Pic Of The Moment: LOL GOP: Is This The Best You Can Do?

[EarlG]

Clinton Holds Solid Leads Over All GOP Challengers

Follow @demunderground

[William769]

1. One of the best pic of the moment ever!

[AllyCat]

2. Where is Walker? I have to know he won't win

Either. Then again, I thought the same thing about Bush the Lesser.

[riversedge]

3. umm. Ultrasound Walker--that Walker?--He is the stinking

slop at the bottom of the repug clown mud hole.

[lobodons]

6. Brown Nose Koch sucker Walker

Brown nose Koch sucker is the one.

[dirtydickcheney]

4. How can we go wrong?

The woman whose policies are are almost completely from the Republican playbook vs. the top 5 Republicans?

This world is doomed if these are our choices.

[William769]

5. Do you care to share what you think those policies are?

This should be fun!

[Lochloosa]

7. We need a cricket smiley....

[William769]

12. Couldn't find a smiley, but I think this will work.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

31. Here ya go...

[Dawgs]

9. Iraq war, for one.

Support of TPP, for two.

[William769]

11. Is that all you got?

Hillary Clinton

“I thought I had acted in good faith and made the best decision I could with the information I had,” she writes “And I wasn’t alone in getting it wrong. But I still got it wrong.”

As to TPP she was doing the Presidents bidding at the time (she was doing her job).

Do you want America to be isolationist? Good luck with that! That would mean you disagree with the Presidents State of the Union address & how he see's helping the middle class & keeping America strong.

Stop drinking the Kool-Aid, or at least change flavor's.

[Dawgs]

14. No. I got more. Just don't have time now.

And, your support of TPP (and excuse for Hillary supporting it) tells me all I need to know on where you stand as a Democrat.

Also, hilarious that you would bring up Kool-Aid as a Hillary supporter.

[William769]

18. Classic response from you "Just don't have time now"

I guess that is all you got!

[1StrongBlackMan]

27. Where has William769 expressed an opinion ...

, let alone, support for TPP?

I've notice anyone typing "TPP", without including some variation of the phrase, "job killing, corporate coup", is immediately branded a supporter of the agreement that hasn't been written, let alone, agreed to by the member nations.

[BainsBane]

16. They are policies supported by a large number of Democrats

Including Biden, who also voted for the war. Yet they don't hold the vote against him. They talk about Secretary Clinton being "corporatist," as though she stands apart from most other politicians in that regard. She doesn't. They pretend democracy and the capitalist system rises and falls based on her personally. The inanity of it is mind boggling. They have placed on her all their anger about American society and the current political system. We even have people in GD saying the number one priority is to defeat Clinton. Not regaining the senate, not preventing the Tea Party from gaining more power, and not a particular issue, but defeating Clinton. So tell me what makes them different from Republicans when they share the same goal? They call the concerns of LGBT Americans, women, and people of color "Third Way." I even saw one yesterday say that "gay marriage" was a rich people's issue. They can keep their straight, white male, elitist view of politics. That went out in the 1950s, with good reason.

[William769]

19. You're preaching to the choir with me.

You are spot on with your assessment here.

I posted this earlier and I back it up 100% http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=1542

As to Hillary & the middle class, she'll be a champion for them along with minority groups you mentioned.

Hillary will take the torch from President Obama & help get the middle class back to where it once was.

[1StrongBlackMan]

32. That's because ...

They are policies supported by a large number of Democrats ... Including Biden, who also voted for the war. Yet they don't hold the vote against him.

They don't think he will run, and if he does, can beat HRC in the primary.

[7962]

69. Admitting it was a mistake is a step many DONT take. nt

[lark]

22. Add fracking and Keystone pipeline to the list.

However, don't think she will put SS on the table like Obama did and don't think she will fold to Repugs extortion like Obama did during his first term.

While I am especially worried about her TPP stance, all the Repugs also strongly support this, so would vote for her as least crazy option, but would also be holding my nose because I know I disagree with her on some major issues.

