I'm calling it now. The Rock will be President of the US in 2020.

[Dextroden]

Hold votes hostage...oh the drama. Why are conservatives/Trumpeteers so fucking dramatic? Haha.

Hillary had well documented faults which made her difficult to vote for. She was a bad candidate who ran a flawed campaign. The sad part is that she would have been less of a clusterfuck embarrassment than the orange shit stain we currently have as president.

It's weird that you so willingly swallow Trump's shit yet still have a hangup about being called a mean name. Well, not weird as much as typically oblivious.

What shit? And the issue with deplorables is the people that probably got mad at Romney for makers and takers are letting this fly. 2012 it was a bad thing to bad mouth large chunks of voters. And then it was strangely only a bad thing for Trump to bad mouth a large chunk of Mexico.

And yes it was a hostage vote. Both campaigns ran heavily on the fact the Republicans aren't worth voting for, so hold your nose and vote Democrat.

[Deadite]

The Rock for president and Kid Rock for vice president. Make it happen America!

[Orby]

Can we get some Rock style promos during his campaign.... that would be awesome lol

[Dextroden]

Absolutely. There were many ingredients in this shit sandwich. Just stop pretending that the ingredients you liked weren't part of the problem.

What ingredients? I haven't pretended voter apathy, voting on slogans and not positions and The Hillary/Bernie split eatting up resources and credibility that could be used on Trump were some of many factors that got him a bare victory.

For the eighteenth time, Hillary being a bad candidate doesn't make Trump good. And vice versa.

[Heladys]

What ingredients? I haven't pretended voter apathy, voting on slogans and not positions and The Hillary/Bernie split eatting up resources and credibility that could be used on Trump were some of many factors that got him a bare victory.

For the eighteenth time, Hillary being a bad candidate doesn't make Trump good. And vice versa.

Of course not. Who said otherwise?

You jumped into the middle of a conversation with a BernieBro disavowing all responsibilty. I'm busy plinking him in the head and you're jumping into the line of fire. Either because you too self-identify as a BernieBro and can't handle the criticism, or because you've grossly misunderstood what's going on here.

[Dextroden]

Can we get some Rock style promos during his campaign.... that would be awesome lol

Can John Cena challenge him for the Presidency during the State of the Union speech?

[Heladys]

Can John Cena challenge him for the Presidency during the State of the Union speech?

That whole "you can't see me" thing is gonna be a handicap in an event where visibility is kind of the point.

[Dextroden]

Of course not. Who said otherwise?

You jumped into the middle of a conversation with a BernieBro disavowing all responsibilty. I'm busy plinking him in the head and you're jumping into the line of fire. Either because you too self-identify as a BernieBro and can't handle the criticism, or because you've grossly misunderstood what's going on here.

Oh good lord no. Too many lofty promises like Trump, just better sounding lofty promises.

I don't like people that get upset if you mention Clinton fucked herself over on top of everything that happened.

[Heladys]

I don't like people that get upset if you mention Clinton fucked herself over on top of everything that happened.

Yes, she absolutely did.

Deplorables was a lovely sound bite and made us all cheer on the inside, but you could tell soon as she said it she was either regretting it or too stupid to regret it. Similarly, her utter failure to reach out and bring Sanders on board as a means of getting his voters was utterly beyond stupid.

She was smug, and taking victory laps around Trump long before election day. I mean, for somewhat understandable reasons, Trump is a dumpster fire, but you never let the electorate see you taking them for granted, even if you aren't already a Clinton who have a reputation for taking people for granted. You just don't.

Plenty of blame to go around.

[Dextroden]

Yes, she absolutely did.

Deplorables was a lovely sound bite and made us all cheer on the inside, but you could tell soon as she said it she was either regretting it or too stupid to regret it. Similarly, her utter failure to reach out and bring Sanders on board as a means of getting his voters was utterly beyond stupid.

She was smug, and taking victory laps around Trump long before election day. I mean, for somewhat understandable reasons, Trump is a dumpster fire, but you never let the electorate see you taking them for granted, even if you aren't already a Clinton who have a reputation for taking people for granted. You just don't.

Plenty of blame to go around.

She sort of half tried at first. Then everyone realised they ran such an intense and bloody primary that chanting unity and pointing to Trump wasn't going to reset things. And I guess they hedged all their bets on winning and spending part of the presidency rebuilding bridges.

Too bad people on the other side of the bridge don't want it rebuilt.

[NYC17]

What shit? And the issue with deplorables is the people that probably got mad at Romney for makers and takers are letting this fly. 2012 it was a bad thing to bad mouth large chunks of voters. And then it was strangely only a bad thing for Trump to bad mouth a large chunk of Mexico.

And yes it was a hostage vote. Both campaigns ran heavily on the fact the Republicans aren't worth voting for, so hold your nose and vote Democrat.

