Theocracy thanks to liberals who refused to vote for Hillary

[dncc]

No, not under any circumstances. She is a criminal and an authoritarian. She voted for us to enter into an aggressive war on false pretenses, and then politically benefited from "opposing" it. She threatened and demeaned the women her husband raped, and became a feminist icon. And, fundamentally, she made it clear that her top political priority in running for President was to pass another arbitrary "assault weapons ban" that serves no legitimate, non-political purpose-- more than a better comprehensive healthcare system, more than tuition control and relieving student debts, more than protecting American women from GOP meddling and protecting American LGBT+ from subjugation and violence, more than literally any other reason that I prefer the Democratic Party to the GOP.

It's an unfortunate political reality that I often have to vote for a candidate who opposes my highest political principle in order to support all of my other political principles. But when a politician like Hillary Clinton makes that her highest political principle, and shows no signs whatsoever of giving a Tuppenny **** about any of my other political principles?

I have literally no reason to vote for Hillary Clinton under any circumstances. Hillary Clinton, and the DNC, have given me no reason.

Wyoming's three-to-one support for Trump over Clinton will have to remain unchallenged by my single vote. Even if I lived in one of the States where my vote mattered... no.

I vote for people; I do not vote against them. And if you put a gun to my head and told me I either had vote for Trump or Clinton, you're going to have to shoot me.

For the record? I voted for Sanders in the Democratic Party and Johnson in the general election. If you took me back to 2016, I would probably decline to vote for Sanders again... but I don't know what else I could have done with that vote.

As I said...

Absolutists are good for absolutely nothing.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Absolutists are good for absolutely nothing.

So's Hillary Clinton now. Maybe I can interest you in my presidential campaign?

 

[Craig234]

I just like telling people I voted for Sanders in the primaries and Johnson in the election, and watching their shitty little primate brains implode.

We're going to disagree on how bad and dangerous trump and Republicans were and how that justified voting for Hillary, but you show how the garbage from Hillary loyalists attacking 'Bernie progressives' is false. Bernie attracted more people other Democrats couldn't.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Well, that is a certainly a belief. Biden might be a bit of a placeholder (at best) but at least he's not an active, ongoing threat to the rule of law.

The Biden regime is rounding up dissidents on bogus charges as we speak. Trump never did that.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

... but you show how the garbage from Hillary loyalists attacking 'Bernie progressives' is false. Bernie attracted more people other Democrats couldn't.

I'm more interested in showing people on the fence how the rhetoric from the Hillary loyalists cost them young progressive votes in 2016 and is going to keep costing them votes, especially when there's no meat on the table to make it worth sitting through the host's dinner speech. Keep telling them they're the pieces of shit that cost the Anointed Queen "her turn", keep blaming them for Trump, like somehow they think this is going to do anything but alienate them further and cost the center-right Democratic elite more progressive votes and hand more elections to the alt-right.

It reminds me of how they think "compromise" works on other issues: you give them half of what they want now, they give you nothing in return, next year they ask for another "compromise".

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

The Biden regime is rounding up dissidents on bogus charges as we speak. Trump never did that.

"Bogus" charges that the accused themselves documented thoroughly, publicized, and saying that trying to overthrow the government doesn't count because they didn't succeed? You're right, Trump never would have pressed charges against them; that's why they were going for the ballot boxes.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

"Bogus" charges that the accused themselves documented thoroughly, publicized, and saying that trying to overthrow the government

There was never any attempt to overthrow the government and most Americans aren’t buying this nonsense. This is a fraud intended to justify an actual overthrow later.

doesn't count because they didn't succeed? You're right, Trump never would have pressed charges against them; that's why they were going for the ballot boxes.

When Trump is re-elected in 2024 I hope he goes as hard as the left has.

 

[dncc]

So's Hillary Clinton now. Maybe I can interest you in my presidential campaign?

No thanks. Absolutists are good for absolutely nothing; as you're proving. So how's Bernie doing? Oh yeah, we're not going to get the minimum wage he wanted, no green new deal, no medicare for all.... And even if Biden were to get those things passed, the supreme court you let get installed will likely strike them down. So you're the crown prince of being completely and totally a non-factor. Congrats.

 

[dncc]

I'm more interested in showing people on the fence how the rhetoric from the Hillary loyalists cost them young progressive votes in 2016 and is going to keep costing them votes, especially when there's no meat on the table to make it worth sitting through the host's dinner speech. Keep telling them they're the pieces of shit that cost the Anointed Queen "her turn", keep blaming them for Trump, like somehow they think this is going to do anything but alienate them further and cost the center-right Democratic elite more progressive votes and hand more elections to the alt-right.

