LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

To Move Forward, Democrats Must Oust Obama

Rightguide

Rightguide

Prof Triggernometry
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Posts
66,985

THE MAGIC IS GONE: Is the Era of Obama Finally Over?​

by Mike LaChance Dec. 13, 2024 10:00 pm

Yes, they whine and cry and emote, like wounded adolescent narcissists, because that’s all they can do. What of cold-eyed analysis that might compel them to make difficult choices and save what remains of their party? No. They’re afraid. That is beyond them now. They’re locked in their doom loop.

In granting Trump the White House through an electoral college landslide and popular vote, American voters also made it clear that they were fed up with leftist ideology…

To win in the future, the Democrats must tear down Obama just as Trump tore down the Bushes. A new Democrat faith must emerge to launch a frontal assault on Obama’s keep in Martha’s Vineyard, sacking it and salting the earth. It must reject the cynical use of race to generate ugly tribalism…

Obama honors himself at every opportunity. But he is America’s one-eyed jack. And we’ve seen the other side of his face.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/12/magic-is-gone-is-era-obama-finally/
 
O
D
S

Gateway pundit telling Democrats how to move forward is fun
 
To move forward, gateway pundit must oust 47.

Sorry, my insightful article is on the works on the topic ...will provide an update later
 
Rightguide said:
It's also the truth. he got you into the Biden mess you suffer from today.
Click to expand...
Your opinion of the party is literally garbage. Pretending to be sincere about its direction is the funniest horseshit I've seen in this forum.

Almost as funny as GP pretending to be sincere
 
ll74 said:
Your opinion of the party is literally garbage. Pretending to be sincere about its direction is the funniest horseshit I've seen in this forum.

Almost as funny as GP pretending to be sincere
Click to expand...
I'm not playing to be sincere at all. The get what they have sown. The point is numb nuts, Obama is the tenet farmer sowing the dragon's teeth that have brought the party down...and it is down.
 
Rightguide said:
I'm not playing to be sincere at all.
Click to expand...
Thabks for confirming

Rightguide said:
The get what they have sown. The point is numb nuts, Obama is the tenet farmer sowing the dragon's teeth that have brought the party down...and it is down.
Click to expand...
The point is that your hatred is all that matters to you. Posting anything suggesting a sincere viewpoint from anyone in your news feed is garbage.
 
Rightguide said:
I'm not playing to be sincere at all. The get what they have sown. The point is numb nuts, Obama is the tenet farmer sowing the dragon's teeth that have brought the party down...and it is down.
Click to expand...
Nobody who lived through Obama's administration regrets it. If allowed to run, he would have won a third term easily. You know this.
 
They really should get serious and oust the Progs. and there's no better guy to do that than Joe Manchin.
 
Rebel5soul said:
They really should get serious and oust the Progs. and there's no better guy to do that than Joe Manchin.
Click to expand...
What does this even mean?

Did you see the election results this year?

The party has already moved. Nobody in the party gives a fuck about what you want
 
Obama was merely a symbol for the Party Aristocracy (I would say elites, but they have gone far past that). They have a problem in that they are so terrible undemocratic.

The Democratic Party will never behave in a Democratic fashion as long as it has the superdelegate system to protect itself from the vagaries of the mob. Is there perhaps a better way for A party to run a primary? I’m just spitballing here because the current system just doesn’t seem fair or particularly democratic (but I can’t, won’t, try to tell them how to run their party). I, king of the world with a wizard’s wand and beck and call, would begin with the usual process, have candidates announce, debate, but make it a good, honest [series of] debates: a super big wish would be to prevent polling as election influencing, but I digress. Then, and this is super off the wall, because I have been opposed to this idea in general election and open primary voting as it skews to one party or the other and may shut out the binary choice, the two sides of the coin allowing you to throw those rascals out, but within one party, it works. Then, they can cull the top two, three or four (any more and half are not always left satisfied with the results) and have a straight-up national vote. This sure would give all of the people at the local level a little bit more say instead of having the party elites tell, or select for, them who the candidates may vote for will be.
 
BAstoicguy said:
Obama was merely a symbol for the Party Aristocracy (I would say elites, but they have gone far past that). They have a problem in that they are so terrible undemocratic.

