# Hillary Clinton attacks Bernie Sanders for damaging her campaign and enabling Trump



## EJ (Sep 6, 2017)

> Hillary Clinton has said Bernie Sanders’ attacks against her during the presidential campaign “caused lasting damage”.
> 
> 
> According to excerpts of her new book, What Happened, that have surfaced online, Ms Clinton accused Mr Sanders of paving the way for Donald Trump's "Crooked Hillary" campaign.
> ...



AND THIS also exist

AY CUZ WHERE DA HILL BOTS AT???

Reactions: Funny 5 | Lewd 1 | Sad! 4


----------



## White Wolf (Sep 6, 2017)

Deja Vu. Never accept blame just blame others instead.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 6, 2017)

official website

I can't believe she is still trying to blame others. It's ridiculous.

She needs to take responsibility that she contributed to her public image, and that she was the reason her campaign failed. She is a detriment at this point, with this dwelling and finger-pointing. The DNC is not going to see successes in 2018 if they choose to continue to hitch their wagon on her. Cut her off.

Reactions: Like 3 | Agree 4 | Funny 2 | Lewd 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 6, 2017)

Very interesting


----------



## dr_shadow (Sep 6, 2017)

Dat Democrat grief process still going strong.

Hill-billies and Berners seem to spend as much time attacking each other over which faction is to blame for the loss, as they do attacking the government.

Reactions: Agree 1 | Funny 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 6, 2017)

mr_shadow said:


> Dat Democrat grief process still going strong.
> 
> Hill-billies and Berners seem to spend as much time attacking each other over which faction is to blame for the loss, as they do attacking the government.



Hillary was the Democratic candidate, she was the leader of the campaign for the party. The responsibility in her losing the election is her's. I mean, this book is just a bunch of pointing fingers at everyone else, and her supporters have followed suit ever since she lost the election. I think it's clear which "faction" isn't over it yet. Because win or lose, Bernie Sanders is still a United States Senator, he's still an official part of the legislative process, and even without being president still has considerable influence in liberal politics. Hillary on the other hand has only seen her image diminish, especially in people seeing how she has reacted to her loss. A stark contrast to Sanders sticking his neck out for her and encouraging his supporters to vote for him, and what does he get in return here?

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## EJ (Sep 6, 2017)

mr_shadow said:


> Dat Democrat grief process still going strong.
> 
> Hill-billies and Berners seem to spend as much time attacking each other over which faction is to blame for the loss, as they do attacking the government.



Hillary Clinton is to blame for Hillary Clinton losing. 

That isn't even up for debate.

EDIT:

ninja'd.

Reactions: Winner 4


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Sep 6, 2017)

How there someone try to become president in a democratic country.

What does he think this is, Europe?


----------



## Roman (Sep 6, 2017)

The irony of her doing this after she bought him out

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## GrimaH (Sep 6, 2017)

She's not technically wrong about the debates (if rather harsh in her criticism of Bernie), but she's just whining at this point.
Eh it's her book.


----------



## Pliskin (Sep 6, 2017)

The hilarious part is that if you look back to Obama, he rightly roasted her and won for it. Bernie took the high road keeping it on policy, lost for it, and she is such a special cookie that she still comes back to blame and back-stab.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 6, 2017)

Musical chairs, jelly, ice-cream, strippers, whores, the whole lot, when this old devil finally shuffles off this mortal coil. 

Venue: Bernie's summer house.


----------



## Nello (Sep 6, 2017)

Is she actually writing a book to justify herself


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 6, 2017)

I looked back during the General Election, I'll admit that I did put her name on my ballot because I firmly believed that she was superior to Donald Trump.
But now that I looked back to her and her excused reasons why she failed her campaign, I completely regret doing so.
I was a complete dumbass back then (and I was a bit paranoid to see someone unstable as Trump leading a great country), I'll never make the same mistake ever again.


----------



## Mickey Mouse (Sep 6, 2017)

Hhhhhhmmmmm



So I hope the Dems have someone new ready to go because...well....huh.


----------



## EJ (Sep 6, 2017)

Superman said:


> Hhhhhhmmmmm
> 
> 
> 
> So I hope the Dems have someone new ready to go because...well....huh.



Their same strategy should not be encouraged. Many people within this country refuse to go on their hands and knees to them even with Trump's presidency. They need to be the party of the people. 

Funny, to this day, Hillary Clinton can't acknowledge her fuck-up and blows it off like it were nothing. This is the dangers of letting her, or other Democrats piggy back off of the anti Trump wagon to their path towards victory. They won't change their tactics, they won't push for progressive policies, and we could end up within this same situation in a decades time.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 2


----------



## GrimaH (Sep 6, 2017)

states

*Sanders brushes off Clinton criticism: 'Look forward and not backward'*
By Alexander Bolton - 09/06/17 11:30 AM EDT  377
1,742

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Wednesday brushed off Hillary Clinton’s criticism of him in her new book about the 2016 presidential election, saying he’s not interested in playing the blame game.

“My response is that right now it’s appropriate to look forward and not backward,” Sanders told The Hill.

“I’m working overtime now to see we overturn Trump’s decision on DACA, pass a $15-an-hour minimum wage, and next week I’ll be offering a Medicare-for-all single-payer system,” he said.

Sanders said he wants to focus on the legislative challenges at hand and not debate who is to blame for President Trump’s stunning electoral upset of Clinton, the Democratic nominee, in November.

“Our job is to go forward,” he said.

Sanders made the comments after attending a Democratic press event responding to Trump’s decision Tuesday to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which President Obama implemented in 2012 to shield from deportation immigrants who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children.

In her new book "What Happened," due out later this month, Clinton casts blame on Sanders for inflicting “lasting damage” on her campaign during the 2016 Democratic presidential primary, which she believes helped Trump win.

Clinton argues that Sanders laid the groundwork for Trump's "crooked Hillary” campaign attack by using "innuendo and impugning my character," according to reported excerpts of her book.

"His attacks caused lasting damage, making it harder to unify progressives in the general election,” she wrote of Sanders.

Clinton also faults Sanders for what she saw as copying her ideas and then super-sizing them to make himself more appealing to liberal voters, describing him as a serial over-promiser.

“We would promise a bold infrastructure investment plan or an ambitious new apprenticeship program for young people, and then Bernie would announce basically the same thing, but bigger,” she wrote.

When pressed on these specific allegations, Sanders shot back: “I’ll let the people decide.”


----------



## baconbits (Sep 6, 2017)

Flow said:


> Their same strategy should not be encouraged. Many people within this country refuse to go on their hands and knees to them even with Trump's presidency. They need to be the party of the people.
> 
> Funny, to this day, Hillary Clinton can't acknowledge her fuck-up and blows it off like it were nothing. This is the dangers of letting her, or other Democrats piggy back off of the anti Trump wagon to their path towards victory. They won't change their tactics, they won't push for progressive policies, and we could end up within this same situation in a decades time.



Its not just Hillary.  Democrats across the nation are losing, regardless of whether they ran as a corporate Dem or as a Bernie bro.  Dems need to do something to appeal to blue collar workers beyond just adopting socialism or they'll continue to lose.

Also if you look at a map you'll see that Democrats are more concentrated than Republicans.  Democrats have to craft policies that appeal to the suburbs and countryside.  If they can do that they'd win in a landslide.

Reactions: Agree 2 | Disagree 1


----------



## baconbits (Sep 6, 2017)

GrimaH said:


> Clinton argues that Sanders laid the groundwork for Trump's "crooked Hillary” campaign attack by using "innuendo and impugning my character," according to reported excerpts of her book.



She was crooked and her character is terrible.  The truth of the matter is that she lacks the personal appeal that her husband and Bernie have.  Very few people were crazy about Hillary.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 6, 2017)

It's just hilarious, Hillary had a more hopeless situation against Obama in 2008 and still refused to drop out. She tried so hard to drop these smears and appeal to the xenophobia of white, blue-collar workers and it all backfired against her. Yet now she and her supporters are still upset that Bernie continued to stay in the primaries as long as he did? She's taking swipes at Bernie and supporters despite that he actively campaigned for her? Bitching about "Bernie or Bust" voters, did she forget the PUMAS or something? At the time I thought he should just concede, but subsequent developments and the information that all came out really changed my perception on that. She is such a lousy hypocrite, and it's becoming evident she felt entitled to the presidency and still does.

Reactions: Like 1 | Winner 2


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 6, 2017)

Didn't she justify staying in the 2008 race by saying Obama still has time to get shot by someone? 

She is an absolute sociopath.


----------



## CrazyAries (Sep 6, 2017)

> Ms Clinton also wrote that some of Mr Sanders’ supporters, “the so-called Bernie Bros, took to harassing my supporters online".



I don’t expect there will be any mention of Correct the Record in this book.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 6, 2017)

CrazyAries said:


> I don’t expect there will be any mention of Correct the Record in this book.



How many of her supporters harassed not only Bernie supporters but anyone not wanting to vote for her? 

#ISTANDWITHHER ARE YOU A SEXIST!? MISOGYNIST!

Reactions: Funny 2 | Lewd 1


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 6, 2017)

hopefully this book flops.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Sep 6, 2017)

The educated decision to not vote is a bittersweet thing, it is.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 6, 2017)



Reactions: Like 1


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Sep 6, 2017)

A woman is having a hard time believing she's in the wrong!?

Reactions: Funny 5 | Winner 3


----------



## GaaraoftheDesert1 (Sep 6, 2017)

wtf is her problem...
Today its Putin's fault, the next day its assange's fault and the day after its bernie's...


----------



## CrazyAries (Sep 6, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> How many of her supporters harassed not only Bernie supporters but anyone not wanting to vote for her?
> 
> #ISTANDWITHHER ARE YOU A SEXIST!? MISOGYNIST!



Yep. They went to forums and PM'd or DM'd people to death. They took down pro-Sanders Facebook pages by linking to child porn.

Hillary Clinton’s most ardent fans came from all ages. Many of them were around her age and saw her as their avatar. They often used the gender argument.

Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright are older than Clinton, but even they got into the act:

Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright Rebuke Young Women Backing Bernie Sanders

I still remember Albright’s comment about their being “a special place in hell for women who work against other women.” I also remember that Steinem said the young women who preferred Sanders in the primaries were trying to impress the boys.

Here’s an OP-ED from Cosmopolitan:

Do You Really Not Like Hillary Clinton, or Are You Just Sexist?

Here’s an excerpt from a book written by Susan Bardo, who’s around Hillary Clinton’s age:



Bardo tries to project her feelings onto the situation, comparing Bernie Sanders to one of the male activists in her day who pushed women and their input to the side.


----------



## RAGING BONER (Sep 6, 2017)

Hillary needs to go away for the good all; she just reeks of desperation at this point

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Sep 6, 2017)

CrazyAries said:


> Yep. They went to forums and PM'd or DM'd people to death. They took down pro-Sanders Facebook pages by linking to child porn.


The fuck.

Why aren't these people in prison. 

Or are they?


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Sep 6, 2017)

Waaaaah my competitors were being mean to me even though I should have expected the spotlight to be placed on my past trangressions !

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 6, 2017)

I fully expect this thread to go south in a little bit.

HAHAHA LOOK AT YALL BERNIEBROS STILL MAD (completely fails to read the thread) HE LOST GET OVER IT (still refuses to read) AND THEY SAY THE HILLARY SUPPORTERS ARE SALTY YALL MAD AS FUCK 

I can see it now.

Reactions: Funny 6 | Winner 1


----------



## GaaraoftheDesert1 (Sep 6, 2017)

I think the DNC this time will try to control the internet...
They will put millions of dollars on internet campaigns for Kamala or whoever their corporate nominee is gonna be....


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Sep 6, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> HAHAHA LOOK AT YALL BERNIEBROS STILL MAD (completely fails to read the thread) HE LOST GET OVER IT (still refuses to read) AND THEY SAY THE HILLARY SUPPORTERS ARE SALTY YALL MAD AS FUCK
> 
> I can see it now.


People talk loud when they want to sound smart.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 6, 2017)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> People talk loud when they want to sound smart.



And they also try to copy words that they just saw you use, but have no idea what they actually mean.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Sep 6, 2017)

erictheking said:


>


The funniest part about this is that the stock image usually has to be purchased to access.  So it's probably an organized sockpuppet in some form, not just some random in his basement.


----------



## EJ (Sep 6, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> I fully expect this thread to go south in a little bit.
> 
> HAHAHA LOOK AT YALL BERNIEBROS STILL MAD (completely fails to read the thread) HE LOST GET OVER IT (still refuses to read) AND THEY SAY THE HILLARY SUPPORTERS ARE SALTY YALL MAD AS FUCK




Found a picture of Mama Hillary disciplining her children @Catalyst75, @SuperSaiyaMan12, and @Huey Freeman.

Do You Really Not Like Hillary Clinton, or Are You Just Sexist?

Reactions: Funny 4 | Informative 1


----------



## Mickey Mouse (Sep 6, 2017)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> People talk loud when they want to sound smart.



CORRECT!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 6, 2017)

afgpride said:


> The funniest part about this is that the stock image usually has to be purchased to access.  So it's probably an organized sockpuppet in some form, not just some random in his basement.


stage select/credits screen


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 6, 2017)

Flow said:


> Found a picture of Mama Hillary disciplining her children @Catalyst75, @SuperSaiyaMan12, and @Huey Freeman.
> 
> stage select/credits screen


Doesn't quite matter now. Hillary is just whining at this point, and ignoring how badly she managed her campaign.

Reactions: Winner 4


----------



## EJ (Sep 6, 2017)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> Doesn't quite matter now. Hillary is just whining at this point, and ignoring how badly she managed her campaign.



Respect for not trying to defend this bullshit.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

the inconvenient truth of this matter for the neoliberals is that obama trashed hillary WAY more than Bernie did. Bernie didn't even have to do anything for people to distrust clinton. Hillary saying Bernie allowed trump to copy his criticisms of her dont make any sense because all Trump had to do was look at her record and what Obama said about her in 08. She was a weak candidate through and through.

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## RAGING BONER (Sep 6, 2017)

HAHAHA LOOK AT YALL BERNIEBROS STILL MAD 
HE LOST GET OVER IT 
AND THEY SAY THE HILLARY SUPPORTERS ARE SALTY YALL MAD AS FUCK

Reactions: Like 2 | Funny 2


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

also...galvanizing supporters and the people to your cause takes a concerted effort. i'm not of the mind that progressive politics doesn't win elections because there are only a smattering of politicians who actually mean it at this point, and even fewer willing to push for those policies in an open forum.  they get drowned out and the rate of political confidence continues to fall.


----------



## Parallax (Sep 6, 2017)

I really dont care about these articles and neither should you.  Texas is Atlantis, Florida finna die, brown kids being booted,  government shutdown.

Who cares about this nonsense

Reactions: Agree 1 | Winner 2 | Optimistic 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 6, 2017)

Parallax said:


> I really dont care about these articles and neither should you.  Texas is Atlantis, Florida finna die, brown kids being booted,  government shutdown.
> 
> Who cares about this nonsense


She just released a book...it's something to talk about.


----------



## Parallax (Sep 6, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> She just released a book...it's something to talk about.



People release books all the time,  no it's not.  This is just being petty and going back to a beaten topic that doesnt matter anymore.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## EJ (Sep 6, 2017)

Parallax said:


> I really dont care about these articles and neither should you.  Texas is Atlantis, Florida finna die, brown kids being booted,  government shutdown.
> 
> Who cares about this nonsense



Because she's an influential member towards the current leadership within the Democratic party and still has ties within politics, and she's openly blaming Bernie Sanders and other progressives for her lost within the 2016 election?

Ok, you don't care about it. That's you.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 6, 2017)

Parallax said:


> People release books all the time,  no it's not.  This is just being petty and going back to a beaten topic that doesnt matter anymore.


SHE is dragging up the topic, what don't you get? Hillary was the Democratic presidential candidate in the last election if I need to point it out. She's not some random nobody.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## EJ (Sep 6, 2017)

Fuck multi-tasking.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

Clinton and her contacts are still is funneling money toward corporate donors to support neoliberal candidates against pretty much anything any rational ctiizen in America wants, and her ideology and the idealogy her husband popularized during his time in office is still the neoliberal ideology of many democrats who continue to attack progressive priorities.

the GOP is not even the enemy here, the true enemy is the enemy standing in front of the enemy. It would be easy to destroy the conservatives with a unified leftist front if they didn't have the democratic establishment shielding them by being horrible in their own ways. 

How can we properly attack trump and the GOP's major conflicts of interest regarding money and corporate greed which is generally what spurs on their horrible decisions, if the democrat neoliberals refuse to even accept their own responsibility in perpetuating the system of money in politics?


----------



## Parallax (Sep 6, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> SHE is dragging up the topic, what don't you get? Hillary was the Democratic presidential candidate in the last election if I need to point it out. She's not some random nobody.



Yeah and?  How is this relevant to what's currently got on, Hillary has been shifting blame on everyone post election who cares that she adds another name in an irrelevant book?  What's the point of constantly paying attention to this nonsense?


----------



## Parallax (Sep 6, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> Clinton and her contacts are still is funneling money toward corporate donors to support neoliberal candidates against pretty much anything any rational ctiizen in America wants, and her ideology and the idealogy her husband popularized during his time in office is still the neoliberal ideology of many democrats who continue to attack progressive priorities.
> 
> the GOP is not even the enemy here, the true enemy is the enemy standing in front of the enemy. It would be easy to destroy the conservatives with a unified leftist front if they didn't have the democratic establishment shielding them by being horrible in their own ways.
> 
> How can we properly attack trump and the GOP's major conflicts of interest regarding money and corporate greed which is generally what spurs on their horrible decisions, if the democrat neoliberals refuse to even accept their own responsibility in perpetuating the system of money in politics?


This post makes no sense

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## EJ (Sep 6, 2017)

Parallax said:


> Yeah and?  How is this relevant to what's currently got on, Hillary has been shifting blame on everyone post election who cares that she adds another name in an irrelevant book?  What's the point of constantly paying attention to this nonsense?



It's addressing the fact that the DNC and Hillary Clinton decided to not run off of policy issues, and how even upon hers and the Democrats defeat, they have been consistent with trying to push the blame onto others or downplay what many progressives are calling for. How are you NOT getting that. 



Parallax said:


> This post makes no sense



Why don't you go into detail why it doesn't?


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

Parallax said:


> This post makes no sense



Your gonna have to explain yourself there. i thought i was being pretty straight forward there, but i'll make it more simple. I'm saying what clinton says absolutely matters, because her supporters and the clinton legacy in general is still a noose around any forward thinking priorities in electoral politics.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Sep 6, 2017)

Similarly to Para I don't particularly care about how butthurt Hillary is. It was already known she didn't take the lost well at all and this really has little to no effect in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 6, 2017)

Because discussing this means we can't and aren't focusing on other matters...Jesus Christ, you people.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 3


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

i mean becaause we're talking about this doesnt mean we're talking about DACA or harvey or irmi? or myanmar or the tax battle coming up?

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 6, 2017)

Parallax said:


> I really dont care about these articles and neither should you.  Texas is Atlantis, Florida finna die, brown kids being booted,  government shutdown.
> 
> Who cares about this nonsense


But Trump makes a fart that sounds like "Russia" and you're in here wetting yourself. When something reflects poorly on the Democrats you suddenly find high-mindedness. Bullshit. Pull the other one Parallax.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 2 | Funny 1 | Winner 2


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 6, 2017)

yeah just beause your brain cant think about two topics at once doesnt mean that's a condition everyone else is suffering from.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 2


----------



## Pliskin (Sep 6, 2017)

Seriously, people acting like an anime forum is some high pressured board room meeting and we can only discuss so much before catching our plane home.
Also notice these people only complain in threads that achieve maximum edginess, none of these guys bring that non-argument up in Swarmy's bug threads.

edit: name calling was uncalled for

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1 | Funny 3 | Winner 1


----------



## Parallax (Sep 6, 2017)

erictheking said:


> But Trump makes a fart that sounds like "Russia" and you're in here wetting yourself. When something reflects poorly on the Democrats you suddenly find high-mindedness. Bullshit. Pull the other one Parallax.



What

I barely post in the Russian threads.   Dont talk to me you edgy leftist Euro

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Parallax (Sep 6, 2017)

Normality said:


> yeah just beause your brain cant think about two topics at once doesnt mean that's a condition everyone else is suffering from.



That's not the issue I'm talking about, it's quality not quantity.  This is a non story what does it add to anything?


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

"edgy leftist euro", i dunno if that's an insult or not Parallax 

The fact of the matter is, other websites are reporting on it as if its news, there's nothing in the rule book saying this can't be reported on either, or talked about.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 6, 2017)

Parallax said:


> What
> 
> I barely post in the Russian threads.   Dont talk to me you edgy leftist Euro


It's a forum you dick.

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 1 | Winner 1


----------



## Alwaysmind (Sep 6, 2017)

And the DNC rigging the process in her favor too.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 6, 2017)

Parallax said:


> That's not the issue I'm talking about, it's quality not quantity.  This is a non story what does it add to anything?



and who is forcing you to be here and read this story? no one. if you think this is a non-story then just stop commenting and go away. not trying to be rude but you sound corny af right now.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Atem (Sep 6, 2017)

GrimaH said:


> Link removed
> 
> *Sanders brushes off Clinton criticism: 'Look forward and not backward'*
> By Alexander Bolton - 09/06/17 11:30 AM EDT  377
> ...



And this is the reason why I wanted Bernie Sanders to be my president. He is chill as fuck, and focuses on doing his fucking job.

The only problem was that he didn't have the energy to be confrontational and call people out when they're doing stupid shit.

He is too polite to do that.

You fix that about him, and he would have won. He would have torn people to pieces if he just learned to be mean. He has the intelligence for it. He has the experience.

It's just not in him to be competitive, and that's why he dropped out. Which sucks because he would have been a great president.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 4


----------



## Vermilion Kn (Sep 6, 2017)

Hillary will be salty for the rest of her reptilian life. 

She was anointed by the media, most celebrities and WT as if she was a queen to be. Then she loses to a sun baked sentient lobster who is about as christian as Lucifer and blames everyone but her arrogant self. Did Bernie attack her in the primary ? Duh, yeah. It's a competition bitch what were you expecting. She's lucky Bernie never went for her jugular. If he had she would have lost by a much larger margin because Bernie had authority behind his criticism where Trump was just a troll who benefited from the low turn out.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1 | Funny 1 | Winner 4


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

What's more pressing about Hillary isn't that she'll be salty,but she has to pay back her donors for a long long time. They've invested countless amounts into the clinton foundation(which collapsed right after the election, what a coincidence) and speaking fees and just paying her off so she would do things when she was Prez, they were waiting for it. And then this happens. Of course it doesnt matter cause the swamp got bigger regardless, but Clinton's gonna be paying back them bills

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 6, 2017)

POKEMON GO TO THE POLLS!!! YEAAAHAAARRRRGHHH

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 6, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> POKEMON GO TO THE POLLS!!! YEAAAHAAARRRRGHHH



THERE IS A SPECIAL PLACE IN HELL FOR WOMEN WHO DO NOT HELP OTHER WOMEN.


----------



## wibisana (Sep 6, 2017)

while I think Hillary is wrong but...

1st it is her book, her memoar, in it she wrote about her oppinion/views/take about what makes her lost.

this book will be "eternal", people in 10yrs-20yrs will read it. so it is kinda wrong to comment "she should have move on"

because she make this book to be read not only now, but years to come

again I think her view in her book is wrong but yeah it is in her right to write about according to her PoV.

that is my oppinion


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

isnt that just historical revisionism then?


----------



## wibisana (Sep 6, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> isnt that just historical revisionism then?


it is not history book

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

wibisana said:


> it is not history book



But the difference between heresay and fact isn't really defined in these times when anyone can just say anything and people will believe it because its what they heard

it doesn't help that even the media has been parroting the same talking point, CNN had an entire panel on today which unanimously agreed that Bernie was the reason she lost. If enough forces come together, they can shape the narrative for years to come


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Sep 6, 2017)

wibisana said:


> 1st it is her book, her memoar
> 
> t


Moar Hillary-ous Memes?


