If Trump was in Lincoln's place, we would have been re-conquered by the British.
American Politics thread: No Nazis Allowed
-
-
All personal qualities aside it feels like a soon to be 80 year old man has no business being in the running for such an office. Just in general your presidental candidates all seem hella old, like being 60+ is a requirment for running for office
Technically it's 35, but yes we've all noticed our candidates are freaking old. Don't know how that happened exactly, especially when Obama was so young, but here we are.
-
Like, did they give reasons for why they think Trump is better than Lincoln?
It basically amounts to "Sure, he freed the slaves but what good does that do me?"
-
Oh dear God please tell me this is an exaggeration or a sick joke
The numbers are misleading because of a lot of factors.
1-it's polled republicans, and a lot of these polls try to go from favorable districts so they can get higher numbers
2-lots of people that were republicans 3 years ago aren't now, so they would't apply to the questionaire
3-they weed it down more to "eligible voters" and then further to "likely voters".Basically they set up the first poll questions in order to get the audience they want responding.
That's how they're able to get Trump a 92% approval rating "among the party" when 90% of the country either doesn't care or actively dislikes him.
-
@Johnny:
If Trump was in Lincoln's place, we would have been re-conquered by the British.
General Cornwallis is a great guy says Trump.
Now i want to see the art of the deal - Time machine edition.
-
It basically amounts to "Sure, he freed the slaves but what good does that do me?"
Or to use a quote from a CSPAN caller during yesterday's hearings: "Sure, Lincoln freed the slaves, but what Trump is doing is so much greater!"
-
I know this is a meme now, but…I don't want to live on this planet anymore.
-
I think I can count the attacks from trailing candidates on the frontrunner, who has been the frontrunner since they started polling sometime in 2017 (!), on one hand. Kamala and that guy who's always on Maher during the first debate and then Castro at a later debate.
Trump somehow was the only one who saw the writing on the wall, and he's getting impeached over it. Wild world.
@Ubiq:It basically amounts to "Sure, he freed the slaves but what good does that do me?"
"Sure, he freed the slaves, but I want to own slaves!"
-
I have seen some conspiratorial comments from the left that Tea Party Pete is mostly in the race to make Biden look tolerable and, why that is somewhat absurd, comments that are THIS dishonest and right-wing certainly make a good case for the idea:
Because, y'know, it was actually Clinton and Obama who blew up the deficit, while Reagan, Dubya, Trump, Ryan and friends were invested in erasing the debt.
-
Is there a reason why Nancy Pelosi isn't considered? I looked over her bio briefly and didn't notice anything outrageous (and she's doing a good job as far as I can tell from over here).
-
For president?
I like to think it's because she's not interested not to mention that due to her position she's third in line to the presidency anyway.
-
Pelosi's easily one of the more divisive American political figures alive right now. Conservatives hate her for being a West Coast liberal elite big government hippie etc. etc. while a lot of progressives dislike for not being more progressive. She's in the same boat as Hillary Clinton for being a woman with a history of political power.
Much easier to stay in the House and hand Trump his ass every few months. She's extremely effective in her role of keeping House Democrats in line.
-
Biden apparently had to learn someone at a town hall
On one end his first point was kinda right third point though….
-
https://whatthefuckjusthappenedtoday.com/2019/12/05/day-1050/
[h=1]Day 1050: Time to act.[/h]
1/ Speaker Nancy Pelosi instructed the key chairmen in the House of Representatives to begin drafting impeachment articles against Trump, signaling that the House will likely vote to charge him with high crimes and misdemeanors before Christmas. Pelosi said the facts of Trump's alleged wrongdoing involving Ukraine "are uncontested" and that "the president leaves us no choice but to act." By ordering the "chairmen" to draft the charges, Pelosi left open the possibility that the other five committees that have investigated Trump and his administration will be asked to make recommendations about articles of impeachment. Pelosi added that Trump "abused his power for his own personal political benefit" and that his alleged wrongdoing "strikes at the very heart of our Constitution." (New York Times / Politico / NBC News / ABC News / CNN / Wall Street Journal / Washington Post / Bloomberg)- The House Judiciary Committee will hold its next impeachment on Monday at 9 a.m. ET, when the panel will receive presentations from Democratic and GOP counsels to the Intelligence Committee on the evidence collected in the inquiry. (CNN / NBC News)
- House Democrats are considering obstruction and bribery articles of impeachment against Trump. Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee and Intelligence Committee believe Trump's actions vis-a-vis Ukraine meet the definition of bribery. House Democrats have also signaled that they plan to include evidence from Robert Mueller's investigation as part of the obstruction of justice articles. (Washington Post / CNN)
- READ: Full text of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's impeachment inquiry update.
2/ Trump accused Pelosi of having "a nervous fit" after a reporter asked if she hated Trump. James Rosen, a reporter for a conservative television network, loudly asked Pelosi as she was leaving a news conference: "Do you hate the president?" Pelosi rejected the question, saying: "Don't mess with me when it comes to words like that." (The Guardian / Washington Post / Bloomberg / New York Times)
- Trump to Democrats: "If you are going to impeach me, do it now." Trump suggested that he wanted the "Do Nothing Democrats" to move "fast" on impeachment "so we can have a fair trial in the Senate." (ABC News)
3/ Attorney General William Barr's handpicked prosecutor told the Justice Department's inspector general that he found no evidence that U.S. intelligence agencies had planted spies in the Trump campaign. Barr tasked U.S. Attorney John Durham with investigating the origins of the Mueller probe, as well as Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud, who conservative media outlets allege was a spy planted by the FBI or U.S. intelligence agencies. As part of a separate investigation, Durham was contacted by Michael Horowitz, the DOJ's inspector general, and asked whether Mifsud, who had early contact with the Trump campaign, was an intelligence asset. Durham informed Horowitz's office that his investigation had produced no evidence to support the allegation. Horowitz's report concludes that the FBI had adequate cause to launch its Russia investigation. (Washington Post / CNN / The Hill)
- Day 1042: The FBI never placed undercover agents or informants inside Trump's 2016 campaign, according to a draft of the Justice Department's inspector general report. Michael Horowitz's report on the FBI's handling of the Russia investigation is due on Dec. 9. Trump and his supporters have repeatedly alleged that FBI officials not only spied on the campaign but that Obama had ordered Trump's phones tapped. The report is also expected to debunk allegations that the FBI relied on information from Christopher Steele's dossier of damaging, unverified information about Trump to open the investigation. (New York Times)
- Day 1037: A report from the Justice Department's inspector general didn't find anti-Trump bias at the FBI when it obtained a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to look into Carter Page, a Trump campaign adviser. According to a draft copy of Michael Horowitz's report, there were errors and omissions in the documents related to wiretapping Page and that a low-level lawyer altered an email used to seek a renewal of the wiretap. Kevin Clinesmith attached additional material to the bottom of an email from an official at another federal agency, which contained several factual assertions. Horowitz concluded that the altered document did not impact the overall validity of the surveillance application, but referred his findings about Clinesmith to prosecutors for a potential criminal charge. Clinesmith left the Russia investigation in February 2018. Overall, the draft report concludes that the FBI had enough evidence for opening the investigation, that Joseph Mifsud, a Russia-linked professor who told a Trump campaign official that Russia had damaging information on Hillary Clinton in the form of hacked Democratic emails, was not an FBI informant, and that none of the evidence used to open the investigation came from the CIA or dossier of Trump-Russia ties compiled by Christopher Steele. (New York Times / Washington Post / CNN / Washington Post)
4/ Trump asked the Supreme Court to block a subpoena from House Democrats for his financial records, arguing that the House exceeded its authority when it ordered Trump's longtime accounting firm Mazars USA to turn over his personal records. The petition is the second request in the last month concerning a similar subpoena for his financial records. In both cases, Trump sued to stop Mazars USA from complying with subpoenas for records. Federal appeals courts ruled against Trump in both cases. (Politico / Bloomberg / NBC News /CNN / New York Times / Washington Post)
- Day 1030: Trump asked the Supreme Court to block a House subpoena for his tax returns for the second day in a row. Yesterday, Trump's lawyers asked the Supreme Court to reverse a lower-court ruling that allowed the Manhattan District Attorney's Office to obtain eight years' worth of Trump's personal and corporate tax returns from his accountant, Mazars USA, as part of a probe into the payments made to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal. Today, Trump's lawyers asked the justices to temporarily block a subpoena from the House Oversight Committee compelling Mazars to provide Trump's tax returns. Mazars has said it will hand over the records if it is required to. (CNBC / Bloomberg / Washington Post)
5/ The former Playboy model who said she had an affair with Trump before he was president sued Fox News for defamation. Karen McDougal alleged that Tucker Carlson falsely accused her of extortion when he said that she "approached Donald Trump and threatened to ruin his career and humiliate his family if he doesn't give them money." (New York Times)
6/ North Korea threatened to resume calling Trump a "dotard" if he keeps referring to Kim Jong Un as "rocket man." The warning came after Trump remarked that Kim "likes sending rockets up, doesn't he? That's why I call him rocket man." (Associated Press)- Day 246: Following Trump's United Nations speech, North Korea threatened to detonate a hydrogen bomb in the Pacific. Kim Jong Un in a statement called Trump a "mentally deranged U.S. dotard" who would "pay dearly" for his words, and that North Korea would enact the "highest level of hardline countermeasure in history." The North Korean foreign minister clarified this phrase, suggesting it could refer to an H-bomb. (Financial Times / New York Times)
-
while a lot of progressives dislike for not being more progressive. She's in the same boat as Hillary Clinton for being a woman with a history of political power.