The Democratic Party will never behave in a Democratic fashion as long as it has the superdelegate system to protect itself from the vagaries of the mob. Is there perhaps a better way for A party to run a primary? I’m just spitballing here because the current system just doesn’t seem fair or particularly democratic (but I can’t, won’t, try to tell them how to run their party). I, king of the world with a wizard’s wand and beck and call, would begin with the usual process, have candidates announce, debate, but make it a good, honest [series of] debates: a super big wish would be to prevent polling as election influencing, but I digress. Then, and this is super off the wall, because I have been opposed to this idea in general election and open primary voting as it skews to one party or the other and may shut out the binary choice, the two sides of the coin allowing you to throw those rascals out, but within one party, it works. Then, they can cull the top two, three or four (any more and half are not always left satisfied with the results) and have a straight-up national vote. This sure would give all of the people at the local level a little bit more say instead of having the party elites tell, or select for, them who the candidates may vote for will be.
Click to expand...
They reduced most of the power of super delegates in 2022. Mostly they are there symbolically
 
BAstoicguy said:
Obama was merely a symbol for the Party Aristocracy (I would say elites, but they have gone far past that). They have a problem in that they are so terrible undemocratic.

The Democratic Party will never behave in a Democratic fashion as long as it has the superdelegate system to protect itself from the vagaries of the mob. Is there perhaps a better way for A party to run a primary? I’m just spitballing here because the current system just doesn’t seem fair or particularly democratic (but I can’t, won’t, try to tell them how to run their party). I, king of the world with a wizard’s wand and beck and call, would begin with the usual process, have candidates announce, debate, but make it a good, honest [series of] debates: a super big wish would be to prevent polling as election influencing, but I digress. Then, and this is super off the wall, because I have been opposed to this idea in general election and open primary voting as it skews to one party or the other and may shut out the binary choice, the two sides of the coin allowing you to throw those rascals out, but within one party, it works. Then, they can cull the top two, three or four (any more and half are not always left satisfied with the results) and have a straight-up national vote. This sure would give all of the people at the local level a little bit more say instead of having the party elites tell, or select for, them who the candidates may vote for will be.
Click to expand...



Something like The Hunger Games would be a lot more fun to watch.
 
BAstoicguy said:
Obama was merely a symbol for the Party Aristocracy (I would say elites, but they have gone far past that). They have a problem in that they are so terrible undemocratic.

The Democratic Party will never behave in a Democratic fashion as long as it has the superdelegate system to protect itself from the vagaries of the mob. Is there perhaps a better way for A party to run a primary? I’m just spitballing here because the current system just doesn’t seem fair or particularly democratic (but I can’t, won’t, try to tell them how to run their party). I, king of the world with a wizard’s wand and beck and call, would begin with the usual process, have candidates announce, debate, but make it a good, honest [series of] debates: a super big wish would be to prevent polling as election influencing, but I digress. Then, and this is super off the wall, because I have been opposed to this idea in general election and open primary voting as it skews to one party or the other and may shut out the binary choice, the two sides of the coin allowing you to throw those rascals out, but within one party, it works. Then, they can cull the top two, three or four (any more and half are not always left satisfied with the results) and have a straight-up national vote. This sure would give all of the people at the local level a little bit more say instead of having the party elites tell, or select for, them who the candidates may vote for will be.
Click to expand...
And make 'rank choice' voting illegal. It's a gimmick to sucker the rubes.
 
Rebel5soul said:
And make 'rank choice' voting illegal. It's a gimmick to sucker the rubes.
Click to expand...
It's literally a popular vote where every choice is fleshed out.

It means no one is out until every vote is counted
 
It's a sucker's game, what 'magicians' and card sharks call 'forcing.' If you're stupid enough to play it you'll lose every time and actually believe you won.
 
Rebel5soul said:
It's a sucker's game, what 'magicians' and card sharks call 'forcing.' If you're stupid enough to play it you'll lose every time and actually believe you won.
Click to expand...
If your candidate gets the most votes. They won. And they would have the most votes of everyone in the state. No possibility of 36% win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rightguide
Democrats Are In Crisis
2
Replies
28
Views
517
Politruk
P
Rightguide
You're Never Going To Get Them back
4 5 6
Replies
126
Views
2K
ll74
ll74
Rightguide
Democrats Are Still At It
2 3
Replies
50
Views
915
73Seahawks
73Seahawks
Rightguide
Could Be The Biggest Story Of The Year?
Replies
3
Views
182
Bn2f
Bn2f
Rightguide
DOJ Said To Be Terrified
2 3
Replies
54
Views
1K
Rightguide
Rightguide
Back
Top