----------



## Alwaysmind (Sep 6, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> isnt that just historical revisionism then?



I suppose but usually revisionism occurs after an orthodox narrative has been set. For instance I can't say that Trump won because of sexism and call it revisionism. One, because it's still too soon for a historiography on the reason of his victory to be cemented. Now if bring this in 5 or 10 years then yes it would be revisionism

More on that,  if I said that the Ottoman Empire started World War One because they wanted to finish what Xeres started then that would be revisionism. And a very flawed one at that.


----------



## Alwaysmind (Sep 6, 2017)

wibisana said:


> it is not history book



It is still a primary source whether you like it or not. Hillary, like Thucydides and Plato, has an ax to grind. Hillary's ax is aimed at Bernie while the latters were aimed at Athenian democracy and some politicians.

Thus, while not a typical history book, it still very much a tool of history.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 6, 2017)

wibisana said:


> while I think Hillary is wrong but...
> 
> 1st it is her book, her memoar, in it she wrote about her oppinion/views/take about what makes her lost.
> 
> ...



it IS within HER right to write this book and it is within MY rights to criticize as much as I want. 



Inuhanyou said:


> What's more pressing about Hillary isn't that she'll be salty,but she has to pay back her donors for a long long time. They've invested countless amounts into the clinton foundation(which collapsed right after the election, what a coincidence) and speaking fees and just paying her off so she would do things when she was Prez, they were waiting for it. And then this happens. Of course it doesnt matter cause the swamp got bigger regardless, but Clinton's gonna be paying back them bills



yeah, what she gunna pay back? she has nothing to sell off anymore(political power). dem donors dont even want to invest in the party and they still arent sure about how to deal with the growing support for Bernie Sanders. For one the donors are smarter than Hillary. They've refrained from going to war directly with Bernie because they know it can cause a full-blown revolution or at the very least cause the base to throwout the party elites once for all. This is why they've adopted the "bernie is great but his ideas are magic" or they just try to altogether ignore him. Bernie needs to stop being nice and goad these arrogant elites into a full-blown political war and then crush them underneath weight of it all. FDR was not afraid to face off against wall-street and the powers of greed and that's why he defeated them in his time. Bernie must do the same.


----------



## wibisana (Sep 6, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> But the difference between heresay and fact isn't really defined in these times when anyone can just say anything and people will believe it because its what they heard
> 
> it doesn't help that even the media has been parroting the same talking point, CNN had an entire panel on today which unanimously agreed that Bernie was the reason she lost. If enough forces come together, they can shape the narrative for years to come


yeah but the book also can provide information about her. not what she claim but about the claim, 

future historian could read it and by comparing it to other books, news etc. maybe they will have conclusion that Hillary is a salty person?

that is the idea about book.


----------



## wibisana (Sep 6, 2017)

Normality said:


> it IS within HER right to write this book and it is within MY rights to criticize as much as I want.


agree


Alwaysmind said:


> It is still a primary source whether you like it or not. Hillary, like Thucydides and Plato, has an ax to grind. Hillary's ax is aimed at Bernie while the latters were aimed at Athenian democracy and some politicians.
> 
> Thus, while not a typical history book, it still very much a tool of history.


it is modern era. chances it will be only source is small


----------



## Alwaysmind (Sep 6, 2017)

wibisana said:


> agree
> 
> it is modern era. chances it will be only source is small


 point was it's still a history source so don't dismiss it and we are still building the orthodox school, so there shouldn't be the fear of revisionists.

Though if everyone was perfect like us post-revisionists then we wouldn't be confused by any of this.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

Normality said:


> yeah, what she gunna pay back? she has nothing to sell off anymore(political power). dem donors dont even want to invest in the party and they still arent sure about how to deal with the growing support for Bernie Sanders. For one the donors are smarter than Hillary. They've refrained from going to war directly with Bernie because they know it can cause a full-blown revolution or at the very least cause the base to throwout the party elites once for all. This is why they've adopted the "bernie is great but his ideas are magic" or they just try to altogether ignore him. Bernie needs to stop being nice and goad these arrogant elites into a full-blown political war and then crush them underneath weight of it all. FDR was not afraid to face off against wall-street and the powers of greed and that's why he defeated them in his time. Bernie must do the same.



i think bernie is too nice a guy to ever go for the jugular. he just wanted to shed truth and he's constantly shed it while in his own way pushing for progressive policies. i think its up to the rest of us to put pressure on the forces we want to see capitulate. Good cop bad cop


----------



## wibisana (Sep 6, 2017)

Alwaysmind said:


> point was it's still a history source so don't dismiss it and we are still building the orthodox school, so there shouldn't be the fear of revisionists.
> 
> Though if everyone was perfect like us post-revisionists then we wouldn't be confused by any of this.





wibisana said:


> yeah but the book also can provide information about her. not what she claim but about the claim,
> 
> future historian could read it and by comparing it to other books, news etc. maybe they will have conclusion that Hillary is a salty person?
> 
> that is the idea about book.


even if the content is wrong the book itself has merit to it.


----------



## Alwaysmind (Sep 6, 2017)

wibisana said:


> yeah but the book also can provide information about her. not what she claim but about the claim,
> 
> future historian could read it and by comparing it to other books, news etc. maybe they will have conclusion that Hillary is a salty person?
> 
> that is the idea about book.



Or that she was a very smart woman who was outwitted by the Russians and their communist surrogate Bernie.


----------



## wibisana (Sep 6, 2017)

Alwaysmind said:


> Or that she was a very smart woman who was outwitted by the Russians and their communist surrogate Bernie.


well we just have to believe to our descendant

Reactions: Optimistic 1


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 6, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> i think bernie is too nice a guy to ever go for the jugular. he just wanted to shed truth and he's constantly shed it while in his own way pushing for progressive policies. i think its up to the rest of us to put pressure on the forces we want to see capitulate. Good cop bad cop



yeah, which is why I'm hoping the progressive than comes out of 2020 is a forceful one. I want someone who wants to rip wall street limb from limb. I want someone who is ready to go to full political war. Bernie is giving sympathy to people who would fucking bury him literally if they could get away with it. These elites must be put in their place if our democracy is to survive. I find it incredible that these elite rats think themselves so superior yet look at the mess of a world they've ushered in. fuck em


----------



## Alwaysmind (Sep 6, 2017)

wibisana said:


> well we just have to believe to our descendant



Remember, the Russians have sources too but they are locked away for 50 years.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

Normality said:


> yeah, which is why I'm hoping the progressive than comes out of 2020 is a forceful one. I want someone who wants to rip wall street limb from limb. I want someone who is ready to go to full political war. Bernie is giving sympathy to people who would fucking bury him literally if they could get away with it. These elites must be put in their place if our democracy is to survive. I find it incredible that these elite rats think themselves so superior yet look at the mess of a world they've ushered in. fuck em



if your looking to see someone more honest a progressive than bernie come along  for 2020...we havent seen that person as of yet unfortunately


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 6, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> if your looking to see someone more honest a progressive than bernie come along  for 2020...we havent seen that person as of yet unfortunately



well, i'm really looking forward to a Tulsi Gabbard run. She really is the best choice out of the known players.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 6, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> i think bernie is too nice a guy to ever go for the jugular. he just wanted to shed truth and he's constantly shed it while in his own way pushing for progressive policies. i think its up to the rest of us to put pressure on the forces we want to see capitulate. Good cop bad cop


Honestly Bernie probably would have won the Primaries if he started campaigning right after 2012 to get his name out there, instead of starting in 2015.


----------



## Utopia Realm (Sep 6, 2017)

Normality said:


> well, i'm really looking forward to a Tulsi Gabbard run. She really is the best choice out of the known players.



 Wouldn't mind her atm. Let Bernie build her up and bring her along some of his town hall visits and such and then give her the nod for the next big elections


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

Normality said:


> well, i'm really looking forward to a Tulsi Gabbard run. She really is the best choice out of the known players.



eh, i'd say our choices are pretty bad considering her previous actions as part of the DNC


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 6, 2017)

Utopia Realm said:


> Wouldn't mind her atm. Let Bernie build her up and bring her along some of his town hall visits and such and then give her the nod for the next big elections



She has taken some questionable stances that make me iffy on her now


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 6, 2017)

She has taken questionable stances which is why I said she's the best out of the players we know now but its totally possible that fresh face will break 2020. come 2020 its going to be fucking war.


----------



## Utopia Realm (Sep 6, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> She has taken some questionable stances that make me iffy on her now



True. That's why I said let Bernie take her under his wing. Try and mold her to be an even better progressive if he decides not to run 2020. I mean, if a progressive runs on UH, Higher Min Wages, A Trillion Dollar+ Infrastructure plan and Nationally Legalized Weed, the race is a wrap barring some Clinton-level skeletons coming out of the closet from Tulsi (If she runs).


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 6, 2017)

I hope that whoever runs for 2020, he or she is qualified to lead the country and defeat Trump for good.


----------



## Utopia Realm (Sep 6, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> I hope that whoever runs for 2020, he or she is qualified to lead the country and defeat Trump for good.



Not just for POTUS, but we need to change over Congress too. Too many politicians there that need to get uprooted (Mitch, Paul, etc.).


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 6, 2017)

Utopia Realm said:


> Not just for POTUS, but we need to change over Congress too. Too many politicians there that need to get uprooted (Mitch, Paul, etc.).



Agreed. They need to go.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 6, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> I hope that whoever runs for 2020, he or she is qualified to lead the country and defeat Trump for good.



no. Hillary was qualified and she would have made a awful president.

-progressive
-for single payer
-for lifting the minimum wage
-for regulations on corporations
-for green energy
-for campaign reform etc


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 6, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> She has taken some questionable stances that make me iffy on her now


...man dealing with the echo chamber...

That's the hardcore Hillary supporters, not you guys.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

All i want from a perspective 2020 candidate is for them to copy bernie sanders funding method. He showed it could be done, and we can see in real time that whatever your positions are, its not affected by donor money and special intrests


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 6, 2017)

Normality said:


> no. Hillary was qualified and she would have made a awful president.
> 
> -progressive
> -for single payer
> ...



I misused the term:
We need a Qualified President who could turn the country upside down for the benefit of it and the people. I said qualified in a sense of leadership, charisma, responsibility/accountability, and honor; Hillary only has one of that (leadership), while she lacked charisma, can't take responsibility (this thread as an example), and certainly has no honor.
Sanders fulfilled 4 of them (3 now, given that he endorsed Hillary and backed her).

But we certainly do need progressive policies.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 6, 2017)

You can't say Bernie wasn't consistent tho, since he did say before he even started running that he would do whatever he could to stop Trump from becoming president, including voting for the dem nominee  Its not as if he went against his word

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 7, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> You can't say Bernie wasn't consistent tho, since he did say before he even started running that he would do whatever he could to stop Trump from becoming president, including voting for the dem nominee  Its not as if he went against his word



I never said he wasn't consistent. I just didn't liked how he endorsed her, and then not too long Wikileaks published articles regarding how the DNC were being biased towards her and kept his endorsement. It just doesn't give him a good public picture where he was spat on the face by the DNC and didn't bothered reacting in disgust.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 7, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> I never said he wasn't consistent. I just didn't liked how he endorsed her, and then not too long Wikileaks published articles regarding how the DNC were being biased towards her and kept his endorsement. It just doesn't give him a good public picture where he was spat on the face by the DNC and didn't bothered reacting in disgust.



bruh bernie is kind.


----------



## GrimaH (Sep 7, 2017)

> We need progressive policies for the people by the people! Oh btw we need a high profile charismatic saviour leader figure to do it or we're done.



Guys. Wake up. Think your posts through.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 7, 2017)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> ...man dealing with the echo chamber...
> 
> That's the hardcore Hillary supporters, not you guys.



What are you talking about?


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 7, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> What are you talking about?


Basically...after taking a long hard look...I went to a blatant pro-Clinton page to see hos big of an echo chamber was. And realized how stupid and deluded I was in the past.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 7, 2017)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> Basically...after taking a long hard look...I went to a blatant pro-Clinton page to see hos big of an echo chamber was. And realized how stupid and deluded I was in the past.



Was it Verrit?:



> *Verrit, the pro-Clinton ‘media platform’ that’s looking worse and worse*
> 
> Verrit’s founder has given himself away.
> 
> ...



tweet

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 7, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Was it Verrit?:
> 
> 
> 
> tweet


Nope, never heard of that one. Its on Facebook.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 7, 2017)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> Basically...after taking a long hard look...I went to a blatant pro-Clinton page to see hos big of an echo chamber was. And realized how stupid and deluded I was in the past.


go on.


----------



## dr_shadow (Sep 7, 2017)

Really what Dems need to focus on is winning a majority of state legislatures before 2020. 

Because that's when the next congressional redistricting is; the once-in-a-decade chance to un-Gerrymander (re-Gerrymander) the House and oust Ryan's Republicans.

Winning the presidency without also having Congress is no fun. Ask Obama.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 7, 2017)

Normality said:


> go on.



Just this place which made me realize I was mindlessly parroting their cult points before I got a sobering look at reality.


----------



## EJ (Sep 7, 2017)

Man the link you showed me, it was like seeing a cult.


----------



## EJ (Sep 7, 2017)

They are bitterly against progressives.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 7, 2017)

Flow said:


> They are bitterly against progressives.


And workers. And millennials.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Sep 7, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Was it Verrit?:
> 
> 
> 
> tweet



_This isn’t especially useful to anyone. The only thing Verrit is capable of debunking is parodies of Verrit. False statistics from elsewhere don’t come with codes that users can check against the site’s database. Neither, of course, do real ones. Verrit’s collection is finite — *filled only with carefully curated cards that confirm Clinton voters’ views*. It serves no purpose except to spare those voters the need to confront beliefs that conflict with their own._
_
All Verrit is, at its core, is what Daou has called a “sanctuary.” Daou has built a bubble for people who were already basically living in one. His is just harder to pop. Of course, a partisan platform that openly declares itself a shill for a particular politician and sticks to stringent fact-checking standards is better than one that spews falsehoods while feigning objectivity. *But Verrit is the last thing we needed in a media market already plagued by consumers’ tendency to seek out sources that tell them what they want to hear and outlets’ willingness to give them exactly what they’re looking for.*
_
And Clinton endorsed this site...why?



Clinton, I expected you to learn from your mistakes in the election.  I expected you to open up a dialogue with other Democrats who shared different views from your own.  I expected you _*NOT* to do something like this_.  I expected you NOT to use the same tactics as Trump and his administration.  You should not be endorsing a site that only "tells people what they already want to hear", and only functions to 'reaffirm beliefs' that people are not willing to let go of, or unwilling to be proven incorrect on.  

...

FUCK this Daou fellow.  FUCK this Verrit "Nightwatch" safety bubble.  FUCK the voters who buy into this propaganda site.  

Just...Why, Clinton?  You're just playing the same game as the Republicans and Trump at this point.

Along with the other potential factors to consider, if this is how you were playing the election campaign from day one, _THIS IS WHY YOU LOST THE FUCKING ELECTION.
_


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 7, 2017)

Waking up too, Catalyst? It...kind of feels good and sobering to be out of that.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Catalyst75 (Sep 7, 2017)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> Waking up too, Catalyst? It...kind of feels good and sobering to be out of that.



Give me a bit to stop fuming over this, and I'll get back to you.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## EJ (Sep 7, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Was it Verrit?:
> 
> 
> 
> Chapter 185





SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> And workers. And millennials.


 Also within the FB link:




You have to go to the one where "Hillary breaks her silence"

A comment:



> Typical Bernie supporter response... I don't agree so you must be a "troll". She carried herself like a professional. Not a woman, not an elite, just professional. Her genitals really had no more to do with her ability and qualifications than Bernie being a Jew did.
> 
> Zero. His platform was such of an extreme view than conservatives in this country carry, that combined with him not actually being a Dem on the Dem ticket and his supporters being very intolerant to opposing views and rational dialogue...
> 
> It's time HE started taking responsibility for HIS loss.






> So what it really comes down to is that you don't like that she carried herself with pride, that she isn't subservient, that she's a strong woman. She behaved like a man and you'd prefer women to stay in their place whatever that means. I guess we should all be in the kitchen quietly baking cookies.





> In what language does it have to be said that Bernie is NOT a Democrat and he used our money to betray us? Only woman haters justify that old opportunist.





> Agree - he should have backed off instead of running against Clinton and promising free tuition, free healthcare, $15 minimum wage and free unicorns for all. I'm not saying all of these things aren't good, but seriously. Congress hasn't been able or willing to accomplish anything for the past several years, but all of these things were just magically going to happen if Bernie Sanders won the presidency?




Just wow..


----------



## Atem (Sep 7, 2017)

The more I hear Hillary Clinton supporters. They more they sound like the crazy feminists you would find on Beast's Lair.


----------



## EJ (Sep 7, 2017)

"What, you dislike Hillary Clinton and support Bernie Sanders? WOMAN HATER!"


That's what some of them genuinely believe. It's concerning that we have Democrats or "Liberals" that have this mindset. What does that mean for the future of Democrats if we still have people that are spitefully against progressive ideas if it is based upon the gender of the person running?

Do these people not realize the donations Hillary Clinton took in from Saudi Arabia? Why do people try to paint her as a champion for woman's rights?


----------



## EJ (Sep 7, 2017)

The fact that she's still finger-pointing says a lot about the state of Democrats, and it seeks further to divide us on account of her OWN FAILURES.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 7, 2017)

Flow said:


> "What, you dislike Hillary Clinton and support Bernie Sanders? WOMAN HATER!"
> 
> 
> That's what some of them genuinely believe. It's concerning that we have Democrats or "Liberals" that have this mindset. What does that mean for the future of Democrats if we still have people that are spitefully against progressive ideas if it is based upon the gender of the person running?
> ...


A bunch of them are trying to get my comment's marked as spam so they don't have to hear me try to get through their echo chamber.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Saishin (Sep 7, 2017)

The Last Democrat in cinemas on December 15


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 7, 2017)

Bernie should have bowed out earlier and his supporters were stupid little shits even saying they were going to vote for Trump as revenge. They are part of the reason we're in the boat we're in now. She had more primary votes and Bernie isn't really a democrat (the same way Trump isn't a Republican). 

I liked Bernie at first, voted for him in the primary, but the moment that it was clear he was going to lose he needed to concede and try to help in the fight against Trump.

Reactions: Sad! 2 | Dislike 3


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 7, 2017)

glad there are some people who are waking up to what a lot of us were trying to tell you during the election  not necessarily that Sanders was good or progressive policy was the way forward, but that most neoliberal attacks don't make much sense because they are hiding behind logic that is more full of holes than swiss cheese



Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Bernie should have bowed out earlier and his supporters were stupid little shits even saying they were going to vote for Trump as revenge. They are part of the reason we're in the boat we're in now. She had more primary votes and Bernie isn't really a democrat (the same way Trump isn't a Republican).
> 
> I liked Bernie at first, voted for him in the primary, but the moment that it was clear he was going to lose he needed to concede and try to help in the fight against Trump.



lol, he did concede. and about 10% of bernie voters voted for trump. way more clinton voters voted for mccain in 08 because they were so triggered at Obama stealing hillary's birth right away.

also for some context, a lot of those bernie voters who switched to trump were republicans. meaning they found something they liked in Bernie that hillary could not replicate and voted out of their political range to start with. That's not Sanders fault.

Reactions: Like 3 | Funny 1


----------



## EJ (Sep 7, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Bernie should have bowed out earlier and his supporters were stupid little shits even saying they were going to vote for Trump as revenge. They are part of the reason we're in the boat we're in now. She had more primary votes and Bernie isn't really a democrat (the same way Trump isn't a Republican).
> 
> I liked Bernie at first, voted for him in the primary, but the moment that it was clear he was going to lose he needed to concede and try to help in the fight against Trump.



Man, you are delusional. Yeah, it's Bernie Sanders and his supporters fault Hillary Clinton wasn't a LIKABLE candidate and people didn't feel enthused enough to vote for her. It's Bernie Sanders and his supporters fault the DNC was found to be BIASED and in favor of Hillary Clinton over Sanders which caused many people to not trust her or the DNC. It's Bernie Sander's fault she took money in from Saudi Arabia while claiming to be a "champion for woman's rights" and boasting about potentially about being the first woman President in any chance she got. It's Bernie Sanders and his supporter's fault for Hillary Clinton focusing on how terrible of a person Donald Trump was and not focusing on policy issues as she should had. It's Bernie Sanders and his supporters fault Hillary Clinton NEGLECTED RUSH-BELT.

Straight up delusional.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 7, 2017)

Flow said:


> Man, you are delusional. Yeah, it's Bernie Sanders and his supporters fault Hillary Clinton wasn't a LIKABLE candidate and people didn't feel enthused enough to vote for her. It's Bernie Sanders and his supporters fault the DNC was found to be BIASED and in favor of Hillary Clinton over Sanders which caused many people to not trust her or the DNC. It's Bernie Sander's fault she took money in from Saudi Arabia while claiming to be a "champion for woman's rights" and boasting about potentially about being the first woman President in any chance she got. It's Bernie Sanders and his supporter's fault for Hillary Clinton focusing on how terrible of a person Donald Trump was and not focusing on policy issues as she should had. It's Bernie Sanders and his supporters fault Hillary Clinton NEGLECTED RUSH-BELT.
> 
> Straight up delusional.


Its getting worse on that cult site.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 7, 2017)

We can go back and forth about it all day. But the issue was that Hillary had a lot of problems and a lot of it didn't have to do with fake right wing attacks like bengazi, email server and whatnot, or sexism or racism 

and in general, a lot of democrats mirror clinton in their lack of soul searching about their own strategies which lead to the dems being wiped out on all levels


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 7, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Bernie should have bowed out earlier and his supporters were stupid little shits even saying they were going to vote for Trump as revenge. They are part of the reason we're in the boat we're in now. She had more primary votes and Bernie isn't really a democrat (the same way Trump isn't a Republican).
> 
> I liked Bernie at first, voted for him in the primary, but the moment that it was clear he was going to lose he needed to concede and try to help in the fight against Trump.



She stuck in the primaries longer against Obama and in a far more hopeless and unambiguous situation. One reason presented being absolutely sociopathic. Going on this point is absolutely hypocritical.


----------



## Ashi (Sep 7, 2017)

Has she learned ANYTHING from her loss against Trump?

Like this is getting ridiculous, if she tries running for a third time. I'm gonna speechless tbh

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Roman (Sep 7, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Bernie should have bowed out earlier and his supporters were stupid little shits even saying they were going to vote for Trump as revenge. They are part of the reason we're in the boat we're in now. She had more primary votes and Bernie isn't really a democrat (the same way Trump isn't a Republican).
> 
> I liked Bernie at first, voted for him in the primary, but the moment that it was clear he was going to lose he needed to concede and try to help in the fight against Trump.



How is it Bernie's fault that Hilary didn't make any attempt to be well received by the general public? Nvm that she still won the popular vote so I have no idea what you're on about. The thing is that Hilary alienated Sander's voters right from the start by pandering to the feminist crowd. That's not the sort of people Sanders' and Trumps' voters wanted to be associated with. Had Hilary focused on policy issue on a larger scale instead of talking about being the first female president every minute of every day, maybe more people would've sided with her.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 7, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> _This isn’t especially useful to anyone. The only thing Verrit is capable of debunking is parodies of Verrit. False statistics from elsewhere don’t come with codes that users can check against the site’s database. Neither, of course, do real ones. Verrit’s collection is finite — *filled only with carefully curated cards that confirm Clinton voters’ views*. It serves no purpose except to spare those voters the need to confront beliefs that conflict with their own.
> 
> All Verrit is, at its core, is what Daou has called a “sanctuary.” Daou has built a bubble for people who were already basically living in one. His is just harder to pop. Of course, a partisan platform that openly declares itself a shill for a particular politician and sticks to stringent fact-checking standards is better than one that spews falsehoods while feigning objectivity. *But Verrit is the last thing we needed in a media market already plagued by consumers’ tendency to seek out sources that tell them what they want to hear and outlets’ willingness to give them exactly what they’re looking for.*
> _
> ...