Remember when the Extremely Online constituency was demanding that Pelosi resign from congress and be replaced by some random white guy for Speaker? Good times.
-
I've legit never heard anyone say "Dotard" except for Saruman's deleted scene in Return of the King.
But to be fair, the House of Trump is similar to a thatched barn where brigands drink in the reek and the brats roll on the floor with the dogs.
-
@Cyan:
Remember when the Extremely Online constituency was demanding that Pelosi resign from congress and be replaced by some random white guy for Speaker? Good times.
I'm mixed on Pelosi. She's doing decently, but at the same time it sure as hell feels and looks like she's putting polling ahead of duty. Taking ages to start impeachment proceedings, and now rushing to finish them by Christmas for no reason even though its the biggest political scandal in our country's history?
At the same time if her stance was "give him enough rope and he'll hang himself" and that was the plan, I guess its working?
Its tough because it IS a balancing act and they DO want the house to keep a majority next time but its also lackluster? Its a mixed bag but I don't know that anyone else in that specific position could do better. Other dems, or lawyers, could be speaking the case better and more clearly in the media though, that's for sure.
-
@Cyan:
Remember when the Extremely Online constituency was demanding that Pelosi resign from congress and be replaced by some random white guy for Speaker? Good times.
Apparently Boehner and Ryan didn't count.
-
@Cyan:
Remember when the Extremely Online constituency was demanding that Pelosi resign from congress and be replaced by some random white guy for Speaker? Good times.
Funny thing was that both the random white guys who challenged her and were supported by the Extremely Online turned out to be very conservative Dems (Ryan and Moulton).
-
Apparently Boehner and Ryan didn't count.
Why am i just now learning that there is someone who willingly goes by the last name boner.
-
Why am i just now learning that there is someone who willingly goes by the last name boner.
It's supposed to be pronounced Bane-ner
So he's basically Bane only without the Lucha Mask, Musculature, and success in achieving his goal (breaking someone).
He did go out like a bitch though like in Batman & Robin.
-
Think "Banal" where Boehner is concerned; both in sound and in policy.
-
There is no way in hell that the rest of house didn't call Boehner "Boner" behind his back.
-
Boehner is a weed lobbyist now, after a lifelong supporter of the war on drugs.
-
Gotta hump/hemp your way to the top!
-
Boehner is a weed lobbyist now, after a lifelong supporter of the war on drugs.
At least he wisened up (for obvious reasons) if only people like Sessions and Biden could join everyone else in 2019/2020.
-
In the words of George Takei:
-
Speaking of Boehner, my dad, as an obnoxiously staunch republican, is proud he didn't vote for him; he said it was because Boehner was a RINO to him (something I assume was an idea Talk Radio planted in his head). In other words
he didn't like that Boehner was willing to reach across the isle and compromise with the democrats. Its a sad state of affairs when my dad (and other likes him) are so consumed by the notion that democrats are pure evil that they'd forgo any
talk of compromise to simply keep the other team from having any input on policy. It seems as if a nonfunctional law making body is preferred to functional one, as long as the other 'team' has no say in control over that body. -
This talk of Boehner is reminding me of this politico article where he trash talks his old colleagues.
Breaking the ice, I mention some news of the day—that Trey Gowdy appears likely to become chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The previous chairman, Jason Chaffetz, had abruptly announced his resignation from Congress; House conservatives had hoped that Jim Jordan, a senior member on the committee, might pursue the chairmanship. Boehner grins. “Gowdy—that’s my guy, even though he doesn’t know how to dress,” he says. Then Boehner leans back in his chair. “Fuck Jordan. Fuck Chaffetz. They’re both assholes."
