Liberals Need to Accept Election Results

[frigidweirdo]

As if that needed to be said!!!

Look, there are 2 separate questions here.

Did Russian hackers (or hackers of any nationality for that matter) try to influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election. I would be shocked if they didn’t try. I’d be equally shocked if our election officials were so inept that they would allow such a hack to go unreported. While there is some truth to not wanting to reveal that you’ve been breached; there is zero chance that a breach would be kept under wraps.

Second question is this:

Did it influence the outcome of the elections. I supported Ms. Clinton from the word “go” in both 2008 and 2016. I can tell you that if you think the answer is “yes”, you’re wearing blinders.

She lost because Trump ran the better campaign in 2016 and she lost in 2008 because Obama ran a better campaign then too as well. SHE IS A DISAPPOINTING CAMPAIGNER!!!! Some people got it and some people don’t. Whatever the secret sauce is that makes one pull a lever next to her name…she ain’t got it. Further evidence of this all-too-clear-fact are the states that Trump won. He won Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Now, if he had won one of these states and lost the EV…someone like me would have said, “Hmm…that’s interesting.” Only because he won all 3 and won the EV do some folks like me (liberals) want to raise questions. To take this stance wounds your credibility. In the first place…One would have to wonder why the hackers spared Virginia—a very contentious state to be sure. Were they feeling generous? Secondly, the states that Mr. Trump did win are historically Blue states with solid governmental infrastructures. Are sensible persons to believe that the elections officials in 3 states have suddenly been retarded to the point where a hack would not be noticed…or reported…by anyone in that hierarchy of the group?

Relax guys. Trump won. Get over it.

Well they don't actually, they can choose to pick up their guns, they can choose to defy it, they can do whatever they like and suffer the consequences of those actions.

 

[Mac1958]

Yes, Hillary was a REALLY bad candidate (I could go on), but it was also her bizarre misfortune to have run against her second Cult of Personality candidate in two tries.

Add to that the fact that the Democratic party has turned into a regional party AND that many of us underestimated how fed up so many people are, and you get this.

Trump -- as ridiculous as he was/is -- was talking jobs, borders and strength, the Democrats hung themselves up on bathrooms, BLM, birthday cakes, burkas and safe places.

There's not much indication yet that they see this.
.

 

[candycorn]

As if that needed to be said!!!

Look, there are 2 separate questions here.

Did Russian hackers (or hackers of any nationality for that matter) try to influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election. I would be shocked if they didn’t try. I’d be equally shocked if our election officials were so inept that they would allow such a hack to go unreported. While there is some truth to not wanting to reveal that you’ve been breached; there is zero chance that a breach would be kept under wraps.

Second question is this:

Did it influence the outcome of the elections. I supported Ms. Clinton from the word “go” in both 2008 and 2016. I can tell you that if you think the answer is “yes”, you’re wearing blinders.

She lost because Trump ran the better campaign in 2016 and she lost in 2008 because Obama ran a better campaign then too as well. SHE IS A DISAPPOINTING CAMPAIGNER!!!! Some people got it and some people don’t. Whatever the secret sauce is that makes one pull a lever next to her name…she ain’t got it. Further evidence of this all-too-clear-fact are the states that Trump won. He won Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Now, if he had won one of these states and lost the EV…someone like me would have said, “Hmm…that’s interesting.” Only because he won all 3 and won the EV do some folks like me (liberals) want to raise questions. To take this stance wounds your credibility. In the first place…One would have to wonder why the hackers spared Virginia—a very contentious state to be sure. Were they feeling generous? Secondly, the states that Mr. Trump did win are historically Blue states with solid governmental infrastructures. Are sensible persons to believe that the elections officials in 3 states have suddenly been retarded to the point where a hack would not be noticed…or reported…by anyone in that hierarchy of the group?

Relax guys. Trump won. Get over it.

Third way democrats like yourself pushed a shitty candidate that ran a horrible campaign and shit on every democrat/lefty that disagreed. You have yourself to blame.

Well, the “shitty” candidate got more votes from we-the-people than her opponent. They ran the right candidate whose credentials are off the charts. The campaign she ran was like all of her campaigns; disappointing.

And lost. I'm going to tell it like it is. Clinton was not a good candidate. Her team ran a horrible campaign. They ignored states they needed votes from, didn't campaign there just considered it a lock.

