The Abortion Truth Liberals Can't Deny

[TopSecretBoiler]

Simple math. People polled aren't just R or D. It's everybody. About 35-40% of Rs are voting Trump. Rs are about 30% of the voting age population. There are a whole lot of I and D along with that 60% of R that don't like Trump. Similar for Clinton, but there are about 20 million more D than R in this country, and she's not running around acting like a complete ass 80% of the time in her campaign, so her number is lower.

haha! the problem with your "simple math" is the electoral college. So if all those extra democratic votes are in states that are already going blue, then they are essentially wasted votes. eg California I think they have like 7M registered D's. And Clinton polls every bit as poorly with independents as Trump does. I wouldn't count him out just yet. He's going to pull I's harder than Clinton. I's tend to be college educated and male more so than the other parties. If he can pull some key states there is a path for him. Plus he's going to run her off the stage in the debates. She can't even handle Bernie and he's lobbing softballs. Would also like to point out Trump just romped in NY by 35% and he was only polling about 25%. The polls are clearly underestimating him, likely on purpose. Republican race is over.

 

[SDBoiler1]

haha! the problem with your "simple math" is the electoral college. So if all those extra democratic votes are in states that are already going blue, then they are essentially wasted votes. eg California I think they have like 7M registered D's. And Clinton polls every bit as poorly with independents as Trump does. I wouldn't count him out just yet. He's going to pull I's harder than Clinton. I's tend to be college educated and male more so than the other parties. If he can pull some key states there is a path for him. Plus he's going to run her off the stage in the debates. She can't even handle Bernie and he's lobbing softballs. Would also like to point out Trump just romped in NY by 35% and he was only polling about 25%. The polls are clearly underestimating him, likely on purpose. Republican race is over.

I think this is true. Cruz will have his last gasp in Indiana, of all places.

One interesting article I saw the other day was in Politico, I believe. In it they talked about how Donald Trump thrives in situations where "the establishment" (in his past these were other real estate developers, his family members, other business people, etc.) tells him he can't do something or can't win something. Basically, the article said in his life experiences that he has typically done everything he can to try to prove "the establishment" wrong and that he has a good track record of coming out on top. No one thought he could do as well as he has except himself in this election campaign. He has an indomitable spirit, which I find refreshing. The Democrats should underestimate him at their own peril...

 

[qazplm]

haha! the problem with your "simple math" is the electoral college. So if all those extra democratic votes are in states that are already going blue, then they are essentially wasted votes. eg California I think they have like 7M registered D's. And Clinton polls every bit as poorly with independents as Trump does. I wouldn't count him out just yet. He's going to pull I's harder than Clinton. I's tend to be college educated and male more so than the other parties. If he can pull some key states there is a path for him. Plus he's going to run her off the stage in the debates. She can't even handle Bernie and he's lobbing softballs. Would also like to point out Trump just romped in NY by 35% and he was only polling about 25%. The polls are clearly underestimating him, likely on purpose. Republican race is over.

So who won independents in 08, and who won the election?

The idea that you think Trump will run Hillary Clinton off the stage in a debate...it's just...brings a tear to my eye...because that's what happens when you laugh hard enough.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

haha! the problem with your "simple math" is the electoral college. So if all those extra democratic votes are in states that are already going blue, then they are essentially wasted votes. eg California I think they have like 7M registered D's. And Clinton polls every bit as poorly with independents as Trump does. I wouldn't count him out just yet. He's going to pull I's harder than Clinton. I's tend to be college educated and male more so than the other parties. If he can pull some key states there is a path for him. Plus he's going to run her off the stage in the debates. She can't even handle Bernie and he's lobbing softballs. Would also like to point out Trump just romped in NY by 35% and he was only polling about 25%. The polls are clearly underestimating him, likely on purpose. Republican race is over.

We were talking about "unfavorable" polls. The electoral college has nothing to do with that discussion. Do try and keep up.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

So who won independents in 08, and who won the election?

The idea that you think Trump will run Hillary Clinton off the stage in a debate...it's just...brings a tear to my eye...because that's what happens when you laugh hard enough.

Seriously. Trump's tactics in debates are not going to appeal to the people he has to have on his side in order to win. They'll appeal to the people he already has while turning anyone else off.

 

[SDBoiler1]

Seriously. Trump's tactics in debates are not going to appeal to the people he has to have on his side in order to win. They'll appeal to the people he already has while turning anyone else off.

