TH3 Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 (edited) So BO and HRC stink and by all accounts should not have won....or shouldn't win Maybe the GOP loses the national vote because the majority of people don't like their policies... The only reason the GOP holds the house is because of gerrymandering....the are vastly outvoted in aggregate congressional vote counts... So after 2016...DEM hold the Pesidency, Senate, and GOP hold onto house via gerrymandering.... Sounds like a bigger problem than affirmative action via being female/minority Edited August 17, 2016 by baskin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Clinton comes after the rich: ‘We’re going where the money is.’ She’s been channeling the spirit of Willie Sutton throughout her entire career (hence our headline), but it’s nice to see her finally make it official. Of course, once your business reaches the too big to fail level and you’re prepared to partake in what Iowahawk calls “bribery dinner theater” with the Clintons, Hillary’s statement is merely so much corporatist kabuki. Bill Clinton’s misleading claim about ‘marked classified’ information in Hillary Clinton’s emailsWashington Post, by Michelle Ye Hee Lee Original Article Congress receives FBI material on Hillary Clinton emails. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 So BO and HRC stink and by all accounts should not have won....or shouldn't win Maybe the GOP loses the national vote because the majority of people don't like their policies... The only reason the GOP holds the house is because of gerrymandering....the are vastly outvoted in aggregate congressional vote counts... So after 2016...DEM hold the Pesidency, Senate, and GOP hold onto house via gerrymandering.... Sounds like a bigger problem than affirmative action via being female/minority I stopped at your bringing up the GOP and I know you're too dense to get it. What does the GOP have to do with how poor of a choice Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are? This is a major problem in this country. Its narrow minded approach to politics when we hold the other side accountable for the side we choose and said sides failings or faults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 So BO and HRC stink and by all accounts should not have won....or shouldn't win Maybe the GOP loses the national vote because the majority of people don't like their policies... The only reason the GOP holds the house is because of gerrymandering....the are vastly outvoted in aggregate congressional vote counts... So after 2016...DEM hold the Pesidency, Senate, and GOP hold onto house via gerrymandering.... Sounds like a bigger problem than affirmative action via being female/minority Do you mean the kind of gerrymandering that resulted in Illinois republicans losing I believe 5 of 18 US house seats in the state in 2012 and 2014 after governor Quinn had the districts redrawn in an obvious outrageous partisan way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 So BO and HRC stink and by all accounts should not have won....or shouldn't win Maybe the GOP loses the national vote because the majority of people don't like their policies... The only reason the GOP holds the house is because of gerrymandering....the are vastly outvoted in aggregate congressional vote counts... So after 2016...DEM hold the Pesidency, Senate, and GOP hold onto house via gerrymandering.... Sounds like a bigger problem than affirmative action via being female/minority More like the majority of people are stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Obama and Hillary are constantly playing the race and gender cards. Anytime someone disagrees with them they pull them out and get the left to agree with them and echo that sentiment. All one has to do is disagree with one of them and that person will be denigrated as a racist or as someone perpetuating the "war on women". Your posts here in this thread as they refer to LA's posts show that you've really mastered the fine art of being obtuse. Thanks for the absurd overstatement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 If Barack Obama was white, absolutely NO ONE in the press would have paid any attention to a first-term senator with literally NO actual accomplishments in his entire freaking life other than getting elected to office by having people's divorce records unsealed. Especially a white first-term senator running against what could be the first FEMALE president. Jimmy Carter says hi. George W says hi. Abe Lincoln says hi. Harry Truman says hi. Benjamin Harrison says hi. Obama got elected because he was a master at the political game. You discredit yourself by attributing so much to his race. He didn't get elected for the sake of electing a black guy. He got elected because he was a top notch campaigner and speech-giver who connected with a lot of people and frankly as much as it pains you to admit it, still does. He'd mop up any person alive except maybe Bill Clinton. Race is only a part of the stew and mostly works against minorities, at least according to 43 white dudes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Hillary Clinton Picks TPP and Fracking Advocate To Set Up Her White House Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Jimmy Carter says hi. George W says hi. Abe Lincoln says hi. Harry Truman says hi. Benjamin Harrison says hi. Obama got elected because he was a master at the political game. You discredit yourself by attributing so much to his race. He didn't get elected for the sake of electing a black guy. He got elected because he was a top notch campaigner and speech-giver who connected with a lot of people and frankly as much as it pains you to admit it, still does. He'd mop up any person alive except maybe Bill Clinton. Race is only a part of the stew and mostly works against minorities, at least according to 43 white dudes. This is a weak response. Bush & Carter were popular governors and Truman was a Veep. You would have a far stronger argument if you pulled JFK out of the hat for the example, as that was the last time the nation voted for a young handsome charismatic candidate who was elected despite his Catholic handicap. Since I wasn't around the 1960 election, I can't say how much of the electorate voted for him for the Camelot halo vs feeling good about themselves in voting for a god-forsaken Catholic, but you can't deny there was a groundswell of voters in 2008 who self-validated their progressiveness by voting for Obama over Hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Jimmy Carter says hi. George W says hi. Abe Lincoln says hi. Harry Truman says hi. Benjamin Harrison says hi. Obama got elected because he was a master at the political game. You discredit yourself by attributing so much to his race. He didn't get elected for the