Community >> View Thread

Author
HammerTime


Member Since: Sun Jan 07, 2018
Posts: 3,830



https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/27/politics/2020-democratic-field-diversity/index.html

Eight different Democratic candidates have either declared that they are running for president (and are still running) or have formed an exploratory committee, according to CNN. Four are women (a record), one is an Asian man (Andrew Yang), one is a Hispanic man (Julián Castro) and one is a gay man (Pete Buttigieg). All told, seven of the eight Democratic candidates are non-white, women or identify as LGBT, or some combination of the three.

What a sorry ass looking field, lol. Is this is the best the democrats can offer? They may as well write 2020 off, none of these snowflakes can hope to win.





Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
HammerTime


Member Since: Sun Jan 07, 2018
Posts: 3,830



https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/27/politics/julian-castro-howard-schultz-presidential-campaign-cnntv/index.html

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article225155790.html

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/howard-schultz-independent-trump_us_5c4dc3cee4b06ba6d3bdf921

Looks like we have another Ralph Nader type (former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz) who may be running as an independent, haha. Julian Castro, democratic hopeful, seems kind of depressed with early pleads for him to not enter the race, as it would likely siphon votes away from the democrats.

Schultz will announce plans on 60 Minutes tonight. Come on down, Harold! The water is warm.




Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 3,177






    Quote:
    https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article225155790.html



    Quote:
    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/howard-schultz-independent-trump_us_5c4dc3cee4b06ba6d3bdf921



    Quote:
    Looks like we have another Ralph Nader type (former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz) who may be running as an independent, haha. Julian Castro, democratic hopeful, seems kind of depressed with early pleads for him to not enter the race, as it would likely siphon votes away from the democrats.

    Schultz will announce plans on 60 Minutes tonight. Come on down, Harold! The water is warm.


Assume the Dems are just testing the water for now.
They don't seem to really have a strong candidate yet.
I am curious though...why focus on them being women or gay?
I'd focus more on what their record shows them to be...as far as agenda etc.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
fearcalypse 

INfinity and BEyond

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,247



    Quote:


      Quote:

        Quote:
        https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article225155790.html

        Quote:

          Quote:
          https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/howard-schultz-independent-trump_us_5c4dc3cee4b06ba6d3bdf921

          Quote:

            Quote:
            Looks like we have another Ralph Nader type (former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz) who may be running as an independent, haha. Julian Castro, democratic hopeful, seems kind of depressed with early pleads for him to not enter the race, as it would likely siphon votes away from the democrats.



      Quote:
      Schultz will announce plans on 60 Minutes tonight. Come on down, Harold! The water is warm.



    Quote:
    Assume the Dems are just testing the water for now.
    They don't seem to really have a strong candidate yet.
    I am curious though...why focus on them being women or gay?
    I'd focus more on what their record shows them to be...as far as agenda etc.


They're just throwing anything at the wall hoping something sticks at this point. And now the rumor mill is churning with a possible Hillary run. Oh boy **grabs popcorn**

They're focusing on gender and sexual preferences because identity politics is what liberals do.

It's funny how in 2016, the Republicans had a very diverse field of candidates, and you didn't really hear a peep about that.






"James told me there's an old saying here on Earth: May you be in heaven half an hour before the devil knows you're dead.
Not sure if Turian heaven is the same as yours, but if this thing goes sideways and we both end up there, meet me at the bar."


Legion: "They will exterminate your species because their gods tell them to. You cannot negotiate with them. They do not share your pity, remorse, or fear."
Posted with Google Chrome 70.0.3538.80 on Linux
Kev Agent of The Shadow


Location: Fair Oaks CA aka Rivendell
Member Since: Tue Jun 01, 2004
Posts: 2,700



    Quote:
    It's funny how in 2016, the Republicans had a very diverse field of candidates, and you didn't really hear a peep about that.


"Very Diverse" - I wouldn't go that far, but would say "diverse".



I do agree with Mystery Man, it would be nice if the candidates were judged on their positions & records, rather than their demographics.





KATS latest read: The Sinister Shadow by "Kenneth Robeson"
Posted with Google Chrome 69.0.3497.100 on Windows 10
atrimus


Location: Saint Louis, MO
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 2,172



    Quote:


      Quote:

        Quote:
        https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article225155790.html

        Quote:

          Quote:
          https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/howard-schultz-independent-trump_us_5c4dc3cee4b06ba6d3bdf921

          Quote:

            Quote:
            Looks like we have another Ralph Nader type (former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz) who may be running as an independent, haha. Julian Castro, democratic hopeful, seems kind of depressed with early pleads for him to not enter the race, as it would likely siphon votes away from the democrats.



