Landslide Incoming

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-09-2016, 12:45 PM)GMDino Wrote: Gay marriage is the same as the civil rights act?

Also...light up sally.

Simmer down, no one is upset.  Also, why would you refer to a man by a woman's name.  Is being female an insult to you? 

[*wildcats forever*]

(11-09-2016, 12:45 PM)GMDino Wrote: Gay marriage is the same as the civil rights act?

Also...light up sally.

(11-09-2016, 12:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Simmer down, no one is upset.  Also, why would you refer to a man by a woman's name.  Is being female an insult to you? 

And speaking of insults.....we don't want any. From anyone. Thank you.

[GMDino]

(11-09-2016, 12:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Simmer down, no one is upset.

(11-09-2016, 05:50 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: We genuinely don't give a complete shit what other countries think of us.  Stick to ***** your own things up and kindly bugger off.  Thank you.

(11-09-2016, 12:18 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: On many issues, I agree.  Hillary's position on the second amendment really hurt her and many Democrats predicted it would a long time ago.  You look at the insane ballot measures in some states, including the most inane one in California (thanks Gavin Newsome you piece of shit) and you see why many gun owners legitimately feared a Clinton presidency.  When she told a questioner during the primaries that we should, "look into", the Australian model on gun control, which is outright confiscation, she drew an insanely far left line on an issue that is really important to many Americans.  It definitely cost her.

(11-09-2016, 12:37 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I think it's pretty obvious.  He'll reward his supporters, especially the early ones (Sessions, the NRA, etc.) and stick in in his opponents.  As far as abortion, he'll do what every GOP president since Roe v. Wade has done, nothing.  I am hoping we get a national law on firearms to override the inane bullshit laws like the ones in CA.

All that said it still sounds like the people who wanted to go back to an America before gays could marry and other whatever were looking to for Trump to create a safe place where they could enjoy life as it was before. If that indeed was their reasoning as Roto was explaining.

And I apologize for the name calling. In the past, on not such a sensitive subject, that would have passed. I can see why it will not here and now.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-09-2016, 12:57 PM)GMDino Wrote:






All that said it still sounds like the people who wanted to go back to an America before gays could marry and other whatever were looking to for Trump to create a safe place where they could enjoy life as it was before.  If that indeed was their reasoning as Roto was explaining.

And I apologize for the name calling.  In the past, on not such a sensitive subject, that would have passed.  I can see why it will not here and now.

I'll give you the first one, I just got finished with a very condescending text conversation with someone from the UK and was annoyed.  That aside, use of profanity does not equal anger and Gavin Newsome is a complete POS.

As to your point, I'll reiterate because it keeps being ignored.  This is not about "safe spaces" it's about a reaction to "safe spaces" and all the insane overreach of the far left the past three or so years.  They went way too far and far too many people humored them instead of rightly repudiating them.  Actions have reactions and anytime our country goes too far in one direction there is a snap back.  This one was just particularly brutal.

[Belsnickel]

(11-09-2016, 01:06 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'll give you the first one, I just got finished with a very condescending text conversation with someone from the UK and was annoyed.  That aside, use of profanity does not equal anger and Gavin Newsome is a complete POS.

As to your point, I'll reiterate because it keeps being ignored.  This is not about "safe spaces" it's about a reaction to "safe spaces" and all the insane overreach of the far left the past three or so years.  They went way too far and far too many people humored them instead of rightly repudiating them.  Actions have reactions and anytime our country goes too far in one direction there is a snap back.  This one was just particularly brutal.

I'll have to disagree with this. The polarization of our politicians, to the left and the right, is a reflection of our country. Clinton is a throwback to the more moderate days in Congress and the current, younger members of the Democrat audience isn't looking for that. If we had seen a more liberal candidate, I think we would have seen Trump take a tumble. That runs counter to your thinking. I would agree that what has been going on is frustrating those on the right, and remaining moderates, but Trump's win in the general election is not because of that.