[OKNancy]

28. dated yesterday - you can't say she "supports" it

WINNIPEG, Manitoba (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday declined again to take a position on the Keystone XL pipeline, telling an audience in Canada that she would not express her views because of an ongoing review by the State Department.

"We have differences and you won't get me to talk about Keystone because I have steadily made clear that I'm not going to express an opinion," said Clinton, a potential 2016 Democratic presidential candidate. "It is in our process and that's where it belongs."

http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2015/01/21/hillary-clinton-to-speak-in-canada-amid-debate-over-keystone

[1StrongBlackMan]

39. Folded how? ...

don't think she will fold to Repugs extortion like Obama did during his first term.

Before repeating that extremist view, consider, then, weigh what was gained by his "folding."

[7962]

70. I was looking for that 'fold" too. Maybe they define "compromise" as "folding"?

Because sometimes to get ANYTHING, you must do a little compromising.

[1StrongBlackMan]

79. Clearly ...

taking "moral" stands (that hurt the poor and working class ... that we pretend to say we care about/are fighting for) is less important than actually getting stuff that sustain the poor and working class ... because, after all, they "would only be inconvenienced for a couple of weeks", as opposed to us all being devastated ... IF my nightmare scenarios come true. (Read: I will sacrifice you to protect MY purse against what MIGHT happen.)

[7962]

87. I see the same comments from the right; "stand your ground! Dont give an inch!"

they should add "and end up with nothing!"

[1StrongBlackMan]

88. Not according to many here ...

in the debt ceiling showdown, republicans got an extension of U/C for the long-term unemployed and they got to raise the debt limit, in exchange for keeping what they already had!

[Spitfire of ATJ]

33. Iran War for three.

[1StrongBlackMan]

40. We're at war with Iran ...

who knew?

Or, are you being prospective?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

81. Haven't you heard? Hillary want's to prove to the Republicans that she's tough.

[William769]

44. Where do you people come up with this shit? Seriously!

Backing Obama, Hillary Clinton opposes new Iran sanctions bill in Congress

Washington-- Hillary Rodkam Clinton, former secretary of state and likely candidate for president in 2016, opposes new legislation in Congress that would sanction Iran if diplomacy fails to reach an agreement over its nuclear program.

Clinton announced her opposition to the bill one day after US President Barack Obama renewed his threat to veto the measure in his sixth State of the Union address.

New sanctions legislation would violate the Joint Plan of Action, the White House says, an interim agreement reached by world powers and Iran that laid the groundwork for comprehensive talks.

http://www.jpost.com/International/Backing-Obama-Hillary-Clinton-opposes-new-Iran-sanctions-bill-in-Congress-388522

I don't mind a spirited debate, but I at least need the other person to have some knowledge of what they claim they know they are talking about.

Sheesh.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

80. Oh, come on. SOMEONE had to say it.

[NCTraveler]

101. Editing because I now realize you were being sarcastic and poking fun at the other poster. nt.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

117. Ain't I a stinker?

[dirtydickcheney]

43. Sure

TPP support
Her support for Iraq war (and potentially upcoming wars)
Support for Wall-Street vs. Middle Class
Maintaining the status-quo and policies that favor big business and the rich.

Are there any of these you differ with or is this just a case of "Oh, she's got a D next to her name an that's good enough for me!" ???

[William769]

45. First two have already been addressed.

She supports the middle class http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/21/politics/hillary-clinton-canada-future-vision/index.html

Once again, is that all you got?

From the OP "Is This The Best You Can Do?"

[dirtydickcheney]

50. Really, which policies

Which policies does she support that when big business and the rich favored them she'd say - "screw you, I don't represent you"?

[Dawgs]

51. LOLOLOLOLOL!!!

I just read the article you posted and she didn't take ONE STAND on anything.

I sure the fuck hope she we be for the middle class. That shouldn't even be a question, and the fact that you brought it up as something to be proud of is scary.

Pathetic!

