man whose time has passed. A woman who is immeasurably better and greater than you.


I'm just sick and tired of the Dem party and our inability to rally when it really matters. When Trump entered a field of 15 seasoned Republican candidates everyone said it would be the death of their party. Instead, they held their noses, kissed the ring and are now poised reverse decades of progressive politics.

What did we Dems do when it was Clinton vs Bernie - a longtime, somewhat-flawed center-left candidate versus an longtime, independent far-left ideologue? We sat it out. We refused to throw our support behind the nominee. We pulled back our claws. We went high when the entire fight went low. 

Ultimately, this is a reality of our own making. This is going to get much worse. And, maybe it has to for folks on the the full spectrum of the left to get in this fight. 


 As long as Democrats continue to use vitriol rather than make an attempt to convince the masses they have their best interests in mind they will lose again.


vitriol seems to have worked pretty well for the GOP 


ml1 said:
vitriol seems to have worked pretty well for the GOP 

Exactly. We need to stop apologizing for our politics and respond to Trump-style rhetoric with our own (smarter) brand of bravado. 


Hahaha said:
I'm just sick and tired of the Dem party and our inability to rally when it really matters. When Trump entered a field of 15 seasoned Republican candidates everyone said it would be the death of their party. Instead, they held their noses, kissed the ring and are now poised reverse decades of progressive politics.
What did we Dems do when it was Clinton vs Bernie - a longtime, somewhat-flawed center-left candidate versus an longtime, independent far-left ideologue? We sat it out. We refused to throw our support behind the nominee. We pulled back our claws. We went high when the entire fight went low. 
Ultimately, this is a reality of our own making. This is going to get much worse. And, maybe it has to for folks on the the full spectrum of the left to get in this fight. 

 Don't agree with this at all.  First of all, Bernie is not a "far-left ideology."  In another country, he would be a centrist.  He is just an old time FDR type Democrat--the type we need to get back to--who supports the people over the rich, donor class. He supports VERY popular programs like Medicare For All (which even Republicans often support) which every other country has.   Otherwise, we have two parties who support business and war--we don't need a third party--we need a second party.   You are wrong about the Republicans--they had a revolution and threw out their leadership and let the nut-jobs take over and now support the ultimate orange nut-job.  You do not want to see the establishment wing of the Democrats throwing out the Progressives (as they are actively trying to do) because that will most likely assure 8 years of Trump.  People are suffering and they want a populist who supports them instead of monied interests. They voted for Obama's "Hope and Change" and they saw no change and now have little hope.   They would rather vote for a fake populist like Trump.  So, why not give them a real Progressive instead of Hillary 2.0?  


lord_pabulum said:
 As long as Democrats continue to use vitriol rather than make an attempt to convince the masses they have their best interests in mind they will lose again.

 Trump uses vitriol to convince "the masses" that he has their best interests in mind.

What is actually in the best interest of "the masses" whomever they are?

Gun control or complete freedom with respect to gun ownership? Abortion "rights" or "abortion restrictions."?

Tax cuts for business or Medicare for all?

Who are "the masses"? White working class? Black working class? Hispanic immigrants?



I believe Democrats should use both vitriol and intelligent civil discussion. There is nothing wrong with vitriol directed at racists or crooked politicians. Vitriol has to be joined with arguments about policy. Vitriol turns out the base. Some think the key to Dem victory is to appeal to "independents" or "moderates" who may have voted for Trump. I feel it is far more fruitful to appeal to those who did not vote last time, especially Blacks and Hispanics, but also those who were too young to vote.

How many people turn 18 between elections?


nan said:


Hahaha said:
I'm just sick and tired of the Dem party and our inability to rally when it really matters. When Trump entered a field of 15 seasoned Republican candidates everyone said it would be the death of their party. Instead, they held their noses, kissed the ring and are now poised reverse decades of progressive politics.
What did we Dems do when it was Clinton vs Bernie - a longtime, somewhat-flawed center-left candidate versus an longtime, independent far-left ideologue? We sat it out. We refused to throw our support behind the nominee. We pulled back our claws. We went high when the entire fight went low. 
Ultimately, this is a reality of our own making. This is going to get much worse. And, maybe it has to for folks on the the full spectrum of the left to get in this fight. 
 Don't agree with this at all.  First of all, Bernie is not a "far-left ideology."  In another country, he would be a centrist.  He is just an old time FDR type Democrat--the type we need to get back to--who supports the people over the rich, donor class. He supports VERY popular programs like Medicare For All (which even Republicans often support) which every other country has.   Otherwise, we have two parties who support business and war--we don't need a third party--we need a second party.   You are wrong about the Republicans--they had a revolution and threw out their leadership and let the nut-jobs take over and now support the ultimate orange nut-job.  You do not want to see the establishment wing of the Democrats throwing out the Progressives (as they are actively trying to do) because that will most likely assure 8 years of Trump.  People are suffering and they want a populist who supports them instead of monied interests. They voted for Obama's "Hope and Change" and they saw no change and now have little hope.   They would rather vote for a fake populist like Trump.  So, why not give them a real Progressive instead of Hillary 2.0?  

 We'll have to agree to disagree. The way we're going another 8 years of Trump is pretty-much assured. I'm a progressive and I supported Clinton - because I'm a pragmatist too. The fact that "they" (i.e. progressives) see Trump as a better alternative to Clinton means we're living on two different planets. 


DannyArcher said:

Why don't we wait to see who is nominated and give them the courtesy of judging them on their qualifications.

 Trusting Trump doesn't seem like a winning strategy to me.


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.