      Quote:
      Schultz will announce plans on 60 Minutes tonight. Come on down, Harold! The water is warm.



    Quote:
    Assume the Dems are just testing the water for now.
    They don't seem to really have a strong candidate yet.
    I am curious though...why focus on them being women or gay?
    I'd focus more on what their record shows them to be...as far as agenda etc.


I'm guessing they think women might want someone who better represents their (womens) interest. It's really no different than for any other demographic or class of people.





Posted with Google Chrome 71.0.3578.99 on Linux
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 3,177



    Quote:

      Quote:


        Quote:

          Quote:
          https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article225155790.html

          Quote:

            Quote:
            https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/howard-schultz-independent-trump_us_5c4dc3cee4b06ba6d3bdf921

            Quote:

              Quote:
              Looks like we have another Ralph Nader type (former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz) who may be running as an independent, haha. Julian Castro, democratic hopeful, seems kind of depressed with early pleads for him to not enter the race, as it would likely siphon votes away from the democrats.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          Schultz will announce plans on 60 Minutes tonight. Come on down, Harold! The water is warm.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          Assume the Dems are just testing the water for now.
          They don't seem to really have a strong candidate yet.
          I am curious though...why focus on them being women or gay?
          I'd focus more on what their record shows them to be...as far as agenda etc.



    Quote:
    I'm guessing they think women might want someone who better represents their (womens) interest. It's really no different than for any other demographic or class of people.


True...but then the Democrats just increase the strength of the argument that all they are is identity politics. That it doesn't matter about qualifications...just that you check the appropriate politically correct check box.

I want to know what their qualifications are...not who they find sexually attractive. And if they are skilled and qualified...THEN they make great candidates. (They may be...but once again the news does a disservice by not talking about that aspect).


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 16,875


I suppose so. It is a problem on the left, but given the gender split for a guy like Trump (like 60% of women do not like him), it is not a bad card to play.

I still would not say identity politics are unique to Democrats. It is human nature. Evangelicals tend to always vote Republican for instance. The GOPs primary voting block are white men. By no means all, but it is what they draw heaviest from.

It would be nice to see reach out to as many as possible. It is hard to have the umbrella that large though. It is very much a focus on who got you there situation. Always has been. And I imagine react out has minimal impact, except at the margins.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 64.0 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 3,177



    Quote:
    I suppose so. It is a problem on the left, but given the gender split for a guy like Trump (like 60% of women do not like him), it is not a bad card to play.


That is what it is...a card to play...a trick. It's superficial and pandering to a physical trait over qualifications then though.


    Quote:
    I still would not say identity politics are unique to Democrats. It is human nature. Evangelicals tend to always vote Republican for instance. The GOPs primary voting block are white men. By no means all, but it is what they draw heaviest from.


Unique no...but played to heck yes. I don't see adds like - Hey whitely! Vote for "Whitey Magilihee" because he is WHITE! - If you look at historical voting...you know who changes their votes the most percentagewise? White men. Statistically their vote is more open to being changed and claimed, and the Dems miss this over and over (Obama Seemed to get it when he was running though).


    Quote:
    It would be nice to see reach out to as many as possible. It is hard to have the umbrella that large though. It is very much a focus on who got you there situation. Always has been. And I imagine react out has minimal impact, except at the margins.


I just want to see their policies. I don't care what they look like or as i said who they want to sleep with. What is their substance not what is their color trait. Playing to that will not get my vote at least...then again maybe they don't want my vote.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
atrimus


Location: Saint Louis, MO
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 2,172



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:


          Quote:

            Quote:
            https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article225155790.html

            Quote:

              Quote:
              https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/howard-schultz-independent-trump_us_5c4dc3cee4b06ba6d3bdf921

              Quote:

                Quote:
                Looks like we have another Ralph Nader type (former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz) who may be running as an independent, haha. Julian Castro, democratic hopeful, seems kind of depressed with early pleads for him to not enter the race, as it would likely siphon votes away from the democrats.

          Quote:

            Quote:
            Schultz will announce plans on 60 Minutes tonight. Come on down, Harold! The water is warm.

          Quote:

            Quote:
            Assume the Dems are just testing the water for now.
            They don't seem to really have a strong candidate yet.
            I am curious though...why focus on them being women or gay?
            I'd focus more on what their record shows them to be...as far as agenda etc.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        I'm guessing they think women might want someone who better represents their (womens) interest. It's really no different than for any other demographic or class of people.



    Quote:
    True...but then the Democrats just increase the strength of the argument that all they are is identity politics. That it doesn't matter about qualifications...just that you check the appropriate politically correct check box.


