Hillary Clinton blew the most winnable election in modern American history.

[Lando Lincoln]

You want an intelligent discussion?  Start with honesty and respect - and if I may say so - stop with the childish, churlish, vulgar, over-the-top and outright untruths.  My opinion?  You lost - America won - she lives to fight another day.  Be part of the solution, or move out of the way and go stand with the losers who can't get a grip on reality. 

I find there is a disconnect in that paragraph, alice.

But, that's just me.

[LateForLunch]

Once again - I will say what we have been saying ALL ALONG - criticize Donald Trump to your heart's content, he is fair game.

However, if you present something as a FACT, when it is only your OPINION - a Trump supporter may come behind you to correct the misconception you have pushed.  If you post an article from a "fake news" site - you might be corrected on that.  If you say something negative, a Trump supporter might come along and say something positive about him. 

That is the nature of a political forum, it's called a discussion, and it's healthy freedom of speech.....it's America.

AGAIN - it's not the criticism of Trump that we can't abide - it's the insults against us.  I know - you want to say something like "tough luck, I'll say what I want" - fine, but don't accuse us of not being able to handle criticism of "our god Trump" - when it is the insults to our intelligence, faith, morality, ethics, etc - that galls us.  And, it would gall you too, if we would respond in kind. 

You want an intelligent discussion?  Start with honesty and respect - and if I may say so - stop with the childish, churlish, vulgar, over-the-top and outright untruths.  My opinion?  You lost - America won - she lives to fight another day.  Be part of the solution, or move out of the way and go stand with the losers who can't get a grip on reality. 

Pfffft!

Fair enough. Would take exception with the "losers" label because it may be misunderstood to be a blanket condemnation of people who are simply grieving over a painful loss because they care deeply about the country and feel (rightly or wrongly) that something is amiss which will come back to hurt us.

LOOOVE the avatar by the way. It is delightfully demented!!

[sneakypete]

And if she blew this, how would she do running the country?

@Weird Tolkienish Figure

She wouldn't have. She would have sold the rights to run whatever aspects of the country to the  highest bidder that offered her a percentage of the money they stole.

Her sole function would have been to keep the Feebs and the Justice Dept away from them.

[sneakypete]

actually Hillary would have lost to any of the Republicans, Trump was her best bet.

@geronl

Yup. I think I even detected a hint of that in the article. The title alone is a strong hint,even if they didn't want to come right out and say it.

I'm hoping this massive loss by Bubbette! is enough to keep Bubbette! Jr out of office. I have no doubt her family money and her husband's family money can buy her a congressional seat somewhere,but I am hoping that after this the 'murikan publick voters that vote Dim will even be sick of hearing the Clinton name on a national ticket.

[sneakypete]

There are too many veterans, not too mention current government employees, that are intimately familiar with the procedures to safely handle classified information. That Hillary was not held accountable for her misdeeds was the main contributor to her unlikable and untrustworthy numbers.

No one besides Trump was seen in the same light. She finished at least 7 million votes shy of what Obama received...there's your difference.

@Night Hides Not

And now Trump seems determined to repeat the mistake by placing prominent retired Generals that have  proven THEY can't be trusted in sensitive Cabinet positions.

I am just hoping this is an example of Trump "playing the game" for political purposes to keep the professional pols silent until he nominates who he really wants.

Yeah,I know,but it costs nothing to hope,does it?

[sneakypete]

I think that's true, but Trump also did go after her much more boldly than some other might have done.  "Crooked Hillary" didn't sound all that good to me, but it did have the effect of reinforcing her biggest weakness.  I dunno if someone like Jeb would have pushed that nearly as hard -- he might even have made excuses for/minimized her misconduct in debates.

@Maj. Bill Martin

No way in HELL would JEB have criticized Bubbette! in ANY harsh way. His mama would have kicked  his punk mama boy's ass. Probably his wife,too.

[sneakypete]

Well either Trump or Hillary were going to blow the most winnable election in modern American History..

@montanajoe

The truth is a name could have been picked at random from out of a phone book that would have probably been better than either of them.

The ONE thing Trump had going for him is ZERO experience in politics other than bribing politicians from both branches of the ruling party to give him what he wants.

[sneakypete]

There's several other NeverTrumps that could use it too - might get a group rate?