I agree with this. I believe you will see a more tame and "kinder, gentler" Trump going forward because he and his "coaches" know that he needs to turn around his (un)favorability ratings, especially with women. He needs to do better with African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asians, too.

He can't go frontal assault all the time on HRC, because that will destroy any chance of reaching the demographics he needs to bolster to win.

That said, I think he can do this. Last night's speech in NY was just the start of this.

 

[qazplm]

I agree with this. I believe you will see a more tame and "kinder, gentler" Trump going forward because he and his "coaches" know that he needs to turn around his (un)favorability ratings, especially with women. He needs to do better with African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asians, too.

He can't go frontal assault all the time on HRC, because that will destroy any chance of reaching the demographics he needs to bolster to win.

That said, I think he can do this. Last night's speech in NY was just the start of this.

I would cut out my left testicle, roast it up, cover it in the finest spices, and eat it if Trump gets double digits of the AA vote. I can't imagine him getting more than 20% of the Hispanic vote. And women? I suspect Hillary goes over 60% with that group.

He has no chance with any of those demographics. Being nicer for a few months is not going to matter. It's the whole reason why his party bosses are freaking the heck out at the idea of him being the nominee, they know he will absolutely cause the bottom to drop out on the party up and down the ballot demographically.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

I would cut out my left testicle, roast it up, cover it in the finest spices, and eat it if Trump gets double digits of the AA vote. I can't imagine him getting more than 20% of the Hispanic vote. And women? I suspect Hillary goes over 60% with that group.

He has no chance with any of those demographics. Being nicer for a few months is not going to matter. It's the whole reason why his party bosses are freaking the heck out at the idea of him being the nominee, they know he will absolutely cause the bottom to drop out on the party up and down the ballot demographically.

Yep. Winning white males handily doesn't cut it anymore. Apparently Trump hasn't gotten that message.

 

[SDBoiler1]

I would cut out my left testicle, roast it up, cover it in the finest spices, and eat it if Trump gets double digits of the AA vote. I can't imagine him getting more than 20% of the Hispanic vote. And women? I suspect Hillary goes over 60% with that group.

He has no chance with any of those demographics. Being nicer for a few months is not going to matter. It's the whole reason why his party bosses are freaking the heck out at the idea of him being the nominee, they know he will absolutely cause the bottom to drop out on the party up and down the ballot demographically.

I would cut out my left testicle, roast it up, cover it in the finest spices, and eat it if Trump gets double digits of the AA vote. I can't imagine him getting more than 20% of the Hispanic vote. And women? I suspect Hillary goes over 60% with that group.

He has no chance with any of those demographics. Being nicer for a few months is not going to matter. It's the whole reason why his party bosses are freaking the heck out at the idea of him being the nominee, they know he will absolutely cause the bottom to drop out on the party up and down the ballot demographically.

Never said he'd win those demographics, but he does need to do better than Romney did. I think he can in some cases, including women.

HRC is an extremely unpopular candidate herself, with an unfavorable rating of 55%. I just saw a video of Bernie Sanders supporters asked to describe HRC and they called her "treacherous", "a liar", "untrustworthy", "establishment", "a fraud", among other things, in a montage of 20 people. (Yes, it's only 20 people, but based on the people they questioned, I really believe it is representative of the Democrat electorate right now.) Not one had a good thing to say about her. Asked if they could vote for her, only 6 said "yes". 11 said they wouldn't vote at all if Sanders doesn't win the Democrat nomination or they would write him in as a 3rd party candidate.

Granted, this is April and the election is in November, but this early indication can't sit well with HRC supporters. She is a weak candidate with very large credibility issues. Democrat establishment people seem to think that their side will automatically unite at the convention and everything will be butterflies and sunshine. I wouldn't be so sure.

Also think that there will be a small numbers of hetero-orthodox Republicans who will sit out the election if Trump is the nominee. He needs these people to vote for him but they won't do it. I know some of these "RWNJ" folks myself.

 

[qazplm]

Never said he'd win those demographics, but he does need to do better than Romney did. I think he can in some cases, including women.

HRC is an extremely unpopular candidate herself, with an unfavorable rating of 55%. I just saw a video of Bernie Sanders supporters asked to describe HRC and they called her "treacherous", "a liar", "untrustworthy", "establishment", "a fraud", among other things, in a montage of 20 people. (Yes, it's only 20 people, but based on the people they questioned, I really believe it is representative of the Democrat electorate right now.) Not one had a good thing to say about her. Asked if they could vote for her, only 6 said "yes". 11 said they wouldn't vote at all if Sanders doesn't win the Democrat nomination or they would write him in as a 3rd party candidate.

