Study: Hillary Clinton’s TV ads were almost entirely policy-free

[UncleBuck]

I disagree

He has no point at all

The Democratic establishment tries to pull the same thing all the time. Throw progressives a bone and hope they stick. The most recent example is appointing Keith Ellison to "Deputy chair" of the DNC.. A position with zero actual power. Earlier during the primary, the Clinton campaign fought tooth and nail against every single progressive proposition to shift the Democratic platform to the left the Sanders campaign proposed, then, as soon as it was decided, they adopted the superficial measures that don't actually make a difference and expected Sanders supporters to get on board with "the most progressive platform in history!"... They took credit for the progressive positions that were accepted on the party platform because of Sanders' success when they initially opposed them during the primary.

It's very clearly a charade to garner progressive votes.

They have a serious awakening coming.

if you think your whiny pussy protestations compare at all to what we're seeing under trump, you're as delusional and fucked as i expect.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Why should they wake up if they're raking in the cash?

Well, they should because it's the moral thing to do. But I understand what you're asking, "Why would they wake up if they're raking in the cash?".. Well, they wouldn't.. Hence the current situation.. The problem for them is that progressives aren't buying it anymore. Simply being better than the worst isn't good enough. You have to offer us something more. If you don't, don't blame us for not voting for you, blame yourselves for not offering your constituents what they want. What they elect you to fight for.

Whether they accept this fact for the future or not, I guess we'll see, I'm almost positive they won't. We are in for the ride. Republicans will continue to win elections because there is no viable opposition. Establishment Democrats currently control the direction of the party, so we will soon have a very clear picture of the direction they want to take us in. Progressives already see that picture loud and clear by the establishment's decision to elect Tom Perez as DNC Chair and abolish Obama's ban on lobbyist contributions. They've decided to double down, dig in, and do exactly what Hillary Clinton did to lose to Donald Trump, just twice as hard!.. The DNC actually appointed the losing members of the Clinton campaign to head the team that is responsible for defeating Trump's reelection bid in 2020, no, I wish I was kidding about that.. They hired the people that already lost to Trump... to beat Trump... Brilliant or brilliant?

This party is in the grave

 

[ttystikk]

if you think your whiny pussy protestations compare at all to what we're seeing under trump, you're as delusional and fucked as i expect.

We'll see if he's wrong.

 

[Padawanbater2]

We'll see if he's wrong.

That's the beauty of being an honest person making a political prediction.. You gain the ability to learn something. Whether I'm right or wrong, I learn something. Learning something is more important to me than being right in front of strangers.

I'll happily admit if I'm wrong, if in 2018 or 2020 the Democrats somehow, miraculously take control. I'll GLADLY admit I was wrong about the current Democratic leadership and their tactics. Will Buck admit he's wrong when Dem's lose in 2018 and 2020 pushing the same tired old message of diversity, "break down the barriers", "stronger together!", etc.. nonsense?

Of course not. Mark it down, quote it. Buck will be wrong about these elections in 2018 and 2020 specifically because he does not understand how the Democratic political establishment works.

3/11/17 right now, Trump hands Democrats ammo on a platter on a daily basis, they can't respond accordingly because they're bought and paid for by the same corporate interests. This is why they lose elections.

 

[UncleBuck]

That's the beauty of being an honest person making a political prediction.. You gain the ability to learn something. Whether I'm right or wrong, I learn something. Learning something is more important to me than being right in front of strangers.

I'll happily admit if I'm wrong, if in 2018 or 2020 the Democrats somehow, miraculously take control. I'll GLADLY admit I was wrong about the current Democratic leadership and their tactics. Will Buck admit he's wrong when Dem's lose in 2018 and 2020 pushing the same tired old message of diversity, "break down the barriers", "stronger together!", etc.. nonsense?

Of course not. Mark it down, quote it. Buck will be wrong about these elections in 2018 and 2020 specifically because he does not understand how the Democratic political establishment works.

