Quest for the Presidency (2020 Edition)

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by Brian249x

"Money is the motng asher's milk of politics" - Jesse Unruh

Don't misunderstand my message I am not saying "don't fuundraise" what I am saying is "the sources of your funding is becoming as important as the dollars themselves." We can easily tell young urban America this very message, "Don't get involved with that drug money, it will only mess you up in the end.". Remember congress has only had an 11% approval rate in 2015 whish issue actually an improvement over 2013's 9% after the government shutdown, and I believe that the money on both sides is a big reason for the low numbers. Why did a supposed pro-labor democratic party fight for the TPP which labor saw as another job killing trade deal? Why does a environmental democratic canindate hire a frakking lobbyists as head of her transition team? I could go on but my point being we cannot let the pursuit of the money make the party lose idenitty with the voter.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by savage560

How did Clinton get so far ahead in the POP vote?
Well maybe?

Clinton got so far ahead in the popular vote because she carried California by 3.7 million votes. So, she lost in the other 49 states by over 1.7 million votes. She also carried New York by 1.5 million votes. Since 44% of those eligible to vote didn't show up she didn't connect with voters outside the bluest of states.

FYI, California generates 13.7% of US GDP. (Our illegal 2.4 million illegal immigrants work very hard. Actually, that number is 1.75 million, because wives and children don't work.) California & New York combined contribute 21.8% of US GDP.

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by savage560

Again on "Fox News" , they stated the Democrats are moving even further left.The only middle of the road "old time like" moderate Dem left, but not too far "left", they say, is US Rep. of WV Joe Manchin, a very good US congressman , who fights for the main stream MC workers, first & foremost.Now he too is believing the Dems are way too far to the nonsensical left,as can be so described, so he is contemplating running as an independent!

Funny the GOP backed off its "exclusive club" ultra right only stand , to sell out the MC workers here too, by supporting horrendous trade agreements , only a millionaire/billionaire could love, or one who doesn't work or does & primarily relies on PA.Like 47% of the country on welfare, or 90+% of illegal aliens with families to support, who most of them do work, but cannot rely on their meager income to support themselves & their families, on the sub standard wages they get.Also very correctly most legal immigrants can be put into that category too.For decades.

Even the multitude of former robot-like conservative talk show hosts , like Laura Ingram,Glen Beck, etc. who could only utter words on horrible trade agreements like the TPP,(on BT=Before Trump era at least), "Its a global market & free trade is best for the US" , has backed down off those BS statements & now state common sense statements, that WTH will the hundreds of millions of people here do with such a limited job outlook that excludes good paying manufacturing/industrial jobs, that BOTH parties have given through traitorous trade agreement to nations like China. & they even mention how we now must buy 25 to 1, dollars in goods , courtesy of the TPP touting Obama adm. , favoring S. Korea over our own nation.

Republicans on trade hopefully have seen the "light" because of Trump? His virtual forcing Clinton to back down a little from her stand of stating NAFTA , that her husband forced through, & the TPP, that BO was about to cram down our throats, were not "Gold Standards of trade for US workers", like she ones said. But in fact were killing our workers with,were absolutely one sided trade agreements, that did & would kill more of US manufacturing.Now if Tarde Traitors like Cruz, Kasich, Rubio,etc. & oh yes the Abominable Bushes ,name collectively all, or any one Bush, they're all carbon copies of each other, can come to their senses & see this enlightenment, we may have a party that is closer to MS WORKING America?Really no one else, but the man Hillary had the machine of her party, cheat him out of a fair race, admonished the US about the ills of the TPP . OTR=other than Trump. & nothing is said of that here , by our mostly "rocket scientists" here!

How did Clinton get so far ahead in the POP vote?
Well maybe?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQNjXkSeawM

Can "Average Joe" bring back the party that was once the champion of the MC working stiff back to common sense & possibly be the candidate of choice in 2020?Doubt it , he seems to favor getting out of the Democratic party, because of its drastic turn away from what got them their votes to win elections! Where will that leave any room for conservative Democrats, a endangered species now?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw40DfVfHJ8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qt4JINBC2W0

Sometimes you need to prune to achieve proper growth. Joe is a "Dino" who really needs to change his uniform to fit where he really is. Also if he is such a friend to the workerst how did he raise such a blood-sacking vampire of a daugter that he did? Yes the party is heading left, as that is where their voters are. The middle of the road Democrats ended up splitting up the party, by shutting out the liberal/progressive wing of the party. When the "libs" did not turn out it really put the "dinos" in a bad light. Of course the "dinos" are trying to mitigate the damage, but this is too many times that that the party have lost elections due to turnout under their leadership.

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by savage560

The so called "Dinos" may not be so extinct as some would think?the world is not actually moving further left as we have seen in the Brexit vote.Germany too has a vote coming up too. It will be interesting there too.

As for Joe's daughter , well she is another human being that unfortunately Joe now has no control over her actions now. That's also a gray area where she's involved in, that this nation can benefit from more controls, in our HC field. We can all hope now that Trump can do something about the HC costs on many issues like this , that Obama did little to oppose & correct?Yes & especially the ACA & PP , which I do know from experience, is a disaster & very unfair to those who even make a tad over the amount what the rules state is on the poverty line. & thus get their HC premiums cost to say the least, cost disproportionately more, because of even a slight rise in income from the deemed minimum ,& which is in fact, is more like a gigantic totally disproportionate increase.

