• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats unsure Hillary Clinton can beat Donald Trump in general election

US Conservative said:
You are getting warm, allow me to elaborate. I will speak only for myself but you should know my views are common amongst conservatives.

I am not a Republican first, I am a conservative (note the little c).

Now, I tend to favor the Republican party because its policies are generally closer to mine, though I have voted for libertarians, independents, and (rarely) democrats. Im actually a registered independent. Ive never been a registered Republican, or Democrat.

For years, I have watched the Republicans ignore me, or write me off. I have watched time and time again Republican fold like frightened kittens at the first sign of opposition. I have watched them try to play the "democrat light" game and fail. Ive watched the GOP lie to me, for a recent example, take the Paul Ryan spending bill. This guy talked tough, got the speakership, and caved in a matter of days. Ive heard GOP establishment paint conservatives as nuts, sounding more like democrats than democrats do.

End result-I feel no special affinity with the GOP. They more often mirror my personal conservative/libertarian views than the dems, but thats all.
When the GOP pushes a moderate I can support, I will support them. When they dont, I will not. If the GOP has figured this out, good for them-its not like they haven't been reminded of this. The GOP currently needs conservatives and independents to win. The establishment (GOP elites and their donor class) have little in common with either me or the typical republican. They don't like me, and frankly I dont like them.

Thats how it is. And when you see movements like the TEA party, when you see the support for conservatives-you are seeing the response from people like me.

It just so happens that the Republicans do best when they are unapologetic, and provide the balance they are supposed to provide. When they defend their beliefs instead of playing defense against dems. Reagan is the obvious example, but there are plenty more, any number of governors for example.

The GOP can ignore me at its own peril. I just dont care.
Click to expand...

I was a registered independent but found out that that is pretty worthless in primaries because in my state (Kentucky) I was only allowed to vote for Independents and technically being independent isn't a real party so there are close to zero people to vote for. It's nothing but a twilight zone. Since I also identify more with Republicans I changed to that party for voting purposes. I vote for a mix of people but it is harder for me to vote for the far right wing. I voted for Rand Paul but only because the Democratic choice was so bad. This last election for governor I couldn't vote for Matt Bevin or the Democratic choice so I voted independent. I appreciate your thoughts on politics but I don't agree with everything the far right fight for and their methods of doing so, even though I strongly identify with fiscal responsibility. Like it or not we don't live in a dictatorship so we can't have a minority group of people trying to force their way into running the country over the will of the majority. I don't think the far right looks at the big picture and vote for the best of two choices. Assuming that everything you say is true:

1. Conservatives not showing up to vote in 2008 and 2012 caused Obama to be in power for eight years and was able to push through Obamacare solely due to that, not to mention all of their other liberal agendas.

2. By forcing a government shutdown which they did not win, conservatives further alienated themselves from independent and moderate Republican voters as the Republicans were blamed for the shutdown, not the Democrats.

I still have to ask you these same questions:

1. If the majority of Republican voters are the moderates who elected both McCain and Romney in the primaries, then how do you expect them to nominate a far right conservative now?

2. If the minority far right conservatives refused to show up at the polls to vote against Obama then how can you expect the majority moderates of the party to show up and vote for a far right conservative like Cruz now?

And a new question:

All of the Republican candidates, including those on the far right, have pledged to support the eventual nominee, whoever it is, so, if they are willing to get out and vote for their own party against Hillary for the greater good, then why can't the far right conservative electorate do the same? Cruz would even get out and vote for Kasich over Hillary.
 
Moderate Right said:
I was a registered independent but found out that that is pretty worthless in primaries because in my state (Kentucky) I was only allowed to vote for Independents and technically being independent isn't a real party so there are close to zero people to vote for. It's nothing but a twilight zone. Since I also identify more with Republicans I changed to that party for voting purposes. I vote for a mix of people but it is harder for me to vote for the far right wing. I voted for Rand Paul but only because the Democratic choice was so bad. This last election for governor I couldn't vote for Matt Bevin or the Democratic choice so I voted independent. I appreciate your thoughts on politics but I don't agree with everything the far right fight for and their methods of doing so, even though I strongly identify with fiscal responsibility. Like it or not we don't live in a dictatorship so we can't have a minority group of people trying to force their way into running the country over the will of the majority. I don't think the far right looks at the big picture and vote for the best of two choices. Assuming that everything you say is true:

1. Conservatives not showing up to vote in 2008 and 2012 caused Obama to be in power for eight years and was able to push through Obamacare solely due to that, not to mention all of their other liberal agendas.

