Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to comment and join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. If you become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

LOL


Recommended Posts

It sounds like the entire basis of her statement is that white people in the democratic party are prejudiced and hiding behind the D label to deem themselves not prejudiced. To imply such is wrong, if she wants to call people prejudiced she should name names instead of accusing people by the color of their skin. That's not a poor choice of words, that is just a morally wrong argument.

 

 

But hey, they're aiming the racist gun in their own mouths now instead of at the other side. It's actually pretty funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could tell them in less than two minutes why they lost the election in November, yet they seem determined to head down the same path, expecting a different result. If anyone from the DNC is reading this, I will save you a whole bunch of research. Read carefully:

You hand picked a candidate who was hated by a lot of people. You rigged the system from the beginning so that the nomination was essentially hers before the first vote was cast. Despite this, you were so complacent during the campaign that your candidate didn't even campaign in states that were close, because you assumed that you had them in the bag. When she claimed to understand our hopes and dreams for ourselves and the country, it seemed forced and scripted. Voters notice things like that.

They are right about one thing: The Democrats did a poor job of energizing minorities, because they sure didn't vote for Trump. They just stayed home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vegas Halo Fan said:

I could tell them in less than two minutes why they lost the election in November, yet they seem determined to head down the same path, expecting a different result. If anyone from the DNC is reading this, I will save you a whole bunch of research. Read carefully:

You hand picked a candidate who was hated by a lot of people. You rigged the system from the beginning so that the nomination was essentially hers before the first vote was cast. Despite this, you were so complacent during the campaign that your candidate didn't even campaign in states that were close, because you assumed that you had them in the bag. When she claimed to understand our hopes and dreams for ourselves and the country, it seemed forced and scripted. Voters notice things like that.

They are right about one thing: The Democrats did a poor job of energizing minorities, because they sure didn't vote for Trump. They just stayed home.

While I would disagree about some of what you wrote in the beginning...I think you bring up a good point about energizing and it's one of the reasons why I scratch my head at independents trying to tell Democrats to act more like what used to be a moderate Republican...you cannot win an election your base does not show up for. The Republican base shows up for every election, including off year primaries. It could be a special election for dog catcher, and they are going to show up. Your base does not show up if you continuously hippie punch them or take them for granted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Vegas Halo Fan said:

You hand picked a candidate who was hated by a lot of people.

Hillary Clinton was hated mostly by Republicans that bought into the many years of outrageous conspiracy theories by right-wing radio and Fox News. The fact that she won the popular vote by a wide margin seems to dispel the notion that she was "hated by a lot of people".

15 hours ago, Vegas Halo Fan said:

You rigged the system from the beginning so that the nomination was essentially hers before the first vote was cast.

Hillary Clinton won the nomination because Bernie Sanders isn't a Democrat and was unpalatable to most in the Party.

15 hours ago, Vegas Halo Fan said:

Despite this, you were so complacent during the campaign that your candidate didn't even campaign in states that were close, because you assumed that you had them in the bag.

I don't think the Clinton campaign was "complacent" at all. Could they have done some things differently..probably..would it have made a difference..we'll never really know. I personally would have preferred a different nominee because of policy issues I have with Hillary but that ship sailed long ago.

The campaigns can only go by the information that they have, the fact that some of the state polls were wrong contributed to losses in those states. They deducted that their time would be better spent elsewhere. The National polls were correct as the popular vote shows that Clinton's popularity and likability is vastly better than Republicans would have you believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/clinton_favorableunfavorable-1131.html

Over 50% unfavorable rating by all news services. 

Both Wasserman and Brazille,  DNC Chair,  were fired for their part in election fixing in the primaries and the general election. Wasserman was immediately hired by Clinton even after being outed as plotting against a candidate in their own ranks. This is why in polls Clinton scored 67% believing she was dishonest. 

She was an unlikable candidate for the most part. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...