Displaying 1,381 To 1,410 Of 19,504 Comments Will Hillary’s Use of the Gender Card Backfire? Kalima, thanks for the article, I really liked it! I think your conclusion is being validated, I see anecdotally on the MSM and on the web that the net result from Steinem’s and Albright’s attacks on young women supporting Bernie is that those young women are angered at them and the Hillary campaign for going after them like that. IMO, this ploy has backfired and whipped up women supporting Sanders to become stronger supporters and far less available to switch to supporting Hillary. The real world stats listed in the article you linked to bear repeating: In the Iowa caucus last week, 84% of women under the age of 30 voted for the 74-year-old Bernie Sanders; just 14% for Hillary. The projection for New Hampshire is even more striking. 92% of that age group say they will back Sanders. Among women aged 30-39 it is not a whole lot better. Just 11% say they are going to back Hillary. So when we talk about a majority of young women supporting Sanders, we need to include the 30-39 age range as well. Hillary draws a lot of support across the board from older voters, men and women, and older voters are more dependable to show up at the polls. But the youth and enthusiasm is on Bernie’s side and when it comes to elections, that can make all the difference. As to running a campaign as a woman based on pressing women to vote for you because you’re a woman, I do think that is regressive in terms of feminism. I’d propose that Feminism is about having the standing and power of an equal to everyone else (especially men) in society. To be told that you need to give up your power as an individual and be part of an obedient herd to be a feminist is beyond any logic I can find. I hear that Bill is going nuts over the campaign, fearing that he’s witnessing a replay of 2008 and Hillary could go from a sure thing to losing the nom. I don’t know that will happen but it sure doesn’t seem that these leopards can change their spots. They reside in an elitist bubble and are repeating similar mistakes they made in 2008. I don’t think there’s anyway Bill Clinton could win a primary nowadays, all the chauvinistic cheating and lies that came out in the primary back in 1992 wouldn’t be overlooked today. Yet he and Hillary seem to be using the same formula in their campaign, thinking they can just go back to the same well they went to in 2008 to win this time. They haven’t learned from their mistakes, if they had, Bernie wouldn’t be so competitive. Hillary may win in the end due to their financial and infrastructure superiority but it would be despite their archaic and out of touch strategies on how to attract voters. » Posted By AdLib On February 9, 2016 @ 2:11 pm Escrib, I don’t think Hillary is a terrible person and if she is the Dem nominee, I will absolutely vote for her. However, I don’t think she’s the best or most principled person running for the Dem nomination. Like many others, I am weary of settling for establishment Dems who change their positions on the issues to get elected then once elected, go back to serving themselves and those that are part of their elite circle. Hillary Clinton supported DADT, DOMA, The Crime Bill (that caused this over-incarceration of black people), getting rid of Glass-Steagal, The Bankruptcy Bill (that stripped citizens of bankruptcy rights and handed billions to the banks), The Iraq War, TPP and more that I strongly opposed. You mentioned that you dislike Bernie because he attacked Obama and it’s true that he did. I didn’t like him when he was doing that either (he hasn’t done so for a long while now). But when Hillary started her run up to her campaign last Fall, the first thing she did was attack Obama for his foreign policy. Her condescending diss included: HILLARY CLINTON: “Great nations need organizing principles, and ‘Don’t do stupid stuff’ is not an organizing principle.” When she started her campaign, Hillary moved to the right, criticizing Obama repeatedly and giving props to George Bush (for his AIDS initiative in Africa). She espoused an aggressive foreign policy including greater military involvement in Syria, no-fly zones (against ISIS which doesn’t have an air force in Syria but Russia does) and going back towards the Bush doctrine of projecting more military force around the world. Much of that was in this interview she did with The Atlantic: She was met with criticisms from David Axelrod, MoveOn.org and other Progressives for attacking Obama and proposing greater militarism. Then, Bernie Sanders joins the race. Suddenly, Hillary moves far left to try and make his candidacy redundant. She reverses herself on many more-Right policies, flips