[Cosmic Kitten]

56. She supports the middle class???

What "support" does she offer in the link you provided?

Is she calling for a Living Wage?

IS she urging Walmart to pay employees enough
to get off food stamps and Govt assistance?

Does she support the WORKING-CLASS?
or just the middle-class?

It looks like the standard political claptrap?

[William769]

57. I cannot help you with your reading comprehension.

Sorry.

[Cosmic Kitten]

62. Just highlight and or C&P the relevant words

I can't see any significant "support" other than vague ideas

[7962]

71. The GOP nominee thanks you for your support by not voting if shes the nominee. nt

[samsingh]

8. the gopers are quite a repulsive looking lot

[lobodons]

10. I see renewed voter suppression efforts

I see renewed voter suppression efforts and States voting to split their electoral votes in the near future.

[SunSeeker]

13. K & R

[a kennedy]

15. What about the wanker walker?

I'm sure she'd crush him too..... Sorry should have read ALL posts before posting this.

[Fearless]

17. Imagine if we ran a democrat

[William769]

20. People that show their ignorance is just sad. nt

[Fearless]

21. Indeed.

[William769]

23. All you have to do is show where she runs as a republican

Or has ever been a republican that held a public office.

Balls in your court.

Willful ignorance indeed!

[Dawgs]

52. Voting for the Iraq war should be enough for any Democrat to question her creds.

Sad that it's not enough for you and many others.

[7962]

72. Would you like a list of prominent Dems who also supported the war?

Remember, a lot was based on BS, and hind sight is always perfect

[truebluegreen]

73. And those prominent Dems were wrong.

I knew it was BS the minute the Bushies started banging the drum. Why didn't Hillary Clinton? Why didn't the others? Were they cowards, blinded by ambition, or did they just not care?

[7962]

86. Well, I did too, but then we may not have seen ALL the BS that was given to them

And as I said above, at least she has admitted that she was wrong, unlike most others. But then again, to look at it from your standpoint, she may have voted in support in order to give the appearance of strength or fear of being on the wrong side

[truebluegreen]

89. I am very sure she did vote in support in order to give the appearance of strength.

I think she thought a "no" vote would doom her chances for the presidency, and I think it's very possible that's why she voted as she did. My problem is, it takes a lot more strength to stand against the tide, and Hillary Clinton seems to lack that strength, or the judgment to know when she's being lied to. Either that, or she really is just a war hawk who wanted to re-shape the Middle East into something more amenable to US interests. Pick your poison; "honest mistake" doesn't seem to be on the menu.

As for us not seeing "all the BS" that the inner circle did, the inner circle did know that inspectors were in Iraq, were being allowed to do their job, were not finding any WMD (not surprising, since there weren't any to find) and were told to leave so we could launch our Excellent Adventure Abroad on schedule. That alone should have been a red flag for anyone with sense, or courage, or integrity.

[7962]

91. She'll definitely have to answer for it from any challenge from the left

But certainly NOT from the gop candidate

[truebluegreen]

92. I'm fine with that.

The more daylight we can put between Democratic and Republican positions, the better.

[nikto]

119. Yes---And that can be done by The Dems moving a bit more LEFT

Bernie Sanders, Liz Warren and Sherrod Brown can help with this.

Those 3 should not just be used for Democratic Party fund-raising, and then pulled-away (and replaced by Corporate and banking lobbyists) when real policies and party direction are being determined.

[truebluegreen]

120. 'Zactly. nt

[Fearless]

58. I don't actually have to explain anything

You already know what I'm going to say. If you don't agree I'm not going to force you to.

[William769]

61. I do?

I know people refuse to explain thing's that are not true.

I also know being painted into a corner has not helped you, so I will let you be and give you a helping hand out of the corner.

Have a great day!

[rhett o rick]

93. I so agree. nm

[NYC Liberal]

25. Yep -- a liberal, Democrat like Hillary Clinton. I'm all for it.

[Fearless]

59. Please descirbe her liberal economic policy.

[Iliyah]

24. Mitt RMoney for the poor, yay!!!

NOT. GOPers like majority of politicians are in your face liars.

