Colombia capitulated. Total surrender. They are a small country facing economic devastation. They let the bully take their lunch money. As we commemorate the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, remember appeasement didn't work out well.
And yes, moron in chief spelled it "Columbia", leading one congressman to ask sardonically why was Columbia sanctioned while Brown and Dartmouth get off scot free?
You’re just angry and bitter and feel personally aggrieved you didn’t get your political way, so you choose to blame all these hypothetical doomsday scenarios that haven’t even happened on regular people who voted differently than you. People you don’t even know the first thing about. You create the division then proceed to cry about it. It’s plain to see. It’s a tantrum.
Isn't that pretty much your thing? You're in a sports forum, never talk about the sports, instead pearl clutch and take issue with select posts in the off topic section. Never contribute, share a link, talk about something besides politics. Find post, react, belittle person's comment and opinion, rinse & repeat. It's odd.
The Democratic party needs to do far better. They shit the bed. I have been saying this. They need better candidates, a better agenda, and more focus on the people instead of opponents.
Kamala wasn't against a ceasefire. She hardly talked about the war in the middle east at all, thinking staying quite was the best method to not piss off either side of the voting block and lose votes. When she did speak about it she was too vague and short with it. She or whoever instructed her inside her campaign to take that path messed up.
Everyone here does those things, many worse than me, and usually in a pile-on fashion against me or one of the other couple posters who don’t follow leftist orthodoxy. You’re taking issue with me personally here because you don’t agree with my politics. That’s what this is.
Well, I appreciate your viewpoint, but I think a large number of those Trump voters voted for Trump because they (thought they) wanted Trump, not because Democrats did or didn't do x, y, or z. Certainly there are some people who voted for Trump to 'teach the D's a lesson' (won't work), and some who really believe there's no meaningful difference (there is), and some who are one-issue voters where Trump lined up better (e.g. deportations), and some who won't consider voting for a woman, and some who are so uninformed they barely know the names of the candidates, and some who believed the lies, ... Do the democrats deserve blame? Absolutely, they could have run a different campaign and/or candidate. Presumably there is a alternate universe where x, y, and z produced a D win. Not possible to know for sure what that looks like, though. Is it accurate to say that Trump won because the democrats failed? I suppose in the sense that you can say that about every single election ever. The winner succeeds, and the loser fails. barfo
Since you did get your political way, why are you angry and bitter and feel personally aggrieved? Maybe you aren't, but that's how it looks. barfo
The Democrats could have run a better candidate last election as well. And if the Democrats would have done a better job delivering (or at least fighting) for the people with whatever candidate they had when they did have the presidency they would have likely won this election. There is a huge gap between what is important to The Democratic Party and what is important to the people who actually vote Democrat. Because the Democratic party has been doing as little for the people as they could possibly get away with to eak out victory over Republicans. Small tweaks to Obamacare don't cut it. Small tweaks to Medicare don't cut it.
Well, we know one thing about them: they voted for Trump. Who is transparently unfit for, well, anything, let alone being president of the USA. Whereas your side is so committed to Inclusion they're banning it everywhere they can. The projection would be funny if it weren't so reminiscent of very scary moments in history.
It's really hard to take people blaming the ordinary run-of-the-mill sort-of-centrist political party for not defeating the norm-breaking blatantly lying, accused rapist, actual felon who promised massive internment camps, pardoning of violent offenders (because they were his fans) and prosecution of his political rivals (because they weren't) and who openly uses fascist terminology and sends out dogwhistles to actual Nazis. People from any other time in history, or any other place than the non-metropolitan parts of the USA just stare at Trump and think "electing him would be like getting on a plane piloted by a colicky 2-year-old".
Yet the Democrats couldn't muster enough votes to beat that. Twice. That is a failure of monumental proportions.
The problem is the second time around, they should have learned, pretended he didn't even exist and focused on the people.
Focusing on the people is counter to everything the current Democrats are built for. They are built upon the idea of bringing in as much money as possible. You have to piss off the lobbies to focus on the people. And the people are fickle. The lobbyists will be there if you take care of them. Every year. Win or lose. And they will make you rich, support you in primaries, and give you countless other benefits along the way. Including writing your bills for you. If you lose, that will just get your base fired up to give you more money. Especially if you can convince the people that it is their own fault...
I don't see how that's a winning formula. That would have made the campaign disappear entirely. People would have thought Trump was running unopposed, as he'd be the only candidate anyone would ever hear about. Like letting a tiger loose in a high school classroom and expecting the students to focus on the lesson on the blackboard. barfo
