Chuck Schumer just threw Hillary Clinton under the bus

[Gray_Matter]

Which makes what Schumer said about Clinton over the weekend all the more intriguing.
"When you lose to somebody who has 40% popularity, you don't blame other things -- Comey, Russia -- you blame yourself," Schumer, the top ranking Democrat in the Senate, told The Washington Post over the weekend. "So what did we do wrong? People didn't know what we stood for, just that we were against Trump. And still believe that."...'

That's a funny comment from Schumer. Do you know how difficult it is for a party to with a 3rd term in a row? It's only happened once since 1948 when the rules changed to prevent a president from seeking more than 2 terms. Clinton did pretty much the only thing that she could. Of course she was one of the factors that contributed to her loss but to try and make out now that it wasn't a good strategy is silly.

[Glorious Leader]

Meh, not so sure about that. The mere mention of the word socialism in this country and some people lose it.

I think this might not be the case anymore or it may be trending away

[mvaliz]

I think this might not be the case anymore or it may be trending away

We thought the same thing about a politician who's campaign of using blatant sexist and racist comments and supporters, a person who obviously lies 90% of the time for their own selfish interest, would never become President.

If there's one thing Dumbass Dump has proven, is to NEVER underestimate the savage backwards-trending stupidity hiding deep beneath the surface of the average person. =/

Not only would "Socialism" be used, but they'll shout from the heavens! "MY TAXES WILL GO UP!? NO!!!!!" (of course, it's only the 1% that get hit with the majority of the tax, and whatever the lower/middle pay in tax increases will be far less than what they currently pay now for insurance... but I digress...)

- - - Updated - - -

So if you can call me a deplorable and not get infracted for flaming can I call you a nigger kike? Let's see if justice prevails or if these forums once again show bias.


[Infracted]

...are you effing kidding me!?

Did you really equate the value of those two horrible horrible words with something as tame/generic as being called a "Deplorable"!?

>_<

[jdbond592]

Kamala Harris would be my choice. Warren is dead on arrival.

[Bryntrollian]

I feel like Schumer could be a reasonable candidate. But as a disclaimer, I know very little about him.

Lets just say hes very low energy

[Allybeboba]

We thought the same thing about a politician who's campaign of using blatant sexist and racist comments and supporters, a person who obviously lies 90% of the time for their own selfish interest, would never become President.

If there's one thing Dumbass Dump has proven, is to NEVER underestimate the savage backwards-trending stupidity hiding deep beneath the surface of the average person. =/

Not only would "Socialism" be used, but they'll shout from the heavens! "MY TAXES WILL GO UP!? NO!!!!!" (of course, it's only the 1% that get hit with the majority of the tax, and whatever the lower/middle pay in tax increases will be far less than what they currently pay now for insurance... but I digress...)

- - - Updated - - -



...are you effing kidding me!?

Did you really equate the value of those two horrible horrible words with something as tame/generic as being called a "Deplorable"!?

>_<

He did. And his point is correct. One group seems to get a pass at flaming others by calling them names that are deemed 'acceptable' such as the word 'deplorables'. However another group does not get this same pass.
Now, I am not condoning what he wrote by any means at all. But the double standard is blatantly clear on this forum that more leniency is given to one group than another.
As for me, I just observe the flaming of others by both of these groups. And don't partake in this flaming. And it quite easy to ascertain which gets the better treatment.

[Antiganon]

He did. And his point is correct. One group seems to get a pass at flaming others by calling them names that are deemed 'acceptable' such as the word 'deplorables'. However another group does not get this same pass.
Now, I am not condoning what he wrote by any means at all. But the double standard is blatantly clear on this forum that more leniency is given to one group than another.
As for me, I just observe the flaming of others by both of these groups. And don't partake in this flaming. And it quite easy to ascertain which gets the better treatment.

Deplorable is not in itself a perjorative. It is an adjective. Behavior can be deplorable. Circumstances can be deplorable. Yes, people can also be deplorable.

Perhaps if the Trump supports shouting racist epithets didn't have such deplorable behavior, they wouldn't be identified as such.

[Allybeboba]

Deplorable is not in itself a perjorative. It is an adjective. Behavior can be deplorable. Circumstances can be deplorable. Yes, people can also be deplorable.

Perhaps if the Trump supports shouting racist epithets didn't have such deplorable behavior, they wouldn't be identified as such.

Supporters of both political sides "shout" racial epithets my friend.

[Allybeboba]

Hey look, a "woke" independent appears to defend the republican victim complex. That is both new and exciting.

Hey look, more predictable name calling and personal attacks.

In what way my friend? Did I say what group is favored over whom? Both questions of which I fully expect you to not answer.
That is unless you have observed the same things I have.

[Kiri]

He did. And his point is correct. One group seems to get a pass at flaming others by calling them names that are deemed 'acceptable' such as the word 'deplorables'. However another group does not get this same pass.
Now, I am not condoning what he wrote by any means at all. But the double standard is blatantly clear on this forum that more leniency is given to one group than another.
As for me, I just observe the flaming of others by both of these groups. And don't partake in this flaming. And it quite easy to ascertain which gets the better treatment.

To be honest, 'liberuls' or variations thereof are often used and allowed. I would see both sides in the same light in that regard, there are derogative terms used by both sides and there are forbidden names to call them on both sides.

[Allybeboba]

To be honest, 'liberuls' or variations thereof are often used and allowed. I would see both sides in the same light in that regard, there are derogative terms used by both sides and there are forbidden names to call them on both sides.

Seen infractions carried over the use of that word. At any rate, I am going to stop discussing the matter here for we are discussing moderation. It is up to you all of you choose to do the same.

I have given my "list" of people for the discussion.
Enjoy the rest of the afternoon everyone.

[Toppy]

Seen infractions carried over the use of that word. At any rate, I am going to stop discussing the matter here for we are discussing moderation. It is up to you all of you choose to do the same.

I have given my "list" of people for the discussion.
Enjoy the rest of the afternoon everyone.

lol predictable

[Allybeboba]

lol predictable

In what way my friend? If you think by calling me "predictable" is an insult you are sadly mistaken. I don't come a video game forum to be unpredictable in my posts.

[Toppy]

In what way my friend? If you think by calling me "predictable" is an insult you are sadly mistaken. I don't come a video game forum to be unpredictable in my posts.

You're doing that "I'm going to take the high ground to win this argument" thing. Its funny.

You could have just stopped posting. Instead you proclaimed you were going to be the bigger man and back out. Well no, the bigger man would simply back out and not proclaim it. Its like calling yourself the most modest person. The action is contradictory to the claim.

[Pterodactylus]

HRC should just quietly bow out of the public light.

An unrelated note, and something that makes me chuckle, is how Trump thinks he is still campaigning for President against HRC.

[Allybeboba]

You're doing that "I'm going to take the high ground to win this argument" thing. Its funny.

You could have just stopped posting. Instead you proclaimed you were going to be the bigger man and back out. Well no, the bigger man would simply back out and not proclaim it. Its like calling yourself the most modest person. The action is contradictory to the claim.

We are not allowed to discuss that subject. I gave people a warning. You can twist it all you like, but that is what I did.
Enjoy the rest of your day.

[Allybeboba]

So far this is you in this thread.

"Guys, were not allowed to discuss the subject I was discussing, and because people started calling me out on my nonsense I am going to take the high road and stop discussing it because of course I have nothing to back up my claims, have a great day everyone!"

What does that have to do with the OP my friend?

[Ghostpanther]

He's a tosser and even more of a party hack than Pelosi, which is saying something.

Agree. If the democrats want to lose again, he is the type of candidate they should put forward as a candidate.

[Sunseeker]

Schumer sucks. The Dems aren't going to win anything without new blood.