Board 8 > Obama's Legacy: FUCKING DEAD!!!!!

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4
Mr Lasastryke 05/09/18 11:30:35 AM #101:	it means a lot of things, but in the context of this discussion it means that hillary did get quite a lot of votes and that your notion that she got "fucking destroyed" by trump is pretty much bullshit. ross perot got fucking destroyed in the 1996 US election. hillary didn't. --- Geothermal terpsichorean ejectamenta <cite>Mr Lasastryke posted [p:901054252] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>it means a lot of things, but in the context of this discussion it means that hillary did get quite a lot of votes and that your notion that she got "fucking destroyed" by trump is pretty much bullshit. ross perot got fucking destroyed in the 1996 US election. hillary didn't.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 05/09/18 11:31:50 AM #102:	If you spend $2 billion making a movie and make $1 billion, is it impressive that you made a $1 billion movie? --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:901054306] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>If you spend $2 billion making a movie and make $1 billion, is it impressive that you made a $1 billion movie?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UInstinctGogeta 05/09/18 11:33:34 AM #103:	Mr Lasastryke posted... it means a lot of things, but in the context of this discussion it means that hillary did get quite a lot of votes and that your notion that she got "fucking destroyed" by trump is pretty much bullshit. ross perot got fucking destroyed in the 1996 US election. hillary didn't. She did.... ONLY EC matters. She could win popular vote by 53 million.... Means NOTHING if you lose EC. And she got trounced in that. <cite>UInstinctGogeta posted [p:901054383] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mr Lasastryke posted...</cite> <quote>it means a lot of things, but in the context of this discussion it means that hillary did get quite a lot of votes and that your notion that she got "fucking destroyed" by trump is pretty much bullshit. ross perot got fucking destroyed in the 1996 US election. hillary didn't.</quote> She did.... ONLY EC matters. She could win popular vote by 53 million.... Means NOTHING if you lose EC. And she got trounced in that.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mr Lasastryke 05/09/18 11:42:27 AM #104:	foolm0r0n posted... If you spend $2 billion making a movie and make $1 billion, is it impressive that you made a $1 billion movie? i'd say so, yeah. but MWC is arguing hillary spent $2 billion making a movie and made $10. --- Geothermal terpsichorean ejectamenta <cite>Mr Lasastryke posted [p:901054822] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote>If you spend $2 billion making a movie and make $1 billion, is it impressive that you made a $1 billion movie?</quote> i'd say so, yeah. but MWC is arguing hillary spent $2 billion making a movie and made $10.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
HanOfTheNekos 05/09/18 12:51:37 PM #105:	Lebron is the best basketball player ever --- "Bordate is a pretty shady place, what with the gangs, casinos, evil corporations and water park." - FAHtastic <cite>HanOfTheNekos posted [p:901058152] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>Lebron is the best basketball player ever</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LiquidOshawott 05/09/18 12:55:15 PM #106:	HanOfTheNekos posted... Lebron is the best basketball player ever Best 3 ever at least Would argue Kareem and MJ still better, maybe Duncan too --- I live on, THROUGH THIS SEASHELL! VI <cite>LiquidOshawott posted [p:901058343] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>HanOfTheNekos posted...</cite> <quote>Lebron is the best basketball player ever</quote> Best 3 ever at least Would argue Kareem and MJ still better, maybe Duncan too</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RySenkari 05/09/18 1:06:43 PM #107:	UInstinctGogeta posted... She could win popular vote by 53 million.... Means NOTHING if you lose EC. It means that the people of the country don't want Donald Trump. People are only putting up with Donald Trump because their daily lives are mostly okay. Panem et circenses and all that. --- This signature won't change until Chrono Trigger gets a re-release on a modern Nintendo console. <cite>RySenkari posted [p:901058920] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>UInstinctGogeta posted...</cite> <quote>She could win popular vote by 53 million.... Means NOTHING if you lose EC. </quote> It means that the people of the country don't want Donald Trump. People are only putting up with Donald Trump because their daily lives are mostly okay. Panem et circenses and all that.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 05/09/18 2:25:56 PM #108:	Mr Lasastryke posted... i'd say so, yeah. That's incredibly stupid and the mentality that makes people think Trump is a good business man Literally anyone, even a baby, could turn $2 billion into $1 billion --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:901063136] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mr Lasastryke posted...</cite> <quote>i'd say so, yeah.