But identity politics isn't exclusive to the left. "War on Christianity." "War on white America." "War on men." These were all talking tactics employed by the right, to stoke parricular sentiments, in particular demographics, and encourage those demographics to vote a particular way. It's simply a less obvious form of identity politics that allows them to field hardcore, white Christian conservative politicians, while escaping the criticism of playing identity politics.


    Quote:
    I want to know what their qualifications are...not who they find sexually attractive. And if they are skilled and qualified...THEN they make great candidates. (They may be...but once again the news does a disservice by not talking about that aspect).


Not saying I don't agree, but still, it isn't exclusive to the left. I mean we're two years into the term of a Republican President who, from the very start, demonstrated zero qualifications to be President.





Posted with Google Chrome 71.0.3578.99 on Linux
Butthead2


Member Since: Tue Oct 24, 2017
Posts: 975


The Democrats showed last time that they are completely incapable of producing any remotely decent candidate since Hilary was their candidate for President. Hilary was BY FAR the worst Presidential candidate in the entire history of The US and that is why Trump won. I hope Schultz does run and helps Trump get re elected. Trump is awesome as President because of his immigration policies


Posted with Google Chrome 71.0.3578.98 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 3,177



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:


            Quote:

              Quote:
              https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article225155790.html

              Quote:

                Quote:
                https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/howard-schultz-independent-trump_us_5c4dc3cee4b06ba6d3bdf921

                Quote:

                  Quote:
                  Looks like we have another Ralph Nader type (former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz) who may be running as an independent, haha. Julian Castro, democratic hopeful, seems kind of depressed with early pleads for him to not enter the race, as it would likely siphon votes away from the democrats.

            Quote:

              Quote:
              Schultz will announce plans on 60 Minutes tonight. Come on down, Harold! The water is warm.

            Quote:

              Quote:
              Assume the Dems are just testing the water for now.
              They don't seem to really have a strong candidate yet.
              I am curious though...why focus on them being women or gay?
              I'd focus more on what their record shows them to be...as far as agenda etc.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          I'm guessing they think women might want someone who better represents their (womens) interest. It's really no different than for any other demographic or class of people.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        True...but then the Democrats just increase the strength of the argument that all they are is identity politics. That it doesn't matter about qualifications...just that you check the appropriate politically correct check box.



    Quote:
    But identity politics isn't exclusive to the left. "War on Christianity." "War on white America." "War on men." These were all talking tactics employed by the right, to stoke parricular sentiments, in particular demographics, and encourage those demographics to vote a particular way. It's simply a less obvious form of identity politics that allows them to field hardcore, white Christian conservative politicians, while escaping the criticism of playing identity politics.


But that's not a platform the right is espousing at their rallies. Listen to for example Hillary Clinton...all she talked about ...and each in turn is how she was going to help this special interest group and that minority and women this and women that...how was she shocked when she got very little of the vote from those she left out of her identity politics speeches?

For sake of argument lets say the right is also doing this (I don't see it nearly as much but lets just say it for now) they are sure playing the game better. They say "Americans" not "Fill in the blank interest group - American". How the Left plays their identity politics is not uniting, its dividing.


    Quote:

      Quote:
      I want to know what their qualifications are...not who they find sexually attractive. And if they are skilled and qualified...THEN they make great candidates. (They may be...but once again the news does a disservice by not talking about that aspect).



    Quote:
    Not saying I don't agree, but still, it isn't exclusive to the left. I mean we're two years into the term of a Republican President who, from the very start, demonstrated zero qualifications to be President.


I wouldn't say he is ALL bad...but I sure don't want him around for another 4 years...but the Dems throwing someone forward based on surface traits isn't going to dethrone him.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 16,875


I agree with policies. Just saying that the "identity" card in general is the same as any other clarion call.

Conservative candidates typically pander to the religious right. So they will shoot for that identity over LGBT rights for instance. So, automatically you are left with like a choice in one way. Religious conservatives would argue being forced out by the reverse.

Just saying that tribal mentalities are human nature. If one side is seeming to attack you, be it left or right, than you will join the other side.

It is sadly what politics have broken down into in the US.

It should be based on policies first, but it has not for quite a while.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 64.0 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 3,177



    Quote:
    I agree with policies. Just saying that the "identity" card in general is the same as any other clarion call.



    Quote:
    Conservative candidates typically pander to the religious right. So they will shoot for that identity over LGBT rights for instance. So, automatically you are left with like a choice in one way. Religious conservatives would argue being forced out by the reverse.



    Quote:
    Just saying that tribal mentalities are human nature. If one side is seeming to attack you, be it left or right, than you will join the other side.