2. By forcing a government shutdown which they did not win, conservatives further alienated themselves from independent and moderate Republican voters as the Republicans were blamed for the shutdown, not the Democrats.

I still have to ask you these same questions:

1. If the majority of Republican voters are the moderates who elected both McCain and Romney in the primaries, then how do you expect them to nominate a far right conservative now?

2. If the minority far right conservatives refused to show up at the polls to vote against Obama then how can you expect the majority moderates of the party to show up and vote for a far right conservative like Cruz now?

And a new question:

All of the Republican candidates, including those on the far right, have pledged to support the eventual nominee, whoever it is, so, if they are willing to get out and vote for their own party against Hillary for the greater good, then why can't the far right conservative electorate do the same? Cruz would even get out and vote for Kasich over Hillary.
Click to expand...


1. Obamacare is the fault of democrats-lay blame where it lies. Its least of all the fault of conservatives.

2. The shutdown was overrated, both lefties and moderates talked about how it would harm the Republicans-it did not-hence the GOP victories afterwards. Its hooting and hollering alone.


1. Moderates ran and lost in two elections. They lose-thats what they do.

2. Conservatives may be a minority but no party will do well if it can't at least get all of its wings to vote for the candidate it nominates. It does not matter what party-a candidate who is not acceptable to everyone isn't wise.
 
Moderate Right said:
I was a registered independent but found out that that is pretty worthless in primaries because in my state (Kentucky) I was only allowed to vote for Independents and technically being independent isn't a real party so there are close to zero people to vote for. It's nothing but a twilight zone. Since I also identify more with Republicans I changed to that party for voting purposes. I vote for a mix of people but it is harder for me to vote for the far right wing. I voted for Rand Paul but only because the Democratic choice was so bad. This last election for governor I couldn't vote for Matt Bevin or the Democratic choice so I voted independent. I appreciate your thoughts on politics but I don't agree with everything the far right fight for and their methods of doing so, even though I strongly identify with fiscal responsibility. Like it or not we don't live in a dictatorship so we can't have a minority group of people trying to force their way into running the country over the will of the majority. I don't think the far right looks at the big picture and vote for the best of two choices. Assuming that everything you say is true:

1. Conservatives not showing up to vote in 2008 and 2012 caused Obama to be in power for eight years and was able to push through Obamacare solely due to that, not to mention all of their other liberal agendas.

2. By forcing a government shutdown which they did not win, conservatives further alienated themselves from independent and moderate Republican voters as the Republicans were blamed for the shutdown, not the Democrats.

I still have to ask you these same questions:

1. If the majority of Republican voters are the moderates who elected both McCain and Romney in the primaries, then how do you expect them to nominate a far right conservative now?

2. If the minority far right conservatives refused to show up at the polls to vote against Obama then how can you expect the majority moderates of the party to show up and vote for a far right conservative like Cruz now?

And a new question:

All of the Republican candidates, including those on the far right, have pledged to support the eventual nominee, whoever it is, so, if they are willing to get out and vote for their own party against Hillary for the greater good, then why can't the far right conservative electorate do the same? Cruz would even get out and vote for Kasich over Hillary.
Click to expand...



Wow, you managed to hit almost all of the Democratic party talking points.

While we're at it, what government shut down? As I recall the federal government ran off some veterans from parks and a few thousand civil servants got time off with pay.

Man I love watching US politics, it's better than comedy central. I glad I'm not paying for it though
 
Fearandloathing said:
Wow, you managed to hit almost all of the Democratic party talking points.

While we're at it, what government shut down? As I recall the federal government ran off some veterans from parks and a few thousand civil servants got time off with pay.