@alicewonders

LOL! It does seem like some of the mental midgets that got banned from FR brought FR over here with them,doesn't it? Most specifically,the Clique Concept from High School.

[sneakypete]

She was losing in polling against "Generic Republican" since the beginning. Trump is a generic Republican. I do not think there was any opportunity for her to win under any circumstances.

People have, will and will always hate her.

@Frank Cannon

Well,sane people with the ability to think,anyhow. The traditional Dim Plantation voter will ALWAYS vote Dim.

[sneakypete]

I just want to point out that @alicewonders  and @flowers were both good people before they became angry, bitter trumpers.

I miss the people they used to be.  I LIKED those people.  They could think.  They could carry on conversations.  They had reasonable positions on issues.  They could disagree without hating you.

No more.

Sad.......   

@musiclady

Are you POSITIVE it is "them"?

[sneakypete]

She didn't seem to be in the best of health.

She really didn't hold many campaign rallies, it was a bit half-----.

@TomSea

I suspect you are right about this. She didn't campaign more because she thought she had it in the bag as much as she didn't campaign more because she was physically and mentally unable to campaign more. There is a limit to how many times someone her age and state of health can be pumped up with injections and trotted out before an audience before things start to rapidly come apart. As witnessed when he had to have help walking and then collapsed trying to get into the van after one appearance.

If she had more of those spasms and collapses in front of tv cameras,even die-hard Dims would have been questioning her ability to run the country.

Her campaign staff were in a damned if they do/damned if they don't  position.

They didn't worry about how she could manage AFTER the election because they all knew it would be Bubba Bill and the bankers running things anyway.

[Cyber Liberty]

  My opinion?  You lost - America won - she lives to fight another day. 

As long as you insist on calling people "losers" that glorious day of unification will never happen.  If I didn't know better, I'd think some people want a permanent split.

[sneakypete]

Makes me wonder if Trump was in support of the algor recount fiasco in 2000?  He was a Dem then, wasn't he?  And a good buddy of Clinton......

@musiclady

Trump has never been a good friend of anyone but the guy looking at him in the mirror.

[sneakypete]

Whatever.  At least I know it's rude to shout in ALL CAPS, and that shouting in ALL CAPS is a pretty good indicator of who the angry hater is.

@Oceander

"Angry hater"???

ROFLMAO! Is that you,Oprah? Care to share anymore Dim code phrases with us?

[Oceander]

@musiclady

Trump has never been a good friend of anyone but the guy looking at him in the mirror.

/snicker

[sneakypete]

I see shades of JimRob in that reply. Am I alone?

@Weird Tolkienish Figure  @Oceander

Nope. Oceander told me something along the line of "too bad this isn't FR or you would already be banned" earlier this morning when I busted in her/him/whatever whining about Bubbette! winning the popular vote and asked if she/he/sheit thinks America is a democracy or not. Never did get a straight out "yes" or "no" answer on that one.

[Oceander]

@Oceander

"Angry hater"???

ROFLMAO! Is that you,Oprah? Care to share anymore Dim code phrases with us?

That'd be you, too.

[Idaho_Cowboy]

As long as you insist on calling people "losers" that glorious day of unification will never happen.  If I didn't know better, I'd think some people want a permanent split.

I don't mind being a loser.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuL8g2Szse0

[Cyber Liberty]

I find there is a disconnect in that paragraph, alice.

But, that's just me.

The thing that bugs me about that soliloquy from Alice is she doesn't seem to appreciate if her guy wins, we all win.  Win-win is the goal, not she wins, everybody else loses.

[Oceander]

@Weird Tolkienish Figure  @Oceander

Nope. Oceander told me something along the line of "too bad this isn't FR or you would already be banned" earlier this morning when I busted in her/him/whatever whining about Bubbette! winning the popular vote and asked if she/he/sheit thinks America is a democracy or not. Never did get a straight out "yes" or "no" answer on that one.

@sneakypete

And now you've devolved to simply lying about me and what I've posted.  I have never said anything about how you're lucky this isn't TOS or you would have been banned already - I do not and never have supported banning (unlike Trumpists).  And I have already stated that I do not believe the US is a direct democracy: you're just too much in love with your own prejudices to both reading what other people actually post. 

