Here's how badly Democrats have to screw up to lose the election[W:558]

[Conservative]

I am pretty sure the 1% or so of that, that goes to public lands isn't part of it.

Thus it isn't part of the problem either but could be part of the solution given the proper financial incentives to create taxpayers

 

[JoeTrumps]

let me think how the democrats can lose this election

OH, I HAVE ONE.

Most americans biggest concern right now is the threat of radical islam. So here is how Democrats can screw themselves. REFUSE TO USE THE WORDS RADICAL ISLAM. refuse to openly identify our sworn enemies. It will scare the sh!t out of everyone and make Clinton look even MORE out of touch(if that is humanly possible).

but hey, what planet am I on? Can't happen, right?

 

[Kobie]

let me think how the democrats can lose this election

OH, I HAVE ONE.

Most americans biggest concern right now is the threat of radical islam. So here is how Democrats can screw themselves. REFUSE TO USE THE WORDS RADICAL ISLAM.

but hey, what planet am I on? Can't happen, right?

If you think avoiding tying terrorist murderers to mainstream religion is going to cost the Democrats the election, you're kidding yourself.

 

[JoeTrumps]

If you think avoiding tying terrorist murderers to mainstream religion is going to cost the Democrats the election, you're kidding yourself.

oh well, there you go. problem solved(for you and no one else)

 

[Conservative]

If you think avoiding tying terrorist murderers to mainstream religion is going to cost the Democrats the election, you're kidding yourself.

Do you have any true knowledge of Islam or are you simply buying the leftwing spin. Do you know Mohammed history and background? Any idea what a Global Caliphate means? You think by ignoring the problem or appeasing Muslims is going to solve the problem? It does appear that you bought the rhetoric and ignore history

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad

 

[Kobie]

oh well, there you go. problem solved(for you and no one else)

Please explain to me why the labeling (or lack thereof) is a "problem," preferably in your own words.

Do you have any true knowledge of Islam or are you simply buying the leftwing spin. Do you know Mohammed history and background? Any idea what a Global Caliphate means? You think by ignoring the problem or appeasing Muslims is going to solve the problem? It does appear that you bought the rhetoric and ignore history

If you have a point, make it, rather than offer up nothing but poor assumptions.

 

[JoeTrumps]

Please explain to me why the labeling (or lack thereof) is a "problem," preferably in your own words.



If you have a point, make it, rather than offer up nothing but poor assumptions.

hmmmm, well if clinton were running for president in 1942 and refused to use the term "nazi germany" to identify our enemies I would ASSUME she would be totally screwed and not taken seriously as someone to lead the country.

is that explanation also to foggy for you to comprehend?

 

[Kobie]

hmmmm, well if clinton were running for president in 1942 and refused to use the term "nazi germany" to identify our enemies I would ASSUME she would be totally screwed and not taken seriously as someone to lead the country.

is that explanation also to foggy for you to comprehend?

Of course, ISIS and Nazi Germany aren't even remotely comparable, but OK.

You should maybe do some reading on the subject before throwing a fit because Democrats won't use the particular phrases you demand.

Why Obama Can't Say 'Radical Islam' - Bloomberg View

Why Republicans want Obama to denounce "radical Islam" — and why he won't do it - Vox

 

[calamity]

Do you have any true knowledge of Islam or are you simply buying the leftwing spin. Do you know Mohammed history and background? Any idea what a Global Caliphate means? You think by ignoring the problem or appeasing Muslims is going to solve the problem? It does appear that you bought the rhetoric and ignore history

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad

I'm far from being a fan of Islam, but the people buying into this global caliphate nonsense are about as numerous as the Christians anxiously awaiting that second coming. Fringe groups, both banking on the end times. One is just more apt to shoot their way to reach their goals than the other.
What ISIS Really Wants - The Atlantic

As for Islam itself, the religion is misogynist and backward. Liberals are afraid to call it what it is though. That is a concern. But, it's not going to sway the election.

 

[Conservative]

Please explain to me why the labeling (or lack thereof) is a "problem," preferably in your own words.



If you have a point, make it, rather than offer up nothing but poor assumptions.

I posted the history of Mohammed which of course you ignored preferring instead to buy the religion of peace BS

 

[Conservative]

I'm far from being a fan of Islam, but the people buying into this global caliphate nonsense are about as numerous as the Christians anxiously awaiting that second coming. Fringe groups, both banking on the end times. One is just more apt to shoot their way to reach their goals than the other.

As for Islam itself, the religion is misogynist and backward. Liberals are afraid to call it what it is though. That is a concern. But, it's not going to sway the election.

What is it going to take before you believe the goal of Islam? Read its history

 

[clownboy]

Of course, ISIS and Nazi Germany aren't even remotely comparable, but OK.

You should maybe do some reading on the subject before throwing a fit because Democrats won't use the particular phrases you demand.

Why Obama Can't Say 'Radical Islam' - Bloomberg View

Why Republicans want Obama to denounce "radical Islam" — and why he won't do it - Vox

They don't have to be comparable. Radical Islam is our current enemy in the eyes of most Americans, that is the only comparison that counts.

