Political Roundtable Part XI

[DCZards]

Do the Dems need to tweak their message to some voters? Absolutely. But this notion that the Dems need to dramatically change their message...and maybe even its core values...is pure nonsense. Let's not forget that Dem candidate is winning the popular vote by more than 2 mil over Repub candidate for President. I'd suggest that when it comes to certain voting populations the problem was more the messenger than the message.

[dckingsfan]

Do the Dems need to tweak their message to some voters? Absolutely. But this notion that the Dems need to dramatically change their message...and maybe even its core values...is pure nonsense. Let's not forget that Dem candidate is winning the popular vote by more than 2 mil over Repub candidate for President. I'd suggest that when it comes to certain voting populations the problem was more the messenger than the message.

And lost in the House by 3M voters... and a majority of the Governorships.

I didn't imply core values by the way. But a little more balance might be a good thing.

[pcbothwel]

Do the Dems need to tweak their message to some voters? Absolutely. But this notion that the Dems need to dramatically change their message...and maybe even its core values...is pure nonsense. Let's not forget that Dem candidate is winning the popular vote by more than 2 mil over Repub candidate for President. I'd suggest that when it comes to certain voting populations the problem was more the messenger than the message.

DC, I hear a lot of people repeat this theme of "Dems are fine, Hillary was just terrible" or "She still won the popular vote..".
While these are true, they are in the past. The D's have to look at the state of the country in the 2018,2020, etc elections.

While I agree with the quotes above that many Dems are stating, you have to look forward and think about how the country will vote with
1) A less bias media: NYT, CNN, Wash Post, etc have all taken a hit with the last election and I doubt they'll be quite as bad next election and give Trump/R's a little more of a fair shake

2) The possibility of Trump successes: Secured Border and stronger immigration/visa program, Lower/simplified taxes, 3-4% growth, Repatriation of 3-4 Trillion dollars, and repealed Obamacare. True, these are mostly Republican selling points, but then you have the other 2 elephants in the room:
- A) Passing and implementation of 400-500 Billion Infrastructure Bill which not only puts people to work, but has tangible benefits to those not actually in those jobs (New Roads, Bridges, Airports, etc. benefit society)
- B) Less invasive, more focused presence in the world/Middle East.

Those two above will appeal to more moderate and/or left leaning people.
I'm not saying that all this things WILL happen, but there is a very high likelihood that most of them will. And if so, Trump/R's will be a much stronger competitor in 2020

[nate33]

Do the Dems need to tweak their message to some voters? Absolutely. But this notion that the Dems need to dramatically change their message...and maybe even its core values...is pure nonsense. Let's not forget that Dem candidate is winning the popular vote by more than 2 mil over Repub candidate for President. I'd suggest that when it comes to certain voting populations the problem was more the messenger than the message.

DC, I hear a lot of people repeat this theme of "Dems are fine, Hillary was just terrible" or "She still won the popular vote..".
While these are true, they are in the past. The D's have to look at the state of the country in the 2018,2020, etc elections.

While I agree with the quotes above that many Dems are stating, you have to look forward and think about how the country will vote with
1) A less bias media: NYT, CNN, Wash Post, etc have all taken a hit with the last election and I doubt they'll be quite as bad next election and give Trump/R's a little more of a fair shake

2) The possibility of Trump successes: Secured Border and stronger immigration/visa program, Lower/simplified taxes, 3-4% growth, Repatriation of 3-4 Trillion dollars, and repealed Obamacare. True, these are mostly Republican selling points, but then you have the other 2 elephants in the room:
- A) Passing and implementation of 400-500 Billion Infrastructure Bill which not only puts people to work, but has tangible benefits to those not actually in those jobs (New Roads, Bridges, Airports, etc. benefit society)
- B) Less invasive, more focused presence in the world/Middle East.

Those two above will appeal to more moderate and/or left leaning people.
I'm not saying that all this things WILL happen, but there is a very high likelihood that most of them will. And if so, Trump/R's will be a much stronger competitor in 2020

I'll add that Trump's character and background were huge obstacles for him. He he lacked an actual governing record, so personality was all the voters had to go on. The next time around, I don't think his various scandals, like the negative comments about women, will really matter much. It'll be about his policy and performance as President.

Obviously, nobody can tell the future. If Trump's deficit spending ends up leading to higher interest rates and a real estate collapse, it could really hurt the economy and impair his chances. But as long as things run reasonably smoothly, I think his path in 2020 will be easier than in 2016. Policy-wise, Trump has taken the Republicans toward the center on economic issues, and the social conservatives have mostly ceded defeat on the great social issues of the day.

The Democrats are really going to have to find a good candidate with broad appeal to beat him. Their bench looks pretty thin right now, but that's usually the case after 8 years in power. Nobody got the spotlight besides Obama. (The Republicans had the same problem in 2008 when they couldn't find anybody better than McCain.) We'll see who emerges in the next 2 years.

[Induveca]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/ijr.com/opinion/2016/11/262276-wisconsin-judge-jill-stein-recount/amp/?client=safari

[tontoz]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/ijr.com/opinion/2016/11/262276-wisconsin-judge-jill-stein-recount/amp/?client=safari

Filing a lawsuit with zero evidence = fail

[DCZards]

- A) Passing and implementation of 400-500 Billion Infrastructure Bill which not only puts people to work, but has tangible benefits to those not actually in those jobs (New Roads, Bridges, Airports, etc. benefit society)

I'm a big fan of the Infrastructure Bill and its potential to both create jobs and improve our bridges and roads. It's unfortunate that the Repubs fought every effort by the Obama Administration to pass infrastructure legislation. It will be hypocritical of the Repubs to all of a sudden be in favor of an Infrastructure Bill...but I guess that's politics.

[JWizmentality]

I'm sure you were just as outraged in 2005 when Clinton proposed the same thing:

Nate, Hillary did not propose revoking citizenship. Come on man, do you really think we're that dumb?

I agree that revoking citizenship is extreme. I even noted that Trump probably intentionally threw it in as a means of bringing attention to his tweet and making the troll more effective. But JWiz didn't even bring that up. He was outraged by the free speech implications of banning flag burning.

FWIW, there is precedent for revoking citizenship of naturalized citizens:

http://immigration.findlaw.com/citizenship/can-your-u-s-citizenship-be-revoked-.html

Membership in Subversive Groups: Your citizenship may be revoked if the U.S. government can prove that you joined a subversive organization within five years of becoming a naturalized citizen. Membership in such organizations is considered a violation of the oath of U.S. allegiance. Examples include the Nazi Party and Al Qaeda

What makes you think I'm outraged?

I find oblivious hypocrisy quite amusing. You're the first on here to rail against minorities and Muslims. You consider yourself above it all. You thumb your nose at backward practices yet fail to realize just how similar you really are. And your line, your justification for any perceived slight is warranted as long as the Democrat did it.

Awesome, not so different from us leftist immigrants eh?

[AFM]

2 or more lol smileys, unless used in response to a hilarious YouTube video, conveys outrage

[Zonkerbl]

Trump's conversation with Pakistan was very nice. I can't complain.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/11/30/pakistans-surprisingly-candid-readout-of-trumps-phone-call-with-prime-minister/?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_pakinstan823pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

[Zonkerbl]

So I spoke to my 17 year old daughter this morning on the drive to school about how I had all these mean people on my political discussion board who were deliberately misinterpreting my reference to 13 year old script kiddies as implying "stupid," which any reasonable person would know was ridiculous. I was informed that the term "script kiddie" is no longer in common usage and that, unlike in the nineties when the only 13 year olds with access to the internet were self taught geniuses, most 13 year olds today do in fact have access to the internet and that you might believably interpret an offhand comment about 13 year old internet users as implying stupidity.

So in other words, I'm getting old, all you young people get off my lawn. >:(

[tontoz]

So I spoke to my 17 year old daughter this morning on the drive to school about how I had all these mean people on my political discussion board who were deliberately misinterpreting my reference to 13 year old script kiddies as implying "stupid," which any reasonable person would know was ridiculous. I was informed that the term "script kiddie" is no longer in common usage and that, unlike in the nineties when the only 13 year olds with access to the internet were self taught geniuses, most 13 year olds today do in fact have access to the internet and that you might believably interpret an offhand comment about 13 year old internet users as implying stupidity.

So in other words, I'm getting old, all you young people get off my lawn. >:(

I will go way out on a limb and guess if someone said you were acting like a 13 year old, which you do all too frequently, your interpretation would be a bit different.

[Zonkerbl]

So I spoke to my 17 year old daughter this morning on the drive to school about how I had all these mean people on my political discussion board who were deliberately misinterpreting my reference to 13 year old script kiddies as implying "stupid," which any reasonable person would know was ridiculous. I was informed that the term "script kiddie" is no longer in common usage and that, unlike in the nineties when the only 13 year olds with access to the internet were self taught geniuses, most 13 year olds today do in fact have access to the internet and that you might believably interpret an offhand comment about 13 year old internet users as implying stupidity.

So in other words, I'm getting old, all you young people get off my lawn. >:(

I will go way out on a limb and guess if someone said you were acting like a 13 year old, which you do all too frequently, your interpretation would be a bit different.

You know Tonto, you never have anything nice to say. And I would say further that you contribute literally nothing to this conversation but insults. Maybe you should go to an insult thread and leave the mature discussion for people who have something meaningful to add.

[tontoz]

So I spoke to my 17 year old daughter this morning on the drive to school about how I had all these mean people on my political discussion board who were deliberately misinterpreting my reference to 13 year old script kiddies as implying "stupid," which any reasonable person would know was ridiculous. I was informed that the term "script kiddie" is no longer in common usage and that, unlike in the nineties when the only 13 year olds with access to the internet were self taught geniuses, most 13 year olds today do in fact have access to the internet and that you might believably interpret an offhand comment about 13 year old internet users as implying stupidity.

So in other words, I'm getting old, all you young people get off my lawn. >:(

I will go way out on a limb and guess if someone said you were acting like a 13 year old, which you do all too frequently, your interpretation would be a bit different.

You know Tonto, you never have anything nice to say. And I would say further that you contribute literally nothing to this conversation but insults. Maybe you should go to an insult thread and leave the mature discussion for people who have something meaningful to add.

at you of all people complaining about insults.

Need a tissue?

[Zonkerbl]

I will go way out on a limb and guess if someone said you were acting like a 13 year old, which you do all too frequently, your interpretation would be a bit different.

You know Tonto, you never have anything nice to say. And I would say further that you contribute literally nothing to this conversation but insults. Maybe you should go to an insult thread and leave the mature discussion for people who have something meaningful to add.

at you of all people complaining about insults.

Need a tissue?

Are you seriously trying to cyber bully me kid? That's pathetic.

[tontoz]

Are you seriously trying to cyber bully me kid? That's pathetic.

I am not the one who randomly threw out the insult "13 year old internet trolls". I am not the one who threw a fit when someones interpretation of the insult was different from mine.

that is a baldfaced, despicable, slanderous lie and I demand a retraction and an apology.

[dckingsfan]

that is a baldfaced, despicable, slanderous lie and I demand a retraction and an apology.

I think that one was aimed at me in good fun

[tontoz]

that is a baldfaced, despicable, slanderous lie and I demand a retraction and an apology.

I think that one was aimed at me in good fun

I think you have Zonk confused with AFM. If he was joking then he wouldn't say something like this:

If people can't tell the difference between the word "troll" and the word "stupid" I think that's on them. I can't be held responsible for other people's lack of reading comprehension.

[AFM]

Okay gentlemen, anyway...

Watch on YouTube

Gavin vs A Young Bernie Doofus

Unfortunately, this dude is like, the perfect example of the millennial college lib.

Watch on YouTube

"It's a calculator's opinion" lmao!!!

[nate33]

Wow, imprisonment and punishment for burning a "symbol". Not too far off from cutting off heads for speaking ill of Mohammad. I'm sure nate thinks it's no big deal.

I find oblivious hypocrisy quite amusing. You're the first on here to rail against minorities and Muslims. You consider yourself above it all. You thumb your nose at backward practices yet fail to realize just how similar you really are. And your line, your justification for any perceived slight is warranted as long as the Democrat did it.

Awesome, not so different from us leftist immigrants eh?

I'd say imprisonment or a fine for flag burning, administered by the State, as punishment for what is clearly agitation against the State, is quite a bit different than sanctioning vigilante murder against someone who merely uses the image of Mohammed. A quick look at Wikipedia shows that the following countries consider flag burning to be illegal, with punishments including fines and imprisonment:

Austria
Brazil
China
Croatia
Finland
France
Germany
Hungary
India
Israel
Italy
Mexico
Philippines
Portugal
Romania
Switzerland

As I said before, I personally do not advocate a flag burning amendment. I would vote against one if I was in power. However, if such an amendment did pass, it wouldn't bother me much. My viewpoint might be different if I fought in the military and had dear friends injured or killed in defense of America.