To be realistic - next election

[Desiremakesmeweak]

I have friends in the same general geographical area from which Hope Hicks had her main start and experience in publicity and marketing - and I am telling you directly what they are saying there and don't argue with me about it, ya idiot Democrats and Rhinos, because you simply don't know if you are going to argue with this:

what they are saying is this - the Democrats are LITERALLY hoping, that they have succeeded in dumbing down the mass of the voting public sufficiently and smothering their dreams, over the past few decades through their superior attitude and media scams, that the American public will 'culturally' accept being losers and voting for an 'elite' that 'knows better' and can run their dumbed down lives for them.

I kid you not. I kid you not at all. This is the talk from people in both camps.

Chances the American public actually thinks like this?

Absolutely NIL.

 

[jaF0]

The simple truth ---

No matter which candidate gets the most votes, the people lose.

 

[YDB95]

what they are saying is this - the Democrats are LITERALLY hoping, that they have succeeded in dumbing down the mass of the voting public sufficiently and smothering their dreams, over the past few decades through their superior attitude and media scams, that the American public will 'culturally' accept being losers and voting for an 'elite' that 'knows better' and can run their dumbed down lives for them.

Sounds to me like what the Republicans have long since succeeded in doing: thanks to decades of right wing economic policy, effectively no one but the rich has had a raise since 1973 or so, and at this point people are resigned to things never getting better, so they cling to their guns and their religion, just like President Obama said. (It was a dumb thing for him to say from a political point of view, but he wasn't wrong.) That's why, when Trump came along and made it OK to blame everything on the already-marginalised and to be openly bigoted again, they fell so madly in love with the man.

Our only hope next year is that those of us who haven't been fooled get out and vote (and are actually able to vote), but I'm cautiously optimistic that we will.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Chances the American public actually thinks like this?

Absolutely NIL.

American public here...totally buy it, thats why the left is a bunch of professional victims totally not responsible for their own behavior and life choices.

It's why they want the state to take over everything and take everyones shit to make things more equal.

Sounds to me like what the Republicans have long since succeeded in doing: thanks to decades of right wing economic policy, effectively no one but the rich has had a raise since 1973 or so, and at this point people are resigned to things never getting better

^^ prime example. "The rich are bad!! If we let people keep their shit they become evil!! Everyone else is a victim!!"

Things are significantly better for everyone that is willing to increase their market value over "unskilled labor" levels.

It's ok to be rich, you're free to do so, this is the USA, not the USSA comrades.

 

[magicalmoments]

#1 above.
Interesting opinion being expressed here.

Sounds like something Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm would write. Just needs "once upon a time" at the start and "they all lived happily ever after" at the end.

 

[JackLuis]

At this point we don't know who will be in the next election for either party!

Trumpski and Pence could be out of the picture for various reasons, most likely Impeached and in prison for treason and dumbfuckery!

Demo's are a crapshoot with four current possibilities, but it's a year away, so Bloomberg???

Mike Pompeo? If Mike flips on Trump and takes down the whole Moscow-Trump-Gulliani-Perry syndicate, he could cast himself as a undercover Patriotic Republican who stood up for the Republic at it most fragile hour and saved us from the nefarious Putin Plot!

He might even have Ms Lindsey to suck his patriotic dick!

 

[Desiremakesmeweak]

Jack... Jack... Your ship has already sunk.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Honestly, I want to see Katy Hill run for president.

At least it make the race interesting.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Trumpski and Pence could be out of the picture for various reasons, most likely Impeached and in prison for treason and dumbfuckery!

Of course, even if impeached and even if convicted the only thing that happens is, Trump would be removed from office. There is no jail.

And then Pence would pardon Trump and appoint him as VP, then resign, restoring Trump to the presidency at which point Trump would appoint Pence as his VP.

Have you actually looked up what the process is?

 

[phrodeau]

Of course, even if impeached and even if convicted the only thing that happens is, Trump would be removed from office. There is no jail.

And then Pence would pardon Trump and appoint him as VP, then resign, restoring Trump to the presidency at which point Trump would appoint Pence as his VP.

Have you actually looked up what the process is?

Jail time is possible if Trump gets convicted of state crimes. I’m pretty sure that New York has an extradition treaty with Florida.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Jail time is possible if Trump gets convicted of state crimes. I’m pretty sure that New York has an extradition treaty with Florida.

Of course, he didn't actually commit any crimes, this is purely political.

But let's just pretend he's impeached AND convicted. See paragraph #2. Isn't that how the swamp works? One politician covers for another?

Even in the wildest chance he's convicted, he'll never, ever see the inside of a jail cell.

 

[YDB95]

And then Pence would pardon Trump and appoint him as VP, then resign, restoring Trump to the presidency at which point Trump would appoint Pence as his VP.

Both would have to be approved by the Senate, and I doubt too many senators who are up for reelection in 2020 (most of whom are Republicans) would want to be on the record supporting a stunt like that.

