What Went Wrong (The Real Reason)..

londonfog

Well-Known Member
Adoption of Sanders platform BY HER wasn't enough. When you're caught on tape admitting that you have one set of bullshit principals that you feed to the public, and an entirely different set of principals in private that benefits corporate America, it's not going to matter.

She was the wrong horse to run. Period.
She was the better candidate in the General, unfortunately idiots fell for all the negative shit put out about Clinton and completely ignored Trumps fucking failings. Bernie Babies will soon learn that sitting out or placing a protest vote was not a smart move. Bernie knew the deal and placed his vote for Clinton.
 

Chunky Stool

Well-Known Member
I think this is an excellent point.
Hillary was a weak candidate.
I wonder how many of us who voted for her were proud enough to put a sign in the yard or a bumper sticker on their car???
I didn't because have never liked her, even though I voted for her.
But Orange Hitler was too much to bear. Tax cuts for the rich will not "trickle down" to the average citizen. Trump will use deficit spending to stimulate the economy and make Joe the plumber happy. This is a tactic Reagan pioneered & every subsequent president followed his lead. Deficit spending is why people felt "better off" in the 80s -- not because money was trickling down from the billionaire class.
Remember how great it felt to get tax refund checks from GW Bush -- while our country was gushing blood and treasure in Iraq.
And we elected that dumb fucker TWICE!
The average American really isn't very bright...
 

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
Hillary was a weak candidate.
I wonder how many of us who voted for her were proud enough to put a sign in the yard or a bumper sticker on their car???
I didn't because have never liked her, even though I voted for her.
But Orange Hitler was too much to bear. Tax cuts for the rich will not "trickle down" to the average citizen. Trump will use deficit spending to stimulate the economy and make Joe the plumber happy. This is a tactic Reagan pioneered & every subsequent president followed his lead. Deficit spending is why people felt "better off" in the 80s -- not because money was trickling down from the billionaire class.
Remember how great it felt to get tax refund checks from GW Bush -- while our country was gushing blood and treasure in Iraq.
And we elected that dumb fucker TWICE!
The average American really isn't very bright...
She got more votes than anyone else in history except Obama.

She's ahead now by 1.4million votes in the popular vote, that's I think the second or third greatest popular vote win/electoral college loss in history, CRUSHING Al Gores differential.

Weak candidate?
 

Chunky Stool

Well-Known Member
She got more votes than anyone else in history except Obama.

She's ahead now by 1.4million votes in the popular vote, that's I think the second or third greatest popular vote win/electoral college loss in history, CRUSHING Al Gores differential.

Weak candidate?
Yep.
I never liked her, and if she was as strong as you claim, she should have whipped Orange Hitler soundly.
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
There are a lot of people with sore behinds. Myself included, who voted for Bernie in the primary and Clinton in the general because I thought they were better candidates than anything the GOP could produce. Also including people who stood down during the election because they couldn't vote for either. Many of those woke to a Trump president and were disappointed too.

Do you really think that Trump is going to do a better job at containing healthcare cost increases and bring forward a better deal than the ACA? 20 million people have healthcare coverage that did not in 2008. Scrapping the ACA will cut them loose.

The only firm proposal out there regarding health care is from Paul Ryan, who is proposing privatizing medicare. Just the opposite of what Bernie or even Clinton supported. Ryan's plan for prosperity or some such named legislation would cap govt. medicare spending where it is right now and shove seniors from the government run program with vouchers for private insurance that only partially cover purchase price of medical coverage from the private sector. No thought is given to containing costs in this program unlike the tangible cost savings that were made under the ACA. The average senior will pay 8000 per year more for health care coverage under Ryan's plan than any other proposal to simply address funding shortfalls for Medicare. Cost controls implemented under the ACA reduced medicare funding issues too. The whole system was working better. But people see price rises and claim failure. I understand this but am disappointed that people don't dig a little further into the reasons why.

Those price rises for coverage were due to GOP congress's failure to fund the ACA as spelled out in the original legislation. If interested, http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2016/06/moda_sues_us_government_demand.html

I'd prefer a government run single payer system too. I saw the ACA as a path toward that, not as an end in itself. Doesn't look like that's going to happen.
I''m not suggesting that the ACA was a complete dog. There was definitely some good to come out of it. I just don't understand why Obama didnt at least attempt to have a conversation about a single payer system. If he were to just break down the numbers and talk about it in plain English, I believe the majority of the country would get behind it. Same hospitals, same doctors, same care. The only thing that changes is the removal of an uneccesary middle man that exists solely to skim profit. We could achieve the same, or better results for a fraction of the cost.