3/11/17 right now, Trump hands Democrats ammo on a platter on a daily basis, they can't respond accordingly because they're bought and paid for by the same corporate interests. This is why they lose elections.

i've repeatedly predicted bad losses in 2018.

do you even listen, or just make whiny pussy rants for the fuck of it?

 

[ttystikk]

I'm done caring which side wins or loses because it never seems to make things better for the rest of us.

I want reform and I'm not alone.

 

[Padawanbater2]

i've repeatedly predicted bad losses in 2018.

do you even listen, or just make whiny pussy rants for the fuck of it?

But it won't be because of policy, it'll be because more Dems are up for reelection..

We can examine that when they inevitably lose, but I'm not going to waste my time on any of them now. You just tacitly admitted establishment politicians tend to lose during elections because their party continuously fails to represent their own constituents. If the party would vote according to their constituents needs/wants, they would continue to win. There is a conflict of interest there that you continue to avoid addressing which prevents actual progressives like me, tty and schuy from voting for establishment candidates.

They wouldn't lose if their constituents actually believed them. They would be enthusiastic about voting for them, about supporting them. So why aren't they?..

Because they offer no hope, no change..

The obliviousness to this outcome is a real insight into the mindset of those who truly believed they had it in the bag.. Tipping champagne glasses before the actual election.. and yet no change is considered..

Absolutely astounding. Impressive ignorance.

 

[ttystikk]

But it won't be because of policy, it'll be because more Dems are up for reelection..

We can examine that when they inevitably lose, but I'm not going to waste my time on any of them now. You just tacitly admitted establishment politicians tend to lose during elections because their party continuously fails to represent their own constituents. If the party would vote according to their constituents needs/wants, they would continue to win. There is a conflict of interest there that you continue to avoid addressing which prevents actual progressives like me, tty and schuy from voting for establishment candidates.

They wouldn't lose if their constituents actually believed them. They would be enthusiastic about voting for them, about supporting them. So why aren't they?..

Because they offer no hope, no change..

The obliviousness to this outcome is a real insight into the mindset of those who truly believed they had it in the bag.. Tipping champagne glasses before the actual election.. and yet no change is considered..

Absolutely astounding. Impressive ignorance.

They pop champagne before the results come in because win or lose, their paychecks are safe.

 

[ttystikk]

Well, they should because it's the moral thing to do. But I understand what you're asking, "Why would they wake up if they're raking in the cash?".. Well, they wouldn't.. Hence the current situation.. The problem for them is that progressives aren't buying it anymore. Simply being better than the worst isn't good enough. You have to offer us something more. If you don't, don't blame us for not voting for you, blame yourselves for not offering your constituents what they want. What they elect you to fight for.

Whether they accept this fact for the future or not, I guess we'll see, I'm almost positive they won't. We are in for the ride. Republicans will continue to win elections because there is no viable opposition. Establishment Democrats currently control the direction of the party, so we will soon have a very clear picture of the direction they want to take us in. Progressives already see that picture loud and clear by the establishment's decision to elect Tom Perez as DNC Chair and abolish Obama's ban on lobbyist contributions. They've decided to double down, dig in, and do exactly what Hillary Clinton did to lose to Donald Trump, just twice as hard!.. The DNC actually appointed the losing members of the Clinton campaign to head the team that is responsible for defeating Trump's reelection bid in 2020, no, I wish I was kidding about that.. They hired the people that already lost to Trump... to beat Trump... Brilliant or brilliant?

This party is in the grave

The entire system is in the grave, all we have left is a sham for public consumption. The comments are particularly thought provoking;
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/03/gaius-publius-explosive-wikileaks-release-exposes-massive-aggressive-cia-cyber-spying-hacking-capability.html

 

[SneekyNinja]

The entire system is in the grave, all we have left is a sham for public consumption. The comments are particularly thought provoking;
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/03/gaius-publius-explosive-wikileaks-release-exposes-massive-aggressive-cia-cyber-spying-hacking-capability.html

You know they said that in the 60's, right?

