POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

Don't worry. Kepler assures us that 2020 is no problem.

Huh. When did I say that?

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

Huh. When did I say that?

You've been steadfast in your belief in demographics and "if it just wasn't Hillary". Well, 2020 is your chance to test that theory.

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

You've been steadfast in your belief in demographics and "if it just wasn't Hillary". Well, 2020 is your chance to test that theory.

Demographics are long term and I am always very careful to say suppression can unwind that.

I have never said it was only Hillary. Hillary sucked but there were plenty of other factors.

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

Magary is absolutely right about this.

Your letters:

Ray:

What are the odds that Trump would be able to recite the entire “Star-Spangled Banner” on the spot? Basic parameters: the challenge is given live on TV, and must follow promptly. He has no advance knowledge of this, so he has no time for prep.

Zero. None. There’s no way he knows the lyrics to the anthem. Look at this video and note how he skips the entire beginning of the song when he’s mouthing the lyrics. I promise you that if he was forced to do all of it, he’d veer immediately off script. “The anthem? Amazing song. GREAT song. Written by Francis Scott Key, one of our absolute heroes. The rockets, the red glare, all of it. Why is no one asking Hillary if SHE knows the lyrics? Many people say I know the lyrics better than anyone! I’m being treated very unfairly! I went to WHARTON.”

[aparch]

Why do you guys even engage the troll?

Same way 1941 Ted Williams gets the same credit for getting hits off that terrible Philly Athletics team that season as he does hits against the Yankees.

We all gotta swing at the pitch on the heart of the plate, can't leave the bat on our shoulder...

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

Demographics are long term and I am always very careful to say suppression can unwind that.

I have never said it was only Hillary. Hillary sucked but there were plenty of other factors.

Well, the vast majority around here think it was all about her. Let's see in 2020. Key factor for a real test will have to be nominating a Dukakis, Hillary, or Kerry type though. If the Democrats fall in love and actually come out to vote (Obama) because of it it's not a true test.

[French Rage]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

Magary is absolutely right about this.

Bull**** he knows Francis Scott Key's name.

[Rover]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

I'll ask again, what has Trump done that's racist? And please use the dictionary definition of "racist", not the "anyone who disagrees with me" definition.

First off, I've come to the conclusing that you're not a real person but rather a Russian bot! But, as you don't bother me, I'll play along!

His support for Charlottesville white supremacists is racism. You can't butter up neo-Nazis ("some of them are good people") but then claim you aren't one yourself.

BTW, is it true that writing "Nyet Spasibo" in response to one of your posts f's up your program?

[Rover]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

Well, the vast majority around here think it was all about her. Let's see in 2020. Key factor for a real test will have to be nominating a Dukakis, Hillary, or Kerry type though. If the Democrats fall in love and actually come out to vote (Obama) because of it it's not a true test.

If a couple of million Bernie Bros don't turn around and vote FOR Trump this time, maybe we have a shot.

[burd]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

I’m wondering if the Vegas shooter short-circuited.

Alex Jones is flaggy's ISIS?

[trixR4kids]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

Well, the vast majority around here think it was all about her.

I'm just gonna respond to this part because I have no idea what you're talking about in the rest of the post.

I think it's a combination of her being the candidate and voter suppression. There were other factors such as Comey, Russia, and some other things that I'm probably forgetting as well but those two strike me as being the biggest. As for saying it was all about her, I think that's more of a backlash to the lazy narratives being peddled that we don't really need to rehash.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

I'm just gonna respond to this part because I have no idea what you're talking about in the rest of the post.

I think it's a combination of her being the candidate and voter suppression. There were other factors such as Comey, Russia, and some other things that I'm probably forgetting as well but those two strike me as being the biggest. As for saying it was all about her, I think that's more of a backlash to the lazy narratives being peddled that we don't really need to rehash.

I'm quite explicit in what I'm getting at. Look at the Gore and Kerry elections closely and you'll figure it out. But, if you listen to what's discussed around here they could have nominated a ham sandwich instead of her and they would have won. I vehemently disagree.

[trixR4kids]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

Well those two candidates in particular have some similar issues as Hillary. Obama did too but he at least pretended not to be a centrist.

Yet these same pundits didn't give a puff about a far wider electoral divide that I think poses an actual crisis for our democracy: the more than 100 million votes that went astray on Election Day.

These votes weren't "lost" to misaligned butterfly ballots, pregnant chads or some conniving election official who deposited them in a closet. Rather, these were the uncast ballots of almost half of the American electorate, who chose not to vote this year largely because they feel they've been cast out of the process by a vacuous, cynical and elitist political system that no longer addresses their needs and aspirations.

These mostly are middle- and low-income folks, people making less than $50,000 a year. While they make up some 80 percent of the U.S. population, exit polls on Nov. 7 found that for the first time they've fallen to less than half of the voting population. As the Clinton-Gore-Lieberman Democrats have jerked the party out from under this core populist constituency, pursuing the money and adopting the policies of the corporate and investor elite, the core constituency of the party has -- big surprise -- steadily dropped away. In 1992, the under-$50,000 crowd made up 63 percent of voters. In 1996, after Clinton and Gore had relentlessly and very publicly pushed NAFTA, the WTO and other Wall Street policies for four years, the under-$50,000 crowd dropped to 52 percent of voters. After four more years of income stagnation and decline for these families under the regime of the Clinton-Gore "New Democrats," the under-$50,000 crowd dropped this year to only 47 percent of voters.
At the same time, those who are prospering under the Wall Street boom, cheered on by the policies of both the Republican and Democratic leadership, have become ever more enthusiastic voters. In 1996, voters with incomes above $100,000 (about 3 percent of the population), made up 9 percent of the turnout; this year, they were 15 percent of the turnout.

This rising income skew among voters causes both parties to push more policies that favor the affluent minority, which causes an even greater turn-off for the majority, which causes ... well, you can see the downward spiral we're in. This is especially damaging to Democrats, since the non-voters are their natural constituency. This constituency feels discarded, not only by the Democrats, but by the whole process.

Keep in mind this was written in 2000 and 17 years later the party hasn't really changed its attitudes much.

https://www.salon.com/2000/11/28/hightower

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

It's been answered hundreds of times on here. How about you do some of the work rather than asking everyone else to?

I'm sure #101 won't hurt. At least one person's already tried, and I debunked every single one of them. If you're referring to that one, you have to try harder.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: POTUS 45.22 - The Genius of Donald Trump

First off, I've come to the conclusing that you're not a real person but rather a Russian bot! But, as you don't bother me, I'll play along!

His support for Charlottesville white supremacists is racism. You can't butter up neo-Nazis ("some of them are good people") but then claim you aren't one yourself.

BTW, is it true that writing "Nyet Spasibo" in response to one of your posts f's up your program?

He condemned the actions of all that did wrong on that day. That includes the "white supremacists" that you are calling out. Heck, a few days later, he even called them out again using the terminology you wanted.