President Donald Trump

[gcstomp]

Who has been the most vocal group whining about the election in here?

Why did the sanders faction as lucky stated, vote Trump, third party or stay home?

Did Hillary get questions to the primary debates prior to those debates?

Did the DNC activity work against Sanders?

Did Hillary ever denounce or apologize for that bias?

Did she put the disgraced DNC chair on her staff after she resigned?

Hodor! You have repeated the hyperbolic lines here as well as your insistence that HRC supporters are every bit as "bad" as Trump supporters. Much of what you listed, and it is an important list to you as you fall back on it often to support your dark feelings for HRC. I have seen you post this or some variant many times and just hold my tongue as it is a view that you hold and will always hold and as we have dealt with before, despite her coming through 9 hearings clean, some lasting 8 or 10 hours a stretch of her being questioned by deeply partisan attack types.

1st, virtually every week, Trump or his staff has had a more serious transgression than anything here. Now to your list. Donna Brazille having leaked a framework of a question to HRC prior to a debate in CNN sponsored events was unfortunate. It is doubtful that helped her any appreciable degree in actual debates, but most important does not compare to Russian leaks, both ways, from Trump staff to Putin and back. HRC was just heads and shoulders above Trump in debates regarding facts, and not just the Donna Brazile tainted CNN ones. It simply did not matter. Trump answered any particular question as an opening to spout whatever he wanted to touch on, and rarely even close to what question was about. He also lied seamlessly, while fact checkers were kept busy with him and HRC was honest.

HRC gave literally dozens of apologies regarding handling but did not choose Trump route of flat out lying. And of course HRC did not hire Donna Brazile for any kind of paid position after she resigned, it was a symbolic volunteer position more honorary in nature, that has been well documented. Like a card in your cereal box saying you are now an honorary member of little orphan annie member club, a nicety like offering to to have coffee along with 200 other people.

Again, this is silly, we could go on, but for what. Daily Trump and friends produce truly unprecedented levels of mayhem and ignorance in ways great and small. We have fresh material.

[DMT]

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/319425-blunt-calls-for-exhaustive-investigation-into-trump-russia-connections

About time.

[Bernie Brewer]

I was articulating my view on why just R voters and why they chose Trump over a field of candidates who had promise, experience, intelligence. I was specifically talking about conservatives. It would not make sense for me to mention D voters, as I was breaking down the other side. The reason D voters didnt support HRC I have broken down before the new year, in great detail, which would just peeve people, but what the heck, as I posted like 3 months ago:
Warren said Trump ran a campaign of pure racism and bigotry as his platform. How could that win, unless that well reflects who we are? Forces involved:
1- FBI director Commey statement release a few days prior to election had some small impact, even though he did his little take backsie comment a couple days later, damage was done.
2- Russian government back hacking releasing steady stream of D only emails to influence our election had some small influence.
3- Sexism, thats a positive to bible belt. Traditional family means to many man leads family period.
4- Racism, bigotry. Build the wall gets cheers. Keep muslims out gets cheers. Trump endorsed by all the white power alt right groups.
5- Trump was a habitual liar, to such velocity no single lie he uttered had impact as by time fact checkers point out 1 item, T had already spouted 10 more, 1/2 of statements conflicting with his own that he said earlier. This again was a positive in net voting. Nothing could be disqualifying as there did not exist the 1 line item to focus on. We had HRC emails, which Sanders said we were tired of talking about some 15 months ago, but since it is the 1 simple item, we can paint in neon and focus on.
6- Air time, Trump was on air all the time, he spent budget on hats, he has decades as reality tv star, no need to spend, while others spent on commercials and polls. The value of the Trump air time estimated at 2 bil+.
7- Most important to Trump election win, mass hyper speed misinformation. Fox has the steady drumbeat of nonsense, Alex Jones, Breitbart, most venomous was Facebook, where any info released was created into something else, weaponized through the alt right filter, and this new product was misinformation spread as memes, or short quipy posts prepped by millions to more millions, with virtually no facts attached. Perception trumps reality.

Ok, in the post above you kinda clarified. You said Rs and Ds vs Consevatives and Liberals. And, maybe I'm splitting hairs but I'm a conservative who probably isn't an R any longer. As some wise republican once said, I didn't leave the party, it left me. It I don't thinks it's fair or safe to all Rs or all Ds anything. Always and never are rarely if ever true.

[gcstomp]

An important part of investigation regarding Putin ties should be on compelling Trump to release full tax returns. The devil would be in the details, the Russia ties could be squashed and put to rest, or not.

[GwynnInTheHall]

Yo DMT,

I've listened to you and your explanations of why Hillary lost and why your opinion on the subject is more valid than any other on the topic in this fourm.

You have twice said I posted Lies, so I'll give you a chance to explain yourself with a very simple test.

Here are the questions I asked/statements I made which you called lies, please point out the ones that are not true and therefore lies or answer the questions in a manner that refutes their inference.

Who has been the most vocal group whining about the election in here? I infer with this question that's it's been the Hillary contingent to the extent one guy quit and another went into hiding and the remainder have been the most vocally butthurt group since True or false?

Did Hillary get questions to the primary debates prior to those debates? Pretty simple Yes or No.

Did the DNC activity work against Sanders? Same as above

Did Hillary ever denounce or apologize for that bias? Again, Yes or No

Did she put the disgraced DNC chair on her staff after she resigned? and again.

You called this a lie too, did you actually read it or is that a auto response for you now when this subject arises?

I'll say it again, I don't recall you or any other Clinton supporter in here being involved in the election at the same level I was. I witnessed first hand what the Clinton delegation did to Sanders at three different caucuses. Don't tell me it didn't happen because I was there.

Who was more involved in the primaries than I was? Who has more first hand knowledge of the Sanders/Clinton skirmishes, here on rotojunkie, than I do?

There's also this:

Why did the sanders faction as lucky stated, vote Trump, third party or stay home?

Did Lucky Lie when he stated this as a reason for Hillary losing?

I've read all your posts, read the articles linked to those posts and I understand we don;t agree on this, but to call me a liar and what I've said lies? That's just not true, it bullshit and it's a sophomoric reactional response rather than a thought out contrary opinion.

You're better than than and though you may care less what I think or expect, I expect better from you.

[gcstomp]

BTW GITH, not looking to continually battle over this. It is like me arguing religion at a family function, that would be silly and not productive. I would appreciate if you could maybe stop with the escalating aggressive talk like saying if you support that piece of shit HRC you are no better than Trump supporters. I get you feel that way, and you have said some variant of this many times. I have let that go for months and you throw those in as if that is some indisputable truth. I am all about harmony with people who I feel are trying to be reasonable, and would like some kind of peace in this area as HRC as is good as dust. She has nothing to do with politics today or tomorrow, and there are real issues every day that come up that dont involve her at all.

[cardboardbox]

CBB, that is some caveman level engagement. You have the fb meme I touched on earlier, with zero substance other than being the snappy joke with vile denigrating image that you proudly wore for months (years?) and churned out without thought to elicit a chuckle from others who give it that same level of thought. Its simply a falsehood dressed as an argument. It is why I initially tried to steer this on just the question of why did R voters vote for Trump. The HRC angle is too poisoned a well, and will generate the same dark disgusting comments, free of facts, but also free of new ground.

Trump and his staff every single day generates real news, and if anything is being treated with kid gloves relative to transgressions.

baldgriff asked for the biggest reason why we have Trump. The only answer is Clinton.

[Bernie Brewer]

BTW GITH, not looking to continually battle over this. It is like me arguing religion at a family function, that would be silly and not productive. I would appreciate if you could maybe stop with the escalating aggressive talk like saying if you support that piece of shit HRC you are no better than Trump supporters. I get you feel that way, and you have said some variant of this many times. I have let that go for months and you throw those in as if that is some indisputable truth. I am all about harmony with people who I feel are trying to be reasonable, and would like some kind of peace in this area as HRC as is good as dust. She has nothing to do with politics today or tomorrow, and there are real issues every day that come up that dont involve her at all.

But doing that towards anyone who supports a GOP candidate or, yes, even Trump is fair game and well-intended? I recognize you're asking for civility between fellow posters, but I think this request is helpful across the board in the general political discourse. I'd find this thread more useful if everyone stopped with their hyper-aggressive name calling. Respect yourself enough to stop name calling and being hyper-aggressive and others are likely follow. Be the change you want in the world, or something like that.

[GwynnInTheHall]

Hodor! You have repeated the hyperbolic lines here as well as your insistence that HRC supporters are every bit as "bad" as Trump supporters. Much of what you listed, and it is an important list to you as you fall back on it often to support your dark feelings for HRC. I have seen you post this or some variant many times and just hold my tongue as it is a view that you hold and will always hold and as we have dealt with before, despite her coming through 9 hearings clean, some lasting 8 or 10 hours a stretch of her being questioned by deeply partisan attack types.

In stating that they are as bad, I mean in the fact they ignore the transgressions of those they support. Integrity is Integrity, there are no acceptable transgressions in my book. You either are Ethical and honest or you're not and if you do fall short, you explain your transgression and ask forgiveness or you're an unethical, dishonest POS. As I've stated MANY times before--this has nothing to do with any of the hearings or GOP talking points and everything to do with her actions in the primaries (or lack of action)

Now to your list. Donna Brazille having leaked a framework of a question to HRC prior to a debate in CNN sponsored events was unfortunate. It is doubtful that helped her any appreciable degree in actual debates, but most important does not compare to Russian leaks, both ways, from Trump staff to Putin and back. HRC was just heads and shoulders above Trump in debates regarding facts, and not just the Donna Brazile tainted CNN ones. It simply did not matter.

First the leaked questions were before the debate with Sanders in Flint and though in the long run they didn;t make a difference as Sanders won that primary, the FACT remains--she cheated and NEVER apologized for doing so, which to me and others is both dishonest and unethical and just another factor in our opinion regarding her Integrity.

HRC gave literally dozens of apologies regarding handling but did not choose Trump route of flat out lying. And of course HRC did not hire Donna Brazile for any kind of paid position after she resigned, it was a symbolic volunteer position more honorary in nature, that has been well documented. Like a card in your cereal box saying you are now an honorary member of little orphan annie member club, a nicety like offering to to have coffee along with 200 other people.

Link me her apology to Sanders and his constituency and I'll shut up. As For the shamed DNC Chair, I was referring to Deb Schultz, who was immediately folded into the Clinton campaign after resigning. In either case if you want to be held above reproach, you distance yourself from those who've proved dishonest or untrustworthy--Clinton chose to embrace those some of us (enough to make an electoral difference) have very big issues with and from my perspective and many other Sanders supporters I know, it cost her.

[GwynnInTheHall]

BTW GITH, not looking to continually battle over this. It is like me arguing religion at a family function, that would be silly and not productive. I would appreciate if you could maybe stop with the escalating aggressive talk like saying if you support that piece of shit HRC you are no better than Trump supporters. I get you feel that way, and you have said some variant of this many times. I have let that go for months and you throw those in as if that is some indisputable truth. I am all about harmony with people who I feel are trying to be reasonable, and would like some kind of peace in this area as HRC as is good as dust. She has nothing to do with politics today or tomorrow, and there are real issues every day that come up that dont involve her at all.

I think I explained myself pretty clearly and I have and always will believe, you must have a foundation of beliefs before your complaints have any merit.

We can indeed have opinions, but to call out others for doing something you've done in the past or continue to do (supporting a questionable politician in this case) is just hypocritical and I wan't it to stop. Like you--I want a more harmonious environment from which we can address the serious issues before us. However I will NOT stand by while those on either side denigrate or offhandedly insult others for doing something similar to what they've done without calling bullshit.

[GwynnInTheHall]

But doing that towards anyone who supports a GOP candidate or, yes, even Trump is fair game and well-intended? I recognize you're asking for civility between fellow posters, but I think this request is helpful across the board in the general political discourse. I'd find this thread more useful if everyone stopped with their hyper-aggressive name calling. Respect yourself enough to stop name calling and being hyper-aggressive and others are likely follow. Be the change you want in the world, or something like that.

Last time I come to your defense.............

[The Feral Slasher]

The Democratic Party certainly deserves much of the blame. Greenwald's latest piece covers the challenges facing the party and the dangers of continuing to promote the corporatist wing, as illuminated by the ongoing DNC Chairperson fight.

https://theintercept.com/2017/02/09/tom-perez-apologizes-for-telling-the-truth-showing-why-democrats-flaws-urgently-need-attention/

"What drove Bernie Sanders’s remarkably potent challenge to Hillary Clinton was the extreme animosity of huge numbers of Democrats — led by its youngest voters — to the values, practices, and corporatist loyalties of the party’s establishment. Unlike the 2008 Democratic primary war — which was far more vicious and nasty but devoid of any real ideological conflict — the 2016 primary was grounded in important and substantive disputes about what the Democratic Party should be, what principles should guide it, and, most important of all, whose interests it should serve."

Perez was quoted as saying the process was rigged. Even though I don't agree with him on this, he quickly retracted.

"So in Tom Perez’s conduct, one sees the mentality and posture that has shaped the Democratic Party: a defense of jobs-killing free trade agreements that big corporate funders love; an inability to speak plainly, without desperately clinging to focus-group, talking-points scripts; a petrified fear of addressing controversial issues even (especially) when they involve severe human rights violations by allies; a religious-like commitment never to offend rich donors; and a limitless willingness to publicly abase oneself in pursuit of power by submitting to an apology ritual for having told the truth.

That is the template that has driven the Democratic Party into a ditch so deep and disastrous that even Vox acknowledges it without euphemisms. That is the template that has alienated voters across the country at all levels of elected office and that enabled the Donald Trump presidency. And it is the template that Democratic Party establishment leaders are more determined than ever to protect and further entrench by ensuring that yet another detached, lifeless functionary who embodies it becomes the next face of the party."

It puzzles me that some people can't or won't acknowledge that some of the items above played a part in the election.

[gcstomp]

We can indeed have opinions, but to call out others for doing something you've done in the past or continue to do (supporting a questionable politician in this case) is just hypocritical and I wan't it to stop. Like you--I want a more harmonious environment from which we can address the serious issues before us. However I will NOT stand by while those on either side denigrate or offhandedly insult others for doing something similar to what they've done without calling bullshit.

Confess to not understanding this. There should not be HRC hate talk thrown into conversations simply because she is out of politics and has nothing to do with anything today or tomorrow, and further no progress will ever be made there. That you feel DMT, or me, or whoever is tainted because we hold positions that are different than you, namely that you are flat out wrong regarding her, and how you feel she is all kinds of garbage but you use darker and often vulgar language, is some unworkable material to reasonable people getting along. It is Scientology level of shunning some family member because of a position. You are saying all future interactions with person are based from the point where you have an irreconcilable viewpoint.

[GwynnInTheHall]

We can indeed have opinions, but to call out others for doing something you've done in the past or continue to do (supporting a questionable politician in this case) is just hypocritical and I wan't it to stop. Like you--I want a more harmonious environment from which we can address the serious issues before us. However I will NOT stand by while those on either side denigrate or offhandedly insult others for doing something similar to what they've done without calling bullshit.

Confess to not understanding this. There should not be HRC hate talk thrown into conversations simply because she is out of politics and has nothing to do with anything today or tomorrow, and further no progress will ever be made there. That you feel DMT, or me, or whoever is tainted because we hold positions that are different than you, namely that you are flat out wrong regarding her, and how you feel she is all kinds of garbage but you use darker and often vulgar language, is some unworkable material to reasonable people getting along. It is Scientology level of shunning some family member because of a position. You are saying all future interactions with person are based from the point where you have an irreconcilable viewpoint.

Again, this all stems from who I am, how i conduct myself and my expectations of others.

I would never presume to complain, denigrate or indict others who are financially irresponsible, because I have been so in my past. Same goes for those who gamble, cannot remain monogamous and other transgressive actions I am consistently guilty of during my life. I feel I CAN comment on ideals I uphold or exemplify. I expect others to hold similar standards. I am often disappointed.

Again, you're using a false equivalency for my objection to your criticism of Trump supporters--I have maintained, HRC was unethical, dishonest and of questionable integrity--None of you have provided any proof to the contrary, just told me I'm wrong--without a counter offer of proof. Yes I use verbiage which is a bit colorful at times, but I swear like a sailor so it's part of my vernacular.

In a nutshell and in it's most simplest form what I'm preaching (and I know I am preaching) Those in Glass Houses, shouldn't even pick up a fucking rock.

And no, there will be no reconciliation on my part, nor an the greater base of Sanders supporters until the Clinton faction is contrite and apologetic regarding the transgressions we feel occured.

[Sour Masher]

baldgriff asked for the biggest reason why we have Trump. The only answer is Clinton.

That completely exonerates all the primary voters that put Trump up against her to run. Or the many forces in play that tried to influence the electorate with false or half false information. Or the voters who allowed themselves to be conned by Trump, or ignore the many negative things he brings to the position of POTUS.