2016 Election -- Part II
Poll
 | 57 votes (47.89%) | ||
| | 33 votes (27.73%) | ||
| | 12 votes (10.08%) | ||
| | 10 votes (8.4%) | ||
| | 4 votes (3.36%) | ||
| | 3 votes (2.52%) |
119 members have voted
Quote: ams288That makes no sense.
The deplorables are racists, misogynists, xenophobes, homophobes, and islamophobes - those are the groups Hillary specifically listed during the deplorables speech. And she was correct.
Has nothing to do with stubbornness.
You must have never met a deplorable, stubbornly sticking to his guns and Bible...
Quote: EricBoehlerthead of @MonmouthPoll on CNN: birther hurt Trump badly, esp among suburban college-educated women.
Somehow, someone thinks that saying Bush41 is going to vote for Hillary is going to be a help?
Let analyze this logically. Hillary needs Bernie supporters to show up or she is toast. Her email problems are costing her with the average voter and her race-baiting is coming off like when Costanza tried to buddy up to any random black guy he saw. Its not playing, she has no energy like Obama had.
Bernie supporters hate the GOP. Just look at them on this site. How on earth is this going to help. It would be as if Trump tried to say Jimmy Carter was voting for him.
Then there is how it affects Trump. Trump supporters hate the establishment. Hate it. Bush41 is establishment. Jeb got zero traction in the primaries, part on the family name.
Meanwhile, more pics of Hillary looking like a sick, old woman.
page. When he had the pic of Hillary being
helped up the steps last month, it was up for
8 hours and the Clinton campaign staff went
nuts, calling Drudge every name they could
think of. Now Hillary has cancelled yet
another event, they don't want her out
there cross eyed two days in a row.
Quote: EvenBobThis was on Drudge for 7 hours! It filled half the
page. When he had the pic of Hillary being
helped up the steps last month, it was up for
8 hours and the Clinton campaign staff went
nuts, calling Drudge every name they could
think of. Now Hillary has cancelled yet
another event, they don't want her out
there cross eyed two days in a row.
Well, harder for her to lose another news cycle when she is not out in public.
Keep her out of sight, like Castro? Maybe they try to slip in a body double for non-speaking appearances? lol
BTW: For those of you in Rio........Linda ....
Quote: AZDuffmanSpending most of my day at work means not much time to check the news, but clear Hillary lost yet another news cycle.
Somehow, someone thinks that saying Bush41 is going to vote for Hillary is going to be a help?
.
What this proves is
Bush is not alone among republicans
Editors at the Dallas newspaper are not alone among republicans
This just shows that there are many republicans that refuse to vote for Trump and will vote for Clinton instead
Today all anyone cared about was the Washington Post story on the Trump Foundation's shady misuse of funds. Hillary did debate prep.
EB pretends that a pic on Drudge means anything. Not realizing that only fervent righties give a flying frick about Drudge.
Quote: ams288I think it's become crystal clear: when EB or AZDuffman declare Hillary the loser of a news cycle, it means Trump's had a bad day.
Today all anyone cared about was the Washington Post story on the Trump Foundation's shady misuse of funds. Hillary did debate prep.
EB pretends that a pic on Drudge means anything. Not realizing that only fervent righties give a flying frick about Drudge.
The pics are totally meaningless
Everybody will watch her closely during the debates and if she looks healthy, end of absurd story.
Quote: ams288Today all anyone cared about was the Washington Post story on the Trump Foundation's shady misuse of funds. Hillary did debate prep.
.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Trump doing a perp walk in handcuffs one day. His exposing himself to high profile investigations may just lead to that.
Quote: rxwine(I didn't actually see anything wrong.)
Here's a still from the video, do you see it now?
This isn't normal, this is an indication something
is screwed up in her brain. Look it up. Nor is it
an isolated incident, there are lots of pics out
there where has happened to her before.
"Visual problems in general are well-recognized as among the many manifestations of Parkinson's disease, Sauerbier explained. These range from blurred vision and photophobia to difficulties in controlling gaze and double vision."
This is why she wore the prism glasses in
her testimony last year. They adjust her
wandering eye so she doesn't get double
vision.
Quote: ams288I understand the point you are trying to make. But it's irrelevant. There isn't any one pollster that does polls of a single state every single week. Most of them do 1 per month. So we don't have a Monmouth poll from last week. The one you're obsessing over is from Aug. 12-15.
We do have a CNN poll from last week showing her down 3.
We now have three Florida polls this week, showing Clinton +1, +5, and +6.
She's regaining her lead after her downswing last week. It's that simple. You can keep trying to nitpick all you want, but I'm not backing down.
I haven't looked at how monmouth came up with the demographics of florida. That could be one way to look at it, if their numbers are skewed there. But monmouth is also showing a 8 pt Trump lead in Iowa. Which could also correlate. It's kind of like Roanoke poll which showed Hillary up 19 in Virginia. Next closest during that time period was plus 12 for her. How they construct the demographics will invariably change the results. Skew party affiliation or lack thereof, ethnicity, income, etc will lead to different results, and that is the hard part picking those correctly which are based off previous exit polls. When I think you will see in this election a different percentage of groups of likely voters than from previous elections.
If I was Roanoke I would have never released that VA poll. It was a disaster. RCP Avg for New York is 17. And they came up with 19 for VA? Absolutely no way.
Quote: AZDuffmanSomehow, someone thinks that saying Bush41 is going to vote for Hillary is going to be a help?
.
Bush41 may be establishment, but I'm also sure he would have never said he wasn't voting for Ted Cruz if Ted had been the nominee.
No, you're kidding yourself if you don't think Trump has more problems than just not being favored as an establishment candidate.
Yes, Trump is a thieving, conniving, evil witch who tortures small animals for fun (waterboarding) and lies to everyone. However that doesn't make Clinton any less of a liar. Someone is starting to reach Joeblow. BBB please get this suspension thread back on track.Quote: JoeshlabotnikQuote: RSQuote: JoeshlabotnikDon't say foolish things. Your "specific examples" didn't actually prove jack diddly. You're the only person on the planet who believes Trump was telling the truth about that. Really, why the slavish, toadying loyalty to him? He's a liar, and everyone knows it.
Ironic, coming from a Clinton supporter.
Yes, Clinton is a thieving, conniving, evil witch who tortures small animals for fun, lies to everybody including her own computer, eats ground glass for breakfast, has destroyed entire ecosystems, and has personally murdered tens of millions of people.
However, that doesn't make Trump any less of a liar.
Quote: mdhBBB please get this suspension thread back on track.
Sorry, neither I nor anyone else are going to be suspended for expressing opinions you don't agree with. Fantasize away, though. Crushing free speech is a major Trump goal.
Quote: rxwineI wouldn't be at all surprised to see Trump doing a perp walk in handcuffs one day. His exposing himself to high profile investigations may just lead to that.
That may be why he was acting like he was dumping the race last month. He may have been sensing the cops getting ready to knock on his door, and figured that if he quit the race, the intense scrutiny would end. But the Republican establishment begged him to soldier on, flattering his ego.
Quote: JoeshlabotnikSorry, neither I nor anyone else are going to be suspended for expressing opinions you don't agree with. Fantasize away, though. Crushing free speech is a major Trump goal.
Nobody said anything about suspensions for that. But I think insulting a member IS suspension worthy:
Quote: JoeshlabotnikI no longer am concerned with Trump. He's a lying, mean-spirited piece of filth, and nothing's going to change that. What worries me is the large, festering population of Trumpers. This clown's behavior should make any decent, reasonable person sick, and it should certainly keep anyone from voting for him! Yet, he has millions of loyal Storm Troopers. He may yet win the election. What does that say about our country, when racism, bigotry and hatred get over forty percent of the vote?
Quote: RSQuote: JoeshlabotnikSorry, neither I nor anyone else are going to be suspended for expressing opinions you don't agree with. Fantasize away, though. Crushing free speech is a major Trump goal.
Nobody said anything about suspensions for that. But I think insulting a member IS suspension worthy:Quote: JoeshlabotnikI no longer am concerned with Trump. He's a lying, mean-spirited piece of filth, and nothing's going to change that. What worries me is the large, festering population of Trumpers. This clown's behavior should make any decent, reasonable person sick, and it should certainly keep anyone from voting for him! Yet, he has millions of loyal Storm Troopers. He may yet win the election. What does that say about our country, when racism, bigotry and hatred get over forty percent of the vote?
Trump is a member of this forum? Since when?
And Babs already explained to you that making general (insulting) statements about a group to which a member may or may not belong is OK; insulting a specific member is not. She also explained that the restrictions were somewhat relaxed on this specific thread.
So I will continue to say mean, nasty, and unfortunately, truthful things about Trumpers.
Quote: JoeshlabotnikAnd Babs already explained to you that making general (insulting) statements about a group to which a member may or may not belong is OK; insulting a specific member is not. She also explained that the restrictions were somewhat relaxed on this specific thread.
So I will continue to say mean, nasty, and unfortunately, truthful things about Trumpers.
While one moderator may have said those things, I don't ever count on them (as a group) following the same script at all times. One of them has warned someone only to have that warning overturned by another and the member ending up suspended. Since she is not the only moderator, and certainly not the boss, I wouldn't take it as free reign to say anything you want as long as you lump the members you insult in with a larger group.
Your "truths" remind me of a lot of lies out there; much like all the % things that have gotten people in trouble--Romney's 47%, Hillary's 50%, etc.--there are some horrible, terrible, nasty people among Trump supporters. There are also some horrible, terrible, nasty people on Hillary's side. Perhaps one has a % more than the other, but it isn't really as wide of a gap as you would state it is. There are also some fine folks out there on both sides, whether you happen to like it or not. You can call them all the names in the world, but your false reality is nowhere close to true. Neither Republicans or Democrats deserve to be eliminated; how someone as supposedly educated as you could even bring something like that up is reprehensible. If you want to paint everyone on the other side with a broad brush and call them names, it is fine...but it says more about you than it does about them. What it says is not good.
Quote: RonC(blah blah) What it says is not good.
If it makes a Trumper not like me, well, then, it IS good. You're the one who is saying there are differences in perception and that one side's opinion is as valid as the other. I consider Trumpers to either be deplorables (might as well use that word now) or to have abandoned their morality and principles for the sake of Party unity or not electing Clinton or some such. Of the two, I consider the latter far worse. Being a rotten person is one thing, Choosing to become one for the sake of some expedient goal is another.
And why am I not acknowledging that there could be perfectly decent people who are supporting Trump for perfectly good reasons? Because there ARE no such reasons. Anyone with a brain can see that Trump is unfit for office (or much of anything else). Therefore, I do indeed divide Trumpers into, essentially, two reprehensible camps.
And what you think about me personally means less than nothing. I have never met you, and hope I never do.
And by the way, it's "free REIN." As in, the reins on a horse. To give the horse free rein is to allow it to go where it wants to,
Quote: JoeshlabotnikAnd by the way, it's "free REIN." As in, the reins on a horse. To give the horse free rein is to allow it to go where it wants to,
Thank you, Mr. Grammar Policeperson. And by the way, sentences don't end in commas.
"You have three options for the end of a sentence: period, exclamation mark, or question mark. Each one sets a different tone for the whole sentence. When we’re reading out loud, our tone naturally adjusts to the punctuation: a period is calm and sedate, an exclamation mark is loud and excited, and the question mark turns the end of the sentence up in wonder. In fact, you can use the same words and the same punctuation within the sentence, and change the whole meaning by using different end punctuation."
https://www.grammarly.com/handbook/punctuation/end-sentence-punctuation/
Quote: RonCThank you, Mr. Grammar Policeperson. And by the way, sentences don't end in commas.
"You have three options for the end of a sentence: period, exclamation mark, or question mark. Each one sets a different tone for the whole sentence. When we’re reading out loud, our tone naturally adjusts to the punctuation: a period is calm and sedate, an exclamation mark is loud and excited, and the question mark turns the end of the sentence up in wonder. In fact, you can use the same words and the same punctuation within the sentence, and change the whole meaning by using different end punctuation."
https://www.grammarly.com/handbook/punctuation/end-sentence-punctuation/
God, what a dumb thing to say. Obviously, it was a typographical error. That's different from a word usage error, which is what you made (and NOT a grammar error). Hitting the wrong key isn't the same thing as having a stunted vocabulary. I freely admit that I will make the occasional typo. However, not knowing what a word means is simple ignorance. I was willing to educate you, and this is the thanks I get? Jeez. (And by the way, did you look up that source because you weren't sure yourself whether sentences end with periods or commas?)
You lose. Again :) I would give up if I were you.
At least no one claimed to have won.Quote: JoeshlabotnikGod, what a dumb thing to say. Obviously, it was a typographical error. That's different from a word usage error, which is what you made (and NOT a grammar error). Hitting the wrong key isn't the same thing as having a stunted vocabulary. I freely admit that I will make the occasional typo. However, not knowing what a word means is simple ignorance. I was willing to educate you, and this is the thanks I get? Jeez. (And by the way, did you look up that source because you weren't sure yourself whether sentences end with periods or commas?)
You lose. Again :) I would give up if I were you.
I was already feeling a little nauseous this morning ;-)
The ones that REALLY run the country.
We've boiled down to two candidates.
AT LEAST half the country's population believe one is the embodiment of 'The Wicked Witch', with maybe serious health problems.
AT LEAST half the country's population believe the other is the embodiment of 'The Wicked Witch', and also a cross dresser with a bad wig.
Just 2F
Quote: rxwineI wouldn't be at all surprised to see Trump doing a perp walk in handcuffs one day. His exposing himself to high profile investigations may just lead to that.
Has a sitting President EVER been arrested while in office?
I recall impeachment proceedings, but cannot recall a President ever being arrested while holding the reins.
Ah, google says two Presidents were arrested while in office: Franklin Pierce for running someone over with his horse, and Ulysses Grant for speeding on his horse.
Seriously.
Quote: MrVHas a sitting President EVER been arrested while in office?
I recall impeachment proceedings, but cannot recall a President ever being arrested while holding the reins.
Ah, google says two Presidents were arrested while in office: Franklin Pierce for running someone over with his horse, and Ulysses Grant for speeding on his horse.
Seriously.
Well, being impeached is a form of being arrested. What I am wondering, though, is if sitting Presidents can be sued in civil court--and I don't see why not.
On Monday, the two candidates will meet for their first debate, one that could be among the most watched in history. How is she going to react when Trump lies?
Because he will, of that there's no doubt. It's possible that at some point in the debate, Clinton will say something untrue. But it is an absolute certainty that Donald Trump will not only lie, but will lie multiple times.
Read more here:
http://theweek.com/articles/649902/hillary-clintons-impossible-challenge-factchecking-donald-trump-debate
https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/778227308255641600
Quote: 777Hillary Clinton's impossible challenge: Fact-checking Donald Trump at the debate
On Monday, the two candidates will meet for their first debate, one that could be among the most watched in history. How is she going to react when Trump lies?
The moderators have already said that it isn't their job to call Trump out on his lies. That wimp who pseudo-moderated the earlier semi-debate was excoriated for not doing so, but he just shrugged. So yes, Trump will lie, and no, he won't be called out for it. So it's Clinton's job to do so, even if she has to break the rules to do it. Interjecting a derisive snort, shaking her head, or even simply saying "bullshit" (God, I wish SOMEONE would do that) would be a great and effective moment. I don't think that's Clinton's style, though.
It's not unlike when a lawyer says something he know the other side will object to, and then quickly says "withdrawn," but knows the jury has heard it anyway. Hillary MUST not rely on the superior logic and truth of her positions. Hasn't the campaign shown so far that logic and truth are ineffective anti-Trump weapons? What she has to do is yes, descend to his level. But he's much better at schoolyard brawling than she is.
So I expect Clinton to rationally, calmly point out her policy positions and the flaws in Trump's plans, and Trump to not answer a single question directly, lie unconvincingly, and evade any challenges while not saying a single thing of substance other than various insults of Hillary and immigrants, etc. And he will be proclaimed the winner of the debate.
That's the last thing she should do. POTUS has already shown the way to get under his skin: passive-aggressive sarcasm. All she has to do is sneer "Sure, Donald, quitting NATO is a GREAT policy. So is using charitable contributions to pay your corporate lawyers. GREAT policy. Or hiring a fundraising chair who's been convicted of felony bribery. GREAT policy. Or forming your military strategy around mocking POWs, parents of dead soldiers, and the generals that would report to you. GREAT policy. What other things are you going to do to make America GREAT, Donald?"Quote: JoeshlabotnikHasn't the campaign shown so far that logic and truth are ineffective anti-Trump weapons? What she has to do is yes, descend to his level. But he's much better at schoolyard brawling than she is..
Descending to his level of insult mockery is absolutely not presidential and would only hurt her image. He's not trying to be presidential so he doesn't care, and it'd be a huge win for him if he got her to act like that. But when Obama sarcastically dismisses him, it accomplishes two things: one is it makes Trump pause. I don't know why, but it does. Two is it parries, rather than confronts, his lunatic policies. Trump's conspiracy theories aren't even worth the time to refute, so don't tackle them head on.
Quote: ObamaI don't know about you guys, but I am so relieved that the whole 'birther' thing is over. I mean: ISIL, North Korea, poverty, climate change -- none of those things weighed on my mind like the validity of my birth certificate. And to think: that with just a 124 days to go, under the wire, we got that resolved.
Quote: JoeshlabotnikGod, what a dumb thing to say. Obviously, it was a typographical error. That's different from a word usage error, which is what you made (and NOT a grammar error). Hitting the wrong key isn't the same thing as having a stunted vocabulary. I freely admit that I will make the occasional typo. However, not knowing what a word means is simple ignorance. I was willing to educate you, and this is the thanks I get? Jeez. (And by the way, did you look up that source because you weren't sure yourself whether sentences end with periods or commas?)
You lose. Again :) I would give up if I were you.
On the internet, they are policed by the same people...people like you...there is no sense having different names for all of the self-important out there that do it; everyone seems to "get it"--except the people that do it. Offering a correction without an insult is usually okay. That is something you have no ability or desire (maybe both) to do.
My vocabulary is just fine, thank you. One accidental misuse does not mean are darned thing.
Have a nice day!!
a 48% chance to win, there's this:
"The latest vote projection from elections guru Nate Silver has Republican Donald Trump just six electoral votes short of winning and one point away from equaling Hillary Clinton's popular vote. The newest Five Thirty Eight survey has Trump at 264 and Clinton at 272, two more than needed."
Quote: EvenBobNot only does Nate Silver have Trump at
a 48% chance to win, there's this:
"The latest vote projection from elections guru Nate Silver has Republican Donald Trump just six electoral votes short of winning and one point away from equaling Hillary Clinton's popular vote. The newest Five Thirty Eight survey has Trump at 264 and Clinton at 272, two more than needed."
Righties hate Nate Silver. Shall we go back and see all the times Evenbob has trashed him?
....unless Nate tells them what they want to hear, I guess.
This is from 5 minutes ago:Quote: EvenBobNot only does Nate Silver have Trump at
a 48% chance to win
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nate-silver-trump-surges-from-3-to-48-chance-of-winning-in-1-month/article/2602386#!
be a dud with foreign leaders. First was the
president of Mexico, now this:
Exclusive — Egyptian Leaders Praise Donald Trump, Blast Hillary Clinton After President El-Sisi Meets with Both Candidates
"NEW YORK CITY, New York — Members of the Egyptian delegation to the United Nations blasted Hillary Clinton just a day after Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi met with both Clinton and Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump. They also had high praise for Trump—and while not an official endorsement, it is a positive outcome for Trump’s first and only meeting with Muslim world leaders thus far."
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/21/exclusive-egyptian-leaders-praise-donald-trump-blast-hillary-clinton-after-president-el-sisi-meets-with-both-candidates/
Quote: EvenBobSo much for Hillary's claim that Trump would
be a dud with foreign leaders. First was the
president of Mexico, now this:
Exclusive — Egyptian Leaders Praise Donald Trump, Blast Hillary Clinton After President El-Sisi Meets with Both Candidates
"NEW YORK CITY, New York — Members of the Egyptian delegation to the United Nations blasted Hillary Clinton just a day after Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi met with both Clinton and Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump. They also had high praise for Trump—and while not an official endorsement, it is a positive outcome for Trump’s first and only meeting with Muslim world leaders thus far."
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/21/exclusive-egyptian-leaders-praise-donald-trump-blast-hillary-clinton-after-president-el-sisi-meets-with-both-candidates/
Anyone wanna post this story from a news source that doesn't cater to white supremacists?
Quote: ams288Anyone wanna post this story from a news source that doesn't cater to white supremacists?
Hillary called it a "military dictatorship".
Trump admires dictators.
Eh, most likely sums it up.
You're trying to refute data from 90 minutes ago with data from yesterday? That's hilarious!Quote: EvenBobNate Silver: Trump Surges From 3% to 48% Chance of Winning
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nate-silver-trump-surges-from-3-to-48-chance-of-winning-in-1-month/article/2602386#!
That's like someone saying "the stock market is up by about 1%" and you retorting "no, it fell 3.4%, see? Here's data from June"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/24/brexit-raises-risk-of-global-recession-as-financial-markets-plunge-worldwide/
But let's look at it another way. If Nate Silver had Trump at 48% yesterday and 43.4% today, that's a pretty big one-day plunge. Look out below!
Quote: EvenBobNot only does Nate Silver have Trump at
a 48% chance to win, there's this:
"The latest vote projection from elections guru Nate Silver has Republican Donald Trump just six electoral votes short of winning and one point away from equaling Hillary Clinton's popular vote. The newest Five Thirty Eight survey has Trump at 264 and Clinton at 272, two more than needed."
Where do you get 48% from
I just checked
As of 9/21/2016 442pm
Clinton 56.8%
John Miller (aka trump) 43.2%
Check out the picture
Pretty crowded
I think I see 1 Black person
https://twitter.com/brandonenglish/status/778633460239912967/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Quote: EvenBob
"NEW YORK CITY, New York — Members of the Egyptian delegation to the United Nations blasted Hillary Clinton just a day after Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi met with both Clinton and Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump. They also had high praise for Trump—and while not an official endorsement, it is a positive outcome for Trump’s first and only meeting with Muslim world leaders thus far."
Given that Egypt is ruled by a military dictatorship, they're probably hoping that if Trump is elected, he'll lick their balls the way he does with Putin.
And one semi-endorsement by a UN delegation does not disprove the fact that the vast majority of world leaders are appalled by Trump, or that he would be a horrible choice from a diplomatic standpoint. The same would apply if he offered to loan Ivanka to Kim Jong-un or something like that.
Quote: EvenBobSo much for Hillary's claim that Trump would
be a dud with foreign leaders. First was the
president of Mexico, now this:
Exclusive — Egyptian Leaders Praise Donald Trump, Blast Hillary Clinton After President El-Sisi Meets with Both Candidates
"NEW YORK CITY, New York — Members of the Egyptian delegation to the United Nations blasted Hillary Clinton just a day after Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi met with both Clinton and Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump. They also had high praise for Trump—and while not an official endorsement, it is a positive outcome for Trump’s first and only meeting with Muslim world leaders thus far."
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/21/exclusive-egyptian-leaders-praise-donald-trump-blast-hillary-clinton-after-president-el-sisi-meets-with-both-candidates/
Kim Jong Un and Assad also praise Trump. And so does Putin. Do you know why?
In contrast, European leaders seem to support Hillary and we don't hear it because they don't speak out publicly for a good reason.
Quote: EvenBobNot only does Nate Silver have Trump at
a 48% chance to win, there's this:
"The latest vote projection from elections guru Nate Silver has Republican Donald Trump just six electoral votes short of winning and one point away from equaling Hillary Clinton's popular vote. The newest Five Thirty Eight survey has Trump at 264 and Clinton at 272, two more than needed."
536? Who gets the other two ec votes? Gary Johnson?
Quote: beerseason536? Who gets the other two ec votes? Gary Johnson?
Now, now. It's a shady liberal tactic to accuse Trumpers of not being able to count. 538 is a really big number, after all. Trump would just say, "An AWESOME number of electoral votes, believe me!"
Quote: terapined
I think I see 1 Black person
So?
Probably minor, but you never know. They put Hillary in a bad place. It is pretty much her largest voting bloc and for sure the most loyal to the Democrat Party in general. She condemns them and she loses their vote. She supports them and she loses votes among sensible "moderates." She stays quiet she looks weak. Main thing I saw from her was a tweet ignoring the riot aspect. To be expected from a weak leader she always has been.
Trump called for an end to the violence. Looking at his turn down the bombast after he got your attention this is fairly predictable. Why risk big when the other side cannot win.
Another in Trump's string of news cycle wins!
Quote: AZDuffmanSo?
It was a closed Town Hall for issues regarding African Americans
Why not invite some African Americans?
Quote: terapinedIt was a closed Town Hall for issues regarding African Americans
Why not invite some African Americans?
Why do they need a special invite?
I used to hear the same complaints about the Tea Party. I guess skin color is important to liberals like yourself.
Quote: AZDuffmanWhy do they need a special invite?
I used to hear the same complaints about the Tea Party. I guess skin color is important to liberals like yourself.
I was just trying to make an ironic observation :-)
Here is another one I have noticed on a personal level related to my post
I'm a huge Blues fan. Buddy Guy, BB King, John Lee Hooker, ect. Seen these musical giants live.
I've gone to the Chesapeake Bay Blues festival which always draws a huge crowd
Everybody on stage is Black
Just about everybody in the audience is white
Just another ironic observation :-)
