Do Democrats Have a Plan B?

[candycorn]

Democrats prove humans can still operate with half a brain.

And you wonder why you are losing elections?

The American People are..losing elections, no doubt.

The American people have the power and ability to elect the right public servant to fit their needs. Few avail themselves of the opportunity.

We get the government we deserve.

 

[Flopper]

It is the moderates that decide elections, not ideologues. These are the people who pay little attention to political battles between left and right. They rarely watch or listen to political commentaries, campaign news, or party debates. When they vote for president unlike the ideologues who vote for party, they vote for the person they like. Choice of candidate will make or break the campaign and that's still a long way off.

 

[nitroz]

No need for a Plan B when the GOP is the laughing stock that it is now.

 

[Sarah G]

It is the moderates that decide elections, not ideologues. These are the people who pay little attention to political battles between left and right. They rarely watch or listen to political commentaries, campaign news, or party debates. When they vote for president unlike the ideologues who vote for party, they vote for the person they like. Choice of candidate will make or break the campaign and that's still a long way off.

Right now it's looking like Chris Christie and Hillary even though both of them deny, deny, deny...

What are your thoughts on those two choices?

 

[ArcticDaishi]

After President Biden pardons Obama for his crimes in the IRS Scandal and lying the the American People over Benghazi, he will appoints Hilly as his VP

^ 100% Genuine Racist

How is that even remotely racist?

 

[Antares]

LOL.....um you go ahead and run with that.

The ACA may well bring the Dems crashing down, it will be a sight to be hold.

If Hillary decides to run, we'll see some competitiveness between her and Biden, but her approval numbers are higher than any other political figure in America, even her husband, so if she runs she'll no doubt get the nomination this time.

It really depends on what Republicans do. If they put up Ted Cruz and Rand Paul and other assorted witches and rape-dudes like the last time, they'll certainly lose yet another general election.

Remember, the GOP has one the popular vote only once in the last 6 general elections. They've got work to do trying to reach the average moderate voter that has pealed away from them, on top of being weary of the fact that old white people are beginning to die off.

It all comes down to the image of both people on tv in that first debate. And if the person the Republicans puts up appears to be clueless about foreign policy and has trouble answering whether gays should be able to marry and adopt kids, forget about it. Hillary wins.

And Hillary was right the last 20 years: Universal Medicare-for-all was the best solution for America. Health insurance was what 20 years ago? A couple grand a year? 10 years later it was $4,000 a year. Now insurance is upwards of $7,500 a year.

At the same time, we find out that because of our private for-profit system, when that uninsured person needs treatment, that box of $4 gauze costs a whopping $76 according to our for-profit system.

Had the government been able to set prices 20 years ago and negotiate the way they do with Medicare, it would have never skyrocketed the way it did.

The way I see it, health care finally has a chance if Hillary wins. I could fucking care less about what your emotions tell you, dear reader, because all I know is that she was one of the only people who was right about that.

 

[Meathead]

Jut like McCain was the only candidate who could attract bipartisan support?
No that we need Democrats picking our candidates.

I'm not a democrat - I WAS a Republican... for 20 years.
I'm a representative of the moderate voters you lost ... and who you desperately need to win back if you want a chance at the White House again.

But you just keep deluding yourself otherwise .... and keep losing.[/QUOTE]Disturbingly like Jake Starkey and JoeB.

It is either duplicity, or there are more idiots than I had figured.

 

[Antares]

Bullshit, McCain was as moderate as it gets...he was aptly named "Obama Lite".

Elections are about differences, NOT similarities.

Jut like McCain was the only candidate who could attract bipartisan support?
No that we need Democrats picking our candidates.

I'm not a democrat - I WAS a Republican... for 20 years.
I'm a representative of the moderate voters you lost ... and who you desperately need to win back if you want a chance at the White House again.

But you just keep deluding yourself otherwise .... and keep losing.

Disturbingly like Jake Starkey and JoeB.

It is either duplicity, or there are more idiots than I had figured.[/QUOTE]

 

[Spoonman]

Democrats plan A = Blame Bush


Democrats plan B = Blame Bush

 

[Meathead]

Democrats plan A = Blame Bush


Democrats plan B = Blame Bush

Very true, but who's going to fall for Benghazi?

Even by Obama's standard, how do you blame Bush?

Oh, that's right! The Republicans cut back on foreign service security.

Fucking specious argument.

 

[Spoonman]

Democrats plan A = Blame Bush


Democrats plan B = Blame Bush

Very true, but who's going to fall for Benghazi?

Even by Obama's standard, how do you blame Bush?

Oh, that's right! The Republicans cut back on foreign service security.

Fucking specious argument.

and when did republicans cut back on foriegn security?