sake of electing a black guy. He got elected because he was a top notch campaigner and speech-giver who connected with a lot of people and frankly as much as it pains you to admit it, still does. He'd mop up any person alive except maybe Bill Clinton. Race is only a part of the stew and mostly works against minorities, at least according to 43 white dudes. Read what I wrote again and try to respond with something relevant, okay? Let me put in in Crayola in hopes you can digest it: none of those people you listed above ran against Hillary. Only Obama did. And if he were white, at that time and in that situation, he loses because...say it with me now... NO ONE in the press would have paid any attention to a first-term senator with literally NO actual accomplishments in his entire freaking life other than getting elected to office by having people's divorce records unsealed. Especially a white first-term senator running against what could be the first FEMALE president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 (edited) Read what I wrote again and try to respond with something relevant, okay? Let me put in in Crayola in hopes you can digest it: none of those people you listed above ran against Hillary. Only Obama did. And if he were white, at that time and in that situation, he loses because...say it with me now... Continue diminishing him based on his race. You return to it. He won because he was and is an amazing campaigner. This is a weak response. Bush & Carter were popular governors and Truman was a Veep. Bush and Carter were single term minimal experience governors. And the others had even less experience. Truman was a bad choice. Edited August 17, 2016 by Observer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Continue diminishing him based on his race. You return to it. He won because he was and is an amazing campaigner. I don't diminish him because he's black. In fact, I give his race full credit. If it weren't for being black, he would have never beat Hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Continue diminishing him based on his race. You return to it. He won because he was and is an amazing campaigner. Actually, we hold him responsible for his poor leadership and executive activity. It's the left that diminishes him based on race, by responding to any criticism with accusations of "Racism!" Apparently the left believes holding someone accountable is racist if they're a minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 (edited) Continue diminishing him based on his race. You return to it. He won because he was and is an amazing campaigner. I think all would agree that Obama is a great campaigner, but having somewhere near 20% of primary voters (portion of registered democrats that are AA's) locked up due to their loyalty to someone of their same race creates a high bar for any competing candidate (Hillary in '08). Edited August 17, 2016 by keepthefaith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 LA says he won because he's black. Period. He says Obama would be a stoner in Hawaii if white. He says Hillary will win because she's a woman. He cuts through all of their appeal and boils them down to race. You're all missing that point. When your daughters, moms, sisters become CEOs and you overhear some douchebag say, "She got that job because she's a woman," maybe you'll get it. When your black friend becomes chief of the fire department and some white firefighters at a bar say "He's there because of affirmative action," maybe you'll get it. When your son in law gets a promotion over a co-worker and the co-worker tells his buddy that "We all know why he got that job" and you hear it, maybe you'll get it. Or maybe not. Obama is flawed. Hillary is flawed. Their flaws are not their skin color or sex. Peace out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Obama is flawed. Hillary is flawed. Their flaws are not their skin color or sex. Peace out. "I'll take...........Things no one has said...........for $200 Alex" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Bush and Carter were single term minimal experience governors. And the others had even less experience. Bush was Governor of Texas from 1994 until he won the presidency in 2000 - two terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 LA says he won because he's black. Period. He says Obama would be a stoner in Hawaii if white. He says Hillary will win because she's a woman. He cuts through all of their appeal and boils them down to race. You're all missing that point. When your daughters, moms, sisters become CEOs and you overhear some douchebag say, "She got that job because she's a woman," maybe you'll get it. When your black friend becomes chief of the fire department and some white firefighters at a bar say "He's there because of affirmative action," maybe you'll get it. When your son in law gets a promotion over a co-worker and the co-worker tells his buddy that "We all know why he got that job" and you hear it, maybe you'll get it. Or maybe not. Obama is flawed. Hillary is flawed. Their flaws are not their skin color or sex. Peace out. I swear, it's like you gave your log in credentials to gatorman. First, Obama WAS a stoner in Hawaii, and today he's probably still a stoner, just in DC, so that point is moot. Second, I never said Hillary will win because she is a woman. You made that up. What I said was that Hillary's surrogates are telling women that they MUST vote for Hillary because HIllary has a vagina. Fact check: true. Third, are you trying to convince people that affirmative action does not exist? Is that your position? Because in order for you to mock someone for saying "He got that job because of affirmative action," you must mean that affirmative action does not exist. Is that your position? Please be specific, and try to use your own words this time instead of making up mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Bush was Governor of Texas from 1994 until he won the presidency in 2000 - two terms. I think he was talking about Papa Bush... ...who was never governor of Texas. Obama is flawed. Hillary is flawed. Their flaws are not their skin color or sex. Peace out. You'd be hard-pressed to find someone here saying that. And if you do, you'd find most of the people you're criticizing jumping all over their **** for saying it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Bush and Carter were single term minimal experience governors. And the others had even less experience. Bush was Governor of Texas from 1994 until he won the presidency in 2000 - two terms. I think he was talking about Papa Bush... ...who was never governor of Texas. But Tom, that doesn't make any sense, oh wait......................observer..................okay, nevermind. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts