Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿

When you rake him over the coals for ordering too much ice cream, people tend to not believe you when you question actual policy, let alone misconduct. Crying Wolf isn't just some analogy that got made up out of nowhere...... there's a reason it happens.
 
Hillary Clinton is one of the wealthiest and most influential people on the planet. To claim that she is in any way oppressed is to be woefully out of touch with reality.
She used her influence with the Democratic party to screw over Bernie Sanders, one of the only candidates remotely popular with people. Having the ability to casually destroy someone else's presidential campaign just so you can be the party's candidate isn't even something oppressed people can do, let alone the average person.

I love how people will just ignore that though. She lost because our society is sexist! Not because, you know, she was an uncharismatic politician that screwed over the one guy that had a chance at beating Trump just so she could have a shot.
 
2012-obama-is-literally-hitler-r-hes-going-to-take-6394712.png
 
One of Neogaf's many pet peeves is trying to put both sides of a conflict on relatively equal footing (like shades of gray), especially if they represent one of those sides. It deeply insults them when someone talks ill of Hillary, or even say that she's no better than Trump, so they'll accuse the person of wrongthink and bully the hell out of them until they get banned.

She was clearly the worst candidate, since the literal proof of who is the better candidate is who wins. Her entire run was one colossal blunder after another, including blowing enormous amounts of money in her $1.2 billion campaign coffers, the most money squandered in any political campaign in history, mostly in states like California and New York where she was already winning. Meanwhile, her campaigns in states she ended up losing were begging for resources or a visit from the candidate, but Hillary was too good for those vile places full of evil poor people.
 
"How stupid was it to even suggest Hillary and this man were even remotely on the same plain field."

I agree. Not only did Hillary lose an election on easy mode and is less graceful about it than fucking DSP, but also looking back at her achievements in the Middle East, unlike her Trump has yet to leave a trail of mass graves behind.
 
She was clearly the worst candidate, since the literal proof of who is the better candidate is who wins. Her entire run was one colossal blunder after another, including blowing enormous amounts of money in her $1.2 billion campaign coffers, the most money squandered in any political campaign in history, mostly in states like California and New York where she was already winning. Meanwhile, her campaigns in states she ended up losing were begging for resources or a visit from the candidate, but Hillary was too good for those vile places full of evil poor people.

The amount of money she dumped into CA and NY seriously makes me wonder if her campaign wasn't some sort of money laundering scheme or if she just had huge political debts to repay. You could win those states for Democrats without ever setting foot in them.
 
The amount of money she dumped into CA and NY seriously makes me wonder if her campaign wasn't some sort of money laundering scheme or if she just had huge political debts to repay. You could win those states for Democrats without ever setting foot in them.
For years both Democrats and the media have been saying it's statistically impossible for a Republican to ever win the white house again due to changing demographics. They've said its possible to win the popular vote but never the electoral college, it's mathematically impossible.

The reason Hillary ran such a wonky campaign is because she assumed an electoral victory was guaranteed and was worried about losing the popular vote to Trump. Had she won the electoral vote but lost the popular vote it would have given Republicans ammo against her. Her campaign makes a lot more sense if you look at it as an attempt to win the popular vote.

A lot of what Democrats have done over the past four years makes sense if they were expecting a Democrat to permanently reside in the white house.
 
For years both Democrats and the media have been saying it's statistically impossible for a Republican to ever win the white house again due to changing demographics. They've said its possible to win the popular vote but never the electoral college, it's mathematically impossible.

The reason Hillary ran such a wonky campaign is because she assumed an electoral victory was guaranteed and was worried about losing the popular vote to Trump. Had she won the electoral vote but lost the popular vote it would have given Republicans ammo against her. Her campaign makes a lot more sense if you look at it as an attempt to win the popular vote.

A lot of what Democrats have done over the past four years makes sense if they were expecting a Democrat to permanently reside in the white house.

It always comes back to the goddamn inevitable demographics belief. John Judis should be tarred and feathered for putting this retarded idea in the minds of Democratic elites, it's absolutely killed the party.
 
For years both Democrats and the media have been saying it's statistically impossible for a Republican to ever win the white house again due to changing demographics. They've said its possible to win the popular vote but never the electoral college, it's mathematically impossible.

The problem with this dumb inevitability argument is assuming you keep all these votes when the demographics shift. Trump got more Hispanic and black votes as a percentage than Romney, and Hillary got less votes in every demographic than Obama. Look at Hispanics. It's dumb to assume the Hispanics who actually show up to vote and have jobs actually give a shit about your dumb identity politics bullshit. They might even be completely turned off with that shit and don't particularly hate the Evil Whitey Demons.
 
The problem with this dumb inevitability argument is assuming you keep all these votes when the demographics shift. Trump got more Hispanic and black votes as a percentage than Romney, and Hillary got less votes in every demographic than Obama. Look at Hispanics. It's dumb to assume the Hispanics who actually show up to vote and have jobs actually give a shit about your dumb identity politics bullshit. They might even be completely turned off with that shit and don't particularly hate the Evil Whitey Demons.
Not to mention most minorities are concentrated in already blue states so it's not really making much of a difference. The only state that Hispanics can really affect the election is Florida and Cubans vote Republican.
 
The razor thin margin of victory in Florida for Dubya back in the day (and thereby the EC) was credited by some to the Cuban vote being pissed at Democrats because they didn't fight harder (in their eyes anyway) to block the return of Elian Gonzalez to Cuba.

There's speculation a lot of them were angry with the Obama administration for formalizing relations with Cuba, no matter how much sense it makes from cold, hard, realpolitiks. And transferred that hate to his heir apparent.

I guess the lesson is, when you have a voting bloc that chooses sides based on strongly-held belief, don't piss off enough people in general that they become the swing votes when they aren't pandered to.
 
Benedict Arnold escaped to England

Not a single person who was a member of the CSA government or military was imprisoned or executed just for that during Reconstruction. Not Jefferson Davis, not Robert E Lee, no one.

Once again, SJWs fail history
 
Atrás
Top Abajo