 

[Meathead]

Democrats plan A = Blame Bush


Democrats plan B = Blame Bush

Very true, but who's going to fall for Benghazi?

Even by Obama's standard, how do you blame Bush?

Oh, that's right! The Republicans cut back on foreign service security.

Fucking specious argument.

and when did republicans cut back on foriegn security?

Very trusted sources like Daily Kos and Huffington Post have reported it, haven't you heard?

 

[Polk]

Now that Hilary is toast and everyone else closely associated with the Obama administration probably is too, do the Democrats have a viable candidate not soiled enough to run in 2016?

Sadly Hillary isn't toast. Most of the public is politically ignorant.

Plus, the real vote of the people hasn't had anything to do with presidential elections since Obama's placement.

Bring out the tinfoil!

 

[Meathead]

Sadly Hillary isn't toast. Most of the public is politically ignorant.

Plus, the real vote of the people hasn't had anything to do with presidential elections since Obama's placement.

Bring out the tinfoil!

I understand your portrait. A tin foil hat wouldn't be that impressive wearing $1000 suit.

 

[Spoonman]

Very true, but who's going to fall for Benghazi?

Even by Obama's standard, how do you blame Bush?

Oh, that's right! The Republicans cut back on foreign service security.

Fucking specious argument.

and when did republicans cut back on foriegn security?

Very trusted sources like Daily Kos and Huffington Post have reported it, haven't you heard?

oh yea, when they snuck it past the democratic majority

 

[The Rabbi]

True. And by spastically spewing vitrol for 8 years, the GOP will have no one to blame but themselves for a Democratic victory in 2016. Christie is the GOP's only hope. He's the only candidate that can convince America that they have turned their back on hyper-partisan hackery.

Jut like McCain was the only candidate who could attract bipartisan support?
No that we need Democrats picking our candidates.

I'm not a democrat - I WAS a Republican... for 20 years.
I'm a representative of the moderate voters you lost ... and who you desperately need to win back if you want a chance at the White House again.

But you just keep deluding yourself otherwise .... and keep losing.

You're representative of the stupidity and low information of the average voter. Yeah lots of Republicans suck. But Democrats suck uniformly. And no, we don't need people like you.

 

[Flopper]

It is the moderates that decide elections, not ideologues. These are the people who pay little attention to political battles between left and right. They rarely watch or listen to political commentaries, campaign news, or party debates. When they vote for president unlike the ideologues who vote for party, they vote for the person they like. Choice of candidate will make or break the campaign and that's still a long way off.

Right now it's looking like Chris Christie and Hillary even though both of them deny, deny, deny...

What are your thoughts on those two choices?

Christie seems like a likely choice. Not sure if Clinton will run although she has the best chance of being nominated. I'm not sure she's up for it.

 

[Lakhota]

Wingnuts are making Hillary stronger and more electable every day...

 

[nodoginnafight]

Also known as a *mole*. Or in the vernacular, "traitor" or "spy".

Join forces with FakeyJakey, asshole.

self delusion
I tell the truth - but you'd rather keep losing than admit you've veered off track.
Have it your way.

We veered off track when we started to compromise. Now the Republican Party is just the Democrat party. The Democrats are now Progressives.

OK, let's test that theory of yours. You claim the GOP lost the last two elections because they were not conservative enough:

The GOP won the conservative vote 82% to 17 %. Pretty close to maxing out on the vote there.

The GOP lost moderates 41% to 56%. Hmmmm appears to me that there is some room for improvement there.

But you think the answer is to chase the 17% of conservatives you missed out on and ignore the 56% of moderates you lost. And of course tacking right to snare some of those 17% of conservatives means you'll lose even more of the moderates.

Nice strategy. Now I understand why you lost two in a row.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Jut like McCain was the only candidate who could attract bipartisan support?
No that we need Democrats picking our candidates.

I'm not a democrat - I WAS a Republican... for 20 years.
I'm a representative of the moderate voters you lost ... and who you desperately need to win back if you want a chance at the White House again.

But you just keep deluding yourself otherwise .... and keep losing.

Disturbingly like Jake Starkey and JoeB.

It is either duplicity, or there are more idiots than I had figured.

You switched the quote function and misquoted me.
I am the one who was a Republican for years. John McCain of 2000 was a good candidate. But you guys dumped him in favor of Bush Jr. and forced him to spend the next 8 years kissing far right butt. You had to ruin him before you would nominate him. If John McCain circa 2000 ran into John McCain circa 2008 on the street, he'd kick his ass out of general principles.

But you guys just keep calling the people you've lost names. Keep sneering, mocking and insulting. It's working so well for you afterall isn't it?