"We never met with Russians, have nothing to do with Russians"

"Ok well my son met with Russians but it's totally ok because nothing came of it".

That right there, if it had been a Clinton, would have sent your "sensibility" meter through the fuckin roof and into outer space. You'd be crafting conspiracy theories about how it ws actually Clinton who killed Magnitsky because she likes to eat children.

No, it wasn't a hostage vote. You don't get to make shit up and declare it relevant analysis because it sounds good to you.

[Deletedaccount1]

Wait.. she made him heir to her estate AFTER she died?

Died Logic with her?

She put it in her will and he inherited it after she died. Was that really not obvious?

[Powerogue]

From Dubya to Sarah Palin to Trump. Surely, the rock bottom has been hit.

That can be his slogan! Though he'd have a tough time against...



It's hard to beat free ponies.

[Fugus]

@NYC17

In your OPINION you think Sanders was not winning the primary, that is your opinion and you are entitled to it. But by given the facts we have, if the DNC had did their job and remained neutral and not tried to sideline him, he was the more likely winner by the data we had. So, you can keep your opinion on the matter and I will keep the facts overall. Sanders might have lost in a primary where the DNC and Clinton had followed their own rules, we won't know 100% for certain though because we never had one, but the data says he probably would have won.

And then you go on to try and blame me for Trump. I didn't cause Clinton to do the shit she did, I didn't cause the DNC to break their own rules. That isn't within my power. I just refused to vote for the person who cheated and reward that bad behavior.

You want to blame someone for Trump, you can blame Clinton and the DNC for meddling in the Republican primaries too trying to get the most damaged person to run against Clinton in the general with their "Pied Piper Strategy" and then you can blame her for running off her own base in the general with her actions.

You are right, the facts do speak for themselves. You are just stubborn to listen to them and claim to the comfortable lie that absolves the guilty party for their actions and blames everyone else on both the Democrat and Republican sides of the isle.

You are also right about 1 other thing. I was not "Her voter base" I didn't vote for the party, I am an independent and vote for the policies and can't vote for the person who cheated.

Now, you can blame me all you want like you are, but that doesn't absolve the guilty party responsible for this, and that isn't me.

Here are some of the facts.

You claim that they didn't cheat. The did break their own rules, that isn't an opinion that is already established and even has their lawyers in court trying to claim their rules weren't legally binding to try and get around it. Breaking your own rules to favor a candidate you like is cheating any way you slice it.

You claim Sanders wouldn't have won. Sanders had jumped from an unknown to getting over 40% of the vote all with the DNC working to minimize his exposure to the public and keep him unknown and colluding with the media to do it as well as having their PACs actually lie and slander him on social media and using the Super Delegates at the start trying to kill any momentum he had while giving Clinton the perception of momentum she never had with them calling her with huge leads before voting had even started and planning the votes in areas where she was projected to have wins trying to prop her up further in the public eye. All when the DNC was supposed to be neutral. But the data and estimated given, Sanders would have likely won had the DNC not cheated. Your opinion can contradict that all you want as it is only a prediction, but it was a fairly educated one by data and very likely.

@Heladys

At least you admit the rig was against him. But the timing is off, the rig appeared to be against him from the start. And while I gladly admit that some of the Sanders supporters were obnoxious, they didn't hold a candle to the level that the Clinton team did and then blamed him for. Clinton even had a group paid a million dollars to talk crap on and lie about Sanders.

Sorry, but most of the people I know who were against Sanders weren't against him because of his supporters, they either didn't know him entirely except as "The guy running against Clinton" or "That communist I saw on facebook who is going to up our tax rate to 95%". Outside of that, none of them who were against him knew anything about him.

I personally didn't do anything to run off Moderates, Independents, or blue republicans. Clinton did that all on her own as did "Correct the Record" and the guys who termed the phrase "Bernie Bros" and so on. Debbie with her voice vote crap actually turned away plenty of voters, I ended up seeing actual Clinton supporters who weren't supporting Sander turn away from her after that one.

And again, the cheer-squad isn't to blame for this fucked up shit, Clinton and DNC are. If they hadn't pulled their shit, that cheer-squad would have been willing to actually vote for her.

Stop trying to blame the voters, it isn't our job to chase after the politicians, never was. It is the Politicians job to EARN our votes, which she actively refused to do thinking she was entitled to them because she managed to help put Trump has her opponent. It doesn't work like that to many voters. You have to give them something to vote FOR, not just forcing them to vote against the other person. And when you have a cheater and a corrupt idiot, many will either stay home or vote 3rd party rather than throw their vote away. You want decent voter turnout, then give them something to actually vote for, don't blame them because they only give them something to vote against.

But I am glad you admit it was rigged. Too many refuse to accept that fact.

[Valeron]

Can we stop with the celebrity politicians?

[NYC17]

@NYC17

In your OPINION you think Sanders was not winning the primary, that is your opinion and you are entitled to it. But by given the facts we have, if the DNC had did their job and remained neutral and not tried to sideline him, he was the more likely winner by the data we had. So, you can keep your opinion on the matter and I will keep the facts overall. Sanders might have lost in a primary where the DNC and Clinton had followed their own rules, we won't know 100% for certain though because we never had one, but the data says he probably would have won.

And then you go on to try and blame me for Trump. I didn't cause Clinton to do the shit she did, I didn't cause the DNC to break their own rules. That isn't within my power. I just refused to vote for the person who cheated and reward that bad behavior.

You want to blame someone for Trump, you can blame Clinton and the DNC for meddling in the Republican primaries too trying to get the most damaged person to run against Clinton in the general with their "Pied Piper Strategy" and then you can blame her for running off her own base in the general with her actions.

You are right, the facts do speak for themselves. You are just stubborn to listen to them and claim to the comfortable lie that absolves the guilty party for their actions and blames everyone else on both the Democrat and Republican sides of the isle.

You are also right about 1 other thing. I was not "Her voter base" I didn't vote for the party, I am an independent and vote for the policies and can't vote for the person who cheated.

Now, you can blame me all you want like you are, but that doesn't absolve the guilty party responsible for this, and that isn't me.

Here are some of the facts.

You claim that they didn't cheat. The did break their own rules, that isn't an opinion that is already established and even has their lawyers in court trying to claim their rules weren't legally binding to try and get around it. Breaking your own rules to favor a candidate you like is cheating any way you slice it.

You claim Sanders wouldn't have won. Sanders had jumped from an unknown to getting over 40% of the vote all with the DNC working to minimize his exposure to the public and keep him unknown and colluding with the media to do it as well as having their PACs actually lie and slander him on social media and using the Super Delegates at the start trying to kill any momentum he had while giving Clinton the perception of momentum she never had with them calling her with huge leads before voting had even started and planning the votes in areas where she was projected to have wins trying to prop her up further in the public eye. All when the DNC was supposed to be neutral. But the data and estimated given, Sanders would have likely won had the DNC not cheated. Your opinion can contradict that all you want as it is only a prediction, but it was a fairly educated one by data and very likely.

@Heladys

At least you admit the rig was against him. But the timing is off, the rig appeared to be against him from the start. And while I gladly admit that some of the Sanders supporters were obnoxious, they didn't hold a candle to the level that the Clinton team did and then blamed him for. Clinton even had a group paid a million dollars to talk crap on and lie about Sanders.

Sorry, but most of the people I know who were against Sanders weren't against him because of his supporters, they either didn't know him entirely except as "The guy running against Clinton" or "That communist I saw on facebook who is going to up our tax rate to 95%". Outside of that, none of them who were against him knew anything about him.

I personally didn't do anything to run off Moderates, Independents, or blue republicans. Clinton did that all on her own as did "Correct the Record" and the guys who termed the phrase "Bernie Bros" and so on. Debbie with her voice vote crap actually turned away plenty of voters, I ended up saying actual Clinton supporters who weren't supporting Sander turn away from her after that one.

And again, the cheer-squad isn't to blame for this fucked up shit, Clinton and DNC are. If they hadn't pulled their shit, that cheer-squad would have been willing to actually vote for her.

Stop trying to blame the voters, it isn't our job to chase after the politicians, never was. It is the Politicians job to EARN our votes, which she actively refused to do thinking she was entitled to them because she managed to help put Trump has her opponent. It doesn't work like that to many voters. You have to give them something to vote FOR, not just forcing them to vote against the other person. And when you have a cheater and a corrupt idiot, many will either stay home or vote 3rd party rather than throw their vote away. You want decent voter turnout, then give them something to actually vote for, don't blame them because they only give them something to vote against.

But I am glad you admit it was rigged. Too many refuse to accept that fact.

We've already been through this. I knocked down your bullshit in another thread, so there's really no need to continue it in this one and derail it further than it already has been. If people wish to educate themselves on just how delusional you are regarding Sanders' "victimization" they can read about it there. Revive it if you're so inclined.

To recap:

You're delusional and unrealistic when it comes to Sanders.

You're the left's version of Trumpeteers.

You aren't anywhere near convincing enough to sell the bullshit you peddle.

You are a part of the reason why Trump was elected.

You need to move on from Sanders.

You should write Clinton and beg her for an apology so you can move on with your life.

[Fugus]

We've already been through this. I knocked down your bullshit in another thread, so there's really no need to continue it in this one and derail it further than it already has been. If people wish to educate themselves on just how delusional you are regarding Sanders' "victimization" they can read about it there. Revive it if you're so inclined.

To recap:

You're delusional and unrealistic when it comes to Sanders.

You're the left's version of Trumpeteers.

You aren't anywhere near convincing enough to sell the bullshit you peddle.

You are a part of the reason why Trump was elected.

You need to move on from Sanders.

You should write Clinton and beg her for an apology so you can move on with your life.

No, you didn't knock down anything, you talked bullshit in another thread trying to claim that their rules weren't legally binding so breaking them wasn't cheating. That is all you did. You didn't knock down anything. You just talked bullshit and spouted your opinion that Sanders wouldn't have won that contradicts the data we have.

And you are the one being the victim here claiming that Clinton would have won if it weren't for the Sanders supporters and absolving her of her actions that ran them off in the first place.

To recap:

YOU are delusional and unrealistic when it comes to this whole situation on the parts of both Clinton and Sanders.
You try and slander me as a left wing Trumpeteers because I am not your brand of deluded and don't believe the lie you are spouting.

I am not talking the bullshit, you are and trying to keep to the lie.

Now, I am not the reason Trump elected, quit playing the victim for Clinton, I didn't run her voters off, she did that. Quit pretending she was entitled to votes she didn't earn and actively ran off with her actions.

You need to accept reality for what it is, not what you wish it to be and quit trying to whitewash the events.

Why the hell would I write Clinton? I didn't make her cheat,I didn't make her run off her voters, I didn't make her do any of that. Why would I apologize for a mess that she caused?

[Fugus]

What rules?

Their rules on neutrality. You can read up on it online, they are even getting sued for it and their lawyers justification was trying to claim that their rules weren't legally binding so it didn't count.

[Fugus]

AH, so its one of these post.

"Hey guy, deh dems did something horrible"!
"What"
"Things, like totes go read online"

No, I just don't have the time to repeat the stuff which is all over the place now for those who look for it. And I am also about to go AFK to go to the grocery store to get ready for nieces and nephews staying the night tonight. Don't have the time nor the motivation.

Was actually about to edit and AFK into the last post before I left but I saw the response.

But you are free to look, they are getting sued for their actions in the election and one of their lawyers justifications was that their rules weren't legally binding. Which I noticed when I looked it up after watching NYC17 I believe it was who tried using that justification to me claiming it wasn't cheating to break their own rules because they weren't legally binding.

Now, I have to AFK and get ready for the migraine of children trying to listen to Kids Bop while playing Minecraft and/or Fat Princess.......

Later man, no hard feelings on this stuff, just a pet peeve when I see someone saying something I know to be factually wrong.

Edit: Might be on later tonight to check this stuff, but no guarantee for today.

[Zarc]

@Fugus The data we have show Hillary winning by almost 4 million votes against Bernie. That's not opinion, that's fact. And what did the emails show? Party staffers trash talking and pitching ideas they could throw at the media about some guy who just crashed the party after having been an independent for the previous 40 years challenging a long-time party member? Well.. yeah. That's to be expected, in fact what is to be expected in like every other political party in every other country is that some guy doesn't have a chance in hell to be the standard-bearer of the party after having just joined it. Regardless, people voted and they chose Hillary. And as for Hillary's magic "Establishment" behind-the-scenes powers she managed to lose the nomination in 2008 to a freshman Senator despite winning the popular vote. So much for that. Losing despite winning the popular vote seems to be her thing, or rather the thing for anyone who runs in the shadow of Bill Clinton. *cough* Al Gore *cough*

Anyway, I agree with @NYC17 that people need to move on from Sanders. Too much cult-of-personality going on with too many people about Sanders. Anyone who doesn't promote Sanders as the standard-bearer of the Democratic party is "the Establishment", and anyone who has a policy position separate from that of Sanders is a "corporate Democrat". It's fine that the Democratic Party is a big tent party with a progressive wing, a liberal/mainstream wing, a centrist/New Democrat wing, a conservative/Blue Dog wing and even a Libertarian wing. But when you constantly assume malice on anyone who disagrees with you that's not going to end well if you want to unite the left-of-Republicans coalition to oust Trump in 2020.

I hope the Democratic primaries in 2020 will be as packed with candidates as the 2016 Republican primaries was. I'd wager that somebody who fits into the liberal/mainstream category ends up clinching the nomination. That person is not Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.

I would cast my vote, though I can't because I'm European, for a candidate who is in favor of free trade, is a liberal internationalist, is in favor of raising taxes on the rich, wants to raise the minimum wage, at least is in favor of the public option tho I'm ultimately in favor of single-payer (again, European, universal healthcare is awesome), is hawkish on climate change and wants to reform the criminal-justice system and stop the war on drugs. Probably agree with the progressives on multiple of those issues, but not on free trade and on being liberal internationalist, and likely not "strong" enough on single-payer. I'm all for proposing an amendment to overrule Citizens United, too.