John Pilger: Liberals created Trump by pushing corrupt Clinton, but now act surprised

[hater]

my John Pilger going in raw

“The only people who are surprised are those who allowed it to happen – and I am speaking about the liberal class in the US,”

They told us that only the status quo – a corrupt, war-mongering candidates will be acceptable to the majority. We will have their hyperventilating, and their frustration, and their frenzied reaction for a long time. But, they’ve created Trump…”

“They corrupted a voting system, within the Democratic Party that ensured that another populist, Bernie Sanders – though I don’t think he would have beaten Trump – could not win, and instead the embodiment of the status quo, who has declared the whole world a battlefield was made out to be the ‘candidate of sanity’ or ‘the candidate for women.’”

“Most of the world regards that kind of behavior from the most powerful country in the world as abhorrent, and Hillary has been the personification of that,”

[hater]

“One of the most revealing things about the campaign has been the exposure of journalism as the extension of the same established power. They are not independent, they are echo chambers… And the most respected are the worst. The New York Times has become a sort of Cold War propaganda sheet,”

“Whether Trump will be any better is unclear. He says he is anti-establishment, but he will come with his own establishment. I don’t believe for a moment that he is against the establishment of the US in a wider sense – indeed he is a product of it,” said Pilger. “The truth is, there was no one to vote for.”

[boutons_deux]

Bernie isn't Democrat.

He didn't have had chance against the DNC establishment/Clinton army.

Nothing corrupt about it, just hard-ball, self-serving politics

Blaming Dems for Trash? Wow, that's some amazing bull .

Trash's policies, hate, LIES, bigotry, prejudices are 100% orthodox Republican going back 50 years.

[z0sa]

Bernie isn't Democrat.

He didn't have had chance against the DNC establishment/Clinton army.

Nothing corrupt about it, just hard-ball, self-serving politics

Blaming Dems for Trash? Wow, that's some amazing bull .

Trash's policies, hate, LIES, bigotry, prejudices are 100% orthodox Republican going back 50 years.

Actually, Mr Know it all, he is caucusing as a Democrat from now on.

[boutons_deux]

Actually, Mr Know it all, he is caucusing as a Democrat from now on.

He always pretty much caucused with Dems, doesn't mean he is a Dem in 100% of votes.

The Dem establishment just couldn't allow a non-Dem "socialist" to usurp "her turn".

[hater]

Of course

Crickets here...

[spurraider21]

republicans voted for trump. twice.

twice.

and yet its liberals fault?

[hater]

republicans voted for trump. twice.

twice.

and yet its liberals fault?

Yup they pushed Clintler to the masses and wanted the masses to vote for that neocon warmonger

The masses said no and they lost

[spurraider21]

Yup they pushed Clintler to the masses and wanted the masses to vote for that neocon warmonger

The masses said no and they lost

that doesn't explain the primaries. no clinton there

[rmt]

She had no message - instead it was all Trump is unfit to be president while she had a private server, bleach bitted 30k emails and smashed devices with a hammer. Enough voters in the right states didn't buy that.

[rjv]

that doesn't explain the primaries. no clinton there

trump benefited from running against career politicians and the only other candidate voters thought of as somewhat of an outsider was cruz, but that was exposed. trump also benefited from the uneven amount of broadcast time the major networks gave him, even breaking away from sanders speeches just to give us more of trump. the clinton campaign had no problem with this during the primaries. it was only after the election that they cried foul.

[spurraider21]

trump benefited from running against career politicians and the only other candidate voters thought of as somewhat of an outsider was cruz, but that was exposed. trump also benefited from the uneven amount of broadcast time the major networks gave him, even breaking away from sanders speeches just to give us more of trump. the clinton campaign had no problem with this during the primaries. it was only after the election that they cried foul.

right, so its moronic to blame libruls for trump winning the primary

[rjv]

right, so its moronic to blame libruls for trump winning the primary

i wouldn't blame "liberals' per se, unless by that term one is referring to clinton democrats. there is no doubt the DNC ran a terrible campaign and backed a deeply flawed candidate.

[spurraider21]

i wouldn't blame "liberals' per se, unless by that term one is referring to clinton democrats. there is no doubt the DNC ran a terrible campaign and backed a deeply flawed candidate.

which had nothing to do with trump emerging in a primary race against non-liberals/democrats

[rjv]

which had nothing to do with trump emerging in a primary race against non-liberals/democrats

well, yes. trump was the preferred candidate of the DNC. they urged the press to give trump coverage.