</quote> That's incredibly stupid and the mentality that makes people think Trump is a good business man Literally anyone, even a baby, could turn $2 billion into $1 billion</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SmartMuffin 05/09/18 2:48:15 PM #109:	I mean the actual relevant question is - what's the baseline # of votes any democratic presidential candidate could expect to receive - and how did Hillary do in comparison to that? (and the answer is, much worse) --- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://i.imgur.com/W66HUUy.jpg http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/ <cite>SmartMuffin posted [p:901064316] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>I mean the actual relevant question is - what's the baseline # of votes any democratic presidential candidate could expect to receive - and how did Hillary do in comparison to that? (and the answer is, much worse)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheRock1525 05/09/18 2:52:11 PM #110:	SmartMuffin posted... I mean the actual relevant question is - what's the baseline # of votes any democratic presidential candidate could expect to receive - and how did Hillary do in comparison to that? (and the answer is, much worse) I mean, Obama got 65.9 million in 2012 and Hillary got 65.8 million in 2016. I guess if you factor in population increase from 2012 to 2016 maybe it's awful? --- TheRock ~ I had a name, my father called me Blues. <cite>TheRock1525 posted [p:901064534] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>SmartMuffin posted...</cite> <quote>I mean the actual relevant question is - what's the baseline # of votes any democratic presidential candidate could expect to receive - and how did Hillary do in comparison to that? (and the answer is, much worse)</quote> I mean, Obama got 65.9 million in 2012 and Hillary got 65.8 million in 2016. I guess if you factor in population increase from 2012 to 2016 maybe it's awful?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SmartMuffin 05/09/18 2:55:34 PM #111:	I mean, Obama got 65.9 million in 2012 and Hillary got 65.8 million in 2016. I guess if you factor in population increase from 2012 to 2016 maybe it's awful? Yeah definitely. Population increase and the general anti-Trump sentiment. Does anybody out there legitimately believe that Hillary did better against Trump than any random semi-famous Democratic politician would have done? --- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://i.imgur.com/W66HUUy.jpg http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/ <cite>SmartMuffin posted [p:901064723] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><quote>I mean, Obama got 65.9 million in 2012 and Hillary got 65.8 million in 2016. I guess if you factor in population increase from 2012 to 2016 maybe it's awful?</quote> Yeah definitely. Population increase and the general anti-Trump sentiment. Does anybody out there legitimately believe that Hillary did better against Trump than any random semi-famous Democratic politician would have done?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
NFUN 05/09/18 2:57:04 PM #112:	what even is your argument --- Thus is our treaty written, thus is our agreement made. Thought is the arrow of time; memory never fades. What was asked is given; the price is paid. ARF <cite>NFUN posted [p:901064798] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>what even is your argument</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheRock1525 05/09/18 2:57:29 PM #113:	SmartMuffin posted... Does anybody out there legitimately believe that Hillary did better against Trump than any random semi-famous Democratic politician would have done? I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run. --- TheRock ~ I had a name, my father called me Blues. <cite>TheRock1525 posted [p:901064817] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>SmartMuffin posted...</cite> <quote>Does anybody out there legitimately believe that Hillary did better against Trump than any random semi-famous Democratic politician would have done? </quote> I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SmartMuffin 05/09/18 2:59:10 PM #114:	I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run. Sure they did, they just didn't win the primary. There's no reason to assume that primary voters necessarily select the best candidate to run, particularly against any specific opposition (when that is also unknown at the time). Also the DNC primary was rigged anyway. --- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://i.imgur.com/W66HUUy.jpg http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/ <cite>SmartMuffin posted [p:901064913] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><quote>I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run.</quote> Sure they did, they just didn't win the primary. There's no reason to assume that primary voters necessarily select the best candidate to run, particularly against any specific opposition (when that is also unknown at the time). Also the DNC primary was rigged anyway.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheRock1525 05/09/18 3:01:34 PM #115:	SmartMuffin posted... I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run. Sure they did, they just didn't win the primary. There's no reason to assume that primary voters necessarily select the best candidate to run, particularly against any specific opposition (when that is also unknown at the time). Also the DNC primary was rigged anyway. 0/3 --- TheRock ~ I had a name, my father called me Blues. <cite>TheRock1525 posted [p:901065029] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>SmartMuffin posted...</cite> <quote><quote>I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run.</quote> Sure they did, they just didn't win the primary. There's no reason to assume that primary voters necessarily select the best candidate to run, particularly against any specific opposition (when that is also unknown at the time). Also the DNC primary was rigged anyway.