Support NeoGAF

[Wilsongt]

This right here. This is a piece of shit (which we already knew, of course)

What a piece of garbage.

 

[Tall4Life]

My dad just told me to "Look up Pizzagate!!". Fuck all this shit.

 

[CygnusXS]

How do they not get that the "-gate" is ironic??

 

[You Know Nothing]

My dad just told me to "Look up Pizzagate!!". Fuck all this shit.

Omg.

I'm so glad my dad hasn't gone down the rabbit hole of fake news. He just watches ABC nightly news. I can't complain.

 

[Diablos]

All these protests are awesome but I wish I saw this kind of energy before the election.

You can rip up newspapers and scream all you want and vow to oppose him but like, he is President for the next 4 years, there's nothing anyone can do about that. Vow whatever you want, he still has lots of power.

I don't get this country sometimes

 

[Fox318]

All these protests are awesome but I wish I saw this kind of energy before the election.

You can rip up newspapers and scream all you want and vow to oppose him but like, he is President for the next 4 years, there's nothing anyone can do about that. Vow whatever you want, he still has lots of power.

I don't get this country sometimes

Democrats fall in love with their candidate

Republicans fall in line.

Hillary was a bad candidate.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Democrats fall in love with their candidate

Republicans fall in line.

Hillary was a bad candidate.

People say this is all the time but it isn't true.

Ask Republicans. They'll say the same exact thing in reverse. That it's democrats who are all the same and always fall in line but Republicans never really get behind anyone.

 

[royalan]

My dad just told me to "Look up Pizzagate!!". Fuck all this shit.

I hope you called him a fucking moron.

Not kidding.

Treat this like a loved one suffering from addiction needing to be confronted with the truth about their addiction and the suffering it's causing those around them.

People who believe moronic things needs to be told that by the ones they love.

 

[Tall4Life]

Omg.

I'm so glad my dad hasn't gone down the rabbit hole of fake news. He just watches ABC nightly news. I can't complain.

Like half of the time he's relatively ok. He was shocked at Trump saying he wanted to take oil (though now he's basically supporting what Trump did). And then he switches into full conspiracy mode and everything that's an anti-establishment conspiracy is true.

I hope you called him a fucking moron.

Not kidding.

Treat this like a loved one suffering from addiction needing to be confronted with the truth about their addiction and the suffering it's causing those around them.

People who believe moronic things needs to be told that by the ones they love.

I'm already on a tight rope. I come home every other week from college for a break. I'm still going to be around them 5 more years. I can't.

 

[Diablos]

Yes but now there's NO candidate, and he is the President. And now Dems want to fall in line...

It's just absurd.

Hillary was flawed but I go back to the part where she won by almost 3 million more votes. In other western democracies that makes her the winner and people would call her campaign brilliant.

But instead 40k morons in the rust belt set us back for a generation. Fuck it's just so infuriating.

 

[VendettaRed07]

All these protests are awesome but I wish I saw this kind of energy before the election.

You can rip up newspapers and scream all you want and vow to oppose him but like, he is President for the next 4 years, there's nothing anyone can do about that. Vow whatever you want, he still has lots of power.

I don't get this country sometimes

I'd say it's probably the media's fault for giving people a false sense of security and that "meh I don't need to get active/donate. She's got this."

It's only when the reality of something sets in and disaster hits do people actually do something about anything. Like this is probably what will happen with climate change. I don't think we'll actually do anything major about it until Florida is literally under water or something.

 

[DrForester]

https://twitter.com/ItsAlita/status/822621923196751872

 

[Teggy]

Oh god, I looked at Clarke's full timeline. I need to bleach my brain.

 

[Ether_Snake]

Hmm, not sure this is the correct way of describing it.

Trump is obviously insufferable and almost everyone would hate having a beer with him because people like to talk about themselves but Trump doesn't like to listen to people talking about themselves.

I don't think (even assuming Trump drank beer) any of his voters would like to have a beer with him.

People would like to have a beer with him just for the show, not to tell him about themselves.

Hey, don't be mad at me. You think it's stupid. I think it's stupid. I'd love to live in a country that placed more worth in being informed. But it's what wins the American electorate.

I've said it before in this OT and real life (and have an easier time in real life, tbh), and I'll keep saying it until Democrats get it:

Politics is performance, and Democrats lose up and down the ticket when they forget that.