 

Rat abandoning a sinking ship. 

I give a bit more credit to @SuperSaiyaMan12 who sounds somewhat sincere now, though he was eyeball-deep in the cult for a good while.

You, on the other hand, had your damn cape on defending Mama Hillary's comments in the Convo thread mere hours before you make this post. You're a fraud and a coward; pissed your pants when the water got a bit rough

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## RAGING BONER (Sep 7, 2017)

I'm taking down names...
you sexist fucks will regret your words come next election and the Hilldawg sweeps the election!


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 7, 2017)

#StillWithHer

Reactions: Optimistic 1


----------



## Catalyst75 (Sep 7, 2017)

erictheking said:


> You, on the other hand, had your damn cape on defending Mama Hillary's comments in the Convo thread mere hours before you make this post.



Commenting that two people on the left shared similar policies (and focusing on that rather than on the differences) is one thing.

Realizing that Clinton endorsed a 'mouth-piece/propaganda' site that tells her and her supporters only the things they want to hear (and only exists to reaffirm their beliefs) is what caused me to change my position on her.

It shows her to be unwilling to learn from her mistake, and shows that people whom I argued with before in the past were correct: she'd rather force the blame on everyone else than admit that she did something wrong.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 7, 2017)

Roman said:


> How is it Bernie's fault that Hilary didn't make any attempt to be well received by the general public? Nvm that she still won the popular vote so I have no idea what you're on about. *The thing is that Hilary alienated Sander's voters right from the start by pandering to the feminist crowd. That's not the sort of people Sanders' and Trumps' voters wanted to be associated with. *Had Hilary focused on policy issue on a larger scale instead of talking about being the first female president every minute of every day, maybe more people would've sided with her.



Unlike Trump, Sanders is an ACTUAL feminist. He's not a bigot hiding behind thinking feminism is going to enslave men or whatever bullshit comes out of the alt right's mouth.

The issue wasn't social justice, the issue was that the neoliberal democrats were not using actual social justice(or economic justice) as a platform, but instead used identity politics, which is just using the illusion of social justice to shield themselves from criticism and cynically pander to the socially liberal crowd by using hollow platitudes and nonsense arguments. 

gloria steinem and Madeleine albrite for example were on Hillary's side and fashioned themselves femenists, but then basically slandered all of the feminist women supporters of Bernie because they wanted someone better than Hillary. Claiming that there is a special place in hell for women who don't support other women, or saying women only supported Sanders to get men ect. These people are not feminists, but establishment shills who use identity politics as a means to slander real social justice advocates.

There's an important distinction to be made between actual social justice and identity politics and they have been conflated to an unfortunate degree

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Roman (Sep 7, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> Unlike Trump, Sanders is an ACTUAL feminist. He's not a bigot hiding behind thinking feminism is going to enslave men or whatever bullshit comes out of the alt right's mouth.



Thing is, current gen feminist weren't gonna take up Sanders because a female leader was more aligned to their aspirations than he was. Doesn't matter to them that Sanders was more of a true feminist than Hilary. The image of a female president mattered more.

But yeah, I know what you mean. I'm just saying, Hilary completely failed to address larger issues, which is why a fair number of people who would've supported Sanders didn't support her.

Reactions: Agree 2 | Disagree 1


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 7, 2017)

Roman said:


> Thing is, current gen feminist weren't gonna take up Sanders because a female leader was more aligned to their aspirations than he was. Doesn't matter to them that Sanders was more of a true feminist than Hilary. The image of a female president mattered more.
> 
> But yeah, I know what you mean. I'm just saying, Hilary completely failed to address larger issues, which is why a fair number of people who would've supported Sanders didn't support her.



Im a current gen feminist who voted for Bernie. Most young women also voted for bernie so where you getting at here?


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 7, 2017)

Roman said:


> Thing is, current gen feminist weren't gonna take up Sanders because a female leader was more aligned to their aspirations than he was. Doesn't matter to them that Sanders was more of a true feminist than Hilary. The image of a female president mattered more.
> 
> But yeah, I know what you mean. I'm just saying, Hilary completely failed to address larger issues, which is why a fair number of people who would've supported Sanders didn't support her.



But there were tons of feminist women who supported bernie sanders, TONS of younger women and older women who were just explained away by Hillary and crowd as not existing because they could not make up a narrative against them that fit the Bernie Bro mold.

Any time you see a Nina turner or a Nomiki konst or a Rose ann Demoro, they don't exist in the eyes of neoliberals in general including people like Joy ann Reid who once shit on Clinton herself and fashioned herself a feminist hater, yet now proclaims to love social justice to attack progressives with the racism and sexism card. its just a game to them, nothing more.


----------



## Roman (Sep 7, 2017)

I refer to feminazis who make up most of what modern feminists are now.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 7, 2017)

Roman said:


> I refer to feminazis who make up most of what modern feminists are now.



Then you are unsalvagable if you actually conflate modern women's rights like the ones supported in the women's march with anything resembling nazism.


----------



## Roman (Sep 7, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> Then you are unsalvagable if you actually conflate modern women's rights like the ones supported in the women's march with anything resembling nazism.



> Thinking I actually take them for Nazis


----------



## Pilaf (Sep 7, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> Then you are unsalvagable if you actually conflate modern women's rights like the ones supported in the women's march with anything resembling nazism.




Wouldn't the common ground be Authoritarianism? 3rd wave Feminists don't tend to be libertarian. They have a tendency to want their views enforced.


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 7, 2017)

Normality said:


> bruh bernie is kind.



I know, but it's because that he's too kind is what really allowed the DNC to spit on his face.


----------



## Pilaf (Sep 7, 2017)

Bolsheviks are never actually kind. Their message begins with "feed the poor" and generally logically ends at "line up the people who don't think like we do and shoot 'em all."

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 2 | Dislike 2


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 7, 2017)

There are people who self-identify as 'feminists' who literally defend Sharia and hard-line Islam to the hilt. Of course there are also feminists who hate Sharia.

That's just a fact - no political group in the world is spotless (same with 'leftists', 'communists', 'socialists', whatever). There are shitloads of feminists and leftists who have some fucking shit political views, usually the idpol fanatics with no class analysis, and to be fair I think those are the ones @Roman is referring to. He shouldn't have described them as current gen because it implies that a fair generalisation can be made when the truth is a bit more nuanced than that.



Pilaf said:


> Bolsheviks are never actually kind. Their message begins with "feed the poor" and generally logically ends at "line up the people who don't think like we do and shoot 'em all."


If you think the poor should starve, how much is your life really worth anyway? Into the gulag you go.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 7, 2017)

Roman said:


> > Thinking I actually take them for Nazis





Pilaf said:


> Wouldn't the common ground be Authoritarianism? 3rd wave Feminists don't tend to be libertarian. They have a tendency to want their views enforced.



Eric said what i wanted to say. Stop generalizing feminists as if they are all, or a majority bad. That's like saying black people marching for their right to not be shot by police are all racists who hate white people and are authoritarians because they want their views enforced by political action.

Also..pilaf...your going down a slippery slope man with that Bolshevik stuff. Like hardcore man, you dont wanna go there.


----------



## CrazyAries (Sep 7, 2017)

Soma Cruz said:


> And this is the reason why I wanted Bernie Sanders to be my president. He is chill as fuck, and focuses on doing his fucking job.
> 
> The only problem was that he didn't have the energy to be confrontational and call people out when they're doing stupid shit.
> 
> ...



When people talk about leadership skills, they often leave out meanness. Sometimes a leader needs to be a little bit mean.

Even outside of leadership, it sometimes pays to be mean. When you’re mean enough, you can get what you want and some people will respect you more.



Normality said:


> bruh bernie is kind.



This is one thing that frustrates me about Bernie Sanders. He is _too_ kind. Although he kept his word regarding his endorsement for Hillary Clinton, he held back against her during the debates. As has been pointed out, Barack Obama was much harsher toward Clinton in the 2008 race and he won the nomination.

Sanders is showing how kind he is. He is now trying to salvage a political party whose leaders hate his guts. I don’t know if the Democratic Party is salvageable at this point because anyone who wants to take it over has a steep wall to climb and they would have to get the consultants out of the party. As it stands now, a number of consultants have voting power and they will not vote to take away their money.

If Sanders was a little bit mean, the Democratic Party might be forced to listen. He needs to hold leverage over them and really consider joining another party in order to allow progressives to congregate there. If Democrats know they couldn’t count on progressive votes — and even more, on Black and Latino votes — that would scare the shit out of them.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 7, 2017)

True, but at the same time, he doesn't want to be held responsible for destroying any progressive safehavens and allowing the right to encroach. If he took a no compromises approach, shunned the democrats and joined a third party and that fell through, there would be no where progressives could leverage their voices, as Dems would become the full on neoliberal party

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 7, 2017)

* Democrats dread Hillary's book tour *
Reliving the 2016 nightmare is the last thing the party needs right now, many say.​


> President Donald Trump may be the only person in politics truly excited about Hillary Clinton’s book tour.
> 
> Democratic operatives can’t stand the thought of her picking the scabs of 2016, again — the Bernie Sanders divide, the Jim Comey complaints, the casting blame on Barack Obama for not speaking out more on Russia. Alums of her Brooklyn headquarters who were miserable even when they thought she was winning tend to greet the topic with, “Oh, God,” “I can’t handle it,” and “the final torture.”
> 
> ...



#Dems

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Sep 7, 2017)

I'm a feminist.  I support the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of equality to men.

Third wave feminism as a political movement is straight up garbage and a disgrace.

Neither of the above two lines invalidate the other.  It just so happens that in popular discourse "feminist" has tended to refer to social justice warriors in particular, and for good reason if we're being honest.  All across academia, media and even politics feminism has turned into a platform for petty and dishonest whining.  It's embarrassing and the reputation is well deserved given its dominance in pop culture at the moment.

Reactions: Winner 2


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 7, 2017)

This is entertaing but admittedly, very concerning. The fact that she refuses to let go and even take full and proper responsibility is going to undermine Democratic efforts as a whole. Let's be real here, it doesn't matter if they get it together if this fucking torpedo named "Hillary Clinton" is going on her ego trip still, and bring their ship down to the bottom of the sea, because she's going to drag a significant portion of the base down with her.


----------



## GRIMMM (Sep 7, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> This is entertaing but admittedly, very concerning. The fact that she refuses to let go and even take full and proper responsibility is going to undermine Democratic efforts as a whole. Let's be real here, it doesn't matter if they get it together if this fucking torpedo named "Hillary Clinton" is going on her ego trip still, and bring their ship down to the bottom of the sea, because she's going to drag a significant portion of the base down with her.


Her ego is beyond massive, and her memoirs are only further proof that she is bitter about both 2012 and 2016. She obviously believes the sun shines out her arsehole to continue with her whinging. I think at this point she is out for a bit of "vengeance" so is trying to pull down The Democrats while her ship is sinking. I think the most appropriate action for The Democrats at this point is to come forward and speak out about Hillary for what she is, and what she stood for throughout the election.

That would be glorious

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 7, 2017)

@afgpride I dont disagree that there is a CERTAIN MINORIITY ELEMENT of current social advocacy circles who are thin skinned and go too far in certain cases, but its irresponsible to tie those people to the broader leftist movement and actual social justice causes and generalize them, which is what has happend.

The very term "social justice warrior" was able to be co opted by the right wing and so everything that is generally social advocacy has been poisoned by anyone with an axe to grind against even vaguely progressive causes. its a very irresponsible thing.

Also, may i just say this



> Asked whether she was excited about Clinton’s book tour, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), one of Republicans’ top 2018 targets, responded first with, “Beg your pardon?”
> 
> Asked again, she started shaking her head, walking away.



Is the funniest shit i ever heard. Claire mcaskill, the most diehard Hillary shill in the election got nothing to say

The woman who said bernie was a communist just like the GOP has claimed is now running away from her friend? What happend?


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 7, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> This is entertaing but admittedly, very concerning. The fact that she refuses to let go and even take full and proper responsibility is going to undermine Democratic efforts as a whole. Let's be real here, it doesn't matter if they get it together if this fucking torpedo named "Hillary Clinton" is going on her ego trip still, and bring their ship down to the bottom of the sea, because she's going to drag a significant portion of the base down with her.


From the way her cult is reacting, they refuse to believe Hillary had any involvement in her own loss! They're even claiming she won the rust belt!



> you a complete ass and have no idea what your talking about, she knows more than any political person that has ever run for office! Believe she is far from being unpopular! I guess you live in a hole try digging your self out for some real reality!





> we no this is a lie hillary clinton is the only one who was qualified than the rest. bernie,trump.jill treated her like trash. she won the blue states trump the GOP all stolen this election from Hillary along with the russia help. this surveys is a lie the hillary clinton is the most popular women in history jealous GOP just lie. american know that hillary clinton will go down in history for a well done job.



Note: This is after showing the latest polls and surveys showing Hillary Clinton was only 30% approval, below Trump.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 7, 2017)

Holy shit, this lady is going to fuck shit up for the Democrats, isn't she? She's never going to let this go.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## CrazyAries (Sep 7, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> True, but at the same time*, he doesn't want to be held responsible for destroying any progressive safehavens and allowing the right to encroach. If he took a no compromises approach, shunned the democrats and joined a third party and that fell through, there would be no where progressives could leverage their voices, *as Dems would become the full on neoliberal party



You’re right. It is a dangerous gamble, especially today, since it’s even harder for third parties to get a foothold in American politics. Both major parties control the process and both make it extremely difficult for third parties to even get on ballots.

But … if enough people knew about a new party and that party could even take some Republican voters away, that would be the the ideal situation.

In the meantime, there needs to be a multi-pronged approach to dealing with both major parties. Elections should not be under their jurisdiction and there needs to be an answer for the DNC to rid itself of consultants.



Inuhanyou said:


> @afgpride I dont disagree that there is a CERTAIN MINORIITY ELEMENT of current social advocacy circles who are thin skinned and go too far in certain cases, but its irresponsible to tie those people to the broader leftist movement and actual social justice causes and generalize them, which is what has happend.
> 
> The very term "social justice warrior" was able to be co opted by the right wing and so everything that is generally social advocacy has been poisoned by anyone with an axe to grind against even vaguely progressive causes. its a very irresponsible thing.
> 
> ...



On some level, Claire McCaskill was overcompensating for her past support of Barack Obama during the 2008 primaries. The Clintons did raise money for her in the past and it cut them deep to see that she endorsed Obama. McCaskill made it on the Clintons’ Hit List.

That aside, I do not like McCaskill’s positions on various things. She does not support single-payer and she had the nerve to ask her constituents to donate to her so she could later stop taking corporate cash.


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 7, 2017)

afgpride said:


> I'm a feminist.  I support the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of equality to men.
> 
> Third wave feminism as a political movement is straight up garbage and a disgrace.
> 
> Neither of the above two lines invalidate the other.  It just so happens that in popular discourse "feminist" has tended to refer to social justice warriors in particular, and for good reason if we're being honest.  All across academia, media and even politics feminism has turned into a platform for petty and dishonest whining.  It's embarrassing and the reputation is well deserved given its dominance in pop culture at the moment.



This. Hilary was primarily using the current gen of "feminism" as her bolstering point rather than going with Feminism ultimately fucked herself up as well as in so many other reasons because she's entitled to be President, as I've been saying this shit ever since she was running yet AGAIN.



Seto Kaiba said:


> * Democrats dread Hillary's book tour *
> Reliving the 2016 nightmare is the last thing the party needs right now, many say.​



It's like she wants to absolutely nuke the DNC.
I already made my thoughts clear but it should be obvious as fuck, The DNC is in massive trouble and if they do not get their shit together, we will be stuck with Republicans for YEARS to DECADES to come. And it's definitely coming out that way because Hilary and a number of Democrats are still playing the fucking blame game rather than, I don't know, REPAIR THEIR FUCKING BRAND!

At this point, someone needs to pull a Senator Armstrong and completely destroy the DNC and rebuild it because they have completely lost their way.



Inuhanyou said:


> I dont disagree that there is a CERTAIN MINORIITY ELEMENT of current social advocacy circles who are thin skinned and go too far in certain cases, but its irresponsible to tie those people to the broader leftist movement and actual social justice causes and generalize them, which is what has happend.
> 
> The very term "social justice warrior" was able to be co opted by the right wing and so everything that is generally social advocacy has been poisoned by anyone with an axe to grind against even vaguely progressive causes. its a very irresponsible thing.



Except the problem is that it's so bad, many women are REFUSING to call themselves feminists because of how poisoned the well is now. It doesn't help that "Social Justice" has become the go to word for everyone because of how co-opted the behavior is in ALOT OF PLACES IN FIRST WORLD COUNTRIES NOW. We have the University of Missouri's bullshit to the point that the University has to close up doors and is constantly losing money and the problem is still growing to the point certain colleges and universities LITERALLY had to say upfront that they aren't going to tolerate that bullshit as a SELLING POINT!

You can't say anything about Feminism being generalized when no one speaks out about it anymore because of how poisoned it is. When you have one of the surviving leaders of the First Wave of Feminism literally say how messed up it has gotten, feminists these days have no one to blame but themselves for not speaking out when they started getting co-opted by feminists of the modern day.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Sep 7, 2017)

does her own husband even support her at this point?


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 7, 2017)

GRIMMM said:


> Her ego is beyond massive, and her memoirs are only further proof that she is bitter about both 2012 and 2016. She obviously believes the sun shines out her arsehole to continue with her whinging. I think at this point she is out for a bit of "vengeance" so is trying to pull down The Democrats while her ship is sinking. I think the most appropriate action for The Democrats at this point is to come forward and speak out about Hillary for what she is, and what she stood for throughout the election.
> 
> That would be glorious


I am 110% confident Hillary thinks she should be the President right now. Her entire social circle is a tightly knit carefully constructed bubble of ego fluffers. They will all have her convinced that "the Russians" stole her birthright. 

That's why she talks to the world with absolute zero levels of self-awareness. In Hillary's World she is still The Queen.

Reactions: Like 2 | Winner 1


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 7, 2017)

At this point, the Democrats should just cut ties from Hillary. Right now, she's contributing nothing but collateral damage towards the party, and with the Midterm Election next year, it's going to be difficult to pull off a victory for taking back the House.
Hell, I'm sure at this point, the Democrats will lose even more seats in the Senate and put them at an enormous disadvantage (there's only a few seats that belongs to a Republican).


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 7, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> At this point, the Democrats should just cut ties from Hillary. Right now, she's contributing nothing but collateral damage towards the party, and with the Midterm Election next year, it's going to be difficult to pull off a victory for taking back the House.
> Hell, I'm sure at this point, the Democrats will lose even more seats in the Senate and put them at an enormous disadvantage (there's only a few seats that belongs to a Republican).


From the way it sounds, they might cut ties with Hillary, she's literally poisoning their chances at this point.


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 7, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> At this point, the Democrats should just cut ties from Hillary. Right now, she's contributing nothing but collateral damage towards the party, and with the Midterm Election next year, it's going to be difficult to pull off a victory for taking back the House.
> Hell, I'm sure at this point, the Democrats will lose even more seats in the Senate and put them at an enormous disadvantage (there's only a few seats that belongs to a Republican).



It's not even just that, the entire party needs to get their shit together.

Bitching about Trump and all of what he does doesn't do shit for them and what they need to do and will guarantee them nothing when it comes to 2020.
Hilary's a big part of the problem, but they still need to get their heads out of their asses.


----------



## GRIMMM (Sep 7, 2017)

erictheking said:


> I am 110% confident Hillary thinks she should be the President right now. Her entire social circle is a tightly knit carefully constructed bubble of ego fluffers. They will all have her convinced that "the Russians" stole her birthright.
> 
> That's why she talks to the world with absolute zero levels of self-awareness. In Hillary's World she is still The Queen.


Too true.

I saw someone in the thread say earlier that Bernie should "take her under his wing" to build her up for the next election, as if his principled and moralistic approach would even leave a scratch on her morally corrupt, money driven and power hungry personality. She has surrounded herself with yes (wo)men and has built an ego that cannot be deflated, EVEN AFTER being defeated by a fucking giant orange trampoline for fuck sake.



Darkmatter said:


> At this point, the Democrats should just cut ties from Hillary. Right now, she's contributing nothing but collateral damage towards the party, and with the Midterm Election next year, it's going to be difficult to pull off a victory for taking back the House.
> Hell, I'm sure at this point, the Democrats will lose even more seats in the Senate and put them at an enormous disadvantage (there's only a few seats that belongs to a Republican).


As well as cutting ties, get the knives out. She obviously has it in for them, so they should return the favour to try and save face even a little.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Catalyst75 (Sep 7, 2017)

erictheking said:


> I am 110% confident Hillary thinks she should be the President right now. Her entire social circle is a tightly knit carefully constructed bubble of ego fluffers. They will all have her convinced that "the Russians" stole her birthright.
> 
> That's why she talks to the world with absolute zero levels of self-awareness. In Hillary's World she is still The Queen.



In an alternate Universe, this book would probably be about her glorious victory.

The entire United States is a burning mess at this point, and this behavior from Clinton is part of the problem.  If she is going to obsess over the past, rather than actually care about the future of her party, then I agree with what @Darkmatter is saying: the Democrats should cut ties with Clinton entirely, focus on rebuilding, and focus on establishing a new platform so they can win the seats in 2018, and the general election in 2020.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 7, 2017)

Xhominid said:


> Except the problem is that it's so bad, many women are REFUSING to call themselves feminists because of how poisoned the well is now. It doesn't help that "Social Justice" has become the go to word for everyone because of how co-opted the behavior is in ALOT OF PLACES IN FIRST WORLD COUNTRIES NOW. We have the University of Missouri's bullshit to the point that the University has to close up doors and is constantly losing money and the problem is still growing to the point certain colleges and universities LITERALLY had to say upfront that they aren't going to tolerate that bullshit as a SELLING POINT!
> 
> You can't say anything about Feminism being generalized when no one speaks out about it anymore because of how poisoned it is. When you have one of the surviving leaders of the First Wave of Feminism literally say how messed up it has gotten, feminists these days have no one to blame but themselves for not speaking out when they started getting co-opted by feminists of the modern day.



now hold on a second there, let's back up a bit.

no one speaks about feminism? I'm pretty sure i hear something about feminists being all feminazi's and "SJWs" equally anybody advocating for progressive policy almost every day from various outlets. I hear far more complaining about feminazis than i hear from anyone actually like what they are describing them to be.

Not saying those people don't exist, but seriously, this axe to grind against some people like Anita sarkessian who make up some videos about being offended at digital boobs, or some tumblr dwellers is overblown personally, to the point where a lot of it feels like automatic blowback from conservative circles and people not equipped to handle outspoken activism.

What's ironic to me is that a lot of actions of the past feminist movements were way more radical, to the point where saying this current movement is super bad is just strange to me.

i can only guess that atleast some of the critics are the same tp


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 7, 2017)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> From the way it sounds, they might cut ties with Hillary, she's literally poisoning their chances at this point.



It's their best chance right now.



Xhominid said:


> It's not even just that, the entire party needs to get their shit together.
> 
> Bitching about Trump and all of what he does doesn't do shit for them and what they need to do and will guarantee them nothing when it comes to 2020.
> Hilary's a big part of the problem, but they still need to get their heads out of their asses.



I agree with you that the Democrats needs to get themselves ready for the midterms next year. It's just that cutting ties with her would be the first step to ensure the party survives.



GRIMMM said:


> Instead of cut ties, get the knives out. She obviously has it in for them, so they should return the favour to try and save face even a little.



TOP 10 ANIME BETRAYALS.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 7, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> It's their best chance right now.


