Donald Trump Has 158 Judges Confirmed!

[Whispering 18,865]

13 hours ago, MrG1087 said:

Actually in this case enough isn’t enough except for the degree of misinformation you’re spewing right now. First of all be real, do you honestly think Hillary would have accomplished anything if she were president? Absolutely not especially not with a GOP controlled House and Senate during the first two years.

Deny it all you want, the real reason why “we’re in this mess” is because of lazy f**** that stayed home that night and because the establishment forced a candidate many people didn’t want. Is the country ready for a female president? I believe so; they just didn’t want her.

Yes, she would have kept us in the Paris Climate Accord, appointed a liberal Supreme Court Judge (probably two because RGB would have probably stepped down), continued the support for our Allies in North America and Europe, kept the EPA regulations that were already set, kept the ACA moving forward and would not have allowed the stacking of the courts for generations to come like we see here! 

The “establishment” is the Democratic Party, which Bernie isn’t a part of in the first place. He conveniently borrows them when it suits his purposes. The people actually went out and cast millions of more votes for Hillary. That’s why she won the Democratic nomination. 

Is the country ready for a female president? I’m going to go with probably not, but we will see. 

[En_Sabah_Nur 9,366]

1 hour ago, HorusRa2 said:

You could even go as far to say that you could blame the Democratic Party. 

Of course, blame the Democratic Party for wanting an ACTUAL Democrat to win the nomination!  Smh  🙄

1 hour ago, HorusRa2 said:

Hillary did not campaign in Wisconsin. She was barely in Michigan

Let me SQUASH this INCESSANT talking point, once & for all...!  Hillary did not campaign in Wisconsin & Michigan because they are(any other time) RELIABLE blue states!!  That’s like blaming a Republican for not campaigning in Mississippi or Texas!  No one would expect those states to go blue, so what would be the point?!  I am sure this is why her campaign did not campaign in those states & instead put their focus more so on battleground states!!!  

[Whispering 18,865]

5 hours ago, Morphine Prince said:

I have never seen a group of people so ****ing bitter and hateful as the blind Hillary Clinton supporters who think she can do no wrong...

Don't forget how you treated Obama when she lost to him in 2008. Her stans were 100 times for vicious than any "Bernie Bros" in 2016.

I doubt there are many hardcore supporters here, especially ones that go back to 2006/7. 

Most liberals here love Obama and voted for him. I certainly did! I supported Hillary, but I never thought she was perfect or “could do no wrong”. They are politicians, they are all wheeling and dealing behind the scenes. You’ve just got to find one that matches up with what you are looking for or who you think would be good for the country. Personally, I never fully agree with any one single candidate.

This particular time around, that person will be the one who has a D next to their name. The particulars don’t matter much, as everyone of them are a thousand times better than the toxic, racist crook we have now! 

[President Biden 5,898]

17 hours ago, Queen ARTPOP said:

Well this is what you get for pushing a working class hero like Bernie out of the primary and going with a corrupt rape apologist (both her own husband and Weinstein), warmonger and bank-friendly monster. I don't blame anyone but the DNC and the rich for this entire disaster. 

The majority of primary voters didn’t vote for him though.......

 

Democracy didn’t nominate Bernie, they picked her

[JazzGa 14,652]

Welp, disappointed to see no one talking about what this means and the consequences, possible routes around it, if Trump's impeachment would impact it etc. and everyone just fighting the same old pointless fight about "Whose Fault Was It In 2016?"

 

[Morphine Prince 109,656]

3 hours ago, Antichrist said:

let me break this down for me. bro equals someone sexist, entitled and irrational?

 

and do you truly believe  solely those people are responsible for Trump winning in 2016?

“Bernie Bro” comes with those connotations. Not just the word “bro.” 

Clinton’s loss is due to many factors. 

[Morphine Prince 109,656]

2 hours ago, HorusRa2 said:

Bernie’s demographics aren’t majority white or male today & so the term is erasure to majority of his base. In fact, Bernie’s support is fueled by Latinos (the only race demo he beats every candidate in). So, I see the term as sexist and racist. 

This. As a Latino I feel I am ERASED by these people when they speak about Bernie. 

The myth that only sexist white males support Bernie is so ****ing misguided. 

Bernie’s supporters are very diverse. 

And the hilarious thing is, you actually NEED white working class men to win the damn election. Again proving he is a good contender for the presidency. 

[Morphine Prince 109,656]

1 hour ago, En_Sabah_Nur said:

Of course, blame the Democratic Party for wanting an ACTUAL Democrat to win the nomination!  Smh  🙄

Let me SQUASH this INCESSANT talking point, once & for all...!  Hillary did not campaign in Wisconsin & Michigan because they are(any other time) RELIABLE blue states!!  That’s like blaming a Republican for not campaigning in Mississippi or Texas!  No one would expect those states to go blue, so what would be the point?!  I am sure this is why her campaign did not campaign in those states & instead put their focus more so on battleground states!!!  

