Hillary's Campaign Kickoff

[DC Tom]

If the left could re-write the constitution, it wouldn't resemble what we have now.

 

I wonder what allowances they'd make for safe spaces and trigger warnings...

[keepthefaith]

 

I wonder what allowances they'd make for safe spaces and trigger warnings...

We'd have no first amendment although both parties like to discourage free speech when it doesn't suit them.

[IDBillzFan]

 

I wonder what allowances they'd make for safe spaces and trigger warnings...

 

I suspect every person who came into their open border country would get a jar of play-doh and some essential oils.

[DC Tom]

 

I suspect every person who came into their open border country would get a jar of play-doh and some essential oils.

 

And no Second Amendment. No guns.

 

That would be awesome. Nobody with guns. I could conquer their stupid country with a butter knife.

[/dev/null]

 

And no Second Amendment. No guns.

 

That would be awesome. Nobody with guns. I could conquer their stupid country with a butter knife.

butter would probably be unconstitutional also

[DC Tom]

butter would probably be unconstitutional also

 

Not soy butter, or some similar bull ****.

[IDBillzFan]

 

Not soy butter, or some similar bull ****.

 

The national plant would be kale, no doubt.

[B-Man]

To Baskin and the other "she won the popular vote" crowd.....................not that it matters.

 

 

Hillary Voters: The Minority in 37 States
by Dan McLaughlin

 

Building on a point I made last week about how geographically narrow and insular the Democrats’ support is right now, consider this: Hillary Clinton won a majority of the popular vote in only thirteen states, the fewest of any major-party nominee since Bob Dole in 1996.

 

That’s an astoundingly poor performance. Facing an opponent so deeply flawed that Democrats were visibly salivating over running against him, she carried a popular majority in half as many states as Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, barely more than half as many as Mitt Romney:

 

{snip}

 

The only state away from the coasts where Hillary cracked 50% of the vote was her home state of Illinois; here’s the map of where she and Trump carried popular majorities:

 

 

 

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/442367/majority-voted-against-hillary-37-states

 

 

 

So please..............please keep pointing out that she won the Popular vote.........................we need the laughs

 

 

.

[ALF]

To Baskin and the other "she won the popular vote" crowd.....................not that it matters.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So please..............please keep pointing out that she won the Popular vote.........................we need the laughs

 

 

.

 

 

 

That was a good article , BTW Kasich was the only one I wanted to win.

[Maury Ballstein]

this is hysterically funny. What did she win by 1.3million? A participation award? She didn't win ****

The 3 million votes from non Us citizens really helped.

[IDBillzFan]

This just in: after weeks of arguing that there is no rigged election, there is no such thing as voter fraud and the results of this election must be accepted by Trump, the left is now arguing that the election WAS rigged, there WAS voter fraud in three key states (WI, MI, PA) and the left MUST NOT accept the results of this election.

 

And who better to bring that message than...Joss Whedon and Debra Messing?

 

Celebrities unite! (Unless you're Susan Sarandon.)

[Cugalabanza]

This just in: after weeks of arguing that there is no rigged election, there is no such thing as voter fraud and the results of this election must be accepted by Trump, the left is now arguing that the election WAS rigged, there WAS voter fraud in three key states (WI, MI, PA) and the left MUST NOT accept the results of this election.

 

And who better to bring that message than...Joss Whedon and Debra Messing?

 

Celebrities unite! (Unless you're Susan Sarandon.)

To be fair, I don't think anyone is really taking this seriously. Or, at least, they shouldn't be.

 

I read what J. Alex Halderman wrote about it. He says the media is misrepresenting his position. What Halderman is arguing is that PAPER ballots are preferable to systems that use only digital information, simply because it makes it possible to verify results in the event that hacking is suspected.

 

Halderman is not suggesting that any hacking was done in this election. He merely wants to shine a light on the potential risk with information being exclusively digital. He said it would be a good thing if a candidate demanded a recount because it would highlight this point about digital vulnerability. His interest is strictly in cyber security. He did not himself make any claims about foul play in the election or espouse any partisan stuff at all.

 

If this story builds, it will just be another instance of media sensationalizing and taking advantage of a climate where people are riled up and eager to read & absorb provocative stuff right now.

Edited November 23, 2016 by Cugalabanza

[DC Tom]

To be fair, I don't think anyone is really taking this seriously. Or, at least, they shouldn't be.

 

I read what J. Alex Halderman wrote about it. He says the media is misrepresenting his position. What Halderman is arguing is that PAPER ballots are preferable to systems that use only digital information, simply because it makes it possible to verify results in the event that hacking is suspected.

 

Halderman is not suggesting that any hacking was done in this election. He merely wants to shine a light on the potential risk with information being exclusively digital. He said it would be a good thing if a candidate demanded a recount because it would highlight this point about digital vulnerability. His interest is strictly in cyber security. He did not himself make any claims about foul play in the election or espouse any partisan stuff at all.

 

If this story builds, it will just be another instance of media sensationalizing and taking advantage of a climate where people are riled up and eager to read & absorb provocative stuff right now.