Man I love watching US politics, it's better than comedy central. I glad I'm not paying for it though
Click to expand...

SSShhh. There are many here on DP who seem to think I am a diehard conservative who only listens to right wing talking points. You're going to ruin their view of me but maybe they will finally realize that I really am a moderate. I'm not talking from a Democratic/Liberal viewpoint. I'm talking as an independent who identifies more with the Republicans and is upset that the far right has hijacked the Republican party and, in doing so, is responsible for the Democrats having the presidency for eight years now because they are too pig-headed to see that their tactics actually put them farther away from their goals instead of closer. If they continue to the point where the party is permanently fractured, Hillary will win and the Democrats will be in power for a very long time because the Tea Partiers can't win by themselves - that's why they're registered as Republicans instead of who they really are. This is the exact opposite of what the far right wants to achieve. If Kasich were to win the nomination and Cruz would vote for him over Hillary then why can't the rank and file do the same?
 
Moderate Right said:
SSShhh. There are many here on DP who seem to think I am a diehard conservative who only listens to right wing talking points. You're going to ruin their view of me but maybe they will finally realize that I really am a moderate. I'm not talking from a Democratic/Liberal viewpoint. I'm talking as an independent who identifies more with the Republicans and is upset that the far right has hijacked the Republican party and, in doing so, is responsible for the Democrats having the presidency for eight years now because they are too pig-headed to see that their tactics actually put them farther away from their goals instead of closer. If they continue to the point where the party is permanently fractured, Hillary will win and the Democrats will be in power for a very long time because the Tea Partiers can't win by themselves - that's why they're registered as Republicans instead of who they really are. This is the exact opposite of what the far right wants to achieve. If Kasich were to win the nomination and Cruz would vote for him over Hillary then why can't the rank and file do the same?
Click to expand...

I don't see the Republican Party as being hijacked by the far right, though the far right element does have some influence. What I see is the Republican Party being controlled by Party Elites and I see the rank and file Republicans...or, at least a substantial percentage of them...getting sick and tired of that going on.

Up till now, they haven't thought they had any choice but to vote for the guy the Elite gives them. That guy has always been a moderate and the Democrats have handed him his lunch. (be aware that I'm talking about the last 2 elections) This time, though, the Elites had everything set up to make another moderate the candidate...Bush...but that set up got derailed by Trump. So, it's likely this time around that we will end up with a President who is not part of the establishment.

The problem with Kasich is that, even though he's not really part of the establishment, he acts pretty much the same way they do. He's not an in-your-face and screw-you kind of guy. A lot of Americans want that type of guy now...especially after putting up with that weasel, Obama, for so long.

In regards to the Tea Party, I'm not so sure they are fully behind Trump. My guess is they are willing to let him show that he'll give them some of what they want, but they aren't fully sold on him. The problem for them is that none of the other candidates are any better.

One thing you have to keep in mind, Moderate Right, is that the candidate and the tactics are two different things. A candidate might have a lot of support, but might employ very crappy tactics and lose the election. That's what we saw in 2012. Romney just didn't campaign as well as Obama did and he lost by what...5 or 6 million votes? Of course, Romney was at a severe disadvantage because he wasn't willing to lie, while Obama was...but that's how the Democrats operate. The Republicans have to either find tactics to combat those lies or start lying themselves. The Republicans also have to find a way to deal with a media that is in the tank for the Democrats.

So...what I'm saying is, the reason the Republicans have lost the last two Presidential elections isn't because they've moved to the far right...it's because they've campaigned badly. Or, at least, not as effectively as the Democrats.
 
Mycroft said:
I don't see the Republican Party as being hijacked by the far right, though the far right element does have some influence. What I see is the Republican Party being controlled by Party Elites and I see the rank and file Republicans...or, at least a substantial percentage of them...getting sick and tired of that going on.

Up till now, they haven't thought they had any choice but to vote for the guy the Elite gives them. That guy has always been a moderate and the Democrats have handed him his lunch. (be aware that I'm talking about the last 2 elections) This time, though, the Elites had everything set up to make another moderate the candidate...Bush...but that set up got derailed by Trump. So, it's likely this time around that we will end up with a President who is not part of the establishment.

