|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 01 2016 04:31 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 04:00 kwizach wrote:On March 01 2016 03:47 xDaunt wrote:
It should be very clear to everyone that Trump is a master media manipulator, and far more skilled at it than any other politician in the race. This is why I'm not buying this notion Trump is going to be exposed come the general election or that the democrats are going to get out some message on Trump that isn't already out there. He's already exposed, that's the point. He's already got the highest unfavorability ratings out of everyone, and they've remained steady for the last few months. And in the general election, he won't be facing candidates too afraid to expose him for the buffoon that he is, he'll be facing someone who's competent, experienced, a policy wonk, who's going to have a much more inspirational message than him, and who won't hesitate to shut him down during the debates (debates in which he will actually have to give longer answers than what he's used to, which will lead people to be a bit more aware of the fact that the same thirty words keep being repeated). You can bet that he knows this himself, and will try to prepare accordingly. He won't have enough time, though (and even less so if Rubio hangs around until the convention). The only issue on which Hillary's going to have to prepare an actual defense is going to be her speeches in front of members of financial institutions. It's not too hard to do -- she has to link those speeches to her robust financial sector reform plan ("we need them, but we need to regulate them better"), and highlight that Trump is running for the 1% based on what he's displayed so far. I promise you that Trump is going to hit her on a lot more than just this issue. He's going to hammer her as being an incompetent secretary of state and wrong on a whole host of foreign policy issues (Iraq, Iran, Russia, Libya, etc), and we're really going to have a lot of fun when Trump accuses her of being an enabler of a serial rapist.
You're really reading too much into Trump's performance at the Republican circlejerks debates here I think, especially since he got to spend months without anybody besides the moderators being mean to him (and the moderators being mean to him was worth its weight in gold). I don't think those skills will really translate; they didn't for Romney or McCain or Kerry or, well, pretty much anybody. We'll see though.
|
On March 01 2016 04:31 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 04:00 kwizach wrote:On March 01 2016 03:47 xDaunt wrote:
It should be very clear to everyone that Trump is a master media manipulator, and far more skilled at it than any other politician in the race. This is why I'm not buying this notion Trump is going to be exposed come the general election or that the democrats are going to get out some message on Trump that isn't already out there. He's already exposed, that's the point. He's already got the highest unfavorability ratings out of everyone, and they've remained steady for the last few months. And in the general election, he won't be facing candidates too afraid to expose him for the buffoon that he is, he'll be facing someone who's competent, experienced, a policy wonk, who's going to have a much more inspirational message than him, and who won't hesitate to shut him down during the debates (debates in which he will actually have to give longer answers than what he's used to, which will lead people to be a bit more aware of the fact that the same thirty words keep being repeated). You can bet that he knows this himself, and will try to prepare accordingly. He won't have enough time, though (and even less so if Rubio hangs around until the convention). The only issue on which Hillary's going to have to prepare an actual defense is going to be her speeches in front of members of financial institutions. It's not too hard to do -- she has to link those speeches to her robust financial sector reform plan ("we need them, but we need to regulate them better"), and highlight that Trump is running for the 1% based on what he's displayed so far. I promise you that Trump is going to hit her on a lot more than just this issue. He's going to hammer her as being an incompetent secretary of state and wrong on a whole host of foreign policy issues (Iraq, Iran, Russia, Libya, etc), and we're really going to have a lot of fun when Trump accuses her of being an enabler of a serial rapist.
We're going to have fun indeed, but that's not going to win Trump an election lol. Hillary will destroy Trump. We're going to have record number Republicans switching over to vote for Hillary.
|
On March 01 2016 04:38 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 04:27 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2016 04:25 kwizach wrote:On March 01 2016 04:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
The media is doing it's damnedest to bury Bernie and based off of the conversation here, people who weren't Bernie supporters are actually falling for it. Voters are doing that, not the media. Agreed. Bernie is a good candidate in general, but voters are not convinced. I personally think he would do a good job as president, but I don’t think he has done enough to convince people of that. And I don’t think the “media” has been overly unfair to him. You mean in ignoring him all the way up until the voting started, in trying to put the nail in his coffin yesterday instead of even mentioning the marches for him across the country, the list goes on and on. They've been nowhere near remotely fair. The whole "voters are rejecting him" is also bullshit, donors are voters. More people have voted for Bernie than Hillary up until SC too. You all are definitely being manipulated or you can't draw the lines between Hillary receiving support from folks like the Walton family and her real positions. Like pushing TPP before she realized she had to come out against it for example.