The DNC did everything in their power to push a flawed, underperforming candidate to the front. A candidate that unknown Sanders gave a run for her money. A robotic candidate hard to believe or trust, stiff and off putting to the public. A candidate that didn't campaign enough and whose strategy was to lay low and hope the other guy looks worse. A candidate who passed out and was loaded into a van. I can go on.

Meanwhile Trump was holding a rally every day, he campaigned tirelessly.

That she has more of the popular vote doesn't matter. If she was a good candidate it wouldn't even have been close, against a candidate with zero experience.

Hillary was a disaster for the Democratic party, and all that contributed to it including yourself need to get real and learn from your massive mistakes. Tools like Debbie WS have lead the party to losing elections all over the country, losing the Senate, state governors, etc. And the dumb fuck DNC kept her in charge as long as possible, then when she was fired Hillary welcomed her into her campaign.

Idiots like you that keep supporting this bullshit are destroying the Democratic party.

Yours is a wholly unsophisticated and frankly pretty juvenile understanding of presidential politics. I agree that there is a need for new blood in the party. The Party gained seats in both Houses of Congress and won the electoral vote. I’d much rather be in the Democrats chair today than the GOP chair from 4 years ago. And in a certain light, If the Trump administration follows through on it’s promises, things will look very good for the Dems in 2020.

 

[owebo]

As if that needed to be said!!!

Look, there are 2 separate questions here.

Did Russian hackers (or hackers of any nationality for that matter) try to influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election. I would be shocked if they didn’t try. I’d be equally shocked if our election officials were so inept that they would allow such a hack to go unreported. While there is some truth to not wanting to reveal that you’ve been breached; there is zero chance that a breach would be kept under wraps.

Second question is this:

Did it influence the outcome of the elections. I supported Ms. Clinton from the word “go” in both 2008 and 2016. I can tell you that if you think the answer is “yes”, you’re wearing blinders.

She lost because Trump ran the better campaign in 2016 and she lost in 2008 because Obama ran a better campaign then too as well. SHE IS A DISAPPOINTING CAMPAIGNER!!!! Some people got it and some people don’t. Whatever the secret sauce is that makes one pull a lever next to her name…she ain’t got it. Further evidence of this all-too-clear-fact are the states that Trump won. He won Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Now, if he had won one of these states and lost the EV…someone like me would have said, “Hmm…that’s interesting.” Only because he won all 3 and won the EV do some folks like me (liberals) want to raise questions. To take this stance wounds your credibility. In the first place…One would have to wonder why the hackers spared Virginia—a very contentious state to be sure. Were they feeling generous? Secondly, the states that Mr. Trump did win are historically Blue states with solid governmental infrastructures. Are sensible persons to believe that the elections officials in 3 states have suddenly been retarded to the point where a hack would not be noticed…or reported…by anyone in that hierarchy of the group?

Relax guys. Trump won. Get over it.

Third way democrats like yourself pushed a shitty candidate that ran a horrible campaign and shit on every democrat/lefty that disagreed. You have yourself to blame.

Well, the “shitty” candidate got more votes from we-the-people than her opponent. They ran the right candidate whose credentials are off the charts. The campaign she ran was like all of her campaigns; disappointing.

And lost. I'm going to tell it like it is. Clinton was not a good candidate. Her team ran a horrible campaign. They ignored states they needed votes from, didn't campaign there just considered it a lock.

The DNC did everything in their power to push a flawed, underperforming candidate to the front. A candidate that unknown Sanders gave a run for her money. A robotic candidate hard to believe or trust, stiff and off putting to the public. A candidate that didn't campaign enough and whose strategy was to lay low and hope the other guy looks worse. A candidate who passed out and was loaded into a van. I can go on.

Meanwhile Trump was holding a rally every day, he campaigned tirelessly.

That she has more of the popular vote doesn't matter. If she was a good candidate it wouldn't even have been close, against a candidate with zero experience.

Hillary was a disaster for the Democratic party, and all that contributed to it including yourself need to get real and learn from your massive mistakes. Tools like Debbie WS have lead the party to losing elections all over the country, losing the Senate, state governors, etc. And the dumb fuck DNC kept her in charge as long as possible, then when she was fired Hillary welcomed her into her campaign.

Idiots like you that keep supporting this bullshit are destroying the Democratic party.

Yours is a wholly unsophisticated and frankly pretty juvenile understanding of presidential politics. I agree that there is a need for new blood in the party. The Party gained seats in both Houses of Congress and won the electoral vote. I’d much rather be in the Democrats chair today than the GOP chair from 4 years ago. And in a certain light, If the Trump administration follows through on it’s promises, things will look very good for the Dems in 2020.

