(12-24-2017 02:05 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 11:14 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  By the way, African American voters will probably vote for a bland white Democrat in same numbers as they would for Cory Booker. They see the existential threat that Trumpism represents. Doug Jones is as white as a Mayonnaise festival in Maine, but he still got higher turnout and vote totals in Alabama than Obama did.

If that was true then Hillary would've won last year. Democrats have basically been a loose consortium of opposing interests since the thirties, they need a charismatic candidate to unite them or else they'll eat each other alive.

LOL. You guys "Beat" Hillary because our turnout was depressed (and electoral college gerrymandering). Turnout isn't depressed, and no amount of Russian news, facebook games, or Jim Hoft lies are going to change that.

Here's the four most likelys at this point. Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Kirstin Gillibrand, and Cory Booker. Beyond that you could see a Joachim Castro, Ted Steyer, etc. to run as well. Bernie might run, but will probably get nowhere. Warren would take many of his voters, and that would probably make the next President Kamala Harris, Kirstin Gillibrand or Cory Booker. If the independent vote is largely white, and less than 10 percent of the vote total, Trump is gone in 2020, and it won't matter who the Dems put up.

The Trump plan is pretty straightforward at this point. Try to figure out how to get 40 percent to vote for you, then hope that an independent candidate like Mark Cuban or Jeff Flake can pull 7 to 8 percent more from the Dem than from Trump.

Its going to be exponentially harder than Trump's upset. The first problem is that everyone will see it coming. The next problem for someone like Flake or Corker is that they've voted with Trump north of 95% of the time. And they don't really have support from the independents and wont get any from Dems. Most likely result is that the impact of a candidate like Flake or Corker is to turn a Democrat win into a complete rout. What Trump really needs is an African American independent candidate that can siphon off votes in significant numbers while running against a Dem. I don't see one out there.

----

For the Dems its pretty simple, keep the party unified, strongly oppose any nascent third party candidate, and viciously respond to Trump/Bannon's attacks.

----

And there's a potential disaster for the GOP out there too....A primary challenge to Trump by Mitt Romney or Jeff Flake. They'd lose, but they'd beat the hell out of Trump in the process. I suspect Trump will not be unopposed.

The complete and utter delusion of the left has become commonplace. Then you see some of the comments here from resident libs and it is truly unreal.

(12-24-2017 03:18 PM)450bench Wrote:  The complete and utter delusion of the left has become commonplace. Then you see some of the comments here from resident libs and it is truly unreal.

Yea, yea, yea. You guys started with a 3 million vote deficit and in just about every election since then...evidence of Democratic surges in voting have been pretty much across the board. And those surges appear to be strengthening.

(12-24-2017 11:14 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:37 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(12-23-2017 10:35 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  A good speech delivery is all he has. Nothing of substance unless You are a far left geek.

Obama won two elections. Zero qualifications for the job. Zero attempts to be a centrist.

Don't under estimate Booker. He has the one thing that will bring dormant voters to the booths if need be. Melatonin. He doesn't need experience. He doesn't need qualifications. He simply needs to read from a teleprompter and call the other guy/gal racist. The media will do the rest.

Uh, Donald Trump IS a racist. Not a complex racist, but a rather simple and obvious one. Lets review. Mexicans are rapists and can't be judges. Support for white supremacists. Haitians all have AIDS. The Central Park 5. His housing policies. Literally pardoning racism when he pardoned Arpaio. Birtherism...and on and on and on.

What happened in Alabama with African American turnout is pretty much guaranteed in 2020. That level of turnout by itself would have flipped the election in 2016 in Michigan and Wisconsin and would have made Pennsylvania too close to call. But that's not your only problem. The big scare is that Trump's racism is going to wake up Latino voters, causing flips in Texas, Arizona, and Florida. And making states like Georgia and North Carolina much more difficult. What I'm looking for in 2018 is Latino turnout. And then you have Trump's problems with educated white voters too.

BTW, Trump's disasterously bad handling of Puerto Rico is a huge, and unreported issue. 400,000 more Puerto Ricans will be voting in Florida in 2020.

And opposition to Trump is hardening. At some point, it won't matter if you can either find (or more likely make up) some scandal about the Democratic nominee....people are simply going to vote Dem to kick Trump out.

-----

By the way, African American voters will probably vote for a bland white Democrat in same numbers as they would for Cory Booker. They see the existential threat that Trumpism represents. Doug Jones is as white as a Mayonnaise festival in Maine, but he still got higher turnout and vote totals in Alabama than Obama did.

-----

Trumps tax plan isn't going to grow the economy in any way that really helps the working class. Its not how Wall Street operates. The tax cut to the middle class will be eaten up by health care increases and then some.

-----

So there's a lot of people, who didn't vote for Hillary that will vote for the Dem in 2020, period. Now where are your new voters. I suppose, there might be a few Johnson voters who might vote for you, or some Mormon voters in Utah, but that's about it. And that assumes, incorrectly, that Trump hasn't lost some of the people that voted for him. He has.

Blacks should continue to vote Dem, as the Dems have done a great job in the inner cities. They are crime free, prosperous, clean, full employment. I am sure the blacks in these Dem led cities are enjoying the rich life. Yes, the Dems over the last 50 years are getting what they voted for.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

most of it's redundant, but i agree with about 75% of what they say here. male allies is the hilarious one. i'm of the opinion that the only woman you should listen to is your wife. if you're gay you probably hold the majority feminine opinion by default. not saying gay men can't also be masculine, but you lean the other way when it comes to compassion. wherever anyone is hurting, you'll be there. i saw some young kid wearing a shirt that loudly said, feminist. i don't need to vocalize my sentiments. i let kate bush carry me away

(12-23-2017 10:35 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  A good speech delivery is all he has. Nothing of substance unless You are a far left geek.

Don't knock it, remember the US elected a mama jeans wearing Muslim sympathizing bigot with great speech writers and a teleprompter. He was/is useless. Cory knows this, he knows all he has to do is repeat the Oblunder method and he'll have the Libturds drooling for him.

(12-24-2017 03:12 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  and electoral college gerrymandering

Oh this ought to be good... How does one gerrymander the Electoral college?

(12-24-2017 03:12 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 02:05 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 11:14 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  By the way, African American voters will probably vote for a bland white Democrat in same numbers as they would for Cory Booker. They see the existential threat that Trumpism represents. Doug Jones is as white as a Mayonnaise festival in Maine, but he still got higher turnout and vote totals in Alabama than Obama did.

If that was true then Hillary would've won last year. Democrats have basically been a loose consortium of opposing interests since the thirties, they need a charismatic candidate to unite them or else they'll eat each other alive.

LOL. You guys "Beat" Hillary because our turnout was depressed (and electoral college gerrymandering). Turnout isn't depressed, and no amount of Russian news, facebook games, or Jim Hoft lies are going to change that.

Here's the four most likelys at this point. Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Kirstin Gillibrand, and Cory Booker. Beyond that you could see a Joachim Castro, Ted Steyer, etc. to run as well. Bernie might run, but will probably get nowhere. Warren would take many of his voters, and that would probably make the next President Kamala Harris, Kirstin Gillibrand or Cory Booker. If the independent vote is largely white, and less than 10 percent of the vote total, Trump is gone in 2020, and it won't matter who the Dems put up.

The Trump plan is pretty straightforward at this point. Try to figure out how to get 40 percent to vote for you, then hope that an independent candidate like Mark Cuban or Jeff Flake can pull 7 to 8 percent more from the Dem than from Trump.

Its going to be exponentially harder than Trump's upset. The first problem is that everyone will see it coming. The next problem for someone like Flake or Corker is that they've voted with Trump north of 95% of the time. And they don't really have support from the independents and wont get any from Dems. Most likely result is that the impact of a candidate like Flake or Corker is to turn a Democrat win into a complete rout. What Trump really needs is an African American independent candidate that can siphon off votes in significant numbers while running against a Dem. I don't see one out there.

----

For the Dems its pretty simple, keep the party unified, strongly oppose any nascent third party candidate, and viciously respond to Trump/Bannon's attacks.

----

And there's a potential disaster for the GOP out there too....A primary challenge to Trump by Mitt Romney or Jeff Flake. They'd lose, but they'd beat the hell out of Trump in the process. I suspect Trump will not be unopposed.

Your party has a problem running White Guys too ? No wonder You all are way down with most of America. Race baiting is Your party weapon of choice, next Gender baiting. Have fun losing once again, inclusive My A$$

Ummm, Tom, how is the electoral college “gerrymandered”?

(12-24-2017 06:47 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 03:12 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  and electoral college gerrymandering

Oh this ought to be good... How does one gerrymander the Electoral college?

Clearly not enough homo electoral votes

Not enough "gender-neutral" voting machines? Oh, so triggered!

(12-24-2017 03:12 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 02:05 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 11:14 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  By the way, African American voters will probably vote for a bland white Democrat in same numbers as they would for Cory Booker. They see the existential threat that Trumpism represents. Doug Jones is as white as a Mayonnaise festival in Maine, but he still got higher turnout and vote totals in Alabama than Obama did.