[liberal N proud]

26. All the GOP and KKKarl Rove need are just the right states close enough to steal it.

[OKNancy]

29. This latest abortion fight will make her even stronger among women

Hillary has been a champion for women's rights and this latest crap by the House Republicans will look really bad.
The Republican candidate will have to defend their actions.

[Cosmic Kitten]

30. A very WEAK poll to give Hillary fans a feel good

Don't be overconfident about Hillary's inevitablity

This is a poll of 1003 people.
Only 843 are "registered voters"

The partisan divisions break down to:
30% Democrats = approx 300 people
24% Republican = approx 240 people
37% "independent" = approx 370 people
BTW, This is only 91%!

Here's Hillary's " DOUBLE DIGIT" lead among 843 REGISTERED VOTERS:
Hillary 54% = 455 votes
Rand Paul 41% = 345 votes
Jeb Bush 41% = 345 votes
Mitt Romney 40% = 337 votes
Chris Cristy 40% = 337 votes

That is ONLY 110 votes out of 843 total!
Why anyone would be excited about 110 votes is puzzling?
Once you include the Sampling Error the difference is possibly less.

This "poll" is hardly reason to celebrate.
In fact it can lull Democrats into a FALSE SENSE of INEVITABILITY.

METHODOLOGY–
This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by landline and cellular telephone Jan. 12-15, 2015, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 1,003 adults, including 843 registered voters. Results have margins of sampling error of 3.5 and 4 points for the general population and registered voters, respectively, including design effect. Partisan divisions are 30-24-37 percent, Democrats-Republicans-independents among the general population, 33-26-33 percent among registered voters
http://www.langerresearch.com/uploads/1166a52016Election.pdf

Hey Democrats is the the best WE can do?

[rocktivity]

34. Polls with fewer than 750 respondents or a margin of error exceeding 3%

should be approached with caution. It looks like Team Hillary is setting themselves up to make the exact same mistake all over again.

Let's make sure that Hillary is the best WE can do -- for US.


rocktivity

[Cosmic Kitten]

35. And her 3rd-Way supporters will help elect a republican

[William769]

48. Howard Dean is a 3rd-Way?

Better yet Elizabeth Warren? Her and Hillary are good friends and she has stated she will support Hillary.

Just because you make a boogie man, doesn't make it true.

[Cosmic Kitten]

54. Supporters are not all mutually inclusive

Supporting Hillary does not make one a 3rd-Wayer
But many democratic 3rd-Wayer's do support Hillary.

Just because you lump all people who vaguely support Hillary together
it doesn't mean they will always support her candidacy.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

100. Those results are confirmed by other pollsters in the field. *

In fact when you combine all the results they are roughly the same, ergo:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html



Can Hillary lose, nothing's inevitable, but she is in a unusually strong position.


* I used real clear politics as that was the easiest to find. I am confident their averages large mirror the averages of others that average polls.

[Cosmic Kitten]

104. Was Hillary leading in the Polls in past Presidential elections?

Just because multiple "polls" show Hillary leading
potential republican candidates there's no reason
to use polls as "evidence" of her inevitability.

These types of polls are fraught with bias and error.
Their basic purpose is ADVOCACY, not discovery.

Someone PAYS to conduct polls,
and someone gets PAID.
It's a business.
Would YOU hire a polling organization
that did not find "results" in your favor?

Lets just call polls what they are, PROPAGANDA.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

109. The polls are snap shots

I have no doubt in my mind that if the election was held on the day of the election the actual results would closely mirror the results of the polls.

That's why so many experts who compile polls can predict House, Senate, and presidential races the lion's share of the time.


It's based on the law of large numbers, a disarmingly simple concept.

Things can change, of course, but I would literally bet my liver against a billionaire's million that if the election were held tomorrow Hillary Clinton would handily beat any Republican challenger.

