All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[aja_christopher]

No Trump won because Hillary under performed with African Americans, Hispanics, independents and whites women like her supporters swore she would.

Trump won because he ran against a very beatable Democrat that way too many people disliked and felt like they were holding their nose.

It’s condescending entitlement to accuse people of shirking anything.

But I do admire how fast the thread went from a smug “”Democrats Cam do whatever they want” to lashing out over the idea that their might be consequences for their actions. Go figure.

Whatever you say.

Keep on fighting over nonsense -- it's exactly what both Trump and Putin want.

[numberthirty]

Again -- Trump won because people like you didn't bother to vote against him.

Nothing you say here is going to change that.

Party politics is just an excuse -- you shirked your responsibility as a voter and now we are all dealing with the consequences.

Anyone with any sense of moral decency or civic responsibility should have known to vote against Trump -- the "DNC" has nothing to do with it.

So...

Your fix isn't "The DNC should see if they can give those voters a reason to vote for the Democratic candidate."

It's more like "We alienated voters last time. Let's see if we can potentially pick a fight with them this time instead of just alienating them."

Leaves a little something to be desired.

Whatever you say.

Keep on fighting over nonsense -- it's exactly what both Trump and Putin want.

"Nonsense" that the DNC created for what amounts to no obvious "Money In The Bank" benefit.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Whatever you say.

Keep on fighting over nonsense -- it's exactly what both Trump and Putin want.

Then stop making it easy for them. Can’t help people who can’t help themselves

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

So...

Your fix isn't "The DNC should see if they can give those voters a reason to vote for the Democratic candidate."

It's more like "We alienated voters last time. Let's see if we can potentially pick a fight with them this time instead of just alienating them."

Leaves a little something to be desired.

No his fix is “let the Democrats do whatever stupid thing they want because if someone doesn’t vote for them, then they are the bad guy and we’ll shame them”. Cause worked so welll before

[Kirby101]

Trump won because of Russian interference, voter supression and Comey. Not to mention an anarchaic election system that doesn't give victory to a woman that got 3 million more votes.

[aja_christopher]

So...

Your fix isn't "The DNC should see if they can give those voters a reason to vote for the Democratic candidate.".

My "fix" is that you stop complaining constantly on message boards about "Clinton" and the "DNC" and vote against the candidates (like Trump and the rest of the Republican party) who actually fight AGAINST a "progressive" agenda.

But I know better than to waste my time -- if you don't want to take responsibility for your inaction, then so be it.

You didn't vote -- now you get to reap what you've sown.

No his fix is “let the Democrats do whatever stupid thing they want because if someone doesn’t vote for them, then they are the bad guy and we’ll shame them”. Cause worked so welll before

Never once said that, or even implied it.

You don't see me here talking up Democrats because everyone here knows that said party could use some work... but at the end of the day here we are with a REPUBLICAN congress slashing health care benefits and setting us up for another recession and a REPUBLICAN president simultaneously attempts to destroy centuries old international alliances while advocating the benefits of inviting Russia back into the international community despite their interference in our election process.

If you want to spend your time talking about the Clintons and the DNC that's your business, but don't act as if anyone who disagrees with you thinks the Democratic party is above criticism.

[numberthirty]

My "fix" is that you stop complaining constantly on message boards about "Clinton" and the "DNC" and vote against the candidates (like Trump and the rest of the Republican party) who actually fight AGAINST a "progressive" agenda.

But I know better than to waste my time -- if you don't want to take responsibility for your inaction, then so be it.

You didn't vote -- now you get to reap what you've sown.

That was ninety-eight percent of someone's plan to win an election last time. Everyone saw how that worked out.

At some point, everyone will be able to grasp the fact that it is incredibly foolish to hope that your opponent will hand you your win.

It's how we got here.

[aja_christopher]

That was ninety-eight percent of someone's plan to win an election last time. Everyone saw how that worked out.

What I -- and the rest of the entire world -- saw is what happens when people don't take collective civic responsibility and vote against a truly unqualified presidential candidate.

And now I get to see how some people continue to make excuses instead of just admitting that they are responsible for their own vote -- or lack thereof.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Trump was the candidate most Republicans previously tried to prevent from winning in the primaries. Bush, John McCain and Herman Cain didn't endorse him.

Hillary was the candidate that the Democrats pushed down the voters' throats in the 2016 Democratic Party presidential primaries.

I don't think Bernie Sanders should have a second chance in the 2020 elections, because of his age. He is too old now. He will turn 79 in 2020. After the inauguration, he will turn 80.

They have way many candidates like Trump, Hillary, Sanders and McCain who are over 70 years old. What the America needs is a young and fresh but experienced candidate like JFK who was elected at the age of 43. I cannot think of any Democrats who would give a good fighting chance in the Presidential elections. But two years is too early for me to judge.

What America needs is a good candidate people will vote for. This “we need someone younger” push just screams “ignore the old popular guy so we can push a focus group younger establishment type coming out of the bullpen”

[numberthirty]

What I -- and the rest of the entire world -- saw is what happens when people don't take collective civic responsibility and vote against a truly unqualified presidential candidate.

And now I get to see how some people continue to make excuses instead of just admitting that they are responsible for their own vote -- or lack thereof.

Again, "Vote Against" just lost an election.

If your plan is "Take People To Task/Make Changes That Might Alienate Independent and Progressive Voters/Hope "Vote Against" Somehow Works This Time"?

Your plan is incredibly foolish.

[numberthirty]

What America needs is a good candidate people will vote for. This “we need someone younger” push just screams “ignore the old popular guy so we can push a focus group younger establishment type coming out of the bullpen”

That is a truly revolutionary concept you are floating there.

[aja_christopher]

Again, "Vote Against" just lost an election.

If your plan is "Take People To Task/Make Changes That Might Alienate Independent and Progressive Voters/Hope "Vote Against" Somehow Works This Time"?

Your plan is incredibly foolish.

I'm not citing a "plan" -- all I said is that if you didn't vote, then you are responsible for said choice.

Not "Clinton", not the DNC, but you -- you knew that Trump was a sexist, racist, Islamophobic liar who advocated torture and the unjust incarceration of the Central Park Five, yet you couldn't be bothered to "vote against" him, despite all your talk of "progressive" politics.

Actions speak louder than words, and since you've already spoken with your inaction, there's not much point in continuing this "debate" so adios.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Yes, you are right. However there are some problems with a potential candidate over 80 years old.

What if Bernie Sanders (who will turn 80 in the year 2021) will become too senile and his senility will affect his ability to make rational decisions based on sound judgement?

What are the odds that he will die of old age in office? In any case, would he be replaced by a perhaps incompetent vice-president who is worse than him?

Some presidents died of natural causes in office like 68-year old William Henry Harrison and Zachary Taylor. At the age of 68, William Henry Harrison was the oldest elected president of the United States until Ronald Reagan. William Henry Harrison's presidential term lasted only one month from March 4 to April 4, 1841.

Even in the 21st century with advanced medicine, there are a few humans who can live past 80 years and retain their mental facilities.

There’s a whole process for the President to choose his line of succession. It’s why the VP is on the ticket.

[aja_christopher]

Republican leadership at work.

-----

"Trump Stuns Allies, Won’t Sign G-7 Joint Agreement"

"President Donald Trump said the United States will not sign a joint agreement with other G-7 countries, an abrupt reversal that will further erode relations with key U.S. allies and underscore the country’s increasing isolation under Trump.

Trump announced his decision in a tweet while lashing out at Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who expressed opposition to Trump’s trade policies at the conclusion of the contentious summit.

“Based on Justin’s false statements at his news conference, and the fact that Canada is charging massive Tariffs to our U.S. farmers, workers and companies, I have instructed our U.S. Reps not to endorse the Communique as we look at Tariffs on automobiles flooding the U.S. Market!“ Trump wrote, adding that Trudeau was “very dishonest and weak.”

It’s a remarkable change of tune for the United States. U.S. officials worked closely with G-7 negotiators for days on the communique, and other nations took pains to ensure that Trump would sign on, despite deep disagreements on trade.

Trump’s decision is likely to further divide the U.S. from its G-7 allies, who have long been skeptical of the president and have publicly and privately expressed deep frustration with Trump’s flippant comments and desire to overhaul their trade policies."

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...-russia-635006

[Tami]

Yes, you are right. However there are some problems with a potential candidate over 80 years old.

What if Bernie Sanders (who will turn 80 in the year 2021) will become too senile and his senility will affect his ability to make rational decisions based on sound judgement?

What are the odds that he will die of old age in office? In any case, would he be replaced by a perhaps incompetent vice-president who is worse than him?

Some presidents died of natural causes in office like 68-year old William Henry Harrison and Zachary Taylor. At the age of 68, William Henry Harrison was the oldest elected president of the United States until Ronald Reagan. William Henry Harrison's presidential term lasted only one month from March 4 to April 4, 1841.

Even in the 21st century with advanced medicine, there are a few humans who can live past 80 years and retain their mental facilities.

Another issue, if someone as old as Sanders were elected, it is highly unlikely that he or she would run again fro a second term or be elected again to a second term. 4 years isn't usually long enough for a political party to make long term changes to government. The eye is then on someone who can not only win, but be able to hang on for the whole 8 years. That is the ultimate prize.