</quote> 0/3</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 05/09/18 3:07:57 PM #116:	TheRock1525 posted... I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run. You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:901065325] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run.</quote> You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 05/09/18 3:08:38 PM #117:	Hillary Clinton was following up 8 years of Democratic control of the presidency (which is a pretty big disadvantage). I also think that the conventional wisdom that Trump was an incredibly weak candidate who anyone else could have beaten is wrong (he's not the best candidate, and is certainly a fucking terrible president, but he had many advantages as a candidate like being able to make the media almost completely ignore actual policy discussion). --- Congrats to BKSheikah for winning the BYIG Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:901065348] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>Hillary Clinton was following up 8 years of Democratic control of the presidency (which is a pretty big disadvantage). I also think that the conventional wisdom that Trump was an incredibly weak candidate who anyone else could have beaten is wrong (he's not the best candidate, and is certainly a fucking terrible president, but he had many advantages as a candidate like being able to make the media almost completely ignore actual policy discussion).</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MoogleKupo141 05/09/18 3:09:53 PM #118:	TheRock1525 posted... SmartMuffin posted... Does anybody out there legitimately believe that Hillary did better against Trump than any random semi-famous Democratic politician would have done? I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run. uhhhhh Lincoln Chafee was right there and everyone fucked up by not voting for him --- For your BK_Sheikah00. At least Kupo has class and doesn't MESSAGE the people -Dr Pizza <cite>MoogleKupo141 posted [p:901065404] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SmartMuffin posted...</cite> <quote>Does anybody out there legitimately believe that Hillary did better against Trump than any random semi-famous Democratic politician would have done? </quote> I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run.</quote> uhhhhh Lincoln Chafee was right there and everyone fucked up by not voting for him</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheRock1525 05/09/18 3:24:49 PM #119:	foolm0r0n posted... TheRock1525 posted... I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run. You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate Of those that decided to run? Yeah. --- TheRock ~ I had a name, my father called me Blues. <cite>TheRock1525 posted [p:901066127] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run.</quote> You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate</quote> Of those that decided to run? Yeah.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 05/09/18 3:26:52 PM #120:	Other Trump advantages: A continuous stream of scandals prevents any one scandal from really sinking in (possibly with a few exceptions like the Access Hollywood tape) vs Hillary's handful of overblown scandals crystallizing into the word "emails" An immunity from the standards applied to any other candidate (e.g. no one ever makes Trump demonstrate that he actually understands even the very basics of any issue (which he almost never does), he lies constantly but those lies are often framed as disagreements or mistakes instead of being explicitly named lies like they should be, etc). Basically, Trump was able to redefine the arena to be exactly the one in which all of his deep flaws could be most overlooked and all of Hillary's strengths (e.g. deep policy expertise) could be ignored. Definitely possible that Bernie would have had an easier time fighting on his terms, but none of the other 16 Republicans could figure out how to do it either. --- Congrats to BKSheikah for winning the BYIG Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:901066232] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>Other Trump advantages: A continuous stream of scandals prevents any one scandal from really sinking in (possibly with a few exceptions like the Access Hollywood tape) vs Hillary's handful of overblown scandals crystallizing into the word "emails" An immunity from the standards applied to any other candidate (e.g. no one ever makes Trump demonstrate that he actually understands even the very basics of any issue (which he almost never does), he lies constantly but those lies are often framed as disagreements or mistakes instead of being explicitly named lies like they should be, etc). Basically, Trump was able to redefine the arena to be exactly the one in which all of his deep flaws could be most overlooked and all of Hillary's strengths (e.g. deep policy expertise) could be ignored. Definitely possible that Bernie would have had an easier time fighting on his terms, but none of the other 16 Republicans could figure out how to do it either.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChaosTonyV4 05/09/18 3:54:40 PM #121:	TheRock1525 posted... foolm0r0n posted... TheRock1525 posted... I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run. You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate Of those that decided to run? Yeah. Wow. --- Phantom Dust. "I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted [p:901067709] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run.</quote> You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate</quote> Of those that decided to run? Yeah.</quote> Wow.