DescentBB

Crazy Bernie has declared himself for Hillary Clinton. Too bad his supporters are looking at this as a sell out. The question is, how many Bernie supporters will turn to Trump out of spite or just as bad...not vote at all. Latest NBC poll shows Hillary's lead shrunk by 3 points.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-el ... ek-n607351

hilarious post woody. Oh, and all indicators STILL say Hillary will get a greater percentage of Bernie supporter than Obama did Clinton supporters in 2008. Jill Stein will pick up a few, always does, but to read you trying to guess about Bernie Sanders, his supporters, and what they'd do is comedy gold.

I'll bet you'll be laughing right until Trump wins and analysts say his win was in part by disaffected Bernie voters.

I long ago offered a bet. You didn't have the courage to back up your guesswork. I did. Nuff said.

Well, it did kind of gall me to watch her standing slightly behind Bernie, nodding and smiling like an arrogant queen who got what she wanted after rigging things in her favor. However, Trump sitting there bloviating a whole bunch of absolute policy nonsense, idiotic promises and decidedly un-Jesus BS to a drooling old Pat Robertson who was drinking it in like manna from heaven, made me want to either hurl right there on the floor or leap up and kick in the TV. I can now make the prediction that the 4 years of Trump would make the 8 years of Bush W. look positively wonderful.

Woody's 'hag' will win. I'm just wondering if he's prepared to take the credit since he backed the WORST candidate the GOP has ever had for president.

callmeslick wrote:I long ago offered a bet. You didn't have the courage to back up your guesswork. I did. Nuff said.

I offered you a bet but you didn't like the numbers...so stop acting superior with a bet that causes you no pain.

callmeslick wrote:Jill Stein will pick up a few, always does, but to read you trying to guess about Bernie Sanders, his supporters, and what they'd do is comedy gold.

I mentioned Stein to a friend last night. Clinton did very well in California. If it looks like the state will be comfortably hers in November I'll probably vote for Stein. But if there is any reasonable doubt that Trump will do better I feel it is my duty to vote against him (based alone on his denial of climate change).

look, the political calculus here is not rocket science: Hillary and the Dems see a very real chance to expand the Dem base by outreach to a LOT of moderate former GOP supporters who by now are holding their heads like that Munch painting, The Scream, and seeing the Republican party go off the rails on toward Mount Stupid. Thus, they have a platform and candidate designed to be somewhat moderate, but still holding to certain positions that are demanded by the Bernie supporters. If they succeed, with no small help from the GOP picking Trump, they will thus have a better base of support to build back control of state houses they don't currently control, and pick up seats in the House and Senate. In so doing, they can actually have a coalition strong enough to push a lot of legislation that has been blocked but is supported by overwhelming majorities of the electorate(background check reform for guns is a good example, but there are many others). They will control the next 3 SCOTUS selections, assuming the Senate doesn't reverse course post November and vote on Obama's pick. It is a sound strategy. They don't want, nor need, to push the platform envelope too far left. Some Bernie people will get all butthurt over it, but now that the GOP platform has endorsed an end to abortion, approval for fed money to support retraining gay people via religious conversion therapy, the denial of climate change altogether and making an ongoing expense of trying to fight transgender bathroom rulings, the differences between the parties are stark enough so that most will support the ticket. It's just sound, real-world politics.

Nightshade wrote:Woody's 'hag' will win. I'm just wondering if he's prepared to take the credit since he backed the WORST candidate the GOP has ever had for president.

I think TB, you need to get your head out of your ass and try to keep up to date:

New swing-state polls released Wednesday by Quinnipiac University show Trump leading Clinton in Florida and Pennsylvania — and tied in the critical battleground state of Ohio.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/swing-sta ... z4EIWcjjm5
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

and what did the weekly CNN poll show?

Who cares. Just the fact that in some polls Trump is leading frightens the panties off Ms Clinton.

was interesting to see the range of polls, this week, after Clinton hit the low point last week. She should be steadily up from here, and most of those polls have her betweeln 3 and 9 percent ahead of Trump, nationwide. The PA thing is going to be close because of strong animosity to both of them. From here on out, though, he is going to be scrutinized for his level of Presidential character, and details of platform. Based on the hate based platform that the GOP jammed through this week, that isn't going to help for the latter, and time will tell if he learns to actually SAY anything in a speech or act consistently like an adult.

next week, we'll see the effects of the police killings, shootings of police, but especially the fallout from the radical, hateful agenda the GOP just adopted as a party platform:
http://www.logcabin.org/pressrelease/a- ... -t-angelo/

the Log Cabin Former Republicans

And next week we'll see how Loretta Lynch's statement for Black Lives Matter to take heart and not get discouraged right after the Dallas cops were massacred.

woodchip wrote:And next week we'll see how Loretta Lynch's statement for Black Lives Matter to take heart and not get discouraged right after the Dallas cops were massacred.

context for that, and why should it matter? I mean, especially in the context of this election. Are you suggesting that white people with brains are somehow going to be put off by the suggestion that black people being killed by cops is STILL an issue, despite a crazy shooting cops in one city? That isn't going to happen. We know that nuts with weapons capable of killing cops were a problem, and have seen the GOP do nothing. We are alarmed that far too many black men and women are being killed in the presence of 'peace officers' to be acceptable. Once again, far too little historically from the GOP on that. Now, what did Loretta Lynch say that changes that dynamic?



On the other hand, a larger and historically more accurate poll from some battlegrounds. Clinton up by 9 percent in PA.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trum ... malertNEWS

And how much do we hear from the Dems when a town they control like Chicago has a veritable slaughter of blacks by blacks. Why isn't BLM marching down Michigan Ave in protest?

woodchip wrote:And how much do we hear from the Dems when a town they control like Chicago has a veritable slaughter of blacks by blacks. Why isn't BLM marching down Michigan Ave in protest?

because, as I read earlier today, despite a couple spikes, killings are actually down. I was surprised by that. Obama has, to black audiences, addressed the issue of black neighborhood violence, more than a couple times. I actually directed a white friend of mine from PA to a few of those the other day, as she said the same of Obama and the dems. She was surprised, and wondered why he didn't do so in more general audience speeches. The answer is obvious: if he goes off about black on black crime, a lot of white people are going to use it to justify their own bogus fears and prejudices.

Killings are down? Do you even do a simple google before you make yet another ignorant post?

CHICAGO — Murders in the nation's third-largest city are up about 72%, while shootings have surged more than 88% in the first three months of 2016 compared with the same period last year, according to data released Friday by the Chicago Police Department.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016 ... /82507210/

Or a even better graphic here:

http://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicago/shootings/

So yet again slick, you confidently spout off here like your word is gold. All I see is a pile of pyrite.

Well, it looks like college educated white voters are opting for Clinton. They'd better get their arses out in force and vote come November if the smart and sane people of this country don't want to see a nut like Trump get elected, because the polls are all over the place right now as to who's ahead of who.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/video ... ted-voters

I still have faith in the electorate. And, woody, as I pointed out, there were a couple spikes that pushed the overall numbers up. Still, why do you persist in tossing out that stat(black on black, supposedly, shootings?). That is NOT what the discussion is about, nationally. It is about COPS shooting citizens of color, it is about race-related acts of violence. The black community has been wrestling with the urban crime issue for a while now, and a LOT of that is tied up into economics, as Sanders tried to point out(bad economic situation, plus bad educational environment equals high unemployment, translates to drug gang and other black market economies, leads to violence). So what? Do you bring that up out of the LEAST degree of concern, or just a political red herring to get the white folks feeling better about voting to cut budgets, reduce police budgets specifically and looking the other way as cops kill innocent or at the very least unconvicted suspects of color?

woodchip wrote:

Nightshade wrote:Woody's 'hag' will win. I'm just wondering if he's prepared to take the credit since he backed the WORST candidate the GOP has ever had for president.

I think TB, you need to get your head out of your ass and try to keep up to date:

New swing-state polls released Wednesday by Quinnipiac University show Trump leading Clinton in Florida and Pennsylvania — and tied in the critical battleground state of Ohio.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/swing-sta ... z4EIWcjjm5
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

Don't you EVER forget. You OWN Trump. If and when he ever gets elected or your 'hag' wins, the trainwreck is yours...not mine. I'm saying that right now.

he isn't going to win. And, yes, NS, I realize I own that claim on this board, too.

Speaking of polls, bwahahaha:

Donald Trump Gets 0% Support From Black Voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania

callmeslick wrote:he isn't going to win. And, yes, NS, I realize I own that claim on this board, too.

Heh, you guys are still living is a delusional world:

The latest Rasmussen Reports weekly White House Watch survey of Likely U.S. Voters finds Trump with 44% support to Clinton’s 37%. Thirteen percent (13%) favor some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided

Rassmussen had Romney in a landslide. Horrible poll.

Still straw clutching I see. Try this also...pretty much as I predicted:

Donald Trump appears to have eliminated Hillary Clinton’s lead in the wake of the FBI’s investigation of her email practices, according to several new polls – even surging ahead of her in one national survey – all indicating that the issue of trust is weighing heavily on voters.

Hillary just implodes more and more.

have you ever followed this sort of stuff before, Woody? If so, you'd have ASSUMED Hillary would take a hit last week, Trump would take a hit for the entire month of June, etc. Some stuff is obvious. You sometimes can get real interesting stuff from looking at the minor questions in those polls, but the big momentum swings are obvious. We'll next see the extent of convention/veep bounces for either party, and being but a week or so apart, that will be a bit turbulent. Some years the conventions were both later and a bit more spread out, so you could read the bounce better. This must be a fun year to be in the trenches(the political wonk in me says), a part of me is bummed that the demands of grandkids and estate distribution killed off my available time. The trench war requires real time committment. I had to kill a week of vacation time from work leading up to the 2008 election......but, the outcome was worth it.

Just goes to show slick, with all the Trump demonizing crap you post here and the Dems do nationally...Trump still is taking away Hillary's lead. With the Nice terror attack, watch Trump gain the lead over Hillary. You can try and paint Trump into all sorts of portraits but one thing people understand, Trump will do a better job of protecting America than some woman who carelessly puts the nations secrets onto her micky mouse server. As I said before, the terrorist will get Trump elected. Lets see what the polls look like next week.

all it will take is a host of experts, from both parties, pointing out that Trump would make matters FAR, FAR worse in terms of security, and how he cannot be trusted to follow International Law or behave rationally. This will NOT help Trump. Hasn't yet, at all. The only thing you're seeing is the fallout from the week of email nonsense.

Right, keep thinking that right up to when Trump wins the election. Yes, lets listen to the experts who can't keep the carnage in Nice from happening nor can they stop the San Bernadino shooting. Voters are looking for results, not innuendo.

he's not going to win the election. Period. Most people are capable of figuring out that France, for example, treated Muslims like Trump would have us do for a long period of time, and now are reaping the damage. I don't really want Trump to turn us into a war zone here, which he would do, far more than we presently deal with.

We already are reaping what a weak president and incompetent Secretary of State can do. We need a strong president and not some power hungry, money grasping woman who is only concerned about her personal wealth.

nonsense. We are reaping what 50 years of imperialistic blundering around get you. Were you under a rock or something? Writ larger, we're seeing the end result of the rapidly changing economy of the planet(see other article I posted yesterday) coupled with anger against about 250 years of Western European conquests. Just as that article warned of western nations taking a nationalistic approach or other dumb policies, what you have in pockets of the Muslim world are enough hopeless, desperate people willing to fall for an even more radical level of rhetoric. Sort of like Trump multiplied by a factor of Hitler plus Ghengis Khan tossed in. One of these days, we'll figure out how best to address it permanently, but until then,we'll just be putting out fires from the Muslim Brotherhood, then Hezbollah, then Al Qaeda, then ISIS, next ???

You aren't ready to think that far, and Trump appeals to that level of shallow thinking. It will do nothing good for the US whatsoever to take his approach. We need something and someone a bit more globally aware and willing to build bridges and keep on building them.

Since non of your family has been killed by the extremists I guess you'll never understand the shallow thinking going on.

Ah yes, as opposed to Trump's complexities. Y'know, the guy who (quite literally) gives speeches at a fifth-grade reading level. That sure as hell is the intellect I want directing complex international policy!

Dunno TG, seems Trump is fully capable of setting up international business deals. You suppose he talks like a 5th grader there and doesn't understand the complexities? With Hillary we have seen how much she understands the complexities of handling classified documents and her sex maniac husband.

woodchip wrote:Since non of your family has been killed by the extremists I guess you'll never understand the shallow thinking going on.

who of YOUR family has been attacked? I did have friends in NYC, in the financial district on 9/11, so give me more than that, please.

woodchip wrote:Dunno TG, seems Trump is fully capable of setting up international business deals.

find me ONE International deal that could be deemed CLOSE to a success. We'll wait to hear back from you.

woodchip wrote:Dunno TG, seems Trump is fully capable of setting up international business deals. You suppose he talks like a 5th grader there and doesn't understand the complexities? With Hillary we have seen how much she understands the complexities of handling classified documents and her sex maniac husband.

What really raises my eyebrows is how obsessed you are with Hillary Clinton's sex life with her husband. Something you're not telling us, woody?