From the way Democrats on the Campaign Trail reacted to Clinton launching her book tour, there may be an unceremonial 'We don't want you here, Hillary' from even up at the top.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## makeoutparadise (Sep 7, 2017)

IIRC it was the DNC who literally took votes away from burnie in favor of hilliary clinton its why the former chair stepped down.

But yes yes squabble and blame amoungst yourselves the only thing its doing is makin the history books more interesting


----------



## CrazyAries (Sep 7, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> At this point, the Democrats should just cut ties from Hillary. Right now, she's contributing nothing but collateral damage towards the party, and with the Midterm Election next year, it's going to be difficult to pull off a victory for taking back the House.
> 
> Hell, I'm sure at this point, the Democrats will lose even more seats in the Senate and put them at an enormous disadvantage (there's only a few seats that belongs to a Republican).



They really should.

Regarding the makeup of Congress:

Like @mr_shadow pointed out, the Democrats need pay more attention to local and state races.  Those are just as important as congressional seats because of redistricting and other constitutional concerns.

Organizations like Justice Democrats would be better served to focus on those races more. They could do it low key and get more of the people they want in position if they play their cards right. They already be doing that since over 1,000 people have been vetted.



GRIMMM said:


> Too true.
> 
> *I saw someone in the thread say earlier that Bernie should "take her under his wing" to build her up for the next election, *as if his principled and moralistic approach would even leave a scratch on her morally corrupt, money driven and power hungry personality. She has surrounded herself with yes (wo)men and has built an ego that cannot be deflated, EVEN AFTER being defeated by a fucking giant orange trampoline for fuck sake.
> 
> Instead of cut ties, get the knives out. She obviously has it in for them, so they should return the favour to try and save face even a little.



That was about Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard.

Reactions: Agree 1 | Informative 1


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 7, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> In an alternate Universe, this book would probably be about her glorious victory.
> 
> *The entire United States is a burning mess at this point*, and this behavior from Clinton is part of the problem. If she is going to obsess over the past, rather than actually care about the future of her party, then I agree with what @Darkmatter is saying: the Democrats should cut ties with Clinton entirely, focus on rebuilding, and focus on establishing a new platform so they can win the seats in 2018, and the general election in 2020.



I already had that in mind the second Trump and Hilary was nominated, that's why I don't even give a darn anymore since we would have been in hotshit regardless, whether it was Hilary or Trump.



Inuhanyou said:


> no one speaks about feminism? I'm pretty sure i hear something about feminists being all feminazi's and "SJWs" equally anybody advocating for progressive policy almost every day from various outlets. I hear far more complaining about feminazis than i hear from anyone actually like what they are describing them to be.



No, the problem is that no feminists are speaking out against the feminazi's or the SJW's that are poisoning their movement to this extreme. It was the same way with Atheists and Atheism+ which incorporated the same shit that SJW's are all over now.
There's a reason that despite Black Lives Matter having an actual goal to have, is something that I, as a black person, will never endorse because it's being driven into the ground by the same fucking scumbags dragging things into it that are muddying the goals to a retarded extent(I even heard about their "list of demands" from a popular Vegas Radio Station and NONE OF THE DEMANDS was about the very reason the group exists for).



Inuhanyou said:


> Not saying those people don't exist, but seriously, this axe to grind against some people like Anita sarkessian who make up some videos about being offended at digital boobs, or some tumblr dwellers is overblown personally, to the point where a lot of it feels like automatic blowback from conservative circles and people not equipped to handle outspoken activism.



Because whether or not you agree with Sarkessian, she is still endorsed by "Feminism". No one is really speaking out against her that has any actual clout. And thus, she continues to fester and cause a fuckton of problems that will ultimately cripple gaming to an extent because no one is able to call her out without getting fired, thrown under the bus or mocked.
It's the same way with so many gaming "journalists" willing to shit on developers who have this mindset and utterly screw them over while in the same breath act as if they have no power to speak of.



Inuhanyou said:


> What's ironic to me is that a lot of actions of the past feminist movements were way more radical, to the point where saying this current movement is super bad is just strange to me.
> 
> i can only guess that atleast some of the critics are the same tp



Yes, we had some very radical feminist groups from the past that was "worse" so to speak. The issue with this group is the fact that they are have the power to actually effect and ruin lives in their spite before they go down, that's the issue.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Sep 7, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> @afgpride I dont disagree that there is a CERTAIN MINORIITY ELEMENT of current social advocacy circles who are thin skinned and go too far in certain cases, but its irresponsible to tie those people to the broader leftist movement and actual social justice causes and generalize them, which is what has happend.
> 
> The very term "social justice warrior" was able to be co opted by the right wing and so everything that is generally social advocacy has been poisoned by anyone with an axe to grind against even vaguely progressive causes. its a very irresponsible thing.


No.  I would go so far as to say that *most* modern social justice advocacy groups rightfully fall under the umbrella of SJW's.  For every fringe lunatic group like antifa, there are a legion of sympathizers on Twitter and Facebook that validate them.  How many people on NF straight up supported the punch-a-nazi movement?  When you can casually support violence in the name of ideology, you can't turn around and call those same types of efforts fringe and non representative.

When platforms with overbearing power over social life like Google and YouTube and Facebook and Twitter are explicitly at the mercy of stereotypical SJW's, that's not a fringe minority.  That's the effective brand of that movement, because it's what's driving the bulk of the discourse and reform.  When women studies and gender studies departments across the western world are near unanimously batshit insane, that's not just a fringe minority.  That's the effective brand of education in that sphere.  When New York City says there are 31 genders and you have to know each one of them and its pronouns and failing to do so as an employer is a legal offense, that's not just a fringe minority.  When Canada makes gender_ identity_ a protected class in the league of race and sex at a federal level, that's not just a fringe minority.

Tell me, where is this reasonable majority of social justice activism in the modern world?  Point to me where:

Wearing feminism on your sleeve while being physically incapable of calling out misogyny in the middle east is rare rather than the norm
BLM supporters are mostly completely reasonable people and have no fundamental hostility toward white people, just police brutality and supremacists in particular
Passionate feminists acknowledge that most of the gender wage gap has nothing to do with discrimination
Gender studies majors acknowledge the biological differences between the sexes that influence behavior
and that not only these situations (I can name hundreds but you get the point) exists, but outnumber all the cases of its inverse.  You just won't be able to, because this is the state of social justice in the *mainstream*.  I am sick and tired of this tonedeaf, blind insistence that these people don't represent social justice.  Yes they do.  That's why Stephen Colbert will worship you on live T.V., why Bernie Sanders will lick your boots, why Hillary Clinton will cater to you, why academia will agree with you, why social media giants will empower you and why left leaning governments will put your thoughts into action if you're part of this poisonous, cretinous ant colony of ideological nutcases.  If a silent majority exists, they sure as hell don't fucking matter.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 2 | Winner 2 | Useful 1


----------



## GRIMMM (Sep 7, 2017)

CrazyAries said:


> That was about Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard.


My bad, I honestly thought someone was delusional enough to think Bernie and Hillary could work together.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 7, 2017)

Xhominid said:


> No, the problem is that no feminists are speaking out against the feminazi's or the SJW's that are poisoning their movement to this extreme. It was the same way with Atheists and Atheism+ which incorporated the same shit that SJW's are all over now.
> There's a reason that despite Black Lives Matter having an actual goal to have, is something that I, as a black person, will never endorse because it's being driven into the ground by the same fucking scumbags dragging things into it that are muddying the goals to a retarded extent(I even heard about their "list of demands" from a popular Vegas Radio Station and NONE OF THE DEMANDS was about the very reason the group exists for).



since i am most familiar with BLM as an organization, i'll address the complaints i see here.

i don't know radio stations you listen to sir, but BLM doesn't actually have a "list of demands", there is no unified list of demands for a decentralized movement that isn't actually a group and just a large amount of people operating under the same general banner.

What we actually have are legislative goals by campaign Zero which strictly support community and police enforcement initiatives.

comments.deviantart.com/1/6738…

They don't speak for 'BLM" generally, but are apart of one major segment of BLM who are involved in legislative activism.

As for feminazi's and SJW's and "why wont normal people speak up against them if they exist", i think it is considered not a priority for actual social justice advocates to come out against what you claim are threatening groups because they don't share what i am sensing is a hysterical level of hostility about how they are taking over, and are what is wrong with the world.

Especially when the majority of those silent majority are too busy trying to fight against actual right wing pushback, and may conflate what you see as legitimate criticism and pushback with hatred and bigotry.

I mean, you can't really look at someone who claims "there are no actual social justice advocates or civil rights groups, they are all SJW and feminazis" seriously and consider their complaints worth anything, they would be totally dismissed.

In which case, if people with the viewpoint you and AFG have want to get anywhere, it would probably be better served to retool the message your trying to send


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Sep 7, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> I mean, you can't really look at someone who claims "there are no actual social justice advocates or civil rights groups, they are all SJW and feminazis" seriously and consider their complaints worth anything, they would be totally dismissed.
> 
> In which case, if people with the viewpoint you and AFG have want to get anywhere, it would probably be better served to retool the message your trying to send


If you're implying I said that then that's a pretty odd strawman.  I never said sensible social justice doesn't exist, I said that it's not the majority which you're claiming it is. The people I categorize as SJW's are *rampant* in pop culture, yet you're insisting they're a fringe minority in the overall efforts of social justice advocacy.  If they were such a minor element in the grand struggle of social justice, why are they so widely accepted everywhere in the left wing mainstream?  Why, from pop culture to academia to social media to politics are these alleged fringed elements kowtowed to constantly?  Is Anita Sarkeesian a random nutcase that shouldn't be taken seriously?  Well she dons a spot at YouTube, is taken seriously by Google as a consultant, was worshiped at TEDx as an intellectual heavyweight and champion of feminism and given a standing ovation on Colbert.  You think extreme social constructionism is just a strawman in the wider advocacy umbrella of non binary rights?  Well it's already canon in gender studies across academia and already signed into law in Canada and parts of the United States.  Bill Nye the science guy also did a segment peddling it in his latest show.  Do you think Black Lives Matter is an innocent group who just happens to have a few bad apples?  Well take a look at their co founders, present leaders and decorated history of shutting down events like the gay pride parade to compete in the privilege Olympics.  Do you think feminist hypocrisy is just some random fringe element in the greater struggle for women's rights?  Well take a look at who organized the massive Women's March, one of which was Linda Sarsour, a Muslim apologist who thinks people complaining about women not being able to drive in Saudi Arabia are stupid because they get a lot of paid maternity leave so it cancels out.  A comically hypocritical charlatan that speaks in a Brooklyn accent wearing her hijab telling her feminist friends how progressive Islam is, as she gets invited to The Young Turks and has her feet kissed by Bernie Sanders.  You think safe spaces and trigger warnings are fringe elements of social justice?  Explain then why nearly every historically left leaning university has them now, and why many tech companies are incorporating them into their business.  Microaggressions aren't are real social justice platform?  Guess the thousands of major businesses they convinced to strike down on them don't exist.  Manspreading is only shit they whine about on tumblr?  It's signed into law in Spain with legal punishment.

I don't wanna hear this "retool the message you're trying to send" business if you're still stuck in denial over the state of social discourse in the world right now.  I gave you examples from every level of mainstream society, from social media to academia to mainstream media to politics, where your alleged _minority_ activists dominate the thought and reform of left leaning institutions.  At best, they'll have their interests co-opted and supported.  At worst, they'll get a polite nod without a follow up.

White privilege
Patriarchy
Trigger warning
Safe space
Manspreading
Mansplaining
Microaggression
Culture appropriation
Social constructionism
_*Islam*_ophobia
Unconscious racism
etc

These are all relevant champions and enemies of modern social justice.  Not a fringe element, not a tiny minority.  It's canon.  The fact that you insist otherwise is a testament to the bubble you're in right now.  You are so invested in the left/right pissing contest you're unwilling to acknowledge, let alone speak against, the viruses spouting out of your side on a regular basis.

Reactions: Agree 1 | Winner 2


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 7, 2017)

*Clinton blasts Biden for saying Dems didn't address middle class*



> Hillary Clinton criticized former Vice President Joe Biden in her new book for his assessment that Democrats did not focus on the middle class during the presidential race.
> 
> The Democratic nominee defeated by President Trump writes that she found Biden's comments "remarkable" given his own campaigning for her, in which he talked about what she would do for the middle class.
> 
> ...



Bernie Sanders

This bitch is like a can of Pringles.

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 1 | Winner 1


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 7, 2017)

Seriously, she flat out ignored the middle class yet she claims she campaigned for them and the working class? Seriously?

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Drake (Sep 7, 2017)

I haven't been paying much attention to Clinton since the election, so I'm surprised that she's still bitter over this... It was completely her fault that she lost and she was a terrible candidate, though I don't really regret voting for her in the general.

Also, I'm pretty sure Bernie told his supporters to vote for Hillary, so I don't see how it's possible for her to make the claim that Sanders somehow detracted from her campaign against Trump.


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 7, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> *Clinton blasts Biden for saying Dems didn't address middle class*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This. Bitch. Is. Fucking. Unstable.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Sep 7, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> This bitch is like a can of Pringles.


Hey now, what did Pringles ever do to you?

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 7, 2017)

I hope that her book flops for good, because I'm at the point where seeing her name makes me sick to my stomach about how much of a lousy politician Hillary has turned into.
And if her book sold more units than anticipated (and I know there will be people who will buy her book like a bitch they are), then either we have ass-kissing Hillarytards or Trumptards bought it for Firewood (which I hope it's the latter).


----------



## Atem (Sep 7, 2017)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> Hey now, what did Pringles ever do to you?



They deserve better than being compared to some sandy cooch.

I concur.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 8, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> *Clinton blasts Biden for saying Dems didn't address middle class*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This bitch didn't even try to address the middle class, that's one of the primary reasons why she fucking lost.
Where the fuck she is getting off to trying to lay blame to everyone but herself!?


----------



## Nemesis (Sep 8, 2017)

Xhominid said:


> This bitch didn't even try to address the middle class, that's one of the primary reasons why she fucking lost.
> Where the fuck she is getting off to trying to lay blame to everyone but herself!?



She fucking did address the middle and working classes.  It's that the boring but realistic approach was fucking rejected by middle america in the states she would have won if things were like any other election.

She brought up things like education of people within these groups to bring them into the 21st century work force since coal and a ton of industries are simply dead in the US because the US worker needs wages that would essentially price the same classes out of buying products.

Instead these people went for the false promises of Trump that have no basis of working in reality.  Jobs will not come back, there's no means to make them come back.  Coal is a dying industry and the sooner the better.  The working/middle class needs to adapt to the realities of the 21st century.  Not try to hold onto 1950s economy which simple will not work.


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 8, 2017)

Nemesis said:


> She fucking did address the middle and working classes. It's that the boring but realistic approach was fucking rejected by middle america in the states she would have won if things were like any other election.
> 
> She brought up things like education of people within these groups to bring them into the 21st century work force since coal and a ton of industries are simply dead in the US because the US worker needs wages that would essentially price the same classes out of buying products.
> 
> Instead these people went for the false promises of Trump that have no basis of working in reality. Jobs will not come back, there's no means to make them come back. Coal is a dying industry and the sooner the better. The working/middle class needs to adapt to the realities of the 21st century. Not try to hold onto 1950s economy which simple will not work.



I didn't hear anything about that at all which should tell you alot in that I doubt many people even heard about it and so many commercials I've seen was the DNC constantly stating how much Trump hates women and so on and so forth.


----------



## Nemesis (Sep 8, 2017)

Xhominid said:


> I didn't hear anything about that at all which should tell you alot in that I doubt many people even heard about it and so many commercials I've seen was the DNC constantly stating how much Trump hates women and so on and so forth.



It was a big part of the second debate.  Cardigan guy asked about it and she went into detail over the education part.  Trump just blah blah about bringing jobs back and "clean coal." bullcrap


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 8, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> *Clinton blasts Biden for saying Dems didn't address middle class*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Blaming Biden and Obama 

And Comey and Putin. Of course.


----------



## Breadman (Sep 8, 2017)

TBH, kinda just wished Hillary was the president so that we wouldn't have to go through 3 more years of insane political rants from everyone about how unfair life is.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Sep 8, 2017)

Yoshua said:


> TBH, kinda just wished Hillary was the president so that we wouldn't have to go through 3 more years of insane political rants from everyone about how unfair life is.


No, we'd just go thru ~4 years of the SJW Orc Horde squealing even louder than before.

To be honest, we were pretty much boned either way.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 8, 2017)

Nemesis said:


> She fucking did address the middle and working classes.  It's that the boring but realistic approach was fucking rejected by middle america in the states she would have won if things were like any other election.
> 
> She brought up things like education of people within these groups to bring them into the 21st century work force since coal and a ton of industries are simply dead in the US because the US worker needs wages that would essentially price the same classes out of buying products.
> 
> Instead these people went for the false promises of Trump that have no basis of working in reality.  Jobs will not come back, there's no means to make them come back.  Coal is a dying industry and the sooner the better.  The working/middle class needs to adapt to the realities of the 21st century.  Not try to hold onto 1950s economy which simple will not work.


That didn't resonate with those people because they have heard the "job re-training" joke coming from Democrats for nearly 30 years now.

Biden makes a valid point though I imagine I know why he makes it: reports are that he very much wanted to run for President this time around but Hillary and her people strong-armed him out.

She may have had policies that claimed to address their concerns but they were at the margins of her campaign and some of them didn't resonate anyway, for good reason. A good academic study was done on this confirming Biden's criticism as valid. She ran a negative campaign focused on Trump and his personality to extreme, unprecedented levels for a Presidential candidate. Even more than the Rove/Bush campaigns.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Sep 8, 2017)

Nemesis said:


> She fucking did address the middle and working classes.  It's that the boring but realistic approach was fucking rejected by middle america in the states she would have won if things were like any other election.
> 
> She brought up things like education of people within these groups to bring them into the 21st century work force since coal and a ton of industries are simply dead in the US because the US worker needs wages that would essentially price the same classes out of buying products.
> 
> Instead these people went for the false promises of Trump that have no basis of working in reality.  Jobs will not come back, there's no means to make them come back.  Coal is a dying industry and the sooner the better.  The working/middle class needs to adapt to the realities of the 21st century.  Not try to hold onto 1950s economy which simple will not work.



It all goes back to "what they want to hear" and "reaffirming their beliefs".  For middle Americans, who evidently based a crucial foundation of their well-being on coal mines and pre-existing jobs, from what I'm hearing here, they didn't want to hear things such as "better education"; what they wanted was their coal mines back, with Trump being the candidate that told them 'what they want to hear'.


----------



## EJ (Sep 8, 2017)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> No, we'd just go thru ~4 years of the SJW Orc Horde squealing even louder than before.
> 
> To be honest, we were pretty much boned either way.



Despite everything, I believe Hillary Clinton and the Democrats would had still done better than Trump. From a legislature and foreign policy perspective, and the economy.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 8, 2017)

Look how triggered all of you get over me saying Hillary does have some blame to lay on Bernie. And it's funny how you claim she wasn't liked by the general population when she won the popular vote by millions. The problem isn't feminists. The problem is straight white people being triggered over losing their upper hand in society. Every white group voted for Trump. White women, men, and millennials. Two of these groups voting against their own interests.

As for the voters who switched from Sanders to Trump, they must not have wanted any of the shit that Sanders stood for. They went from one old white man claiming to be an outsider to another old white man claiming to be an outsider. The Hillary voters that went from Hillary to McCain still must not have supported Hillary's real platform.

The U.S. has a problem with women and minorities. Rep me or bitch at me all you want, but all these white power riots going are showing a serious problem in this country and this problem has been here for a long time. And it's the problem that's more dangerous than Islamic terrorism or "feminism" (which isn't a problem unless you're an insecure little punk).

And that shit's coming home to roost.

Reactions: Funny 1 | Neutral 1 | Disagree 2 | Optimistic 2 | Sad! 2 | Dislike 1


----------



## EJ (Sep 8, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Look how triggered all of you get over me saying Hillary does have some blame to lay on Bernie. And it's funny how you claim she wasn't liked by the general population when she won the popular vote by millions. The problem isn't feminists. The problem is straight white people being triggered over losing their upper hand in society. Every white group voted for Trump. White women, men, and millennials. Two of these groups voting against their own interests.
> 
> As for the voters who switched from Sanders to Trump, they must not have wanted any of the shit that Sanders stood for. They went from one old white man claiming to be an outsider to another old white man claiming to be an outsider. The Hillary voters that went from Hillary to McCain still must not have supported Hillary's real platform.
> 
> ...




Funny how you switch from "Hillary lost because Sanders didn't drop out earlier! If he had done so and hadn't attacked her, we wouldn't be in this mess! "

to

"Well, if the country wasn't so racist/misogynist, then she would had won!"

Never Hillary Clinton's fault, huh


And while yes, a lot of Trump supporters are racist/misogynist (I believe it's more than what people try to downplay it as), a lot of counties and districts that voted for Obama overwhelmingly twice, SWITCHED to Donald Trump. 

It's extremely complicated, and you can't paint a broad brush over it.


----------



## EJ (Sep 8, 2017)

This is bad man. Upon the release of this book and it's faults that people are already finding depending on what she says the Democratic Party and other Progressives have to do away with Hillary Clinton. If she's still as relevant as she is today a year from now without meeting much opposition from the Democratic Party and how she ran her 2016 election the Republicans are going to have another two years into 2020.


----------



## Heart Over Blade (Sep 8, 2017)

I was going to say we might need to outsource the Hillary shilling after two of them woke up and dropped out. Looks like people are already lining up to fill the void.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Ashi (Sep 8, 2017)

afgpride said:


> If you're implying I said that then that's a pretty odd strawman.  I never said sensible social justice doesn't exist, I said that it's not the majority which you're claiming it is. The people I categorize as SJW's are *rampant* in pop culture, yet you're insisting they're a fringe minority in the overall efforts of social justice advocacy.  If they were such a minor element in the grand struggle of social justice, why are they so widely accepted everywhere in the left wing mainstream?  Why, from pop culture to academia to social media to politics are these alleged fringed elements kowtowed to constantly?  Is Anita Sarkeesian a random nutcase that shouldn't be taken seriously?  Well she dons a spot at YouTube, is taken seriously by Google as a consultant, was worshiped at TEDx as an intellectual heavyweight and champion of feminism and given a standing ovation on Colbert.  You think extreme social constructionism is just a strawman in the wider advocacy umbrella of non binary rights?  Well it's already canon in gender studies across academia and already signed into law in Canada and parts of the United States.  Bill Nye the science guy also did a segment peddling it in his latest show.  Do you think Black Lives Matter is an innocent group who just happens to have a few bad apples?  Well take a look at their co founders, present leaders and decorated history of shutting down events like the gay pride parade to compete in the privilege Olympics.  Do you think feminist hypocrisy is just some random fringe element in the greater struggle for women's rights?  Well take a look at who organized the massive Women's March, one of which was Linda Sarsour, a Muslim apologist who thinks people complaining about women not being able to drive in Saudi Arabia are stupid because they get a lot of paid maternity leave so it cancels out.  A comically hypocritical charlatan that speaks in a Brooklyn accent wearing her hijab telling her feminist friends how progressive Islam is, as she gets invited to The Young Turks and has her feet kissed by Bernie Sanders.  You think safe spaces and trigger warnings are fringe elements of social justice?  Explain then why nearly every historically left leaning university has them now, and why many tech companies are incorporating them into their business.  Microaggressions aren't are real social justice platform?  Guess the thousands of major businesses they convinced to strike down on them don't exist.  Manspreading is only shit they whine about on tumblr?  It's signed into law in Spain with legal punishment.
> 
> I don't wanna hear this "retool the message you're trying to send" business if you're still stuck in denial over the state of social discourse in the world right now.  I gave you examples from every level of mainstream society, from social media to academia to mainstream media to politics, where your alleged _minority_ activists dominate the thought and reform of left leaning institutions.  At best, they'll have their interests co-opted and supported.  At worst, they'll get a polite nod without a follow up.
> 
> ...



