• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

'17 Specials & '18 Midterms Thread

ImTheCaptain said:
those grapes were sour, huh
Click to expand...
If your dissatisfaction with political outcomes is limited to "sour grapes", then I can see where criticism of individual policy wouldnt be a major concern of yours. I wish more people shared your insulation.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
The problem that you few individual posters have with a Democrat making "pie in the sky" promises is irrelevant. Hillary would have won if she had ran on such promises, because thats what people want.
Click to expand...

There's a limit to what a responsible politician should promise, regardless of what the people want. It seems like you are suggesting she should have just out-Trump'd him and lied even more.

There's no doubt she should have done a much better job crafting a message to the rural poor, but even if she had, I suspect it would have been hard to compete with such outrageous lies. At least next time around it should be easier to prove that he's completely full of shit.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
If your dissatisfaction with political outcomes is limited to "sour grapes", then I can see where criticism of individual policy wouldnt be a major concern of yours. I wish more people shared your insulation.
Click to expand...

if only HC had pandered more, she'd have won
 
PhDeac said:
#1 is most likely. #7 is least likely.

1, 2, [big gap] 4, 6, 3, 5, 7
Click to expand...

Really? With Bannon recently saying there is a 30% chance he finishes his 1st term and with Kelly or Mattis leaking about tackling him if he went for the nuclear football? While I despise Bannon, I have found myself paying attention to what he says because he's often correct in his predictions/assertions. While it probably doesn't make it to Fox News, there have been a growing number of stories in credible publications that he's becoming more and more unhinged. If he makes it through his 1st term and runs, I believe his losing in the general is the most likely event. And if he doesn't make it through his 1st term, I'm thinking he's more likely to be 25th amendmented by his cabinet over impeachment or quitting.
 
cville deac said:
Really? With Bannon recently saying there is a 30% chance he finishes his 1st term and with Kelly or Mattis leaking about tackling him if he went for the nuclear football? While I despise Bannon, I have found myself paying attention to what he says because he's often correct in his predictions/assertions. While it probably doesn't make it to Fox News, there have been a growing number of stories in credible publications that he's becoming more and more unhinged. If he makes it through his 1st term and runs, I believe his losing in the general is the most likely event. And if he doesn't make it through his 1st term, I'm thinking he's more likely to be 25th amendmented by his cabinet over impeachment or quitting.
Click to expand...

81% approval among Republicans
http://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx
 
PhDeac said:
81% approval among Republicans
http://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx
Click to expand...

Which is why he won't be impeached. He hates everyone in the WH who isn't family and is openly feuding with his cabinet. If he makes international relations worse and tries to start an unwise war or something, I can see Kelly, Mattis, Tillerson and McMaster going to Pence and convincing him that they all need to keep the country safe from Trump. Or he could fire them all and just not replace them and get involved in a yuge international incident.
 
Trump will fire anybody before they can 25th Amendment him. Regardless of how Constitutional it is, it would be perceived as a coup against a very popular President within his party.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
if only HC had pandered more, she'd have won
Click to expand...
Oh no, dear lord, please don't present new policy ideas in an attempt to please your constituents and motivate people to vote for you. Instead just promise to keep doing the same shit the last president did, call your opponents voters "deplorable" and maybe whip and nae-nae a little bit on Ellen.

I look forward to whatever rich vanilla dipshit you trot out to get embarrassed by Trump in 2020. I'm sure we'll all be blown away by the pragmatism.
 
Last edited:
myDeaconmyhand said:
Oh no, dear lord, please don't present new policy ideas in an attempt to please your constituents and motivate people to vote for you. Instead just promise to keep doing the same shit the last president did, call your oppenents "deplorable" and maybe whip and nae-nae a little bit on Ellen.

I look forward to whatever rich vanilla dipshit you trot out to get embarrassed by Trump in 2020. I'm sure we'll all be blown away by the pragmatism.
Click to expand...

Hillary called the people you're talking about "people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they're just desperate for change." And she specifically said they weren't the "basket of deplorables."

Then the people you're talking about heard that and grouped themselves in with the deplorables.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
You're both being idiotic. It's hardly "Revolution" to enact the same shit thats already in place in the socialist republics of the UK, Canada, Australia, and Germany. But please, go on posting memes and saying nothing but "better things are hard to do". Hard hitting stuff.
Click to expand...

Sure but the majority (all?) of those nations have parliamentary elections rather than our system which enables parties to gain legislative seats and exposure without winning the whole thing.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Sure but the majority (all?) of those nations have parliamentary elections rather than our system which enables parties to gain legislative seats and exposure without winning the whole thing.
Click to expand...
Dude, stop it. The ACA passed with zero, read: ZERO Republican votes. It was veto proof. The only limits to what we could have passed were constitutionality. So this arbitrary, theoretical amount of control that is seemingly impossible to achieve, we achieved less than 9 years ago. I have t-shirts older then that.
 
and the only reason that Republicans wont repeal it is because of fucking medicare and affordability, the most socialist aspect of the whole fucking bill.
 
If you needed any more goddamn proof that your theory is bullshit, the only Obama legislation that Republicans can't undue is the only be halfway-socialist legislation he passed.
 
Last edited:
myDeaconmyhand said:
If you needed any more goddamn proof that your theory is bullshit, the only Obama legislation that Republicans can't undue is the only be halfway-socialist legislation he passed.
Click to expand...

Rubes might call it socialist, but the ACA is about as neoliberal as it gets.
 
The super left people like MDMH have a problem in that the election has consequences to them. You have two groups of people that vote against their self interest one in each of the two parties. The republicans have the poor down trodden religious white people who support a party that does nothing to help them by conning them with abortion and immigration and any other flashy objects of hate. Despite most likely the democrat positions helping them and the ones that are enacted that do, like ACA, they still vote against that interest and with republicans.
The left has well to do people, many that populate this board, that have some idea and morality that they should help people. They vote for people that want to enact higher taxes on them, put into place regulations and restrictions that cost them money and time. They vote against their own interests where the republicans want to make it easier to make more money and further separate the haves from the have nots. The idea of helping others somehow convinces people to vote against this.
Put the two against each other and despite what people say hate is going to trump love. The republican voters passion for voting against their self interests is way stronger than their democrat opposites. Keep pushing and eventually you stop giving a shit, it's already happened i.e. This boards response to rubes, fuck em.
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
The super left people like MDMH have a problem in that the election has consequences to them.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to say on here that I personally feel more consequences from the election than FYC or anyone else, because I dont know if thats true. I don't know his circumstances. I just feel that Democrats like FYC take political progress for granted, they view it as inevitable, and not as the result of desperate, needy people fighting for change every day. If you try to reason with conservatives and meet them in the middle you're only going to wind up getting pulled to the right on every issue, because they dont compromise on shit and they are always looking for a way to peel back progress, economic, social, foreign policy, or otherwise. There is just no room for moderate Democrats in our two party system, because social justice and economic justice are intertwined and inseperable.
 
Last edited:
When Target starts paying all their employees 15/hr by 2020, it wont be because Hillary Clinton said 15/hr minimum wage was a "pipe dream" or a "pony promise", its because of labor rights activism keeping the idea relevant and normalizing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top