2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumbasselope
(2,565 posts)Hard to tell these days which side she is on.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)questionseverything
(9,661 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,222 posts).
Hey, the Brooklyn Bridge just went up for auction.
I'm taking $1,000 vetting payments to show good faith on this bid process.
Sent it to lefty@IllOwnTheBrooklynBridge.ru
.
w0nderer
(1,937 posts)i mailed my paycheck, will you please scan then zip up the bridge and send it attached to an email to
dummy_spendmoney@dumbdumber.dumdum.dum please
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)MattSh
(3,714 posts)say anything to get elected.
IF she should get elected, then it will be perfectly clear what side she is on...
VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)RIght now it's triangulating to the Left just to get the job. Later the triangle will continue to spin.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)That is to say, a liar.
Or maybe I should give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you have no clue what a political endorsement actually is. The NRA will endorse the GOP candidate after the primary, period. Pointing out that a candidates's position on a single point isn't stupid* isn't an "endorsement."
The depths to which Hillary and her acolytes will sink is positively breathtaking.
*suing companies for legal, non-defective products is bullshit
Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)because they hate her so very much and believe she's a candidate strong on gun laws against weapon manufacturers profits.
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)Clinton was not endorsed by the NRA. She was just co-hosting a fundraiser for her Campaign with a NRA lobbyist, they have not endorsed her yet. So please don't spread misinformation like a Clinton Supporter has been doing.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)I hope it was the result of being misinformed.
disillusioned73
(2,872 posts)& votes have consequences..
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)The American people are speaking, and they're choosing Hillary.
PS: Who made that monstrosity? I didn't know that anyone still used MS-Paint for Windows95.
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)He's convincing quite a lot of people. Clinton may have the lead, but Sanders is doing pretty darn well. The points made by the OP are pretty significant, I think. I don't think the American people overall have chosen anyone just yet. The race goes on.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)Thank you! I try to do the same. I've been called a "fake" Bernie supporter on here a few times.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)Okay, that's true, but Bernie won BIG on Super Saturday. The media downsizes it.
jmowreader
(50,565 posts)There were three states on Super Saturday. Bernie won two and came out further behind than he already was. Only a Bernie supporter calls that a win.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)who actually have the opportunity to hear it. But of course we know that the corporate media and the DNC (and DWS) are working together to prevent that from happening. Don't we.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Please post links to major newspaper stories and media clips that REPORT that Bernie won 3 of 4 primaries on Saturday.
I'd say I would wait but a) you won't look and b) you wouldn't find them if you did.
If Drumpf or Cruz and Hillary Clinton are the best the vaunted American democracy can offer, we are toast.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)I guess that's just the nature of US media, but it's not the conspiracy that Bernie's hardcore fans imagine. His wins weren't really the stuff that makes the "BREAKING NEWS" scrolling tickers, it was all pretty much expected. Good candidates know how to compensate and don't need to rely on tickers to get out their message or to appear viable. He's the wrong candidate at the wrong time who doesn't do a very good job at getting his message out. (Just my opinion.)
Well, if you truly believe that, then I hope your "doomsday prepper" food supplies, ammo and underground shelter and bug-out gear are stocked up. (Personally, I'm a bit more optimistic.)
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Hillary was expected to run the table only a year ago: so is the result so far Dog-Bites-Man or the reverse?
As for Doomsday prepping, it's a done thing: I left the country long ago and live in the civilized world now. The only question was whether I would ever come back; it is not looking likely.
Enjoy your time in the barrel.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)that Bernie would win only one state...Vermont.
THAT is how credible their opinions are.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)virgista
(48 posts)past and very much present? It's as if they just don't want to think about it. Pretend it isn't happening, or, "it will all be OK... because, because, she's just so wonderful that's why..."
Medea Benjamin has written a superb synopsis of Hilary's war-bent in today's Commondreams: "Pink-Slipping Hillary: On Remembering the Victims of the Iraq War". [sorry I haven't figured out how to link yet]. The article starts with a 2003 trip to HRC's senate office by Code Pink. Hilary's steadfast enthusiasm for invading Iraq would not be dissuaded by any argument:
We thought the easiest way to prevent harming women, children and other living things in Iraq was to stop a war of aggression, a war over weapons of mass destruction that UN inspectors on the ground couldn'tt find which were, in fact, never found because they didn'tt exist. Clinton, however, was steadfast in her commitment to war: She said it was our responsibility to disarm Saddam Hussein and even defended George W. Bushs unilateralism, citing her husbands go-it-alone intervention in Kosovo.