What I have said repeatedly - and the reason for my statement in my signature line - is that Trumpists like you had better be damned glad the US is not a direct democracy because if it were they would have lost.

Try getting reality straight sometime; you might enjoy it. 

[sneakypete]

@Right_in_Virginia



He beat everyone for one reason. He was the only authentic anti-establishment candidate. All the other major candidate were owned by Marxist globalists with the possible exception of Ted Cruz. Noticed I said "possible", lots of evidence points to Cruz being a globalist too. The voters have had it with globalism, open borders and one way trade deals. The corrupt DC establishment is the disease and Trump is the cure.

Every other candidate running was more of the same.

@Right_in_Virginia

FWIW,I tend to THINK that Cruz HAS to dance right up to the Globalist Line in order to remain a mainstream alleged Republican candidate with any influence. I THINK that if he were free to express his own opinions he would be much more conservative than he appears to be.

Which is kind of why Trump won the primary. IMO,he was in the running for the ego boost and had nothing to lose,so he didn't HAVE to suck up to anybody. Then he actually won the damn thing and suddenly had to start taking it seriously.

I am HOPING that a lot of what we see as Trump sucking up the GOP establishment now is merely him "playing" them until after he has his cabinet picked and is sworn in. IF this is what he is doing,it is,IMHO, a VERY smart move because it gives him time to organize and actually be sworn in before he has to start putting out fires in his backfield. By then he will be in a position to punish those who try to harm him and reward those who want to work with him,and it will be too late to sabotage his cabinet and his agenda.

I may well be 180 degrees off,but I hope I'm not,and it doesn't cost anything to hope. Especially since there is nothing else we can do at this point.

[sneakypete]

 


Boy are you ever brainwashed.

@Weird Tolkienish Figure

Somebody is,anyway.

Since  you seem to be absolutely certain you know it all,how about tell us what you are going to do to change things to make America "America" again?

[sneakypete]

I agree.  Mr. Trump's election is now in the history books.  Those who supported him won and those who did not were disappointed.  Fairly straightforward, isn't it?

But with winning comes responsibility to deliver.

@Lando Lincoln

Very true,but what I am seeing more than anything else is the "anti-Trump at all costs,even if it means electing Hillary!" crowd still foaming at the mouth and getting wood from accusing Trump of "breaking the faith " by "doing this!" or "NOT doing THAT!".

Seems like SOME of these people  would realize he hasn't even been sworn in yet,and has no more authority to "Do THIS!" or "NOT do THAT!" than you and I have.

How about we let him get sworn in first and then give him 60 to 90 days to settle in and establish a pattern,and THEN go after him for the things he as ACTUALLY DONE WRONG?

BTW,Lando,NOT saying you are one of these people. Your post just seemed to be a good one to partially quote and add these comments to.

[Cyber Liberty]

@Lando Lincoln

Very true,but what I am seeing more than anything else is the "anti-Trump at all costs,even if it means electing Hillary!" crowd still foaming at the mouth and getting wood from accusing Trump of "breaking the faith " by "doing this!" or "NOT doing THAT!".

Seems like SOME of these people  would realize he hasn't even been sworn in yet,and has no more authority to "Do THIS!" or "NOT do THAT!" than you and I have.

How about we let him get sworn in first and then give him 60 to 90 days to settle in and establish a pattern,and THEN go after him for the things he as ACTUALLY DONE WRONG?

BTW,Lando,NOT saying you are one of these people. Your post just seemed to be a good one to partially quote and add these comments to.

The problem I see with this is the folks who are long-time Trump supporters are calling everybody who's not "on their side" losers and Never Trumps, and that smears a lot of people in the middle who went through this whole election without taking a side.  The wait-and-see people. 

Stop calling them losers and things will brighten up considerably.

[Right_in_Virginia]

@TomSea

I suspect you are right about this. She didn't campaign more because she thought she had it in the bag as much as she didn't campaign more because she was physically and mentally unable to campaign more. 

I think this is part of why Clinton didn't campaign more @sneakypete   But, she also didn't appear on talk shows (even the friendly ones) or talk to the press (again, even the friendly members).  This tells me their internal polling showed a drop in her favorability/approval ratings with each public exposure.   She had to rely on the media and surrogates to campaign for her because she was her own worst political enemy.