That was a central theme in Bernie's platform. He was willing to take on the insurance corporations. It makes me wonder if Obama/Hillary would be willing to do the same? Biting the hand that feeds them.
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
She was the better candidate in the General, unfortunately idiots fell for all the negative shit put out about Clinton and completely ignored Trumps fucking failings. Bernie Babies will soon learn that sitting out or placing a protest vote was not a smart move. Bernie knew the deal and placed his vote for Clinton.
She was the more qualified candidate. Better though? Apparently not.

When the vast majority of the country wants change, and is sick and tired of the cozy relationship between politicians and corporate America, do you really feel that a candidate that has been in bed with corporate America for decades is the best that the Democrats could offer?

The results speak for themselves. You can blame racism, or whatever ism you like, but the difference in this election came down to Obama voters that either stayed home, or flipped to Trump because they are tired of the status quo. Donald fucking Trump.
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
She was the more qualified candidate. Better though? Apparently not.

When the vast majority of the country wants change, and is sick and tired of the cozy relationship between politicians and corporate America, do you really feel that a candidate that has been in bed with corporate America for decades is the best that the Democrats could offer?

The results speak for themselves. You can blame racism, or whatever ism you like, but the difference in this election came down to Obama voters that either stayed home, or flipped to Trump because they are tired of the status quo. Donald fucking Trump.
I guess better can be view as an opinion. A lot of racist bigots would say Trump is the better candidate. I would disagree.
If you or others think that Donald is about to change anything in Washington DC that would be better for the working class, you all are about to very disappointed. His cabinet picks will reveal this, unless you are too stupid to understand.
Data shows that Obama/Bernie people did not vote for Trump, they stayed home. Lowest turnout in the last 20 years.
 
Last edited:

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
I guess better can be view as an opinion. A lot of racist bigots would say Trump is the better candidate. I would disagree.
If you or others think that Donald is about to change any thing in Washington DC that would be better for the working class, you all are about to very disappointed. His cabinet picks will revel this, unless you are too stupid to understand.
Data shows that Obama/Bernie people did not vote for Trump, they stayed home. Lowest turnout in the last 20 years.
It's not actually that low a turnout, check the (sex tape) stats, it just wasnt record breaking like with Obama.

She lost cos the electoral college is gamed towards inbred red states.
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
I guess better can be view as an opinion. A lot of racist bigots would say Trump is the better candidate. I would disagree.
If you or others think that Donald is about to change any thing in Washington DC that would be better for the working class, you all are about to very disappointed. His cabinet picks will revel this, unless you are too stupid to understand.
Data shows that Obama/Bernie people did not vote for Trump, they stayed home. Lowest turnout in the last 20 years.
Oh, I don't believe for one second that Trump will benefit the working class in this country. He might pull off a few things that I'll be OK with, but I'm fully expecting to be disappointed with the majority of his policies. I don't think I would have been happy with much of what Clinton was looking to do either.

My point is, that like you, the Democrat party was completely tone def in backing her as its candidate. Trump, despite all of his bluster, was smart enough to pick up on the fact that people are looking for change. On both sides of the aisle. The dems and Hillary ignored that at their peril.
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
Oh, I don't believe for one second that Trump will benefit the working class in this country. He might pull off a few things that I'll be OK with, but I'm fully expecting to be disappointed with the majority of his policies. I don't think I would have been happy with much of what Clinton was looking to do either.

My point is, that like you, the Democrat party was completely tone def in backing her as its candidate. Trump, despite all of his bluster, was smart enough to pick up on the fact that people are looking for change. On both sides of the aisle. The dems and Hillary ignored that at their peril.
LOL. what a fool Trump has made out of the likes of you. Trump fed on the racism and bigotry of some. We has 8 years of Obama and a certain group were ready to see America White Again. Now you can chose to ignore this fact or you can say yes I agree that was part of the problem. I will admit Clinton became a big turn off to a lot of people who voted for Obama. They decided to sit this one out, whilst Trump was energizing the uneducated white vote. This election the uneducated white vote won. We will see where this takes us.
 

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
Great discussion but one big issue you are not talking about is Foreign policy.

Allot of talk in our media and chat shows (the intelligent ones) on Trumps rebirth of the two theater war idea's, expanding the navy/troops etc to make more of a presence in China's historical back yard. This is not a good idea but one Russia would be happy with. If China and America go to war (and lets face it wars dont seem to end these days....) Russia would be the one left standing the strongest. Whats a few decades or more of war to countries with such long history? 300 years to them is a small time frame.

Telling Japan and other countries that they should have nuclear weapons is also war like and backward thinking.

Talk of tearing up trade agreements and huge tariffs? Not good at all for world financial stability.