[Benton]

(11-09-2016, 01:20 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'll have to disagree with this. The polarization of our politicians, to the left and the right, is a reflection of our country. Clinton is a throwback to the more moderate days in Congress and the current, younger members of the Democrat audience isn't looking for that. If we had seen a more liberal candidate, I think we would have seen Trump take a tumble. That runs counter to your thinking. I would agree that what has been going on is frustrating those on the right, and remaining moderates, but Trump's win in the general election is not because of that.

pretty much.
gun control hurt her with moderates, but her agenda wasn't far left enough for millenial voters of her party. They flocked to Bernie for a reason, and gun control wasn't near the top of that list. Education, marriage equality, defense spending, etc cost her that growing chunk of the base

look for the party to shift more left once the numbers are sorted in a year or so.

[GMDino]

(11-09-2016, 01:20 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'll have to disagree with this. The polarization of our politicians, to the left and the right, is a reflection of our country. Clinton is a throwback to the more moderate days in Congress and the current, younger members of the Democrat audience isn't looking for that. If we had seen a more liberal candidate, I think we would have seen Trump take a tumble. That runs counter to your thinking. I would agree that what has been going on is frustrating those on the right, and remaining moderates, but Trump's win in the general election is not because of that.

(11-09-2016, 01:43 PM)Benton Wrote: pretty much.
gun control hurt her with moderates, but her agenda wasn't far left enough for millenial voters of her party. They flocked to Bernie for a reason, and gun control wasn't near the top of that list. Education, marriage equality, defense spending, etc cost her that growing chunk of the base

look for the party to shift more left once the numbers are sorted in a year or so.

So we're saying she was  too moderate versus the other side saying she was a tree-hugging socialist liberal? 

[6andcounting]

(11-09-2016, 12:31 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: I have a major concern that Miley will move to Canada and hook-up with Justin Bieber, thus creating demon-spawn children to kill us all!!!

Trumps 2nd term will focus on the northern wall. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-09-2016, 01:47 PM)GMDino Wrote: So we're saying she was  too moderate versus the other side saying she was a tree-hugging socialist liberal? 

Uhm Each side calls each other the extreme in order to scare their voter base into voting for them, that's the propaganda part of it.

Looking at the stances on the Policies is what actually determines their real position.

With that said! :)

Go Trump, build that wall and to hell with all of you that kept belittling Trump supporters.

[Bengalzona]

(11-09-2016, 01:52 PM)6andcounting Wrote: Trumps 2nd term will focus on the northern wall. 

We'll need something like this:

[Millhouse]

(11-09-2016, 01:20 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'll have to disagree with this. The polarization of our politicians, to the left and the right, is a reflection of our country. Clinton is a throwback to the more moderate days in Congress and the current, younger members of the Democrat audience isn't looking for that. If we had seen a more liberal candidate, I think we would have seen Trump take a tumble. That runs counter to your thinking. I would agree that what has been going on is frustrating those on the right, and remaining moderates, but Trump's win in the general election is not because of that.

She was pretty far left with the free college plan nonsense and her open border statements though & other things. I dont know how much more liberal a presidential candidate could get without being on a full blown socialistic progressive platform. 

I think it just came down to she was simply not a good candidate with all the cumulative baggage, and then throw in the 'progressive' liberal ideas that were more than what Obama has done. I dont even think Bernie would have won to be honest. However I still think Biden would have, and he wouldnt have been as liberal as she was, or at least I am assuming he wouldnt.

[JustWinBaby]

(11-09-2016, 09:29 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: This is a direct result of SJW's, Safe Spaces, BLM, ect..
People who had been changing from their outdated ways were still getting beat down, told they were still racist, they had white privilege, hit with the bathroom saga, ect...
Trump was a knee-jerk reaction to never being good enough, never being accepted, and treated as they were accused of treating of treating others.
They decided that if they were going to be continually labeled the bad guy, they'd put that shoe on and kick someone in the ass.
That's what I've ascertained, during my stumping for Johnson.

The Deplorables thing really resonated.

I think this is 100% correct.  I voted for Johnson, but I have to admit I'm enjoying the comeuppance and butthurt.

[Belsnickel]

(11-09-2016, 02:55 PM)Millhouse Wrote: She was pretty far left with the free college plan nonsense and her open border statements though & other things. I dont know how much more liberal a presidential candidate could get without being on a full blown socialistic progressive platform. 

I think it just came down to she was simply not a good candidate with all the cumulative baggage, and then throw in the 'progressive' liberal ideas that were more than what Obama has done. I dont even think Bernie would have won to be honest. However I still think Biden would have, and he wouldnt have been as liberal as she was, or at least I am assuming he wouldnt.

Open border statements? Not familiar with those. The free college stuff was her pandering to Bernie supporters and the voters knew that. It was not going to happen.

Clinton is much more moderate than a lot of people realize.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-09-2016, 03:18 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Open border statements? Not familiar with those. The free college stuff was her pandering to Bernie supporters and the voters knew that. It was not going to happen.

Clinton is much more moderate than a lot of people realize.

Might have been the thing she said to a private audience and was leaked out.  The one where she said you have to have a public face and a private face or something like that.

[GMDino]

(11-09-2016, 03:22 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Might have been the thing she said to a private audience and was leaked out.  The one where she said you have to have a public face and a private face or something like that.

When she was talking about Abraham Lincoln.  That was taken completely out of context and dumbed down for a certain bloc of voters.

[Millhouse]

(11-09-2016, 03:18 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Open border statements? Not familiar with those. The free college stuff was her pandering to Bernie supporters and the voters knew that. It was not going to happen.

Clinton is much more moderate than a lot of people realize.

Its from a private speech she gave back in 2013 to a Brazilian bank about having a dream for open borders and free trade in the western hemisphere. Came out in the emails which Trump brought up in the last debate. And then her comments in the campaign that called for a substantial increase of refugees from around the world which would dwarf what Obama wanted to do. As well as an increase in legal immigration. That what I meant by open borders.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-09-2016, 01:52 PM)6andcounting Wrote: Trumps 2nd term will focus on the northern wall. 

Nah, the Canadians will take care of it.
They don't want Miley any more than we do.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-09-2016, 03:27 PM)GMDino Wrote: When she was talking about Abraham Lincoln.  That was taken completely out of context and dumbed down for a certain bloc of voters.

I was just saying where it might have come from.  I knew it was from something private that was revealed.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-09-2016, 01:20 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'll have to disagree with this. The polarization of our politicians, to the left and the right, is a reflection of our country. Clinton is a throwback to the more moderate days in Congress and the current, younger members of the Democrat audience isn't looking for that. If we had seen a more liberal candidate, I think we would have seen Trump take a tumble. That runs counter to your thinking. I would agree that what has been going on is frustrating those on the right, and remaining moderates, but Trump's win in the general election is not because of that.

You argument has more than a little chicken or egg to it.  I totally disagree with your assertion that a more liberal candidate would have won, I firmly believe it would have been a greater victory for Trump.  There were many issues that decided this election for Trump and the continuing rush to the left was certainly one of them.  If you disagree, which I'm seeing you do, then we just have differing opinions on this issue.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-09-2016, 01:59 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Uhm Each side calls each other the extreme in order to scare their voter base into voting for them, that's the propaganda part of it.

Looking at the stances on the Policies is what actually determines their real position.

With that said! :)

Go Trump, build that wall and to hell with all of you that kept belittling Trump supporters.

And you called Paul Ryan a RINO and denied the two time former Democrat, Reform party member, and independent Trump was. News flash, if person has declared they are a member of four different parties seven separate times, they aren't a true Republican.