It's pleasing to see you open your mind....thank you....

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Liberals have a history of refusing to accept the results of the presidential election when they are on the losing end.
They wouldn't accept the results of 2000, blaming the SCOTUS for stopping the recount in Florida.
They wouldn't accept the results of 2004, claiming the GOP stole the election, especially in Ohio.

 

[WheelieAddict]

As if that needed to be said!!!

Look, there are 2 separate questions here.

Did Russian hackers (or hackers of any nationality for that matter) try to influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election. I would be shocked if they didn’t try. I’d be equally shocked if our election officials were so inept that they would allow such a hack to go unreported. While there is some truth to not wanting to reveal that you’ve been breached; there is zero chance that a breach would be kept under wraps.

Second question is this:

Did it influence the outcome of the elections. I supported Ms. Clinton from the word “go” in both 2008 and 2016. I can tell you that if you think the answer is “yes”, you’re wearing blinders.

She lost because Trump ran the better campaign in 2016 and she lost in 2008 because Obama ran a better campaign then too as well. SHE IS A DISAPPOINTING CAMPAIGNER!!!! Some people got it and some people don’t. Whatever the secret sauce is that makes one pull a lever next to her name…she ain’t got it. Further evidence of this all-too-clear-fact are the states that Trump won. He won Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Now, if he had won one of these states and lost the EV…someone like me would have said, “Hmm…that’s interesting.” Only because he won all 3 and won the EV do some folks like me (liberals) want to raise questions. To take this stance wounds your credibility. In the first place…One would have to wonder why the hackers spared Virginia—a very contentious state to be sure. Were they feeling generous? Secondly, the states that Mr. Trump did win are historically Blue states with solid governmental infrastructures. Are sensible persons to believe that the elections officials in 3 states have suddenly been retarded to the point where a hack would not be noticed…or reported…by anyone in that hierarchy of the group?

Relax guys. Trump won. Get over it.

Third way democrats like yourself pushed a shitty candidate that ran a horrible campaign and shit on every democrat/lefty that disagreed. You have yourself to blame.

Well, the “shitty” candidate got more votes from we-the-people than her opponent. They ran the right candidate whose credentials are off the charts. The campaign she ran was like all of her campaigns; disappointing.

And lost. I'm going to tell it like it is. Clinton was not a good candidate. Her team ran a horrible campaign. They ignored states they needed votes from, didn't campaign there just considered it a lock.

The DNC did everything in their power to push a flawed, underperforming candidate to the front. A candidate that unknown Sanders gave a run for her money. A robotic candidate hard to believe or trust, stiff and off putting to the public. A candidate that didn't campaign enough and whose strategy was to lay low and hope the other guy looks worse. A candidate who passed out and was loaded into a van. I can go on.

Meanwhile Trump was holding a rally every day, he campaigned tirelessly.

That she has more of the popular vote doesn't matter. If she was a good candidate it wouldn't even have been close, against a candidate with zero experience.

Hillary was a disaster for the Democratic party, and all that contributed to it including yourself need to get real and learn from your massive mistakes. Tools like Debbie WS have lead the party to losing elections all over the country, losing the Senate, state governors, etc. And the dumb fuck DNC kept her in charge as long as possible, then when she was fired Hillary welcomed her into her campaign.

Idiots like you that keep supporting this bullshit are destroying the Democratic party.

Yours is a wholly unsophisticated and frankly pretty juvenile understanding of presidential politics. I agree that there is a need for new blood in the party. The Party gained seats in both Houses of Congress and won the electoral vote. I’d much rather be in the Democrats chair today than the GOP chair from 4 years ago. And in a certain light, If the Trump administration follows through on it’s promises, things will look very good for the Dems in 2020.

Disagree. What you call my "juvenile and unsophisticated understanding" is the blunt truth. You gloss over the massive failures like they didn't happen. Agreeing that there is a need for new blood in the party is an understatement. The third way dems and ageing boomers have failed. If they remain in charge they will keep losing.

 

[Mac1958]

As if that needed to be said!!!

Look, there are 2 separate questions here.

Did Russian hackers (or hackers of any nationality for that matter) try to influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election. I would be shocked if they didn’t try. I’d be equally shocked if our election officials were so inept that they would allow such a hack to go unreported. While there is some truth to not wanting to reveal that you’ve been breached; there is zero chance that a breach would be kept under wraps.