[Cosmic Kitten]

111. Why ignore that the snap shot is intended to persuade?

As to betting your liver...
did you notice the last election results?

Democrats are down in the public's opinion,
based on election results, not "snap shots".

What states will Hillary carry in this hypothetical election?
NO RED STATES, right? Can we agree on that?
What reliably blue states would she win?

The "Clinton fatigue" is HEAVY among
Democrats I personally know.
Working people are apoplectic about her being dead broke...
when THEY ARE BROKE.
And Lewinsky is still a viable memory for all of us.

Fair or not, she carries the Clinton baggage.
She would NOT get elected IMO,
Lots of people will stay home.
The Supreme Court issue will NOT persuade any undecided votes.

Don't gamble on vital organs

[DemocratSinceBirth]

115. "did you notice the last election results?"

"did you notice the last election results?"


Res ipsa loquitur


http://mashable.com/2012/11/07/nate-silver-wins/

http://votamatic.org/

http://election.princeton.edu/2012/11/06/presidential-prediction-2012-final/

All the reputable statisticians who compile polls and then make predictions nailed it. There are a lot more sites that compiled polls (LAW OF LARGE NUMBERS) and nailed it but I will let you do the research.

Oh, if you are referring to the 014 election. All the polls indicated we were going to have our asses handed to us.


"What states will Hillary carry in this hypothetical election?
NO RED STATES, right? Can we agree on that?
What reliably blue states would she win? "


She will win all the states Barack Obama won in 2012 and might steal North Carolina



"And Lewinsky is still a viable memory for all of us. "


Is that why President Clinton left office with an approval rating in the mid 60s, ergo:


http://www.gallup.com/poll/116584/presidential-approval-ratings-bill-clinton.aspx

Democrat Since Birth is getting ready to party like its 1999.


____________________

P.S. Every election season we have the same debates about the efficacy of polls (when we don't like the results) and every year the people challenging the efficacy of the polls are wrong and those that abide by them are right.

[Cosmic Kitten]

116. Mmmm, OK.

It's 16 years since 1999, and a LOT has changed.

Do polls influence turnout?

All the polls indicated we were going to have our asses handed to us.

If the MSM is talking DOWN democratic voters
does that depress turnout?
Is there a Poll that asks...
"will you still vote if you believe you will lose"?

This is ALL about perception management.
You seem to be very intent on defending
the MSM's manipulation of voters perceptions?

Why are EXIT polls wrong?
Why don't EXIT polls correctly reflect election results?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

35. Do you guys like Obama and want infrastructure spending?

To carry on the legacy of the current administration the traditional method has been to elect the Vice President.

We know we'd get high speed rail too.

And everyone knows Joe can hit with the zingers. "A noun, a verb and 9/11" wiped out Rudy.

[Fred Sanders]

37. All of them put together might beat her.

Vote for President Romjebcruzorum!

[AzDar]

38. I think a better question would be: Is this the best WE can do?

[1StrongBlackMan]

42. Well ...

pick your "better" ... then look at what the polling says.

{Note: You probably won't like what the polling says, though.}

[Cosmic Kitten]

60. How about some "honest polls"

How about polls that emphasize NAME RECOGNITION
rather than who would you vote for?

How about straight up generic Dem vs Repub?
What are the trends for party preference?

Do Dems hold ANY significant lead over repubs?
Could any difference be attributed to the named candidates?
Last election says repubs would be leading?

These feel-good polls prove nothing and serve only as propaganda.
1000 people does NOT represent the general public.

[1StrongBlackMan]

63. "Honest Polls" ...

meaning, "polls that produce the results I agree with, or at a minimum, don't indicate what I oppose?"

BTW, anyone that knows anything about Research Methods and/or Statistics can pick apart any poll/survey to point out it's flaws ... But this is, typically, only done when we do not like the poll's/survey's results.

[Cosmic Kitten]

65. Polls only serve to confirm, not inform.

Why would you practice mind reading?
And reach the wrong conclusion...