The problem with Kasich is that, even though he's not really part of the establishment, he acts pretty much the same way they do. He's not an in-your-face and screw-you kind of guy. A lot of Americans want that type of guy now...especially after putting up with that weasel, Obama, for so long.

In regards to the Tea Party, I'm not so sure they are fully behind Trump. My guess is they are willing to let him show that he'll give them some of what they want, but they aren't fully sold on him. The problem for them is that none of the other candidates are any better.

One thing you have to keep in mind, Moderate Right, is that the candidate and the tactics are two different things. A candidate might have a lot of support, but might employ very crappy tactics and lose the election. That's what we saw in 2012. Romney just didn't campaign as well as Obama did and he lost by what...5 or 6 million votes? Of course, Romney was at a severe disadvantage because he wasn't willing to lie, while Obama was...but that's how the Democrats operate. The Republicans have to either find tactics to combat those lies or start lying themselves. The Republicans also have to find a way to deal with a media that is in the tank for the Democrats.

So...what I'm saying is, the reason the Republicans have lost the last two Presidential elections isn't because they've moved to the far right...it's because they've campaigned badly. Or, at least, not as effectively as the Democrats.
Click to expand...

In the 2008 election McCain came from behind and either tied or surpassed Obama at one point in the campaign and then the mortgage crisis hit. GWB had been very unpopular at the time and so, in the beginning, Republicans were blamed for the mortgage crises and McCain fell like a rock from that point until November.

In 2012 it is also my opinion that Romney's chances of winning were about 50/50 until the video of him came out with the 47% comment and he tanked afterward. As rich as he was, after that comment came to light, he just couldn't convince the average Joe and Jane that he understood them.

In both cases it is my personal opinion that neither loss was due to the fact that the candidates were too moderate but the far right has narrow mindedly believed that to be the case.
 
Moderate Right said:
In the 2008 election McCain came from behind and either tied or surpassed Obama at one point in the campaign and then the mortgage crisis hit. GWB had been very unpopular at the time and so, in the beginning, Republicans were blamed for the mortgage crises and McCain fell like a rock from that point until November.

In 2012 it is also my opinion that Romney's chances of winning were about 50/50 until the video of him came out with the 47% comment and he tanked afterward. As rich as he was, after that comment came to light, he just couldn't convince the average Joe and Jane that he understood them.

In both cases it is my personal opinion that neither loss was due to the fact that the candidates were too moderate but the far right has narrow mindedly believed that to be the case.
Click to expand...

And I disagree.

In both cases, it was Obama's tactics that turned the tide against McCain and Romney. He used those events you mentioned...along with his media buddies' help...to turn public opinion against them. Obama and his buddies tied McCain to Bush and they lied about Romney and his taxes. That's what brought them down...not any far right support either men may or may not have had.
 
Mycroft said:
And I disagree.

In both cases, it was Obama's tactics that turned the tide against McCain and Romney. He used those events you mentioned...along with his media buddies' help...to turn public opinion against them. Obama and his buddies tied McCain to Bush and they lied about Romney and his taxes. That's what brought them down...not any far right support either men may or may not have had.
Click to expand...

It sounds like you are saying that you don't think McCain and Romney lost because they were too moderate, which I absolutely agree with. I'm not much on defending Obama and others on the left, but as far as that other stuff goes, that's politics as usual for both sides in using events against their opponents and Romney did say that about the 47% so that really wasn't a lie of any kind. The right has been doing that very same thing to Obama in the last several elections in which Republicans have had a string of victories across the country. I know here in Kentucky the right has been extremely effective at knocking off Democratic challengers by tying them to Obama. As far as the media goes, they slant left and always have so it's kind of like they are the 12th man on the field at a football game. It's something that the Republicans have always had to deal with so it's nothing new. It gives the Democrats home field advantage but that doesn't mean they are going to win the game every time.
 