I get the feeling that out of office more politicians are like this. They are human, after all. Not that it excuses them, but still can't you just see Paul Ryan cursing out Trump like this?
Also, I think Trump started ranting about toilets and light bulbs today? It was weird.
-
. In other words
he didn't like that Boehner was willing to reach across the isle and compromise with the democrats.Too bad that's not really what Boehner was trying to do before the tea party segment of the party came along and basically kept trying to fuck everything up while essentially trying to throw Boehner in the woodchipper for not being a "true" conservative.
Also, I think Trump started ranting about toilets and light bulbs today? It was weird.
That's pretty much how Trump's comments are supposed to work, not make sense him repeating shit twice and essentially trying to make someone look aggrieved.
-
Speaking of Boehner, my dad, as an obnoxiously staunch republican, is proud he didn't vote for him; he said it was because Boehner was a RINO to him (something I assume was an idea Talk Radio planted in his head). In other words
he didn't like that Boehner was willing to reach across the isle and compromise with the democrats. Its a sad state of affairs when my dad (and other likes him) are so consumed by the notion that democrats are pure evil that they'd forgo any
talk of compromise to simply keep the other team from having any input on policy. It seems as if a nonfunctional law making body is preferred to functional one, as long as the other 'team' has no say in control over that body.The thing is that, as GvR pointed out, even before the GOP took the House, Boehner regulary called various Obama initiaifes forms of fascism. Just Youtube his Obamacare speeches.
-
The thing is that, as GvR pointed out, even before the GOP took the House, Boehner regulary called various Obama initiaifes forms of fascism. Just Youtube his Obamacare speeches.
I've never thought that Boehner was anything more than your typical 21st century Republican Speaker of the house, but whether or not Boehner is actually a bipartisan 'RINO' or not is irrelevant to people who buy into right wing propaganda like my father.
The matter of fact is, these folks are so enthralled with notions that the other side is the devil that even the thought of someone working with the other 'team' gets them indignant and riled up (whether or not the information that leads to those thoughts is valid or not). -
"Bernie and his followers already ruined one election"
Okay fine, I'll bite: What exactly did Bernie Sanders do in 2016? Because from what I've seen he…
-Threw his hat into the race in the presidential primary, something he was entirely within his right to do considering it's supposed to be a democratic process where the best candidate prevails, and how exactly would one gauge the best candidate if one arbitrarily shuts people out?
-Managed to go from being a no-name outside of his own state to very nearly winning the primary, indicating that his message really resonated quite strongly with people
-Stayed in the race until it became clear that he had no shot at victory, at which point he very quickly switched gears to aggressively campaigning for Hillary Clinton.Oh my. What a villain. Note also that people more or less stopped listening to him after he switched to campaigning for Hillary, because, as it turns out, people liked Bernie Sanders for the policies he championed, so once he stopped championing those policies and went over to "You have to vote for Hillary because Trump would be an unmitigated disaster!", people were no longer interested.
Did I also mention how both last time and this time, there's a transparently obvious anti-Sanders bias in the media? Every time he ends up accomplishing anything such as, I dunno, having larger crowds at his events than any other candidate, reaching one million individual donors faster than any other candidate, or ranking first in polls, sites like MSNBC and CNN go out of their way to acknowledge this as little as possible.
"Buttigieg in fourth, but a strong fourth"? Seriously? That's more noteworthy than Bernie Sanders being in first? Granted, it's not just Bernie; They have a tendency to ignore Yang and Tulsi Gabbard as well. Warren at least gets proper coverage at least some of the time.
Also worth noting: A lot of the states Hillary Clinton lost in in 2016? She didn't even campaign there, taking them for granted because those states had previously voted for Obama both times. Oh, my, who could possibly have foreseen that Trump might have been able to gain ground in the states where his opposition didn't even bother to show up?
Also this:
-
That’s a whole wall of inaccuracies based on whiny Youtube videos.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
I’m at work so I will go through it tonight, but for starters Bernie was blown out on Super Tuesdsy in early March but didn’t quit the race until July.
-
Bernie stayed in the race a lot longer than he should have before officially conceding and endorsing Hillary. Ostensibly to force the DNC to adopt some of his policies in their official platform but it just played into the "Bernie vs. The DNC" narrative that had sprung up. This painted the DNC as this shady lying organization that did everything it could to stop Bernie and install Hillary as the candidate.