If that was true then Hillary would've won last year. Democrats have basically been a loose consortium of opposing interests since the thirties, they need a charismatic candidate to unite them or else they'll eat each other alive.

LOL. You guys "Beat" Hillary because our turnout was depressed (and electoral college gerrymandering). Turnout isn't depressed, and no amount of Russian news, facebook games, or Jim Hoft lies are going to change that.

Here's the four most likelys at this point. Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Kirstin Gillibrand, and Cory Booker. Beyond that you could see a Joachim Castro, Ted Steyer, etc. to run as well. Bernie might run, but will probably get nowhere. Warren would take many of his voters, and that would probably make the next President Kamala Harris, Kirstin Gillibrand or Cory Booker. If the independent vote is largely white, and less than 10 percent of the vote total, Trump is gone in 2020, and it won't matter who the Dems put up.

The Trump plan is pretty straightforward at this point. Try to figure out how to get 40 percent to vote for you, then hope that an independent candidate like Mark Cuban or Jeff Flake can pull 7 to 8 percent more from the Dem than from Trump.

Its going to be exponentially harder than Trump's upset. The first problem is that everyone will see it coming. The next problem for someone like Flake or Corker is that they've voted with Trump north of 95% of the time. And they don't really have support from the independents and wont get any from Dems. Most likely result is that the impact of a candidate like Flake or Corker is to turn a Democrat win into a complete rout. What Trump really needs is an African American independent candidate that can siphon off votes in significant numbers while running against a Dem. I don't see one out there.

----

For the Dems its pretty simple, keep the party unified, strongly oppose any nascent third party candidate, and viciously respond to Trump/Bannon's attacks.

----

And there's a potential disaster for the GOP out there too....A primary challenge to Trump by Mitt Romney or Jeff Flake. They'd lose, but they'd beat the hell out of Trump in the process. I suspect Trump will not be unopposed.

Tom, you never answered why the blacks should continue to support the great Dem policies which have the inner cities enjoying great riches, safety and abundant life.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

For dems to win is very simple—Keep black and brown voters dumb, poor, and dependent on handouts. That’s been their formula for five decades.

What irritates me to no end is that republicans have not come up with a viable counter.

(12-24-2017 11:19 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  For dems to win is very simple—Keep black and brown voters dumb, poor, and dependent on handouts. That’s been their formula for five decades.

What irritates me to no end is that republicans have not come up with a viable counter.

As Hillary has been known to say: those effing n’s will do what the hell I tell them to do.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(12-25-2017 12:04 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 11:19 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  For dems to win is very simple—Keep black and brown voters dumb, poor, and dependent on handouts. That’s been their formula for five decades.

What irritates me to no end is that republicans have not come up with a viable counter.

As Hillary has been known to say: those effing n’s will do what the hell I tell them to do.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

And that includes Obama and Booker, that I can tell you.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(12-24-2017 11:19 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  For dems to win is very simple—Keep black and brown voters dumb, poor, and dependent on handouts. That’s been their formula for five decades.

What irritates me to no end is that republicans have not come up with a viable counter.

you , me, and many others share that frustration as well.............until now.....

#infrastructure is a solid strategy that will focus on the tangibles going into '18....this is simply phase 2...

as I've mentioned before, the ®s have an opportunity to do real damage in that arena....and they're beginning to turn the corner.....now we need a few (d)s to realize the same

continuing to reverse the trend on the war on drugs through incarceration to extreme levels is not in DJT's playbook......putting the 'figurative' shovel in their hands is where he's going with this....

this is the number one reason how the ®s screwed up starting with Nixon....all that accomplished was creating more division allowing that subset to grow in numbers....once those numbers became a threat, the obvious move for the donks was to pander to that subset....

in other words, it's that stance, education fail, urban consolidation, etc.... that allowed the donks to become the slum lords they are today....

even sessions hasn't mentioned anything about it lately.....#SMART......the wall has become a real way how to fight that war beyond our borders with the hardcore drugs combined with allowing states to legislate mary-jane properly; allowing it to slowly become integrated like alcohol and nicotine....

cutting corp taxes (which already has foreign countries rethinking how it will impact trade) and focusing on infrastructure next year offers the potential for a job boon in this country not seen in quite some time....those alone will help reduce the numbers of impoverished and even turn a few heads that are currently living 12 under a roof.....

there's no magical 'click heels' fix.....however, DJT has the pedal to metal now relative to real solutions vs. status quo bullshite like a Jeff Flake or many others in the house/senate would have one believe.....

if this doesn't work, I really don't have a better solution relative to economic policy to reverse the trend.....this is the move I've been begging from someone with balls to implement my entire life.....

not so shockingly, it's taken someone w/o a politically groomed life, yet KNOWS POLITICIANS AND UNDERSTANDS HOW THE SYSTEM WORKED IN THE PAST, to forge/implement this plan.......that was something the RNC had zero clue how to recognize on their own as they are a percentage of the #swamp.....