    Quote:
    It is sadly what politics have broken down into in the US.



    Quote:
    It should be based on policies first, but it has not for quite a while.


Ahhh...then we are 100% in agreement.

What scares me most about the far right...is how little they believe in climate change...you can disagree what is causing the problem....but its insanity to say there isn't one. The Dems have me 100% here policy wise they at least consider it important.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
atrimus


Location: Saint Louis, MO
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 2,172



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:

            Quote:


              Quote:

                Quote:
                https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article225155790.html

                Quote:

                  Quote:
                  https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/howard-schultz-independent-trump_us_5c4dc3cee4b06ba6d3bdf921

                  Quote:

                    Quote:
                    Looks like we have another Ralph Nader type (former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz) who may be running as an independent, haha. Julian Castro, democratic hopeful, seems kind of depressed with early pleads for him to not enter the race, as it would likely siphon votes away from the democrats.

              Quote:

                Quote:
                Schultz will announce plans on 60 Minutes tonight. Come on down, Harold! The water is warm.

              Quote:

                Quote:
                Assume the Dems are just testing the water for now.
                They don't seem to really have a strong candidate yet.
                I am curious though...why focus on them being women or gay?
                I'd focus more on what their record shows them to be...as far as agenda etc.

          Quote:

            Quote:
            I'm guessing they think women might want someone who better represents their (womens) interest. It's really no different than for any other demographic or class of people.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          True...but then the Democrats just increase the strength of the argument that all they are is identity politics. That it doesn't matter about qualifications...just that you check the appropriate politically correct check box.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        But identity politics isn't exclusive to the left. "War on Christianity." "War on white America." "War on men." These were all talking tactics employed by the right, to stoke parricular sentiments, in particular demographics, and encourage those demographics to vote a particular way. It's simply a less obvious form of identity politics that allows them to field hardcore, white Christian conservative politicians, while escaping the criticism of playing identity politics.



    Quote:
    But that's not a platform the right is espousing at their rallies. Listen to for example Hillary Clinton...all she talked about ...and each in turn is how she was going to help this special interest group and that minority and women this and women that...how was she shocked when she got very little of the vote from those she left out of her identity politics speeches?


The people who didn't vote for her couldn't care less about identity politics. They were upset because they felt their identity wasn't being spoken to. It's precisely why minorities, gays, Muslims, etc. tend to vote Democrat, because they don't think Republicans heed them ... because the Republican platform upholds conservative values which tend to exclude certain groups.

I don't know why Clinton campaigned the way she did, but it's no coincidence that the groups she targeted have historically been marginalized. Gays, for instance. They literally have fewer rights than others, so why not speak to them specifically? It'd be silly to say "I'm gonna fight for the right of marriage for ALL Americans" when it's only gays who don't have that right. Straight people offended by this are simply being self centered.


    Quote:
    For sake of argument lets say the right is also doing this (I don't see it nearly as much but lets just say it for now) they are sure playing the game better. They say "Americans" not "Fill in the blank interest group - American". How the Left plays their identity politics is not uniting, its dividing.


Here's the thing, it's kinda oxymoronic to have an "R" (and to a lesser extent, a "D") by your name, but then say you're for all Americans. Republicans and Democrats are tailor made to consider certain groups. How can Republicans be for all Americans yet pander to religious conservatives, who are indifferent to most non-Christians, and openly antagonistic to Muslims and the LGBTQ community? I imagine American-Muslims didn't think Conservative Trump was for them when he was talking about bans, nor Hispanics when he was disparaging Mexican immigrants. It's no accident that straight white males supported him overwhelmingly, because his message was tacitly aimed at them.


    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        I want to know what their qualifications are...not who they find sexually attractive. And if they are skilled and qualified...THEN they make great candidates. (They may be...but once again the news does a disservice by not talking about that aspect).

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Not saying I don't agree, but still, it isn't exclusive to the left. I mean we're two years into the term of a Republican President who, from the very start, demonstrated zero qualifications to be President.



    Quote:
    I wouldn't say he is ALL bad...but I sure don't want him around for another 4 years...but the Dems throwing someone forward based on surface traits isn't going to dethrone him.






Posted with Google Chrome 71.0.3578.99 on Linux
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 3,177



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:

            Quote:

              Quote:


                Quote:

                  Quote:
                  https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article225155790.html

                  Quote:

                    Quote:
                    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/howard-schultz-independent-trump_us_5c4dc3cee4b06ba6d3bdf921

                    Quote:

                      Quote:
                      Looks like we have another Ralph Nader type (former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz) who may be running as an independent, haha. Julian Castro, democratic hopeful, seems kind of depressed with early pleads for him to not enter the race, as it would likely siphon votes away from the democrats.