Is your mission in life to become a copypasta?


----------



## Raiden (Sep 8, 2017)

Hillary just keeps hitting all the wrong places with her moves. It's the same exact problem as the election. I just watched a video about her, and it's stunning to hear just how much she talks about herself.

I understand the frustration though. Democrats had an entirely winnable race on their hands.


----------



## quicksilver (Sep 8, 2017)

Flow said:


> This is bad man. Upon the release of this book and it's faults that people are already finding depending on what she says the Democratic Party and other Progressives have to do away with Hillary Clinton. If she's still as relevant as she is today a year from now without meeting much opposition from the Democratic Party and how she ran her 2016 election the Republicans are going to have another two years into 2020.



The Clinton wing is still in full control of the Democratic party. The highest elected Democrats are Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. The DNC chair is a Clintonite. They will absolutely nominate another of their own for 2020, and I think they'll possibly only learn their lesson after Trump wipes them again.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 8, 2017)

silverflash said:


> The Clinton wing is still in full control of the Democratic party. The highest elected Democrats are Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. The DNC chair is a Clintonite. They will absolutely nominate another of their own for 2020, and I think they'll possibly only learn their lesson after Trump wipes them again.


If Trump decides to run away that is. He absolutely despises the job.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 8, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Look how triggered all of you get over me saying Hillary does have some blame to lay on Bernie. And it's funny how you claim she wasn't liked by the general population when she won the popular vote by millions. The problem isn't feminists. The problem is straight white people being triggered over losing their upper hand in society. Every white group voted for Trump. White women, men, and millennials. Two of these groups voting against their own interests.
> 
> As for the voters who switched from Sanders to Trump, they must not have wanted any of the shit that Sanders stood for. They went from one old white man claiming to be an outsider to another old white man claiming to be an outsider. The Hillary voters that went from Hillary to McCain still must not have supported Hillary's real platform.
> 
> ...



No she doesn't, and you defeat your argument acknowledging her gaining in the popular vote. What cost her the election is the Rust Belt, she did not campaign sufficiently in that region. The electoral votes for those states came down to a few districts. Nationally, most Bernie supporters voted for Hillary, and more chose to abstain than vote for Trump. What's also funny is that in 2008 about 1 in 4 Hillary supporters went for McCain over Obama, but he still managed to win not only the popular vote but the electoral college of course. It all ultimately boiled down to the quality of the candidate, and she is pathetic in trying to shift the blame and so are you for buying into it.

What's even dumber about your rant is that Hillary LOST the white, blue-collar worker in comparison to Obama that performed even better than she did in both his election and re-election campaigns. Which is ironic, because during the primaries she tried to present herself as someone that had the appeal to those white blue-collar workers that Obama did not. Which at the time was a blatant appeal to the fact that he was "different", but he still managed to beat her out in the end despite her tactics. 

Which once again, goes to the point I made before, it is about the quality of the candidate. Hillary was a low-quality candidate. 

The vast minority actually support that white nationalist bullshit. They are a present, and very vocal minority of course. There are communities acting as incubators for them, needless to say. Yet you also know what doesn't help that shit out? Is that hateful strain of feminism, is that social justice bullshit that you ascribe to that paints wide condemnation on white people, that hypocritical racism and sexism while trying to preach about equality. 

Demonstrably, Islamic terrorism is more dangerous. Right-wing terrorism has the most occurrences, but the second most number of casualty in the United States. A lot of those feminists of that hateful strain have begun to embrace ever more radical ideologies, some even affiliating or sympathizing with antifa. That is a problem.

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 8, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Look how triggered all of you get over me saying Hillary does have some blame to lay on Bernie. And it's funny how you claim she wasn't liked by the general population when she won the popular vote by millions. The problem isn't feminists. The problem is straight white people being triggered over losing their upper hand in society. Every white group voted for Trump. White women, men, and millennials. Two of these groups voting against their own interests.
> 
> As for the voters who switched from Sanders to Trump, they must not have wanted any of the shit that Sanders stood for. They went from one old white man claiming to be an outsider to another old white man claiming to be an outsider. The Hillary voters that went from Hillary to McCain still must not have supported Hillary's real platform.
> 
> ...


Aren't you nearly 40? And your world-view is identical to a 12 year-old Tumblr kid. 

Why don't you reflect on that and consider reading a book or two?

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Roman (Sep 8, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Look how triggered all of you get over me saying Hillary does have some blame to lay on Bernie. And it's funny how you claim she wasn't liked by the general population when she won the popular vote by millions. The problem isn't feminists. The problem is straight white people being triggered over losing their upper hand in society. Every white group voted for Trump. White women, men, and millennials. Two of these groups voting against their own interests.
> 
> As for the voters who switched from Sanders to Trump, they must not have wanted any of the shit that Sanders stood for. They went from one old white man claiming to be an outsider to another old white man claiming to be an outsider. The Hillary voters that went from Hillary to McCain still must not have supported Hillary's real platform.
> 
> ...



Explain exactly what Hillary has that she can feasibly blame on Sanders. The fact that he didn't drop out soon enough? Please. Like Seto said, you defeat your own argument by acknowledging she won the popular vote. What really stopped her from winning the electoral vote was failing to properly campaign in regions outside those she focused on and targeting a wider range of voters. She lost because she put all her eggs in one basket and left Trump free to take the rest.

And yes, there were voter groups who went against their own interest. Have you ever heard of protest votes? That's what they were. They didn't vote for Trump because they legitimately believed in him and his policies. It was a vote against Hillary, not a vote for Trump.

Misogyny and racism are considerable issue, I agree, but it's been blown way out of proportion by extreme feminists (those I ironically refer to as feminazis, before @Inuhanyou and @Normality get their panties in a bunch) who make up a large portion of feminists today, the type that want to effectively silence white males under the pretext that virtually all of them are racist and/or sexist. Hillary and her supporters who claim racism and misogyny are what lead to her defeat exacerbates the problem and give the toxic portion of the feminist and sjw community more fuel to start a fire.

You wish for equality between genders and races? Don't marginalize one side claiming all who fit under a certain description are like what some of who fit that description are. All that leads to is that side marginalizing yours in turn.



erictheking said:


> Aren't you nearly 40?



Seriously?


----------



## Atem (Sep 8, 2017)

I voted for neither.

I wanted Bernie Sanders to be my president, and if I couldn't have him I wasn't about to be served an ultimatum between a turd sandwich and a giant douche.

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## Nemesis (Sep 8, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> It all goes back to "what they want to hear" and "reaffirming their beliefs".  For middle Americans, who evidently based a crucial foundation of their well-being on coal mines and pre-existing jobs, from what I'm hearing here, they didn't want to hear things such as "better education"; what they wanted was their coal mines back, with Trump being the candidate that told them 'what they want to hear'.



Then there is a problem that needs to be addressed.  How do you put in a 21st century economy if too many states keep voting against it for what is essentially self defeating supidity to the point of outright insanity.

If you lie then you're basically fucked.  If you tell the truth you're not getting elected.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 8, 2017)

Nemesis said:


> Then there is a problem that needs to be addressed.  How do you put in a 21st century economy if too many states keep voting against it for what is essentially self defeating supidity to the point of outright insanity.
> 
> If you lie then you're basically fucked.  If you tell the truth you're not getting elected.


If you're willing to do what it takes to empower the economically deprived population, like Bernie Sanders was, then you can tell the truth and win. Like he would have done, easily. 

If you are unwilling to do what it takes, then of course you have to lie to win. Like Trump. Hillary tried to lie, she is just terrible at doing so persuasively.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Breadman (Sep 8, 2017)

Soma Cruz said:


> I voted for neither.
> 
> I wanted Bernie Sanders to be my president, and if I couldn't have him I wasn't about to be served an ultimatum between a turd sandwich and a giant douche.



DON'T YOU GET IT?!

DON'T YOU GET HOW INCREDIBLY STUPID YOU ARE FOR NOT VOTING FOR THE TURD SANDWICH?!

NOT VOTING FOR THE TURD SANDWICH IS A VOTE FOR THE GIANT DOUCHE.

IT'S YOUR FAULT MY MOUTH TASTES SO BAD-GHSAFLJKADFHLK *inane keyboard head smashing*


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 8, 2017)

erictheking said:


> Aren't you nearly 40? And your world-view is identical to a 12 year-old Tumblr kid.
> 
> Why don't you reflect on that and consider reading a book or two?


If by nearly forty you mean 9 years from forty? Then yeah. That's nearly forty. 

This place is just all over sanders's cock and it shows by how people act about the guy. Some people are still pulling their "not voting was the best choice" bullshit. 

And keep whining about tumblr and all the other SJW boogie man stories. It looks pretty fucking foolish when we got a president claiming there are good people among Nazis and pardoning a blatant racist who violates constitutional rights of others.


----------



## Chelydra (Sep 8, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> If by nearly forty you mean 9 years from forty? Then yeah. That's nearly forty.
> 
> This place is just all over sanders's cock and it shows by how people act about the guy. Some people are still pulling their "not voting was the best choice" bullshit.
> 
> And keep whining about tumblr and all the other SJW boogie man stories. It looks pretty fucking foolish when we got a president claiming there are good people among Nazis and pardoning a blatant racist who violates constitutional rights of others.



I'm glad Arapio was pardoned, people are fed up with illegal aliens so blatantly violating our laws.

Reactions: Like 2 | Dislike 1


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Sep 8, 2017)

*Guide to getting any candidate you want into the white house, regardless of in-party consensus:*​

Step 1: Get a bunch of people to register Democrat with the false impression that they'll get to choose their own nominee.
Step 2: Choose a nominee for them.
Step 3: Hold them at gunpoint and say if they don't vote for "the chosen one" then the other bad guy will get into office.  Repeat the phrase "lesser of two evils".
Step 4: Enjoy your chosen candidate in the white house.

_Note: if step 4 fails, make sure to guilt and shame everyone that didn't vote for your manufactured candidate so that if the situation pops up again in the future (which it will), they'll be more likely to play along._​

Here's a neat list of corporately purchased robots to choose in your skip-the-filter system:
-Cory Booker
-Hillary Clinton (run it back mama!)
-Tim Kaine
-Chelsea Clinton (if Hillary can't rule Westeros herself, she can at least do it through her daughter!)
-Wall Street A.I. Android #812
-John Podesta

Take your pick.  Remember, you don't have to actually choose someone that will mobilize your party the most.  You can choose anyone your little heart desires, provided they can be advertised as less-bad than the other person once you usher them to the generals by force.

Good luck!

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 8, 2017)

Chelydra said:


> I'm glad Arapio was pardoned, people are fed up with illegal aliens so blatantly violating our laws.



What makes this funnier is that I watched Sargon's video which showed ANTIFA most likely started the massive chaos in the first place and the Alt Right got blamed for alone.
Of course, doesn't excuse the death that happened on the Alt Right's side, but it's fucked up if that is what Trump looked at before making his statement that both sides are at fault, then the media really should have been slammed for their blatant bias.


----------



## Breadman (Sep 8, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> If by nearly forty you mean 9 years from forty? Then yeah. That's nearly forty.
> 
> This place is just all over sanders's cock and it shows by how people act about the guy. *Some people are still pulling their "not voting was the best choice" bullshit. *
> 
> And keep whining about tumblr and all the other SJW boogie man stories. It looks pretty fucking foolish when we got a president claiming there are good people among Nazis and pardoning a blatant racist who violates constitutional rights of others.



Can you please highlight out of the shit choices we had which one was best then? Because it seems that the US voters were doomed if they did, and doomed if they didn't.


----------



## Ghost_of_Gashir (Sep 8, 2017)

Almost a year later and Hillary still doesn't get it.

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## baconbits (Sep 8, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> This is entertaing but admittedly, very concerning. The fact that she refuses to let go and even take full and proper responsibility is going to undermine Democratic efforts as a whole. Let's be real here, it doesn't matter if they get it together if this fucking torpedo named "Hillary Clinton" is going on her ego trip still, and bring their ship down to the bottom of the sea, because she's going to drag a significant portion of the base down with her.



I don't think so.  The Clintons have always been very preoccupied with their public image.  Her trying to point fingers at a guy who most likely won't even run again will do very little to hurt the Democrats' chances.  In the end they'll rise or fall based on their candidate and his or her specific appeal to the voters.

If in-fighting would kill your chances Trump wouldn't have won because he starts a new feud every other week with someone on his side of the aisle.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 8, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> If by nearly forty you mean 9 years from forty? Then yeah. That's nearly forty.
> 
> This place is just all over sanders's cock and it shows by how people act about the guy. Some people are still pulling their "not voting was the best choice" bullshit.
> 
> And keep whining about tumblr and all the other SJW boogie man stories. It looks pretty fucking foolish when we got a president claiming there are good people among Nazis and pardoning a blatant racist who violates constitutional rights of others.



Such a lazy, slackjawed response. As if criticism of feminists and SJWs have excluded criticism of the far-right. Are you just dumb or something or did you miss the countless threads criticizing Trump and the right?

You stupidly keep going back to that as if you have a point or something.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 8, 2017)



Reactions: Funny 4


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Sep 8, 2017)

How dare this straight white male go on national television and say we should focus on what's happening now instead of the past.  I'M LITERALLY SHAKING RIGHT NOW.  WHITE STRAIGHT MEN MAKE ME SO MAD.  IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT WE DON'T HAVE A WOMEN PRESIDENT YOU CIS HETEROSEXUAL WHITE UTERUS-NEGATIVE SLIME.

Reactions: Agree 3 | Funny 6 | Winner 1


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 8, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> If by nearly forty you mean 9 years from forty? Then yeah. That's nearly forty.
> 
> This place is just all over sanders's cock and it shows by how people act about the guy. Some people are still pulling their "not voting was the best choice" bullshit.
> 
> And keep whining about tumblr and all the other SJW boogie man stories. It looks pretty fucking foolish when we got a president claiming there are good people among Nazis and pardoning a blatant racist who violates constitutional rights of others.


Still old enough to know better than a kid aren't you? 

Kids can't be wrong because Trump is a bad guy. Impeccable logic.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 8, 2017)

erictheking said:


>



Damn. First I realize rachel bloom is the woman in the terrible bill nye saves the world skit. Now jen kirkman.

Rough week.


----------



## Atem (Sep 8, 2017)

Yoshua said:


> DON'T YOU GET IT?!
> 
> DON'T YOU GET HOW INCREDIBLY STUPID YOU ARE FOR NOT VOTING FOR THE TURD SANDWICH?!
> 
> ...



It's not my fault for anything. I don't participate in an election, or any sort of event that I know is rigged from the start in the favor of people I don't want to win. If the system is broken, and unfairly biased towards people who don't deserve to be the president? What is wrong is participating in such a sham, and giving it any sort of legitimacy. You don't accept something like that, and simply begrudgingly become part of the problem. That apathy is what caused the election to turn out the way it did, and no refusing to vote because of how much of a joke the election was is not apathy. It's realizing that you were not being served an actual choice, and only being held at gunpoint to forcibly choose between two people who don't deserve to sit in the Oval Office.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 8, 2017)

Soma Cruz said:


> It's not my fault for anything. I don't participate in an election, or any sort of event that I know is rigged from the start in the favor of people I don't want to win. If the system is broken, and unfairly biased towards people who don't deserve to be the president? What is wrong is participating in such a sham, and giving it any sort of legitimacy. You don't accept something like that, and simply begrudgingly become part of the problem. That apathy is what caused the election to turn out the way it did, and no refusing to vote because of how much of a joke the election was is not apathy. It's realizing that you were not being served an actual choice, and only being held at gunpoint to forcibly choose between two people who don't deserve to sit in the Oval Office.



He was just being sarcastic there, he wasn't trying to attack you.


----------



## Atem (Sep 8, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> He was just being sarcastic there, he wasn't trying to attack you.



Alright then.

I don't exactly know him so I wasn't sure.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 8, 2017)

Soma Cruz said:


> It's not my fault for anything. I don't participate in an election, or any sort of event that I know is rigged from the start in the favor of people I don't want to win. If the system is broken, and unfairly biased towards people who don't deserve to be the president? What is wrong is participating in such a sham, and giving it any sort of legitimacy. You don't accept something like that, and simply begrudgingly become part of the problem. That apathy is what caused the election to turn out the way it did, and no refusing to vote because of how much of a joke the election was is not apathy. It's realizing that you were not being served an actual choice, and only being held at gunpoint to forcibly choose between two people who don't deserve to sit in the Oval Office.



I didn't vote either, but I understand the cynicism about abstaining. No election will be perfect. Every election will dig up dirt on the candidates and give people excuses to mistrust everybody. There's a level of maturity citizens should have about this. You shouldn't need perfect people to vote. One of the two candidates will intersect with your values more than the other even if they're both absolute maniacs. Imagine employment in a small town where only a few places are hiring; just because you find problems in your options doesn't mean the solution is to stay unemployed. Work with what you have.

Unrelated, but I had a guy get mad at me for not voting. He went on about my generation being spoiled and dispassionate and suchandsuch and soandso. So I asked him who the governor was. He didn't know. He never votes in local elections.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 9, 2017)

Hillary used Hether hayer's name in an ad to promote her new book  hether hayer voted Bernie in the virginia primary and abstained from voting in the general because she thought hillary and trump were both shit

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 9, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> Hillary used Hether hayer's name in an ad to promote her new book  hether hayer voted Bernie in the virginia primary and abstained from voting in the general because she thought hillary and trump were both shit



are you serious?


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 9, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> are you serious?



Link removed


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 9, 2017)

Inuhanyou said:


> Hillary used Hether hayer's name in an ad to promote her new book  hether hayer voted Bernie in the virginia primary and abstained from voting in the general because she thought hillary and trump were both shit





Inuhanyou said:


> Link removed



Jesus Christ...
She's fucking deplorable at this point.


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Sep 9, 2017)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> And keep whining about tumblr and all the other SJW boogie man stories. It looks pretty fucking foolish when we got a president claiming there are good people among Nazis and pardoning a blatant racist who violates constitutional rights of others.


Boogie man? Do conservatives and libertarians exprees their opinions as freely in the workplace as others? Did every white public figure under the sun got accused of being a racist recently? Do we have 3 years op ed after op ed from mainstream outlets about the supposed lameness of the white devils? Do we have companies going kamikaze for Social Justice? Any evidence that Arpaio thinks whites are superior because of their genes?


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 9, 2017)



Reactions: Funny 3


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 9, 2017)

The woman is so clueless. She just doesnt get it.

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## GRIMMM (Sep 9, 2017)

erictheking said:


>




Fucking crybaby.

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 9, 2017)

Normality said:


> The woman is so clueless. She just doesnt get it.



She's not clueless; she's in deepshit denial in a place where the sun never shines.

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Amol (Sep 9, 2017)

I don't get the self patting by those who didn't vote for anybody. See you are entitled for your opinion that both sides were shit but you are not helping democracy by not voting in election that matters.
The way I see you lose any right to whine about politicians if you are not using right to vote . Abstaining is not some praise worthy thing to do. It is actually quite the opposite.
So I honestly don't get proud posts that says 'I didn't vote for anyone'. That only makes you part of the problem. A very big and serious problem.

Reactions: Agree 2 | Disagree 2


----------



## EJ (Sep 9, 2017)

Amol said:


> I don't get the self patting by those who didn't vote for anybody. See you are entitled for your opinion that both sides were shit but you are not helping democracy by not voting in election that matters.
> The way I see you lose any right to whine about politicians if you are not using right to vote . Abstaining is not some praise worthy thing to do. It is actually quite the opposite.
> So I honestly don't get proud posts that says 'I didn't vote for anyone'. That only makes you part of the problem. A very big and serious problem.


 More fault should always be towards the political system and candidates though. I'm not proud of not voting even if I knew my state would go to Hillary. Still should had out of principle. Never again will that happen. I will vote third party if I have to to make my voice heard.


----------



## Mider T (Sep 9, 2017)

She's a true inspiration, I hope she runs for Governor If Biden decides to run for President.

Reactions: Funny 1 | Dislike 1


----------



## Drake (Sep 9, 2017)

Amol said:


> I don't get the self patting by those who didn't vote for anybody. See you are entitled for your opinion that both sides were shit but you are not helping democracy by not voting in election that matters.
> The way I see you lose any right to whine about politicians if you are not using right to vote . Abstaining is not some praise worthy thing to do. It is actually quite the opposite.
> So I honestly don't get proud posts that says 'I didn't vote for anyone'. That only makes you part of the problem. A very big and serious problem.



It only makes sense if you truly do not see a difference between Trump and Clinton, but I doubt that holds true for many people.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 9, 2017)

Amol said:


> I don't get the self patting by those who didn't vote for anybody. See you are entitled for your opinion that both sides were shit but you are not helping democracy by not voting in election that matters.
> The way I see you lose any right to whine about politicians if you are not using right to vote . Abstaining is not some praise worthy thing to do. It is actually quite the opposite.
> So I honestly don't get proud posts that says 'I didn't vote for anyone'. That only makes you part of the problem. A very big and serious problem.



People are tired of corrupt politicians and choosing between bad and worse. That's human to feel that way.

It doesnt help that most HRC supporters get salty if you even mention the possibility of a lesser of two evils scenario. "HOW DARE YOU SAY NEOLIBERALS LIKE HRC ARE EVIL AT ALL!? THEY ARE THE BEST AND NEVER DID ANYTHING WRONG EVER YOU SEXIST RACIST!"


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 9, 2017)

It also dont help that these HRC supporters like Joan Walsh and Joy Ann Reid are nothing but garbage themselves, constantly shitting on poor people to help their own arguments, and will shit on minorities when they feel they need to in order to help their flawed logic while proclaiming themselves "social justice advocates". that's what i think it takes to be considered a full on SJW myself


----------



## Breadman (Sep 9, 2017)

Amol said:


> I don't get the self patting by those who didn't vote for anybody. See you are entitled for your opinion that both sides were shit but you are not helping democracy by not voting in election that matters.
> The way I see you lose any right to whine about politicians if you are not using right to vote . Abstaining is not some praise worthy thing to do. It is actually quite the opposite.
> So I honestly don't get proud posts that says 'I didn't vote for anyone'. That only makes you part of the problem. A very big and serious problem.



You're given two buttons. One will kill one million black people at random, the other will kill one million asian people at random. You can choose not to press either button, but then someone else will choose for you.

What do you do?

Reactions: Creative 1 | Dislike 1


----------



## EJ (Sep 9, 2017)

Yoshua said:


> You're given two buttons. One will kill one million black people at random, the other will kill one million asian people at random. You can choose not to press either button, but then someone else will choose for you.
> 
> What do you do?


 Terrible example.


----------



## Breadman (Sep 9, 2017)

Flow said:


> Terrible example.



Care to elaborate in order to help me understand and learn from my mistake?


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 9, 2017)

Amol said:


> I don't get the self patting by those who didn't vote for anybody. See you are entitled for your opinion that both sides were shit but you are not helping democracy by not voting in election that matters.
> The way I see you lose any right to whine about politicians if you are not using right to vote . Abstaining is not some praise worthy thing to do. It is actually quite the opposite.
> So I honestly don't get proud posts that says 'I didn't vote for anyone'. That only makes you part of the problem. A very big and serious problem.



Okay sure, when we have 2 candidates that I never wanted and the one I wanted(Bernie Sanders) never stood a damn chance, why should I vote for a snake an someone who shouldn't even be in the running?
Could I have voted for Third Party? Sure. Was there any point? No as with the Democrats and Republicans having such strong holds, no Third Party would ever even be close by comparison.

As Flow stated, it's all on the process for even allowing this to happen.