 

[JoeTrumps]

Of course, ISIS and Nazi Germany aren't even remotely comparable, but OK.

let me walk you through it.
in '42 if you asked americans who our biggest threat is, they would say nazi germany
today, same question: radical islam.

to say it's not comparable for a candidate to refuse to say radical islam now to a candidate refusing to say nazi germany in '42 makes total sense to everyone but you. which is why I"m having to explain the obvious.

 

[clownboy]

On the thread topic: democrats have a history of finding ways to shoot themselves in the foot. All the republicans have to do is stand back and let them do it. Hillary or one of the party elite will open their mouths and unlike Trump, will be hung with it.

Trump has already taken the Teflon crown for this election. There can be only one. :mrgreen:

 

[Kobie]

let me walk you through it.
in '42 if you asked americans who our biggest threat is, they would say nazi germany
today, same question: radical islam.

to say it's not comparable for a candidate to refuse to say radical islam now to a candidate refusing to say nazi germany in '42 makes total sense to everyone but you. which is why I"m having to explain the obvious.

/sigh

Read the links I provided, please.

 

[Kobie]

On the thread topic: democrats have a history of finding ways to shoot themselves in the foot. All the republicans have to do is stand back and let them do it. Hillary or one of the party elite will open their mouths and unlike Trump, will be hung with it.

Trump has already taken the Teflon crown for this election.

Do you have anything to support this notion that Democrats shoot themselves in the foot more than Republicans? I would say it's almost the exact opposite. See Romney, Mitt.

 

[clownboy]

Do you have anything to support this notion that Democrats shoot themselves in the foot more than Republicans? I would say it's almost the exact opposite. See Romney, Mitt.

Sorry, Mitt was the selection of the party leadership. That's not going to happen this time, the base has rallied. It'll be Trump or Cruz, both antithetical to the leadership. And really, you going to deny now the common knowledge that the dem party shoots itself in the foot?

 

[poweRob]

Do you have anything to support this notion that Democrats shoot themselves in the foot more than Republicans? I would say it's almost the exact opposite. See Romney, Mitt.

Then

Romney, Mitt part 2

This time its personal!

 

[Kobie]

Sorry, Mitt was the selection of the party leadership. That's not going to happen this time, the base has rallied. It'll be Trump or Cruz, both antithetical to the leadership. And really, you going to deny now the common knowledge that the dem party shoots itself in the foot?

I would say both parties quite often shoot themselves in the foot. Mittens may very well have won the election if not for his idiotic 47 percent speech.

 

[truthatallcost]

You are totally out of touch here. Changing demographics in the USA have nothing to do with anything that The Democrats have done or may do.The Democrats don't control the USA's demographics.

Get back with us in about 30-years and we can talk about how the GOP was destroyed by its failure to react in the right way to changing demographics.




[I]"Better days are coming." [/I]~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP.

No one with a brain buys that crap. It's no secret that the Democrat party has been counting on third world immigration to eliminate their rivals from viability. It worked in California, which used to be a conservative state, coincidentally when it was still considered a mecca for prosperity. After 30 years of third world immigration run amok, California is overpopulated, polluted, associated with high crime, and a stronghold of the Democrat party. This is precisely what I'm talking about; Democrats are willing to ruin an entire state to seize power.

 

[Kobie]

No one with a brain buys that crap. It's no secret that the Democrat party has been counting on third world immigration to eliminate their rivals from viability. It worked in California, which used to be a conservative state, coincidentally when it was still considered a mecca for prosperity. After 30 years of third world immigration run amok, California is overpopulated, polluted, associated with high crime, and a stronghold of the Democrat party. This is precisely what I'm talking about; Democrats are willing to ruin an entire state to seize power.

Oh, horsefeathers. When was California a "conservative state"? You're just pulling stuff directly out of your ass now.

Save your conspiracy theories for someone stupid enough to believe them.

 

[calamity]

What is it going to take before you believe the goal of Islam? Read its history

It's not monolithic. Perhaps it is you who needs to do the reading.

 

[calamity]

Oh, horsefeathers. When was California a "conservative state"? You're just pulling stuff directly out of your ass now.

Save your conspiracy theories for someone stupid enough to believe them.

When the grapes had wrath?

 

[Frank Apisa]

Sorry, Mitt was the selection of the party leadership. That's not going to happen this time, the base has rallied. It'll be Trump or Cruz, both antithetical to the leadership. And really, you going to deny now the common knowledge that the dem party shoots itself in the foot?

What you are doing...and saying the base is doing...

...seems to me to be what Kobie has been talking about.

You not only are shooting yourselves in the foot...you are bragging about your aim!

 

[Conservative]

It's not monolithic. Perhaps it is you who needs to do the reading.

This says it all, what does surrender mean to you

Three years after this event Muhammad started preaching these revelations publicly,[13] proclaiming that "God is One", that complete "surrender" (lit. islām) to him is the only way (dīn)[n 4] acceptable to God, and that he was a prophet and messenger of God, similar to the other prophets in Islam.[14][15][16]

You really don't understand Islam, do you?