dagblog - Comments for "Here's how we lose next time"

I think it's important not to

ocean-kat — Sat, 06 Jan 2018 07:04:42 +0000

In reply to No, she lost - which is why

I think it's important not to forget that Hillary lost only because of the unusual quirk of American "democracy." Fixed it for you is a common joke in the gamer community. It's not really meant as a correction nor does in mean you're wrong. I thought you played some MMORPG occasionally as I do so I'd thought you get it.

No, she lost - which is why

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 05 Jan 2018 19:35:05 +0000

In reply to Perhaps in 100 years we'll

No, she lost - which is why we have the jackass in the Oval Office now.

Yeah, technically she got more popular vote, she was more persuasive, they cheated, yadda, yadda - but we don't have our candidate in the office despite "winning", so we lose. Similar bullshit happened in 2000. Maybe 2004, who knows, and of course in a variety of down-ticket races they're cheating 24x7. They will fuck us every time we let them. Okay, if you want to say "we won, so we demand our fucking president's slot", that's great. Fight on. If it's just an asterisk on the historical presidential scorecard, not interested.

just a ditto on how it's good

artappraiser — Fri, 05 Jan 2018 19:28:13 +0000

In reply to Hey KGB, good to see you,

just a ditto on how it's good to see the old kgb nomiker again

Perhaps in 100 years we'll

ocean-kat — Fri, 05 Jan 2018 11:01:16 +0000

In reply to Hey KGB, good to see you,

Perhaps in 100 years we'll finally accept that we did run the best candidate we could and despite a wide variety of criminal and unfair social factors and some unforced errors, she still won.

Fixed it for you.

Hey KGB, good to see you,

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 05 Jan 2018 09:24:00 +0000

In reply to Wait ... are you saying

Hey KGB, good to see you, though sorry I have to then trash your opinion. Hillary *leap-frog* Joe? well, Joe could have actually put his hat in the ring instead of playing Hamlet Mario Cuomo-style (okay, he'd run a few times and never impressed anyone). Aside from Maureen Dowd pimping a Joe-with-son bedside confessional and then trying to decide like Michael Bloomberg whether the fans really really really wanted him to join the fight. LIke for all this talk about Hillary feeling anointed & presumptuous, I always got that impression more from *others* - like she was taking the nomination away from the rightful party heir of Obama or Sanders or Biden or flirtatiously Bloomberg or others who were going to save us from the supposed (and very poorly defined) "dynasty". How many times did I read over the last 3 years how HIllary should just quit, go away, wasn't needed - even after she largely went away.

Now, after all that blabbing, here are 2 graphs showing why us "centrist faithful" (will you people ever tire of this fucking nonsense pejorative framing - did you intentionally leave out "neoliberal"? - is Biden something other than centrist and pro-insurance companies and weak on feminism and 'pro-war' and all sorts of other selective blindness?) went with the centrist favorite. Because as of June 2015, popular Joe had a 45% negative rating and 40% favorable, and that's while not taking chances and just being the faithful White House puppy dog - his popularity only improved because his son died and he played that up to maximum tearjerking intensity. Back in reality, the lukewarm Obama Administration was one of the biggest anchors around Hillary's neck, but somehow this centrist establishment guy who helped accommodate all this Republican legislative obstruction and built his career on not sticking his neck out and being nice to everyone and enabled Obama's go-it-slowism is going to push through liberal causes and champion the Democratic Party better than Hillary? And yeah, I liked it that she pissed the right off, and knew much of this "unfavorability" was because she was a lightning rod for right wing craziness like 9 Benghazi hearings. Is that getting any better without her? Oh, they're launching another Hillary email probe. Would that benefit Joe somehow? Hardly, they'd drag him in with it via 6 degrees of crazy, and give him a special PizzaGate topping to boot.

Oh, 1 more thing - did I mention that Joe's shit at fundraising? Per this article, while Hillary had raised $45 million in her first quarter, Joe's exploration committee task was to raise $3 million by end of summer. He instead raised less than $1 million. Perhaps in 100 years we'll finally accept that we did run the best candidate we could and through a wide variety of criminal and unfair social factors and some unforced errors, she barely lost.

Wait ... are you saying

Anonymous kgb — Fri, 05 Jan 2018 07:14:44 +0000

In reply to Here's how we lose next time

Wait ... are you saying Democrats plan to run Roy Moore next cycle? If you swap out a few names here and there, this could totally have been written by a Trump supporter bitter about that loss.

I don't necessarily think Franken *should* have resigned, but I absolutely understand why he did ,,, and respect his choice. The accusations against Franken weren't unfounded, they were just comparatively trivial. But you're running against a party with a president who has a dozen-odd major harassment accusations (including intentionally walking in on naked underage girls) and recently thought it would be a good idea to endorse a guy who, most salaciously, fondled 14 year-old ... *after* it was known he groped 14 year olds.

The only way to have a contrast is to actually hold your own side accountable. Franken gets it. Clearly, the centrist faithful still haven't ... even after losing to TRUMP (oh yeah, you guys lost to TRUMP ... hahahahahahhahahaha, btw. That's what you get for letting Hillary leap-frog the very-popular incumbent Biden. Well played, all.)

Happy New Year!