🇺🇸 Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC P - Part 3

[compgar]

Democrats needs to grow some balls

 

[AvengerPA]

If the Democrats want to take a harder line toward Russia, then I would be all for that.

 

[Herofan]

Have the Democrats in Washington done anything since January 2017 besides say No and that we need to restrict guns?

 

[Sithborg]

When the party in power doesn't believe in cooperation, there isn't a whole lot that can be done. There have been some impressive low level work, that McConnell and Ryan pretty much just sabotaged.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Have the Democrats in Washington done anything since January 2017 besides say No and that we need to restrict guns?

Are they the majority party in congress? Were they the reason Obamacare wasn't "repealed and replaced"?

Here's a question... What did the Republicans do for two terms of Obama? I mean other than obstruct, which they admitted to by the way (publicly stating that they intended Obama to be a one termed) or go on zealous actual witch hunts to try to pin something on Hillary Clinton (which they also brazenly stated was all about tarring her for the purpose of hobbling her in the run up to 2016) and coming away with nothing to actually charge her with.


Of course I don't expect these facts to get in the way of the propaganda you are obviously accepting.

 

[Herofan]

Are they the majority party in congress?

No and so it's reasonable that they would mostly just oppose and try to obstruct but they seem to have done particularly nothing else. Edit: Especially given how much they themselves branded the previous opponents as just being Party of No.

Here's a question... What did the Republicans do for two terms of Obama?

They reduced the deficit while extending much of the predecessor's tax reductions and the Senate Republicans passed a comprehensive/compromise immigration reform (though it was not passed by the House Republicans).

or go on zealous actual witch hunts to try to pin something on Hillary Clinton (which they also brazenly stated was all about tarring her for the purpose of hobbling her in the run up to 2016) and coming away with nothing to actually charge her with.

Who has said investigating the attack in Benghazi was all about trying to hurt Hillary Clinton?

 

[Sithborg]

I mean, the Senate Dems were able to force a successful vote to reinstate Net Neutrality. Also forced a vote on immigration reform. The House almost forced a vote that would have been successful for immigration reform.

They have been a pain in Trump's budget, much like the GOP were a pain in Obama's budgets. But then again, a lot of that has to do with the schism in the GOP, so the Dems just kind of sit back.

 

[MaceB]

Who has said investigating the attack in Benghazi was all about trying to hurt Hillary Clinton?

It clearly was...

Hillary Clinton is not the corrupt politician, lethal tactician that the right likes to give her credit for. The truth... she's a pretty middle of the road, centrist Democrat that leans only slightly left and believes you've got to work with the party leadership you've got, not the party leadership you want. People think she's an inside player... she is.... she plays to win, and she knows the people on top. She's that little girl at school who came prepared every day with extra Notebooks for the late kids, and asked Mrs. Arredondo if she could get help after class... even though she knew the material inside and out.... she's the over achiever.

She hasn't ever killed anyone though. She staid with Bill because she loves him. She didn't take political bribes through the Clinton Foundation. And no - she didn't conduct an elaborate coverup in Benghazi that lead to anyone's deaths. The e-mail server demonstrates a greater interest in privacy, but not much more... others before her did the same thing and didn't receive this high a degree of scrutiny. And after pouring through thousands of her records... perhaps more than any public candidate in history.... there isn't one indictable item found. Embarrassing inter-office exchanges? Yeah... but no evidence of illegal or corrupt activity.

In 20 years, America is gonna have some apologizing to do to Hillary Clinton. Is she a great campaigner? No. Does she play it cowardly, and safe? Yeah. Is she an accomplished and well meaning stateswoman? She darn right is. There's no dark motives... no feminist plot... no secret coverup... that is, unless you're taking the Enquirer, Fox News, and Britebart as news.

That's what the House GOP and Trey Gowdy did, and that's why they wasted our time and treasure on a politically motivated fishing expedition that lead absolutely no where. But still... conservatives spew this hateful filth about Hilary Clinton... without anything ever having been proven...without any charges of any kind brought forth... just pure speculation that feeds this emotional need to trample on her for some reason. It's gross.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Who has said investigating the attack in Benghazi was all about trying to hurt Hillary Clinton?