                Quote:

                  Quote:
                  Schultz will announce plans on 60 Minutes tonight. Come on down, Harold! The water is warm.

                Quote:

                  Quote:
                  Assume the Dems are just testing the water for now.
                  They don't seem to really have a strong candidate yet.
                  I am curious though...why focus on them being women or gay?
                  I'd focus more on what their record shows them to be...as far as agenda etc.

            Quote:

              Quote:
              I'm guessing they think women might want someone who better represents their (womens) interest. It's really no different than for any other demographic or class of people.

          Quote:

            Quote:
            True...but then the Democrats just increase the strength of the argument that all they are is identity politics. That it doesn't matter about qualifications...just that you check the appropriate politically correct check box.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          But identity politics isn't exclusive to the left. "War on Christianity." "War on white America." "War on men." These were all talking tactics employed by the right, to stoke parricular sentiments, in particular demographics, and encourage those demographics to vote a particular way. It's simply a less obvious form of identity politics that allows them to field hardcore, white Christian conservative politicians, while escaping the criticism of playing identity politics.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        But that's not a platform the right is espousing at their rallies. Listen to for example Hillary Clinton...all she talked about ...and each in turn is how she was going to help this special interest group and that minority and women this and women that...how was she shocked when she got very little of the vote from those she left out of her identity politics speeches?



    Quote:
    The people who didn't vote for her couldn't care less about identity politics. They were upset because they felt their identity wasn't being spoken to. It's precisely why minorities, gays, Muslims, etc. tend to vote Democrat, because they don't think Republicans heed them ... because the Republican platform upholds conservative values which tend to exclude certain groups.



    Quote:
    I don't know why Clinton campaigned the way she did, but it's no coincidence that the groups she targeted have historically been marginalized. Gays, for instance. They literally have fewer rights than others, so why not speak to them specifically? It'd be silly to say "I'm gonna fight for the right of marriage for ALL Americans" when it's only gays who don't have that right. Straight people offended by this are simply being self centered.


It's not just this...it's that she systematically talked about EVERY group but one. And talked about being united. That's implicitly stating everyone but the particular group.


    Quote:

      Quote:
      For sake of argument lets say the right is also doing this (I don't see it nearly as much but lets just say it for now) they are sure playing the game better. They say "Americans" not "Fill in the blank interest group - American". How the Left plays their identity politics is not uniting, its dividing.



    Quote:
    Here's the thing, it's kinda oxymoronic to have an "R" (and to a lesser extent, a "D") by your name, but then say you're for all Americans. Republicans and Democrats are tailor made to consider certain groups. How can Republicans be for all Americans yet pander to religious conservatives, who are indifferent to most non-Christians, and openly antagonistic to Muslims and the LGBTQ community? I imagine American-Muslims didn't think Conservative Trump was for them when he was talking about bans, nor Hispanics when he was disparaging Mexican immigrants. It's no accident that straight white males supported him overwhelmingly, because his message was tacitly aimed at them.


Didn't I just say earlier if the democrats don't even pretend to care about white or men or middle class they shouldn't expect their vote?

Most people are moderate....we just don't have any (many) moderate politicians.


    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:
          I want to know what their qualifications are...not who they find sexually attractive. And if they are skilled and qualified...THEN they make great candidates. (They may be...but once again the news does a disservice by not talking about that aspect).

        Quote:

          Quote:
          Not saying I don't agree, but still, it isn't exclusive to the left. I mean we're two years into the term of a Republican President who, from the very start, demonstrated zero qualifications to be President.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        I wouldn't say he is ALL bad...but I sure don't want him around for another 4 years...but the Dems throwing someone forward based on surface traits isn't going to dethrone him.



Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 16,875


I would say so, but I find that to be all a hedging of bets anyway. Like I said below, conservatives and liberals will reach out to their bases in this.

And given Trump's approval rating with female voters, it is a pretty big block to just ignore. Seems like low hanging fruit. Should not matter too much if the candidate is a woman, but classically congress and government has not done a great job of listening to policy concerns for some of these groups.

Does not mean that policy should not be what we go for, but I think the last presidential election killed that sort of talk for a while. Trump will personally attack, make up stuff and so on. I feel the man did not have a policy position that was consistent outside of the wall and attacking various other groups.

Clinton had all manner of scandals too. Just probably marked where the country is. Not even sure that policy positions move most people.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 65.0 on Windows 7
HammerTime


Member Since: Sun Jan 07, 2018
Posts: 3,830





Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software