May 2017 Fundraising:Lowest May for Dems since 2003, Highest May ever for Pubs

[Ray From Cleveland]

Could have fooled me.

Yeah, well I think it's more that the past two Repubs presidents have just been so bad on an intelligence level, that's it's hard not to dislike them. Especially Trump who is such a narcissistic, despicable person in so many ways. I thought G Bush snr was an okay pres.

Despicable? Your last three presidential candidates were supported by the US Communist Party, and you voted for them. To me, that's despicable.

 

[AntonToo]

Democrats had the worst May fundraising since 2003

Pelosi and the DNC chair Perez are failing...now 0-4 in special elections since Trump took office.

Maybe they can win in Alabama and Utah to replace Sessions and Chaffetz

Rediculous nonsense, Democrat fundraising was huge in May, it just went to specific candidates not DNC

 

[12icer]

I do think it's a victory, especially when the leftists keep telling us about this rebellion by those who voted for Trump and had a serious change of heart. So it seems, there is no change of heart. Trump is doing just fine.

I think most on the right take things too literally. No leftie expects to win a safe GoP seat, just like no rightie expects anybody to defeat Pelosi in her seat. In saying that, as mentioned ad nauseum on these threads by me, the GoP majority has been smashed in Atlanta. You can put a lipstick on it and call it what you like - when 63,000 votes are slashed in just six months, that is very telling. None of it good for Trump...

Your narrative has so many holes in it not even a ten ton rock would stay in it. First THE DIMSHIT AND THEIR LAPDOG LIARS WERE THE ONES SAYING IT WAS A REFERENDUM ON TRUMP, When they lost it was not anymore. It is just like all bullshit the ignorant leftist supporters worship WRONG AND COMPLETELY without intellectual reasoning or history.

 

[Dr Grump]

Despicable? Your last three presidential candidates were supported by the US Communist Party, and you voted for them. To me, that's despicable.

Doesn't mean that they Obama or HIilary agreed with them. They didn't ask to be endorsed by them. If Charles Manson said he endorsed Trump does that mean Trump is responsible for that endorsement? What a ridiculous statement.

Obama was, and Hillary would have been, infinitely better presidents than the moron in the Oval Office at the moment. So would have most of the other GoP candidates.

I didn't vote for anybody. For the zillionth time I'm not even American.

 

[Dr Grump]

Your narrative has so many holes in it not even a ten ton rock would stay in it. First THE DIMSHIT AND THEIR LAPDOG LIARS WERE THE ONES SAYING IT WAS A REFERENDUM ON TRUMP, When they lost it was not anymore. It is just like all bullshit the ignorant leftist supporters worship WRONG AND COMPLETELY without intellectual reasoning or history.

No Trump supporter has the right to put the words 'intellectual' and 'reasoning' in the same sentence if they voted for him. His is the anti-intellectual. You could not get a more insipid, vacuous, moronic president if you tried. He is the anti-reasoning. So much so he just creates fake news.

It was a referendum on Trump. His super safe seat just had a 500% swing AGAINST him....you do get that, right?

 

[baileyn45]

Here's another definition for you:

result:
To happen as a consequence

Serious question: If Pelosi's seat was up for re-election, and she won, and the Dems were going around saying "See, we told you that Trump had no mandate" based upon that result, would you agree with them, or just think they're being silly?

Well if the reps were running around saying that a current adm was so bad that there was going to be a huge backlash then yes. We've been listening to the dems basically saying exactly that and as yet no indication. Who knows it may come but no indication yet.

 

[Dschrute3]

This round-the-clock vicious Democrat incitement campaign is beginning to backfire on em. Rational logical folks have had enough of the hate. They know what's right and wrong. They know the Democratic Party is completely out of control. Democrats could pay a hefty price in future Elections.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Doesn't mean that they Obama or HIilary agreed with them. They didn't ask to be endorsed by them. If Charles Manson said he endorsed Trump does that mean Trump is responsible for that endorsement? What a ridiculous statement.

It would mean something if Manson and Trump had the same ideology. Take a look at the US Communist Party platform sometime. If you didn't know it was theirs, you'd swear you were reading a leftist politician platform.

 

[Dr Grump]

Well if the reps were running around saying that a current adm was so bad that there was going to be a huge backlash then yes. We've been listening to the dems basically saying exactly that and as yet no indication. Who knows it may come but no indication yet.

If having a majority of 75,000 in a very safe seat cut to 12,000 in six months isn't a backlash, what is it?

