Page 2 of 37 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 370
Thanks Tree497Thanks

Thread: Always a Dem until 2016

  1. #11
    Frecks1710 Frecks1710's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    158
    Thanks
    176

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    Not voting for Hillary is survivable of the forum.

    For gawd's sake never admit that you voted for The Donald.
    The other choice was not voting at all. I would never do that.
    Thanks from Devil505

  2. #12
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    64,018
    Thanks
    20707

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    Not voting for Hillary is survivable of the forum.

    For gawd's sake never admit that you voted for The Donald.
    LOL....why?

    Members have a pretty damn good idea who voted for and still support him.
    What's the problem with admitting it and defending your reasons?
    Isn't that why most of us are here......to exchange viewpoints and explain them?
    Thanks from Frecks1710 and Friday13

  3. #13
    the "good" prag pragmatic's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    31,250
    Thanks
    19395

    From
    between Moon and NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by Frecks1710 View Post
    The other choice was not voting at all. I would never do that.
    Many of us voted for neither of the candidates nominated by the two major parties.

    ...with no feelings of guilt.
    Thanks from One and Kontrary

  4. #14
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    64,018
    Thanks
    20707

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    Many of us voted for neither of the candidates nominated by the two major parties.

    ...with no feelings of guilt.
    I find that hard to believe fwiw.
    I think many are just embarrassed by their vote and don't have the courage to defend it.....on both sides

    That helps no one on an anonymous political debate forum..
    Last edited by Devil505; 10th June 2018 at 07:01 PM.
    Thanks from Frecks1710

  5. #15
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    64,018
    Thanks
    20707

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Good topic Frecks!
    Thanks from Frecks1710

  6. #16
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    15,225
    Thanks
    4064

    From
    AK & ID
    Quote Originally Posted by Frecks1710 View Post
    I would like your opinion...civilly, of course. I have been a registered Dem and always voted that way. Then this past election I left the party. For the very first time! I was just so unhappy with Hillary...I didn't want any part of her or her Foundation. I had hoped for "a refreshing change." I am not sure just how refreshing that change has been! Surely, there are many mistakes, but I do not feel POTUS or the Republicans are ALL wrong as the left believes. I do know a lot of people did the same exact thing I did. In fact, I think the percentage of disgruntled, disappointed, frustrated Dems helped to bring Trump into office. I am seriously wondering just how the Democratic party can win myself back and the others? I still have the same values I always have had. I am truly not a Republican; but neither am I on the far left. I would like to hear your response.
    Powerful interest groups have been feeding their respective party bases agitating rhetoric for a long time, and mainstream Presidents (candidates, even) almost never reach to the extremes of this rhetoric. They pump the rhetoric and then support a moderate. Pump the rhetoric and support a moderate.

    Feed the people enough divisive rhetoric for long enough, and eventually they will topple your moderate candidate with a populist.

    In the case of the Democratic Party, that powerful interest group is Big Labor. Democrats have been obediently trumpeting their anti-trade rhetoric for over 30 years. Hillary couldn't sell it. She comes across as extremely inauthentic. Her husband is associated with NAFTA, which Big Labor has railed against for almost three decades now. She was quoted referring to the TPP as a "gold standard" of free trade agreements. Trump came in and boldly stated the TPP was toast and that NAFTA would be renegotiated. People believed him. Then in a panic the Democrats asked Richard Trumka to scream into the microphone at the Convention that "She opposes the job-killing Trans-Pacific Partnership!" and no one believed him. Everyone who has paid any attention knew Trumka was lying. He lies constantly. They believed Trump though. And Trump turned out to be telling the truth! He did pitch the TPP, and has been continuously anti-trade, which is what unions have been clamoring for.

    Sanders was the more believable candidate for progressives. It was evident the DNC was actively undermining him. The media's extreme over-confidence that Hillary would win created an enormous sense of complacency. The Democratic Party establishment did everything extremely wrong in 2016, and completely unraveled.
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 10th June 2018 at 07:06 PM.
    Thanks from Frecks1710 and orangecat

  7. #17
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    64,018
    Thanks
    20707

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Powerful interest groups have been feeding their respective party bases agitating rhetoric for a long time, and mainstream Presidents (candidates, even) almost never reach to the extremes of this rhetoric. They pump the rhetoric and then support a moderate. Pump the rhetoric and support a moderate.

    Feed the people enough divisive rhetoric for long enough, and eventually they will topple your moderate candidate with a populist.

    In the case of the Democratic Party, that powerful interest group is Big Labor. Democrats have been obediently trumpeting their anti-trade rhetoric for over 30 years. Hillary couldn't sell it. She comes across as extremely inauthentic. Her husband is associated with NAFTA, which Big Labor has railed against for almost three decades now. She was quoted referring to the TPP as a "gold standard" of free trade agreements. Trump came in and boldly stated the TPP was toast and that NAFTA would be renegotiated. People believed him. Then in a panic the Democrats asked Richard Trumka to scream into the microphone at the Convention that "She opposes the job-killing Trans-Pacific Partnership!" and no one believed him. Everyone who has paid any attention knew Trumka was lying. He lies constantly. They believed Trump though. And Trump turned out to be telling the truth! He did pitch the TPP, and has been continuously anti-trade, which is what unions have been clamoring for.

    Sanders was the more believable candidate for progressives. It was evident the DNC was actively undermining him. The media's extreme over-confidence that Hillary would win created an enormous sense of complacency. The Democratic Party establishment did everything extremely wrong in 2016, and completely unraveled.
    Agreed that the 2016 Dems misplayed their hand but as far as 2018 elections and beyond, I think they're the only game in town for anyone but the super-rich.

    Most families need 2 incomes these days just to survive and wealth disparity is growing.

    The GOP IS the party of the rich and corporations and the DEms just have to up their advertising to average people.

    Without the Dems there would be no SS, Medicare, Medicaid or safety net for the non-rich.
    Labor unions no longer have the power they once did.....wages are stagnant while CEo's get richer every day.
    Thanks from namvet69 and Friday13

  8. #18
    Human Bean KnotaFrayed's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    14,842
    Thanks
    12343

    From
    Here
    Quote Originally Posted by Frecks1710 View Post
    I would like your opinion...civilly, of course. I have been a registered Dem and always voted that way. Then this past election I left the party. For the very first time! I was just so unhappy with Hillary...I didn't want any part of her or her Foundation. I had hoped for "a refreshing change." I am not sure just how refreshing that change has been! Surely, there are many mistakes, but I do not feel POTUS or the Republicans are ALL wrong as the left believes. I do know a lot of people did the same exact thing I did. In fact, I think the percentage of disgruntled, disappointed, frustrated Dems helped to bring Trump into office. I am seriously wondering just how the Democratic party can win myself back and the others? I still have the same values I always have had. I am truly not a Republican; but neither am I on the far left. I would like to hear your response.
    I am curious as to why you were a Democrat, until 2016 and would like to hear you expound on what you find attractive or even redeeming about Donald Trump. I grew up in a Republican household that does not resemble hardly any part of today's republican party. Most of that family and many Republican friends feel Trump is repugnant to any values of truth, honesty and faithfulness to anything, but his personal profit and hedonism (greed) and would hope that Americans would want this nation to be representative of truth, honesty, faithfulness, charity consideration for others and other values that Trump seems to hold a contempt for. We were Republicans because of Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation and because it ended, the continuation of American support for humans owning other human beings as property. This did not mean problems did not still arise for former slaves because simply freeing people from ownership by others and making them as free as others, did not remove discrimination and it did not do much to support those freed, getting on their feet and catching up to all other free people, when it came to money in their pocket, a job and property ownership. There were Homestead Acts which opened the door for many people who didn't have much to begin with, but the color of some people's skin, meant continued spurning and lack of equality. Theodore Roosevelt, for all his faults, was another Republican was a part of our the heritage of our Republicanism based on his recognition of setting aside some land for future Americans to enjoy and from what he recognized was the "use up (and in some cases totally trash as they were doing so) and move on" practices of some whose only interest was in short term profit, not preserving or CONSERVing anything beyond what it could provide for them in profit. As NightSwimmer and possibly some others here have mentioned, we were not interested in extremes, but focused on balance and moderation because the portion between two ends of a pole is the greatest part of the pole, the ends represent only a small portion. Balance and moderation were also the aim of "a balance of power" and the aim of the founders of this nation, so that no "group" had sole power or the power to shut out all other interests. We were taught, if our neighbors were happy and healthy the general attitude, support for one another was good and anger and unhappiness, not to mention hunger and lack of opportunities were low. We were taught healthy and happy neighbors, be they local, national and global, because we all looked after one another and picked one another up when needed, were far more valuable than being super wealthy in the midst of people who are struggling to make ends meet. We were taught that an attitude of I got mine, what's wrong with them getting theirs, like I did, was wrong, mostly because so many people are not as fortunate, as the fortunate few. This was not a alien concept, but one that could be found in any Christian Bible, even for those who were/are not Christian and found in the tenets of many religions and secular societies. Now, it seems some want the opposite to be true for obvious reasons. Being humane, does not support greed, gluttony and a whole host of human characteristics that were never known as virtuous. Virtue and being virtuous gets in the way of crooks and liars.

