2016 Democratic Thread

[illinilaw08]

I could say the same about Hillary if and when she gets indicted. I mean trust me, where there's smoke oh there indeed is fire with her. I'm hoping she gets indicted before the election but she could get it after the election too.

 

Greg, I didn't know you had such access to Hillary Clinton! Based on your personal knowledge of the facts and circumstances, I will definitely trust you that where there's smoke, there's fire!

[illinilaw08]

It said: "President Obama's approval rating stands at 49/48, the first time we've had him with a positive approval spread in a considerable amount of time."

 

Well, well, I've pointed out in the past mysteriously Obama is beloved near election time. That's when the media returns to its roots and makes sure everybody loves the Democrats. Now shortly after election they might have some negative crap on Obama, or off an on the first 2-3 years there's some negative stuff, but when it's time to elect another Democratic president, you better believe people start saying how great Obama is and how his approval rating has skyrocketed.

 

Good job cherry picking from that article. It sure is mysterious that the media would so mislead Americans that 32% of voters think the stock market went down while Obama was President. Damn media conspiracy!

[greg775]

jesus just stop already. Obama's ratings are going up because people are realizing that we're facing a future President Trump or President Clinton and the collective feeling is:

 

Do you deny this happened when Obama was running for re-election? Suddenly oh boy his approval rating is high. Get him back in that oval office then we can point out some negative things ... til it's election time again.

 

Greg, I didn't know you had such access to Hillary Clinton! Based on your personal knowledge of the facts and circumstances, I will definitely trust you that where there's smoke, there's fire!

Just as some on this board shoe away Bernie with, "He is a socialist! We cant have a socialist!" and Trump with "He is a war mongering wacko; he is dangerous!" I can come back with "Hillary is a proven liar (we're not rich we just accept 250,000 a speech from Goldman Sachs, lol) and is on the cusp of jail."

[illinilaw08]

Do you deny this happened when Obama was running for re-election? Suddenly oh boy his approval rating is high. Get him back in that oval office then we can point out some negative things ... til it's election time again.

 

 

Just as some on this board shoe away Bernie with, "He is a socialist! We cant have a socialist!" and Trump with "He is a war mongering wacko; he is dangerous!" I can come back with "Hillary is a proven liar (we're not rich we just accept 250,000 a speech from Goldman Sachs, lol) and is on the cusp of jail."

 

You said to trust you - that where there's smoke with Hillary there is definitely fire. The only reason that I should trust you on that point is if you have personal knowledge of Hillary Clinton's actions and defenses.

 

I can say "I don't trust Trump with foreign policy because his statements have no basis in reality" (getting Mexico to build and pay for a wall between the countries). I can say that I consider Trump's rhetoric regarding foreigners to be ignorant and inflammatory. In both cases, I have evidence backing me up. In neither case am I saying "Trump is a war criminal! He's going to jail!"

 

IF you were merely saying that you do not trust Hillary Clinton because she has changed policy positions repeatedly over the last 20 years, or that you don't trust her because the e-mail scandal, at best, shows a lack of judgment that raises concerns about her ability to lead, I might disagree, but at least you would have support for your argument.

 

Time and time again, you assert that Hillary Clinton is not a nice person (without considering the fact that someone might consider Trump or Cruz or Kasich's actions that of a not very nice person either). Time and time again, you rail on Hillary Clinton as a liar and someone heading to prison without any support for those arguments.

 

Simply put, you have an ax to grind against Hillary Clinton and your posts contain zero analysis or objectivity on that point.

[lostfan]

To this extent that this silly "media conspiracy" is a thing, if anything, the media made it seem like Obama was in danger of not being re-elected which never was actually true at any point in 2012. His actual approval rating didn't really change that much then.

 

Obama's approval rating doesn't really matter, it's held within the same narrow range the past few years. Democrats adore him, Republicans despise him, a handful of people go back and forth depending on how their own lives are going, that's all. When he leaves office, it will go up even higher, it always does. Bush had the worst approval rating of any modern president when he left, and after a couple of years they basically forgave him. Obama will leave office much more popular and they will cut him some slack, too.

Edited May 14, 2016 by Ezio Auditore

[DrunkBomber]

Everyday I wake up and hope that there are still people on Soxtalk willing to dedicate multiple paragraph responses to things greg says. It makes me feel like anything is still possible. Good dude.

[caulfield12]

I wouldn't say Democrats adore him...many were disappointed/disillusioned on a number of fronts.

 

If you took away Monica Lewinsky, Clinton would have left in 2000 with a 60-65% approval rating.

 

 

 

Greg, if your media theory is correct about supporting Obama when there's an election, why didn't they do the same thing in 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000 and 2004?

 

You had Democratics in office for only 4/20 years and 12/36. Even now, it's 20/44 dating back to the Kennedy/Johnson years. If Hillary wins this time, it would be exactly even over a 48 year period, basically a half century.

 

And whereas the Democrats for a long time had control of at least either the House or the Senate, they've lost that as well as holding a minority of governorships. Local politics, like city councils, state legislatures and school boards, Republicans have a pretty large advantage still.

[greg775]

You said to trust you - that where there's smoke with Hillary there is definitely fire. The only reason that I should trust you on that point is if you have personal knowledge of Hillary Clinton's actions and defenses.

 

I can say "I don't trust Trump with foreign policy because his statements have no basis in reality" (getting Mexico to build and pay for a wall between the countries). I can say that I consider Trump's rhetoric regarding foreigners to be ignorant and inflammatory. In both cases, I have evidence backing me up. In neither case am I saying "Trump is a war criminal! He's going to jail!"

 

IF you were merely saying that you do not trust Hillary Clinton because she has changed policy positions repeatedly over the last 20 years, or that you don't trust her because the e-mail scandal, at best, shows a lack of judgment that raises concerns about her ability to lead, I might disagree, but at least you would have support for your argument.

 

Time and time again, you assert that Hillary Clinton is not a nice person (without considering the fact that someone might consider Trump or Cruz or Kasich's actions that of a not very nice person either). Time and time again, you rail on Hillary Clinton as a liar and someone heading to prison without any support for those arguments.

 

Simply put, you have an ax to grind against Hillary Clinton and your posts contain zero analysis or objectivity on that point.

How come whenever somebody like me or Meghan McCain on the radio or Rush Limbaugh rip Hillary for being mean and elitist (rich and flaunting it) and a liar people like you freak out and want evidence even though like I said that is her reputation. Meanwhile the same simplistic criticisms of Bernie (socialist nutjob) and Trump (wacko narcissist, asshole) are accepted as gospel. I don't get it. I have an axe to grind against Hillary yes. She's a career politician who believes it's her turn and America for some reason is all to ready to coronate her. Nobody can blast Hillary, but Trump, Bernie are mocked, ridiculed and criticized and nobody bats and eye.

[caulfield12]

But where was the outrage when George HW Bush's son became president...?

 

When Jeb Bush ran?

 

Bush had 9/11 on his watch, destroyed the budget by going unilaterally (based on the WMD argument that turned out to be a farce) into war and spending over 60% of discretionary funds on warfare in Iraq and Afghanistan, passed a Medicare prescription benefit that was completely unfunded...created an environment where the threats against the US were greater than any point since the end of the Cold War and maybe the Cuban Missile Crisis. Oh, forgot suspending personal liberties/freedom with the Patriot Act and torture/Guantanamo Bay, not to mention the Hurricane Katrina fiasco.

 

What is is that you would expect Hillary Clinton to do that would destroy the country? If you've learned nothing, it's that the Clintons gave up on HUGE institutional change after 1994 when gays in the military and the health care reform was met with a wall of opposition and they were nearly destroyed by the Gingrich Revolution....she's going to be very moderate/centrist/establishment, more conservative in terms of her orientation than even her husband. It will be a "status quo" presidency, minus another 9/11 or conflict with China.

 

What is it that you actually want/hope/believe that Trump could accomplish as president that would make our country better?

 

1)???

 

2)???

 

3)???

 

4)???

 

5)???

 

Would like to see at least three realistic answers of what would be a reasonable expectation for improvements from a Trump presidency...

 

 

 

You want to see the consequences of the Bushes, I would highly recommend you read a great non-fiction story by Dave Eggers titled "Zeitoun" and then report back.

Edited May 14, 2016 by caulfield12

[pettie4sox]

I could say the same about Hillary if and when she gets indicted. I mean trust me, where there's smoke oh there indeed is fire with her. I'm hoping she gets indicted before the election but she could get it after the election too.

 

She hasn't secured anything yet like Trump. (Although it's projected she will)

[pettie4sox]

jesus just stop already. Obama's ratings are going up because people are realizing that we're facing a future President Trump or President Clinton and the collective feeling is:

 

 

POTY

[pettie4sox]

How come whenever somebody like me or Meghan McCain on the radio or Rush Limbaugh rip Hillary for being mean and elitist (rich and flaunting it) and a liar people like you freak out and want evidence even though like I said that is her reputation. Meanwhile the same simplistic criticisms of Bernie (socialist nutjob) and Trump (wacko narcissist, asshole) are accepted as gospel. I don't get it. I have an axe to grind against Hillary yes. She's a career politician who believes it's her turn and America for some reason is all to ready to coronate her. Nobody can blast Hillary, but Trump, Bernie are mocked, ridiculed and criticized and nobody bats and eye.

 

Bloody hell greg! You are one of the most rigid, black and white posters on this forum. Stop speaking in absolutes so your posts are more bearable.

 

All politicians get ripped and the fact that you use the media as evidence is god awful. Rush and Meghan are conservatives, so they will naturally be biased against any liberal. That socialist nutjob tidbit comes from the right wing base as well. The criticism of Trump are pretty much from both sides of aisle. Did you watch any Republican debates this election cycle? They were insult filled slug fests. Seriously, go watch them, I dare you because you will find out your posts have zero merit after watching his alleged republican colleagues rip him on national television.

 

The hardcore Bernie supporters have been harping on Clinton for a while now even to the point there is a Bernie of Bust movement. Look it up! No one is free of ridicule and the fact that you think it's one sided shows how intellectually lazy you are.

[southsider2k5]

But where was the outrage when George HW Bush's son became president...?

 

When Jeb Bush ran?

 

Bush had 9/11 on his watch, destroyed the budget by going unilaterally (based on the WMD argument that turned out to be a farce) into war and spending over 60% of discretionary funds on warfare in Iraq and Afghanistan, passed a Medicare prescription benefit that was completely unfunded...created an environment where the threats against the US were greater than any point since the end of the Cold War and maybe the Cuban Missile Crisis. Oh, forgot suspending personal liberties/freedom with the Patriot Act and torture/Guantanamo Bay, not to mention the Hurricane Katrina fiasco.

 

What is is that you would expect Hillary Clinton to do that would destroy the country? If you've learned nothing, it's that the Clintons gave up on HUGE institutional change after 1994 when gays in the military and the health care reform was met with a wall of opposition and they were nearly destroyed by the Gingrich Revolution....she's going to be very moderate/centrist/establishment, more conservative in terms of her orientation than even her husband. It will be a "status quo" presidency, minus another 9/11 or conflict with China.

 

What is it that you actually want/hope/believe that Trump could accomplish as president that would make our country better?

 

1)???

 

2)???

 

3)???

 

4)???

 

5)???

 

Would like to see at least three realistic answers of what would be a reasonable expectation for improvements from a Trump presidency...

 

 

 

You want to see the consequences of the Bushes, I would highly recommend you read a great non-fiction story by Dave Eggers titled "Zeitoun" and then report back.

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

[greg775]

You said to trust you - that where there's smoke with Hillary there is definitely fire. The only reason that I should trust you on that point is if you have personal knowledge of Hillary Clinton's actions and defenses.

 

I can say "I don't trust Trump with foreign policy because his statements have no basis in reality" (getting Mexico to build and pay for a wall between the countries). I can say that I consider Trump's rhetoric regarding foreigners to be ignorant and inflammatory. In both cases, I have evidence backing me up. In neither case am I saying "Trump is a war criminal! He's going to jail!"

 

IF you were merely saying that you do not trust Hillary Clinton because she has changed policy positions repeatedly over the last 20 years, or that you don't trust her because the e-mail scandal, at best, shows a lack of judgment that raises concerns about her ability to lead, I might disagree, but at least you would have support for your argument.

 

Time and time again, you assert that Hillary Clinton is not a nice person (without considering the fact that someone might consider Trump or Cruz or Kasich's actions that of a not very nice person either). Time and time again, you rail on Hillary Clinton as a liar and someone heading to prison without any support for those arguments.

 

Simply put, you have an ax to grind against Hillary Clinton and your posts contain zero analysis or objectivity on that point.

 

Please IlliniLaw and others. If you are Clinton fans here is EVIDENCE of some of her flip flops and shoddy behavior. Elizabeth Warren is a liar, right? Watch this and tell me if you are not sickened by Hillary or at least bothered by her. Oh, but many will blame the messenger ... WARREN IS LYING!!! Sure she is.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9d60AzoIqvE

[greg775]

Bloody hell greg! You are one of the most rigid, black and white posters on this forum. Stop speaking in absolutes so your posts are more bearable.

 

All politicians get ripped and the fact that you use the media as evidence is god awful. Rush and Meghan are conservatives, so they will naturally be biased against any liberal. That socialist nutjob tidbit comes from the right wing base as well. The criticism of Trump are pretty much from both sides of aisle. Did you watch any Republican debates this election cycle? They were insult filled slug fests. Seriously, go watch them, I dare you because you will find out your posts have zero merit after watching his alleged republican colleagues rip him on national television.

 

The hardcore Bernie supporters have been harping on Clinton for a while now even to the point there is a Bernie of Bust movement. Look it up! No one is free of ridicule and the fact that you think it's one sided shows how intellectually lazy you are.

 

Come on now. It is one-sided. Do you watch cable channels? Hillary's transgressions rarely get mentioned. It's like they don't want to even acknowledge the email problem exists at all. It should be part of the discussion how badly she wants power, but nobody in the media is digging at all.

[caulfield12]

http://www.amazon.com/Clinton-Cash-Foreign...s/dp/0062369288

 

Writing books attacking the Clintons is an industry that has earned publishing houses millions and millions of dollars over the years...that's not to mention right wing radio and tv hosts like Ann Coulter, Matt Drudge or Rush Limbaugh whose careers have basically been made off them. Fox News owes the Clintons and Obamas half of their advertising revenues.

 

 

There's even a book UNLIKEABLE: THE PROBLEM WITH HILLARY

 

Amazing, right?

Edited May 15, 2016 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

"The next president (Clinton) is going to inherit a recession that this president has largely been able to avoid due to the timings of things. Regardless of the party politics, out of a recession you are faced with a political opportunity to redirect the message," Bahnsen told CNN.

In his article, which is making the rounds with social conservatives, Bahnsen added: "We simply must prepare ourselves for the fight ahead, which is in diminishing the power of Hillary Clinton by preserving divided government, and then in replacing Hillary in 2020 with a pro-growth candidate of character and seriousness."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/14/politics/202...race/index.html

 

This all sounds sort of vaguely familiar...where have we heard this before? Obstructionism, so good for the country.

[caulfield12]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/us/polit...p-news&_r=0

 

Crossing the Line: Donald Trump and His Complicated Relationship with Women...

 

 

https://images.search.yahoo.com/search/imag...mp;action=click

Not so shocked he was willing to help this pageant contestant...she's like a younger version of Melania (Bulgarian originally)

[cabiness42]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/us/polit...p-news&_r=0

 

Crossing the Line: Donald Trump and His Complicated Relationship with Women...

 

 

https://images.search.yahoo.com/search/imag...mp;action=click

Not so shocked he was willing to help this pageant contestant...she's like a younger version of Melania (Bulgarian originally)

 

It's been 16 years since we had a slimeball womanizer as President. Perhaps we're due again.

[DrunkBomber]

Apparently the Bernie Bros at the Nevada Democratic Convention were doing some more of what they do best.

 

 

[Bananarchy]

Apparently the Bernie Bros at the Nevada Democratic Convention were doing some more of what they do best.

 

 

Bernie's candidacy has been doing more bad than good, it seems. His supporters are going collectively more insane.

[GoSox05]

This is the election of people complaining about candidate supporters. Every time someone does something crazy it has to be a reflection of that candidates whole base.

 

 

Maybe every election is like that and I just never noticed.

Edited May 16, 2016 by GoSox05

[lostfan]

This is the election of people complaining about candidate supporters. Every time someone does something crazy it has to be a reflection of that supporters whole base.

 

 

Maybe every election is like that and I just never noticed.

They are, but this one more than normal.

[Bananarchy]

This is the election of people complaining about candidate supporters. Every time someone does something crazy it has to be a reflection of that candidates whole base.

 

 

Maybe every election is like that and I just never noticed.

This one is particularly contentious on the Dem side. I think Bernie is a decent man, but his followers are desperate now that he won't be the candidate. I am seriously tired about hearing how crooked the DNC or Hillary is.

Edited May 16, 2016 by Deadpool

[lostfan]

This one is particularly contentious on the Dem side. I think Bernie is a decent man, but his followers are desperate now that he won't be the candidate. I am seriously tired about hearing how crooked the DNC or Hillary is.

Bernie supporters are pretty annoying on social media when you are doing anything other than carrying water for Bernie, but my worst run-ins have been with Trump supporters. Those are a whole other breed of people I've never seen before. Conservatives, at least, think and behave in pretty predictable ways. These guys are something else.