on the TPP, Keystone XL, and represents herself as a true Progressive. When the recent conflict began over Bernie Sanders replying to a question about whether Hillary is a Progressive, he replied that she is sometimes, when she’s not telling people she’s a moderate. Bernie was literally repeating Hillary’s own words, back from when she was positioning herself as a center-right candidate last Fall and yet Hillary responded with faux outrage, attacking Bernie for trying to be the gatekeeper of who is or isn’t Progressive. That was wholly dishonest of her and very calculated. Here is the video from just months earlier when she made that declaration herself that she pleads guilty to being a moderate and centrist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3Lc3ZWEU7Q In this clip, she describes how she supported passing tax cuts under George Bush though not as huge as he wanted and that she is a moderate and centrist so she can make deals with Republicans. That is not a horrible thing but it is not being Progressive nor supporting a Progressive position against cutting taxes for the wealthy. And yet, Hillary continues to call Bernie’s mentioning of this documented fact, “an artful smear”. Is she being honest about that? Clearly, no. I do think you’re very wrong about Bernie playing “The Jewish Card” if he could. There’s nothing stopping him from doing so, he could and he hasn’t. Obama didn’t play “The Black Card”. Hillary didn’t have to play “The Gender Card” but she has which does go to an issue of judgment in my mind (especially since it appears to be really backfiring now). There are a number of things she said or did in 2008 that I found unprincipled including her and Bill demeaning Obama in a racial way, her refusal to say that Obama was Christian when he was being attacked by Birthers, her completely false story about being shot at on the tarmac in Bosnia and her attempt to override the democratic nature of the primary through the use of Superdelegates to cancel out the decision by a majority of voters to nominate Obama. There are many more issues I have with her and they all stem from my expectations of the Democratic candidate staying faithful to a meaningful set of ethics. It is a whole other issue though to compare her to the Repub candidates. At worst, if elected, Hillary may operate as a center-right Democrat. But any of the Repubs would be like a wrecking ball to our society, economy and safety nets. So the choice would be simple if it was Hillary against any of the Repubs. I don’t doubt the Repubs would wheel out all the negative oppo they can find on Bernie and some could pose a real challenge for for him to deal with…but it will be a fraction of what they can throw at Hillary (even though much of it is BS). As it was with Obama, they’re not really prepared to take down Bernie because they’ve been planning on having to take down Hillary, they have reams of oppo to use against Hillary that they’ve been waiting to use since 2008 and building on since then. One other thing to consider, with Hillary the nom, a Bloomberg entry could result in a Repub win if he takes away enough of her voters. In Bernie’s case, it would play right into the scenario of Bernie fighting for the people against two billionaires each trying to grab control of the government away from the people (Hillary and Bill are of course multi-millionaires and travel in the same circles with Trump and Blooomberg so the contrast wouldn’t really be too strong). He can also draw Trump voters too while Hillary doesn’t really draw from them. Bottom line, as Nirek mentioned, I would love to have the first woman President in the WH. I would be a passionate supporter for Elizabeth Warren. So it’s not a “woman thing” with many Bernie supporters (especially of course for the women supporting him), it is specific to Hillary. She has a track record and continues to create one that undermines support for her when contrasted with Bernie. But in the end, if Hillary is the nom, I and I would suggest that most Bernie supporters will firmly pull the lever for her so we can have a Dem in the WH and keep the Repubs out. » Posted By AdLib On February 9, 2016 @ 1:50 pm Monicaangela, imagine if in the 2008 race, Obama had his surrogates make big public statements that accused AAs of being traitors or unintelligent if they didn’t support him. I would write an article just like this one on Hillary over the hypocrisy of claiming his election is about empowering AAs while attacking those who dared to think for themselves and have their own opinions. If such a thing had happened, it would have been widely condemned and Obama would rightfully have paid a political price for it. So when Hillary