Idiot Begs Electable Candidate to Run on 2020. Nation Suffers Major Mental Breakdown.

[evildevil]

Political Party to Commit Mass Suicide to Appease the gods of Wall Street.

Trump: 0. Democrats: 0. The People: 1
Throughout the country, the Trump administration’s policies are being met by resistance - no thanks to Democratic elites.

1.

Donald Trump was handed a major defeat a couple nights ago when the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to

Comments

[maynardsong]

Uh, false on Joe Biden: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/2801657/Joe-Biden-Hillary-Clinton-might-have-been-a-better-vice-president-than-me.html

[blackjedii]

yeah biden's not gonna toot his own horn but he is significantly less of a war hawk than Hilldawg

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/10/us/politics/a-biden-run-would-expose-foreign-policy-differences-with-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0

I'm tired of this debate though. Clintonism lost and no way it's comin' back.

[meadowphoenix]

lol, do you mean in the next 4 years, because fascism is back and you'd think that should be considerably more gone (and also because Chelsea Clinton came out of this looking sincere and ethical, and Caroline Kennedy is no different from
H. Clinton).

[blackjedii]

Nah, I mean the whole Third Way Neolib Republican-lite schmooze with the big donors while trying to appeal to the little guy policies. If Dems are to win in 2018 and later (and i really, sincerely, hope they do) they need to NOT follow the blueprint Bill Clinton had in 1992.

[rainbows_]

+1

I agree.

[meadowphoenix]

So what you're saying is that in a world where campaign finance law is worse and there is no way in sight of it getting better, the Democrats would not follow the example of the only Democrat in 40 years to get enough white people in strategic places, a strategy you yourself keep insisting is necessary, to not need a firewall of an ~identity politics coalition, even though in 2018 the places they need to win have no problems voting for Republicans who do the "big donors small guy policies" and keep winning and the places they need to keep also don't give a fuck?

Lmao, thanks for the laugh.

The Democrats need to actually field people in places Clinton won like a party with some sense or for god fucking sakes, actually get Democrats to put somebody up in places in which Trump was vulnerable, but whose representatives are now in his cabinet. If they want the house, anyway. Nobody really gives a fuck about "big donors, small guy policies" or they wouldn't have voted in Republicans. Try an argument that is coherent with reality.

[blackjedii]

...you know what... I had a response all typed up but it just isn't worth it. I'm fine with you disagreeing and throwing word salad out but the insulting is getting a bit old hat.

[meadowphoenix]

So it wasn't worth it to have an actual response, but it was worth it type nothing useful out and also be hypocritical about "insults" (word salad huh? like if you're finding it difficult to understand, I would really check yourself or ask for clarification, but you never do, which is telling)? K.

It's really fragile to believe that "your argument does not fit with facts" is insulting, but I can't say I'm surprised.

[shahar]

I agree. It would be a mistake if they Democrats allowed her to run again. I can't remember the user that said this, but the politicians that run because it is their turn often lose. Kerry, Gore, Clinton (the first time she ran), McCain, etc. are just a few examples