Well, her campaign was idiotic then. Trump held rallies here in Texas multiple times despite it being a consistently red state since the 80’s. 

[En_Sabah_Nur 9,366]

15 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

Well, her campaign was idiotic then. Trump held rallies here in Texas multiple times despite it being a consistently red state since the 80’s. 

...and Mississippi??

....and we use to agree on a lot on here @Morphine Prince, what happened?!  

 

[Morphine Prince 109,656]

3 minutes ago, En_Sabah_Nur said:

...and Mississippi??

....and we use to agree on a lot on here @Morphine Prince, what happened?!  

 

Idk about Mississippi. 

Nnnn I’ve been a Bernie supporter since 2015 so I will not tolerate the slander going on in this thread. 

[En_Sabah_Nur 9,366]

14 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

slander

Or Truth?!  

 

[Morphine Prince 109,656]

16 minutes ago, En_Sabah_Nur said:

Or Truth?!  

 

Slander. From bitter sentiments from 2016. It's pathetic people aren't over that election already. We need to look to the future. 

[HorusRa2 5,005]

2 hours ago, En_Sabah_Nur said:

Of course, blame the Democratic Party for wanting an ACTUAL Democrat to win the nomination!  Smh  🙄

Let me SQUASH this INCESSANT talking point, once & for all...!  Hillary did not campaign in Wisconsin & Michigan because they are(any other time) RELIABLE blue states!!  That’s like blaming a Republican for not campaigning in Mississippi or Texas!  No one would expect those states to go blue, so what would be the point?!  I am sure this is why her campaign did not campaign in those states & instead put their focus more so on battleground states!!!  

Ok so let’s talk. You pointed to the democrat nomenclature. Let’s review: Bernie and his platform represents the Democratic Party values that existed under FDR before the party sold out to the managerial professional class. Bernie caucuses with the democrats and is part of their leadership. You can’t call foul on him being a democrat when it helps you but claim he doesn’t count when it doesn’t. Bernie campaigned harder and did more events than Obama did for Clinton and more than Clinton did for Obama. So, if anything, her loss would have been even worse had him and others not have supported her. 

 

So, you correctly identified the problem but see it as a positive. She took those states and voters for granted and assumed she had their votes when she really didn’t. Also, as I already pointed out, she took the states for granted and ignored the fact that voters in Michigan and Wisconsin said they perferred Sanders over her and assumed that when Trump hit her on the same trade policies that it wouldn’t cost her votes. I’m just saying that her loss had to do with bad strategy as opposed to rogue sanders voters. 

[En_Sabah_Nur 9,366]

12 minutes ago, HorusRa2 said:

Ok so let’s talk. You pointed to the democrat nomenclature. Let’s review: Bernie and his platform represents the Democratic Party values that existed under FDR before the party sold out to the managerial professional class. Bernie caucuses with the democrats and is part of their leadership. You can’t call foul on him being a democrat when it helps you but claim he doesn’t count when it doesn’t. Bernie campaigned harder and did more events than Obama did for Clinton and more than Clinton did for Obama. So, if anything, her loss would have been even worse had him and others not have supported her. 

 

 

You can say whatever you want, but this is not the 1930’s and Bernie is STILL not a Democrat!  If he is sooo much like one, then become one then or stay in his INDEPENDENT lane...  

 

12 minutes ago, HorusRa2 said:

So, you correctly identified the problem but see it as a positive. She took those states and voters for granted and assumed she had their votes when she really didn’t. Also, as I already pointed out, she took the states for granted and ignored the fact that voters in Michigan and Wisconsin said they perferred Sanders over her and assumed that when Trump hit her on the same trade policies that it wouldn’t cost her votes. I’m just saying that her loss had to do with bad strategy as opposed to rogue sanders voters. 

Preferring Sanders over her, is different than preferring Trump over her!  At least it should have been anyway...

 

[HorusRa2 5,005]

6 minutes ago, En_Sabah_Nur said:

You can say whatever you want, but this is not the 1930’s and Bernie is STILL not a Democrat!  If he is sooo much like one, then become one then or stay in his INDEPENDENT lane...  

 

Preferring Sanders over her, is different than preferring Trump over her!  At least it should have been anyway...

 

What does it even mean to be a “democrat?” You keep saying the same talking points that CNN and MSNBC taught you but you don’t really contribute anything of value to the conversation. And did it not occur to you that he’s running as a democrat to change what it means to be a “democrat.” You act as if you have to check specific boxes in order to BE a democrat when the reality is that it’s a lot more like pop music when the definition is actually quite vague. I.E. conservative Democrat could also be a liberal Republican. Etc