does this, she deserves to be taken to task. She should be the last one to ever condemn women for making up their own minds on who they would or wouldn’t want to vote for. How dare anyone who’s part of any group of people decide that they can dictate to that group the only things that they should be allowed to think…especially while claiming to be a symbol of equality and empowerment for that group. These repeated attacks on Bernie of being sexist are dishonest, plain and simple. When he said that we need to get things done instead of just yelling about them, she jumped on that eagerly to claim Bernie is sexist. Clearly, he was talking about actions speaking louder than words yet for political advantage, she claimed the role of victim by branding him sexist. Now just before election day, Bill and Hillary try it again, trying to paint Bernie as sexist because they claim that supporters of his have written awful sexist comments on the web. I don’t know about you but I’ve read rude and ageist comments about Bernie by Hillary supporters but I would never think of blaming Hillary for it. BTW, Rachel Maddow told Hillary this and my experience is the same, I don’t see any difference between the tone and hostility of Hillary supporters and Bernie supporters when they write negative comments about the other. I believe this is a phony, manufactured issue to once again create the victim/sexist meme that they feel will drive women voters to them. The proof is in the pudding, a huge majority of young women are voting for Bernie so they don’t see him as sexist but instead see him as someone they respect for his political views. Dissing young women for making up their own minds and choosing Bernie over Hillary is not a smart recipe for winning them over. » Posted By AdLib On February 9, 2016 @ 10:08 am Nirek, yes, considering the stakes, it’s not surprising that politicians use dirty tricks in elections. It is true and documented that there were a number of questionable tactics used the last time Hillary ran for President. I’ve made the case that a leopard doesn’t change its spots and such things are happening this time around as well. While it would be justified for Hillary or her supporters to take issue with any negative characterizations of her that Bernie Sanders makes, I don’t think Bernie could be fairly portrayed as being intentionally dishonest. Like young men, young women are supporting Bernie by a large margin because they connect with his integrity and his vision for what the U.S. should be. That’s not to say Hillary’s supporters aren’t doing the same but it’s a one way street. Because a majority of young women are supporting Bernie, they are being insulted and slammed by the Hillary camp for not being faithfully feminist…which in this tortured definition means they must act like cattle and vote for the woman candidate even if they prefer the male candidate. The disrespect for the intelligence, morality and independence of young women who won’t be told who to vote for and instead make up their own minds is very disappointing and contrary to what feminism is really about. Some think Hillary will make the best President, a majority think Bernie would. If Hillary wants to win over those young female voters, she should start by respecting their right to their own personal decisions and try and convince them with thoughtful arguments instead of trying to intimidate them into voting for her because it’s their duty as women to vote for a woman. Bernie has won them over by respecting their intellects and appealing to them through his passion and vision, they’re not voting for him because of his gender. That’s the playing field that Hillary should be playing on, the entitlement thing doesn’t work with independently minded young women. » Posted By AdLib On February 9, 2016 @ 9:42 am Escrib, I think your comment is a very thoughtful and potent argument for supporting Hillary. I do understand and appreciate it. Though my post does contain criticisms of Hillary and her campaign, the focus of my article was about the end result of her focusing so much on gender as leverage to bring women voters to support her. It resulted in the negative treatment of young women because they were women, for exercising their independence to pick the candidate they thought was best…by the surrogates for a woman candidate who represents the empowerment of women. The irony was dizzying to me. What is feminism if it doesn’t include supporting and empowering other women to make their own decisions for themselves? What seems to be going on today is a clash between classic Feminism and today’s Feminism 2.0 where young women appear to believe that it is even greater empowerment to not have to feel obligated to consider the gender or age of a candidate when they consider who they want to support. For them, this is what empowerment looks like. On the other hand, classic feminists like Madeline Albright and Gloria Steinem don’t understand why all women wouldn’t rally together to elect the first woman President, hence their harsh criticisms of younger women. It is a disconnect right now. I do recognize the excitement and historical aspect of Hillary becoming the first woman president. I fully understand the many women who want to see that happen in their lifetime because one of them is a family member. And where Hillary is on the issues right now is pretty much in tune with most of the Democratic base. It is no surprise that she and Bernie are now virtually tied among Dems nationally in terms of support. There are legit reasons for folks to support either one of them and there are legit reasons to be critical of either one of them. You mentioned the reasons you dislike Bernie and in some cases, I agree with you on what you dislike about him (his dissing of Obama and the Dems in previous years, for example). I think it is important though to see candidates warts and all, especially the ones we support. I leave it to the Republicans to be in denial about the flaws in their candidates. Please understand though, that when I express what I dislike about Hillary or her campaign, it is not the result of GOP propaganda or anyone else’s influence. I always try to present the facts and justifications that lead to my conclusions, I may not always be correct but it’s not a typical practice of mine to make unsupported assertions or simply echo someone else’s opinion. In the end, no matter who wins the nomination, the Hillary supporters will need the Bernie supporters to join them and vice versa, to defeat the real danger posed by a Republican Presidency. The primaries will be over by June (probably sooner in a de facto way) and if this is going to be the year the first woman President is elected…or the first Jewish President…I think it benefits us to accept the disagreements between fellow Dems on the positives and negatives of two candidates who espouse agreement on 99% of the issues…that most Dems support anyway. » Posted By AdLib On February 8, 2016 @ 11:52 pm The Two Candidates That Really Need to Win in Iowa Tonight Santorum dropped out today! I’m 3 for 3! Woo-hoo! Rand Paul dropped out too, a little surprised because he was beating many who are staying in but he may be getting worried about losing his Senate seat now that a solid Dem candidate jumped in the race. Next week before NH, I will make new predictions on the next Repubs to drop out. They should have a Draft Kings/Fan Duel for this! » Posted By AdLib On February 3, 2016 @ 7:22 pm Trump is still walking wounded today, having a subdued “loser” tone and whining about how the media is evil, not complimenting his 2nd place win but complimenting Rubio’s 3rd place win. Now…he says he wasn’t even expected to be in the top 10 in IA, using a quote from half a year ago and trying to rewrite history that he wasn’t leading in IA…except in one last minute poll. Sorry Donny, we know what we know and we heard you bragging about crushing Cruz in IA. Maybe Trump should rebrand all his “Trump” properties to “Loser”? » Posted By AdLib On February 2, 2016 @ 4:29 pm monica, with a win in NH Bernie will validate his candidacy with doubters and pick up more support. I do see an unending pro-establishment drumbeat in the MSM, still finding ways to minimize Bernie’s successes while exaggerating Hillary’s candidacy and “wins”. But it’s not really working on voters, it just bounces around the MSM bubble for them to keep batting back and forth between themselves. » Posted By AdLib On February 2, 2016 @ 4:23 pm Cheers Kalima! And who knows, maybe my prediction that Sarah Palin will spontaneously combust during a New York Times interview will still come true! » Posted By AdLib On February 2, 2016 @ 4:17 pm Nirek, you know what, I didn’t even consider a virtual tie as an outcome and I should have (even though it’s never happened before like this in the IA Caucuses). In that case, I do agree that this is closer to a Bernie win than a Hillary win. So, Bernie should have a lot of energy and momentum going into NH and Hillary has to deal with the perception that comes with losing a 50% lead and ending up in a virtual tie. I do hope he wins by a big margin and this primary continues competitively for months to come. Whoever eventually wins, a strong primary is good for the Dems. If Hillary was to run away with the primary, she would look far too entitled and grow complacent. If Bernie was to run away with it, he wouldn’t be as tested as he would need to be to bear up under a GE attack from the Repubs. So, the results in IA seem pretty good for Dems all the way around. I didn’t want to see Trump sweep IA and NH and possibly have a quick path to the nom. Cruz, Trump and Rubio are all unprincipled and nasty and having them tear into each other for months is a dem dream come true. » Posted By AdLib On February 2, 2016 @ 4:10 pm monicaangela, how you describe Santorum makes a lot of sense. His political career is over and all he has is these desperate runs for President to get publicity and have a sense of importance…as minimal as it is. Huckabee’s support may go more to Cruz since it is evangelical but it’s so negligible. Who may bail out after NH? I think Christie and Kasich may bail if they don’t come in at least 3rd. Bush? I think just out of the debt he has to feel towards his contributors, he’s going to stay in hoping some miracle happens that damages the front runners and Jeb! becomes “Mr. Last Resort if Absolutely Necessary”. » Posted By AdLib On February 2, 2016 @ 4:00 pm Kalima, I actually smile at the desperate Hillary propaganda today about how she “won” IA. First of all, she started with a 50% lead over Bernie. Second, she and Bernie got an equal amount of delegates so claiming she won is de facto silly. Lastly, they used coin flips in several cases, which somehow came up for Hillary so if she did win, it was by the luck of coin flips (or maybe the “luck” of supporters flipping coins), not because she won a plurality of votes. Now onto NH where Bernie’s lead may shrink or grow but either way, a week from today, it seems pretty certain Bernie will be announcing a real win over Hillary. » Posted By AdLib On February 2, 2016 @ 3:53 pm gyp46, so true that IA is a grade school primer in hypocrisy. They supported Trump who is as big an unreligious “sinner” as they come and as you say, they demand that all candidates support huge handouts to their corn industries while railing against everyone for not being Christian like them and government giving away tax money. There’s a good reason why the GOP is imploding and their obvious hypocrisy has a lot to do with it. » Posted By AdLib On February 2, 2016 @ 3:49 pm KT – All campaigns promote themes each day to the MSM about themselves. Bernie would be able to promote the theme and appearance of being the unbeaten candidate who is gathering momentum and notching one win after another. Voters are influenced by a candidate winning, it makes the candidate look stronger and more attractive so it snowballs support from voters. Many folks want to be on the team of a “winner”. Since right now, it’s a virtual tie between Bernie and Hillary, I think it has to count as a win for him and a disappointing performance by Hillary. So Bernie has momentum going into NH which is great for him going forward. » Posted By AdLib On February 1, 2016 @ 9:11 pm Okay, 2 out of 3 ain’t bad. In my post above, I predicted that up to 3 candidates might drop out tonight after poor results. Huckabee, O’Malley and Santorum. I got the first two right but may not have accounted for how much more delusional Santorum is than I assumed. Then again, maybe there will be more announcements tomorrow morning! » Posted By AdLib On February 1, 2016 @ 9:02 pm At this point in 2008, a majority of black voters favored Hillary. Victories change opinions. » Posted By AdLib On February 1, 2016 @ 8:57 pm KT – I think they are both dangerous. I didn’t want Trump winning IA then NH and maybe having an easy “cruise” to the nom. We needed Cruz to win Ia and Trump to win NH so that they can be locked in a destructive death match (maybe with Rubio too). Both are so nasty, turning them on each other until Summer will only help Dems beat them. Trump has huge negatives with voters and Cruz is disliked by Repubs as well as Dems so he has no chance to win either. Both are doomed but let them make each other even more damaged for the GE. Have confidence, whoever the Repub is, will be unpalatable to the majority of Americans. And always remember, all the MSM was telling us Trump would win IA and was unstoppable, the inevitable winner. There is a huge disconnect between the MSM and voters. They don’t want Any of the Repubs, that seems pretty clear. » Posted By AdLib On February 1, 2016 @ 8:56 pm Kalima, I watched Trump’s concession speech, his eyes were squinty and watery. Oh, did my heart so good! Having to admit he’s a big loser! So cool! » Posted By AdLib On February 1, 2016 @ 8:49 pm He is a winner by virtually tying her, IMO, whether he or she wins by 1%, they both get virtually the same amount of delegates and since Hillary was ahead of him for most of the time by a big margin, a virtual tie makes her look weak and Bernie look to be her equal. Both of those definitions help Bernie. And this is not leverage for Hillary to carry into NH, it changes nothing so if she virtually ties Bernie in IA then Bernie beats her big time in NH, advantage and momentum goes to Bernie. Nevada is next and it’s a caucus, that favors Bernie. A good night for Bernie and anti-Trump folks! » Posted By AdLib On February 1, 2016 @ 8:45 pm TED CRUZ WINS IA! Now he and Trump can have a battle to the death for a long time to come! » Posted By AdLib On February 1, 2016 @ 7:27 pm Funk – Looking at the results as of 7:17pm PST, Cruz will likely win in IA which is what I hoped for. I want to see Trump and Cruz in a cage match, going back and forth up until the end of the GOP primary so Trump winning IA and NH could have given him too clear of a path to win. So that’s good. As for Bernie, he’s already won because at this moment, he and Hillary are 1% apart and will pretty much take away an equal amount of delegates (not counting Hillary’s Superdelegates). So the night’s winners look to be Cruz, Rubio (for overperforming in 3rd place, just a point right now behind Trump) and Bernie. Hillary could technically win but not having a clear win over Bernie in a state she was supposed to win and was ahead by a big margin for so long, hurts her “inevitable” meme and makes her look vulnerable to losing to Bernie. Waiting for the final results now but so far, so good. Trump, who’s built his whole candidacy on his polls and how he’s going to win so much we’ll get sick of winning, is battered and bruised by such a loss. I am SO looking forward to seeing Trump limping around tomorrow, denying that he lost. » Posted By AdLib On February 1, 2016 @ 7:26 pm monicaangela, I am trying to be impartial in my projections even though I favor Bernie over Hillary. What you say about Bernie supporters redoubling their efforts if he loses makes a lot of sense. As it looks now, Bernie and Hillary will pretty much split the delegates in IA so Bernie can’t lose. As you say, Hillary is the one who gets hurt if she ties Bernie. » Posted By AdLib On February 1, 2016 @ 7:15 pm KT – I am rooting for Bernie to win tonight and do agree that it is possible that for him to lose in Iowa, win in NH and win the nom but he wouldn’t have the narrative of having momentum as winning both would give him. he needs the dynamics to change in the South though and just splitting IA and NH doesn’t seem to be something that would change that. Again, it doesn’t mean he can’t win but without making voters in SC and NV reconsidering their support of Hillary, it could mean Hillary wins two in a row, 3 of 4 and you know she’ll pump up the “inevitable” narrative after that. BTW, agreed about NH not caring what IA does. » Posted By AdLib On February 1, 2016 @ 6:52 pm Weekend Music Thread – Message in a Bottle To Carly Fiorina: » Posted By AdLib On January 30, 2016 @ 4:29 pm To Jeb! » Posted By AdLib On January 30, 2016 @ 4:16 pm Anti-Abortion Republicans are Also Pro-Criminals Cheers, Kalima! I mentioned “white privilege/entitlement” in a reply to you, didn’t see yet that you nailed it here! The problem with these damaged human beings is that they NEED to believe the worst things about people that disagree with them. To the lesser educated, insecure people, it is too threatening to their security to be open to the possibility that the opinions they have blindly adopted from the authority figures they depend on to tell them how to think, could be wrong. So they are anti-intellectual of course and must justify the demonizing of everything that doesn’t support the world view that’s been stamped into their brains. No wonder they don’t believe in evolution. So they’ll rationalize why it’s okay for the anti-Planned Parenthood frauds to have committed crimes to destroy Planned Parenthood, they’ll support the immoral bigotry against Muslims, they’ll applaud the portrayal of an entire country’s people and their entire race as “criminals and rapists”…they have and continue to stoop to the most immoral beliefs while perceiving themselves as superior in morality. It is a dichotomy and in the end, a product of the lack of education. As they say, knowledge is power and through the gutting of public education by Republicans cutting taxes and spending on educations, they are helping produce a larger population that is uneducated and unable to use critical thinking to make their own decisions and conclusions on issues. So of course, they are more susceptible to looking to authority figures like Fox News and Rush Limbaugh to figure things out for them and tell them how to think. No one who is well educated and well adjusted requires an