#centristwinning

(12-24-2017 03:12 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 02:05 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 11:14 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  By the way, African American voters will probably vote for a bland white Democrat in same numbers as they would for Cory Booker. They see the existential threat that Trumpism represents. Doug Jones is as white as a Mayonnaise festival in Maine, but he still got higher turnout and vote totals in Alabama than Obama did.

If that was true then Hillary would've won last year. Democrats have basically been a loose consortium of opposing interests since the thirties, they need a charismatic candidate to unite them or else they'll eat each other alive.

LOL. You guys "Beat" Hillary because our turnout was depressed (and electoral college gerrymandering). Turnout isn't depressed, and no amount of Russian news, facebook games, or Jim Hoft lies are going to change that.
One, I'm not part of 'you,' I didn't vote for Trump. Two, how is the EC gerrymandered as Owl points out? Three, why was turnout depressed last year? Hillary was banking on the fact that she was a woman but about six people were actually excited about her as a candidate.

Here's the four most likelys at this point. Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Kirstin Gillibrand, and Cory Booker. Beyond that you could see a Joachim Castro, Ted Steyer, etc. to run as well. Bernie might run, but will probably get nowhere. Warren would take many of his voters, and that would probably make the next President Kamala Harris, Kirstin Gillibrand or Cory Booker. If the independent vote is largely white, and less than 10 percent of the vote total, Trump is gone in 2020, and it won't matter who the Dems put up.
Might see Biden throw his hat in the ring as well.

The Trump plan is pretty straightforward at this point. Try to figure out how to get 40 percent to vote for you, then hope that an independent candidate like Mark Cuban or Jeff Flake can pull 7 to 8 percent more from the Dem than from Trump.

Its going to be exponentially harder than Trump's upset. The first problem is that everyone will see it coming. The next problem for someone like Flake or Corker is that they've voted with Trump north of 95% of the time. And they don't really have support from the independents and wont get any from Dems. Most likely result is that the impact of a candidate like Flake or Corker is to turn a Democrat win into a complete rout. What Trump really needs is an African American independent candidate that can siphon off votes in significant numbers while running against a Dem. I don't see one out there.
Trump's problem is that he's an egotistical narcissist who can't get out of his own way with the rhetoric. If he just turned off his Twitter for a month you'd see his rating go up 10%, his policies in reality aren't the hell-raising evil schemes that the Democrats portray them as.

----

For the Dems its pretty simple, keep the party unified, strongly oppose any nascent third party candidate, and viciously respond to Trump/Bannon's attacks.
That's the problem, it's very difficult to unify the Democrats under their traditional voting block. As Peter Zeihan points out, the Dems since the thirties have basically been a large group of opposing interests (e.g. greens and unions) who can't agree on much. When someone runs on policy like Dukakis they get creamed, so instead they need someone with charisma to rally around to oppose the stable but smaller group of traditional Republican voters.

----

And there's a potential disaster for the GOP out there too....A primary challenge to Trump by Mitt Romney or Jeff Flake. They'd lose, but they'd beat the hell out of Trump in the process. I suspect Trump will not be unopposed.
I agree on the point that primary challengers are a bad sign for the incumbent (e.g. Carter and Ted Kennedy) but if unemployment is at a record low, the stock market is booming, and GDP is well over 3% growth per year, it'll be very difficult for anyone to gain traction against him in the primaries. If there's a recession (very possible, we haven't had one in close to a decade) then yeah he's vulnerable.

(12-24-2017 03:18 PM)450bench Wrote:  The complete and utter delusion of the left has become commonplace. Then you see some of the comments here from resident libs and it is truly unreal.

They still can't figure out why Trump won. When they try, they just blame someone or something else. Funny thing is they have doubled down on what lost them the election last time. They are even making non Trump voters defend him. If repubs that didn't vote for Trump last time decide to vote for him next time (if he runs) the D's won't stand a chance. I imagine even then they won't figure out why they lost. It's popcorn worthy.

Tom, I'm still waiting here... All I want for Xmas, from you, is to explain how one gerrymanders the electoral college.