It reminds me of how they think "compromise" works on other issues: you give them half of what they want now, they give you nothing in return, next year they ask for another "compromise".

Wow... now only if you could cite anyone calling your a "piece of shit" from the Clinton campaign... or that someone wanted to "annoint her as queen"

Your imagination has completely ran away with you and whatever is left isn't that attractive. If you liked Trump--which I guess you did since you're proud that he became President because of your actions--you're going to absolutely love DeSantis. But hey...you're sticking by your guns of legislation that doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of passing because...well...I guess you'd rather have that feather in your cap instead of some actual legislation that evens the playing field somewhat for middle income Americans.

 

[Craig234]

I'm more interested in showing people on the fence how the rhetoric from the Hillary loyalists cost them young progressive votes in 2016 and is going to keep costing them votes, especially when there's no meat on the table to make it worth sitting through the host's dinner speech. Keep telling them they're the pieces of shit that cost the Anointed Queen "her turn", keep blaming them for Trump, like somehow they think this is going to do anything but alienate them further and cost the center-right Democratic elite more progressive votes and hand more elections to the alt-right.

It reminds me of how they think "compromise" works on other issues: you give them half of what they want now, they give you nothing in return, next year they ask for another "compromise".

I agree with you that Hillary and her supporters' behavior is despicable, and reduces their right to complain about losing votes as a result, but it's a mistake for people to vote based on that. Her jerkiness isn't 1/10000 of the problem trump is. I know it wasn't the point you were making, I meant that you show something, not that it's what you were saying.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Conservative Democrats are the most annoying group. Nader took votes about evenly from Gore and Bush, studies show, but conservative Democrats post lies attacking progressives. They refused to vote for Bernie and gave us a lunatic and now a theocracy. Talk about self-defeating. Two conservative Democrats have blocked Biden and Berne's entire BBB agenda for the country. I bet that's Bernie's fault, you'll say.

How many votes did Bernie get compared to Clinton?

It has gotten to the point that I don't vote for anybody, just against the worst as***le. Voting for someone that does not have a snowball's chance in hell is effectively the same as voting for the worst as***le.

Politics is irrational crap and the world has gotten to complicated for a democratic republic with TV advertising.

 

[psikeyhackr]

For me, it's how Reagan was used (because he was famously dim) to radically shift away from all the hard won victories for commonweal.

I didn't bother voting. It was obvious that Carter was going to lose because of the hostage crisis.

Then we got Iran-Contra. This country is absurd.

 

[dncc]

I agree with you that Hillary and her supporters' behavior is despicable, and reduces their right to complain about losing votes as a result, but it's a mistake for people to vote based on that. Her jerkiness isn't 1/10000 of the problem trump is. I know it wasn't the point you were making, I meant that you show something, not that it's what you were saying.

Politics is a results business. In our system there are no points for 2nd place. There is no "participation trophy" for federal politics. Liberals need to understand this game better. Winning is ALL that matters.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

I didn't bother voting. It was obvious that Carter was going to lose because of the hostage crisis.

Then we got Iran-Contra. This country is absurd.

No it’s not. Iran contra was a brilliant side step. And it was done for the moral cause of defeating communism in Nicaragua. Something we should’ve encourage more of.

Only leftists who are Soviet sympathizers opposed it.

 

[Craig234]

How many votes did Bernie get compared to Clinton?

If I recall correctly, he got about 46% of the Democratic primary vote.

Politics is irrational crap and the world has gotten to complicated for a democratic republic with TV advertising.

Seems there's a lot of truth there.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

I agree with you that Hillary and her supporters' behavior is despicable, and reduces their right to complain about losing votes as a result, but it's a mistake for people to vote based on that. Her jerkiness isn't 1/10000 of the problem trump is.

Is it a mistake? Because it tells me what she thinks of the American people, and what she thinks of our values and our material needs; when the DNC parrots this rhetoric, instead of appealing to American voters, even while they're (supposedly) trying to win the election, it tells me how they think they're going to use their offices after they've won.

No thanks.

Nobody is entitled to the office of President and anybody who believes that they are should be disqualified.

I mean, you look at this thread and the mindset that spawned it. If you don't believe there's any place in a functioning democracy for that kind of blind, slavish devotion to our political leaders... then I don't think you can justify voting for anyone who encourages it amongst their followers. Trying to compare Clinton to Trump in terms of which is the bigger threat to American democracy is a fool's game... because the fact that we got to an election for the highest office in our country and our political parties positioned those two as the only candidates who could realistically win?

Trump was a threat to a lot of things, but what American democracy did we have for him to be a threat to?

 

[psikeyhackr]

If I recall correctly, he got about 46% of the Democratic primary vote.

