How to validate a stereotype, presented by Buzzfeed

UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
What's astonishing is that people still don't seem to understand why she was so unpopular. She's in bed with corporate America! Period. I didn't have some long list of grievances with her. If I felt that she would actually represent the interests of her voters, and not her donors, she would have gotten my vote.

This isn't some new revelation. People have been fed up with this for a while. Obama won because he promised change. Bernie was popular for the same reason. Hillary was more of the same. I refuse to vote for someone that is beholden to big business.
Click to expand...
"i am in michigan and could have easily voted for clinton but didn't but don't blame me! it's your fault because you should have voted for bernie even though you actually did and he didn't win anyway"

get the fuck out of our party you whiny puss.
 
Shroominnm

Shroominnm

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
I'm not the one whining, buckles.

What's with all of the name calling btw? You don't talk to people like that in person, so why do it here? You do realize that calling me a pussy from the safety of your keyboard kinda makes you look like the pussy, right?

That irony thing again.
Click to expand...
LOL this makes me laugh, bucky's like the little, scrawny kid (except he's fat and old as dirt) that will never say a bad word to anyone in public (for fear of having his vagina beat in) but goes home and gets on the internet and calls every one every bad name in the book, which his moms would never let him say out loud.
I believe he has very real mommy issues, and projects his insecurities on other people to make him feel better about his pathetic little lonely life..

Just my 2 cents

stay smokin'
 
Justin-case

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
Shroominnm said:
LOL this makes me laugh, bucky's like the little, scrawny kid (except he's fat and old as dirt) that will never say a bad word to anyone in public (for fear of having his vagina beat in) but goes home and gets on the internet and calls every one every bad name in the book, which his moms would never let him say out loud.
I believe he has very real mommy issues, and projects his insecurities on other people to make him feel better about his pathetic little lonely life..

Just my 2 cents

stay smokin'
Click to expand...

Stay spun
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Shroominnm said:
LOL this makes me laugh, bucky's like the little, scrawny kid (except he's fat and old as dirt) that will never say a bad word to anyone in public (for fear of having his vagina beat in) but goes home and gets on the internet and calls every one every bad name in the book, which his moms would never let him say out loud.
I believe he has very real mommy issues, and projects his insecurities on other people to make him feel better about his pathetic little lonely life..

Just my 2 cents

stay smokin'
Click to expand...
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
People vote for who they feel will best represent them. Who are you, or anyone else to be telling people how they should vote?

She was as cozy with big business as any candidate in recent memory. I won't support that. You're not paying attention if you can't see that the revolving door between DC and corporate America is at the very center of everything that is wrong with this country. Continue running candidates like this at your own peril...
Click to expand...
Aww man, "She was as cozy with big business as any candidate in recent memory."

How does the above square with what we've seen Trump do with his cabinet recently? Clinton was definitely to the right of center when it came to economic issues and military issues for that matter. On social issues more to the center. In Eisenhower's day she could have been a New York Republican. Just saying, Clinton wasn't my first choice but she certainly was my last choice. Compared to Trump was Clinton really "as cozy with big business as any candidate" or "at the very center of everything that is wrong with this country"?

Just looking at Trump's cabinet and his Treasury Secretary's advocacy of privatizing Fannie and Freddie, I'd say Benedict Donald is mighty cozy with the big banks. A move, by the way, that has already poured billions into a hedge fund in which Trump is a partner. Kozy Kleptocracy for the 1% and he's a member of the club. .Isn't' that at the center of all that is wrong with this country?
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
You guys realize there will come a day when this apparent dilemma is put to rest, though, right?

Who should run the leadership of the Democratic party? The establishment wing or the progressive wing

Whoever wins between the most likely candidates, Ellison and Perez, will determine where that leadership takes us. Imo, if Perez is elected, he will favor more establishment type Democratic candidates like Hillary Clinton, if Ellison is elected, he will favor a more fair and balanced Democratic primary and actually allow one to take place for 2020, meaning a more progressive candidate is likely to get elected.

Perez wins, the Democratic party will continue to lose and they'll lose the progressive wing of the party for elections to come. Good luck winning without African Americans now? Good luck winning without actual progressives later!

What Republicans choose to do from here with complete control of the government is because Clinton supporters were too naive to understand how American politics actually works.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
By holding out for everything you and others lost it all.
Click to expand...
We didn't "hold out for everything", we simply couldn't invest in a deplorable candidate. Sanders didn't offer me "everything", either

You can't intellectually honestly attribute Clinton's loss to anything other than Clinton's message, or lack thereof... "I'm with her!", "Stronger Together!"...?? She and the Democratic party abandoned the middle-class. That's why she lost. Sanders and Trump both had populist messages, one was a con artist bullshiting people, the other was honest.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
You guys realize there will come a day when this apparent dilemma is put to rest, though, right?

Who should run the leadership of the Democratic party? The establishment wing or the progressive wing

Whoever wins between the most likely candidates, Ellison and Perez, will determine where that leadership takes us. Imo, if Perez is elected, he will favor more establishment type Democratic candidates like Hillary Clinton, if Ellison is elected, he will favor a more fair and balanced Democratic primary and actually allow one to take place for 2020, meaning a more progressive candidate is likely to get elected.