----------



## Nemesis (Sep 9, 2017)

Xhominid said:


> Okay sure, when we have 2 candidates that I never wanted and the one I wanted(Bernie Sanders) never stood a damn chance, why should I vote for a snake an someone who shouldn't even be in the running?
> Could I have voted for Third Party? Sure. Was there any point? No as with the Democrats and Republicans having such strong holds, no Third Party would ever even be close by comparison.
> 
> As Flow stated, it's all on the process for even allowing this to happen.



It's called FPTP system.  Unless you're going to turn into PR system of voting suck it up bucko and vote for the person who is closer to your views in the political world.  Even if that person is Satan. D. Luficer and the person against is Usama Bin Laden.

Until you as a country (not you personally) are going to push for a change in the voting system you're going to have that choice every 4 years.  In most places in the UK it's the same, it's shit.  We at least have been trying to change it.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Sep 9, 2017)

Amol said:


> I don't get the self patting by those who didn't vote for anybody. See you are entitled for your opinion that both sides were shit but you are not helping democracy by not voting in election that matters.
> The way I see you lose any right to whine about politicians if you are not using right to vote . Abstaining is not some praise worthy thing to do. It is actually quite the opposite.
> So I honestly don't get proud posts that says 'I didn't vote for anyone'. That only makes you part of the problem. A very big and serious problem.


You can't try to condemn people for not voting and then justify yourself by saying it's not worthy of praise.  That's like yelling at someone for not donating to charity and then justifying yourself by saying it's not a heroic thing to do.  You're on opposite extremes in disposition and explanation.  Something doesn't have to be the best thing in the world or the worst thing in the world and no inbetween.  It can be neutral. 

The fact of the matter is that voting is:
1. Optional 
2. Restricted 
3. An act of endorsement 

Unless you think voting should be mandatory, you have no business chastising people for not going out of their way to endorse someone they hate.

Reactions: Agree 1 | Winner 4


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 10, 2017)

Nemesis said:


> It's called FPTP system.  Unless you're going to turn into PR system of voting suck it up bucko and vote for the person who is closer to your views in the political world.  Even if that person is Satan. D. Luficer and the person against is Usama Bin Laden.
> 
> Until you as a country (not you personally) are going to push for a change in the voting system you're going to have that choice every 4 years.  In most places in the UK it's the same, it's shit.  We at least have been trying to change it.



And I also have the choice by not voting at all, simple as that.


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Sep 10, 2017)

Amol said:


> I don't get the self patting by those who didn't vote for anybody. See you are entitled for your opinion that both sides were shit but you are not helping democracy by not voting in election that matters.
> The way I see you lose any right to whine about politicians if you are not using right to vote . Abstaining is not some praise worthy thing to do. It is actually quite the opposite.
> So I honestly don't get proud posts that says 'I didn't vote for anyone'. That only makes you part of the problem. A very big and serious problem.


Voters are not part of the problem? Why?


----------



## Amol (Sep 10, 2017)

Flow said:


> More fault should always be towards the political system and candidates though. I'm not proud of not voting even if I knew my state would go to Hillary. Still should had out of principle. Never again will that happen. I will vote third party if I have to to make my voice heard.


My post was in general nature even if reference point was American Presidential Election .
And you are right , more blame should rightfully on system and candidates. I wasn't trying to put all the blame on voters. Simply that voting is THE most essential thing in Democracy, not doing it is basically choking the functioning of democracy.
Sometimes I wonder maybe it is time America abolishes two party system. Multi Party system gives lot of choices to voter .
But that is upto you americans and I don't know what consensus is on this matter. 


Drake said:


> It only makes sense if you truly do not see a difference between Trump and Clinton, but I doubt that holds true for many people.


My argument isn't much about candidates themselves that the process. When you are surrounded by bad choices you have to choose the least bad one you can think. That is how it works in democracy. This is one of the flaw of democracy I guess. 


Inuhanyou said:


> People are tired of corrupt politicians and choosing between bad and worse. That's human to feel that way.
> 
> It doesnt help that most HRC supporters get salty if you even mention the possibility of a lesser of two evils scenario. "HOW DARE YOU SAY NEOLIBERALS LIKE HRC ARE EVIL AT ALL!? THEY ARE THE BEST AND NEVER DID ANYTHING WRONG EVER YOU SEXIST RACIST!"


Again I was speaking in generally.
See if both choices given to you are bad then , choice of not voting is also bad . That is all I am saying.
You can't get tired with democracy.
If you want merit based system where candidate is actually capable person then you have to go with china style communism.



Yoshua said:


> You're given two buttons. One will kill one million black people at random, the other will kill one million asian people at random. You can choose not to press either button, but then someone else will choose for you.
> 
> What do you do?


Such a terrible example.
I almost wasn't going to dignify it with reply .
From your own terrible example not voting would be killing one million people at random .
Which is basically crest of my argument. Not voting is not good choice in itself. 


afgpride said:


> You can't try to condemn people for not voting and then justify yourself by saying it's not worthy of praise.  That's like yelling at someone for not donating to charity and then justifying yourself by saying it's not a heroic thing to do.  You're on opposite extremes in disposition and explanation.  Something doesn't have to be the best thing in the world or the worst thing in the world and no inbetween.  It can be neutral.
> 
> The fact of the matter is that voting is:
> 1. Optional
> ...


What are you even talking about? 
I was berating those people who were chest thumping about how they didn't vote at all. My 'praise' comment means they somehow believes that by not voting at all they did some good thing and should be praised .
I am not talking about best thing or worst thing here . I have absolutely no idea how you took that from my post .
I am arguing that not voting is also a terrible choice. I am not blaming people for it. I understand why they did that. I just want them to acknowledge that to avoid two terrible choices they chose third terrible option. The mentality where people starts to think that not voting is good thing is toxic for very foundation of democracy. How or whom people want to vote is completely upto them, I just wanted them to understand what not voting really means .
Basically if you don't like any candidate and don't want to vote?
Fine that is your right .
Just acknowledge that it is also a terrible choice and nothing to be proud off.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Sep 10, 2017)

Amol said:


> What are you even talking about?
> I was berating those people who were chest thumping about how they didn't vote at all. My 'praise' comment means they somehow believes that by not voting at all they did some good thing and should be praised .
> I am not talking about best thing or worst thing here . I have absolutely no idea how you took that from my post .


Because people generally don't actually ask to be praised for not voting.  If they did in this thread I must've missed it, care to point it out for me?



> I am arguing that not voting is also a terrible choice. I am not blaming people for it. I understand why they did that. I just want them to acknowledge that to avoid two terrible choices they chose third terrible option. The mentality where people starts to think that not voting is good thing is toxic for very foundation of democracy. How or whom people want to vote is completely upto them, I just wanted them to understand what not voting really means .
> Basically if you don't like any candidate and don't want to vote?
> Fine that is your right .
> Just acknowledge that it is also a terrible choice and nothing to be proud off.


I don't entirely disagree with everything you said, but you make it seem like voting for someone you don't agree with is categorically productive.

Here's an idea.

America is a partisan system ONLY because the GOP and DNC are powerful institutions.  Not because the country spontaneously comes to a consensus on two candidates every general election.  When it comes to the DNC in particular, they have the power to choose a nominee in spite of public interest.  That means even if a candidate gets obliterated in the primaries, if the DNC wants them as their nominee they can simply make it so.

Why is this important?  Because once that nominee makes it to the generals, there's a guilt tripping narrative toward everyone on that side of the political spectrum to vote for them, so that the lesser of the evils can proceed.  People are shamed and pressured into choosing that candidate on those grounds.

So

From a Democratic voter's perspective,
1. Vote for nominee
2. Your nominee gets rejected with or without majority vote or a fair primary
3. You're obliged to vote for a nominee you hate, lest someone worse get into power

Under this system big corporations and powerful political bodies can usher in whatever candidate they want to the general election.  They can dissuade big name candidates from running with threats of political ostracizing, they can override public vote with super delegates, and then they can mobilize half of the country to vote for their chosen candidate under the banner of "voting is better than not voting, lesser of the evils is better than worst of the evils".


Hence, voting just to vote perpetuates this system.  That action is exactly what allows it to flourish.  *That doesn't mean not-voting is a good decision*.  Trump is in power, after all.  All it means is that going out and voting isn't automatically productive in the grand scheme of things.  It has its pros and cons, especially in the corporate farce of the United States.  From the standpoint of shaming and whining, I'm of the opinion that the finger should be pointed away from absentees and toward the democratic establishment.  They are the ones who alienated a large chunk of their base, shoving them aside while demanding they go out and wave their banner.  They are the ones who pushed for an unpopular candidate.  It's not the job of the public to go vote in whoever THEY want, it's their job to mobilize their base.  They failed miserably on that front.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 2 | Winner 1


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 10, 2017)

Amol said:


> Again I was speaking in generally.
> See if both choices given to you are bad then , choice of not voting is also bad . That is all I am saying.
> You can't get tired with democracy.
> If you want merit based system where candidate is actually capable person then you have to go with china style communism.
> .



we do not have a democracy in america, we have an oligachy. the most powerful corrupt individuals get far more coverage, pushes and disproportionate support, and you must choose between two candidates from a very rigid two party structure that the system forces together.

there are more independents among elegible voters than dems or republicans, most independents cant even vote in republican or democratic primaries because of the rules set up benefiting who the democratic or republican party wants to win from the start. hillary was who the dnc was set on before the election even started and thus democracy was not considered in a fair process

furthermore they have since the election directly argued to the courts that they have no legal rules in place against being biased or working against candidates even while claiming they are fair and impartial, hence why the DNC lawsuit was thrown out. 

i'm pissed off the american people are so docile that they dont even give a shit about this outrage. but of course most people barely even care about local and state elections, and even presidential elections are loosing voting numbers


----------



## Drake (Sep 10, 2017)

Amol said:


> My argument isn't much about candidates themselves that the process. When you are surrounded by bad choices you have to choose the least bad one you can think. That is how it works in democracy. This is one of the flaw of democracy I guess.



I agree with you, but I was just saying that if someone really didn't see a difference between Trump and Clinton, then there is no reason for them to waste their time voting. In that case, all the choices would be equally as bad, but again, I doubt that many people actually see no difference between Trump and Clinton in terms of their policies.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 10, 2017)

_Does_ anybody here vote in their local elections? Trump lost the popular vote, but the electoral process he won could have been effected if people were more involved in their state politics.

And did anybody go out and campaign during the presidential elections?


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 10, 2017)

reiatsuflow said:


> _Does_ anybody here vote in their local elections? Trump lost the popular vote, but the electoral process he won could have been effected if people were more involved in their state politics.
> 
> And did anybody go out and campaign during the presidential elections?



I do. I was hoping people were rational and not voted for Marco Rubio for the Senate, but surprise surprise, he got re-elected anyways.
And then there's the Governorship as well, which I prefer not to go into details because it was equally as terrible as the 2016 General Election.


----------



## Nemesis (Sep 10, 2017)

Drake said:


> I agree with you, but I was just saying that if someone really didn't see a difference between Trump and Clinton, then there is no reason for them to waste their time voting. In that case, all the choices would be equally as bad, but again, I doubt that many people actually see no difference between Trump and Clinton in terms of their policies.



If someone didn't see the difference between Clinton and Trump then they clearly were not looking for them.  Clinton would not have any of the shit Trump is trying to do with things like Margianalizing the LGBT community, trying to put neo nazis on the same level as sane people or go on twitter rants and destroying diplomatic process that was being repaired after the last 8 years.

The only thing Trump and Hillary have in common is that neither were going to bring Jobs back that are never going to come back.  Trump wouldn't because impossible and lied about it.  Hillary won't and wouldn't sugar coat it instead gave alternatives which people rejected.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## αce (Sep 10, 2017)

man this thread was entertaining


----------



## Rukia (Sep 10, 2017)

It's a fact that Bernie hurt Hillary.  Hillary also hurt Bernie though too; obviously!  Hillary could have stepped aside and allowed Bernie to win.  But she's a selfish vindictive woman.  So it didn't happen.

Reactions: Funny 3


----------



## Catalyst75 (Sep 10, 2017)

song.

She made very big mistakes, but I doubt anyone denies that there is some accuracy to how she describes Trump's campaign - a "reality show" rather than a traditional campaign, and the link between Trump's campaign and the rise of White Nationalism.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Rukia (Sep 10, 2017)

There has been no rise in white nationalism.  That's a myth.  White nationalism has been covered more by the media because they want to tie it to Trump.

#fakenews

Reactions: Informative 1 | Sad! 1


----------



## Breadman (Sep 10, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> song.
> 
> She made very big mistakes, but I doubt anyone denies that there is some accuracy to how she describes Trump's campaign - a "reality show" rather than a traditional campaign, and the link between Trump's campaign and the rise of White Nationalism.




While I agree with the first part of that, I'm a bit skeptical on the 2nd part. While it's definitely played a role, white nationalism seems to be more of a reaction to PC culture that's been taking a rise over the past couple of years. For every millenial SJW, there seems to be a white guy around the same age who's victimized themselves into thinking that they're the underdog in the grand scheme of things.

I think pushed it along, but I don't think it was the origins of its rise to fame.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 2


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 10, 2017)

It's hard for me to figure out how much of this is white nationalism and how much is a bunch of low status whites intimidated by the changing demographics and economy. They're not succeeding and see their demographics are being discouraged in some pop culture. As a low status white intimidated by changing demographics and economy, I can see some entry points. 

I also think some of this anger has little to do with, well, nonwhites. A ton of this is infighting between whites. Resentment between middle america and the coasts. Conservatives and liberals. Even when you go on actively racist forums and subreddits, it seems like they attack liberal whites even more than they attack whatever nonwhite group they're after.


----------



## wibisana (Sep 10, 2017)

heil victory?


----------



## Breadman (Sep 11, 2017)

reiatsuflow said:


> It's hard for me to figure out how much of this is white nationalism and how much is a bunch of low status whites intimidated by the changing demographics and economy. They're not succeeding and see their demographics are being discouraged in some pop culture. As a low status white intimidated by changing demographics and economy, I can see some entry points.
> 
> I also think some of this anger has little to do with, well, nonwhites. A ton of this is infighting between whites. Resentment between middle america and the coasts. Conservatives and liberals. Even when you go on actively racist forums and subreddits, it seems like they attack liberal whites even more than they attack whatever nonwhite group they're after.



I mean, it's not uncommon for whites to not get along with each other. Have you seen the Irish with their catholic vs protestant shit?

Or Brits vs the French?
Or Ukrainians and Russians?

It's why the concept of uniting over a skin colour seems so dumb.


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 11, 2017)

Yoshua said:


> While I agree with the first part of that, I'm a bit skeptical on the 2nd part. While it's definitely played a role, white nationalism seems to be more of a reaction to PC culture that's been taking a rise over the past couple of years. For every millenial SJW, there seems to be a white guy around the same age who's victimized themselves into thinking that they're the underdog in the grand scheme of things.
> 
> I think pushed it along, but I don't think it was the origins of its rise to fame.



I honestly kinda have to agree with this because that thought always wound up at the back of my head.
We have all these groups suddenly condemning white people as being the kings at the top when they really aren't in most cases. There was going to be some very obvious pushback in the future and I just didn't know when.


----------



## Breadman (Sep 11, 2017)

Xhominid said:


> I honestly kinda have to agree with this because that thought always wound up at the back of my head.
> We have all these groups suddenly condemning white people as being the kings at the top when they really aren't in most cases. There was going to be some very obvious pushback in the future and I just didn't know when.



Exactly. Plus, you take a look at pretty much any scenario, and you notice something about us.

Whenever there's two combatting groups that align themselves under a certain ideology, most often they think of themselves as the victims. The crusades? Christians fighting the evil oppressive muslims. The catholic church against Martin Luther? Bringing peace against a corrupt outsider trying to disrupt the harmony. The genocide of Aboriginal people? Merely proud travellers defeating the wild and untameable savages that couldn't listen to reason.

Matter of fact is that nobody thinks in cartoon logic. No person thinks "I'm so EVIL! TOPKEK!"

We always try to justify our actions, and in this case, people that we see as racist try to justify their actions the same way. Whenever you act or disagree, you have justification for doing so, because in your head you spin yourself as on the side of "good".

As a result, when we face opposing views that don't align with our morals perfectly, we view it as an attack on us and try to "justify" our own actions.


----------



## Raiden (Sep 11, 2017)

Where she might have a valid point is in talking about the problems  the DNC. Obama's operation neglected the organization, in part because they were preparing their own political wing. And man the DNC is in crisis again. Numbers are down, and Tom Perez just doesn't seem to get how his actions are being taken the wrong way:

Link removed


----------



## Utopia Realm (Sep 11, 2017)

We'll, at this rate it's a matter of time b4 other DNC heads get side gigs and the DNC's operations get reduced to save money.


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Sep 11, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> Sea Guardian
> 
> She made very big mistakes, but I doubt anyone denies that there is some accuracy to how she describes Trump's campaign - a "reality show" rather than a traditional campaign, and the link between Trump's campaign and the rise of White Nationalism.


By white nationalism you mean white getting tired of bullshit double standards and mocking from the chatttering classes?


----------



## Vermilion Kn (Sep 11, 2017)

Now a Hillary advisor is saying that Bernie colluded with Russia. 

These people are fucking pathetic.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 11, 2017)

What do you guys think are the chances she tries to run again? I dont think they are high but what i am worried about is her trying forcibly play a bigger role within the democratic party as 2020 approaches.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 11, 2017)

Normality said:


> What do you guys think are the chances she tries to run again? I dont think they are high but what i am worried about is her trying forcibly play a bigger role within the democratic party as 2020 approaches.


I'm certain you don't have to worry about her running again for President, she'll probably literally drop dead if she tries again, but I'm also certain you have to be extremely wary of her influence in the Democratic Party for the foreseeable future. This is why the 'it wuz Russia' narrative is so actively harmful to the American left/progressive movement/Sanders wing. It effectively absolves Clinton and the neoliberal wing of their staggering failures, and gives them a reason to "try again, this time without Russian interference". Only this time it won't be her, but her successor, whoever that may be. It seems to me that the Clintons still hold a lot of clout and influence in the party and I have no doubt they will use *all of it* to keep their money train rolling and keep the donations/paid speeches coming. 

These people have made hundreds of millions of dollars selling nothing but their political influence to the highest bidder. This is an undisputed fact. Just that on its own is absolutely breathtaking corruption. 

This time it will be "pay us and we will use our clout to get your candidate in".

Reactions: Like 1 | Neutral 1


----------



## Utopia Realm (Sep 11, 2017)

erictheking said:


> I'm certain you don't have to worry about her running again for President, she'll probably literally drop dead if she tries again, but I'm also certain you have to be extremely wary of her influence in the Democratic Party for the foreseeable future. This is why the 'it wuz Russia' narrative is so actively harmful to the American left/progressive movement/Sanders wing. It effectively absolves Clinton and the neoliberal wing of their staggering failures, and gives them a reason to "try again, this time without Russian interference". Only this time it won't be her, but her successor, whoever that may be. It seems to me that the Clintons still hold a lot of clout and influence in the party and I have no doubt they will use *all of it* to keep their money train rolling and keep the donations/paid speeches coming.
> 
> These people have made hundreds of millions of dollars selling nothing but their political influence to the highest bidder. This is an undisputed fact. Just that on its own is absolutely breathtaking corruption.
> 
> This time it will be "pay us and we will use our clout to get your candidate in".



By the time 2020 elections come around, there's a chance Trump's numbers won't be as bad as they are now and the whole Schitk of "He's Trump and we're not as bad" mantra will be played so damn hard..


----------



## EJ (Sep 11, 2017)

Utopia Realm said:


> By the time 2020 elections come around, there's a chance Trump's numbers won't be as bad as they are now and the whole Schitk of "He's Trump and we're not as bad" mantra will be played so damn hard..


 Yes, there is. I agree with you. The Democrats do a disservice to not talk about policy issues and instead focus primarily on how stupid and fucked up the current administration is.


----------



## EJ (Sep 11, 2017)

It is pointing out the obvious. We already know the current administration is terrible. What are you going to do differently? Not be "as bad?" Offer sentinent such as "We will come together to beat Donald Trump!" ...besides that?


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 11, 2017)

Flow said:


> It is pointing out the obvious. We already know the current administration is terrible. What are you going to do differently? Not be "as bad?" Offer sentinent such as "We will come together to beat Donald Trump!" ...besides that?


I got banned from that Hillary Cult group by pointing out that and that constantly attacking Sanders with slander and bullshit hurts their cause.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 11, 2017)

Boy u out here arguing with bots payed for by clinton cash.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Huey Freeman (Sep 11, 2017)

Good thing I didn't see this thread in its creation 

Getting upset over someone irrelevant, saying irrelevant things, who should be insignificant in grand scheme of things, but I guess we aren't over these petty squabbles.

But continue to fight with each other surely that won't help your opposition another 4 year term like at all.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 11, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Good thing I didn't see this thread in its creation
> 
> Getting upset over someone irrelevant, saying irrelevant things, who should be insignificant in grand scheme of things, but I guess we aren't over these petty squabbles.
> 
> But continue to fight with each other surely that won't help your opposition another 4 year term like at all.



This guy is a human projector.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Sep 11, 2017)

Normality said:


> This guy is a human projector.


Hillary thread # 234324564 since Her lost.
Hillary bitch comment from Normality #124757548383
Insignificance 100%

No matter how you hide it, you're bitter follow your leader example move forward and not backward.

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## Huey Freeman (Sep 11, 2017)

Such a philistine individual


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 12, 2017)

Flow said:


> It is pointing out the obvious. We already know the current administration is terrible. What are you going to do differently? Not be "as bad?" Offer sentinent such as "We will come together to beat Donald Trump!" ...besides that?



You REALLY want them to do the same damn thing that caused them to lose the election in the first place? Actually GIVE A REASON why people should put you into office rather than bitch about how bad Trump is.

Reactions: Agree 2 | Dislike 1


----------



## EJ (Sep 12, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Hillary thread # 234324564 since Her lost.
> Hillary bitch comment from Normality #124757548383
> Insignificance 100%
> 
> No matter how you hide it, you're bitter follow your leader example move forward and not backward.




Wasn't it like just over a week ago you were bitching about Bernie Sanders and his supporters in another thread?  

Your attempt to brush it off as if you're "over it"...lol.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Sep 12, 2017)

Flow said:


> Wasn't it like just over a week ago you were bitching about Bernie Sanders and his supporters in another thread?
> 
> Your attempt to brush it off as if you're "over it"...lol.


Oh nice redirecting my point towards me. Only if that thread wasn't created by you, coincidence I think not, to bitch Bernie lost or some shit.

Face it flow Hillary lives rent free in your head and any article about her you will post.


----------



## EJ (Sep 12, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Oh nice redirecting my point towards me. Only if that thread wasn't created by you, coincidence I think not, to bitch Bernie lost or some shit.
> 
> Face it flow Hillary lives rent free in your head and any article about her you will post.



The thread wasn't specifically about Bernie Sanders losing, it is how Hillary Clinton to this day (who still has heavy connections with the DNC) blames Bernie Sanders and his supporters for her losing the election, and refuses to acknowledge her mistakes. Are you that dense you can't understand that?

On top of that your earlier post is idiotic. She is still relatively important and not "irrelevant." She represents a failure in which many in the DNC don't want to acknowledge her as a mistake. You have plenty of Democrats to this day (as exposed earlier within this thread by @SuperSaiyaMan12 ) that blame Sanders and his supporters...so yeah, she brings herself out to the public and brings attention on herself by attacking the progressive base.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Sep 12, 2017)

Flow said:


> The thread wasn't specifically about Bernie Sanders losing, it is how Hillary Clinton to this day (who still has heavy connections with the DNC) blames Bernie Sanders and his supporters for her losing the election, and refuses to acknowledge her mistakes. Are you that dense you can't understand that?
> 
> On top of that your earlier post is idiotic. She is still relatively important and not "irrelevant." She represents a failure in which many in the DNC don't want to acknowledge her as a mistake. You have plenty of Democrats to this day (as exposed earlier within this thread by @SuperSaiyaMan12 ) that blame Sanders and his supporters...so yeah, she brings herself out to the public and brings attention on herself by attacking the progressive base.