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheRock1525 05/09/18 3:59:37 PM #122:	ChaosTonyV4 posted... TheRock1525 posted... foolm0r0n posted... TheRock1525 posted... I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run. You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate Of those that decided to run? Yeah. Wow. Yes, thank you for your incredulity. "Omg Bernie would have totally won even though he couldn't win the primary among the group that actually likes socialists." --- TheRock ~ I had a name, my father called me Blues. <cite>TheRock1525 posted [p:901067958] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run.</quote> You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate</quote> Of those that decided to run? Yeah.</quote> Wow.</quote> Yes, thank you for your incredulity. "Omg Bernie would have totally won even though he couldn't win the primary among the group that actually likes socialists."</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 05/09/18 3:59:53 PM #123:	LordoftheMorons posted... A continuous stream of scandals prevents any one scandal from really sinking in (possibly with a few exceptions like the Access Hollywood tape) vs Hillary's handful of overblown scandals crystallizing into the word "emails" There were tons of scandals that the opposition could've used to destroy Trump. But they all would've involved skewering Hillary too since it all involved his long history with her. Trump's biggest marketing weakness was that the was cut from the exact same cloth and lifelong friends and business partners with the Clintons. But the democrats wanted so badly to separate Hillary from Trump that they didn't realize they were nullifying Trump's main weakness. (Or, from another perspective, they did realize this.) LordoftheMorons posted... but none of the other 16 Republicans could figure out how to do it either. Ah yes, the 16 sharpest conservative minds in America all failed, so Trump really must have had a good campaign. This is the fundamental problem with modern politics. Only the absolute dregs of society are willing to dedicate their lives to this crap. Everyone else is living their life and actually doing work . So when you end up with a race between a bunch of politicians, at BEST you're gonna get the best-of-the-worst. If you're lucky maybe 1 or 2 end up actually being good people. But there are far more than 1 or 2 offices to fill. It's the basic pigeonhole principle that guarantees the vast majority of political offices will be filled with garbage people. And even with that in mind, Hillary STILL wasn't the best Democrat who ran. --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:901067977] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>LordoftheMorons posted...</cite> <quote>A continuous stream of scandals prevents any one scandal from really sinking in (possibly with a few exceptions like the Access Hollywood tape) vs Hillary's handful of overblown scandals crystallizing into the word "emails"</quote> There were tons of scandals that the opposition could've used to destroy Trump. But they all would've involved skewering Hillary too since it all involved his long history with her. Trump's biggest marketing weakness was that the was cut from the exact same cloth and lifelong friends and business partners with the Clintons. But the democrats wanted so badly to separate Hillary from Trump that they didn't realize they were nullifying Trump's main weakness. (Or, from another perspective, they did realize this.) <cite>LordoftheMorons posted...</cite> <quote>but none of the other 16 Republicans could figure out how to do it either.</quote> Ah yes, the 16 sharpest conservative minds in America all failed, so Trump really must have had a good campaign. This is the fundamental problem with modern politics. Only the absolute dregs of society are willing to dedicate their lives to this crap. Everyone else is living their life and actually doing work . So when you end up with a race between a bunch of politicians, at BEST you're gonna get the best-of-the-worst. If you're lucky maybe 1 or 2 end up actually being good people. But there are far more than 1 or 2 offices to fill. It's the basic pigeonhole principle that guarantees the vast majority of political offices will be filled with garbage people. And even with that in mind, Hillary STILL wasn't the best Democrat who ran.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChaosTonyV4 05/09/18 4:33:57 PM #124:	TheRock1525 posted... ChaosTonyV4 posted... TheRock1525 posted... foolm0r0n posted... TheRock1525 posted... I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run. You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate Of those that decided to run? Yeah. Wow. Yes, thank you for your incredulity. "Omg Bernie would have totally won even though he couldn't win the primary among the group that actually likes socialists." Setting aside all the nuance you're stripping and political strategy you're ignoring, what you're basically saying is "Donald Trump was unbeatable" in an election where he lost the popular vote. --- Phantom Dust. "I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted [p:901069844] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run.</quote> You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate</quote> Of those that decided to run? Yeah.</quote> Wow.</quote> Yes, thank you for your incredulity. "Omg Bernie would have totally won even though he couldn't win the primary among the group that actually likes socialists."</quote> Setting aside all the nuance you're stripping and political strategy you're ignoring, what you're basically saying is "Donald Trump was unbeatable" in an election where he lost the popular vote.