obnoxious, chauvinist, racist drug addict to tell them how they should think. But those who feel insecure about being smart enough to figure out truths for themselves are a very different story. » Posted By AdLib On January 28, 2016 @ 11:22 am Thanks for your kind words, monica! What gets me is the holistic hypocrisy of the GOP. It is global for them. They pound their chests about fighting for morality on all the social issues but they encourage and champion immorality as a means of attaining their “moral” goals. Out of the ignorance of self-righteousness, they want so badly to force their religious beliefs on all Americans and relegate women back to the role of helpless baby makers of 2,000 years ago that they will lie, defraud and break laws to accomplish that. What belief do they have that isn’t hypocritical? They claim they are pro-life yet support executions, wars and police murders of unarmed African Americans. Do they really not know that all of those innocent people killed under policies they support were once “unborn” babies? How can someone be pro-life when they stop protecting the life of a baby the moment it’s born? I think the whole Trump phenomenon is directly related to the GOP being merely an arm of the plutocracy. For decades, the GOP has treated its voters like rubes, promising them everything they want in campaigns while knowing that the only things they’ll do when elected is make the wealthy wealthier at the expense of everyone else. Now Repub voters finally are understanding that they have just been played for fools and supporting Trump and Cruz is there way of rebelling. Thankfully, this is a Repub “thing” so Trump will only dominate within the GOP and can’t win in a GE. Dems like their President and the many promises he has kept so they’re not looking for a plutocrat in populist clothing. While many Dems do support Bernie for a related reason of opposing the plutocratic forces, they will support Hillary if she became the Dem nominee. Truly, I am not concerned at all that Trump could win the Presidency. He needs around 50% of the Latino vote and a majority of the women vote to win. It just isn’t going to happen. And a reminder, Trump has not really been hit by negative campaigning and advertising, as he will when the GE starts. Think about how much horribleness from Trump’s mouth the public could be reminded of and it’s only inevitable that his chauvinism will come out in his attacks on Hillary if she is the nom, even more women will be alienated from him. Trump can’t win in a General Election for the very reasons that he is winning the GOP race so far. Only a hateful demagogue could prevail in today’s GOP and such a candidate will be far too toxic to win in a GE. » Posted By AdLib On January 28, 2016 @ 11:05 am Satire Declares Bankruptcy After Sarah Palin Endorses Donald Trump Harleigh, I’d guess Palin would say, “Obama!”. » Posted By AdLib On January 25, 2016 @ 11:12 am Harleigh, the funny thing is, Trump has out Bachamanned Bachmann, she would be less outrageous now as a candidate than Trump. Trump/Palin/Apocalypse 2016! » Posted By AdLib On January 25, 2016 @ 11:11 am Kalima, your wisdom has inspired Satire to withdraw its bankruptcy! You are right, most people see what’s really going on. It’s our MSM that is making a fortune off of the Trump candidacy that is warping the reality of minor support for Trump as being more major. Even if he had 40% support in the GOP, only about 23% of voters are registered Republicans. So that means that in fact, only 9.2% of voters support Trump right now…and 90.8% of voters aren’t supporting Trump. Palin, screeching aside, looked like a melting wax replica of herself. What a brilliant description of Palin! Nailed it! It will be a bit of a grating on our patience to put up with the lunacy of the next 10 months of Trump’s campaign but as you say, when we get to the finish lines, the reward of watching the GOP blow up will be worth all of it. No question that Trump or Cruz winning would turn the US into a rogue state in the eyes of most of the world but that ain’t gonna happen! Isn’t it amazing that the GOP claims to be the party of personal responsibility yet at every opportunity, they squirm in any way they can to avoid it. Yes, Obama is responsible for everything Sarah Palin and her entire family does. I guess when they say believe in “personal responsibility”, it’s more of a conspiracy theory that involves Obama controlling them. Yes, I saw the Brits just savage Trump and give a preview of how the whole world would treat the US’s President if such a fool was to win. But again, he never will. » Posted By AdLib On January 25, 2016 @ 11:08 amComments Posted By AdLib
«« Back To Stats Page
Home Stats