Welcome to the club, she has blamed everyone so far for her lost, Bernie isn't special. If I look up those other threads about Hillary blaming someone I can almost guarantee its you who posted it.

It's dumb shits like you who keep getting riled up over someone insignificant for the mission at hand, thats the fucking point.

Your own candidate isn't worrying about this woman.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 12, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Good thing I didn't see this thread in its creation
> 
> Getting upset over someone irrelevant, saying irrelevant things, who should be insignificant in grand scheme of things, but I guess we aren't over these petty squabbles.
> 
> But continue to fight with each other surely that won't help your opposition another 4 year term like at all.





Huey Freeman said:


> Hillary thread # 234324564 since Her lost.
> Hillary bitch comment from Normality #124757548383
> Insignificance 100%
> 
> No matter how you hide it, you're bitter follow your leader example move forward and not backward.





Huey Freeman said:


> Oh nice redirecting my point towards me. Only if that thread wasn't created by you, coincidence I think not, to bitch Bernie lost or some shit.
> 
> Face it flow Hillary lives rent free in your head and any article about her you will post.





Huey Freeman said:


> Welcome to the club, she has blamed everyone so far for her lost, Bernie isn't special. If I look up those other threads about Hillary blaming someone I can almost guarantee its you who posted it.
> 
> It's dumb shits like you who keep getting riled up over someone insignificant for the mission at hand, thats the fucking point.
> 
> Your own candidate isn't worrying about this woman.



I am a prophet:



Seto Kaiba said:


> I fully expect this thread to go south in a little bit.
> 
> HAHAHA LOOK AT YALL BERNIEBROS STILL MAD (completely fails to read the thread) HE LOST GET OVER IT (still refuses to read) AND THEY SAY THE HILLARY SUPPORTERS ARE SALTY YALL MAD AS FUCK
> 
> I can see it now.

Reactions: Funny 4 | Winner 3


----------



## Huey Freeman (Sep 12, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Do you know...what a prophet is...? It's in the word...



It's going to rain sometime this month....oh look I'm a prophet as well

Guess we have something common after all.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Sep 12, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> It's going to rain sometime this month....oh look I'm a prophet as well
> 
> Guess we have something common after all.



Huey, just stop it with inciting arguments.  Being an annoying genki bunny girl isn't going to win you any favors.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Huey Freeman (Sep 12, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> Huey, just stop it with inciting arguments.  Being an annoying genki bunny girl isn't going to win you any favors.


Well I would stop if, and this is a big if, the kiddies stop blowing up my notification. I said my piece and I am out. Its not hard figure out Mr. younggirlanimewaifuthatattracksgrownassmenwhoarelonelyforattention.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Sep 12, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Well I would stop if, and this is a big if, the kiddies stop blowing up my notification. I said my piece and I am out. Its not hard figure out Mr. younggirlanimewaifuthatattracksgrownassmenwhoarelonelyforattention.



My Avatar before Caulifla was a guy who could dislocate and break every bone in your body _with a wrench _without killing you.  With whom I shared a first name.  

I've metaphorically done that to both Tonathan100 and Doom TM before those guys got the boot in the Battledome.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## EJ (Sep 12, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> I am a prophet:




LOL dead ass I forgot about this post.


----------



## EJ (Sep 12, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Welcome to the club, she has blamed everyone so far for her lost, Bernie isn't special. If I look up those other threads about Hillary blaming someone I can almost guarantee its you who posted it.
> 
> It's dumb shits like you who keep getting riled up over someone insignificant for the mission at hand, thats the fucking point.
> 
> Your own candidate isn't worrying about this woman.




Still refusing to read or you're not acknowledging what I stated purposefully. She still has connections and sway with the DNC. The more  she continues to blame Progressives for her lost and for people to be "realistic" in terms of healthcare, free college, she hurts the Progressive/Bernie side of the wing. That's why she faced criticism. Yes, people are pissed about her snubbing Bernie Sanders, but it's the fact that she can prove to be a hindrance towards the Democratic Party within the future if she continues disregarding actual progressive arguments such as healthcare, college, drawing down on war, infrastructure, etc. 

Why this translates to = Y'ALL JUST MAD BERNIE LOST LET IT GO LOL" shows either how much of an idiot you are, as well as how you can't look at the bigger picture.


----------



## EJ (Sep 12, 2017)

Xhominid said:


> You REALLY want them to do the same damn thing that caused them to lose the election in the first place? Actually GIVE A REASON why people should put you into office rather than bitch about how bad Trump is.



Was this a direct post towards mine? Because we are in agreement. If it was, I believe you misread my post.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 12, 2017)

Flow said:


> Was this a direct post towards mine? Because we are in agreement. If it was, I believe you misread my post.


I think he was just emphasizing the Hillary Cult argument that there's nothing wrong with the Democrats here and that Hillary was cheated out of the presidency.


----------



## EJ (Sep 12, 2017)

Bloodbath of B-R5RB

Think this was posted earlier, but she blames Obama for her lost as well.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 12, 2017)

Flow said:


> Bloodbath of B-R5RB
> 
> Think this was posted earlier, but she blames Obama for her lost as well.


...even though he endorsed her and actively campaigned for her. Practically calling her his successor and when she can't live up to it, its HIS fault? For the love of god. 

Oh and guess what Hillary? If there is one person Democrats near universally love its Obama, blaming him for YOUR damn incompetence is going to lose whatever sway you have in the party now. Wouldn't be surprised if even the 'corporate Democrats' begin to distance themselves from you like the plague you are.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 12, 2017)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> I got banned from that Hillary Cult group by pointing out that and that constantly attacking Sanders with slander and bullshit hurts their cause.





Normality said:


> Boy u out here arguing with bots payed for by clinton cash.



By the way after the paid Clinton troll @Darnell_FL had their Twitter account banned, a new Clinton troll started posting with the same Twitter bio, another black-sounding name, and another stock image of a black businessman

Reactions: Funny 2 | Informative 1


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Sep 12, 2017)

When the fuck did Huey become so desperate and antagonistic, good lord.


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 12, 2017)

Flow said:


> Was this a direct post towards mine? Because we are in agreement. If it was, I believe you misread my post.



I guess I didn't read it properly, my apologies.



SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> I think he was just emphasizing the Hillary Cult argument that there's nothing wrong with the Democrats here and that Hillary was cheated out of the presidency.



Wha?


----------



## EJ (Sep 13, 2017)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> When the fuck did Huey become so desperate and antagonistic, good lord.



He's gotten his ass handed to him more times than a few. Been angry as a result.

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Sep 13, 2017)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> When the fuck did Huey become so desperate and antagonistic, good lord.


You are on the Internet...


----------



## GRIMMM (Sep 13, 2017)

Two articles. One makes sense, the other is a load of old bollocks.

section 1101(a)(20) of title 8
section 1101(a)(20) of title 8


----------



## Huey Freeman (Sep 13, 2017)

Flow said:


> He's gotten his ass handed to him more times than a few. Been angry as a result.


Big talk for a guy who catfish posters and talk behind their backs to the mods

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## EJ (Sep 13, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Big talk for a guy who catfish posters and talk behind their backs to the mods



Keep showing your desperation.


----------



## Ashi (Sep 13, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Big talk for a guy who catfish posters and talk behind their backs to the mods




So much salt


----------



## Huey Freeman (Sep 13, 2017)

Flow said:


> Keep showing your desperation.


Just annoyed that you only want to talk shit when I'm not tagged to the convo. I enjoy me some good shit posting as well.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 13, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Just annoyed that you only want to talk shit when I'm not tagged to the convo. I enjoy me some good shit posting as well.


Lol we are all laughing at u not with u.


----------



## Atem (Sep 13, 2017)

erictheking said:


> By the way after the paid Clinton troll @Darnell_FL had their Twitter account banned, a new Clinton troll started posting with the same Twitter bio, another black-sounding name, and another stock image of a black businessman



Hue, hue, hue, hue.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Sep 13, 2017)

Normality said:


> Lol we are all laughing at u not with u.


You said you major English Lit right? I can see why because I didn't hint at either


----------



## EJ (Sep 13, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> Just annoyed that you only want to talk shit when I'm not tagged to the convo. I enjoy me some good shit posting as well.



I did tag you to this thread. It was a lovely picture of you and Mama Hillary.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Sep 13, 2017)

Normality said:


> Lol we are all laughing at u not with u.


I was more laughing at the situation he put himself in...


----------



## Huey Freeman (Sep 13, 2017)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> I was more laughing at the situation he put himself in...


wait what you mean you don't hate a complete stranger over the internet for no apparent reason?
Yami I'm shocked!


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 13, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> You said you major English Lit right? I can see why because I didn't hint at either


Lol english lit is def not my major.


Yami Munesanzun said:


> I was more laughing at the situation he put himself in...



Lol if u stick around long enough, trust me its only a matter of time before ur laughing at him.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Sep 13, 2017)

Huey Freeman said:


> wait what you mean you don't hate a complete stranger over the internet for no apparent reason?
> Yami I'm shocked!


Stop being such a weiner.

 try saying that to anybody, irl, with a straight face, I dare you.


----------



## Huey Freeman (Sep 13, 2017)

m



Yami Munesanzun said:


> Stop being such a weiner.
> 
> try saying that to anybody, irl, with a straight face, I dare you.


You see how active these guys got with my presence. I just made their week


----------



## Ashi (Sep 13, 2017)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> Stop being such a weiner.
> 
> try saying that to anybody, irl, with a straight face, I dare you.



Sir, that language is uncalled for.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Sep 13, 2017)



Reactions: Funny 1 | Informative 1 | Sad! 2


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 13, 2017)

erictheking said:


>



What the actual fuck...


----------



## Pliskin (Sep 13, 2017)

Hillary absolving Americans from their sins.

Pure gold.

edit: also wtf?! shaming your daughter in front of a celeb is a dick move, wouldn't talk to my mother about politics in honest anymore.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Sep 13, 2017)

erictheking said:


>


Holy shit

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Mr. Good vibes (Sep 13, 2017)

erictheking said:


>


There are no words to describe this


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 13, 2017)

erictheking said:


>



this bitch is literally crazy.


----------



## Heart Over Blade (Sep 13, 2017)

erictheking said:


>



Reminds me of an email from NBC's crew detailing her going ballistic following the September 7th Commander in Chief Forum. After reading that I guess it was true. Knowing how she thinks it's not at all surprising she'd act like this off camera.

More Clinton meltdowns, for entertainment purposes.


----------



## Mider T (Sep 13, 2017)

Hillary is a tough woman, she's had to put up with more criticism than any candidate in modern history yet she has never failed to keep the moral high ground.  Kudos to her.  I think she has the NY Governorship run in the bag!



Huey Freeman said:


> You said you major English Lit right?

Reactions: Disagree 1


----------



## Vasto Lorde King (Sep 13, 2017)

erictheking said:


>



But then again she is also ''Cersei Lannister'' so take of it what u will.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 13, 2017)

erictheking said:


>



what the fuck


----------



## C-Moon (Sep 13, 2017)

erictheking said:


>



that's a great way to get your children to stop talking to you

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 13, 2017)

Instead of asking the young woman why her message didnt resonate with her, shes out here blaming ppl for not voting for her. Does this woman not understand she lives in a democracy and u have to earn votes. Ur not entitled to them.

Reactions: Agree 3 | Informative 1


----------



## CrazyAries (Sep 13, 2017)

erictheking said:


>



I don't want to buy this book, but I am tempted ... I would like to read the full context, but what I see from previews isn't good.

She's talking about people apologizing for not doing more to help her campaign. Girl, you didn't help your own campaign!

Also, she recently sat down with Ezra Klein (the founder of Vox) for 51 minutes and she was talking about what she wanted to do for America, before placing blame on some of the usual suspects.


An interesting part was what she said about health care. She said that she would want to see universal coverage, but she is the same person who said Medicare for all would "never, ever come to pass!" She said she preferred the public option. However, she did not mention that the time for it came and went when the ACA was being passed.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 13, 2017)

Holy shit, what an entitled egomaniac.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## αce (Sep 13, 2017)

official website


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 13, 2017)

αce said:


> Link removed



_, John McCain or John Kerry did in the aftermaths of their campaigns. Female reporters play into this too.

But, in part, that’s because politics in general and political journalism in particular has a really … how you say? … masculine energy.

It picks up the inherent biases that we all have — women included — from being shaped in a patriarchal culture._

Oh god...*They are decorated fucking veterans*, that's why. *She's not.*

_micah: I mean, Al Gore made a freaking movie after he lost and no one was like, “Why is he making this movie?” (At least, as far as I can remember.)

And Gore is a good comp because he too won the popular vote.
_
Because *he had moved onto something else*. Also he did get a lot of shit for it.

_perry: The “she should not write a book because she is distracting from the Democrats’ strategy” crowd is making such a dumb argument that it’s not really worth debating it.

micah: A lot of the criticism of the book goes something like “Clinton is blaming everyone else for her losing” instead of taking responsibility. Now, she very much does take responsibility for losing in the book. But she also points to other factors that helped Trump and hurt her.
_
Clinton is basically saying "Yeah, I take responsibility BUT IF IT WASN'T FOR THESE PEOPLE..." that is not taking responsibility.

This article is retarded. It is always on the candidate at the end of the day on whether they win or lose. It was Clinton's inability to energize the voter base, and her lack of foresight to campaign sufficiently in the Rust Belt that cost her the election.

There's way too much to go over, but to present this idea as if certain parties are "scared" that they had their part in electing Trump is fucking retarded. Nobody is scared, they just rightfully see Clinton as some entitled egomaniac that can't seem to truly take responsibility and accept that the defeat was ultimately on her shoulders. As being one of the first candidates in my lifetime that couldn't even bring herself to give a concession speech, she can honestly get fucked. She got plenty of press time too, and Trump got a lot of negative press that he constantly griped about but she was more than happy to seize on, and now tries to complain about.

Jesus fucking Christ. Obama had more against him for being a black man of his background (which Hillary was more than happy to try and use against him) and still managed to beat her and serve two terms as president.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 13, 2017)

Dude if this were flipped and Trump whining there would be no question that he needs to just shut the fuck up and accept defeat. The fact that Hillary is doing this shit AFTER again, she couldn't even give a fucking concession speech on election night indicates a person that does not truly take responsibility and does not truly accept her defeat.


"IT WAS MY TURN AND I WOULD HAVE WON IF EVERYONE ELSE HAD PICKED UP MY SLACK..."

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 3 | Winner 4


----------



## αce (Sep 13, 2017)

I mean, it's her fault she lost (or at least, it's on her to take the full share of responsibility for the loss), but the idea that there wasn't any other factors contributing is just as dumb as saying otherwise. 

crowd

"False equivalencies abound in today’s reporting. When journalists can’t, or won’t, distinguish between allegations directed at the Trump Foundation and those directed at the Clinton Foundation, there’s something seriously amiss. And false equivalencies are developing on a grand scale as a result of relentlessly negative news. If everything and everyone is portrayed negatively, there’s a leveling effect that opens the door to charlatans. The press historically has helped citizens recognize the difference between the earnest politician and the pretender. Today’s news coverage blurs the distinction.

Indiscriminate criticism also works against the party in power. If voters think everything is bad or going downhill, some of them invariably think that it’s time for a change. In our two-party system, that handicaps the in-party, whether a Republican or Democratic administration. It’s hard for those in power to maintain public support if their policy successes get little note and their shortcomings draw headlines."



crowd



_"Is it possible this was all just a coincidence — that Clinton’s numbers went into decline for reasons other than Comey’s letter? I think there’s a decent case (which we’ll take up in a moment) that some of the decline in Clinton’s numbers reflected reversion to the mean and was bound to happen anyway.

But it’s not credible to claim that the Comey letter had no effect at all."_




Unfortunately, the entire post-election conversation revolves either around it being 100% Hillary's fault or 100% Comey/Russia's fault, when it's probably a combination of both. It's possible to hold two thoughts in your head at once. The hate is so visceral or the love so inexplicable that this just sad now.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Sep 13, 2017)

αce said:


> Unfortunately, the entire post-election conversation revolves either around it being 100% Hillary's fault or 100% Comey/Russia's fault, when it's probably a combination of both. It's possible to hold two thoughts in your head at once. The hate is so visceral or the love so inexplicable that this just sad now.



That was a problem I observed with other posters here before.  While there is definitely blame at Clinton's feet, since she seems to primarily say things her base 'wants to hear', rather than engaging in discourse about what is best for the American people, there are also the actions of other parties to consider, yet other posters consider only Hillary to be 100% responsible for her defeat and forcefully disregard any discussion about other factors.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 13, 2017)

αce said:


> Unfortunately, the entire post-election conversation revolves either around it being 100% Hillary's fault or 100% Comey/Russia's fault, when it's probably a combination of both. It's possible to hold two thoughts in your head at once. The hate is so visceral or the love so inexplicable that this just sad now.



It is a candidate's job ultimately to overcome these challenges. As your own article points out the negative and positive coverage for both candidates were about even. Doesn't help Hillary had prior baggage.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 13, 2017)




----------



## Mr. Good vibes (Sep 13, 2017)

At this point even Trump would have moved on with his life had he lost.


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 13, 2017)

Onewhosbeenaround said:


> At this point even Trump would have moved on with his life had he lost.



I'm unsure if this would ever be true, but considering how I believed Hillary was much better than this, I would see that being possible.


----------



## Heart Over Blade (Sep 14, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> I'm unsure if this would ever be true, but considering how I believed Hillary was much better than this, I would see that being possible.



The difference is Hillary felt entitled to a presidency. Whereas Trump seemed ambivalent about it at the time of the election.



Considering how rigged he thought the election was and the mainstream media all forecasting a Clinton victory, losing was well within his expectations. Therefore it wouldn't have been hard to move on.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 14, 2017)

Onewhosbeenaround said:


> At this point even Trump would have moved on with his life had he lost.


Course he would. Trump didn't want to be president _in the first place_. It was solely about promoting his brand and he got way too over his head. Like his campaign managers (not Manafort) said, they never expected to get this far. And Trump HATES being President, but he's too far in to pull out. At least a loss would have allowed him to go back to his old life which is what he wanted in the first place.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Sep 14, 2017)

I don't think Hillary could've anticipated how bad this book would be for her PR.  Everyone is picking it apart on Twitter and people who've never read the book are getting only the worst parts of it through shares and retweets.  Supporters are losing confidence and detractors are hating her even more.


*Spoiler*: __ 



it's beautiful

Reactions: Agree 5


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 14, 2017)

Heart Over Blade said:


> The difference is Hillary felt entitled to a presidency. Whereas Trump seemed ambivalent about it at the time of the election.
> 
> 
> 
> Considering how rigged he thought the election was and the mainstream media all forecasting a Clinton victory, losing was well within his expectations. Therefore it wouldn't have been hard to move on.



That is true. He thought he was going to lose based on the election results, but somehow it turned out to be something like a miracle for Conservatives with his victory and the domination of both the house and senate.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 14, 2017)

Chapter 186

"I would've given this one star but didn't want my review deleted"

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Heart Over Blade (Sep 14, 2017)

This must be her thought process before she wrote this: "If only they realized how much of my loss was everyone else's fault, then I'll be popular again. I know, I'll write a book explaining this!"


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 14, 2017)

Just freaking wow.
You know, I thought Hilary would have finally taken the hint and moved on...but I'm damn glad she isn't President now as it probably would have been an even bigger embarrassment, believe it or not.

Let's face it, If Hilary would have been President, the Republicans(and even other World Leaders and countries) would have been ALL OVER HER as she would have only been President because it was Trump, a person who was never even in it to BE President, who she beat. She had to bribe so many freaking people, stations and otherwise to constantly give her bumps to the point that it would have still been a net loss and even her supporters would wonder after awhile WHY they allowed her to be President considering she never even gave a damn reason why she should have been elected.

Would she have been laughed at as hard as Trump is? No. Would she have been mocked mercilessly even after her Presidency? Yes. Because atleast with Trump, you can say that America really got tired of how the Democrats kept saying things and offered nothing new and we was willing to go outside the box for an answer, with Hilary, we would have been laughed at for different reasons.


----------



## EJ (Sep 14, 2017)

Xhominid said:


> Just freaking wow.
> You know, I thought Hilary would have finally taken the hint and moved on...but I'm damn glad she isn't President now as it probably would have been an even bigger embarrassment, believe it or not.
> 
> Let's face it, If Hilary would have been President, the Republicans(and even other World Leaders and countries) would have been ALL OVER HER as she would have only been President because it was Trump, a person who was never even in it to BE President, who she beat. She had to bribe so many freaking people, stations and otherwise to constantly give her bumps to the point that it would have still been a net loss and even her supporters would wonder after awhile WHY they allowed her to be President considering she never even gave a damn reason why she should have been elected.
> ...



I don't believe her Presidency would have been as frustrating and embarrassing as a guy that is ultimately trying to separate Mexican families, build a Mexican wall, privatize the Afghanistan war (when he continuously called to pull out), act as a constant victim and has spun any kind of media that doesn't report good about him as "fake news", eager to throw millions of their healthcare, discriminating against transgender in the military..

Like her Presidency would have pissed me off, but I fail to see how it would had been as bad as Trump so far. Maybe I'm just not being as imaginative.


----------



## Breadman (Sep 14, 2017)

Flow said:


> I don't believe her Presidency would have been as frustrating and embarrassing as a guy that is ultimately trying to separate Mexican families, build a Mexican wall, privatize the Afghanistan war (when he continuously called to pull out), act as a constant victim and has spun any kind of media that doesn't report good about him as "fake news", eager to throw millions of their healthcare, discriminating against transgender in the military..
> 
> Like her Presidency would have pissed me off, but I fail to see how it would had been as bad as Trump so far. Maybe I'm just not being as imaginative.



I honestly would've liked Hillary to be prez at this point. I have a hunch that there would be a LOT less bitching, or at least it would be not as vocal or in your face EVERY SINGLE WAKING MOMENT OF YOUR LIFE.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 14, 2017)

Flow said:


> I don't believe her Presidency would have been as frustrating and embarrassing as a guy that is ultimately trying to separate Mexican families, build a Mexican wall, privatize the Afghanistan war (when he continuously called to pull out), act as a constant victim and has spun any kind of media that doesn't report good about him as "fake news", eager to throw millions of their healthcare, discriminating against transgender in the military..
> 
> Like her Presidency would have pissed me off, but I fail to see how it would had been as bad as Trump so far. Maybe I'm just not being as imaginative.



she is playing a victim by the media and she didnt even win. she said she would deport children even if they were born here in 2014, and she said she's rip up obama's iran deal, and go even more hawkish in syria than trump did. so in the end....


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Sep 14, 2017)

αce said:


> I mean, it's her fault she lost (or at least, it's on her to take the full share of responsibility for the loss), but the idea that there wasn't any other factors contributing is just as dumb as saying otherwise.
> 
> Museum of London
> 
> ...


How dare the press show some of the full ugliness of politics. They should had been sucking cock with no rest 24/7.



Yoshua said:


> I honestly would've liked Hillary to be prez at this point. I have a hunch that there would be a LOT less bitching, or at least it would be not as vocal or in your face EVERY SINGLE WAKING MOMENT OF YOUR LIFE.



The press decided to be in our face 24/7/ So we took dump and threw it their face.


----------



## EJ (Sep 14, 2017)

Kalondo Zephyrin said:


> How dare the press shouw some of the full ugliness of politics. They should had been sucking cock with no rest 24/7.
> 
> 
> 
> The press decided to be in our face 24/7/ So we took dump and threw it their face.



"We"

You didn't vote, you aren't American. And yeah, voting a manchild into office that surrounded himself around goldman sachs sure took it to the man!


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Sep 14, 2017)

Flow said:


> "We"
> 
> You didn't vote, you aren't American. And yeah, voting a manchild into office that surrounded himself around goldman sachs sure took it to the man!