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 05/09/18 4:43:28 PM #125:	TheRock1525 posted... even though he couldn't win the primary among the group that actually likes socialists You like socialists? --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:901070363] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>even though he couldn't win the primary among the group that actually likes socialists</quote> You like socialists?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SmartMuffin 05/09/18 4:48:57 PM #126:	It's not even about Hillary being a bad or good candidate in some sort of theoretical absolute sense. It's that she was uniquely bad to compete against Trump specifically. Any Democratic senator drawn at random would probably have done better. --- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://i.imgur.com/W66HUUy.jpg http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/ <cite>SmartMuffin posted [p:901070654] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>It's not even about Hillary being a bad or good candidate in some sort of theoretical absolute sense. It's that she was uniquely bad to compete against Trump specifically. Any Democratic senator drawn at random would probably have done better.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kenri 05/09/18 4:58:01 PM #127:	Being a good candidate doesn't mean shit if people don't vote for you, and being a bad candidate doesn't mean shit if people do vote for you. I don't know why any of you are bothering to discuss candidate quality as if it's at all relevant to the actual results. Voter quality, on the other hand...! --- Congrats to BKSheikah, who knows more about years than anyone else. <cite>Kenri posted [p:901071169] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>Being a good candidate doesn't mean shit if people don't vote for you, and being a bad candidate doesn't mean shit if people do vote for you. I don't know why any of you are bothering to discuss candidate quality as if it's at all relevant to the actual results. Voter quality, on the other hand...!</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SmartMuffin 05/09/18 4:59:01 PM #128:	Voter quality, on the other hand...! http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/645/713/888.jpg --- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://i.imgur.com/W66HUUy.jpg http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/ <cite>SmartMuffin posted [p:901071225] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><quote>Voter quality, on the other hand...!</quote> http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/645/713/888.jpg</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kenri 05/09/18 5:03:55 PM #129:	SmartMuffin posted... Voter quality, on the other hand...! http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/645/713/888.jpg Essentially the argument of people who say "these candidates who got 60 million votes each are both terrible", yes. --- Congrats to BKSheikah, who knows more about years than anyone else. <cite>Kenri posted [p:901071471] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>SmartMuffin posted...</cite> <quote><quote>Voter quality, on the other hand...!</quote> http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/645/713/888.jpg</quote> Essentially the argument of people who say "these candidates who got 60 million votes each are both terrible", yes.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheRock1525 05/09/18 5:04:31 PM #130:	foolm0r0n posted... TheRock1525 posted... even though he couldn't win the primary among the group that actually likes socialists You like socialists? The people voting in the Democratic primary didn't seem to. --- TheRock ~ I had a name, my father called me Blues. <cite>TheRock1525 posted [p:901071500] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>even though he couldn't win the primary among the group that actually likes socialists</quote> You like socialists?</quote> The people voting in the Democratic primary didn't seem to.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheRock1525 05/09/18 5:06:19 PM #131:	ChaosTonyV4 posted... TheRock1525 posted... ChaosTonyV4 posted... TheRock1525 posted... foolm0r0n posted... TheRock1525 posted... I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run. You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate Of those that decided to run? Yeah. Wow. Yes, thank you for your incredulity. "Omg Bernie would have totally won even though he couldn't win the primary among the group that actually likes socialists." Setting aside all the nuance you're stripping and political strategy you're ignoring, what you're basically saying is "Donald Trump was unbeatable" in an election where he lost the popular vote. No, I'm saying "Donald Trump was unbeatable compared to the field of Democratic candidates that opted to run." I'm sure there's a ton of other Democratic candidates that could have beaten Donald, like a Joe Biden, but once again, none of them decided to run. --- TheRock ~ I had a name, my father called me Blues. <cite>TheRock1525 posted [p:901071585] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run.</quote> You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate</quote> Of those that decided to run? Yeah.</quote> Wow.</quote> Yes, thank you for your incredulity. "Omg Bernie would have totally won even though he couldn't win the primary among the group that actually likes socialists."</quote> Setting aside all the nuance you're stripping and political strategy you're ignoring, what you're basically saying is "Donald Trump was unbeatable" in an election where he lost the popular vote.</quote> No, I'm saying "Donald Trump was unbeatable compared to the field of Democratic candidates that opted to run." I'm sure there's a ton of other Democratic candidates that could have beaten Donald, like a Joe Biden, but once again, none of them decided to run.