They're literally dying of old age waiting.

 

[schuylaar]

See that's what I don't get either. How the fuck is Hillary's bribery worse than Trump's. We all knew what kind of shit bag Trump was for fucking 40 years. I mean nobody liked him because he was a shit bag. Fucking millions of people tuned in to watch his retarded ass on TV simply because he was a drama queen but somehow that is more legit than Hillary?

Like Trump isn't lining his pockets with bribe money.
Like Trump has American's best interest at heart.

I totally understand the frustration people felt when Bernie was dismissed even though he clearly had a better chance at beating Trump but I don't see how Hillary was a more corrupt candidate than Trump. Shit baffles me.

I even had a facebook "friend" post about how is was so relieved that Obama was finally out of office and that he didn't really agree with all Trump's policies but at least Trump loves America more? And this was out of an intelligent person's mouth. I asked him 'how exactly does the equate?" Obama spent 6 years educating himself on Constitutional law and Trump blew coke off hooker's asses will dodging both the draft and taxes, but yeah Trump's a patriot... The dude's answer was, "Where is the proof that Obama even went to college?" Needless to say I ended the conversation there. lol

That's what I don't get about the rightie..why should you have to prove Obama went to college. The onus is on him to prove he didn't.

 

[ttystikk]

Here's an intriguing argument for why a progressive party assault on the current Establishment Democratic Party has a better chance of winning than many people think;

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/03/campaign-calls-bernie-sanders-lead-new-party.html

Basically, the idea is that if the party isn't representing the majority of its base, it's vulnerable to being cannibalized by a new one that will.

 

[ttystikk]

You know they said that in the 60's, right?

They're literally dying of old age waiting.

You didn't read the article, did you?

 

[SneekyNinja]

You didn't read the article, did you?

A single article from a single source means nothing, it really doesn't.

Let me know when they're a registered party otherwise it's a pipe dream.

 

[schuylaar]

Fucker only has one name...Bernie
Problem with these Bernie Babies. Still talking Bernie while Trump is fucking up the country

Some people wish to have more than one CHOICE in a primary.

It SEEMS like the democratic thing to do.

Soooooooooooooooo, why didn't the DEMOCRATIC party?

 

[SneekyNinja]

Some people wish to have more than one CHOICE in a primary.

It SEEMS like the democratic thing to do.

Soooooooooooooooo, why didn't the DEMOCRATIC party?

You once again fail to accept that it was the voters who rejected Bernie.

For clarity:
The VOTERS rejected BERNIE.

 

[schuylaar]

Mitch the bitch is going to ride the wave for as long as possible and has said same.

As long as he (Trump) doesn't push the button they're going to effect change this way..

Nancy's methodology is going to back fire- because Mitch DOESN'T care.

Rome is burning.

 

[schuylaar]

You once again fail to accept that it was the voters who rejected Bernie.

For clarity:
The VOTERS rejected BERNIE.

For clarity:
She CHEATED.

And what can be said of those who willingly support a CHEAT? And still do?.This is all that cunts fault along with YOU for supporting the CHEAT! Then being Sad-Mad when they didn't 'fall in line'..get used to it..that argument has sunseted. Long ago.

Because Bucky's wife's portfolio! And you know what?..it's not even fucking his. If they divorced the very same system he embraces will see him in the street. He's not really part of the Tribe. Sad!

See Pada's quote below.

 

[SneekyNinja]

For clarity:
She CHEATED.

And what can be said of those who willingly support a CHEAT? And still do..This is all that cunts fault along with you for supporting the CHEAT! Then being Sad-Mad when they didn't 'fall in line'..get used to it..that argument has sunseted. Long ago.

You're fake news.

 

[Justin-case]

You're fake news.

Did not register to vote for Bernie, then claims Hillary cheated, lmao. #epicfail