The election is already over....

[Tranquillus in Exile]

Dems considered Lincoln an extremist back in 1860.

I don't consider Trump an extremist; I consider him a self-seeking p.o.s who shouldn't be anywhere near government. And I'm not talking left/right.

With perhaps one exception, Republican presidents in the past century have been relatively honorable men of varying abilities who did the best they could for the country and didn't disgrace it. Trump is something else.

[Stone]

And it sure shows, just by looking at their posts and the threads they've started.

Yep! Easy to see. The wailing and the gnashing of teeth!

[Minister of Truth]

I don't consider Trump an extremist; I consider him a self-seeking p.o.s who shouldn't be anywhere near government. And I'm not talking left/right.

With perhaps one exception, Republican presidents in the past century have been relatively honorable men of varying abilities who did the best they could for the country and didn't disgrace it. Trump is something else.

Well, the talking points from the left have been calling him an extremist.

But, everything else you wrote I agree with.

[Darth Omar]

This is like a repeat of Democrats about Hillary in 2016.

It’s not an exact parallel.

2016 was a change election: after 8 years of Obama people were ready for a change. On paper at least, this should be a status quo election: the economy is good; we’re at relative peace etc. So voters won’t be hot to change anything.

Also, Democrats are fielding some weak candidates. I don’t think even Trump’s hardest critics would call him ‘weak’ even though they thought he was a fluke in 2015. Twenty thousand people don’t show up at rallies for weak candidates.

I think a better parallel would be McGovern in ‘72. But we shall see.

[Stone]

I wonder if the Dem overlords will use the fact that Bernie is under investigation for Russian collusion as justification for awarding the delegates to Bloomberg at the convention? Or will they simply say......eat shit Bernie, your OUT! Now get up on that stage like a good little lackey and pledge your full support to OUR nominee just like we made you do last time!"

[StoneByStone]

Trump would have won anyway, but those wacky lefties sure make it easier for him.

So heres what will happen in a simple by the numbers post so everyone can understand.

1...... Bernie will win the nomination " sort of"

2... Even though he will have won it fair and square through votes, the corrupt democratic party heads will strip him of the nomination thru the use of super delegates at the convention and award it to Bloomberg.

3....Anger and rage will manifest its ugly self in the ranks of the bernie bros. After they are brought to heel,and they will be....hilarity ensues....LOL

4.... Trump is gaining daily in the black and hispanic voting bloc. Say what you will, but his economic policies are impacting their communities in a positive way. In the end he ends up with around 30% of the hispanic vote or so and 25% of the black vote. BYE BYE dem party.


5.... Feeling fucked over by their own party, as they should,... the bernie people sit this one out again like many did in 16. By staying home its just as good as actually voting for trump.

6.... Bloomberg wont sell at all, but he REALLY wont sell in the rust belt critical to anyone wanting to be elected potus.

7.........Landslide victory for Trump. Media talking heads literally explode on live tv election night. Wonderful......simply wonderful.


8..... And the dem party? Its gone. Flushed down the shitter like the corrupt piece of shit it is.

4 is obviously wrong, and of course the media is rooting for Trump at this point because they're afraid of Bernie, but most of this is right. Either the DNC does the right thing and nominates Bernie, or Trump gets reelected.

[Darth Omar]

4 is obviously wrong, and of course the media is rooting for Trump at this point because they're afraid of Bernie, but most of this is right. Either the DNC does the right thing and nominates Bernie, or Trump gets reelected.

Well, they are really in a hard place.

No matter who gets the nomination one side will feel left out and that adds up to no-shows at the polls.

[Cancel 2020.1]

It’s not an exact parallel.

2016 was a change election: after 8 years of Obama people were ready for a change. On paper at least, this should be a status quo election: the economy is good; we’re at relative peace etc. So voters won’t be hot to change anything.

Also, Democrats are fielding some weak candidates. I don’t think even Trump’s hardest critics would call him ‘weak’ even though they thought he was a fluke in 2015. Twenty thousand people don’t show up at rallies for weak candidates.

I think a better parallel would be McGovern in ‘72. But we shall see.

Trump is all bluster. He IS a weak man, and a weak leader.

Terrified of dissent. Look at what just happened to our intelligence capabilities. Repeating a pattern, he removed someone qualified & capable with an inexperienced loyalist.

I can never tell - do you fellow loyalists REALLY not see what effect that can have on our national security?

[StoneByStone]

Well, they are really in a hard place.

No matter who gets the nomination one side will feel left out and that adds up to no-shows at the polls.

Yeah, it will be up to the winner to unify the party after that. Which is possible, Obama was able to do that and get a high turnout.

[Darth Omar]

Trump is all bluster. He IS a weak man, and a weak leader.

Terrified of dissent. Look at what just happened to our intelligence capabilities. Repeating a pattern, he removed someone qualified & capable with an inexperienced loyalist.

I can never tell - do you fellow loyalists REALLY not see what effect that can have on our national security?

The ‘weak’ leader has the mullahs on their heels.

Leaking intelligence briefings is a threat to national security. Trump put a loyalist in because he apparently can’t trust anyone else. Trump was stabbed in the back by Comey; his ‘people’ in the NSC leaked to try and get him impeached. And that’s not even the half of it

[anonymoose]

This is like a repeat of Democrats about Hillary in 2016.

Odds are lightening won't strike twice .

[USFREEDOM911]

4 is obviously wrong, and of course the media is rooting for Trump at this point because they're afraid of Bernie, but most of this is right. Either the DNC does the right thing and nominates Bernie, or Trump gets reelected.

[Darth Omar]

Yeah, it will be up to the winner to unify the party after that. Which is possible, Obama was able to do that and get a high turnout.

But Obama was the first black nominee so he had that going for him.

Also, the split in the Democrat Party is *ideological*. It would be different if some Democrat voters simply preferred another candidate who was a slightly different flavor of Democrat.

I think they’re in trouble.

[StoneByStone]

Do you actually ever watch CNN or MSNBC?

[Cancel 2020.1]

The ‘weak’ leader has the mullahs on their heels.

Leaking intelligence briefings is a threat to national security. Trump put a loyalist in because he apparently can’t trust anyone else. Trump was stabbed in the back by Comey; his ‘people’ in the NSC leaked to try and get him impeached. And that’s not even the half of it

Don't you guys get tired of this kind of spin?

Those agencies are supposed to be independent. Every President has had to deal with agencies not falling in line with every single thing they want to do and every opinion they hold.

I'm sorry you can't see it with Trump. He is a deeply insecure, weak man. We've never had someone with this level of insecurity in the highest office - not even close. It has made us vulnerable and gutted vital institutions, likely for a long time.