 

[Dr Grump]

Doesn't mean that they Obama or HIilary agreed with them. They didn't ask to be endorsed by them. If Charles Manson said he endorsed Trump does that mean Trump is responsible for that endorsement? What a ridiculous statement.

It would mean something if Manson and Trump had the same ideology. Take a look at the US Communist Party platform sometime. If you didn't know it was theirs, you'd swear you were reading a leftist politician platform.

Communism by its definition is a leftist platform. But that doesn't mean your average Dem agrees with it. There is a reason that there is a Green Party and Dem party. it's because they believe in different things.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Doesn't mean that they Obama or HIilary agreed with them. They didn't ask to be endorsed by them. If Charles Manson said he endorsed Trump does that mean Trump is responsible for that endorsement? What a ridiculous statement.

It would mean something if Manson and Trump had the same ideology. Take a look at the US Communist Party platform sometime. If you didn't know it was theirs, you'd swear you were reading a leftist politician platform.

Communism by its definition is a leftist platform. But that doesn't mean your average Dem agrees with it. There is a reason that there is a Green Party and Dem party. it's because they believe in different things.

The Green and Democrat party, perhaps, but the ideology between the Communists and liberals is frighteningly similar.

They both believe in wealth redistribution. They both believe in disarming the public. They both believe in a central controlling government. They both believe in giving minorities extra rights and laws that favor their race.

If these are not Democrat ideologies, I don't know what is.

 

[Dr Grump]

The Green and Democrat party, perhaps, but the ideology between the Communists and liberals is frighteningly similar.

They both believe in wealth redistribution. They both believe in disarming the public. They both believe in a central controlling government. They both believe in giving minorities extra rights and laws that favor their race.

If these are not Democrat ideologies, I don't know what is.

I think you are wrong. I am a centrist, but I don't believe in wealth distribution per se, but I do believe everybody should get their fair share. Should the guy who invented the gadget get more wealth because of this? Sure.

Disarming the public? I don't know many people who want to disarm anybody in the US. They just wonder why they want fully automatic firearms.

I don't think they want to give minorities extra rights, they just want to give them rights that the rest of us take for granted. They have a lot of these rights now.

 

[Dschrute3]

I think Democrats are marginalizing their Party. The 24/7 hate incitement propaganda has gotten out of control. I truly believe most Americans know what's right and wrong. They know the Democratic Party has gone insane. It may not be a viable choice for rational Americans. They're digging their own grave.

 

[TheDude]

Democrats had the worst May fundraising since 2003

Pelosi and the DNC chair Perez are failing...now 0-4 in special elections since Trump took office.

Maybe they can win in Alabama and Utah to replace Sessions and Chaffetz

Obviously Republicans don't need it.

 

[whitehall]

Maybe gun toting left wing anarchists will start holding up banks and armored cars for funding like they did in the 60's and 70's.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The Green and Democrat party, perhaps, but the ideology between the Communists and liberals is frighteningly similar.

They both believe in wealth redistribution. They both believe in disarming the public. They both believe in a central controlling government. They both believe in giving minorities extra rights and laws that favor their race.

If these are not Democrat ideologies, I don't know what is.

I think you are wrong. I am a centrist, but I don't believe in wealth distribution per se, but I do believe everybody should get their fair share. Should the guy who invented the gadget get more wealth because of this? Sure.

Disarming the public? I don't know many people who want to disarm anybody in the US. They just wonder why they want fully automatic firearms.

I don't think they want to give minorities extra rights, they just want to give them rights that the rest of us take for granted. They have a lot of these rights now.

Everybody should get their fair share?

"Just what is YOUR fair share of what somebody else worked for?"
Thomas Sowell

The debate over guns has nothing to do with automatic weapons. Unless you get a government permit to own one, they are illegal in the US and nobody is fighting for their legalization. If not for our Constitution, the left would disarm the public. I have several links (if you'd like to see them) of leftists trying to disarm as many people as they could, or make it much more difficult to own a firearm. Suggestions such as taxation on ammunition, holding gun sellers and manufacturers liable for murders, forcing firearm owners to have liability insurance, and things like that.

But the truth is leftists are not so much against guns as they are against people being allowed to protect themselves with guns. You have to understand that in our country (as other free nations) each party tries to expand their tent. The two largest groups of Democrat supporters are victims and government dependents. The more victims and government dependents Democrats can create, the more likely Democrat voters.

So if they could ever disarm the pubic, that means we would all be victims since you can't disarm everybody. The criminals would still have their guns--we innocents would not. Therefore we would be victims of crime. After all, if we can legally defend ourselves against criminals, then who needs Democrats?