And Katie Hill is too young to run for president. You have to be 35.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Both would have to be approved by the Senate, and I doubt too many senators who are up for reelection in 2020 (most of whom are Republicans) would want to be on the record supporting a stunt like that.

And Katie Hill is too young to run for president. You have to be 35.

That's all right. It'll be at least 12 years before we get saddled with another Dem anyway.

 

[YDB95]

That's all right. It'll be at least 12 years before we get saddled with another Dem anyway.

Given that the Republicans have only won the popular vote for president once in the past seven elections, I'll be rather surprised at that.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Given that the Republicans have only won the popular vote for president once in the past seven elections, I'll be rather surprised at that.

What is this? America's Got Talent? Maybe Trump and Lizzie should put on some tap shoes and dance for votes?

You may not know this but here we use the electoral college system.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Given that the Republicans have only won the popular vote for president once in the past seven elections, I'll be rather surprised at that.

And despite that the fact that they've won 3 it's amazing how it seems (D)'s cling to that ever so CRITICAL to the presidential election popular vote as if it means anything to the presidential election.

It's like none of them understand how a US, a union of states, elects a president.

How'd that popular vote work out in 2016??

 

[YDB95]

And despite that the fact that they've won 3

1992, 1996, 2008, 2012 together equal 3, do they?

And if I owed my party's recent successes entirely to an archaic system that was designed to preserve slavery in the first place, I don't think I'd brag about it.

All that aside, though, if you don't think the Dems are going to win another election for at least 12 years, are you really saying you expect the Republicans to squeak through in the electoral college every time while losing the popular vote? That doesn't strike me as terribly likely.

 

[gunthernehmen]

1992, 1996, 2008, 2012 together equal 3, do they?

And if I owed my party's recent successes entirely to an archaic system that was designed to preserve slavery in the first place, I don't think I'd brag about it.

All that aside, though, if you don't think the Dems are going to win another election for at least 12 years, are you really saying you expect the Republicans to squeak through in the electoral college every time while losing the popular vote? That doesn't strike me as terribly likely.

It might interest you to know that Vermont was the first country on the planet to abolish slavery and the US banned the slave trade in a race for moral superiority with Great Britain in 1808.

It did take nearly 60 years more to overcome Democratic opposition and ban slavery entirely, and was what, around the sixth country in the world to do so.

Yes, the USA has had it's issues on the topic, but not on the scale other parts of the world had (and still have in some places).

 

[YDB95]

It might interest you to know that Vermont was the first country on the planet to abolish slavery and the US banned the slave trade in a race for moral superiority with Great Britain in 1808.

It did take nearly 60 years more to overcome Democratic opposition and ban slavery entirely, and was what, around the sixth country in the world to do so.

Yes, the USA has had it's issues on the topic, but not on the scale other parts of the world had (and still have in some places).

None of that has anything to do with my point about the electoral college. Besides, although the slave trade was officially banned in 1807, it didn't stop then.

 

[Dumpington]

YDB95 writes: "Given that the Republicans have only won the popular vote for president once in the past seven elections..."

And yet the Republicans have somehow WON six of the last ten presidential elections!

Furthermore, Republican incumbents tend to do MUCH BETTER in their re-election efforts than do Democratic Party incumbent presidents.

George W. Bush, for example, added a whopping 11,577,160 popular votes to his 2004 total over what he won in 2000! Compare that with Barack Obama, who won 3,580,921 FEWER votes in 2012 than he'd won in 2008!

Donald Trump will very likely add over 10-million more popular votes over what he won in 2016 in next year's 2020 presidential elections, due to the fact that he's done incredible things for our nation's economy (while the Democrats increasingly preach higher taxes & socialism!) This is one of the reasons for the current impeachment hearings - the House Dems are attempting to blunt Trump's re-election win. But it's going to fail, as are their failing efforts to get the U.S. Senate interested in following Nancy Pelosi's lead on impeachment. They won't even get ONE Republican senator to vote their way (not even Mitt Romney!)

 

[BotanyBoy]

1992, 1996, 2008, 2012 together equal 3, do they?

Republican wins? Yea.

Despite not having that SUPER critical and very very important popular vote!!

And if I owed my party's recent successes entirely to an archaic system that was designed to preserve slavery in the first place, I don't think I'd brag about it.

An advanced system designed to ensure state representation.

BTW I've been a democrat up until just recently when they came totally unhinged from reality, decided to quit being liberals and embraced a number of vile ideologies.

All that aside, though, if you don't think the Dems are going to win another election for at least 12 years, are you really saying you expect the Republicans to squeak through in the electoral college every time while losing the popular vote? That doesn't strike me as terribly likely.

Depends on what the (D)'z do.

Do they keep ratcheting down on radical leftism and "fuck whitey!!" ???

Because if they do they won't win the WH back for a whole lot longer than 12 years.

And I think the harder they go for socialism, class warfare, anti-Americanism and racism against white folks it will cost them the popular vote.

If they manage to take a hint from somewhere other than the most batshit enraged at the white cis hetero scourge intersectional communist they can find on Twitter??