Second question is this:

Did it influence the outcome of the elections. I supported Ms. Clinton from the word “go” in both 2008 and 2016. I can tell you that if you think the answer is “yes”, you’re wearing blinders.

She lost because Trump ran the better campaign in 2016 and she lost in 2008 because Obama ran a better campaign then too as well. SHE IS A DISAPPOINTING CAMPAIGNER!!!! Some people got it and some people don’t. Whatever the secret sauce is that makes one pull a lever next to her name…she ain’t got it. Further evidence of this all-too-clear-fact are the states that Trump won. He won Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Now, if he had won one of these states and lost the EV…someone like me would have said, “Hmm…that’s interesting.” Only because he won all 3 and won the EV do some folks like me (liberals) want to raise questions. To take this stance wounds your credibility. In the first place…One would have to wonder why the hackers spared Virginia—a very contentious state to be sure. Were they feeling generous? Secondly, the states that Mr. Trump did win are historically Blue states with solid governmental infrastructures. Are sensible persons to believe that the elections officials in 3 states have suddenly been retarded to the point where a hack would not be noticed…or reported…by anyone in that hierarchy of the group?

Relax guys. Trump won. Get over it.

Third way democrats like yourself pushed a shitty candidate that ran a horrible campaign and shit on every democrat/lefty that disagreed. You have yourself to blame.

Well, the “shitty” candidate got more votes from we-the-people than her opponent. They ran the right candidate whose credentials are off the charts. The campaign she ran was like all of her campaigns; disappointing.

And lost. I'm going to tell it like it is. Clinton was not a good candidate. Her team ran a horrible campaign. They ignored states they needed votes from, didn't campaign there just considered it a lock.

The DNC did everything in their power to push a flawed, underperforming candidate to the front. A candidate that unknown Sanders gave a run for her money. A robotic candidate hard to believe or trust, stiff and off putting to the public. A candidate that didn't campaign enough and whose strategy was to lay low and hope the other guy looks worse. A candidate who passed out and was loaded into a van. I can go on.

Meanwhile Trump was holding a rally every day, he campaigned tirelessly.

That she has more of the popular vote doesn't matter. If she was a good candidate it wouldn't even have been close, against a candidate with zero experience.

Hillary was a disaster for the Democratic party, and all that contributed to it including yourself need to get real and learn from your massive mistakes. Tools like Debbie WS have lead the party to losing elections all over the country, losing the Senate, state governors, etc. And the dumb fuck DNC kept her in charge as long as possible, then when she was fired Hillary welcomed her into her campaign.

Idiots like you that keep supporting this bullshit are destroying the Democratic party.

Yours is a wholly unsophisticated and frankly pretty juvenile understanding of presidential politics. I agree that there is a need for new blood in the party. The Party gained seats in both Houses of Congress and won the electoral vote. I’d much rather be in the Democrats chair today than the GOP chair from 4 years ago. And in a certain light, If the Trump administration follows through on it’s promises, things will look very good for the Dems in 2020.

Disagree. What you call my "juvenile and unsophisticated understanding" is the blunt truth. You gloss over the massive failures like they didn't happen. Agreeing that there is a need for new blood in the party is an understatement. The third way dems and ageing boomers have failed. If they remain in charge they will keep losing.

In what direction would you like to see the party go?

So in general, Blue Dog or Bernie? Or something else?
.

 

[JQPublic1]

Liberals don't have to accept the election results, but they have no choice but to accept the consequences of the election results. Like it or not change is coming and its not the change they voted for. Grab a tissue and deal with it.

As if that needed to be said!!!

Look, there are 2 separate questions here.

Did Russian hackers (or hackers of any nationality for that matter) try to influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election. I would be shocked if they didn’t try. I’d be equally shocked if our election officials were so inept that they would allow such a hack to go unreported. While there is some truth to not wanting to reveal that you’ve been breached; there is zero chance that a breach would be kept under wraps.

Second question is this:

Did it influence the outcome of the elections. I supported Ms. Clinton from the word “go” in both 2008 and 2016. I can tell you that if you think the answer is “yes”, you’re wearing blinders.