Granted, this is April and the election is in November, but this early indication can't sit well with HRC supporters. She is a weak candidate with very large credibility issues. Democrat establishment people seem to think that their side will automatically unite at the convention and everything will be butterflies and sunshine. I wouldn't be so sure.

Also think that there will be a small numbers of hetero-orthodox Republicans who will sit out the election if Trump is the nominee. He needs these people to vote for him but they won't do it. I know some of these "RWNJ" folks myself.

Later than this in 08, over 40% of HRC supporters were polled to say they wouldn't vote for Obama. They even created "PUMA" which stood for Party Unity My Ass. It ended up being a shallow threat. Same here. MOST Sanders supporters will support Hillary, in large part because Sanders will do what Hillary did in 08, get behind the nominee.

Be honest, in the summer of 08, you'd have said Obama was a weak candidate wouldn't you? When he was trailing in most polls to McCain, with Saul Alinsky, and Jeremiah Wright, lack of qualifications, etc etc?

Elections at the presidential level are less about people, and more about demographics these days. And, right now, the demographics HEAVILY favor the Democrats at the electoral college level.

 

[SDBoiler1]

Later than this in 08, over 40% of HRC supporters were polled to say they wouldn't vote for Obama. They even created "PUMA" which stood for Party Unity My Ass. It ended up being a shallow threat. Same here. MOST Sanders supporters will support Hillary, in large part because Sanders will do what Hillary did in 08, get behind the nominee.

Be honest, in the summer of 08, you'd have said Obama was a weak candidate wouldn't you? When he was trailing in most polls to McCain, with Saul Alinsky, and Jeremiah Wright, lack of qualifications, etc etc?

Elections at the presidential level are less about people, and more about demographics these days. And, right now, the demographics HEAVILY favor the Democrats at the electoral college level.

Yes they do, but it's also about who the candidates actually get to the polling places to vote. Obama had a very high enthusiasm factor around his campaign. The energy level right now is not with Hillary so much. Until NY, Bernie had the energy. Can Hillary count on Millennials to come out in droves? Don't bank on it.

 

[qazplm]

Yes they do, but it's also about who the candidates actually get to the polling places to vote. Obama had a very high enthusiasm factor around his campaign. The energy level right now is not with Hillary so much. Until NY, Bernie had the energy. Can Hillary count on Millennials to come out in droves? Don't bank on it.

Folks say that, but to me energy level is truly measured by one thing...voting.
It takes more energy to sit in a line to vote then to attend a rally IMO.

And Hillary has more votes thus far than anyone else. More than Bernie. More than Trump.
And it's not even close.

I don't bother counting on millennials coming out in droves in any election. They are fickle, prone to low turnout, and they certainly didn't come out enough for Bernie did they? As long as she's winning women by more than 50%, and she will, and crushing it with minority voters (and she definitely will), she's going to win the electoral college.

 

[SDBoiler1]

Folks say that, but to me energy level is truly measured by one thing...voting.
It takes more energy to sit in a line to vote then to attend a rally IMO.

And Hillary has more votes thus far than anyone else. More than Bernie. More than Trump.
And it's not even close.

I don't bother counting on millennials coming out in droves in any election. They are fickle, prone to low turnout, and they certainly didn't come out enough for Bernie did they? As long as she's winning women by more than 50%, and she will, and crushing it with minority voters (and she definitely will), she's going to win the electoral college.

Bernie Sanders has treated HRC with kid gloves so far. The Republican candidate will not be so nice. He will club her about her lying and deceitful record. She's weak already, and she's going to get bludgeoned and become even weaker. She will be exposed for the fraud she is and the independent voters will start paying more attention to her background than they have so far.

Trump has a much higher ceiling, IMHO, than Hillary does. The general angst and discontent with the "establishment" on both sides will be fully brought to bear.

 

[qazplm]

Bernie Sanders has treated HRC with kid gloves so far. The Republican candidate will not be so nice. He will club her about her lying and deceitful record. She's weak already, and she's going to get bludgeoned and become even weaker. She will be exposed for the fraud she is and the independent voters will start paying more attention to her background than they have so far.

Trump has a much higher ceiling, IMHO, than Hillary does. The general angst and discontent with the "establishment" on both sides will be fully brought to bear.