Disgusted, CODEPINK cofounder Jodie Evans tore off her pink slip and handed it to Clinton, saying that her support for Bushs invasion would lead to the death of many innocent people. Making the bogus connection between the September 11, 2001, attacks and Saddam Hussein, Clinton stormed out, saying, I am the Senator from New York. I will never put my peoples security at risk.
Take the blind from your eyes HRC fans. Wanting to go to war, real bad, in the Middle East, just can't be forgiven.
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)What you want from American people is not a good thing. With the over the top obvious attempt by the media and DNC to limit Sanders voice should make any True democrat upset. Scheduling only 6 debates and ensuring only 6 vs 26 we had in 2008, is a clear cut attempt to limit exposure of Sanders. If people have never heard Sanders then why would they vote for him? And they really really crappy times the DNC is having the debates, Sat night? You would think DNC would want as many people see them, that is what GOP is doing. And all dirty tricks that have come out of HRC headquarters is bad. Even if we ignore the less obvious ones the whole Civil Rights thing and then race baiting was just plan and simple GOP things.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #9)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Jitter65
(3,089 posts)mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)You are not of the body!
(insert picture of crazed Dr. McCoy)
longship
(40,416 posts)Resistance is useless!
Paper Roses
(7,475 posts)kgnu_fan
(3,021 posts)kgnu_fan
(3,021 posts)ladjf
(17,320 posts)Herman4747
(1,825 posts)On September 14, 2001 the House passed House Joint Resolution 64 (Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists). The totals in the House of Representatives were 420 ayes, 1 nay and 10 not voting. The sole nay vote was by Barbara Lee, D-CA.[2] Lee was the only member of either house of Congress to vote against the bill-- Wikipedia
rgbecker
(4,834 posts)(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
democrank
(11,112 posts)I had no idea that Hillary, like Bernie, was so "progressive"
Response to cyberpj (Original post)
Post removed
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)She doesn't support them, she just... takes their money. Which is really just as bad come to think about it.
Uncle Joe
(58,426 posts)Thanks for the thread, cyberpj.
Response to Uncle Joe (Reply #35)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Ivan Kaputski
(528 posts)Response to cyberpj (Original post)
DebDoo This message was self-deleted by its author.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Ivan Kaputski
(528 posts)Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)her supporters would be screaming "DINO! BLUE DOG! NOT A REAL DEMOCRAT!!!!"
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Bohunk68
(1,364 posts)right to choose what to do with her own body? Or would you tell her, "Oh, brother! GMAFB?"
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Her gender is her only asset in this campaign.
Kip Humphrey
(4,753 posts)Elizabeth Warren would be our candidate now hands down had she chosen to run.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Thespian2
(2,741 posts)Do the flips of Her Royal Highness out-number her flops?
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)grntuscarora
(1,249 posts)nt
felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)because the records speak for themselves--and line up with conservative Republicans. HRC is not a liberal and not a progressive. Actions speak louder than words.
This pretense is not only insulting to actual liberals and progressives, it denies the left any voice at all. I am convinced under HRC liberals would not be represented in government.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Great graphic.
felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)for those with open enough ears
G'day to you, Octafish
Thank you, cyberpj!
H2O Man
(73,623 posts)Powerful.
KansDem
(28,498 posts)"More Of The Same"
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Democratic...Progressive...or Liberal.
And that only leaves that other side of the spectrum.
No...More...Clintons.
Coincidence
(98 posts)noamnety
(20,234 posts)Bernie: Consistently Supports
Hillary: Willing to Compromise
Tanuki
(14,922 posts)tomm2thumbs
(13,297 posts)not good ads, but definitely easy-picking low fruit
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)yuiyoshida
(41,864 posts)Tweeted
saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)The last time I saw Mr. Hightower in person was at a UM on campus rally in A2. Get out the vote for Bernie my dear friends in the beautiful state of Michigan.
The middle of the road is for yellow lines and dead armadillos.
The opposite for courage is not cowardice, it is conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow.
Do something. If it doesn't work, do something else. No idea is too crazy.
Populists have always been out to challenge the orthodoxy of the corporate order and to empower workaday Americans so they can control their own economic and political destinies. This approach distinguishes the movement from classic liberalism, which seeks to live in harmony with concentrated corporate power by trying to regulate excesses.
When I entered politics, I took the only downward turn you could take from journalism.
What created democracy was Thomas Paine and Shays' Rebellion, the suffragists and the abolitionists and on down through the populists and the labor movement, including the Wobblies. Tough, in your face people... Mother Jones, Woody Guthrie... Martin Luther King and Caesar Chavez. And now it's down to us.