She lost because Trump ran the better campaign in 2016 and she lost in 2008 because Obama ran a better campaign then too as well. SHE IS A DISAPPOINTING CAMPAIGNER!!!! Some people got it and some people don’t. Whatever the secret sauce is that makes one pull a lever next to her name…she ain’t got it. Further evidence of this all-too-clear-fact are the states that Trump won. He won Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Now, if he had won one of these states and lost the EV…someone like me would have said, “Hmm…that’s interesting.” Only because he won all 3 and won the EV do some folks like me (liberals) want to raise questions. To take this stance wounds your credibility. In the first place…One would have to wonder why the hackers spared Virginia—a very contentious state to be sure. Were they feeling generous? Secondly, the states that Mr. Trump did win are historically Blue states with solid governmental infrastructures. Are sensible persons to believe that the elections officials in 3 states have suddenly been retarded to the point where a hack would not be noticed…or reported…by anyone in that hierarchy of the group?

Relax guys. Trump won. Get over it.

Third way democrats like yourself pushed a shitty candidate that ran a horrible campaign and shit on every democrat/lefty that disagreed. You have yourself to blame.

Well, the “shitty” candidate got more votes from we-the-people than her opponent. They ran the right candidate whose credentials are off the charts. The campaign she ran was like all of her campaigns; disappointing.

You might be the one grabbing for tissues when you discover Trump is really one of US!

Um...he is one of us....

That he's not one of you seems to have you very agitated.....

Tell me that in two years when Obamacare, social security and medicare are all alive and well!

 

[owebo]

Liberals don't have to accept the election results, but they have no choice but to accept the consequences of the election results. Like it or not change is coming and its not the change they voted for. Grab a tissue and deal with it.

Third way democrats like yourself pushed a shitty candidate that ran a horrible campaign and shit on every democrat/lefty that disagreed. You have yourself to blame.

Well, the “shitty” candidate got more votes from we-the-people than her opponent. They ran the right candidate whose credentials are off the charts. The campaign she ran was like all of her campaigns; disappointing.

You might be the one grabbing for tissues when you discover Trump is really one of US!

Um...he is one of us....

That he's not one of you seems to have you very agitated.....

Tell me that in two years when Obamacare, social security and medicare are all alive and well!

Obamacare will be repealed in the first 100 days....your unilateral democrat fascism will come to a horrific end for you....

 

[LoneLaugher]

Yes, Hillary was a REALLY bad candidate (I could go on), but it was also her bizarre misfortune to have run against her second Cult of Personality candidate in two tries.

Add to that the fact that the Democratic party has turned into a regional party AND that many of us underestimated how fed up so many people are, and you get this.

Trump -- as ridiculous as he was/is -- was talking jobs, borders and strength, the Democrats hung themselves up on bathrooms, BLM, birthday cakes, burkas and safe places.

There's not much indication yet that they see this.
.

What a load of shit. Trump played identity politics as much as anyone. He thrived on fear and he misrepresented facts.

 

[JQPublic1]

Liberals don't have to accept the election results, but they have no choice but to accept the consequences of the election results. Like it or not change is coming and its not the change they voted for. Grab a tissue and deal with it.

Well, the “shitty” candidate got more votes from we-the-people than her opponent. They ran the right candidate whose credentials are off the charts. The campaign she ran was like all of her campaigns; disappointing.

You might be the one grabbing for tissues when you discover Trump is really one of US!

Um...he is one of us....

That he's not one of you seems to have you very agitated.....

Tell me that in two years when Obamacare, social security and medicare are all alive and well!

Obamacare will be repealed in the first 100 days....your unilateral democrat fascism will come to a horrific end for you....

when it doesn't happen I'm going to beat you over the head with your own indignation daily!

 

[candycorn]

As if that needed to be said!!!

Look, there are 2 separate questions here.

Did Russian hackers (or hackers of any nationality for that matter) try to influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election. I would be shocked if they didn’t try. I’d be equally shocked if our election officials were so inept that they would allow such a hack to go unreported. While there is some truth to not wanting to reveal that you’ve been breached; there is zero chance that a breach would be kept under wraps.

Second question is this:

Did it influence the outcome of the elections. I supported Ms. Clinton from the word “go” in both 2008 and 2016. I can tell you that if you think the answer is “yes”, you’re wearing blinders.

She lost because Trump ran the better campaign in 2016 and she lost in 2008 because Obama ran a better campaign then too as well. SHE IS A DISAPPOINTING CAMPAIGNER!!!! Some people got it and some people don’t. Whatever the secret sauce is that makes one pull a lever next to her name…she ain’t got it. Further evidence of this all-too-clear-fact are the states that Trump won. He won Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Now, if he had won one of these states and lost the EV…someone like me would have said, “Hmm…that’s interesting.” Only because he won all 3 and won the EV do some folks like me (liberals) want to raise questions. To take this stance wounds your credibility. In the first place…One would have to wonder why the hackers spared Virginia—a very contentious state to be sure. Were they feeling generous? Secondly, the states that Mr. Trump did win are historically Blue states with solid governmental infrastructures. Are sensible persons to believe that the elections officials in 3 states have suddenly been retarded to the point where a hack would not be noticed…or reported…by anyone in that hierarchy of the group?