Voters didn’t reject him. They just voted for someone else. The fact that you claim everyone who didn’t vote for your candidate is being manipulated is garbage too. You fall into the classic problem that you believe everyone who doesn’t agree with you is stupid or has been tricked. It saves you the trouble of having to argue with them, since you can just dismiss them and their views.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Trump would be a lot more vulnerable if the debates were more about issues that about records, at least in the general. All Republican candidates are awful on the issues so it's easier to talk about how great America is and to have pissing contests over stupid stuff.
If it comes down to "Hillary sux" vs "Trump sux" then I think Trump can win.
|
GH has been playing the "I'm privy to information that is both beyond the confines of your belief and unavailable to you" game since he started posting. Nothing too surprising here 
|
On March 01 2016 04:49 LegalLord wrote:
Trump would be a lot more vulnerable if the debates were more about issues that about records, at least in the general. All Republican candidates are awful on the issues so it's easier to talk about how great America is and to have pissing contests over stupid stuff.
If it comes down to "Hillary sux" vs "Trump sux" then I think Trump can win.
I think there is zero chance of the campaigns coming down to that. With the amount of garbage chucked at Hilary to date, she is still winning the nomination. I doubt Trump is going to win over independent voters by being himself or performing the magical shift people claim is going to happen.
|
On March 01 2016 04:42 Deathstar wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 04:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 01 2016 04:00 kwizach wrote:On March 01 2016 03:47 xDaunt wrote:
It should be very clear to everyone that Trump is a master media manipulator, and far more skilled at it than any other politician in the race. This is why I'm not buying this notion Trump is going to be exposed come the general election or that the democrats are going to get out some message on Trump that isn't already out there. He's already exposed, that's the point. He's already got the highest unfavorability ratings out of everyone, and they've remained steady for the last few months. And in the general election, he won't be facing candidates too afraid to expose him for the buffoon that he is, he'll be facing someone who's competent, experienced, a policy wonk, who's going to have a much more inspirational message than him, and who won't hesitate to shut him down during the debates (debates in which he will actually have to give longer answers than what he's used to, which will lead people to be a bit more aware of the fact that the same thirty words keep being repeated). You can bet that he knows this himself, and will try to prepare accordingly. He won't have enough time, though (and even less so if Rubio hangs around until the convention). The only issue on which Hillary's going to have to prepare an actual defense is going to be her speeches in front of members of financial institutions. It's not too hard to do -- she has to link those speeches to her robust financial sector reform plan ("we need them, but we need to regulate them better"), and highlight that Trump is running for the 1% based on what he's displayed so far. I promise you that Trump is going to hit her on a lot more than just this issue. He's going to hammer her as being an incompetent secretary of state and wrong on a whole host of foreign policy issues (Iraq, Iran, Russia, Libya, etc), and we're really going to have a lot of fun when Trump accuses her of being an enabler of a serial rapist. We're going to have fun indeed, but that's not going to win Trump an election lol. Hillary will destroy Trump. We're going to have record number Republicans switching over to vote for Hillary.
For what it's worth I went to a party with nothing but Republicans(I guess the younger ones tended libertarian), from age 10-80 and they all were embarrassed by Trump leading their nomination.
I talked several of them into supporting Bernie in the Washington caucus because they dislike Hillary and Trump that much. Not a one of them even heard the word Hillary without blurting out an insult/neg like it was some sort of Pavlovian response.
I've seen and talked to people that have voted Republican for decades saying they'd rather support an "honest socialist" over the "orangutan" or similar variations. I have not once seen/met/heard of a single Republican defecting to Hillary. Of course voting booths are private (caucus's aren't though) so it could happen, but if Hillary were to win it would be on remarkably low turnout on both sides not R's defecting toward her.
|
The Republican field was pretty weak to begin with, and no one was prepared for Trump. The GOP desperately wants to believe Marco Rubio is their version of Barack Obama, except Barack Obama had more charisma in his big toe and was actually able to win states. Plus, BO humiliated Trump at the White House Press Correspondents' Dinner.
|
On March 01 2016 04:49 farvacola wrote:GH has been playing the "I'm privy to information that is both beyond the confines of your belief and unavailable to you" game since he started posting. Nothing too surprising here
Not privy or unavailable. Just folks choose not to see it, or repeat the characterizations we find in the media. The same folks and characterizations that called Bernie the next Ron Paul, doesn't have a chance, etc.. They were wrong then and are wrong now.