Saying stupid comments and treating Putin as a "nice strong leader"..he isnt..he is a thug who has rorted the legal and political system to stay in power and for his own financial gain. He is just a big bully with a big stick.

Its all kinda scary.....We even have one of the major political parties and an ex tresurer saying we should rethink our ties with the US and maybe edge closer to China. China is closer and is our main trading partner....strange times.
 
Last edited:

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
I''m not suggesting that the ACA was a complete dog. There was definitely some good to come out of it. I just don't understand why Obama didnt at least attempt to have a conversation about a single payer system. If he were to just break down the numbers and talk about it in plain English, I believe the majority of the country would get behind it. Same hospitals, same doctors, same care. The only thing that changes is the removal of an uneccesary middle man that exists solely to skim profit. We could achieve the same, or better results for a fraction of the cost.

That was a central theme in Bernie's platform. He was willing to take on the insurance corporations. It makes me wonder if Obama/Hillary would be willing to do the same? Biting the hand that feeds them.
I supported Bernie and supported his health care initiative. Whether you believe Bernie was cheated or Bernie lost the primary or something in between, fact is, Bernie later on supported Hillary for prez. He did so for pragmatic reasons.

Obama/Hillary would not take on the insurance lobby. For pragmatic reasons. If you recall, Clinton's early debacle in his attempt to enact universal healthcare in 1993 pretty much stalled out when the public didn't support it. It helped bring in the Gingrich's GOP congress and threatened the Clinton run for re-election in 1996. What makes you think things would be different for public support for universal coverage 20 years later?

Result was nothing done between 1993 and 2010 until the ACA, a pragmatic weird hybrid that satisfied nobody it seems but did good for many millions of people. I saw the ACA as a bridge to universal healthcare which is why I'm not surprised at conservative's antipathy to it. What I don't understand is antipathy from the left. Or this idea as you say, by just holding out for universal healthcare coverage the american people will have a change of heart. That didn't work 1993, what was different in 2009, when this country was in a terrible recession and the last thing people wanted to consider was a new expansion in government programs.

Maybe Trump will break the system so badly that universal coverage will be the only reasonable fix. To people with the means to ride out a disaster like that, maybe this is acceptable.
 

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
When you compare actually registered voters to voter who actually voted, we have the lowest turnout in 20 years.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/
Approximately 58.1 percent of eligible voters cast ballots in last week’s presidential election, according to the latest estimates from Michael McDonald, associate professor at the University of Florida, who gathers data at the U.S. Elections Project. That’s down only slightly from 2012, when turnout was 58.6 percent, and well above 2000’s rate of 54.2 percent. Turnout may end up being higher than in any presidential election year between 1972 and 2000.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-voter-turnout-wasnt-way-down-from-2012/
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Approximately 58.1 percent of eligible voters cast ballots in last week’s presidential election, according to the latest estimates from Michael McDonald, associate professor at the University of Florida, who gathers data at the U.S. Elections Project. That’s down only slightly from 2012, when turnout was 58.6 percent, and well above 2000’s rate of 54.2 percent. Turnout may end up being higher than in any presidential election year between 1972 and 2000.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-voter-turnout-wasnt-way-down-from-2012/
why do you care about this?
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
Approximately 58.1 percent of eligible voters cast ballots in last week’s presidential election, according to the latest estimates from Michael McDonald, associate professor at the University of Florida, who gathers data at the U.S. Elections Project. That’s down only slightly from 2012, when turnout was 58.6 percent, and well above 2000’s rate of 54.2 percent. Turnout may end up being higher than in any presidential election year between 1972 and 2000.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-voter-turnout-wasnt-way-down-from-2012/
Let us just wait until the final tally
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Bernie was stumping for a single payer system. Medicare for all...and he would have taken the White House with that as part of his platform.
have you even glanced at some of the opposition research on bernard sandlers?

he was deader than fried chicken from before the starting line. hence why trump wanted to run against him.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
have you even glanced at some of the opposition research on bernard sandlers?

he was deader than fried chicken from before the starting line. hence why trump wanted to run against him.
This from the guy who told us Shillary would be good for the middle class.

Care to compromise on Ms Warren?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
This from the guy who told us Shillary would be good for the middle class.

Care to compromise on Ms Warren?
warren can stay in the senate, that's where she is most needed. we don't need old faces on our party anymore.

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/main/2016/5/19/this-ends-now-the-bernie-sanders-opposition-research-the-media-refuses-to-release

what would you have said when the news broke that bernie's wife committed bank fraud to scam the catholic church out of $2 million? or how about the rally that bernie attended where they were chanting "death to the yankees"?

vetting is important. bernie was never vetted.
 
Top