Moderate Right said:
It sounds like you are saying that you don't think McCain and Romney lost because they were too moderate, which I absolutely agree with. I'm not much on defending Obama and others on the left, but as far as that other stuff goes, that's politics as usual for both sides in using events against their opponents and Romney did say that about the 47% so that really wasn't a lie of any kind. The right has been doing that very same thing to Obama in the last several elections in which Republicans have had a string of victories across the country. I know here in Kentucky the right has been extremely effective at knocking off Democratic challengers by tying them to Obama. As far as the media goes, they slant left and always have so it's kind of like they are the 12th man on the field at a football game. It's something that the Republicans have always had to deal with so it's nothing new. It gives the Democrats home field advantage but that doesn't mean they are going to win the game every time.
Click to expand...

The lie I was referring to was this one: Harry Reid is proud he lied about Mitt Romney's taxes | Washington Examiner

And no, I don't think those guys lost because they were too moderate. I think they lost because Obama, using all his tricks, ran a better campaign. If the Republicans...no matter who their candidate is...wants to win this year, they'll have to find a way to combat the Democratic tricks machine.

I'm not so sure any Republican can do it...except Trump.
 
Mycroft said:
The lie I was referring to was this one: Harry Reid is proud he lied about Mitt Romney's taxes | Washington Examiner

And no, I don't think those guys lost because they were too moderate. I think they lost because Obama, using all his tricks, ran a better campaign. If the Republicans...no matter who their candidate is...wants to win this year, they'll have to find a way to combat the Democratic tricks machine.

I'm not so sure any Republican can do it...except Trump.
Click to expand...

I'd forgotten about that.
 
Moderate Right said:
SSShhh. There are many here on DP who seem to think I am a diehard conservative who only listens to right wing talking points. You're going to ruin their view of me but maybe they will finally realize that I really am a moderate. I'm not talking from a Democratic/Liberal viewpoint. I'm talking as an independent who identifies more with the Republicans and is upset that the far right has hijacked the Republican party and, in doing so, is responsible for the Democrats having the presidency for eight years now because they are too pig-headed to see that their tactics actually put them farther away from their goals instead of closer. If they continue to the point where the party is permanently fractured, Hillary will win and the Democrats will be in power for a very long time because the Tea Partiers can't win by themselves - that's why they're registered as Republicans instead of who they really are. This is the exact opposite of what the far right wants to achieve. If Kasich were to win the nomination and Cruz would vote for him over Hillary then why can't the rank and file do the same?
Click to expand...



It was sarcasm. You really did simply compile memes and throw out the standard, two year old talking points. I haven't heard any play the shut down card in two years.

My criticism is the Republicans have control of the congress and senate and have failed to address many issues, and has not been a factor in the election. They continue to play silly games like drafting a bill to kill Obamacare knowing it will be defeated, simply to be able to say "we tried to get rid of it." Whoever is doing the strategizing needs to be shot
 
Mycroft said:
The lie I was referring to was this one: Harry Reid is proud he lied about Mitt Romney's taxes | Washington Examiner

And no, I don't think those guys lost because they were too moderate. I think they lost because Obama, using all his tricks, ran a better campaign. If the Republicans...no matter who their candidate is...wants to win this year, they'll have to find a way to combat the Democratic tricks machine.

I'm not so sure any Republican can do it...except Trump.
Click to expand...

Harry Reid is one disgusting old fool. What an asshole.
 
tres borrachos said:
I really wonder how many people enthusiastically support Trump because of his statements on Mexicans and the claim that thousands of Muslims were celebrating on 9/11 in New Jersey, and would not have without them.
Click to expand...

I think most people who support Trump knows what he really meant when he made his statements and that's why they support him.

For example, he wants to actually do something about illegal immigration and he wants to prevent terrorist attacks in the US. I think people believe him.
 
Mycroft said:
I don't see the Republican Party as being hijacked by the far right, though the far right element does have some influence. What I see is the Republican Party being controlled by Party Elites and I see the rank and file Republicans...or, at least a substantial percentage of them...getting sick and tired of that going on.

Up till now, they haven't thought they had any choice but to vote for the guy the Elite gives them. That guy has always been a moderate and the Democrats have handed him his lunch. (be aware that I'm talking about the last 2 elections) This time, though, the Elites had everything set up to make another moderate the candidate...Bush...but that set up got derailed by Trump. So, it's likely this time around that we will end up with a President who is not part of the establishment.