 

Actually, I've seen a few people taking it seriously, and people less "fringe" than I'd hope. I expect the story will be taken more seriously in the days ahead simply because "it's a story." Everyone in the media will run with it, because everyone ELSE in the media's running with it, and they'll all unironically report it alongside stories on "viral fake news stories" on Facebook (and you, for disagreeing with the story, will be called a "low information voter.")

 

But it's pretty entertaining to take all the "there is no voter fraud" nonsense I heard a month ago and quote their own words right back to them. All the responses pretty much amount to "But this is different! We thought Trump would lose back then!" Uh-huh...democracy must be protected, but only when your side wins. Just what the hell kind of "democracy" is that?

 

At this point, voter idiocy is the greater threat to the country than voter fraud.

[B-Man]

Progressives without Power

by Kevin D williamson

 

FTA:

 

This is a larger problem for the Democratic party than is generally appreciated. The Democratic party is an odd apparatus in which most of the power is held by sanctimonious little old liberal white ladies with graduate degrees and very high incomes — Hillary Rodham Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, Randi Weingarten — while the manpower, the vote-power, and the money-power (often in the form of union dues) comes from a disproportionately young and non-white base made up of people who, if they are doing well, might earn one-tenth of the half-million dollars a year Weingarten was paid as the boss of the teachers’ union. They are more likely to be cutting the grass in front of Elizabeth Warren’s multi-million-dollar mansion than moving into one of their own. They roll their eyes at Hillary Rodham Clinton’s risible “abuela” act, having actual abuelas of their own.

 

As in the Republican party, the Democrats have a restive base that is more radical than its leadership, more aggressive, and in search of signs of tribal affiliation. The Democratic base is not made up of little old liberal white ladies with seven-, eight-, and nine-figure bank balances, but the party’s leadership is. It is worth noting that in a year in which the Republican candidate painted Mexican immigrants with a rather broad and ugly brush, Mrs. Clinton got a smaller share of the Hispanic vote than Barack Obama did in 2012. She got a significantly smaller share of the black vote, too. Interestingly, Mrs. Clinton’s drop in the black vote came exclusively from black men. Many black Americans had very high hopes that an Obama administration would mean significant changes in their lives and in the state of their communities. but that has not come to pass. There is nothing about Mrs. Clinton that inspired similar hopes. “She’s not right, and we all know it,” the comedian Dave Chappelle said.

 

It is far from obvious that Senator Cherokee Cheekbones or anyone standing alongside Debbie Wasserman Schultz will feel more “right” to Democratic voters who have almost nothing in common with them. A coalition in which elderly rich white faculty-lounge liberals have all the power and enjoy all the perks while the work and money come from younger and browner people is not going to be very stable.

 

Especially when it has been stripped of the one thing that has held that coalition together so far: power.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/442474/democratic-party-lost-governors-state-legislature-seats-2016-election

[Prickly Pete]

I remember my father pointing out that there is a whole class of people that have spent their entire lives in institutions. Meaning, they went from high school, to college, then graduate school, then to work as teachers or government/social work, many never even working at any job outside of institutions their entire lives. That is where I suspect many of these liberals (especially the women) come from.

 

I don't know that Hillary Clinton, or Elizabeth Warren has ever had any kind of "real" job, but more likely some internships, and volunteer work for political groups. These people live in a bubble, and many of their supporters have too. It's a controlled environment, with set rules for advancement, tenure, pay scale, etc.

 

Most of the women (and some of the men) in my own family are from this class (mostly teachers), and EVERY one of them is vehemently anti-Trump, pro-Hillary (they love her).

Edited December 1, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[ALF]

Growing South Korean protests demand President Park's resignation

Park is accused of letting her confidante Choi Soon-sil, who does not hold an official government post, view confidential documents and presidential speeches.

Choi is accused of using her relationship with Park to accumulate millions of dollars in donations to her foundations. Choi is charged with abuse of power, fraud and coercion, and two of Park's former aides also face criminal charges.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/26/asia/south-korea-mass-protests/index.html

sounds familiar to me

[B-Man]

FLASHBACK: Clinton Called Not Accepting Election Results 'Horrifying'...

BLACK FRIDAY SALE !!

[B-Man]

 

..Jim Clyburn’s 76,...... Nancy Pelosi’s 76, .......Steny Hoyer’s 77.

 

 

Your Democrat "leaders"

 

 

Hillary 2020 !!

Edited December 1, 2016 by B-Man

[keepthefaith]

 

..Jim Clyburn’s 76,...... Nancy Pelosi’s 76, .......Steny Hoyer’s 77.

 

 

Your Democrat "leaders"

 

 

Hillary 2020 !!

Why don't these !@#$ing people retire? Go fishing or learn to fingerpaint for ****'s sake.

[Nanker]

Why don't these !@#$ing people retire? Go fishing or learn to fingerpaint for ****'s sake.

 

Power. Power and influence. There's money to be made in power and influence.

They're addicted to it. They addicts. They're power and influence junkies.