A narrative he did little to dispel. In fact, I STILL see people bringing this up today for why they won't vote for any Democratic candidate besides Bernie, even against Trump in the primary.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz is basically the devil to these people.His support of her also just amounted to "Trump bad. So Hillary good by comparison"
He SHOULD have been saying:
"I'm never going to stop fighting for the things I campaigned for, but the fact remains that if I manage to draft a bill and get it passed through congress, President Trump would automatically veto it. With Hillary, the bill will get a fair shake. She is at moment, the best chance at our Revolution moving forward. Trump will send it backwards".
-
Don't bother, starfish. People don't like Bernie cause he's old and white. Doesn't matter that he has the best policy positions by far, he's not a minority and doesn't have a vagina, so some people will just absolutely not support him. Which is really stupid, but whatever. It's their vote and their choice.
-
@The:
Don't bother, starfish. People don't like Bernie cause he's old and doesn't know when to stop.
FTFY
he's not a minority
He's Jewish
-
-Threw his hat into the race in the presidential primary, something he was entirely within his right to do considering it's supposed to be a democratic process where the best candidate prevails, and how exactly would one gauge the best candidate if one arbitrarily shuts people out?
Same reason third parties are frowned upon. Vothing in the US is more strategic than democratic. People consder Bernie stayed to long or that he did not do good enough to dispell the idea that the DNC aren't shady assholes that fucked him over and thefore does not deserve their vote.
-
@The:
Don't bother, starfish. People don't like Bernie cause he's old and white. Doesn't matter that he has the best policy positions by far, he's not a minority and doesn't have a vagina, so some people will just absolutely not support him. Which is really stupid, but whatever. It's their vote and their choice.
Well that and all the stuff outlined in the post literally above yours.
For myself, I supported Clinton in 2016 and Warren now because they seen to be the most competent people currently in the running. Sanders had a lot of ideas but, by my understanding either few plans or plans that were overly optimistic.
Clinton and Warren were/are not that far from him and had ways in mind to implement their ideas if elected. Warren's meme for a while was even "she has a plan for that".
Also, I've seen people comment that Sanders' economic policies were pretty pie in the sky in the sense that they needed things to go better than that realistically might. Couple that with an unfortunate tone-deafness on racial issues and his stock was lowered in my book.
-
@The:
Don't bother, starfish. People don't like Bernie cause he's old and white. Doesn't matter that he has the best policy positions by far, he's not a minority and doesn't have a vagina, so some people will just absolutely not support him. Which is really stupid, but whatever. It's their vote and their choice.
The winner was a white man who is relatively old. I suppose you are talking about the primary. I think it was more about how Hilary was a much more well known figure that basically run a campain since Obama was a thing and Bernie was a relative unknown with a lot of ground to cover.
-
FTFY
He's Jewish
Didn't fix anything. Why would he stop when he's clearly the best choice? Not everyone wants to settle for their political choices.
And he's white passing like most jews in the U.S, and that's all some people need to see. I did just genuinely forget jews are amkng the minority though, lol. That was an honest mistake.–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Well that and all the stuff outlined in the post literally above yours.
…Except not really. Hillay doesn't believe in the things Bernie does. So no, his ideals wouldn't get "a fair shake" in her hypothetical administration.
-
@The:
Didn't fix anything. Why would he stop when he's clearly the best choice? Not everyone wants to settle for their political choices.
And he's white passing like most jews in the U.S, and that's all some people need to see. I did just genuinely forget jews are amkng the minority though, lol. That was an honest mistake.Wants to, no. But if the choice is someone who might do much the same thing (Clinton/Warren) or someone who very definitely won't (Trump), you kind of have to.
-
The winner was a white man who is relatively old. I suppose you are talking about the primary. I think it was more about how Hilary was a much more well known figure that basically run a campain since Obama was a thing and Bernie was a relative unknown with a lot of ground to cover.
Yes, within the democratic base there is a sect of people who absolutely don't want their candidate to be a white male. Doesn't matter if he's the best choice.
-
@The:
Don't bother, starfish. People don't like Bernie cause he's old and white. Doesn't matter that he has the best policy positions by far, he's not a minority and doesn't have a vagina, so some people will just absolutely not support him. Which is really stupid, but whatever. It's their vote and their choice.
That's an extremely shitty way to dismiss the things other people are actually saying.
It's the equivalent of me turning that around on you and saying "You only support Bernie because he's a white old man and you feel threatened by any minorities."