I just enjoyed it.Having someone who will be forced do stuff for the peeps not to go to prison and is hated by the man is a start even of it's not the start i wanted.


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 14, 2017)

Flow said:


> I don't believe her Presidency would have been as frustrating and embarrassing as a guy that is ultimately trying to separate Mexican families, build a Mexican wall, privatize the Afghanistan war (when he continuously called to pull out), act as a constant victim and has spun any kind of media that doesn't report good about him as "fake news", eager to throw millions of their healthcare, discriminating against transgender in the military..
> 
> Like her Presidency would have pissed me off, but I fail to see how it would had been as bad as Trump so far. Maybe I'm just not being as imaginative.



And you are acting as if Hilary wouldn't have done some similar messed up shit when we know Hilary has said some pretty dumb shit herself on what she would have done if she was President.

And again, my point was not to pretend she would be worse than Trump(although at this rate, she most likely would effortlessly be just as bad), but she would actually be *mocked* worse than Trump is now by damn near everyone but her fanbase and the DNC.



Flow said:


> "We"
> 
> You didn't vote, you aren't American. And yeah, voting a manchild into office that surrounded himself around goldman sachs sure took it to the man!



At this rate, Hilary is coming as a far worse manchild than Trump ever could...atleast we know Trump would have took the loss and went back to his empire.

Reactions: Disagree 1


----------



## EJ (Sep 14, 2017)

Xhominid said:


> And you are acting as if Hilary wouldn't have done some similar messed up shit when we know Hilary has said some pretty dumb shit herself on what she would have done if she was President.



No, I'm not. @Inhunayou brought up her statements in regards to illegal immigrants (would be Dreamers essentially), and the situation with Syria and I'm in agreement that she would have stayed true to her word. Her support of TPP was another program which was not beneficial for American workers.

Deregulating shit for the hell of it, not focusing on clean-energy and denying climate-change, throwing millions off of health care, privatizing the Afghanistan war, kicking transgender people out of the military, taking time to appeal to his base in situations such as Charlottesville, constantly telling lies about "millions of illegals voting in the election",





> And again, my point was not to pretend she would be worse than Trump(although at this rate, she most likely would effortlessly be just as bad), but she would actually be *mocked* worse than Trump is now by damn near everyone but her fanbase and the DNC.



They are both shitty people for different reasons. I'm considering policy issues as well, not just because "She's a crybaby that doesn't know when to shut the fuck up." I don't believe she would be bad as Trump and his administration currently.



> At this rate, Hilary is coming as a far worse manchild than Trump ever could...atleast we know Trump would have took the loss and went back to his empire.



Didn't he outright send a tweet that he would not accept the election outcome if he had lost?


tl;dr As much as I have complained over Hillary Clinton, I still would have voted for her over Trump if it wouldn't be Third Party.


----------



## EJ (Sep 14, 2017)

Kalondo Zephyrin said:


> I just enjoyed it.Having someone who will be forced do stuff for the peeps not to go to prison and is hated by the man is a start even of it's not the start i wanted.



You enjoyed seeing the right gain power over the left in terms of the administration. You couldn't give a shit for policies, as long as the side you support wins. You have outright stated you are biased against the left, so again, seeing you constantly try and spin it off as a "victory" is funny considering the fact that you try to paint yourself as the "anti-establishment" reasonable person yet you support and defend a billionaire that has attempted to pass policies that would throw millions off of their health insurance.

Really, it's the same as @GaaraoftheDesert1. You both try to paint it that you "want change" that would be beneficial for the American people/the world but in actuality you care more for "MAKING THE LEFT TRIGGERED DE HE HE HE"

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Sep 14, 2017)

Flow said:


> Type something coherent.


It's more coherent than the current politicxs of the left. You should be able to get it.


----------



## Dragon D. Luffy (Sep 14, 2017)

The last page's argument is the definition of pointless.

- arguing whether Hilary would have been better or worse than Trump

She didnt win. This will never be relevant. Move on.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## EJ (Sep 14, 2017)

Kalondo Zephyrin said:


> It's more coherent than the current politicxs of the left. You should be able to get it.



You're being as pathetic as usual. "Tch, re-read my poorly written post. Not like it's as bad as the left."

No, how about you type in a manner in which people can adequately understand you. I know you don't like to argue with consistency, and you're insecure of expanding upon your stupid beliefs, but don't be that afraid I'll dismantle your argument so bad.


----------



## EJ (Sep 14, 2017)

All this "we", "the left"

You can't argue on account of your own basis, can you? Have you ever noticed that the bulk of your arguments and whataboutery is based upon what the "left" is? Don't even get me started on your stupid "trench-warfare" bullshit.

Please, drop this "Yeah, we'll just use the left's anger to get what we want." If that was what you were trying to express within that poorly typed post. You have been consistent with your broad generalizations to show that you're willing to overlook the antics of the right. Idiots like yourself who think anyone is stupid to believe you can't be consistent with what you believe and policies you would push says a lot.

Still, this is the same user that doesn't believe the "alt-right is real."


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Sep 14, 2017)

Flow said:


> You're being as pathetic as usual. "Tch, re-read my poorly written post. Not like it's as bad as the left."
> 
> No, how about you type in a manner in which people can adequately understand you. I know you don't like to argue with consistency, and you're insecure of expanding upon your stupid beliefs, but don't be that afraid I'll dismantle your argument so bad.


Oh come on, peeps understand me fine outside of this political hellhole.



Flow said:


> All this "we", "the left"
> 
> You can't argue on account of your own basis, can you? Have you ever noticed that the bulk of your arguments and whataboutery is based upon what the "left" is? Don't even get me started on your stupid "trench-warfare" bullshit.
> 
> ...



What antics do i overlook?


----------



## Roman (Sep 14, 2017)

Kalondo Zephyrin said:


> This is the first time someone complains about not understanding me.



IS IT? IS IT REALLY?

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Kansas City Kipchaks Point Guard (Sep 14, 2017)

Roman said:


> IS IT? IS IT REALLY?


Any right wingers have that difficulty since they have more of a motivation to be objective?


----------



## wibisana (Sep 14, 2017)

I like how in vox interview she mention about basic income (tho she dont explicitly say she would give US citizen Basic income)

it is like saying too bad I lost, you could have enjoyed basic income if i won.

it is like wtf


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 14, 2017)

Report says that Hillary says the Electoral College must be abolished. While I do understand the reasoning to support such action, this will only damage her public image even more than it already has been with this shitty book.

She needs to fucking stop. Just stop. It's bad enough that I've grown to resent and regret voting for a deplorable politician who can't take responsibility and pins the blame to others, and now you want to abolish the EC because of your fucking ego/"Muh Popular vote!"?


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 14, 2017)

The EC does need to be abolished hobestly. It just looks bad when she is saying it due to her recent loss.

Reactions: Agree 3


----------



## Pliskin (Sep 14, 2017)

Yeah worst possible candidate to send that message for the worst possible reason.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 14, 2017)

The ideal person is one who won the EC and majority popular vote, while still serving their first term.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 15, 2017)



Reactions: Funny 1 | Sad! 2


----------



## Xhominid (Sep 15, 2017)

Going full on SJW there huh Hilary?


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 15, 2017)

She's right. White Women were told to vote for Trump in exchange for leaving the kitchen once, cause their husband's bitchslaps were more lethal than bullets.

Jokes aside, I can't say I'm surprised by her destructive behavior.


----------



## Ashi (Sep 16, 2017)

Hillary is truly incorrigible


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 16, 2017)

Darkmatter said:


> She's right. White Women were told to vote for Trump in exchange for leaving the kitchen once, cause their husband's bitchslaps were more lethal than bullets.
> 
> Jokes aside, I can't say I'm surprised by her destructive behavior.


Did she lose _any_ and all sense of self awareness with her loss to Trump? Seriously this is something TRUMP himself would claim!


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Sep 16, 2017)

... 

Her face looks fake af.

That's a rogue reptilian gone apeshit underneath that rubber-foam-latex mesh mask, I assure you.


----------



## Junta1987 (Sep 16, 2017)

Bernie Sanders suppoerted her even though she represents everything he hates (getting big money for companies) and this bitch still has the audacity to blame him for her hummiliating defeat. 

Like or hate Trump, but America dodged a bullet when they voted him over Clinton

she is a meme now, her butthurt will give Trump, Alex Jones and everyone who hates her a good laugh


----------



## Mider T (Sep 16, 2017)

Junta1987 said:


> Like or hate Trump, but America dodged a bullet when they voted him over Clinton


Lol no.

Reactions: Agree 1 | Optimistic 1


----------



## Junta1987 (Sep 16, 2017)

Seto Kaiba said:


> [LINKHL]201388[/LINKHL]





Mider T said:


> Lol no.



The DNC rigged the vote for Hillary Trump on the other hand won fair and square his nomenny (and than the election)

She is so corrupt that Trump looks good in comparison

Reactions: Optimistic 1


----------



## Mider T (Sep 16, 2017)

Junta1987 said:


> *Trump on the other hand won fair and square *his nomenny (and than *the election*)


Lol no.


----------



## Nemesis (Sep 16, 2017)

Junta1987 said:


> The DNC rigged the vote for Hillary Trump on the other hand won fair and square his nomenny (and than the election)



Lol no she didn't, the only people who believe that are extreme bernistas who couldn't handle their guy wasn't as popular as they belived.  More people (Both members of DNC and Independents in open primaries) voted for Hillary by a large margin in the primaries.  Hell each state has their own primaries in which the central DNC can't actually force to do anything with each state being independent of each other during this time.

As for abolition of EC comment, well at least she didn't go on a twitter rant about the EC when someone believed Obama won that but lost the popular vote? Hey Trump fans?

Reactions: Funny 1 | Disagree 3 | Optimistic 1 | Dislike 1


----------



## Inuhanyou (Sep 16, 2017)

Why did you say " no she didn't?" it is a fact that the DNC were biased for clinton and heavily moderated the debates and other things against Sanders. they were raising money for her 2 years before she actually started her run through a specifically named clinton presidential fund.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Sep 16, 2017)

Junta1987 said:


> The DNC rigged the vote for Hillary Trump on the other hand won fair and square his nomenny (and than the election)
> 
> She is so corrupt that Trump looks good in comparison


If I knew Trump had a legitimate shot at presidency, I'd rig that shit too.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Sep 16, 2017)

Nemesis said:


> Lol no she didn't, the only people who believe that are extreme bernistas who couldn't handle their guy wasn't as popular as they belived.  More people (Both members of DNC and Independents in open primaries) voted for Hillary by a large margin in the primaries.  Hell each state has their own primaries in which the central DNC can't actually force to do anything with each state being independent of each other during this time.
> 
> As for abolition of EC comment, well at least she didn't go on a twitter rant about the EC when someone believed Obama won that but lost the popular vote? Hey Trump fans?


The DNC didn't conspire to give her an advantage in the primaries and basically act as her puppets throughout the process?

That's a new one.  I guess Hillary had a completely fair-and-square road to the general election.  I also guess Bernie "just wasn't that popular", which is why his approval ratings were the highest of any candidate and there was an entire strategic-vote propaganda campaign devoted to making his supporters vote Hillary because "she has a better chance against Trump".  Clearly, people just so happened to vote Hillary in the primaries because they liked her better and because she had the best spontaneous unscripted answers to debate questions.  I have no clue what "DNC leaks" even refers to, probably a meme peddled by the Russians.  I'm still #WithHer.

Reactions: Agree 3 | Funny 1


----------



## Alwaysmind (Sep 16, 2017)

At this point this isnt a news thread anymore it's a legit debate thread.


----------



## Ashi (Sep 16, 2017)

Alwaysmind said:


> At this point this isnt a news thread anymore it's a legit debate thread.




That's nothing new


----------



## Alwaysmind (Sep 16, 2017)

Ashi said:


> That's nothing new



There should be one. Did Hillary lose because of Bernie? Debate starts now?


----------



## Ashi (Sep 16, 2017)

Alwaysmind said:


> There should be one. Did Hillary lose because of Bernie? Debate starts now?




Cafe threads normally follow a simple formula (esp when politics or religion are involved)

>News gets posted
>people give opinions
>ideals clash

Frankly, the only difference between the regular cafe and the debate corner is how opinionated the article/OP is.


----------



## Alwaysmind (Sep 16, 2017)

Ashi said:


> Cafe threads normally follow a simple formula (esp when politics or religion are involved)
> 
> >News gets posted
> >people give opinions
> ...



I was making a joke. 
-.-


----------



## Ashi (Sep 16, 2017)

Alwaysmind said:


> I was making a joke.
> -.-





From where I stood, your first post on the matter seemed like you were making statement

But if it was just for shits and giggles, I guess there's no point in tryna hammer in something you already understand lol


----------



## Alwaysmind (Sep 16, 2017)

Ashi said:


> From where I stood, your first post on the matter seemed like you were making statement
> 
> But if it was just for shits and giggles, I guess there's no point in tryna hammer in something you already understand lol



I guess you missed the 

I find it amusing that this thread has already 20 pages


----------



## Junta1987 (Sep 16, 2017)

Mider T said:


> Lol no.


give me proof that he didnt won fair



Nemesis said:


> Lol no she didn't, the only people who believe that are extreme bernistas who couldn't handle their guy wasn't as popular as they belived.  More people (Both members of DNC and Independents in open primaries) voted for Hillary by a large margin in the primaries.  Hell each state has their own primaries in which the central DNC can't actually force to do anything with each state being independent of each other during this time.
> 
> As for abolition of EC comment, well at least she didn't go on a twitter rant about the EC when someone believed Obama won that but lost the popular vote? Hey Trump fans?



Wikileaks proofs the opposite

he himself admitted that Sasuke is too fast for him and took his distances


----------



## Lee-Sensei (Sep 17, 2017)

Flow said:


> on Twitter
> 
> AY CUZ WHERE DA HILL BOTS AT???


Hillary's blame game now includes Bernie, the DNC and the media. Given that they've all been pushing Russian conspiracy theories for several months, I can't say that I feel much sympathy for them.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Junta1987 (Sep 17, 2017)

[/URL]

The book title provides the answer to the question "What happened"

Reactions: Agree 1 | Funny 2


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 17, 2017)

apparently amazon is deleting negative reviews of her book LOL

Reactions: Agree 2 | Funny 2


----------



## Atlas (Sep 17, 2017)

Normality said:


> apparently amazon is deleting negative reviews of her book LOL



Wow, big surprise there. Does she mention this censorship shit in her book as another reason she lost?

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 2


----------



## Darkmatter (Sep 17, 2017)

Normality said:


> apparently amazon is deleting negative reviews of her book LOL


Better give it a 2 star now, cause someone ironically joked about it. 

But seriously, giving it a 1-star is being generous of her book, because at least it is giving a shitty book some attention it doesn't deserve.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Lee-Sensei (Sep 17, 2017)

Atlas said:


> Wow, big surprise there. Does she mention this censorship shit in her book as another reason she lost?


I think she's blaming Facebook now.


----------



## Nemesis (Sep 17, 2017)

Normality said:


> apparently amazon is deleting negative reviews of her book LOL



Amazon delete all reviews they can get their hands of when it is irrelevent to the book.  Attacking the Author is not a valid review so they don't belong in the review section.

Reactions: Optimistic 1 | Dislike 1


----------



## Junta1987 (Sep 17, 2017)

Nemesis said:


> Amazon delete all reviews they can get their hands of when it is irrelevent to the book.  Attacking the Author is not a valid review so they don't belong in the review section.



the book is full of lies and everyone knows it


----------



## Catalyst75 (Sep 17, 2017)

Junta1987 said:


> the book is full of lies and everyone knows it



You mean like the people here who think Trump is doing a good job.


----------



## Lee-Sensei (Sep 17, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> You mean like the people here who think Trump is doing a good job.


Do you think Hillary's book is good? It seems like she's just trying to shift blame.


----------



## Atlas (Sep 17, 2017)

Lee-Sensei said:


> Do you think Hillary's book is good? It seems like she's just trying to shift blame.



I thought that was the point of the book.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Sep 17, 2017)

Lee-Sensei said:


> Do you think Hillary's book is good? It seems like she's just trying to shift blame.



If you knew Junta's records, you'd see a different context to my post.  

If the book only contains what Hillary's hardcore supporters 'want to hear', then it won't be a good book.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 18, 2017)

everyone knows what the book contains. there is a fucking reason the book has been trashed all around and its not because its a smart,reflective piece about the 2016 election.


----------



## sworder (Sep 18, 2017)



Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 18, 2017)

*THIS IS ALL YOUR FAULTS BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T POKEMON GO TO THE POLLS!!!!*

Reactions: Funny 1 | Winner 9


----------



## Junta1987 (Sep 18, 2017)

Catalyst75 said:


> If you knew Junta's records, you'd see a different context to my post.
> 
> If the book only contains what Hillary's hardcore supporters 'want to hear', then it won't be a good book.



my record? What does my record to do with anything?


----------



## Nemesis (Sep 18, 2017)

And here be the actual 31 their view on it.

Reactions: Sad! 2


----------



## Heart Over Blade (Sep 18, 2017)

So how many Hillhumpers do we still have left and what are their names?


----------



## Tarot (Sep 18, 2017)

Wew, Kyle went ham on Hillbots


----------



## Vermilion Kn (Sep 18, 2017)

Death Arcana said:


> Wew, Kyle went ham on Hillbots



The lack of self awareness of that old bitch is hilarious. Bernie is a narcissist ? Who is on a book tour blaming everything in the universe for her loss to lobster-man and who is fighting for healthcare ?

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 18, 2017)

afgpride said:


> The DNC didn't conspire to give her an advantage in the primaries and basically act as her puppets throughout the process?
> 
> That's a new one.  I guess Hillary had a completely fair-and-square road to the general election.  I also guess Bernie "just wasn't that popular", which is why his approval ratings were the highest of any candidate and there was an entire strategic-vote propaganda campaign devoted to making his supporters vote Hillary because "she has a better chance against Trump".  Clearly, people just so happened to vote Hillary in the primaries because they liked her better and because she had the best spontaneous unscripted answers to debate questions.  I have no clue what "DNC leaks" even refers to, probably a meme peddled by the Russians.  I'm still #WithHer.


To be fair, Bernie's popularity rise only came AFTER Hillary's disastrous loss to Trump. He only gained nationwide popularity during the primaries and after the general.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 18, 2017)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> *To be fair, Bernie's popularity rise only came AFTER Hillary's disastrous loss to Trump*. He only gained nationwide popularity during the primaries and after the general.




no.

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 18, 2017)

Normality said:


> no.


Before the primaries and General Election, Normality, would you even _know_ of Bernie Sanders, yes or no? He enjoyed popularity in Vermont...but that was about it until he got a bigger spotlight.


----------



## Lee-Sensei (Sep 18, 2017)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> Before the primaries and General Election, Normality, would you even _know_ of Bernie Sanders, yes or no? He enjoyed popularity in Vermont...but that was about it until he got a bigger spotlight.


Weren't Bernie's crowds far larger than Hillary's? He looked pretty popular to me.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 18, 2017)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> Before the primaries and General Election, Normality, would you even _know_ of Bernie Sanders, yes or no? He enjoyed popularity in Vermont...but that was about it until he got a bigger spotlight.



he wasnt famous before the primaries but that wasnt what you stated. you said that bernie didnt become widely popular till after Hillary lost which is a flat out lie. He was more popular than her during the primaries which is why he was drawing bigger crowds than her.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 18, 2017)

Lee-Sensei said:


> Weren't Bernie's crowds far larger than Hillary's? He looked pretty popular to me.


No. I meant that before he got his spotlight, Bernie was a virtual unknown. That's what I am trying to say. His popularity only went nationwide due to the sheningans in the primaries and Hillary's disastrous loss.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 18, 2017)

Normality said:


> he wasnt famous before the primaries but that wasnt what you stated. you said that bernie didnt become widely popular till after Hillary lost which is a flat out lie. He was more popular than her during the primaries which is why he was drawing bigger crowds than her.


Which is why I said BEFORE the PRIMARIES AND GENERAL ELECTION. That's the point I was making. Before that, he was a virtual unknown. Learn English Please.


----------



## EJ (Sep 18, 2017)

His popularity would have continued to rise anyways. He has introduced legislation, and been in opposition towards the current administration not because "TRUMP IS A BAD GUY", but because of the policies he has tried to push for and how he (Bernie Sanders) has spoken out against them and called for America to embrace medicare for all, spoken out against DACA, etc.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 18, 2017)

Flow said:


> His popularity would have continued to rise anyways. He has introduced legislation, and been in opposition towards the current administration not because "TRUMP IS A BAD GUY", but because of the policies he has tried to push for and how he (Bernie Sanders) has spoken out against them and called for America to embrace medicare for all, spoken out against DACA, etc.


I know. That's a no brainer. But he only took off nationally due to the primaries and general election. Hillary's failure made him even more popular since he has actual ideas to help Americans which can now be shown more.


----------



## EJ (Sep 18, 2017)

That's not what you were trying to argue though, he was gaining popularity even before wikileaks. If you're saying the DNC and wikileaks helped substantially to give him new-found fame is one thing (he would have gained it regardless), it's another to credit them specifically for why he gained such popularity, to begin with. 

The DNC was skeptical and cautious against the popularity Sanders had achieved.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 18, 2017)

Flow said:


> That's not what you were trying to argue though, he was gaining popularity even before wikileaks. If you're saying the DNC and wikileaks helped substantially to give him new-found fame is one thing (he would have gained it regardless), it's another to credit them specifically for why he gained such popularity, to begin with.
> 
> The DNC was skeptical and cautious against the popularity Sanders had achieved.


No. I was saying that before the primaries? I bet none of us would even know about Bernie Sanders. After the Primaries and how he was treated, he became insanely popular, and only became even more popular after the General Election.


----------



## EJ (Sep 18, 2017)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> No. I was saying that before the primaries? I bet none of us would even know about Bernie Sanders. After the Primaries and how he was treated, he became insanely popular, and only became even more popular after the General Election.



A few people here knew of types like Bernie Sanders before the Presidency, but even before the Primaries, people were talking about his chances of becoming President. Of course, him running to become President would cause him to gain attention on a large platform.This is what you had originally stated though:



> *To be fair, Bernie's popularity rise only came AFTER Hillary's disastrous loss to Trump*. He only gained nationwide popularity during the primaries and after the general.



That's not the case. this isn't the truth.


----------



## SuperSaiyaMan12 (Sep 18, 2017)

Flow said:


> A few people here knew of types like Bernie Sanders before the Presidency, but even before the Primaries, people were talking about his chances of becoming President. Of course, him running to become President would cause him to gain attention on a large platform.This is what you had originally stated though:
> 
> 
> 
> That's not the case. this isn't the truth.


I meant the primaries there too, and that Hillary's loss made him even more popular. Sorry there, I made my next posts clarifying that position.


----------



## Junta1987 (Sep 19, 2017)

this song summs up why Clinton lost


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Sep 20, 2017)

SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> Which is why I said BEFORE the PRIMARIES AND GENERAL ELECTION. That's the point I was making. Before that, he was a virtual unknown. Learn English Please.





SuperSaiyaMan12 said:


> I meant the primaries there too, and that Hillary's loss made him even more popular. Sorry there, I made my next posts clarifying that position.



So who's the one who has to learn English? Dont blame me because you cant express your thoughts accurately.


----------



## GRIMMM (Sep 20, 2017)

Bernie was a popular grassroots candidate. He was a fairly known politician with a decent following, but still an underdog. When his campaign properly kicked off about a quarter of the way through, he got a massive following as it continued to rise throughout. By the time the vote for the Dems candidate was coming, Bernie's campaign and following was almost enough that it rivalled both Hillary's following and Trump's following.

To say he didn't gain popularity or a following before the loss to Trump is pretty ignorant.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1


----------



## Junta1987 (Sep 21, 2017)

if she continues with this blame game than that could be the end of the political influence of the Clintons (and that would probably be a good thing)


----------