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 05/09/18 5:09:42 PM #132:	Honestly, if the Democrats didn't nominate anyone and said, if we win our electors will choose a Democratic senator at random and vote for that person in the electoral college, they would have had a good shot. They chose a lightning rod of a candidate and paid the price. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:901071758] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>Honestly, if the Democrats didn't nominate anyone and said, if we win our electors will choose a Democratic senator at random and vote for that person in the electoral college, they would have had a good shot. They chose a lightning rod of a candidate and paid the price.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MariaTaylor 05/09/18 5:15:15 PM #133:	tag great stuff so far --- ~* Now I only see your dull imposter ~* https://i.imgur.com/tdhOSKc.png <cite>MariaTaylor posted [p:901072034] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>tag great stuff so far</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChaosTonyV4 05/09/18 5:15:18 PM #134:	TheRock1525 posted... ChaosTonyV4 posted... TheRock1525 posted... ChaosTonyV4 posted... TheRock1525 posted... foolm0r0n posted... TheRock1525 posted... I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run. You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate Of those that decided to run? Yeah. Wow. Yes, thank you for your incredulity. "Omg Bernie would have totally won even though he couldn't win the primary among the group that actually likes socialists." Setting aside all the nuance you're stripping and political strategy you're ignoring, what you're basically saying is "Donald Trump was unbeatable" in an election where he lost the popular vote. No, I'm saying "Donald Trump was unbeatable compared to the field of Democratic candidates that opted to run." I'm sure there's a ton of other Democratic candidates that could have beaten Donald, like a Joe Biden, but once again, none of them decided to run. Basically, what Smuffin said above. Hillary was particularly ill-suited to go against Trump. She basically nullified his weaknesses (scandals) by being plagued with her own. The idea that "if you lose the primary you'd definitely lose the general" is so short-sighted, especially when you consider that states like Michigan and Wisconsin were easily won by Bernie. --- Phantom Dust. "I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted [p:901072037] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, if there was a candidate out there better than Clinton, they didn't opt to run.</quote> You really think Hillary was the best Democrat candidate</quote> Of those that decided to run? Yeah.</quote> Wow.</quote> Yes, thank you for your incredulity. "Omg Bernie would have totally won even though he couldn't win the primary among the group that actually likes socialists."</quote> Setting aside all the nuance you're stripping and political strategy you're ignoring, what you're basically saying is "Donald Trump was unbeatable" in an election where he lost the popular vote.</quote> No, I'm saying "Donald Trump was unbeatable compared to the field of Democratic candidates that opted to run." I'm sure there's a ton of other Democratic candidates that could have beaten Donald, like a Joe Biden, but once again, none of them decided to run.</quote> Basically, what Smuffin said above. Hillary was particularly ill-suited to go against Trump. She basically nullified his weaknesses (scandals) by being plagued with her own. The idea that "if you lose the primary you'd definitely lose the general" is so short-sighted, especially when you consider that states like Michigan and Wisconsin were easily won by Bernie.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 05/09/18 5:20:04 PM #135:	TheRock1525 posted... The people voting in the Democratic primary didn't seem to. So do democrats like socialists or not/ --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:901072254] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>The people voting in the Democratic primary didn't seem to.</quote> So do democrats like socialists or not/</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 05/09/18 5:22:37 PM #136:	The idea that Donald Trump was unbeatable is reflective of the problem with the Democratic Party. Jennifer Palmieri, fairly high up on the campaign, recently put out a book, and in an interview, said that if she were to do it again she would just work even harder, and maybe devote more resources to Arizona, Georgia, and Texas. She won't admit that Trump is a political genius, instead saying he's dumb, but also won't admit to making any mistakes. You really can't have it both ways. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:901072369] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>The idea that Donald Trump was unbeatable is reflective of the problem with the Democratic Party. Jennifer Palmieri, fairly high up on the campaign, recently put out a book, and in an interview, said that if she were to do it again she would just work even harder, and maybe devote more resources to Arizona, Georgia, and Texas. She won't admit that Trump is a political genius, instead saying he's dumb, but also won't admit to making any mistakes. You really can't have it both ways.