"polls that produce the results I agree with, or at a minimum, don't indicate what I oppose?"

Not everyone is a partisan to the extreme.

ABC conducted a poll to VALIDATE that Hillary is inevitable.
The Pundits are continually saying Hillary is inevitable.
The poll presents "scientific" evidence that Hillary is inevitable.
ABC and the MSM in general WANTS Hillary to be inevitable.
It will make GREAT TeeVee, and sell LOTS of advertising.

Notice the poll did not indicate in the results ANY option
or question other than "Hillary vs Republican".
That intentionally shapes and forces the outcome.
AND, more Democrats were included in the "random sample".
Is the the national demographic?
That fact doesn't seem too "random"?

How about we acknowledge the real agenda
behind this dog and pony show?

Show me the polls that focus on party affiliation,
which party people will vote for,
and generic dem/repub match ups.

[1StrongBlackMan]

77. I was not speaking specifically of you ...

my offending comment was a generalized, and easily provable, observation.

Polls only serve to confirm, not inform.

That is the problem ... I wonder if you can explain why? (Yes ... this is a quiz!)

[Cosmic Kitten]

99. oooh, a quiz! Every day is a school day here!

If it is an easily provable observation that
Polls only serve to confirm not inform,
then why do we allow people to fall prey
to such misinformation and propaganda?

Why not just tear down this blatantly misleading subterfuge?

The point of such polling ONLY serves to influence
the behaviors of people who are unaware of the
inherent bias and overt manipulation of their perceptions.

As to the "Quiz":
Such political polling is not pure "social research".
There is not intent on the part of the researchers
to discover surprising data about the subject.

Political polls such as the "Hillary is Inevitable poll"
Is ADVOCACY RESEARCH.

Advocacy research has the "agenda" to promote it's "agenda".
To that end, the polls are typically designed to reinforce
the desired "conclusion" through various biased techniques.
Those biased techniques are numerous, spanning from
sample bias, wording of questions, and speculative weighting.
That's a very short explanation.

Bottom line, polls are intended to manipulate, not inform.
Don't believe the hype!

[nikto]

83. How about polls on ISSUES?

Examples:
Do you prefer:
Public Schools or Privatized Charter Schools run for-profit on Public Fund$?
Hillary prefers Privatized Charter Schools.


Do you favor TPP, secretly negotiated and fast-tracked, as currently proposed??
Hillary does.

Do you think Wall St bankers who break the law are untouchable by US Justice,
and "too rich too jail", and do you want a president with a clear "pro-Wall St" bias?
Hillary does, and she's got that bias.

Do you support unconditional backing of Israel and adherence to AIPAC,
no matter how extreme and aggressive their policies may be?
Hillary does.

Do you display a definite hawkish, NEOCON-tilt in your foreign-policy orientation?
Hillary does.

Do you support NSA meta-data spying on ALL Americans?
Hillary does.

Do you support hard-line continuation of America's Drug War?
Hillary does.

Did YOU see yourself as poor, less than ten years before having a net worth of 100-million dollars?
Hillary did.
.................................................................................



We can do better.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

98. When you load the questions like that she sounds amazingly like President Obama...

When you load the questions like that she sounds amazingly like President Obama and the Democratic party.

[nikto]

118. Yup---She's DLC right-center, all the way

Although I am grateful she is pro-choice and pro Gay rights.


But to me, that does not excuse, or make acceptable, her undeniable neoliberalism/corporatism.

[panfluteman]

103. BINGO! This Post Sums It Up Perfectly!

Yes we CAN do better! And the consequences of NOT doing better, and simply acquiescing to the corporatist status quo become ever more bleak and disastrous for the future of our democracy, our economy, our national sovereignty, the environment, the planet and the entire human race. As a previous poster pointed out, this infographic relies on inflated statistics to create the illusion of Hillary as an unstoppable juggernaut, the presidential heir apparent, who it is absolutely futile to oppose.