I'm wary of Bernie because of his record supporting the NRA until very recently, also he and his supporters like to crow about how he "Always" supported LGBT rights but if you look back, more often than not when he'd vote against some anti-LGBT bill, he'd frame it as "Yes, protecting marriage IS an important thing, I just don't think it's something that we should be focusing on NOW when there are economic issues to deal with"
That's really my big problem with him boiled down into a nutshell. He has his pet economic issues he REALLY cares about and it honestly feels like he doesn't care about anything he can't tie back into those.
Also, his followers are in for a rude awakening. I keep seeing people saying that the reason they are "Bernie or Bust" is because they believe the system is entirely broken and the only way to get "real change" is to completely overhaul it.
If you think Bernie will actually have the power to do that as president you are deluding yourself. It's still going to be the standard system where bills have to pass through the house and the senate, then go to his desk. Without a top down rebuild of the entire system we'll just basically go back to gridlock.
He'd ABSOLUTELY be better than Trump no doubt about it. The stuff that IS in his power like making policy regarding ICE, military stuff including trans service members, stuff regarding the stupid wall etc would definitely be reversed.
But all of the big things he wants to do like Tax Payer funded college, single payer healthcare, campaign finance reform all of that will require someone in congress draft a bill: Nancy Pelosi will need to bring it up for vote in the house. It will need to pass, then Moscow Mitch will keep it in limbo forever and it will never go anywhere.
Even if Dems take both the House and the Senate, unless they win supermajorities in both, there will still be enough Republicans to disrupt and even completely stop the process of the bills dead in their tracks with the practical effect being that Bernie never gets any of the big things done.
But sure. I guess I don't actually know anything about anything and I'm just some idiot who only has reservations about Bernie because "White man bad".
Yup.
-
Wants to, no. But if the choice is someone who might do much the same thing (Clinton/Warren) or someone who very definitely won't (Trump), you kind of have to.
Don't get me wrong, I haaaate trumpy with every fiber of my being. He's a disgusting excuse for a human being who should never have been president. I'll vote blue no matter who, but that doesn't mean I'll like it. I voted for Hillary because she was possibly the most qualified person to ever run for president. Doesn't mean I like her or support her status quo ideals, but she was far and away superior to trumpy. Same as Bernie, same as Warren. Sometimes I forget we're all on the same "side", but when someone bad mouths the person I believe in, my emotions get the better of me, ya know?
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
I never called you an idiot, Rin. I'm sorry I came off as such a cunt. But I really, truly believe in Bernie. And there are people who trash talk him just because he's old and white, and there have been enough of them in power. I let my emotions get the better of me. I apologize.
-
This post is deleted!
-
Let's not forget the things Bernie and his supporters did that helped normalize Trump's candidacy either; refusing to fully release his tax information, the constant implications that a process he lost by millions of votes was rigged against him, and fhe message that Clinton was the corrupt one tied to Wall Street because she took money from speeches. Trump jumped on that message bigtime to promote himself as an outsider despite being known for decades as a highly corrupt person with ties to Wall Street.
-
Let's not forget the things Bernie and his supporters did that helped normalize Trump's candidacy either; refusing to fully release his tax information, the constant implications that a process he lost by millions of votes was rigged against him, and fhe message that Clinton was the corrupt one tied to Wall Street because she took money from speeches. Trump jumped on that message bigtime to promote himself as an outsider despite being known for decades as a highly corrupt person with ties to Wall Street.
I don't know that Hillary is corrupt, but she's certainly not a progressive. And that's reason enough for me not to like her. And Bernie did switch to supporting Hillary after she got the nomination. It really boils down to people whining that some of Bernie's supporters have conviction in their beliefs and won't sell out just to toe the party line. If you don't believe in someone or something, don't support them. Simple as that.
-
@The:
I don't know that Hillary is corrupt, but she's certainly not a progressive. And that's reason enough for me not to like her. And Bernie did switch to supporting Hillary after she got the nomination. It really boils down to people whining that some of Bernie's supporters have conviction in their beliefs and won't sell out just to toe the party line. If you don't believe in someone or something, don't support them. Simple as that.
The point being made, I think, is that very thing was a factor in why Trump won. People refused to support Clinton because she wasn't Sanders, even in the face of Trump.
The way I've looked at 2016, the moment Clinton and Trump became the candidates, Clinton's faults, real and imagined, became irrelevant.