I'm not saying everyone voting for Hillary is being manipulated but the folks here are supporting someone that clearly doesn't match up to what they say in their posts here.
|
If Donald Trump wins the Republican presidential nomination, he’ll have undermined a lot of assumptions we once held about the GOP. He’ll have become the nominee despite neither being reliably conservative nor being very electable, supposedly the two things Republicans care most about. He’ll have done it with very little support from “party elites” (although with some recent exceptions like Chris Christie). He’ll have attacked the Republican Party’s three previous candidates — Mitt Romney, John McCain and George W. Bush — without many consequences. If a Trump nomination happens, it will imply that the Republican Party has been weakened and is perhaps even on the brink of failure, unable to coordinate on a plan to stop Trump despite the existential threat he poses to it.
Major partisan realignments do happen in America — on average about once every 40 years. The last one, which involved the unwinding of the New Deal coalition between Northern and Southern Democrats, is variously dated as having occurred in 1968, 1972 and 1980. There are also a lot of false alarms, elections described as realignments that turn out not to be. This time, we really might be in the midst of one. It’s almost impossible to reconcile this year’s Republican nomination contest with anyone’s notion of “politics as usual.”
If a realignment is underway, then it poses a big empirical challenge. Presidential elections already suffer from the problem of small sample sizes — one reason a lot of people, certainly including us, shouldn’t have been so dismissive of Trump’s chances early on. Elections held in the midst of political realignments are even rarer, however. The rules of the old regime — the American political party system circa 1980 through 2012 — might not apply in the new one. And yet, it’s those elections that inform both the conventional wisdom and statistical models of American political behavior.
This doesn’t necessarily mean we’ll be completely in the dark. For one thing, the polls — although there’s reason to be concerned about their condition in the long-term — have been reasonably accurate so far in the primaries. And some of the old rules will still apply. It’s probably fair to guess that Pennsylvania and Ohio will vote similarly, for example.
Still, one should be careful about one’s assumptions. For instance, the assumption that the parties will rally behind their respective nominees may or may not be reliable. True, recent elections have had very little voting across party lines: 93 percent of Republicans who voted in 2012 supported Romney, for example, despite complaints from the base that he was insufficiently conservative. And in November 2008, some 89 percent of Democrats who voted supported Barack Obama after his long battle with Hillary Clinton.
Source
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
hillary vs trump would be a pretty ugly affair. i do think hillary can win if she picks the right line on trade, something trump is sure to hammer with the nafta stuff. but this is also not the situation i want to see policy wise
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On March 01 2016 04:51 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 04:42 Deathstar wrote:On March 01 2016 04:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 01 2016 04:00 kwizach wrote:On March 01 2016 03:47 xDaunt wrote:
It should be very clear to everyone that Trump is a master media manipulator, and far more skilled at it than any other politician in the race. This is why I'm not buying this notion Trump is going to be exposed come the general election or that the democrats are going to get out some message on Trump that isn't already out there. He's already exposed, that's the point. He's already got the highest unfavorability ratings out of everyone, and they've remained steady for the last few months. And in the general election, he won't be facing candidates too afraid to expose him for the buffoon that he is, he'll be facing someone who's competent, experienced, a policy wonk, who's going to have a much more inspirational message than him, and who won't hesitate to shut him down during the debates (debates in which he will actually have to give longer answers than what he's used to, which will lead people to be a bit more aware of the fact that the same thirty words keep being repeated). You can bet that he knows this himself, and will try to prepare accordingly. He won't have enough time, though (and even less so if Rubio hangs around until the convention). The only issue on which Hillary's going to have to prepare an actual defense is going to be her speeches in front of members of financial institutions. It's not too hard to do -- she has to link those speeches to her robust financial sector reform plan ("we need them, but we need to regulate them better"), and highlight that Trump is running for the 1% based on what he's displayed so far. I promise you that Trump is going to hit her on a lot more than just this issue. He's going to hammer her as being an incompetent secretary of state and wrong on a whole host of foreign policy issues (Iraq, Iran, Russia, Libya, etc), and we're really going to have a lot of fun when Trump accuses her of being an enabler of a serial rapist. We're going to have fun indeed, but that's not going to win Trump an election lol. Hillary will destroy Trump. We're going to have record number Republicans switching over to vote for Hillary. For what it's worth I went to a party with nothing but Republicans(I guess the younger ones tended libertarian), from age 10-80 and they all were embarrassed by Trump leading their nomination. I talked several of them into supporting Bernie in the Washington caucus because they dislike Hillary and Trump that much. Not a one of them even heard the word Hillary without blurting out an insult/neg like it was some sort of Pavlovian response. I've seen and talked to people that have voted Republican for decades saying they'd rather support an "honest socialist" over the "orangutan" or similar variations. I have not once seen/met/heard of a single Republican defecting to Hillary. Of course voting booths are private (caucus's aren't though) so it could happen, but if Hillary were to win it would be on remarkably low turnout on both sides not R's defecting toward her.
lol this is hilarious. hillary is the best
|
On March 01 2016 05:27 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 04:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 01 2016 04:42 Deathstar wrote:On March 01 2016 04:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 01 2016 04:00 kwizach wrote:On March 01 2016 03:47 xDaunt wrote:
It should be very clear to everyone that Trump is a master media manipulator, and far more skilled at it than any other politician in the race. This is why I'm not buying this notion Trump is going to be exposed come the general election or that the democrats are going to get out some message on Trump that isn't already out there. He's already exposed, that's the point. He's already got the highest unfavorability ratings out of everyone, and they've remained steady for the last few months. And in the general election, he won't be facing candidates too afraid to expose him for the buffoon that he is, he'll be facing someone who's competent, experienced, a policy wonk, who's going to have a much more inspirational message than him, and who won't hesitate to shut him down during the debates (debates in which he will actually have to give longer answers than what he's used to, which will lead people to be a bit more aware of the fact that the same thirty words keep being repeated). You can bet that he knows this himself, and will try to prepare accordingly. He won't have enough time, though (and even less so if Rubio hangs around until the convention). The only issue on which Hillary's going to have to prepare an actual defense is going to be her speeches in front of members of financial institutions. It's not too hard to do -- she has to link those speeches to her robust financial sector reform plan ("we need them, but we need to regulate them better"), and highlight that Trump is running for the 1% based on what he's displayed so far. I promise you that Trump is going to hit her on a lot more than just this issue. He's going to hammer her as being an incompetent secretary of state and wrong on a whole host of foreign policy issues (Iraq, Iran, Russia, Libya, etc), and we're really going to have a lot of fun when Trump accuses her of being an enabler of a serial rapist. We're going to have fun indeed, but that's not going to win Trump an election lol. Hillary will destroy Trump. We're going to have record number Republicans switching over to vote for Hillary. For what it's worth I went to a party with nothing but Republicans(I guess the younger ones tended libertarian), from age 10-80 and they all were embarrassed by Trump leading their nomination. I talked several of them into supporting Bernie in the Washington caucus because they dislike Hillary and Trump that much. Not a one of them even heard the word Hillary without blurting out an insult/neg like it was some sort of Pavlovian response. I've seen and talked to people that have voted Republican for decades saying they'd rather support an "honest socialist" over the "orangutan" or similar variations. I have not once seen/met/heard of a single Republican defecting to Hillary. Of course voting booths are private (caucus's aren't though) so it could happen, but if Hillary were to win it would be on remarkably low turnout on both sides not R's defecting toward her. lol this is hilarious. hillary is the best
Oh stop trolling poor GH.
