"White working class voters are good people, they're not racist, not sexist" -Joe Biden

st0wandgrow

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
not a feeling when it can be backed by verifiable facts.

20% of republicans want to literally ban homosexuals from living in the country.

25% want to ban muslims from living in the country.

29% want to shut down all mosques.

11% outright believe that whites are the "superior race".
Click to expand...
Yep, that's called the Republican base. They wouldn't vote for a dem candidate period. What was at play were counties that Obama won, some by large margins, and Hillary lost tipping the result to Trump. You have suggested this is due to racism, and have explained it by saying that those racist people were willing to vote for a black man, but not Hillary because she denounced racism.

That doesn't seem logical
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
Yep, that's called the Republican base. They wouldn't vote for a dem candidate period. What was at play was counties that Obama won, some by large margins, and Hillary lost tipping the result to Trump. You have suggested this is due to racism, and have explained it by saying that those racist people were willing to vote for a black man, but not Hillary because she denounced racism.

That doesn't seem logical
Click to expand...
I agree. Mrs Clinton was simply the less desirable candidate to them and crying racism is just blinding/distracting people from the truth.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Because the DNC set registration time limits in key states/counties, closed voting locations in key states/counties, closed key primaries to exclude independents in places that were likely to go to Sanders, etc. Many small things like that that added up to the result of the election, all orchestrated by biased members of the DNC who wanted Clinton to win
Click to expand...
I can't say I'm very concerned about people who can't follow a rule that was in effect a long time. I'm not going to defend ridiculous registration deadlines. Just saying that the deadline was set a long time before the election. Oregon has a deadline that is two weeks before the election and I'm happy that it increases the voter turnout FWIW.

The electoral SNAFUs are completely unnecessary and I don't understand why states don't switch to mail-in ballots. It works great in Oregon. So, maybe you are correct about what -- 200,000 voters who didn't cast a ballot due to election site corruption. Please, don't say that all of those would have been Sanders voters. So maybe 125,000 voters? Isn't that more than an order of magnitude from the 2M votes that @st0wandgrow is talking about?

This is all ignoring the fact that Clinton's nomination was based upon delegate counts, not popular vote. Clinton's victories in the south all but swamp the effect of voters in NY who have a righteous gripe about election night fraud. I'm in agreement with you on this. The south should not have had such a large effect on the nomination.
 
tampee

tampee

Well-Known Member
For the most part racism is dead honestly I know a white mechanic who always has a gun on his hip you would swear he's racist until you see his Wu-Tang Clan tattoo he's more of a Libertarian though never really met too many proud Democrats or Republicans.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
How do we determine what an establishment politician is and isn't?



This concerns me greatly; it doesn't work to combat fascism with more of it.
Click to expand...
Establishment politicians generally fund their campaigns by corporate campaign contributions, so if you see a guy taking $50K from the 'oil and gas' industry or $100K from Goldman Sachs, it's a pretty safe bet that person is going to be working for those interests in government. The only way forward is to get the influencing power of corporate money out of our political process
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
The above paragraph justifies why I spent so much time a few days ago asking about the validity of your claim that the primary election was stolen from Bernie by DNC collusion. We agreed that there is no way to prove this assertion and you simply believe it. You base your opinion on something that is actually very difficult to achieve -- corruptly turning 4 million votes from one candidate to another without leaving any proof that it happened. A different "Bernie was robbed" believer claims it was because media suppression but again, the facts are that Bernie's run for president was as well covered as any other. A person who so easily chooses to center their beliefs on unprovable and unlikely events is an unreliable source for an opinion.
Click to expand...
Sanders wasn't covered by Media as often as Clinton: FACT

It was not 'as well covered as any', by far.

Where do you get that from?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
The only way forward is to get the influencing power of corporate money out of our political process
Click to expand...
well, your constant badmouthing of hillary and non-stop recitation of trump rhetoric assured the death of that dream for another 4 years at least, so we are gonna have to move forward in a different way.

how about someone who has done more than name a post office (LOL @ do-nothing bernard sandlers)?

tom perez for DNC chair is the way to go. just got endorsed by 4 very prominent governors.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/22/politics/tom-perez-dnc-chair-four-governors/index.html

In a statement, Hickenlooper said the two worked together to reform Denver's police department when Perez worked at the Justice Department.

"I can tell you firsthand that Tom's work has made an actual difference in the lives of countless Americans. I've watched him lead large, complex organizations to success, and I know he will do the same at the DNC," Hickenlooper said, calling Perez "an organizer, a progressive, and someone who delivers results."
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Senators Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, and incoming Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer have publicly supported Representative Keith Ellison of Minnesota, the co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. MoveOn.org, led by Ilya Sheyman, has also expressed support for Ellison.
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I can't say I'm very concerned about people who can't follow a rule that was in effect a long time. I'm not going to defend ridiculous registration deadlines. Just saying that the deadline was set a long time before the election. Oregon has a deadline that is two weeks before the election and I'm happy that it increases the voter turnout FWIW.

The electoral SNAFUs are completely unnecessary and I don't understand why states don't switch to mail-in ballots. It works great in Oregon. So, maybe you are correct about what -- 200,000 voters who didn't cast a ballot due to election site corruption. Please, don't say that all of those would have been Sanders voters. So maybe 125,000 voters? Isn't that more than an order of magnitude from the 2M votes that @st0wandgrow is talking about?

This is all ignoring the fact that Clinton's nomination was based upon delegate counts, not popular vote. Clinton's victories in the south all but swamp the effect of voters in NY who have a righteous gripe about election night fraud. I'm in agreement with you on this. The south should not have had such a large effect on the nomination.
Click to expand...
You should have to forfeit if you get caught cheating.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Hillary Clinton says she opposes the TPP, is she wrong, too?
Click to expand...
absolutely she was. should have taken a stand on it and explained the benefits of it.

i don't hold my candidates to some fucked up purity test though. i am pragmatic like that.

if bernard looked like he was gonna be good to run in 2020, i'd vote for his 88 year old carcass.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
absolutely she was. should have taken a stand on it and explained the benefits of it.

i don't hold my candidates to some fucked up purity test though. i am pragmatic like that.

if bernard looked like he was gonna be good to run in 2020, i'd vote for his 88 year old carcass.
Click to expand...
Your kind of pragmatism just lost the left the election

I don't think it's pragmatism you have, it's standards you lack
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top