I'm not mad I said before I believe that's always who wins.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Nope, that's the plan. I actually wrote this in the other thread before even reading the Vox piece.

Right wing people haven't trusted the media since the 90s. Right wing media (especially talk radio) gaslit the media to the point that their own listeners don't even consider the right-slanted news believable.

It's not about background, it's about authenticity. Hillary had an authenticity issue speaking to the middle class (white AND nonwhite). Trump, for whatever reason, connected as honest about the poors. Like, I don't get why. Don't ask me why. But he did.

You need someone who can talk about being middle class and talk about being aspirational and sell his policies as aspirational and have people believe him.

I think it's a little more nuanced than that. They want someone they can trust to do things with their best interests in mind when they're not paying attention, which apparently bold faced lying isn't necessarily a deal breaker for.

At least for the right, where they have a lot harder time saying what they think than the left does, out of fears of being called racist.

It's really just short answers on things. Most people think long answers are conjobs. And to a point, they are. These Rust Belt voters wanted a candidate who promised them unicorns, and they got one.

If our candidate in 4 years decides to go the "lie your ass off" route, then I don't know that I could support them. Even if I voted for them in the end, I'd never donate a cent of my money or a minute of my time. Lying is for the GOP.

I absolutely agree with this. And it highlights how little background matters.

We can talk about the Hillary today who is a rich old white woman. But she wasn't born wealthy. She grew up in a middle class life. Her fault was her inability to connect in that way.

Whereas Trump was born wealthy, and has never known a hardship his entire life. But because he's simple, he connects. Not to say that all of his voters are dumb (although quite a few are), but it's easy to believe that someone stands for you when they remind you of your idiot cousin, and they don't use big, intimidating words.

So Democrats need to find that candidate who knows how to connect. The "We need a candidate with [insert physical traits here] from [insert swing state here]" debate is the most useless debate to have now, and going forward. Like, there is no worth whatsoever in it.

Eh, there's value in background since our base is particularly angry with compromise, which you need to do to have a resume worth mentioning. Like, you're either Bernie (who's been around for decades and never done anything since he takes a hard line) or you're Hillary (who's been around for decades and did a lot that required compromise).

The lesson from this year and '08 is that Obama was green as fuck and had no record (Trump too, actually). That's how you win as a Democrat.

All these protests are awesome but I wish I saw this kind of energy before the election.

You can rip up newspapers and scream all you want and vow to oppose him but like, he is President for the next 4 years, there's nothing anyone can do about that. Vow whatever you want, he still has lots of power.

I don't get this country sometimes

You do know we won the popular vote, right?

Almost every person at these marches voted for Hillary. This is essentially the same fallacy Trump makes when he says "I can't be unpopular, look at this crowd size!" You're ignoring the people who weren't at the marches who voted for Trump or someone else (or didn't vote).

There's literally no reason to cede talking points from the get-go. The popular vote doesn't matter at all for winning the White House (it's totally possible to win 99.9% to 00.1% of the total votes, and lose the EC 535-3), but damned if that means we should just ignore those votes and act like people really do like Trump. They don't. Most people don't. If he wants to act like he's well-liked, it's our job to remind him that he isn't.

 

[Diablos]

Of course I know she won the popular vote but I am feeling a sense of urgency that wasn't there on November 8th. That's the problem.

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Of course I know she won the popular vote but I am feeling a sense of urgency that wasn't there on November 8th. That's the problem.

American politics are unfortunately very reactionary.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

It's impressive that Trump is known to be the greediest man in the world and yet his inauguration speech made my girlfriend think he plagiarized Chairman Mao.

Communist rhetoric combined with massive tax cuts for the rich, it's kind of impressive.

 

[kirblar]

Of course I know she won the popular vote but I am feeling a sense of urgency that wasn't there on November 8th. That's the problem.

Coddled 18-25yos seem like they're going to be an eternal problem for the Dems.

 

[thepotatoman]

It's really just short answers on things. Most people think long answers are conjobs. And to a point, they are. These Rust Belt voters wanted a candidate who promised them unicorns, and they got one.

If our candidate in 4 years decides to go the "lie your ass off" route, then I don't know that I could support them. Even if I voted for them in the end, I'd never donate a cent of my money or a minute of my time. Lying is for the GOP.

For the left, it's a question of Bernie style promising the end goal of what he wants to happen, vs Clinton style promising what she thinks she might possibly be able to accomplish, should democrats win a slight majority or republicans stop being 100% obstructionists.

Personally, I don't really think what Bernie as an example was doing counts as lying, and I think it's on the voters to understand that he can't necessarily accomplish what he wants unless he gets a congress friendly to him. But we can at least trust Bernie to get as close to his promised vision as possible.

I found it admirable hearing in those leaked tapes that Hillary wants to only promise what she thinks she can accomplish, even if it hurts her politically, but in the end, all of her promises still seemed pretty unachievable, since she's going to get a republican house anyway, which will 100% obstruct even the tiniest of things she wants to do.

Either way, I don't think the left is really in danger of a candidate that is nearly the liar that Trump is.

 

[royalan]

Eh, there's value in background since our base is particularly angry with compromise, which you need to do to have a resume worth mentioning. Like, you're either Bernie (who's been around for decades and never done anything since he takes a hard line) or you're Hillary (who's been around for decades and did a lot that required compromise).

The lesson from this year and '08 is that Obama was green as fuck and had no record (Trump too, actually). That's how you win as a Democrat.

But that's not really even true. Bernie is far from being clean. There's the fact that he voted for the 1994 Crime Bill that his supporters tried to hang Hillary with (and then touted that vote in his 2006 senate run). He was also against gay marriage for a time. His history of supporting dictators. His refusal to release his full tax returns. The incredibly high likelihood that his status as a US Senator was used to excuse some incredibly shady things his wife has done. Sierra Blanca, Texas. His Trump-like tendency to twist facts, and attack long-standing institutions to suit his narrative. The (also Trump-like) mind-blowing ignorance he displays toward things that don't suit his narrative. I mean, I could go on. Bernie is a politician, and a pretty scummy one at times.

The point isn't to relitegate the primaries for the umpteenth time, but Bernie is pretty flawed. But he was forgiven that, because he was charming and charismatic...in an "everybody's loud uncle who needs to take a shower" sorta way. But that works.

Charisma forgives a lot. It's the #1 quality Dems need to look for. Background has no value.

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Coddled 18-25yos seem like they're going to be an eternal problem for the Dems.

Yep, a fresh batch of people who are always ready to fall for the 3rd party meme.

 

[Ogodei]

The strategy of "our word is now impossible to trust for any foreign nation" is a really good strategy, definitely.

That won't lead to any international incidents.

Tried to convince some Nazish people who like dope to call their Senators and say they don't like Jeff "Good people don't smoke marijuana" Sessions.

They dodged and avoided it and went with "I don't want to talk about politics!!" After spending the prior 24 hours spamming Trump memes.

Come the fuck on.

I've fallen into the trap of arguing with facebook memes too lately. I let myself get sucked in earlier, need to learn how to apply minimum pressure for maximum results.

But that's not really even true. Bernie is far from being clean. There's the fact that he voted for the 1994 Crime Bill that his supporters tried to hang Hillary with (and then touted that vote in his 2006 senate run). He was also against gay marriage for a time. His history of supporting dictators. His refusal to release his full tax returns. The incredibly high likelihood that his status as a US Senator was used to excuse some incredibly shady things his wife has done. Sierra Blanca, Texas. His Trump-like tendency to twist facts, and attack long-standing institutions to suit his narrative. The (also Trump-like) mind-blowing ignorance he displays toward things that don't suit his narrative. I mean, I could go on. Bernie is a politician, and a pretty scummy one at times.

The point isn't to relitegate the primaries for the umpteenth time, but Bernie is pretty flawed. But he was forgiven that, because he was charming and charismatic...in an "everybody's loud uncle who needs to take a shower" sorta way. But that works.

Charisma forgives a lot. It's the #1 quality Dems need to look for. Background has no value.

I agree with your post by and large, but everyone was against gay marriage at one point.

Is there actually a list of Democratic politicians who were on record supporting gay marriage before 2005?

 

[Evening Musuko]

Of course I know she won the popular vote but I am feeling a sense of urgency that wasn't there on November 8th. That's the problem.

People got comfortable. Now that we have to deal with a GOP congress and President Trump for the next couple of years people are starting to realize what happens when you do.