[spurraider21]

well, yes. trump was the preferred candidate of the DNC. they urged the press to give trump coverage.

and we all know that conservative voters are soo influenced by the press

people who voted for trump TWICE can't just wash their hands and say they aren't the reason he got elected, sorry

[rjv]

and we all know that conservative voters are soo influenced by the press

people who voted for trump TWICE can't just wash their hands and say they aren't the reason he got elected, sorry

but trump didn't just win over your typical GOP voting bloc. he also won over moderates and people who had voted for obama in the previous election. also, his additional coverage came at the expense of sanders. and in an election in which there were more registered voters who did not vote at all than ever before, any advantage took on extremely significant importance.

[spurraider21]

but trump didn't just win over your typical GOP voting bloc. he also won over moderates and people who had voted for obama in the previous election. also, his additional coverage came at the expense of sanders. and in an election in which there were more registered voters who did not vote at all than ever before, any advantage took on extremely significant importance.

how many obama voters participated in the GOP primary?

[rjv]

how many obama voters participated in the GOP primary?

you're missing the point, entirely. independents who voted for obama in the previous election were voting in the primaries for trump. for instance, in the ohio GOP primary, 7% were registered democrats and 28% were independents. kasich won ohio but it shows that is an example of how open primaries attracted other non-traditional GOP voters. trump came out ahead in 13 of the 16 states that had open primaries.

[spurraider21]

you're missing the point, entirely. independents who voted for obama in the previous election were voting in the primaries for trump. for instance, in the ohio GOP primary, 7% were registered democrats and 28% were independents. kasich won ohio but it shows that is an example of how open primaries attracted other non-traditional GOP voters.

and so trump won all those primary races because of democrat voters?

[rjv]

and so trump won all those primary races because of democrat voters?

he won 13 of the 16 open primaries and this is where he won the votes of independents and some democrats.

[spurraider21]

he won 13 of the 16 open primaries and this is where he won the votes of independents and some democrats.

and the democrat voters tilted the balance in how many of those?

and here, republican voters favored trump more than independent voters did. i wonder if you're right and it really was the independent and democrat voters that won trump the primaries

[rjv]

and the democrat voters tilted the balance in how many of those?

you do realize there are a great deal of registered democrats who generally vote for the GOP candidate, right? so, if you wanted that answer, you'd have to somehow filter it to remove that demographic. but i still don't get your initial argument. you have concluded that one cannot blame the DNC or liberals for Trump winning the election because voters were given the opportunity to vote for Trump twice and did so therefore it was their votes in both the primaries and the general election that shaped the results. never mind that the media gave trump a platform to generate more of an advantage over the other GOP candidates (at the behest of the DNC), that clinton failed to get the most important blocs to vote for her, the DNC sabotaged the Sanders campaign, hillary openly mocked millenials and gave no platform to black lives matter or environmentalists and doubled down on her support of Wall Street. at best, all your premise could hope for is that one could cast some blame on traditional GOP voters. and again, if by liberals, we are talking about the neoliberal centrists that worshipped obama and clinton then we are definitely going to have to create a separate set for the progressive left as they are clearly separate factions.

[boutons_deux]

Hillary wiped the floor with Trash's stinkin ass

[spurraider21]

you do realize there are a great deal of registered democrats who generally vote for the GOP candidate, right? so, if you wanted that answer, you'd have to somehow filter it to remove that demographic. but i still don't get your initial argument. you have concluded that one cannot blame the DNC or liberals for Trump winning the election because voters were given the opportunity to vote for Trump twice and did so therefore it was their votes in both the primaries and the general election that shaped the results. never mind that the media gave trump a platform to generate more of an advantage over the other GOP candidates (at the behest of the DNC), that clinton failed to get the most important blocs to vote for her, the DNC sabotaged the Sanders campaign, hillary openly mocked millenials and gave no platform to black lives matter or environmentalists and doubled down on her support of Wall Street. at best, all your premise could hope for is that one could cast some blame on traditional GOP voters. and again, if by liberals, we are talking about the neoliberal centrists that worshipped obama and clinton then we are definitely going to have to create a separate set for the progressive left as they are clearly separate factions.

clinton being ty is certainly an explanation as to why she didnt perform well in the general election

it does nothing to explain how a piece of like trump wins the nomination. and ty as she was, it doesn't explain how an incompetent buffoon wins anyway. its not like trump ran a squeaky clean campaign