![]() |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by zargof
(Post 12025334)
And yet during the primary, he was painted as a tax hiking socialist and his popularity went up, weird...
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by zargof
(Post 12025334)
No, what I've consistently said is that it's all about getting the best deal possible. To do that, you propose a whole loaf, then you end up with half. It seems your approach is to negotiate with yourself and propose a half loaf and be happy if you get crumbs.
There's no path for progressives for getting much of they want until they can turn more voters into progressives. (And no, winning Democratic primaries is not enough; Democrats must field candidates who can win general elections in order to avoid losing to the Republicans.) This isn't that complicated. It's a numbers game, and progressives don't have the numbers. Ignoring the numbers won't improve them. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Giantaxe
(Post 12025337)
All rather moot given he garnered a lot fewer votes than his opponent.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP
(Post 12025341)
Progressives are outnumbered by conservatives within the Democratic party, not to mention the country at large.
There's no path for progressives for getting much of they want until they can turn more voters into progressives. (And no, winning Democratic primaries is not enough; Democrats must field candidates who can win general elections in order to avoid losing to the Republicans.) This isn't that complicated. It's a numbers game, and progressives don't have the numbers. Ignoring the numbers won't improve them. If Everyone Voted, Progressives Would Win | Al Jazeera America That, plus getting money out of politics. I think Bernie Sanders has started to move the Overton window back to the left, it just remains to be seen if the movement will continue after this election. But the main point I was making is to capitalise on the gains made by Sanders as much as possible. I don't know why you think that is delusional. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP
(Post 12025341)
Progressives are outnumbered by conservatives within the Democratic party, not to mention the country at large.
There's no path for progressives for getting much of they want until they can turn more voters into progressives. (And no, winning Democratic primaries is not enough; Democrats must field candidates who can win general elections in order to avoid losing to the Republicans.) This isn't that complicated. It's a numbers game, and progressives don't have the numbers. Ignoring the numbers won't improve them. Not sure the definition of "conservatives in the democrat party" fits reality. What are usually considered conservative principles or beliefs do not fit within the platform of the party or the "plan" of Hilary. |
Re: 2016 Election
Seem Hillary's charitable donations are mainly to her.
Who could have guessed it? |
Re: 2016 Election
Good description of Trumps alledged business success.
"But for me, the words that best summed up the financial nonsense that led to the bankruptcy of Trump’s businesses were uttered in the early 1990s by the dean of financial journalists, Floyd Norris. He said that someday we all would have to explain to our children and grandchildren the bizarre story of Donald Trump, how so many banks behaved so recklessly to benefit a man who was obviously little more than a carnival barker. The answer, Floyd said, was: “You just had to be there. It can’t be explained rationally.†|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Boiler
(Post 12025415)
Seem Hillary's charitable donations are mainly to her.
Who could have guessed it? |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by anotherlimey
(Post 12025427)
Well a fifth of Donald's campaign expenses are for Trump-owned services.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Boiler
(Post 12025415)
Seem Hillary's charitable donations are mainly to her.
Who could have guessed it? Trump doesn't do that, he makes everybody else pay. And he doesn't have charities. Nothing is free and being so naive as to give money away is only a concealed way to take tax deductions. Besides, she's an idiot to even release her tax returns. The biased media will only find out how stupid she is. You can bet Trump won't do that. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Boiler
(Post 12025415)
Seem Hillary's charitable donations are mainly to her.
Who could have guessed it? Perhaps we could compare against Trump's charitable contributions? Oh... |
Re: 2016 Election
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Boiler
(Post 12025415)
Seem Hillary's charitable donations are mainly to her.
Who could have guessed it? |
Re: 2016 Election
I guess there will some harrassment at the polls in PA.
Donald Trump says the only way he will lose the election in Pennsylvania is if his opponents cheat. "We're going to watch Pennsylvania. Go down to certain areas and watch and study and make sure other people don't come in and vote five times," Trump said during a Friday rally in Pennsylvania. "If you do that, we're not going to lose. The only way we can lose, in my opinion -- I really mean this, Pennsylvania -- is if cheating goes on." An NBC/WSJ/Marist poll released August 7 showed Trump trailing Clinton 11 points in Pennsylvania. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Nutmegger
(Post 12025555)
Why on earth wouldn't she donate to a charity that has her full support? I volunteer with local organizations and that is where I focus my charitable giving; it would make no sense not to.
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 7:36 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.