Perez wins, the Democratic party will continue to lose and they'll lose the progressive wing of the party for elections to come. Good luck winning without African Americans now? Good luck winning without actual progressives later!

What Republicans choose to do from here with complete control of the government is because Clinton supporters were too naive to understand how American politics actually works.
Click to expand...
After reading this article, I'd have to agree with you about Perez.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/14/politics/tom-perez-democratic-national-committee/

Perez, an outspoken surrogate for Clinton who has worked for the Obama administration for more than seven years and was on Clinton's vice presidential short list, is the first serious challenger to square off with Ellison.

People close to Perez say he wants to help rebuild the shell-shocked party after last month's surprise loss to Donald Trump and thinks the best way for him to be helpful is at the helm of the DNC.

One key reason Perez has decided to run: The labor secretary appears to have the backing of the Obama White House.

President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden have not endorsed anyone in the DNC race, and Josh Earnest said Wednesday that he does not expect them to do so.

I guess this line was pretty much the kiss of death for Paddy:: "Perez, an outspoken surrogate for Clinton who has worked for the Obama administration for more than seven years"
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
You guys realize there will come a day when this apparent dilemma is put to rest, though, right?

Who should run the leadership of the Democratic party? The establishment wing or the progressive wing

Whoever wins between the most likely candidates, Ellison and Perez, will determine where that leadership takes us. Imo, if Perez is elected, he will favor more establishment type Democratic candidates like Hillary Clinton, if Ellison is elected, he will favor a more fair and balanced Democratic primary and actually allow one to take place for 2020, meaning a more progressive candidate is likely to get elected.

Perez wins, the Democratic party will continue to lose and they'll lose the progressive wing of the party for elections to come. Good luck winning without African Americans now? Good luck winning without actual progressives later!

What Republicans choose to do from here with complete control of the government is because Clinton supporters were too naive to understand how American politics actually works.
Click to expand...
weren't you boasting about ellison's endorsements from ESTABLISHMENT! senators harry reid and chuck schumer though?

LULZ
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
After reading this article, I'd have to agree with you about Perez.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/14/politics/tom-perez-democratic-national-committee/

Perez, an outspoken surrogate for Clinton who has worked for the Obama administration for more than seven years and was on Clinton's vice presidential short list, is the first serious challenger to square off with Ellison.

People close to Perez say he wants to help rebuild the shell-shocked party after last month's surprise loss to Donald Trump and thinks the best way for him to be helpful is at the helm of the DNC.

One key reason Perez has decided to run: The labor secretary appears to have the backing of the Obama White House.

President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden have not endorsed anyone in the DNC race, and Josh Earnest said Wednesday that he does not expect them to do so.

I guess this line was pretty much the kiss of death for Paddy:: "Perez, an outspoken surrogate for Clinton who has worked for the Obama administration for more than seven years"
Click to expand...
yeah, let's ignore obama's bilingual labor secretary who fought for unions, higher wages, and paid leave for the muslim who cozies up to anti-semites.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
We didn't "hold out for everything", we simply couldn't invest in a deplorable candidate. Sanders didn't offer me "everything", either

You can't intellectually honestly attribute Clinton's loss to anything other than Clinton's message, or lack thereof... "I'm with her!", "Stronger Together!"...?? She and the Democratic party abandoned the middle-class. That's why she lost. Sanders and Trump both had populist messages, one was a con artist bullshiting people, the other was honest.
Click to expand...
It's true that most of Sander's supporters didn't hold out for everything or probably better put; hold out for Sanders or nothing.. Most voted for Clinton. There were a few who held out for Sanders in the key states. Maybe enough to swing the election but there are plenty of other places where those votes could have come from and didn't. I'm not wailing about betrayal. It was their choice. They shouldn't expect more pragmatic people to agree with it. Shoving their reasons into the faces of the majority who voted for Clinton won't make Bernie's abstainers popular at the upcoming New Year's celebrations either. Also not a good strategy for getting laid if you are single. Just saying.

Did you know that Trump's pick for Treasury Secretary is floating the idea of privatizing Fannie and Freddy? US can't afford to let let them fail but he's endorsing complete private control. We've seen this show before. Meanwhile, an equity firm in which Trump holds an interest has gone up billions of dollars on the news. In comparison to Trump's Kleptocracy, I'm going to miss the Obama status quo.

The only thing you said that made sense was Clinton abandoned the middle class. It's not entirely true but true enough. The Democratic Party including Clinton did not work on issues that appealed to a majority in middle America. By middle America, I mean states that are prosperous but didn't keep up economically with the North Eastern and Western new age economy-states Clinton garnered plenty of middle class votes and working class votes in the most prosperous and populous states and counties. She lost in key middle American states, this is true.

Her slogans were a symptom of the disconnect. I never could figure out what they thought was appealing to the "stronger together" slogan either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top