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 05/09/18 5:22:40 PM #137:	ChaosTonyV4 posted... She basically nullified his weaknesses (scandals) by being plagued with her own. Her scandals were either super overblown (e.g. private server) or things that shouldn't have been scandals at all but were made out to be nefarious (e.g. Podesta emails). The same thing could have been done to any Democratic candidate regardless of whether or not there were real scandals because the media was desperate to be seen as unbiased (which, ironically, made them biased against Trump's opponents). ChaosTonyV4 posted... The idea that "if you lose the primary you'd definitely lose the general" is so short-sighted, especially when you consider that states like Michigan and Wisconsin were easily won by Bernie. He lost PA and FL though (And I'm not saying he definitely wouldn't have won, just that it's definitely not obvious that he would have). --- Congrats to BKSheikah for winning the BYIG Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:901072374] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted...</cite> <quote>She basically nullified his weaknesses (scandals) by being plagued with her own. </quote> Her scandals were either super overblown (e.g. private server) or things that shouldn't have been scandals at all but were made out to be nefarious (e.g. Podesta emails). The same thing could have been done to any Democratic candidate regardless of whether or not there were real scandals because the media was desperate to be seen as unbiased (which, ironically, made them biased against Trump's opponents). <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted...</cite> <quote>The idea that "if you lose the primary you'd definitely lose the general" is so short-sighted, especially when you consider that states like Michigan and Wisconsin were easily won by Bernie.</quote> He lost PA and FL though (And I'm not saying he definitely wouldn't have won, just that it's definitely not obvious that he would have).</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SmartMuffin 05/09/18 5:29:06 PM #138:	LordoftheMorons posted... Her scandals were either super overblown (e.g. private server) or things that shouldn't have been scandals at all but were made out to be nefarious (e.g. Podesta emails). The same thing could have been done to any Democratic candidate regardless of whether or not there were real scandals because the media was desperate to be seen as unbiased (which, ironically, made them biased against Trump's opponents). This wasn't the main issue. The main issue is that Trump ran on a platform of overturning the status quo, and you can't possibly get any more "status quo" than Hillary. MAYBE Biden would be equally status quo, but he's also a lot more personally likeable than Hillary. Hillary was bad on every dimension. Represented business as usual, personally unlikeable, and full of scandal. --- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://i.imgur.com/W66HUUy.jpg http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/ <cite>SmartMuffin posted [p:901072709] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>LordoftheMorons posted...</cite> <quote>Her scandals were either super overblown (e.g. private server) or things that shouldn't have been scandals at all but were made out to be nefarious (e.g. Podesta emails). The same thing could have been done to any Democratic candidate regardless of whether or not there were real scandals because the media was desperate to be seen as unbiased (which, ironically, made them biased against Trump's opponents). </quote> This wasn't the main issue. The main issue is that Trump ran on a platform of overturning the status quo, and you can't possibly get any more "status quo" than Hillary. MAYBE Biden would be equally status quo, but he's also a lot more personally likeable than Hillary. Hillary was bad on every dimension. Represented business as usual, personally unlikeable, and full of scandal.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheRock1525 05/09/18 5:29:24 PM #139:	foolm0r0n posted... TheRock1525 posted... The people voting in the Democratic primary didn't seem to. So do democrats like socialists or not/ Some do, more didn't. As opposed to conservatives, where some didn't and others didn't as well. --- TheRock ~ I had a name, my father called me Blues. <cite>TheRock1525 posted [p:901072722] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>The people voting in the Democratic primary didn't seem to.</quote> So do democrats like socialists or not/</quote> Some do, more didn't. As opposed to conservatives, where some didn't and others didn't as well.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 05/09/18 5:37:20 PM #140:	It may be a bit early for this, but Obama's long term legacy may end up being the collapse of the Democratic Party outside of 12ish deep blue states in offices below that of the President. Those 1000+ lost seats in state legislatures, a Supreme Court lost for a generation, etc, covered up for a while by moderate success in winning the Presidency. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:901073147] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>It may be a bit early for this, but Obama's long term legacy may end up being the collapse of the Democratic Party outside of 12ish deep blue states in offices below that of the President. Those 1000+ lost seats in state legislatures, a Supreme Court lost for a generation, etc, covered up for a while by moderate success in winning the Presidency.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ngamer64 05/09/18 5:37:50 PM #141:	His legacy will never be stronger than it will a year from now when we see where these 2017/2018 decisions land us. --- BKSheikah dominated even The Show hosts in 2017, wow! board8.wikia.com \| thengamer.com/xstats <cite>Ngamer64 posted [p:901073174] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>His legacy will never be stronger than it will a year from now when we see where these 2017/2018 decisions land us.