    Additionally, a lot of it had to do with honesty, fairness, being just, honorable, considerate of others and being charitable. To be honest, while I have met others who behave like Donald Trump, I don't know ANYONE who was raised to act in such a manner, have such an attitude and be so blind to themselves. Based on that, I am seriously curious to know how, if one believed Hillary Clinton was corrupt, they then voted for Donald Trump, knowing he had even more baggage than she did when it came to allegations or anything proven regarding any corruptions. For me, those that voted for Trump because they didn't like Hillary Clinton because of what she did, are like someone asked if the wanted one scoop of banana ice cream refusing it, saying they don't like banana ice cream, then seeing them 10 minutes later devouring a bowl with four scoops of banana ice cream in it. It makes no sense, unless someone is posing as someone they are not, to try to sway people who are not very astute. People posing as disgruntled HRC voters in an effort to try to pull others with them, as a means to split the Democratic vote, is not a secret and no doubt, still goes on, perhaps still hoping to catch some people in the deception net.

    I am no longer a Republican, because of the neo republicans and their ushering in, in my mind, extreme views, selfishness, greed, gluttony, forms of capitalism that do not consider anything, but maximizing profits, regardless of any costs to human beings and the environment, (all human beings share), meanness, bullying, lack of empathy, narcissism, hypocrisy, among other things. I am now an Independent and as before, still vote for candidates and what they stand for individually, not their party affiliation. I have seen decades of attacks on the Clintons, intended to bring them down for obvious reasons, as the "opposition" to the republican party and after all that time, the allegations against the Clintons are a mere fraction of those against Trump and if one studies Trump's history, there is a pattern of stretching the truth, if not out and out lying and fraud. Court cases back that up, so, might one conclude, from how Trump performed in his hometown and home state, his hometown (NYC) being where people would know him the best.

    I am sorry, but I find it hard to believe the credibility of those who claim to have been a Democrat and did not vote for HRC based on her doing XYZ, then voting FOR Trump in spite of his doing the same XYZ sorts of things, but multiple times over. I am more than just a bit skeptical, if not merely wondering what the thought process is of someone that would reject someone based on their being corrupt, then vote to elect someone based on their record of being even more corrupt, if allegations, court cases, investigations into dealings which show a pattern of behavior, are the measure anyone goes by.