 

[RustyNails]

Of course I know she won the popular vote but I am feeling a sense of urgency that wasn't there on November 8th. That's the problem.

I'm going to bet you a ton of money that some, if not many of the young protestors you saw on the streets didn't vote or voted for Jill Stein or some shit.

 

[Wilsongt]

Sadly, Republicans aren't the only one immune to facts. The far left seems to be also.

 

[thepotatoman]

But that's not really even true. Bernie is far from being clean. There's the fact that he voted for the 1994 Crime Bill that his supporters tried to hang Hillary with (and then touted that vote in his 2006 senate run). He was also against gay marriage for a time. His history of supporting dictators. His refusal to release his full tax returns. The incredibly high likelihood that his status as a US Senator was used to excuse some incredibly shady things his wife has done. Sierra Blanca, Texas. His Trump-like tendency to twist facts, and attack long-standing institutions to suit his narrative. The (also Trump-like) mind-blowing ignorance he displays toward things that don't suit his narrative. I mean, I could go on. Bernie is a politician, and a pretty scummy one at times.

The point isn't to relitegate the primaries for the umpteenth time, but Bernie is pretty flawed. But he was forgiven that, because he was charming and charismatic...in an "everybody's loud uncle who needs to take a shower" sorta way. But that works.

Charisma forgives a lot. It's the #1 quality Dems need to look for. Background has no value.

Even if Sanders fails the same test as badly as Hillary, I'd still agree with the quoted post that it's very clear that an inexperienced candidate with no real record is generally more electable than an expericenced one with a large record.

It's something to keep in mind for Biden.

 

[Diablos]

I'm going to bet you a ton of money that some, if not many of the young protestors you saw on the streets didn't vote or voted for Jill Stein or some shit.

You don't say!

 

[Spoiled Milk]

What exactly is within the scope of the executive action signed by Trump? The individual mandate seems gone, but non-discrimination against pre-existing conditions is apparently here to stay. Aren't both "federal regulations" that "burden insurance companies"?

 

[Teggy]

What exactly is within the scope of the executive action signed by Trump? The individual mandate seems gone, but non-discrimination against pre-existing conditions is apparently here to stay. Aren't both "federal regulations" that "burden insurance companies"?

It doesn't do anything. Theoretically the IRS could decide not to go after people who don't pay their penalty if they think it is "economicly burdensome", but none of the law is off the books.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

New favorite take on dude punching Spencer

 

[thepotatoman]

What exactly is within the scope of the executive action signed by Trump? The individual mandate seems gone, but non-discrimination against pre-existing conditions is apparently here to stay. Aren't both "federal regulations" that "burden insurance companies"?

Depending on the legal argument that the health secretary uses and what the courts say about it, it could completely get rid of both the mandate and the non-discrimination against pre-existing conditions.

The bill gives the Health Secretary a lot of power to say what counts as minimum coverage to satisify the mandate and what counts as a pre existing condition that can not be discriminated against. It's not hard to imagine that Tom Price comes up with definitions that basically include everyone as minimually covered, and no one as having pre-existing conditions, but we'll have to wait to see what Tom Price comes up with, and potentially what the courts have to say about that.

In any case, anything Tom Price does come up with will have to go through months worth of approval processes.

And that's assuming congress doesn't beat him to it with a repeal, which the non-filibusterable vote has to happen by friday. After that, I think congress loses the ability to repeal without filibuster for a year.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Sadly, Republicans aren't the only one immune to facts. The far left seems to be also.

Ideologues of all kinds love it.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Jeb! as the Bye Bye Man is my new head canon.

 

[Pixieking]

Hillary Clinton's Personal March On Washington

Really interesting piece, and the quote from Obama isn't altogether new, but worth reading:

In the long piece I wrote about Obama, I didn’t have the chance to quote him in full about Clinton. When the subject turned to her, he was measured, respectful, sombre.

“Look, I said this on the eve of the election, and I continue to believe this is true, that Hillary Clinton would have been an outstanding President,” Obama said. “ I think she’s been an outstanding public servant. By her own admission, she’s not a flashy, inspirational speaker, and is much more relaxed off camera than she is on camera. But that’s not something she can do something about. I think you can always second-guess campaigns that have been lost. We could have done this a little bit better or that a little bit better. But the truth is, is that they ran a professional, effective, well-structured campaign, given the information they had and what they knew.”

