Reply With Quote
What happened?
By 'proving' that she is maybe .09% Native American. She really got back at Trump! Obviously, she needed to check that Native American box on the job application.
This is a Democratic frontrunner for the president. Second coming of Dukakis coming.
What happened?
There’s no way she’s the candidate after he she acted in 2016.
That DNA test was a stupid political move on so many levels.
Other than eighty-year-old Biden, she's the only one with a conceivable shot at winning. Nobody's gonna care about Kamala Harris or Corey Booker doing amateur hour.
That's what was said about Obama and Trump. You just can't underestimate people's desire for amateurs.
The dumb black guy looked really uncomfortable and got owned pretty hard.
Which is why I didn't when I said she was one of two candidates with at least a theoretical shot at beating Trump. But in truth, Pocahontas would be in Mondale territory if she got the nomination.
Warren was blackballed by Native Americans. That's not her fault.
Warren tried to get ahead of this for 2020 and only shot herself in the gut instead.
We elected Donald Fn Trump.
Its wide open.
It's really not.
Leftists don't think 'It's the economy, stupid' is a thing anymore.
?
She claimed to be on she is not very much
This notion that suddenly anyone can become president of the United States is rooted in wishful thinking mostly. If the dems go into 2020 with that in mind, they are going to lose again. It's a mistake now, however, to run old party names. People want a fresher face. They are fairly certain they won't get anything they want out of it either way, but many cannot bet on someone who smells like Washington DC. DC has become the enemy and a strong talking point for both parties. They do it to themselves when they both preach about how ty it is inside the beltway, yet that's basically where they're from. It's like the NFC and AFC advertising about how ty the NFL is, and promising something different this year.
The media did a great job of drilling the idea that Trump was a clumsy shyster incapable of handling the economy. But when I go back and look at the debates I realize he is saying a lot of truths that the bought and paid for politicians would not say and that he had a greater understanding of how it works in the second place. As long as the economy is good, nobody has a chance to beat Trump. Americans don't knowingly vote against their pocketbook.
Trump had 2 aspects going for him that will be difficult to duplicate
- He was a very liked public figure for 2 decades
- He created his reputation in business
Pop culture + business. 2 aspects Americans are bias to.
Last edited by FrostKing; 10-20-2018 at 02:42 AM.
Tnhey are so into today's inden y bs the new leadership would also be a disaster.
Her mom told her all this! It's not her fault!
That is where the left is headed.
You don't have to be a leftist to know he inherited a pretty ing great economy (I mean, compared to what Barry inherited, he received a freaking Cadillac). He should get credit for not ruining it. Yet anyways.
This is exactly where I was disagreeing with Spurt... Kamala Harris or Corey Booker are not 'anybody', they're relatively seasoned politicians at the local/state level, have some Washington experience but are also relatively fresh faces in national politics.
I would argue they're actually much better positioned than Biden or Pocahontas, tbh... (not sure about Bernie, he has a pretty solid grass root, but I don't think the party will really throw all the machinery to help him).
The Dems have a big problem in figuring out who they're going align themselves with, which I think if it comes organically, as opposed to what happened last time, it will give them some credibility. On the other hand, they also have a huge plus that the candidate won't be Shillary, an almost automatic improvement. On the GOP side, midterms matter beyond control of Congress, because I think if they do a terrible election, it might push some moderate guys like Kasich to come forward and challenge Trump. On the other hand, turnout for midterms have always been generally a strength for the GOP recently. The big confusion here could be thinking presidential elections are anything like it. At some point they're going to have to face the fact that if you continue to lose the popular vote, the margin of error and your odds of winning irrevocably diminish. Neither the GOP or the Dems have enough with their base to win presidential elections, and I think Trump's message post-election has been strictly aimed at the base. Granted, he's the ultimate bull ter, so pivoting into a some centrist position overnight wouldn't be surprising in the least.
Anemic, great. Same difference.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