I do want to point out that if your libertarian/ conservative friends have such an ingrained dislike of Hillary it's hardly rational.
|
On March 01 2016 05:43 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 05:27 oneofthem wrote:On March 01 2016 04:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 01 2016 04:42 Deathstar wrote:On March 01 2016 04:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 01 2016 04:00 kwizach wrote:On March 01 2016 03:47 xDaunt wrote:
It should be very clear to everyone that Trump is a master media manipulator, and far more skilled at it than any other politician in the race. This is why I'm not buying this notion Trump is going to be exposed come the general election or that the democrats are going to get out some message on Trump that isn't already out there. He's already exposed, that's the point. He's already got the highest unfavorability ratings out of everyone, and they've remained steady for the last few months. And in the general election, he won't be facing candidates too afraid to expose him for the buffoon that he is, he'll be facing someone who's competent, experienced, a policy wonk, who's going to have a much more inspirational message than him, and who won't hesitate to shut him down during the debates (debates in which he will actually have to give longer answers than what he's used to, which will lead people to be a bit more aware of the fact that the same thirty words keep being repeated). You can bet that he knows this himself, and will try to prepare accordingly. He won't have enough time, though (and even less so if Rubio hangs around until the convention). The only issue on which Hillary's going to have to prepare an actual defense is going to be her speeches in front of members of financial institutions. It's not too hard to do -- she has to link those speeches to her robust financial sector reform plan ("we need them, but we need to regulate them better"), and highlight that Trump is running for the 1% based on what he's displayed so far. I promise you that Trump is going to hit her on a lot more than just this issue. He's going to hammer her as being an incompetent secretary of state and wrong on a whole host of foreign policy issues (Iraq, Iran, Russia, Libya, etc), and we're really going to have a lot of fun when Trump accuses her of being an enabler of a serial rapist. We're going to have fun indeed, but that's not going to win Trump an election lol. Hillary will destroy Trump. We're going to have record number Republicans switching over to vote for Hillary. For what it's worth I went to a party with nothing but Republicans(I guess the younger ones tended libertarian), from age 10-80 and they all were embarrassed by Trump leading their nomination. I talked several of them into supporting Bernie in the Washington caucus because they dislike Hillary and Trump that much. Not a one of them even heard the word Hillary without blurting out an insult/neg like it was some sort of Pavlovian response. I've seen and talked to people that have voted Republican for decades saying they'd rather support an "honest socialist" over the "orangutan" or similar variations. I have not once seen/met/heard of a single Republican defecting to Hillary. Of course voting booths are private (caucus's aren't though) so it could happen, but if Hillary were to win it would be on remarkably low turnout on both sides not R's defecting toward her. lol this is hilarious. hillary is the best Oh stop trolling poor GH. I do want to point out that if your libertarian/ conservative friends have such an ingrained dislike of Hillary it's hardly rational.
How is it irrational?
|
On March 01 2016 05:48 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 05:43 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 01 2016 05:27 oneofthem wrote:On March 01 2016 04:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 01 2016 04:42 Deathstar wrote:On March 01 2016 04:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 01 2016 04:00 kwizach wrote:On March 01 2016 03:47 xDaunt wrote:
It should be very clear to everyone that Trump is a master media manipulator, and far more skilled at it than any other politician in the race. This is why I'm not buying this notion Trump is going to be exposed come the general election or that the democrats are going to get out some message on Trump that isn't already out there. He's already exposed, that's the point. He's already got the highest unfavorability ratings out of everyone, and they've remained steady for the last few months. And in the general election, he won't be facing candidates too afraid to expose him for the buffoon that he is, he'll be facing someone who's competent, experienced, a policy wonk, who's going to have a much more inspirational message than him, and who won't hesitate to shut him down during the debates (debates in which he will actually have to give longer answers than what he's used to, which will lead people to be a bit more aware of the fact that the same thirty words keep being repeated). You can bet that he knows this himself, and will try to prepare accordingly. He won't have enough time, though (and even less so if Rubio hangs around until the convention). The only issue on which Hillary's going to have to prepare an actual defense is going to be her speeches in front of members of financial institutions. It's not too hard to do -- she has to link those speeches to her robust financial sector reform plan ("we need them, but we need to regulate them better"), and highlight that Trump is running for the 1% based on what he's displayed so far. I promise you that Trump is going to hit her on a lot more than just this issue. He's going to hammer her as being an incompetent secretary of state and wrong on a whole host of foreign policy issues (Iraq, Iran, Russia, Libya, etc), and we're really going to have a lot of fun when Trump accuses her of being an enabler of a serial rapist. We're going to have fun indeed, but that's not going to win Trump an election lol. Hillary will destroy Trump. We're going to have record number Republicans switching over to vote for Hillary. For what it's worth I went to a party with nothing but Republicans(I guess the younger ones tended libertarian), from age 10-80 and they all were embarrassed by Trump leading their nomination. I talked several of them into supporting Bernie in the Washington caucus because they dislike Hillary and Trump that much. Not a one of them even heard the word Hillary without blurting out an insult/neg like it was some sort of Pavlovian response. I've seen and talked to people that have voted Republican for decades saying they'd rather support an "honest socialist" over the "orangutan" or similar variations. I have not once seen/met/heard of a single Republican defecting to Hillary. Of course voting booths are private (caucus's aren't though) so it could happen, but if Hillary were to win it would be on remarkably low turnout on both sides not R's defecting toward her. lol this is hilarious. hillary is the best Oh stop trolling poor GH. I do want to point out that if your libertarian/ conservative friends have such an ingrained dislike of Hillary it's hardly rational. How is it irrational?