He went on, “I think all of us, and that includes the campaign, felt that there were certain thresholds with respect to somebody becoming President that during the course of the campaign President-elect Trump hadn’t crossed, and I think there was probably some sense internally that because he hadn’t run a traditional campaign or behaved in a traditional way, despite the success that he had shown, that at the end of the day he would not inspire enough overperformance in any sector that it would throw off the data as much as it did. But, you know what? I can’t fault the campaign for not seeing it, because nobody saw it. And so I do believe—and I’ve said this before, so it’s not, I think, sour grapes on the back end—that Hillary Clinton was subjected to a double standard that even by the standards of national politics is unusual.”

A double-standard of gender? I asked.

“For reasons of gender—a combination of gender and the fact that she had been in the arena for a long time,” Obama replied.

 

[UltimaPooh]

People say this is all the time but it isn't true.

Ask Republicans. They'll say the same exact thing in reverse. That it's democrats who are all the same and always fall in line but Republicans never really get behind anyone.

Bingo.

 

[Abinash117]

Even if Sanders fails the same test as badly as Hillary, I'd still agree with the quoted post that it's very clear that an inexperienced candidate with no real record is generally more electable than an expericenced one with a large record.

It's something to keep in mind for Biden.

From some of that stats that people reported here. All we need is someone to get the base out to vote. Bernie probably wouldn't probably have lost as much as Hillary in terms of rural voters, but might have lost more of the minority vote. It heavily depends the strategy. Bernie might have gone for the same voting group and at the same time would have been negative as Hilary like a part of her campaign was.

We need a candidate that is capable of being realistic and has decent experience. We don't need completely inexperienced candidates, because once they win they need to undo what Trump has done and push their own agenda.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Going to be weird seeing Hollywood really get political again. Or at least to the degree it was during the Bush years. There's going to be so much shit on this.

I wouldn't be surprised if Civil War or the Avengers ends up going to the point where Tony Stark becomes President and goes full on "I'm literally an evil Republican asshole", like he was in the comics, and then Captain America beats the crap out of him.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

From some of that stats that people reported here. All we need is someone to get the base out to vote. Bernie probably wouldn't probably have lost as much as Hillary in terms of rural voters, but might have lost more of the minority vote. It heavily depends the strategy. Bernie might have gone for the same voting group and at the same time would have been negative as Hilary like a part of her campaign was.

Did Hillary really do noticeably better than Kerry or Gore with minority voters?

 

[Officerrob]

People say this is all the time but it isn't true.

Ask Republicans. They'll say the same exact thing in reverse. That it's democrats who are all the same and always fall in line but Republicans never really get behind anyone.

I wish Dems would fall in line in non Presidential elections

 

[Abinash117]

Did Hillary really do noticeably better than Kerry or Gore with minority voters?

I don't have the info to know. Although, I've looked at some stats of some states that was posted her like in FL. It appears turnout wasn't as it needed to be with some groups.

Plus, some Dems was sounding the alarm that they weren't paying enough attention to some groups like AAs.

 

[kirblar]

I don't have the info to know. Although, I've looked at some stats of some states that was posted her like in FL. It appears turnout wasn't as it needed to be with some groups.

Plus, some Dems was sounding the alarm that they weren't paying enough attention to some groups like AAs.

The complete infrastucture collapse post-2008 is an issue that would have helped sink Bernie as well.

 

[CreepingFear]

My dad just told me to "Look up Pizzagate!!". Fuck all this shit.

Damn, my condolences.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Did Hillary really do noticeably better than Kerry or Gore with minority voters?

The overall numbers were higher, but percentage wise.. No she did not. Exception being Asian voters.

Gore got 90% of black voters where as Hillary only got 88%. Really, really bad considering. Millenial turnout was down, and there were more third party voters amongst black voters than usual. Normally there's barely even more than 1%, but nearly 5% went third party this time.

 

[etrain911]

But that's not really even true. Bernie is far from being clean. There's the fact that he voted for the 1994 Crime Bill that his supporters tried to hang Hillary with (and then touted that vote in his 2006 senate run). He was also against gay marriage for a time. His history of supporting dictators. His refusal to release his full tax returns. The incredibly high likelihood that his status as a US Senator was used to excuse some incredibly shady things his wife has done. Sierra Blanca, Texas. His Trump-like tendency to twist facts, and attack long-standing institutions to suit his narrative. The (also Trump-like) mind-blowing ignorance he displays toward things that don't suit his narrative. I mean, I could go on. Bernie is a politician, and a pretty scummy one at times.