    From the position of being an Independent, the only thing I can see the Democrats have done wrong, is to follow (wherever it came from) the notion that NOT voting would somehow end in a better result than voting or that mid-term elections might have no relationship to Presidential election years or state legislation and majorities that may have as much or more to do with them, if not only what goes on in one's state. Lastly, the "logic" of claiming to love a candidate that became a Democrat to run for President and completely ignoring or dismissing the point of their stressing the importance of weighing ideologies and unifying behind it and the one candidate, after the primary elections, who can win, with enough that are unified behind them. People said Bernie Sanders was their man and they were willing to trust him enough to vote for him for POTUS, but when he recommended that unify and vote for Hillary Clinton, they didn't trust him. That doesn't make sense, like some other things that occurred during the election.

    We all know the outcome of the election and that Trump won the EC, but his unprecedented loss in the popular vote should not be forgotten or go without notice, considering all the attempts to forward the false claims that Trump won by a "landslide", when he did no such thing, in the popular vote OR the EC.

    https://www.factcheck.org/2016/11/trump-landslide-nope/

    This is just one example of how Trump lies and while some people who may have first believed what he said, then researched it and take note of it as false, others are caught in the net of believing it as fact, rather than fiction, because they won't take the time to research anything Trump says. They just agree with him because he's not a Democrat, wasn't a woman or HRC.

    Trump might be what could be called an incremental con artist. He makes a fortune, by cheating and lying to people, but only in small increments, done thousands of times. If someone short changes or overcharges by $1000, people they hire to do work for them or their customers, 1,000 times, that adds up to $1 million. Do the same thing, several thousand times and/or for larger amounts and it adds up. Same with casting lies, like casting a net. The aren't going to be believed by (catch) most people, but catch a few each time and it adds up to a lot. Trump only needed to pass the point of what is needed to be elected, he didn't need a landslide or even the popular vote. In a nation of over 200 million potential voters, and of those who did vote, Trump's EC win, was relatively and effectively, by a small number of voters.
    Last edited by KnotaFrayed; 11th June 2018 at 06:39 PM.
    Thanks from namvet69, BDBoop, Friday13 and 2 others

  9. #19
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    15,225
    Thanks
    4064

    From
    AK & ID
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Agreed that the 2016 Dems misplayed their hand but as far as 2018 elections and beyond, I think they're the only game in town for anyone but the super-rich.

    Most families need 2 incomes these days just to survive and wealth disparity is growing.

    The GOP IS the party of the rich and corporations and the DEms just have to up their advertising to average people.

    Without the Dems there would be no SS, Medicare, Medicaid or safety net for the non-rich.
    Labor unions no longer have the power they once did.....wages are stagnant while CEo's get richer every day.
    Labor unions still have a lot of power, as evidenced by their ability to get you to internalize their talking points.

  10. #20
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,629
    Thanks
    4835

    From
    Englewood, Fl
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Agreed that the 2016 Dems misplayed their hand but as far as 2018 elections and beyond, I think they're the only game in town for anyone but the super-rich.

    Most families need 2 incomes these days just to survive and wealth disparity is growing.

    The GOP IS the party of the rich and corporations and the DEms just have to up their advertising to average people.

    Without the Dems there would be no SS, Medicare, Medicaid or safety net for the non-rich.
    Labor unions no longer have the power they once did.....wages are stagnant while CEo's get richer every day.
    Yeah to say that unions are the concern of the GOP is laughable. The union busting started with the lord Reagan. I hope people everywhere don't wait til the income gap is doubled and all the programs that working people depend on are gone, because that's exactly the position of the hard right. The so-called freedom caucus and Ryan are drooling from the prospect of killing the social safety net. It's already under way with COLAS shifting to "Chain based" And VA benefits are being regulated downward daily. It's the insidious way the GOP makes money grabs for their corporate and uber rich donor base. Reverse robin hoodism in its most stealthy form.

Page 2 of 37 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Gop: Rip 2016
    By Friday13 in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 317
    Last Post: 25th February 2016, 10:07 PM
  2. Who then in 2016?
    By Bourne in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 17th June 2015, 12:01 AM
  3. 2016
    By Bassman in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 4th November 2012, 11:42 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed