Study: Hillary Clinton’s TV ads were almost entirely policy-free

[Wilderb]

kinda hard when you have 48 seats out of 100.

did you call bennet and gardner after the revelation and demand they call for resignation?

And HOW did we get in that position?

 

[ttystikk]

You believe that Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Florida voted Trump and republican congressmen because the Democrats were not liberal enough?

Do you have something factual that this belief is based upon? Because that sounds delusional to me.

From what I see, the reason Democrats lost those states because liberals weren't addressing what they wanted. The voters chose people who they thought were more likely to support what they wanted. And the people they voted for are as conservative as the day is long. So, just the opposite of you. I see the signal from the losses in those states in 2016 as a sign that those states support more conservative leaning policies than a California or Oregon liberal would be happy with. My evidence is the election result. What information do you have that refutes this?

Voters did not want an establishment candidate, no matter how she was branded. Trump was the anti establishment vote.

Buyer's remorse is proof that they did not get what they wanted.

Shame on the Democratic Party for ignoring/sabotaging the wave of support for Bernie.

 

[SneekyNinja]

Voters did not want an establishment candidate, no matter how she was branded. Trump was the anti establishment vote.

Buyer's remorse is proof that they did not get what they wanted.

Shame on the Democratic Party for ignoring/sabotaging the wave of support for Bernie.

Let's face it, most voters are stupid. They voted like children lured into @Rob Roy's van with the promise of non-existent candy.

"Jobs, so many jobs, the best jobs...and less brown people"

 

[Fogdog]

Voters did not want an establishment candidate, no matter how she was branded. Trump was the anti establishment vote.

Buyer's remorse is proof that they did not get what they wanted.

Shame on the Democratic Party for ignoring/sabotaging the wave of support for Bernie.

You have a story that you believe. There are some polls that back your and Paddy's claims that the majority in this country want a better safety net, an increase in the minimum wage and other items on the liberal agenda. This, I guess is enough to convince you. What this all flies in the face of is the long term trend of fewer states that are putting liberals in office.

I have trouble reconciling your and Paddy's story with what actually happened.

Let each state select their own representatives. California liberals should have enough to deal with in their own state. Democratic party should encourage all that want to join in the opposition to fascism. Even if some are anti-choice.

 

[ttystikk]

You have a story that you believe. There are some polls that back your and Paddy's claims that the majority in this country want a better safety net, an increase in the minimum wage and other items on the liberal agenda. This, I guess is enough to convince you. What this all flies in the face of is the long term trend of fewer states that are putting liberals in office.

I have trouble reconciling your and Paddy's story with what actually happened.

Let each state select their own representatives. California liberals should have enough to deal with in their own state. Democratic party should encourage all that want to join in the opposition to fascism. Even if some are anti-choice.

Chump rode in on an anti establishment wave. It was misplaced faith, nothing more or less. What's so hard to understand about that?

 

[Wilderb]

Let's face it, most voters are stupid. They voted like children lured into @Rob Roy's van with the promise of non-existent candy.

"Jobs, so many jobs, the best jobs...and less brown people"

Sounds very republican.

 

[ttystikk]

You have a story that you believe. There are some polls that back your and Paddy's claims that the majority in this country want a better safety net, an increase in the minimum wage and other items on the liberal agenda. This, I guess is enough to convince you. What this all flies in the face of is the long term trend of fewer states that are putting liberals in office.

I have trouble reconciling your and Paddy's story with what actually happened.

Let each state select their own representatives. California liberals should have enough to deal with in their own state. Democratic party should encourage all that want to join in the opposition to fascism. Even if some are anti-choice.

I'm having trouble recognizing any narrative at all in your recent posts. What's your explanation for how such a deeply corrupt and unpopular person got into office?

 

[SneekyNinja]

Sounds very republican.

If Bernie ran again I'd vote for him.

My thoughts going into this election was that I preferred Sanders but didn't think "convention" would allow it to happen. Hillary was a decent candidate and definitely would've been better than the Orange one.

Apres Trump... I guess convention no longer applies.

 

[Wilderb]

If Bernie ran again I'd vote for him.

My thoughts going into this election was that I preferred Sanders but didn't think "convention" would allow it to happen. Hillary was a decent candidate and definitely would've been better than the Orange one.

Apres Trump... I guess convention no longer applies.

Mine also. But when you start going down the "Voters are stupid" road, you are carrying their water.

 

[tangerinegreen555]

If Bernie ran again I'd vote for him.

Well, sure.

Need a younger version though, he's 75.

If someone tries to make me do high pressure work at 75, I'd tell them to fuck off. I voted for Bernie in the primary.

Sometimes, the best team doesn't win.

 

[SneekyNinja]

Mine also. But when you start going down the "Voters are stupid" road, you are carrying their water.

OK in this situation let's change "stupid" to "ridiculously easily mislead", but the point remains the same.

 

[ttystikk]

OK in this situation let's change "stupid" to "ridiculously easily mislead", but the point remains the same.

Right. You're still carrying their water.

 

[Fogdog]

I'm having trouble recognizing any narrative at all in your recent posts. What's your explanation for how such a deeply corrupt and unpopular person got into office?

I think the country, people in general, tend to be conservative and resist change. A smaller fraction of the population is not so bound with tradition and see alternatives others do not. Some of them support liberal or other causes. Liberals think that if they ape Tea Party tactics they can win. The difference is that the majority is not and never has been liberal. Not even the majority who side with Democrats. After 8 years of a more progressive government under Obama -- not even close to what you want -- there was a large enough faction of Democrats who voted for a return to the past.

This idea that Clinton lost because she wasn't liberal enough flies in the face of who won enough states to become president and at the same time swept in a republican congress. You rant on and on about the Corrupt Democrats. Yet you voted for one. Same goes with people who voted for Republicans. I think you were wrong about Hillary Clinton. I don't think she is corrupt but you won't hear that. Donald Trump is so corrupt, he doesn't even think he is. If you listen to the people who voted for him, they either say they don't care or they don't believe it. It all comes down to opinions based on belief, not facts. This is not amenable to rational decisions and so is not useful for forming effective policy or plan of action.

What I'm advocating is not a litmus test of who should be a Democrat. I'm advocating that Democrats learn how to work with each other. I think the Republican Party is too conservative, corrupt and backward and will collapse in disgrace. At that time, there should be a Democratic Party alternative that is acceptable to each state's electorate. Some of whom won't meet your litmus test.

 

[ttystikk]

I think the Democratic Party Establishment likes the money and will actively resist any attempts to field a more liberal candidate. People like you, @Fogdog , will keep giving them cover and they'll keep losing because they don't understand that the other 90% of Americans aren't being served by their government.

It's a shut out game and we're the losers.

 

[Fogdog]

I think the Democratic Party Establishment likes the money and will actively resist any attempts to field a more liberal candidate. People like you, @Fogdog , will keep giving them cover and they'll keep losing because they don't understand that the other 90% of Americans aren't being served by their government.

It's a shut out game and we're the losers.

You speak for 90% of all Americans?

Stop it with the idiotic blame game. I'm not a conservative voter. I'm just saying that what you and Paddy say is counter to what I've heard coming from voters in purple states that voted for the GOP. My pointing out the recent past isn't the same as endorsing it. I think what you propose is a losing strategy based upon voting trends over the past decades.

Long term, I think the Democratic Party is in position to overcome reactionary right wing Republican ideology. But I don't really think the conservative nature of this country is ready to change overnight.

 

[ttystikk]

You speak for 90% of all Americans?

Stop it with the idiotic blame game. I'm not a conservative voter. I'm just saying that what you and Paddy say is counter to what I've heard coming from voters in purple states that voted for the GOP. My pointing out the recent past isn't the same as endorsing it. I think what you propose is a losing strategy based upon voting trends over the past decades.

Long term, I think the Democratic Party is in position to overcome reactionary right wing Republican ideology. But I don't really think the conservative nature of this country is ready to change overnight.

I'm saying that neither party speaks to the needs of the 90%.

I'm not blaming you, but I do hold the Democratic Party accountable for their actions. That's certainly reasonable, no matter how you try to spin it.

The Republican party has stopped even trying to make a show of speaking to the needs of the majority of their constituents.

That's the impasse we have in this country.

And the rich get richer.

 

[Wilderb]

You speak for 90% of all Americans?

Stop it with the idiotic blame game. I'm not a conservative voter. I'm just saying that what you and Paddy say is counter to what I've heard coming from voters in purple states that voted for the GOP. My pointing out the recent past isn't the same as endorsing it. I think what you propose is a losing strategy based upon voting trends over the past decades.

Long term, I think the Democratic Party is in position to overcome reactionary right wing Republican ideology. But I don't really think the conservative nature of this country is ready to change overnight.

What they are saying is what rural America has been saying for years. Seems like the establishment only cares about the city dwellers and thinks everyone out here in the sticks are rubes. We have been screwed over by both sides.
And yet we are just supposed to "vote" for the dems? Because it's the better team?
I've done that for years, and look at the result. The writing was on the wall way before this election.
If the dems think everything is rosey, they are sadly mistaken. They will continue to lose elections until they start to walk the walk they promise to.
Wait and see.
WE
Edit
I spent several years as a citizen lobbyist. I've seen how government works. Made many trips to my state capital and one to Washington. Very eye opening but depressing.

 

[ttystikk]

What they are saying is what rural America has been saying for years. Seems like the establishment only cares about the city dwellers and thinks everyone out here in the sticks are rubes. We have been screwed over by both sides.
And yet we are just supposed to "vote" for the dems? Because it's the better team?
I've done that for years, and look at the result. The writing was on the wall way before this election.
If the dems think everything is rosey, they are sadly mistaken. They will continue to lose elections until they start to walk the walk they promise to.
Wait and see.
WE
Edit
I spent several years as a citizen lobbyist. I've seen how government works. Made many trips to my state capital and one to Washington. Very eye opening but depressing.

As a citizen lobbyist, you know that sinking feeling that comes from knowing the corporate guys have millions to spread around, which is why no one ever took you seriously.

Ban campaign finance!

 

[Fogdog]

What they are saying is what rural America has been saying for years. Seems like the establishment only cares about the city dwellers and thinks everyone out here in the sticks are rubes. We have been screwed over by both sides.
And yet we are just supposed to "vote" for the dems? Because it's the better team?
I've done that for years, and look at the result. The writing was on the wall way before this election.
If the dems think everything is rosey, they are sadly mistaken. They will continue to lose elections until they start to walk the walk they promise to.
Wait and see.
WE
Edit
I spent several years as a citizen lobbyist. I've seen how government works. Made many trips to my state capital and one to Washington. Very eye opening but depressing.

What do you think the rural voter wants that is different from what the city dweller wants?

 

[UncleBuck]

What do you think the rural voter wants that is different from what the city dweller?

clearly north dakotans want us to run a socialist democrat who promises free college to an agrarian, "self-reliant" state rather than a centrist democrat who fights for oil development and farm subsidies.