Come back to being liberals....working to raise people up, not tear others down, I think they will be wildly successful. But that would make them fascist NAZI WHITE NATIONALIST!!! LOL

 

[gunthernehmen]

None of that has anything to do with my point about the electoral college. Besides, although the slave trade was officially banned in 1807, it didn't stop then.

You introduced the topic, claiming the electoral college was designed to preserve slavery. Which is absurd, even for you.

Perhaps you do not understand that the slave trade is the buying and selling of human beings while the practice of slavery is the condition of owning them. What I stated was correct and the US was the 2nd or 3rd (depending on that morals race) country in the world to outlaw the slave TRADE. Vermont, then an independent republic, had banned the practice of slavery even earlier.

The United States has LED the world in eliminating slavery. As recently as 1981 it was LEGAL in some parts of the world.

 

[YDB95]

Republican wins? Yea.

Despite not having that SUPER critical and very very important popular vote!!

Sounded to me like the reference was to three Democratic wins. Which is incorrect, there were four.

An advanced system designed to ensure state representation.

Yes, and we all know what "states' rights" meant, both in 1789 and today.

BTW I've been a democrat up until just recently when they came totally unhinged from reality, decided to quit being liberals and embraced a number of vile ideologies.

Ah yes, the "I used to be a Democrat but" gang. You can always count on them to recite those seven words followed immediately by something that makes it clear the party is much better off without their "support".

Do they keep ratcheting down on radical leftism and "fuck whitey!!" ???

Okay, look. The anti-white issue is the one thing on which I've agreed with you in the past, but I'm starting to wonder just what exactly you're referring to there. Because I've heard some of what I would call "fuck whitey" from individuals on the left, but never from the party at large or from any of its presidential candidates. Feel free to explain.

And I think the harder they go for socialism, class warfare, anti-Americanism and racism against white folks it will cost them the popular vote.

It will certainly cost them the votes of people who believe they stand for any of that. But as I always say, people like you have been saying that about us for at least a century. The Dems have won a fair number of elections in that time.

You introduced the topic, claiming the electoral college was designed to preserve slavery. Which is absurd, even for you.

It's not absurd at all. It was part and parcel with the three-fifths compromise, which effectively gave slave states more representation than they had votes, and had the support of the same delegates for the same reason. (Another historical fact about the electoral college: no one at the time liked it much. It was a compromise. There was never anything sacred about it, then or now!)

Perhaps you do not understand that the slave trade is the buying and selling of human beings while the practice of slavery is the condition of owning them.

I majored in history, and I understand the difference just fine. I also know although the slave trade was technically illegal after 1807, it did not in fact stop.

The United States has LED the world in eliminating slavery. As recently as 1981 it was LEGAL in some parts of the world.

Would that we were half as good at grappling with its legacy.

 

[seeshelly]

Blatenly obvious that the think people are dumb

It is blatenly obvious that they do think they have dumbed people down. The shit they are pulling would never have worked 20 years ago. But they have mucked up the water a lot during the last 20 years and the Obama-nation years really made the water murky. He was able to fuel deep-state corruption to all new levels. At this point I think Trump is still likely to win. From a historical point of view he is extraordinary in his ability to fight like he has. Really, I can't think of any politician that would not have buckled. Look how the deep state easily controlled Jeff Session. But Trump is really just a rubble strip on their road to global power and mind control. They have the universities and the major "news" outlets. They have poorly educated invaders from shithole countries racing here for free stuff. So, in the long run the agony of global socialism looms on the horizon. The horror they have brought to every place they have touched will likely be a global cancer in a few short years. The horror that will being to the earth will make Hitler seem like Lincoln. In each of those historic examples college kids thought they had everything figured out and plunged ahead with foolish political theories that have always proven to be abused. The current generation is the dumbest and most egotistical in all history. So this is not a pretty picture. (They THINK they are smart because they have Smart Phones but they need to watch You Tube Videos to figure out how to use toilet paper.)

 

[gunthernehmen]

It's not absurd at all. It was part and parcel with the three-fifths compromise, which effectively gave slave states more representation than they had votes, and had the support of the same delegates for the same reason. (Another historical fact about the electoral college: no one at the time liked it much. It was a compromise. There was never anything sacred about it, then or now!)

I majored in history, and I understand the difference just fine. I also know although the slave trade was technically illegal after 1807, it did not in fact stop.

Would that we were half as good at grappling with its legacy.

Slavery was widely regarded as thing to be done away with. Sadly, not everyone at the time agreed and it took time to change things. Same thing happened when horseless carriages replaced horse drawn buggies.

You majored in history. Well THAT explains a lot ROFL

So, history lesson for the day: Not everybody OBEYS laws. If they did, one entire branch of our government could be eliminated.

Grappling by any chance mean reparations? Imagine that.

What more do you want? We restricted slavery, then eliminated it (at a cost of over 600,000 lives), then spent a hundred years more or less working through the five stages of grief. And we did it sooner and faster than any other country.