2016 Democratic Party presidential primaries
Party Candidate Votes %
Democratic Hillary 16,849,779 55.2%
Democratic Bernie 13,167,848 43.1%

 

[Craig234]

Trying to compare Clinton to Trump in terms of which is the bigger threat to American democracy is a fool's game...

Not trying to is the mistake. Hillary was terrible, but she was so much better than trump it was important we elect her. She wouldn't have nearly committed a coup.

 

[Craig234]

2016 Democratic Party presidential primaries
Party Candidate Votes %
Democratic Hillary 16,849,779 55.2%
Democratic Bernie 13,167,848 43.1%

Then why did you ask? After it was clear he couldn't win, his number might have gone down.

 

[ultmd]

I should have added a point, that banking crashes have always been a feature of the US economy, EXCEPT during the FDR era from 1933 when regulations were passed to Reagan when they were repealed.

Again, this is correct. And it's a great historical point.

So, you're talking about FDR's Glass-Stegall Act (Glass and Stegall were both conservative southern Dems, btw) of 1933.

Reagan actually didn't repeal Glass-Stegall, but he did begin the bank deregulation movement in '82 (I forget the name of the bill), by taking a small bite out of Glass-Stegall which partially deregulated just Savings and Loans entities. That lead to the Savings and L Loan crisis, as you stated. But it was a "LIBERAL" president (i.e. Bill Clinton) who actually/literally shepherded through the legislative repeal of Glass-Stegall in toto....which lead to the Great Recession of 2008.

But you are 100% correct in that Glass-Stegall worked SPLENDIDLY for 65 years. Unfortunately, it was repealed in favor of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (all 3 were conservative southern GOP'ers) with the help of the "centrist" democratic President BILL CLINTON. This is another great example of the damage that the DLC-wing of the Democratic Party caused to America. Bill Clinton, with his "Republican-lite" or "triangulation" brand of politics helped the GOP accomplish things that they could have never done with Reagan in the Oval Office. The DLC Dems gave Newt, Phil Gamm and company ALL the cover they needed. And the ugly fact is that Gramm-Leach-Bliley pass with HUGE majorities of BOTH parties....in BOTH the House and the Senate.

So this is ANOTHER example of the folly of following the lead of "centrist" Dems/liberals that you've been highlighting, @Craig234

But Republicans are blind to the facts and history, because they get injections of propaganda for their politics instead of facts, LIBS SUCK MAGA.

Yep. 25 years of FauxNews (etc) have created a permanent class of brainwashed ideologues whose ideology consists of grievance politics. These are people who TRULY see politics as a zero-su m game in which "the left" must be destroyed. They view politics as a street fight or "FIGHT CLUB".

Meanwhile, the Dems continue to see politics today as a DEBATE CLUB. And that's how the Dems (who enjoy majority support from voters on almost EVERY major social/political issue)....consistently manage to turn 60/40 elections into 50/50 nailbiters.

Fight Club vs Debate Club. One side shows up with their brass knuckles....the other shows up with their thesauruses.

People/voters are not very sophisticated. When given the clear choice between "STRONG AND WRONG" vs "WEAK AND RIGHT".....voters will choose the former. You cannot reason with people who are unreasonable. You have to beat them at their own game. And until the Dems understand AND EMBRACE this reality, America will continue to suffer and backslide.

That's the best explanation I can think of, to explain how and why we are where we are today in America.

Great stuff @Craig234 ! You're on a roll lately!

 

[Craig234]

So, you're talking about FDR's Glass-Stegall Act (Glass and Stegall were both conservative southern Dems, btw) of 1933.

Primarily, but not only, for example I mentioned the creation of the SEC, where he had stock manipulator Joseph Kennedy (father of JFK) make rules to shut down a lot of stock manipulating.

Reagan actually didn't repeal Glass-Stegall, but he did begin the bank deregulation movement in '82 (I forget the name of the bill), by taking a small bite out of Glass-Stegall which partially deregulated just Savings and Loans entities. That lead to the Savings and L Loan crisis, as you stated. But it was a "LIBERAL" president (i.e. Bill Clinton) who actually/literally shepherded through the legislative repeal of Glass-Stegall in toto....which lead to the Great Recession of 2008.

Largely correct - but Clinton didn't do it alone, he had great help from Republicans and is seen as a pretty pro-plutocrat president ('The Era of Big Government is over', Welfare gutting, Telecommunications corruption, etc.), and the repeal of Glass-Steagall wasn't the entire cause of the Great recession, and lax oversight by all those presidents helped lead to the problems - remember the business scams from Enron to MCI to Arthur Andersson under Bush?

But you are 100% correct in that Glass-Stegall worked SPLENDIDLY for 65 years. Unfortunately, it was repealed in favor of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (all 3 were conservative southern GOP'ers) with the help of the "centrist" democratic President BILL CLINTON. This is another great example of the damage that the DLC-wing of the Democratic Party caused to America. Bill Clinton, with his "Republican-lite" or "triangulation" brand of politics helped the GOP accomplish things that they could have never done with Reagan in the Oval Office. The DLC Dems gave Newt, Phil Gamm and company ALL the cover they needed. And the ugly fact is that Gramm-Leach-Bliley pass with HUGE majorities of BOTH parties....in BOTH the House and the Senate.

Well said. Basically I'd suggest that Bill Clinton showed the result of 'Well, the plutocrats totally own the Republicans, how about they take over Democrats also'. That Democrats were tired of losing - Carter, Mondal, Dukakis - and 'sold out'. People forget that Wall Street backed Bush, but then backed Obama OVER McCain. Guess who didn't jail a single Wall Street figure for the Great Recession?

So this is ANOTHER example of the folly of following the lead of "centrist" Dems/liberals that you've been highlighting, @Craig234

Agreed.

Yep. 25 years of FauxNews (etc) have created a permanent class of brainwashed ideologues whose ideology consists of grievance politics. These are people who TRULY see politics as a zero-su m game in which "the left" must be destroyed. They view politics as a street fight or "FIGHT CLUB".

It's as if rooting for a professional sports team, watching games, cheering for teams, donating for red hats, loving to 'see the opponents crushed', was training for them to be imbecilic in politics fighting FOR the plutocrats taking their democracy away, and then just to destroy irony meters, becoming cult followers of a who lies about 'draining the swamp'.

 

[Craig234]

Fight Club vs Debate Club. One side shows up with their brass knuckles....the other shows up with their thesauruses.

I'm not sure what brass knuckles refers to, except for ruthless power grabbing by the Republican Party officials. Luckily so far we haven't seen a lot of actual violence from the mob. We do need citizens to be 'rational and informed', not to just match Republicans with blue hats being a mob. I don't think it's about the mob, I think it's about the massive political machine Republicans have built.

Their goal since the 70's has been to allow the advantage they have - big donors - to have money have a lot of power, and to deny power to (Democratic mostly, but Republicans get caught up sometimes) voters.

This is why you see massive propaganda factories called think tanks (Heritage, AEI, Hoover, Cato, Federalist, etc.), a massive propaganda machine to spread it (Fox and 95% of talk radio leading), the lobbying industry over half of Congress and staff are hired by when they leave office, a political consulting industry, and the takeover of the courts by groomed plutocrat ideologues, and ever more 'rights' for money in elections.

People/voters are not very sophisticated. When given the clear choice between "STRONG AND WRONG" vs "WEAK AND RIGHT".....voters will choose the former. You cannot reason with people who are unreasonable. You have to beat them at their own game. And until the Dems understand AND EMBRACE this reality, America will continue to suffer and backslide.

Truth to that but it's not that simple. It's like saying until Grenada understood and embraced that the US had massive military power, they couldn't defeat the US military. Democrats need to do different things than Republicans, as well as strongly defeat them when they can. Democrats like FDK, JFK and LBJ were pretty good at it.

I think Progressives are the policy response to the plutocracy, and that the 'centrist' side to the Democrats is the unwitting helpers to the Republicans and plutocrats. The Republicans and 'centrist Democrats' form a strong majority for plutocracy.

Great stuff @Craig234 ! You're on a roll lately!

Thanks, great post.

 

[Greenbeard]

I'm more interested in showing people on the fence how the rhetoric from the Hillary loyalists cost them young progressive votes in 2016 and is going to keep costing them votes, especially when there's no meat on the table to make it worth sitting through the host's dinner speech.

The Trump court is now beginning to roll back individual rights, chip away at the foundations of the modern administrative state, and undermine our democratic process. Anyone whose primary concern is “rhetoric” is not an ally and folks should stop trying to ruin the progressive label by tying it to these empty-headed prima donnas.

 

[Peter]

At least I can't be blamed as I wasn't allowed to vote.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

I just want to take time to vent about all the liberals who refused to vote for Hillary and allowed Trump to squeak by and turnover the SC to theocrats for generations. Imagine what the court would have looked like had Hillary won?

It frustrates me when ultra-liberals take this all-or-nothing approach and end up screwing things up for everyone.

More socialized medicine? Forget it. Labor right? lol. Gay rights? You'll be lucky if it's not illegal to be gay. Women's rights? gone.

Ultra-liberals are the most annoying group. They voted for Nader and gave us Bush and the Iraq war. They refused to vote for Hillary and gave us a lunatic and now a theocracy. Talk about self-defeating.

God bless Trump for saving us from the hildabeast! And God bless Trump for nominating justices who took down Roe V Wade!