The problem with Kasich is that, even though he's not really part of the establishment, he acts pretty much the same way they do. He's not an in-your-face and screw-you kind of guy. A lot of Americans want that type of guy now...especially after putting up with that weasel, Obama, for so long.
{Edited for room}.
Click to expand...



Your post is dead on. I read in several areas that in the end, there was like 5% difference in the platforms of Obama and Romney. Yet, conservatives see "policy" as what's killing you. It's not.

I have said from the beginning it was no landslide, and had Romney been able to repeat what he did in the first debate, we would have seen the end of the Obama family. Having said that, Barrack Obama is the best campaigner I have seen anywhere, with the possible exception of Justin Trudeau. When you put those two things together the big bad Obama and the Democratic Party stop looking like giants and become just another barrier.

Whoever has been making the campaign decisions since Bush needs to be shot. The 08' campaign looked like a high school election, the Republicans let Sarah's clothes become an issue.

Three years ago I was part of a provincial campaign that was in the gutter. The main opposition was 20 points ahead and the Liberal leader Cristy Clark had 65% disapproval rating. And we won. Helped a bit by the oppositions mistakes, but a genius comeback to win five additional seats. The same brain trust was involved in Justin's win a few months ago. Like Americans, the Conservatives saw Trudeau as an over ambitious pot smoking kid, and spent four months advertising what a jerk he was and he "wasn't ready" They lost....one of the greatest upsets in Canadian parliamentary history. He battled his own age, 43, and surprised his opponents on the left by stealing their platform, and his opponents on the right with a perfect campaign that counterbalanced the attacks on him .

The point being that it's a new ball game, not just social media etc., and the Republican Party is going to have to learn how to run an effective campaign.

I agree, the nation needs some shaking up, not sure if Trump's turning its on its head is the right thing, but whoever wins will be the guy who has demonstrated that has a broom and will use it. Clearly the winds of change are blowing, and reaching gale force based on the reception Trump is getting. The guy who can get in front of this [as he has] will take the nomination AND the White House.

I live about 20 miles from the US border, and I can feel the anger, the disappointment, frustration and rage from here. I have four close friends in Point Roberts, all gun and bible owners, and have voted Democrat when they vote. They have all said they would vote for a serial killer to get rid of Obama or anyone who follows. That's a sample I believe crosses the land. The Republican who wants to win needs to tape that anger, rage....and ride it into the White House.
 
Fearandloathing said:
It was sarcasm. You really did simply compile memes and throw out the standard, two year old talking points. I haven't heard any play the shut down card in two years.

My criticism is the Republicans have control of the congress and senate and have failed to address many issues, and has not been a factor in the election. They continue to play silly games like drafting a bill to kill Obamacare knowing it will be defeated, simply to be able to say "we tried to get rid of it." Whoever is doing the strategizing needs to be shot
Click to expand...

It depends on what you mean by "control". The Republicans control the House. They don't really control the Senate and they certainly don't control the White House. There's only so much they can accomplish. They can't force anything through without compromise because if they stand their ground and don't blink and the other side stands their ground and doesn't blink then nothing gets done at all and perhaps the government is shut down or we default on the national debt. Both sides assume the other side will eventually blink and so far the Republicans keep on blinking, but only because they other side has no intention of blinking either, especially when they know the public will blame the Republicans in the end anyway. You're right about the silly games though, passing crap that they know ahead of time has no chance of passing just to try scoring political points for the future is just plain stupid and a big waste of time. They might as well be out golfing instead.
 
US Conservative said:
Democratic Party activists are conflicted over whether Hillary Clinton can take on Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in the general election, with some fearing she provides too much ammunition for the flamboyant businessman’s style of attack.

While Mr. Trump is leading the national polls and calling the shots in what’s become a circuslike GOP primary season, Mrs. Clinton tops a sedentary Democratic race with two other opponents respectfully nipping at her without doing much damage — and party stalwarts are happy to have it that way.