Well, you can postulate any number of reasons why she's doing so well, but the reality is she IS doing better by any metric (raw votes, states won, delegates won).

Hillary Clinton has been attacked for most of her adult life by the right. What attack specifically do you think is going to land now that hasn't already been baked into the thought process of voters?

How is she a fraud?

Bernie has attacked her, but it's things that the GE won't care about nearly as much and things that Donald Trump can't say any better about.

You don't think there's an opposition research file on Trump that's a mile long HRC's people are just itching to use at the right time?

 

[SDBoiler1]

Well, you can postulate any number of reasons why she's doing so well, but the reality is she IS doing better by any metric (raw votes, states won, delegates won).

Hillary Clinton has been attacked for most of her adult life by the right. What attack specifically do you think is going to land now that hasn't already been baked into the thought process of voters?

How is she a fraud?

Bernie has attacked her, but it's things that the GE won't care about nearly as much and things that Donald Trump can't say any better about.

You don't think there's an opposition research file on Trump that's a mile long HRC's people are just itching to use at the right time?

I am sure that HRC's campaign has a thick file on Trump. It just seems to me that HRC is not very adept on her feet. Trump is pretty good on his feet (most of the time).

I don't think that much of general electorate knows about (or remembers) the Clinton legacy of Whitewater, her former lovers (including those who mysteriously died like Vince Foster), the $2B the Clinton foundation has funneled through its coffers (including $ from Saudi Arabia, Russia, Qatar, China, etc.), the Clinton connection to the Panama Papers - the list goes on an on. Her criminal behavior with the emails (they are felonies) don't matter? If you did this, you'd be in jail and paying a huge fine, so would I. The Obama Administration cover-up of Benghazi, of which HRC played a key role?

HRC thinks she's above the law and she acts like it. She also is one of the worst politicians when it comes to identity politics - female vs. male, black vs. white, gay vs. straight, Muslim vs. Christian, pro-choice vs. pro-life. there is almost nothing she does that unites this country in any way. Except of course if its to continually demonize white males.

 

[qazplm]

I am sure that HRC's campaign has a thick file on Trump. It just seems to me that HRC is not very adept on her feet. Trump is pretty good on his feet (most of the time).

I don't think that much of general electorate knows about (or remembers) the Clinton legacy of Whitewater, her former lovers (including those who mysteriously died like Vince Foster), the $2B the Clinton foundation has funneled through its coffers (including $ from Saudi Arabia, Russia, Qatar, China, etc.), the Clinton connection to the Panama Papers - the list goes on an on. Her criminal behavior with the emails (they are felonies) don't matter? If you did this, you'd be in jail and paying a huge fine, so would I. The Obama Administration cover-up of Benghazi, of which HRC played a key role?

HRC thinks she's above the law and she acts like it. She also is one of the worst politicians when it comes to identity politics - female vs. male, black vs. white, gay vs. straight, Muslim vs. Christian, pro-choice vs. pro-life. there is almost nothing she does that unites this country in any way. Except of course if its to continually demonize white males.

UGH...good on his feet? The victims of 7-11 would like to have a word with you. It's easy to be good on your feet when you just toss out a bunch of gonna make this and that great, and everything sucks, and I'll make it all not suck. How ya gonna do it Donald? Don't worry about it, I got a plan.

That's not going to fly in the GE.

Whitewater was looked at by a special prosecutor. The result, Bill and Monica. Vince Foster?? Come on man. Don't make me break our entente with that mess.

The Clinton foundation I suppose is recent enough that looking at it is fair game, but I doubt there's any more there there than anything else that the right has looked at time and again and found nothing.

Benghazi?? She spent 11 hours on that and came out of it with her approval ratings actually shooting up.

If the FBI finishes up and she's not indicted, then the email stuff is over.

The list may go on and on, but the effective list is mighty, mighty short.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

HRC is an extremely unpopular candidate herself, with an unfavorable rating of 55%. I just saw a video of Bernie Sanders supporters asked to describe HRC and they called her "treacherous", "a liar", "untrustworthy", "establishment", "a fraud", among other things, in a montage of 20 people. (Yes, it's only 20 people, but based on the people they questioned, I really believe it is representative of the Democrat electorate right now.) Not one had a good thing to say about her. Asked if they could vote for her, only 6 said "yes". 11 said they wouldn't vote at all if Sanders doesn't win the Democrat nomination or they would write him in as a 3rd party candidate.