Relax guys. Trump won. Get over it.

Third way democrats like yourself pushed a shitty candidate that ran a horrible campaign and shit on every democrat/lefty that disagreed. You have yourself to blame.

Well, the “shitty” candidate got more votes from we-the-people than her opponent. They ran the right candidate whose credentials are off the charts. The campaign she ran was like all of her campaigns; disappointing.

And lost. I'm going to tell it like it is. Clinton was not a good candidate. Her team ran a horrible campaign. They ignored states they needed votes from, didn't campaign there just considered it a lock.

The DNC did everything in their power to push a flawed, underperforming candidate to the front. A candidate that unknown Sanders gave a run for her money. A robotic candidate hard to believe or trust, stiff and off putting to the public. A candidate that didn't campaign enough and whose strategy was to lay low and hope the other guy looks worse. A candidate who passed out and was loaded into a van. I can go on.

Meanwhile Trump was holding a rally every day, he campaigned tirelessly.

That she has more of the popular vote doesn't matter. If she was a good candidate it wouldn't even have been close, against a candidate with zero experience.

Hillary was a disaster for the Democratic party, and all that contributed to it including yourself need to get real and learn from your massive mistakes. Tools like Debbie WS have lead the party to losing elections all over the country, losing the Senate, state governors, etc. And the dumb fuck DNC kept her in charge as long as possible, then when she was fired Hillary welcomed her into her campaign.

Idiots like you that keep supporting this bullshit are destroying the Democratic party.

Yours is a wholly unsophisticated and frankly pretty juvenile understanding of presidential politics. I agree that there is a need for new blood in the party. The Party gained seats in both Houses of Congress and won the electoral vote. I’d much rather be in the Democrats chair today than the GOP chair from 4 years ago. And in a certain light, If the Trump administration follows through on it’s promises, things will look very good for the Dems in 2020.

Disagree. What you call my "juvenile and unsophisticated understanding" is the blunt truth. You gloss over the massive failures like they didn't happen. Agreeing that there is a need for new blood in the party is an understatement. The third way dems and ageing boomers have failed. If they remain in charge they will keep losing.

Yours is tantamount to the guy in class who was given the answers and then tries to explain how “smart” he is by virtue of getting 100 on the test.

New blood is part of the equation. But the situation is nowhere near as dire as one would think by listening to you. What I expect the Dems to do is basically triangulate the way Bill Clinton did; absorbing the best from both sides and presenting the middle viewpoint that will appeal to the most voters.

The “blunt truth” as you put it is that HRC had superior credentials and the backing of most (if not all) democrats. The campaign she ran in the General was ineffective. If you’re right about anything, it is that folks like me were giving her the “thumbs up” the entire way. And that was bore out by the polling; which turned out the be wrong.

 

[Mac1958]

There's not much indication yet that they see this.

What a load of shit. Trump played identity politics as much as anyone. He thrived on fear and he misrepresented facts.

And yet again, my point, illustrated, immediately.
.

 

[owebo]

Liberals don't have to accept the election results, but they have no choice but to accept the consequences of the election results. Like it or not change is coming and its not the change they voted for. Grab a tissue and deal with it.

You might be the one grabbing for tissues when you discover Trump is really one of US!

Um...he is one of us....

That he's not one of you seems to have you very agitated.....

Tell me that in two years when Obamacare, social security and medicare are all alive and well!

Obamacare will be repealed in the first 100 days....your unilateral democrat fascism will come to a horrific end for you....

when it doesn't happen I'm going to beat you over the head with your own indignation daily!

Good for you....you set low goals, as do all liberals, but at least you set one....kudos....

 

[owebo]

Third way democrats like yourself pushed a shitty candidate that ran a horrible campaign and shit on every democrat/lefty that disagreed. You have yourself to blame.

Well, the “shitty” candidate got more votes from we-the-people than her opponent. They ran the right candidate whose credentials are off the charts. The campaign she ran was like all of her campaigns; disappointing.

And lost. I'm going to tell it like it is. Clinton was not a good candidate. Her team ran a horrible campaign. They ignored states they needed votes from, didn't campaign there just considered it a lock.