These guys.

https://thinkprogress.org/congressm...y-hurting-hillarys-poll-numbers-8e5680d66788/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...42b5a459b1e_story.html?utm_term=.a36519abee1f

https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/14/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi-committee/


Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), the likely successor to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), told Fox News’s Sean Hannity explicitly on Tuesday night that the Clinton investigation was part of a “strategy to fight and win.”

He explained: “Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened, had we not fought.”


But please... Tell me I and others are wrong for remembering these public statements.

 

[Herofan]

Interesting and disappointing, Congress shouldn't spend tax money even in part just to make a rival look bad (especially when there already was/should have been enough material before to make people consider Hillary to be untrustworthy).

I don't think investigating an attack on an embassy including American deaths and the government's response to it is inappropriate, especially when actually a small amount of money was spent on the investigation, but partisan/electoral greed does certainly weaken credibility.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Interesting and disappointing, Congress shouldn't spend tax money even in part just to make a rival look bad (especially when there already was/should have been enough material before to make people consider Hillary to be untrustworthy).

I don't think investigating an attack on an embassy including American deaths and the government's response to it is inappropriate, especially when actually a small amount of money was spent on the investigation, but partisan/electoral greed does certainly weaken credibility.

There were SEVEN. And despite the evidence you think was already out there (most of which was as manufactured as the reasoning behind these "investigations " ) none found Sec. Clinton responsible personally for the deaths or the attack's outcome. Seven over multiple years for the express reason to disqualify a political opponent.


Now... How is it that I had to inform you of this? You seem to have had no idea about this information which not only was of course reported at the time but was easily available with a minute of Googling. Why?

 

[MaceB]

I don't think investigating an attack on an embassy including American deaths and the government's response to it is inappropriate, especially when actually a small amount of money was spent on the investigation, but partisan/electoral greed does certainly weaken credibility.

Benghazi was a political slander operation from top to bottom. What were they even looking for? That Obama and Hillary concocted this video story to deflect from the fact that they didn't protect the embassy, right? That's the story?
But what evidence was actually found to support that argument? Absolutely none. The truth is that embassies are attacked every now and again, because we can't possibly fully protect all of our empire properties all the time... It happened under Clinton, under Bush, under Carter, under Ford... you name it. Our embassy was attacked... we heard about it... we sent in help... but it didn't come soon enough. End of story.
But that wasn't enough for the GOP, so they started one of the longest running and most expensive investigations in congressional history, which amounted to 0 indictments and 0 convictions. Conservatives should be ashamed of that farce that they put on. ... Not Hillary. Hillary did everything she could.

 

[Sithborg]

An election to pay attention to would be the MI primary on Tue. May be telling on where the party goes. Especially given the progressive El-Sayid is 20 points behind the more moderate Whitmer in the polls, which was similar to the lead Hillary had going into the MI primary.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

NBC News - Over 50 Democratic candidates say they would oppose Pelosi as House speaker
NBC News surveyed candidates and their public statements to determine whether they would back the California lawmaker.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna899271

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

While I don't think of Pelosi as the boogie woman Fox News paints her as... Dem leadership needs to move on from her and her lieutenants. Dems need younger leadership with less baggage no matter how good Pelosi is at fundraising.

 

[Fading]

While I don't think of Pelosi as the boogie woman Fox News paints her as... Dem leadership needs to move on from her and her lieutenants. Dems need younger leadership with less baggage no matter how good Pelosi is at fundraising.

The saying, "if something isn't broke, don't fix it" is the opposite of this case. She may be able to raise money, but something isn't working, is broke in the democrat leadership, and it needs fixed.

Right now, they should be in easy win mode. Everything Trump says, or does is extremely offensive to over half the populace, and the republican led congress, and Senate are still extremely unpopular. Yet instead they let Trump, and republicans get away with mocking, trashing, and blaming them for everything. Even things you'd have to be insane to believe is the democrats doing.

On top of which they continually fold, and lay down on several issues that should be core to the party. Plus they just don't even run in certain districs they may actually have a chance in (not talking hopeless elections). Meanwhile the regular everyday voters go out fighting, and protesting for the things dems give up on, and end up making a difference. Or they run in districts the Dems gave up on, and win. They even lost against what should have been a gag contender for president.

So something, or a lot of somethings aren't working. So I agree, a change is needed. Changing ineffectual leadership is a good start when you continuously, and pointlessly take loses left and right.

 

[SV Fan]

While I don't think of Pelosi as the boogie woman Fox News paints her as...

Pelosi has 2 things going against her.

1. She is a woman in high power
2. She is from "San Francisco" *wink* *wink*

2 things the republican base hate

I remember hearing a story I believe from Frank Luntz how he was doing poll testing with attacks on Reid and Pelosi, he said the Harry Reid ones didn't register anywhere near the Pelosi ones. To me Reid was much more of a crap disturber then Pelosi ever was, but it was obviously something else that made Pelosi an easier target.

 

[Robert_Anthony]

In a story Fox "News" won't even cover...about the Democrats, those on the Far-left (which may describe some in this forum) appear to be weaponizing 'political correctness' against President Trump to gain political leverage. However, some say this 'PC-pandemic' poses a far greater challenge. Like namely to the US Constitution, something many on the far left and neocon right want to get rid of.

From the One America News Network is Kristian Rouz with this story.

[YT]oKVmfYRcScQ[/YT]

 

[enterthemadness]

So in Polling news.

https://71republic.com/2018/08/20/gary-johnson-poll-second-place/

New Mexico Senate race is interesting.

Excuse me for any mispellings,but...

(D) Henrich 39%
(L) Johnson 21%
(R) Hich So 11%

 

[MaceB]

In a story Fox "News" won't even cover...about the Democrats, those on the Far-left (which may describe some in this forum) appear to be weaponizing 'political correctness' against President Trump to gain political leverage. However, some say this 'PC-pandemic' poses a far greater challenge. Like namely to the US Constitution, something many on the far left and neocon right want to get rid of.

From the One America News Network is Kristian Rouz with this story.

[YT]oKVmfYRcScQ[/YT]

wow...

1) The One America News Network is a garbage citation. It's a far right "news" media outlet that is much more akin to far right propaganda than it is to news. It has no credibility.

2) You straight up quoted the video as your open to it... which I find a little strange. Do you go from site to site propagating this video in their name? The way you introduced the video kinda perked my interest.

3) This whole video is crap... defining PC rhetoric as I guess...inclusivity? As if us wanting to make a society for atheists, muslims, Wiccans, LGBTQ, etc. is a political maneuver instead of just being moral human beings. If you're telling me that I can't stick up for equality and be anti-fascist at the same time, then I believe you are wrong.

4) This video didn't provide one specific example of PC rhetoric being weaponized on the left. It showed a few posters of a woman in a veil and then a woman in a veil speaking out for minorities... so? How does that cripple the constitution in any way? What exactly are you talking about? The social media bans? If that's the case... it's not a 1st amendment right that you get a voice on facebook or other social media sites. As providers, some websites have a duty to safeguard their users from purposely misleading information. I agree that this is a hazy area... but the video only talked about this for one sentence, so I'm not gonna go into it too heavily.

5) What does this have to do with the Democratic Party, exactly? You're troll'n brah.

 

[Hypestyle]

we'll just have to see what happens in the midterms. Of particular attention should be governor races and state legislature races. these often get marginalized by the national party infrastructure, but they are in fact incredible important. Especially as so many states have gerrymandered voting districts, expanded voting access is a major policy issue that needs attention.


addendum:

Congratulations to mr. Gilliam in Florida, good luck for the general election. Don't be afraid to go to as many districts and towns as possible. Get as many grassroots organizers as possible.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

The New York Times - C.I.A. Officer-Turned-Candidate Says PAC Obtained Her Security Application

A former C.I.A. officer running for Congress accused a super PAC aligned with Speaker Paul D. Ryan on Tuesday of improperly obtaining her entire federal security clearance application — a highly sensitive document containing extensive personal information — and then using it for political purposes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/28/us/politics/cia-officer-house-election-super-pac.html

 

[Sithborg]

Fun little factoid about the midterms.


So, where are all the people saying that the Woman's March did nothing???

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

Latest Quinnipiac poll has Beto O'Rourke (D) 9 points down below Ted Cruz (R) in Texas.

Latest Reuters/Ipsos poll has Beto O'Rourke (D) 2 points ahead of Ted Cruz (R) in Texas.

The cause? Different 'likely voter' screens, probably.

Texas - 2018 Senate Forecast

They're both highly rated pollsters.

 

[Lily Adler]

I'm voting for O'Rourke next election cause I cannot stand Ted Cruz.