I'm half-joking, but Pavlovian/ kneejerk hatred like that is pretty irrational by definition since it's instinctive and doesn't require thought.
|
I don't think it really matters to the point, but I imagine it's both. I didn't discuss it at length with the folks who were over the top but no one liked Hillary and people had plenty of good reasons. It's a lot harder to understand how people (on the left) put aside all of her issues with a "it's how the game is played" attitude.
That's not surprising on the right with Trump but it is a little difficult to digest from the left.
|
On March 01 2016 06:03 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't think it really matters to the point, but I imagine it's both. I didn't discuss it at length with the folks who were over the top but no one liked Hillary and people had plenty of good reasons. It's a lot harder to understand how people (on the left) put aside all of her issues with a "it's how the game is played" attitude.
That's not surprising on the right with Trump but it is a little difficult to digest from the left.
If we were to be completely honest though, none of the candidates here are necessarily "good" for the country.
Bernie Sanders have a VERY pure intentions with his campaign. We get it, he wants to help out the poor and needy. But however his methodology to achieve that isn't exactly the best for long-term development. It will drive out companies which provides the job in the first place out of the country.
Hilary Clinton takes a lot of talking points from Sanders and she may ACTUALLY have the necessary resources to pull off Bernie's plans. But many people know that she is only saying these things to get elected (so is Sanders but I believe that he is more genuine than Hilary) so there is a trust issue there.
Trump on one hand probably have the best plans to develop the country long-term speaking but however his temperament could be very volatile and might make rash decisions to get the country into a corner but that also depends on other countries' reaction to a Trump presidency.
|
On March 01 2016 06:03 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't think it really matters to the point, but I imagine it's both. I didn't discuss it at length with the folks who were over the top but no one liked Hillary and people had plenty of good reasons. It's a lot harder to understand how people (on the left) put aside all of her issues with a "it's how the game is played" attitude.
That's not surprising on the right with Trump but it is a little difficult to digest from the left.
Come on, stop mischaracterizing Hillary and the people supporting her. It's tiring, and it doesn't do you or anyone else a favor.
|
On March 01 2016 06:32 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 06:03 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't think it really matters to the point, but I imagine it's both. I didn't discuss it at length with the folks who were over the top but no one liked Hillary and people had plenty of good reasons. It's a lot harder to understand how people (on the left) put aside all of her issues with a "it's how the game is played" attitude.
That's not surprising on the right with Trump but it is a little difficult to digest from the left. Come on, stop mischaracterizing Hillary and the people supporting her. It's tiring, and it doesn't do you or anyone else a favor.
Maybe he really did go into that conference and the people there really didn't like Hillary.
Are you calling GH a liar?
|
On March 01 2016 06:32 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 06:03 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't think it really matters to the point, but I imagine it's both. I didn't discuss it at length with the folks who were over the top but no one liked Hillary and people had plenty of good reasons. It's a lot harder to understand how people (on the left) put aside all of her issues with a "it's how the game is played" attitude.
That's not surprising on the right with Trump but it is a little difficult to digest from the left. Come on, stop mischaracterizing Hillary and the people supporting her. It's tiring, and it doesn't do you or anyone else a favor.
You still don't think Hillary & co has tried to rig the election, so clearly we're in two totally different worlds. It would naturally follow that we don't have the same perspective on her supporters.
It wasn't a conference, it was just a birthday party for an acquaintance but there was probably ~50 adults there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
