The new Democratic party. What will it look like?

@georgeob1,

Im reserving any assertion till Congress finishes its investigations and we see whether doctoring did NOT occur. I will live with th result, just not now. The timing and assertions are too damn coincidental. (Just like breaking the possibility fo Russian interference with the election). Ill live with the whole ball of results.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Im reserving any assertion till Congress finishes its investigations and we see whether doctoring did NOT occur. I will live with th result, just not now. The timing and assertions are too damn coincidental. (Just like breaking the possibility fo Russian interference with the election). Ill live with the whole ball of results.

Then I think we're in the same place, except that going in you presume absolute innocence on the part of the Clintons and I assume some degree of guilt.

It appears that neither of claims to know the truth with certainty, which is appropriate. I happen to believe that the weight of the evidence points strongly to some self-serving corruption on the part of the Clintons, though precisely how much and how pervasive I cannot say.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

read Snopes on Warren. The whole ancestry thing seems to have originated mostly with her Republican opponent Scott Brown, (who lost badly in MA and moved to NH and lost there too. Last I heard he was thinking of moving to Iowa and trying there too) and is just about total hyperbole and the usual disinformation and distortion from the GOP

1 Reply

I've already said all I really have to say on the topic of "russian interference," but I can't resist repeating it here:

Absent some charge that russia injected false information into the arena (which they could well have done, but which no one is currently claiming), I can't see that this whole "issue" is anything other than a non sequitur.

I fail to see why the charge even merits a response.

I would suspect that a lot more "dirty tricks" (such as the Clinton campaign hiring thugs to start fights at Trump rallies, and then claim that his supporters were "violent people") were played by the parties themselves than any foreign entities.

Did CNN "interfere" when it published the emails? When it published Trump's stolen tax return? When it aired an audio tape that violated established rights of privacy? Where was the outrage then?

The problem with Podesta's emails was their content, generated by the DNC itself, not anything the russians did or didn't do. If they influenced the outcome, them's the breaks. At least the electorate was considering truthful information.

Since when has the suppression of truth been a "democratic" ideal which we strive for?

Of course that's not to say that having our sensitive information hacked by everybody and his brother isn't a matter of serious concern. But the democrats are simply complaining that they weren't able to keep their dirty little secrets secret. They act as though the russians just fabricated the emails. Fraid not.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

read Snopes on Warren. The whole ancestry thing seems to have originated mostly with her Republican opponent Scott Brown, (who lost badly in MA and moved to NH and lost there too. Last I heard he was thinking of moving to Iowa and trying there too) and is just about total hyperbole and the usual disinformation and distortion from the GOP

No argument about the origins of it in a hotly contested campaign. However. when it ended, and the Cherokee Nation disavowed her claim, Warren ewas forced to admit that she had no documentary or facual evidence to support the claim she made when she applied for favored treatment.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

read Snopes.. They go into quite a lkokt of detail about the whole "favored treatment" meme, and the whole meme is basically misinformation.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Snopes is not what it used to be.

I trust the site on internet fraud, but there's no reason to believe that they don't have a political bias.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Snopes is not what it used to be.

I trust the site on internet fraud, but there's no reason to believe that they don't have a political bias.

And a great number of reasons to believe that they do.

1 Reply

@layman,

They have a large staff of fact checkers, do you? How many people who dealt with her job applications have you actually talked to? They talked to a lot. The whole favorable treatment meme was bogus..

0 Replies

@revelette1,

Quote:

we just lost enough not to be able to retake the senate

And enough, in the swing states that matter in the flawed electoral system you have to work with, to lose the presidency.
And enough to remain far from regaining a majority in the House.
And enough to be in a historically bad position in state legislatures.

Seems like a good enough reason to change something. Folks on the left of the center might disagree on what that something should be, but doubling down and pretending nothing's wrong when you're out of power in the executive, the senate, the house, most governor's positions, and most state legislatures is not smart.

2 Replies

@nimh,

nimh wrote:

Doubling down and pretending nothing's wrong when you're out of power in the executive, the senate, the house, most governor's positions, and most state legislatures is not smart.

I think it's clear that they are making "corrective" changes by heading to the extreme left.

Even less "smart" than doing nothing, eh?

0 Replies

@nimh,

I agree somewhat, but, after a few years of Trump, we will see where we are. I worry about gerrymandering and perhaps other voting right laws coming out of a Trump supreme court pick.

It is like democrats only pay attention to the presidential election, we don't worry about local or the midterm elections too much and then we moan about the results.

I suppose the reason I resist this idea we need to change is because I am not sure what kind of a change is being advocated. Moreover, in all those instances it wasn't by much we lost. This country is divided among partisan lines and unfortunately in the non coastal states, they seem more republican than democrat.

1 Reply

The democrat party is in disarray, and it's members are desperate.

I believe the democrat party will resort to what they know best - violence.
Be it the KKK, or BLM, or Occupy whatever, or something we haven't seen yet.

1 Reply

@Frugal1,

Frugal1 wrote:

I believe the democrat party will resort to what they know best - violence.

Yeah, Frug, it wouldn't surprise me if some of these fanantical left-wing cheese-eaters are plotting, right now, to infiltrate the crowd at Trump's inauguration with a suicide bomb strapped to their sorry ass and blow themselves up, eh?

0 Replies

@layman,

Liar.

0 Replies

@revelette1,

Notice Rev that the liar conservatives have begun to attack the person that they believe will run for president in the next election. It is a planed conservative attack by the liars who have been lying about the Clintons. Considering the intelligence of the average U S voter it will probably work. Another democrat that has worked for years in an attempt to make the middle class a better life.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Im reserving any assertion till Congress finishes its investigations and we see whether doctoring did NOT occur.

Unless the congress decides that it needs to be classified secret because like tRumps tax returns it might do them harm.

0 Replies

@revelette1,

Quote:

I suppose the reason I resist this idea we need to change is because I am not sure what kind of a change is being advocated.

I think we need to adopt more of a leftist attitude and go with some of Bernies ideas. Every time the conservatives get into power they go with the trickle down theory which they have advocated for 100 years and which have failed for the middle class for 100 years. Been great for the 1%. Maybe if the democrates showed some balls and pointed this out to the populace they might make some headway.

2 Replies

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

Quote:
I suppose the reason I resist this idea we need to change is because I am not sure what kind of a change is being advocated.

I think we need to adopt more of a leftist attitude and go with some of Bernies ideas. Every time the conservatives get into power they go with the trickle down theory which they have advocated for 100 years and which have failed for the middle class for 100 years. Been great for the 1%. Maybe if the democrates showed some balls and pointed this out to the populace they might make some headway.

Right now the Dems are clueless what they need to do. They are looking at getting a celebrity to be groomed to run. Its silly. Instead of focussing on policy they think some popular pop star is the answer.

They haven't realized why they lost. Policy lost them this election. Clintons ties with TPP that was set to screw over millions of Americans lost her voters.

The Dems could easily win if they just focussed on what the people want instead of continuing with their corruption and corporate money well. Give the people what they need and want not some clueless pop star.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

One of the reasons she lost other than the FBI interfering with the election days before the vote, was tRump and his liars telling coal miners he was going to save their jobs knowing coal was on the way out. Natural gas and wind and sun will take over unless congress screws up the economy passing stupid laws.

1 Reply

The new Democratic party. What will it look like?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know