As I scrolled down, I couldn't help but notice how many Elizabeth Warren bumper stickers were posted. Now she's a REAL solution, and a REAL champion of middle and working class Americans. Same with Bernie Sanders, and the two together would be the ultimate dream team for populist progressives. We urgently need to restore some sane balance of power and common sense checks and balances in our government and political system; otherwise we're totally doomed as the corporate pied pipers, driven crazy by blind greed and gloating over their newfound unlimited political power, lead us sheeple, like lemmings, over the cliff to total destruction.

[Cosmic Kitten]

105. Looks Republican-lite from here.

She can throw around some faux "social liberal" words
and she's still considered a "democrat". Amazing!?!

Apparently Hillary holds positions similar to Caribou Barbie!

[Tarheel_Dem]

41. Love it!

[dirtydickcheney]

46. LOL DEMOCRATIC PARTY: Is HRC the BEST WE CAN NOMINATE??

How would her policies noticeably differ if she had an (R) next to her name vs. a (D)?

[mahannah]

53. Good question.

[oberliner]

47. Five chubby white males

Quite an assortment they've got.

[William769]

49. It's been real and it's been fun, but it's not been real fun correcting all the errors

& ignorance in this thread but it looks like my job is done here.

Have a great day all!

[yuiyoshida]

55. Despite the fact the country doesn't seem to want

a Republican President, Corporations and other people of the 1% will find a way to do what they did when George Bush Jr. Became President. They will cheat, lie and do those things it takes for them to win. Unless the Democratic party can do what Obama did, we're screwed.

Imagine a Republican House, Senate and President. The Rightwinger would probably declare war on Canada again, just to show they could do it..

Thanks Fox News, for brainwashing, and making Half of America stupid.

[certainot]

64. that's the way it always is but by the time the election rolls

around it's likely the pounding from 1000 unchallenged ignored radio stations will have greatly reduced the gap, like it did for romney obama, making another ignorant corporate ayn randian loon actually acceptable.

[Cosmic Kitten]

66. That is exactly why Hillary is a bad bet

Once the right-wing smear machine gears up,
Hillary is doomed, meaning Democrats are doomed.

[certainot]

95. thing is, hillary scares the rw because they blew their idiot wad

on her long ago. that's why benghazi got blown up- desperation. they have to do something else to hurt clinton besides their usual and that doesn't work as well in a presidential

[Cosmic Kitten]

102. Not convincing

The right-wing base won't vote for Hillary.
The middle, would rather vote real republican than republican-lite.
There is nothing Hillary offers that the republicans can't match...

[MADem]

67. Oh, but look at the diversity in that GOP field!!!

You've got two guys who part their hair on their right, one who parts it on their left, one who kinda parts it on the right but combs it back (indecisive, there, Mitt?) and one guy with a squirrel on his head!!!!

[7962]

68. But wait till Ted Cruz gets in; THEN we'll really see what the people want!!! nt

[santamargarita]

74. Well look at the criminally insane bunch in the police lineup

[matt819]

75. No disrespect meant, but. . .

I think the Geico gecko would be double digits ahead of any of the GOP clown posse.

Or the Aflac duck.

Or the Geico pig.

[BainsBane]

76. They did just sweep an election. nt

[Phlem]

78. just proves how pathetic our choices are compared

to a bunch of monkeys.

[nikto]

82. is Hillary Clinton REALLY the best The Democratic Party can do?

Last edited Thu Jan 22, 2015, 09:38 PM - Edit history (3)

hint hint...





#elisabeth%20warren%202425x3000




I think we all agree the GOPers are an ugly bunch of liars, thieves and psychopaths.
But let's not let that fact distort our vision.

I have been essentially a lifelong-Democrat, due to FDR's Legacy,
and it's positive effect on my life.

But I am now more Progressive than Democrat.


In a party that contains such regressive elements as the DLC, Rahm Emmanuel, Andrew Cuomo,
an increasingly-corporatist Diane Feinstein and Chuck Schumer,
plus various "Blue Dogs", that is an important distinction, IMO.