The point isn't to relitegate the primaries for the umpteenth time, but Bernie is pretty flawed. But he was forgiven that, because he was charming and charismatic...in an "everybody's loud uncle who needs to take a shower" sorta way. But that works.

Charisma forgives a lot. It's the #1 quality Dems need to look for. Background has no value.

This can never be understated. I took a psychology of negotiations class and this is the first thing you learn. You separate the people from the problem by disarming the people and acknowledging their interests. You always shoot for the ideal in negotiations and campagins, not what you think is achievable, but what you in a Candide-style best-of-all-possible-world could see happening. That way, any step downward from there is a smaller concession than a step down from what you think is realistically achievable. Those two things are what made Bernie appear more charismatic. He was able to appeal to a large swath of people by acknowledging their interests in a way that made them feel like he was connected and in touch even though there were portions of his platform that were woefully lacking in thought, and he presented the ideal best possible outcome to the electorate rather than the realistic one.

 

[royalan]

I don't have the info to know. Although, I've looked at some stats of some states that was posted her like in FL. It appears turnout wasn't as it needed to be with some groups.

Plus, some Dems was sounding the alarm that they weren't paying enough attention to some groups like AAs.

Yep, there was a point around October where things here in Philly started getting pretty frantic, at least from my vantage point. We were getting a lot of confirmation that people were voting, but seeing none of the outward signs you expect by that point.

Never take your base for granted, even if the data is telling you to expand the map because they're in the bag.

Basically, if Hillary had campaigned as aggressively as she did in the primary, I truly believe she'd be president right now. Although I completely understand and accept the logic behind why the campaign strategy shifted. It just ended up being the wrong choice.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

The overall numbers were higher, but percentage wise.. No she did not. Exception being Asian voters.

Gore got 90% of black voters where as Hillary only got 88%. Really, really bad considering. Millenial turnout was down, and there were more third party voters amongst black voters than usual. Normally there's barely even more than 1%, but nearly 5% went third party this time.

Okay, so then I'm not seeing much evidence that Bernie or Biden would cause some big exodus of minority voters, especially since the biggest defecting/dropped turnout group (young minorities) were the only minority group Clinton underperformed with in the primaries. This isn't to "blame" minorities (I'm firmly for blaming defections from rural voters in midwestern states) but if Obama-level performance with minority voters is unattainable going forward because of the unique circumstances of his candidacy, then not getting further killed with the WWC by the margins Hillary did is probably necessary going further.

Also, I think people are conflating charisma with clear messaging. The former is (mostly) natural, the latter is much more generally achievable.

Edit: oh and nice avatar! Summer Wars is my favorite movie ever.

 

[Pixieking]

People say this is all the time but it isn't true.

Ask Republicans. They'll say the same exact thing in reverse. That it's democrats who are all the same and always fall in line but Republicans never really get behind anyone.

It's been noted before (here and elsewhere) that the almost-single-issue nature of the GOP helps them tremendously with falling-in-line. Anti-abortion? Vote GOP. Pro-guns? Vote GOP. Deny or disbelieve climate change? Vote GOP. That last group is the most fluid in terms of being married to a single party, with the first group wedded to Republicans til the day they die. Trump proved that no matter how morally repugnant the candidate, Republican voters will fall in line, because they see their core values as immutable, unchanging - a war that will never end. Even if Roe is gone (as an example) they'll continue to vote R, partially because they see the beliefs of the party in-line with their own, and partially because a R president will help their agenda abroad.

In this sense, R voters are way more concerned about policy than Dem voters. Imagine the same force of will focused on a Dem issue - minimum wage, gun control, mental health care, education for special educational needs children, climate change. It doesn't exist - not in the same way. The closest the Dems will have is the ACA, and that will be thanks to Trump and the GOP repealing it and physically killing people.

 

[Sirpopopop]

Either way, I don't think the left is really in danger of a candidate that is nearly the liar that Trump is.

Tulsi Gabbard called.

She is what everyone accused Hillary of being.

 

[Retromelon]

Please append your post to read Progressive Icon Tulsi gabbard