Granted, this is April and the election is in November, but this early indication can't sit well with HRC supporters. She is a weak candidate with very large credibility issues. Democrat establishment people seem to think that their side will automatically unite at the convention and everything will be butterflies and sunshine. I wouldn't be so sure.

Also think that there will be a small numbers of hetero-orthodox Republicans who will sit out the election if Trump is the nominee. He needs these people to vote for him but they won't do it. I know some of these "RWNJ" folks myself.

So, Trump calls Cruz "lyin' Ted" and Cruz supporters loath Trump every bit as much as Sanders supporters loath Hillary, though likely more. I think Hillary stands a far greater chance of unifying the Democratic base than Trump does unifying Republicans. Hillary's path is much easier than Trump's because of the demographics in this country. That means Trump is staring at an uphill battle already, and he's not the type of guy who is going to inspire people to jump on his bandwagon that aren't already there.

He's going to get trounced. It wouldn't really surprise me if it was a Mondale trouncing, honestly.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

So, Trump calls Cruz "lyin' Ted" and Cruz supporters loath Trump every bit as much as Sanders supporters loath Hillary, though likely more. I think Hillary stands a far greater chance of unifying the Democratic base than Trump does unifying Republicans. Hillary's path is much easier than Trump's because of the demographics in this country. That means Trump is staring at an uphill battle already, and he's not the type of guy who is going to inspire people to jump on his bandwagon that aren't already there.

He's going to get trounced. It wouldn't really surprise me if it was a Mondale trouncing, honestly.

I don't think Repubs are at a point where they can be unified, by anyone. The party needs to change and the baby boomers need to go the **** away. They've run the country into the ground, on both sides, for long enough.

 

[qazplm]

So, Trump calls Cruz "lyin' Ted" and Cruz supporters loath Trump every bit as much as Sanders supporters loath Hillary, though likely more. I think Hillary stands a far greater chance of unifying the Democratic base than Trump does unifying Republicans. Hillary's path is much easier than Trump's because of the demographics in this country. That means Trump is staring at an uphill battle already, and he's not the type of guy who is going to inspire people to jump on his bandwagon that aren't already there.

He's going to get trounced. It wouldn't really surprise me if it was a Mondale trouncing, honestly.

I dunno about that last bit...I suspect he wins most of the southern states: The only ones at play there might Arkansas and maybe Georgia...VA and NC are more swing states than Southern states for this purpose....FL too.

But I'd guess the rest of the southern states would go Trump...as would say ND, SD, OK, NE, ID.

Maybe UT slips to Hillary based on polling but I doubt it. Montana is not as red as some folks might think so maybe that one too.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

I don't think Repubs are at a point where they can be unified, by anyone. The party needs to change and the baby boomers need to go the **** away. They've run the country into the ground, on both sides, for long enough.

I don't know about that. I don't think Cruz or Trump can, nor probably Kasich either. But you all ran off all the actually viable candidates that could've beaten Hillary because you're sooooo maaaaaad. Hopefully the people learn the lesson and apply to 2020, but I doubt it. I suspect I'll be voting to re-elect Hillary then, too.

 

[SDBoiler1]

I don't know about that. I don't think Cruz or Trump can, nor probably Kasich either. But you all ran off all the actually viable candidates that could've beaten Hillary because you're sooooo maaaaaad. Hopefully the people learn the lesson and apply to 2020, but I doubt it. I suspect I'll be voting to re-elect Hillary then, too.

Nope, she'll be in jail well before 2020.

 

[SDBoiler1]

So, Trump calls Cruz "lyin' Ted" and Cruz supporters loath Trump every bit as much as Sanders supporters loath Hillary, though likely more. I think Hillary stands a far greater chance of unifying the Democratic base than Trump does unifying Republicans. Hillary's path is much easier than Trump's because of the demographics in this country. That means Trump is staring at an uphill battle already, and he's not the type of guy who is going to inspire people to jump on his bandwagon that aren't already there.

He's going to get trounced. It wouldn't really surprise me if it was a Mondale trouncing, honestly.

Hillary's path is easier than Trump's no doubt, but Trump's gotta love it when people so casually dismiss his chances. I've seen on cable news shows (MSNBC, which I know you love) that the Democrat establishment and Hillary's campaign are worried about facing Trump far more than either Cruz or Kasich. He's much more unpredictable and Hillary can't stand facing an opponent who is unpredictable. Obama came out of nowhere and cleaned her clock. She wasn't prepared for Obama in any, way, shape, or form. She never predicted Sanders would make her sweat so much, either, because she's so out-of-touch with reality.

