![]() |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Giantaxe
(Post 12100401)
Right. But when things are likely blocked at the federal level, the only way forward is at the state. Even with Clinton as president, nothing on the gun control front would have got through congress.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by dc koop
(Post 12100412)
Would not California have the right to require background checks when purchasing firearms at gun shows ?
|
Re: 2016 Election
Colorado require that and more stuff.
|
Re: 2016 Election
This. All of it.
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/09/...son-of-brexit/ Democrats need to do an autopsy similar to the GOP from last time. They should reach the conclusion that they actually have to do something to help the people rather their donors, and then they have to follow through, and actually do something about it. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by zargof
(Post 12100462)
This. All of it.
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/09/...son-of-brexit/ Democrats need to do an autopsy similar to the GOP from last time. They should reach the conclusion that they actually have to do something to help the people rather their donors, and then they have to follow through, and actually do something about it. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by zargof
(Post 12100462)
This. All of it.
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/09/...son-of-brexit/ Democrats need to do an autopsy similar to the GOP from last time. They should reach the conclusion that they actually have to do something to help the people rather their donors, and then they have to follow through, and actually do something about it. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by zargof
(Post 12100462)
This. All of it.
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/09/...son-of-brexit/ Democrats need to do an autopsy similar to the GOP from last time. They should reach the conclusion that they actually have to do something to help the people rather their donors, and then they have to follow through, and actually do something about it. |
Re: 2016 Election
Do we take solace in the fact that Clinton won the popular vote? That that in itself shows that there is a future for Democrats if the DNC get more in tune with their base?
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by dakota44
(Post 12100506)
When should Republicans come to that same conclusion about themselves?
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by SultanOfSwing
(Post 12100515)
Do we take solace in the fact that Clinton won the popular vote? That that in itself shows that there is a future for Democrats if the DNC get more in tune with their base?
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by zargof
(Post 12100462)
This. All of it.
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/09/...son-of-brexit/ Democrats need to do an autopsy similar to the GOP from last time. They should reach the conclusion that they actually have to do something to help the people rather their donors, and then they have to follow through, and actually do something about it. Let's remember that she won more votes, she apparently just didn't win them in the right places. Clinton is bright, but she isn't charismatic or a particularly compelling speaker. I'm willing to bet that Joe Biden would have won, people just like him better. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by zargof
(Post 12100517)
Not really. Unless all those liberals in California are relocating to the Midwest.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by zargof
(Post 12100517)
Not really. Unless all those liberals in California are relocating to the Midwest.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by SultanOfSwing
(Post 12100523)
The Midwest will turn blue again with the right candidate to get behind.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by SultanOfSwing
(Post 12100523)
The Midwest will turn blue again with the right candidate to get behind.
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 7:12 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.