Since 2010 the dems have been terrible in turning out the liberal vote in an attempt to be able to reach across the aisle tto get votes that aren't there.The "dinos"are on the defensive. They suffer from a massive case of "donoritis" a condition where they chase donations so much that it leaves the politicians subject to the donor's every whim to the point where the political loses touch with the voter and drives down turnout. We just saw an epic case of this in this in the last election. Instead of leaving the convention ando start campaigning she makes her way onto the fundraising curcuit for about a month. You think her voters did not notice? I have even ñoticed the president taking shots on the sly about her "campaign performance".

"Dinos" & "rhinos" face the same issue, Thier attempt to keep the status quo in order to keep the money coming in has fostered an adversarial relationship between political and voter

[scoundrel]

It didn't start with Citizens United but this abysmal ruling was a landmark in the process by which American politics has been corrupted. Hillarry Clinton and Jeb Bush were the fruits of this tree. Jeb Bush received more donations than any others in the Republican "clown car" and yet consistently did worse than Mr Rubio or Mr Cruz, both of whom had "I am crap" tattooed on their foreheads. He was a worse candidate than either of these two.

If donations came on the basis of political talent and of merit as a candidate, neither Jeb Bush nor Hillary Clinton would have received so much as a bag of aluminium washers. They were two of the worst candidates ever seen in a US presidential election. Their public speaking performances were diabolical. Mr Trump, on the other hand, is a very effective speaker in public meetings, and the big donors did not go to him.

Therefore, there is no direct relationship between the effectiveness and skill of the candidate and the willingness of billionaires to fund the candidate. The funding decision must depend on some other factor. I think the relevent point is that the donor wants something and will invest (not donate) money to the candidate whom he/she calculates is most likely to give them what they want.

The good news is that no one can guarantee that the bought-and-paid-for candidate will necessarily win. The donors assumed that the voters would veer away from the flakey candidate and therefore sank their money into the two "steady-as-she-goes" candidates, thinking that the American people would vote conservatively. But they forgot. Conservative decisions are usually made by people who have something to lose. An awful lot of voters no longer have anything to lose, thanks to the economic policies which the donors have been buying from the politicians for decades now. There has been a voter rebellion and this is not a good time to be seen by the voters as a stooge of the donor class.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by savage560

Again look at demographics & unfortunately how those people on the "coasts" ,actually get their money, on how they survive.

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/cap...mit-they-vote/

This website is dedicated to "promoting a pro-business agenda." Recent voting audits by the L.A. Times have found nowhere near this level of fraud. Here's a little math for you. California has 17.9 million registered voters. California is believed to have 2.9 million illegal immigrants. We know some of these immigrants are children. Even if we assume that 13% of the 2.9 million illegal immigrants voted, that would be 337,000 votes or 2% of the total.

Again, California has 44.8% registered Democrats, 27.3% Republicans and 23% unaffiliated/"declined to state." Did you notice that our 2016 senatorial race was between two women, both Democrats? Our state law provides that the two candidates receiving the most votes in the primaries run off in the general election regardless of party affiliation. So two Democrats each garnered more votes in the primary than any Republican.

The two major metropolitan areas, Los Angeles and San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose, are Democratic strongholds. I live in Oakland, where voters are 68.8% Democrats, 5.98% Republicans, 1.96% Green Party, 0.32% Libertarian, and 20% declined to state. Hillary Clinton didn't need any help from illegal immigrants voting to carry California by 3.7 million votes.

Now we are faced with more disruption as possible voting irregularities in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania are investigated. We here in California abandoned the Diebold voting machines after it was discovered they could be hacked or manipulated.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/..._wemost&wpmm=1

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini..._wemost&wpmm=1

Sorry, but I have to ask you Savage560, are you one of Putin's paid trolls?

[diamelsx]

With the impending cival war coming in the Democratic party between the "Dinos" & the "Liberal/Progressives" A couple of questions need to be askeducated and the answers may determine the winner.

1. How much coverage will the fight get?
2. Will the media take a side and who's side will it choose?
3. will Republicans stay on the sidelines or do they have a stake in this also?
4. how did this situation start in the first place, and when?
5. How will the voters factor into this?
6. What will be the aftermath of it all?

These questions I am throwing out there, fielding answers cause I see this as an intriguing battle whether we see it played out or not...

[diamelsx]

I was afraid that if Trump would "bring back jobs" he would do it on the backs of the US tax payer. By this story my fears may be realized. Link

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by diamelsx

I was afraid that if Trump would "bring back jobs" he would do it on the backs of the US tax payer. By this story my fears may be realized. Link

The trouble with the argument of the speaker in the link is that he ignores the hard fact that Donald Trump was duly elected to serve as US president. If you vow to oppose anything whatsoever that he does (as Republicans did with Mr Obama) you are also vowing to oppose the will of the American people expressed in the ballot box. The US constitution is not designed to be adversarial and we have already seen the consequences of this "oppose everything" approach.

There is no argument which I have heard that Democrats will support the slaughter of the firstborn. But whenever Mr Trump puts forward a proposal which is moderate in character and which makes sense and is in the public interest, what will then be the Democrat excuse for refusing to work with someone the people elected?

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

The trouble with the argument of the speaker in the link is that he ignores the hard fact that Donald Trump was duly elected to serve as US president. If you vow to oppose anything whatsoever that he does (as Republicans did with Mr Obama) you are also vowing to oppose the will of the American people expressed in the ballot box. The US constitution is not designed to be adversarial and we have already seen the consequences of this "oppose everything" approach.

There is no argument which I have heard that Democrats will support the slaughter of the firstborn. But whenever Mr Trump puts forward a proposal which is moderate in character and which makes sense and is in the public interest, what will then be the Democrat excuse for refusing to work with someone the people elected?

my apologies, wrong video. Here is the actual clip