HillaryClinton_c0-460-4595-3139_s885x516.jpg


Democrats unsure Hillary Clinton can beat Donald Trump in general election - Washington Times

Dems are getting more and more worried that Hillary will be eaten alive this election. :cool:
Click to expand...

Why would they be worried?

Heck, I think even FOX polls has her over Trump. When even Rasmussen has her over Trump, I think they may be just worrying for the sake of worrying.

The Dems better pray Trump gets the nomination.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton
 
Mycroft said:
And I disagree.

In both cases, it was Obama's tactics that turned the tide against McCain and Romney. He used those events you mentioned...along with his media buddies' help...to turn public opinion against them. Obama and his buddies tied McCain to Bush and they lied about Romney and his taxes. That's what brought them down...not any far right support either men may or may not have had.
Click to expand...


And still came within 5%.

That nice little **** job byHarry Reid is a greater sin than most Americans know, had he done it in Canadian Parliament, his carerr would have been over the next ****ing day!

It is called "parliamentary or congressional privilege, a means by which elected officials are saved harmless should they, in debate, make a mistake and libel someone. Reid deliberately lied and said Romney had not paid his taxes, and the low life scum who are the democrats, willing to break any law for a vote, simply sat back smugly and smiled. Congressional privilege is a cornerstone of democracy, and they have turned congress into a school yard where anyone can say anything, including lie about a man's taxes.

When that disgusting piece of freshly laid **** did that I realized how cut throat is American politics. They were shred the constitution if they have to, to get a handful of votes.

Hats off to the Republicans for not stooping as low, but it cost them the election. I lost all respect for all Democrats when they stood silent, and I lost Respect for Republicans, they could have turned that into the issue and a win simply by explaining how Reid single handedly destroyed all credibility in congress and the Democratic Party.

I figure any party that will crush 600 year old tradition, a tradition that keeps them honest, will easily do anything to advance themselves over the needs opf the country. Every. One. Of. Them.

The word 'senator' to me means 'self-absorbed', thieving, liar sell out'....in both of our countries.
 
Moderate Right said:
It depends on what you mean by "control". The Republicans control the House. They don't really control the Senate and they certainly don't control the White House. There's only so much they can accomplish. They can't force anything through without compromise because if they stand their ground and don't blink and the other side stands their ground and doesn't blink then nothing gets done at all and perhaps the government is shut down or we default on the national debt. Both sides assume the other side will eventually blink and so far the Republicans keep on blinking, but only because they other side has no intention of blinking either, especially when they know the public will blame the Republicans in the end anyway. You're right about the silly games though, passing crap that they know ahead of time has no chance of passing just to try scoring political points for the future is just plain stupid and a big waste of time. They might as well be out golfing instead.
Click to expand...



Oh come on, can we get past the high school primer stage?

Obamacare? Every voter in the US knows they can't scrap Obamacare, and most know you can't scrap it at all...not now.

THE ISSUE...hello America WAKE THE **** UP is security, in the broad sense and in the pocket book. They have been under employed for all of Obama's reign. Meanwhile, 500,000 Mexicans take jobs away from Americans every year, that's 1,300 a day.

Why do you think Trump can shoot to 40% with five words " I will build a wall".

So, strategically, if you are going to make a statement through getting vetoed, make it one that counts. You bring in an Omnibus law covering everything from the treatment of when they are caught [under international law they are NOT entitled to the protections of the US constitution] to fies, penalties and a host of ugly **** they are going to face. In that bill is an appropriation, a moderate amount, say $125 million for "additional security and fortifications".

And to be cute, you add some amnesty that won't choke a moderate conservative, like Reagan, who gave a pass to a whole list of people who had been waiting a long time, elderly etc.

Then you hit the hustings "selling" the idea, while Obama has no option than to kill it.

Meanwhile you start doing some clean up with a series of nice looking bills that address a lot of minor issues, all of which Obama has to veto. The issue you now have is that the "progressive" is now holding back progress because of partisan bull****.

I have covered many campaigns, and been inside a few more, and I will guarantee you that a bill with $ for a "wall" without mentioning, "a wall" will reign king of the headlines.

This veto is already history
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom