Dems Rebuild

[BigRedBuster]

Huskerzoo, gotcha. Wrong language used on my part, although I do remember reading about a study where they had someone hooked up to an fMRI, and had others hooked up some other brain activity measuring devices, and they would have the woman on the fMRI tell a story and it would activate the same parts of the brain in the people listening, as if it was a shared experience. Or something like that -- can't find it now.

 

 

BRB, that Rusty troll idiot posted a picture of it with an insult towards dems or something so I was responding to him.

Ahhhh....got it.

[JJ Husker]

It's just weird to see that in this thread. I don't think the Democrats would be building around such a "joke," or using Kathy Griffin in any way.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But since this has been brought up here, does Griffin get charged with a crime for threatening Trump? Last time I checked, that's a felony.

 

Maybe not charged, but maybe a phone call from the Secret Service with a "suggestion" not to make such images? I'm no fan of Trump, but I'd be completely fine if they leaned on her a little. This kind of thing isn't remotely funny.

 

 

Knapp has powers man.

Looks like the Secret Service is leaning on her.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/kathy-griffin-says-shes-under-secret-service-inquiry/ar-BBBPJvg?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=DELLDHP

[knapplc]

 

 

 

 

 

Uhhhh..... no. You broke you, ya weirdo.

 

Trump has many flaws, which we've covered extensively. That doesn't mean you get to do anything to/about him you want.

[knapplc]

The Democrats need to rebuild, but it's becoming more and more clear that Hillary is not the foundation upon which to do so. Good article calling her out for her BS of late.

Hillary Lacks Remorse of Conscience

What is true is that throughout her career Mrs. Clinton has shown herself to be largely incapable of honest self-reflection, of pointing the finger, for even a moment, at herself. She is not capable of what in Middle English was called “agenbite of inwit”—remorse of conscience, the self-indictment and implicit growth, that come of taking a serious personal inventory. People are always doing bad things to her, she never does bad things to them. They operate in bad faith, she only in good. They lie and exaggerate, she doesn’t. They are low and partisan, not her. There’s no vast left-wing conspiracy only a right-wing one.

People can see this. It’s part of why she lost.

It is one thing to say, “I take responsibility,” and follow that up with a list of things you believe you got wrong. It’s another thing to say, “I take responsibility,” and then immediately pivot to arguments as to why other people are to blame. “I take responsibility for everything I got wrong, but that’s not why I lost,” is literally what she said Wednesday.

It would have been helpful if she’d spoken at least of those who’d voted for her and supported her and donated to her campaign precisely because she was a woman.

You should never slander a country that rejected you. Maybe it had its reasons. Maybe her most constructive act now would be to quietly reflect on what they might be.

 

 

 

There were so many, many reasons not to vote for Hillary. When it came down to it, the one reason that trumped all those was that I could not vote for the single least qualified candidate in my lifetime.

 

If just about anyone else had gotten the Republican nomination, I would have strongly considered voting for them. As it was, I had to vote for Hillary because the alternative was a disaster.

 

I wonder how many of those 2.9 million more people who voted for Hillary only did so because, like me, they understood that Trump could not do the job?

 

She likely would have been buried if she had run against Ryan, Rubio or Kasich. Then what/who would she blame?

[mrandyk]

I'm right there with you Knapp. Hillary only ever had my support because the opposition was quite clearly a disaster. Put Kasich on the ticket and I'd have been just fine seeing him win

 

However, is it uncommon for politicians to deflect blame onto anyone but themselves? You don't see a whole of "my bad guys" after obvious blunders.

 

I still believe she wins if she is the exact same candidate, but male. I could be wrong but there aren't exactly a ton of elected women in congress.

[Danny Bateman]

You guys don't need to qualify your vote. You made the right choice. For all her problems, Trump was an absolutely atrocious, unacceptable candidate for numerous reasons and our fears are playing out in front of our very eyes every day.

 

Clinton needs to stop blaming other people for everything. It's really odd and off-putting, especially when she was already such a polarizing figure.

 

If she were to stay active in politics, it should be simply as a leader of the resistance to Trump. Trolling him is just fine. Shut up with the blame-shifting about your loss. And I for one don't believe for a minute she'd try to run again in 2020. That would be an unmitigated disaster for Democrats.

 

Has a Presidential election loser ever won their party's nomination again the next cycle?

[Moiraine]

It's kinda funny to think what it would be like if she was president. I don't think she could possibly get anything done because of Republican control of congress, and I think the Democrats would be complaining about her being ineffectual.

 

But the thing is, Clinton doing nothing (the status quo) would have been vastly superior to what Trump with the Republicans are doing.

[Danny Bateman]

I totally agree. It would be four more years of gridlock.

Instead, we've gotten a mostly ineffectual Trump, but instead of it being due to a Republicans vs. Democrats dynamic, it's because of a Republicans vs. their own agenda problem.

 

My only question about a Clinton win is after four more years of fomenting anger and discontent, what in God's name would we have elected in 2020?

[Moiraine]

I totally agree. It would be four more years of gridlock.

 

Instead, we've gotten a mostly ineffectual Trump, but instead of it being due to a Republicans vs. Democrats dynamic, it's because of a Republicans vs. their own agenda problem.

 

My only question about a Clinton win is after four more years of fomenting anger and discontent, what in God's name would we have elected in 2020?

 

I had the same thought. She wouldn't have won in 2020.

[mrandyk]

I totally agree. It would be four more years of gridlock.

 

Instead, we've gotten a mostly ineffectual Trump, but instead of it being due to a Republicans vs. Democrats dynamic, it's because of a Republicans vs. their own agenda problem.

 

My only question about a Clinton win is after four more years of fomenting anger and discontent, what in God's name would we have elected in 2020?

She definitely would have been set up for failure, given the control of congress. I suppose the one saving grace of Trump being elected is that the public will have hard proof of exactly how effective a Republican controlled government is. If that's not enough to push us back to some semblance of normalcy in 2020 then I fear what comes next.

[TGHusker]

While the repub party struggles to pass any meaningful legislature, the Dems are still in collapse. Hillary blames everyone including her own party while the party

fails to win elections - even against the 'body slammer'.

 

 

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/fractured-democratic-party-struggles-to-find-footing/

[zoogs]

Lifezette.

[RedDenver]

Lifezette.

Here's a take from zero hedge:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-04/hillary-clintons-deceptive-blame-shifting

[zoogs]

Zero Hedge.

 

[zoogs]

I've taken the liberty of completing the next steps in this sequence:

 

Townhall: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2017/05/30/hillary-wrongly-claims-that-detractors-fear-her-n2333370

 

Breitbart: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/04/democrats-asking-hillary-clinton-step-spotlight/

 

TheGatwewayPundit: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/06/hillary-clintons-excuses-losing-election-now-hits-24-total-including-content-farms-macedonia/

 

#demsincollapseparty2017