There are some hardcore "Orthodox Republicans" (RWNJs, Cruz supporters to the end) who will never vote for Trump. I've seen much more "never Trump" from the establishment than from the voting public, though.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Hillary's path is easier than Trump's no doubt, but Trump's gotta love it when people so casually dismiss his chances. I've seen on cable news shows (MSNBC, which I know you love) that the Democrat establishment and Hillary's campaign are worried about facing Trump far more than either Cruz or Kasich. He's much more unpredictable and Hillary can't stand facing an opponent who is unpredictable. Obama came out of nowhere and cleaned her clock. She wasn't prepared for Obama in any, way, shape, or form. She never predicted Sanders would make her sweat so much, either, because she's so out-of-touch with reality.

There are some hardcore "Orthodox Republicans" (RWNJs, Cruz supporters to the end) who will never vote for Trump. I've seen much more "never Trump" from the establishment than from the voting public, though.

How much is Sanders making her sweat? She's never really been threatened in the popular vote nor the delegate count, and has it virtually locked up at this point.

I'm sure Trump loves it. Your miscalculation is that the GE isn't about competing amidst a group of people that all largely feel the same way about things. It's about attracting voters who are split, voters who lean the other way, etc., and Trump's tactic has been to largely dismiss those people and treat them as sub-human. Yeah, that's not going to attract my center-right vote, sorry.

I'd rather vote for a DINO.

 

[qazplm]

Hillary's path is easier than Trump's no doubt, but Trump's gotta love it when people so casually dismiss his chances. I've seen on cable news shows (MSNBC, which I know you love) that the Democrat establishment and Hillary's campaign are worried about facing Trump far more than either Cruz or Kasich. He's much more unpredictable and Hillary can't stand facing an opponent who is unpredictable. Obama came out of nowhere and cleaned her clock. She wasn't prepared for Obama in any, way, shape, or form. She never predicted Sanders would make her sweat so much, either, because she's so out-of-touch with reality.

There are some hardcore "Orthodox Republicans" (RWNJs, Cruz supporters to the end) who will never vote for Trump. I've seen much more "never Trump" from the establishment than from the voting public, though.

Trump in most elections would be rightfully casually dismissed. But with the field being so large AND so poor, he was able to ride his 1/3d of 1/2 vote totals to a primary win.

The half that votes Dem ain't voting for him. The independents that don't vote in Republican primaries ain't voting for him either. Those two pools together are well over 50%.

Blacks + Women + Hispanics + Asians ain't voting for him. White men will. But that gets you skunked in 2016. Heck it got you skunked in 2008.

 

[SDBoiler1]

Trump in most elections would be rightfully casually dismissed. But with the field being so large AND so poor, he was able to ride his 1/3d of 1/2 vote totals to a primary win.

The half that votes Dem ain't voting for him. The independents that don't vote in Republican primaries ain't voting for him either. Those two pools together are well over 50%.

Blacks + Women + Hispanics + Asians ain't voting for him. White men will. But that gets you skunked in 2016. Heck it got you skunked in 2008.

Trump will do better against Hillary than either McCain or Romney did against Obama. Book it.

 

[qazplm]

Trump will do better against Hillary than either McCain or Romney did against Obama. Book it.

Nope. I'll bet 1000 to your favorite charity.

 

[Bruce1]

SD, you are right on about HRC. She was a Saul Alinski protege. She cares nothing about people. She is about power and money. She uses many of his tactics of creating conflict based on race, religion, economics, gender, etc to get power for herself. The end game is to gain personal power and wealth. Even Alinski's utlimate goal was to improve conditions for the poor, HRC cares nothing for anyone not named Clinton.

 

[qazplm]

SD, you are right on about HRC. She was a Saul Alinski protege. She cares nothing about people. She is about power and money. She uses many of his tactics of creating conflict based on race, religion, economics, gender, etc to get power for herself. The end game is to gain personal power and wealth. Even Alinski's utlimate goal was to improve conditions for the poor, HRC cares nothing for anyone not named Clinton.

LOL How much more mileage are you guys going to get out of Alinsky? Obama...Hillary...is this now the talking point for every left of center Dem candidate for the next 30-40 years?

 

[Bruce1]

LOL How much more mileage are you guys going to get out of Alinsky? Obama...Hillary...is this now the talking point for every left of center Dem candidate for the next 30-40 years?

Not looking looking for mileage Qaz, Looking at her history helps explains who she is, that's all. Facts Speak for themselves. I don't line up with any party, I am an American first (so please don't put me in as a Trump or Cruz crony.) That what happened to the Beacon of Freedom. We got lost in Red, Blue, rich, poor, black, white, and on and on. HRC uses the principals of Rules for Radicals to the letter. So does the Pres.

 

[SDBoiler1]

LOL How much more mileage are you guys going to get out of Alinsky? Obama...Hillary...is this now the talking point for every left of center Dem candidate for the next 30-40 years?

Obama himself talks about how much of an impact Saul Alinsky had in shaping young BHO's purview. HRC did supposedly study Alinsky and wrote a thesis about his book. I can't comment about "other left-of-center" Dem candidates too much.

Maybe "Fauxcahontas" had a liaison with Saul Alinsky when she was in college? LOL

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Not looking looking for mileage Qaz, Looking at her history helps explains who she is, that's all. Facts Speak for themselves. I don't line up with any party, I am an American first (so please don't put me in as a Trump or Cruz crony.) That what happened to the Beacon of Freedom. We got lost in Red, Blue, rich, poor, black, white, and on and on. HRC uses the principals of Rules for Radicals to the letter. So does the Pres.

Yeah, you're about as Independent as Karl Rove.

 

[Bruce1]

Yeah, you're about as Independent as Karl Rove.

gr, the partisanship in our country has become so vile that we can no longer honestly disagree and still work together to find middle ground. It is a sad commentary that the four candidates running this year is the best that this country can put forward. Sad.

 

[IlluminatiEXPOSETHEMNOW1]

What say the board?

http://nypost.com/2016/04/14/the-abortion-truth-that-liberals-cant-deny-but-try-to/

Liberals view freedom in death only. Death of the country, death of a baby, death of sovereignty, death of rights, death of wealth, death of religion, death of heterosexuality, death of traditional human sexes of male and female, death of anything good. That is freedom. Therefore, they won't care about some baby. These people would eat the baby if they could. And those videos of the abortion clinics prove that pretty clearly.

 

[qazplm]

Liberals view freedom in death only. Death of the country, death of a baby, death of sovereignty, death of rights, death of wealth, death of religion, death of heterosexuality, death of traditional human sexes of male and female, death of anything good. That is freedom. Therefore, they won't care about some baby. These people would eat the baby if they could. And those videos of the abortion clinics prove that pretty clearly.

You know what goes good with dead baby? Kitten sauce.

 

[Bruce1]

You know what goes good with dead baby? Kitten sauce.

Qaz. Your comment is really sad. Is that who you are? Really? I don't care which side of the argument you're on that is just sick.

I am a white male, married many years, Christian, American, have four kids, 8 grandkids, and one great grandchild. Would you mind sharing your profile?

 

[qazplm]

Qaz. Your comment is really sad. Is that who you are? Really? I don't care which side of the argument you're on that is just sick.

I am a white male, married many years, Christian, American, have four kids, 8 grandkids, and one great grandchild. Would you mind sharing your profile?

OK but I'm telling you, kitten sauce is really rather underrated. It goes well with puppy and baby seal too.

My comment was an absurd, joking comment to an absurd, serious comment...on purpose. The vast majority of sane folks on here realize that. You, apparently, did not. Or you don't think the first response was absurd.

 

[Bruce1]

Sick Humor is still sick.

 

[kescwi]

Sick Humor is still sick.

And still humor, it may not be some people preferred humor, but I doubt qaz is distilling kittens to make sauce.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Qaz. Your comment is really sad. Is that who you are? Really? I don't care which side of the argument you're on that is just sick.

I am a white male, married many years, Christian, American, have four kids, 8 grandkids, and one great grandchild. Would you mind sharing your profile?

qaz's profile:
http://www.businessinsider.com/clinton-pac-spends-1-million-to-correct-people-online-2016-4

 

[Bruce1]

And still humor, it may not be some people preferred humor, but I doubt qaz is distilling kittens to make sauce.

I dont care what Qaz is doing. True, people can say whatever they want as jokes, etc. It is their right. I also have a right to denounce their vile comments, etc. It is amazing to me that people could make jokes about killing babies in this manner, even if they are jokes.