I say,
Judge theses pols not by color, or party label, but by the content of their character (i.e. as demonstrated by
the policies they will fight for).

[whatchamacallit]

84. I'm really glad they're sucking. I just wish we weren't sucking too. n/t

[fbc]

85. She probably had a similar lead in 2006

[Gothmog]

90. This is great

[rhett o rick]

94. And why does she have such a lead? Maybe the conservatives all love her.

Conservatives all love her more than the nitwits the Republicans have. She has the backing of the big money corporations. This is not good news for the 99%. H. Clinton is a favorite of our Oligarch Rulers (Goldman-Sachs).

We desperately need change. 51% of American school children live in poverty and Goldman-Sachs/ Clinton don't give a crap. It's time for change. The change that Obama promised.

[patricktype1]

96. Polling Problems and Fallacies

Hello Democratic Underground, this is my first post but I'll quickly get to the point... Polls are very subjective and are extremely influenced on the source on which they are posted such as: I watch Fox News, CNN, and The BBC. This is so I can get some sort of "clear" view on all angles. But sadly it seems that as if these news stations will cater to their own viewers, become very choosey in who they poll, or completely make up the statistics altogether. I'm not saying they did but there are very high chances that it could happen because after all news is just another business and there's money to be made in it. For example: Fox News blowing up the story of President Obama interviewing the YouTube star which isn't really that necessary. ABC and The Washington Post tend to lean towards the Democratic/Liberal side while Fox News obviously leans toward Republican/Conservative side so the news channels will probably curve that information towards the type of viewers they have. I'm very sorry for the super long post but it's my first one better make it count, amiright? haha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

97. How is this question subjective?

Would you vote for Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush?

[Cosmic Kitten]

107. How is objective?

Framing a poll as either "Bush or Clinton"
is an example of TINA...
There Is No Alternative.
Hillary is INEVITABLE, no one can beat her!

The purpose of TINA is to narrow YOUR thinking.
To exclude the possibility of any external challenge.
It reinforces the narrow perception of INEVITABILITY.

It's manipulation.
The intended outcome is to maintain the status quo
A false choice to placate the masses with a "fake fight".
If either Bush or Clinton wins... Wall st and the MIC wins...
and the American Public loses.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

110. It's a question with mutually exclusive choices.

I'm an empiricist. When it comes to social science I like to keep it that way.

It is no more biased than asking someone if they think the Patriots or Seahawks will win the SuperBowl.

[Cosmic Kitten]

112. It is a mutually exclusive choice

But how we got to that choice is the issue.

Football is a very defined, competitive, endeavor
unimpeded by media, money, or undue influence.

Politics by it's very nature is subject to undue influence.
Arriving at an "empirical", mutually exclusive choice,
can still be a false choice "TINA"

question: Would you rather lose an arm or a leg?
"circle one" because There Is No Alternative.
"Writing in" neither is "throwing away" your vote.

[Scott6113]

106. A hold your nose vote

History is written by the winners. Demographics are on her side. There are more women than men in this country, and women vote in higher proportions. There will be many couples who arrive to the polls who will split the vote. She's a republican but to elect the first woman President?

I dislike identity politics. It isn't far removed from racism. But it's a huge factor.

I suspect that in one of those quiet rooms Romney made famous the RNC has already written the concession speech. Their money will be in veto-proof majorities in Congress, and in the states. Hillary will be President but frozen out.

The only real adversary she has is her health. Will be sworn in at 68. Reagan was 73 and I think the effects of alzheimers was already discernable in his 2nd term. Women live longer but have more problems.

Our activism should really be lower down. That's where the power of a divided government will be.

My 2₵

[Cosmic Kitten]

108. Hillary will be President but frozen out ?!

What?

Her Neo-Con agenda won't be embraced by republicans?
Her Wall St, corporate friendly agenda won't fly in a
right-wing congress?

Seriously?
Are you punking us?