The DNC did everything in their power to push a flawed, underperforming candidate to the front. A candidate that unknown Sanders gave a run for her money. A robotic candidate hard to believe or trust, stiff and off putting to the public. A candidate that didn't campaign enough and whose strategy was to lay low and hope the other guy looks worse. A candidate who passed out and was loaded into a van. I can go on.

Meanwhile Trump was holding a rally every day, he campaigned tirelessly.

That she has more of the popular vote doesn't matter. If she was a good candidate it wouldn't even have been close, against a candidate with zero experience.

Hillary was a disaster for the Democratic party, and all that contributed to it including yourself need to get real and learn from your massive mistakes. Tools like Debbie WS have lead the party to losing elections all over the country, losing the Senate, state governors, etc. And the dumb fuck DNC kept her in charge as long as possible, then when she was fired Hillary welcomed her into her campaign.

Idiots like you that keep supporting this bullshit are destroying the Democratic party.

Yours is a wholly unsophisticated and frankly pretty juvenile understanding of presidential politics. I agree that there is a need for new blood in the party. The Party gained seats in both Houses of Congress and won the electoral vote. I’d much rather be in the Democrats chair today than the GOP chair from 4 years ago. And in a certain light, If the Trump administration follows through on it’s promises, things will look very good for the Dems in 2020.

Disagree. What you call my "juvenile and unsophisticated understanding" is the blunt truth. You gloss over the massive failures like they didn't happen. Agreeing that there is a need for new blood in the party is an understatement. The third way dems and ageing boomers have failed. If they remain in charge they will keep losing.

Yours is tantamount to the guy in class who was given the answers and then tries to explain how “smart” he is by virtue of getting 100 on the test.

New blood is part of the equation. But the situation is nowhere near as dire as one would think by listening to you. What I expect the Dems to do is basically triangulate the way Bill Clinton did; absorbing the best from both sides and presenting the middle viewpoint that will appeal to the most voters.

The “blunt truth” as you put it is that HRC had superior credentials and the backing of most (if not all) democrats. The campaign she ran in the General was ineffective. If you’re right about anything, it is that folks like me were giving her the “thumbs up” the entire way. And that was bore out by the polling; which turned out the be wrong.

Seems her credentials were lacking after all....

 

[candycorn]

Yes, Hillary was a REALLY bad candidate (I could go on), but it was also her bizarre misfortune to have run against her second Cult of Personality candidate in two tries.

Add to that the fact that the Democratic party has turned into a regional party AND that many of us underestimated how fed up so many people are, and you get this.

Trump -- as ridiculous as he was/is -- was talking jobs, borders and strength, the Democrats hung themselves up on bathrooms, BLM, birthday cakes, burkas and safe places.

There's not much indication yet that they see this.
.

What a load of shit. Trump played identity politics as much as anyone. He thrived on fear and he misrepresented facts.

You don’t understand his deeper meaning or is it his higher understanding? Regardless, its too deep for your shallow mind.

 

[JQPublic1]

You might be the one grabbing for tissues when you discover Trump is really one of US!

Um...he is one of us....

That he's not one of you seems to have you very agitated.....

Tell me that in two years when Obamacare, social security and medicare are all alive and well!

Obamacare will be repealed in the first 100 days....your unilateral democrat fascism will come to a horrific end for you....

when it doesn't happen I'm going to beat you over the head with your own indignation daily!

Good for you....you set low goals, as do all liberals, but at least you set one....kudos....

You're the liberal. You actually showed tolerance for a gambler and his dance hall girl when you voted for Trump. We conservative would NEVER do that!

 

[owebo]

Um...he is one of us....

That he's not one of you seems to have you very agitated.....

Tell me that in two years when Obamacare, social security and medicare are all alive and well!

Obamacare will be repealed in the first 100 days....your unilateral democrat fascism will come to a horrific end for you....

when it doesn't happen I'm going to beat you over the head with your own indignation daily!

Good for you....you set low goals, as do all liberals, but at least you set one....kudos....

You're the liberal. You actually showed tolerance for a gambler and his dance hall girl when you voted for Trump. Us conservative would NEVER do that!

You fascist liberals are clueless....

 

[Disir]

As if that needed to be said!!!

Look, there are 2 separate questions here.

Did Russian hackers (or hackers of any nationality for that matter) try to influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election. I would be shocked if they didn’t try. I’d be equally shocked if our election officials were so inept that they would allow such a hack to go unreported. While there is some truth to not wanting to reveal that you’ve been breached; there is zero chance that a breach would be kept under wraps.

Second question is this:

Did it influence the outcome of the elections. I supported Ms. Clinton from the word “go” in both 2008 and 2016. I can tell you that if you think the answer is “yes”, you’re wearing blinders.

She lost because Trump ran the better campaign in 2016 and she lost in 2008 because Obama ran a better campaign then too as well. SHE IS A DISAPPOINTING CAMPAIGNER!!!! Some people got it and some people don’t. Whatever the secret sauce is that makes one pull a lever next to her name…she ain’t got it. Further evidence of this all-too-clear-fact are the states that Trump won. He won Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Now, if he had won one of these states and lost the EV…someone like me would have said, “Hmm…that’s interesting.” Only because he won all 3 and won the EV do some folks like me (liberals) want to raise questions. To take this stance wounds your credibility. In the first place…One would have to wonder why the hackers spared Virginia—a very contentious state to be sure. Were they feeling generous? Secondly, the states that Mr. Trump did win are historically Blue states with solid governmental infrastructures. Are sensible persons to believe that the elections officials in 3 states have suddenly been retarded to the point where a hack would not be noticed…or reported…by anyone in that hierarchy of the group?

Relax guys. Trump won. Get over it.

That is wise. The damage that was done to the Democrats was done by their own hand.

There were a lot of liberals that were not going to vote for Clinton because we already knew what her policies were. We had seen her in action. She was going to follow Obama and we are done with neoliberal policies. Neoliberalism is not center. The more she was "sold" the less she was liked. That doesn't mean most of us voted for Trump either.

And there are a lot more people on the right that voted for Trump but are really skeptical of him. It isn't that they think he is going to pull off all that he said. He has the capacity to destroy the GOP. Some have said so on this forum. Then they can elect people that represent..........you know, the people.
They watched the Republicans run to Clinton because the IMF said to.
That was not lost on anyone.

The Democrats need a come to Jesus moment. They need to decide who and what they represent.

 

[Mac1958]

As if that needed to be said!!!

Look, there are 2 separate questions here.

Did Russian hackers (or hackers of any nationality for that matter) try to influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election. I would be shocked if they didn’t try. I’d be equally shocked if our election officials were so inept that they would allow such a hack to go unreported. While there is some truth to not wanting to reveal that you’ve been breached; there is zero chance that a breach would be kept under wraps.

Second question is this:

Did it influence the outcome of the elections. I supported Ms. Clinton from the word “go” in both 2008 and 2016. I can tell you that if you think the answer is “yes”, you’re wearing blinders.

She lost because Trump ran the better campaign in 2016 and she lost in 2008 because Obama ran a better campaign then too as well. SHE IS A DISAPPOINTING CAMPAIGNER!!!! Some people got it and some people don’t. Whatever the secret sauce is that makes one pull a lever next to her name…she ain’t got it. Further evidence of this all-too-clear-fact are the states that Trump won. He won Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Now, if he had won one of these states and lost the EV…someone like me would have said, “Hmm…that’s interesting.” Only because he won all 3 and won the EV do some folks like me (liberals) want to raise questions. To take this stance wounds your credibility. In the first place…One would have to wonder why the hackers spared Virginia—a very contentious state to be sure. Were they feeling generous? Secondly, the states that Mr. Trump did win are historically Blue states with solid governmental infrastructures. Are sensible persons to believe that the elections officials in 3 states have suddenly been retarded to the point where a hack would not be noticed…or reported…by anyone in that hierarchy of the group?

Relax guys. Trump won. Get over it.

That is wise. The damage that was done to the Democrats was done by their own hand.

There were a lot of liberals that were not going to vote for Clinton because we already knew what her policies were. We had seen her in action. She was going to follow Obama and we are done with neoliberal policies. Neoliberalism is not center. The more she was "sold" the less she was liked. That doesn't mean most of us voted for Trump either.

And there are a lot more people on the right that voted for Trump but are really skeptical of him. It isn't that they think he is going to pull off all that he said. He has the capacity to destroy the GOP. Some have said so on this forum. Then they can elect people that represent..........you know, the people.
They watched the Republicans run to Clinton because the IMF said to.
That was not lost on anyone.

The Democrats need a come to Jesus moment. They need to decide who and what they represent.

Interesting stuff.

I'll ask the same question I asked above: What direction would you like to see - Blue Dog, Bernie, something else?
.