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChaosTonyV4 05/09/18 5:48:49 PM #142:	LordoftheMorons posted... Her scandals were either super overblown (e.g. private server) or things that shouldn't have been scandals at all but were made out to be nefarious (e.g. Podesta emails). The same thing could have been done to any Democratic candidate regardless of whether or not there were real scandals because the media was desperate to be seen as unbiased (which, ironically, made them biased against Trump's opponents). I agree with you completely that the scandals are overblown, but outside of George Soros or Obama, no one else on the planet has as many conspiracies and scandals attached to them. There's just no way a person can honestly say "the same thing could have been done to any Democrat", because her scandals didn't just spring up in 2016, they've been around for years, and they persist. --- Phantom Dust. "I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted [p:901073710] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>LordoftheMorons posted...</cite> <quote>Her scandals were either super overblown (e.g. private server) or things that shouldn't have been scandals at all but were made out to be nefarious (e.g. Podesta emails). The same thing could have been done to any Democratic candidate regardless of whether or not there were real scandals because the media was desperate to be seen as unbiased (which, ironically, made them biased against Trump's opponents). </quote> I agree with you completely that the scandals are overblown, but outside of George Soros or Obama, no one else on the planet has as many conspiracies and scandals attached to them. There's just no way a person can honestly say "the same thing could have been done to any Democrat", because her scandals didn't just spring up in 2016, they've been around for years, and they persist.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kenri 05/09/18 5:50:41 PM #143:	SmartMuffin posted... Hillary was bad on every dimension. Represented business as usual, personally unlikeable, and full of scandal. All of this describes Trump as well and he's president right now so I think your theory needs work. --- Congrats to BKSheikah, who knows more about years than anyone else. <cite>Kenri posted [p:901073806] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>SmartMuffin posted...</cite> <quote>Hillary was bad on every dimension. Represented business as usual, personally unlikeable, and full of scandal.</quote> All of this describes Trump as well and he's president right now so I think your theory needs work.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChaosTonyV4 05/09/18 5:53:17 PM #144:	Kenri posted... SmartMuffin posted... Hillary was bad on every dimension. Represented business as usual, personally unlikeable, and full of scandal. All of this describes Trump as well and he's president right now so I think your theory needs work. "Republicans fall in line. Democrats fall in love." Them being the same is exactly the problem. Edit: And to be clear, I'm not saying Trump and Hillary are/were equally bad, but in general, this old adage holds true. --- Phantom Dust. "I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted [p:901073928] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kenri posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SmartMuffin posted...</cite> <quote>Hillary was bad on every dimension. Represented business as usual, personally unlikeable, and full of scandal.</quote> All of this describes Trump as well and he's president right now so I think your theory needs work.</quote> "Republicans fall in line. Democrats fall in love." Them being the same is exactly the problem. Edit: And to be clear, I'm not saying Trump and Hillary are/were equally bad, but in general, this old adage holds true.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SmartMuffin 05/09/18 5:56:24 PM #145:	Trump wasn't status quo at all. The media loudly yelled every day about how abnormal and not like a normal politician he was (because they thought that would hurt him, because theyre really fucking stupid) --- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://i.imgur.com/W66HUUy.jpg http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/ <cite>SmartMuffin posted [p:901074062] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>Trump wasn't status quo at all. The media loudly yelled every day about how abnormal and not like a normal politician he was (because they thought that would hurt him, because theyre really fucking stupid)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 05/09/18 6:00:50 PM #146:	Hillary has a lot of positives (e.g. she is really fucking smart). Trump has literally none (as a person). It is true that normally positive things like knowing anything relevant to the job you're seeking are not currently in vogue, though...! --- Congrats to BKSheikah for winning the BYIG Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:901074274] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>Hillary has a lot of positives (e.g. she is really fucking smart). Trump has literally none (as a person). It is true that normally positive things like knowing anything relevant to the job you're seeking are not currently in vogue, though...!</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 05/09/18 6:09:55 PM #147:	TheRock1525 posted... Some do, more didn't. So why is it so pathetic that Bernie didn't win? --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:901074663] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>Some do, more didn't.</quote> So why is it so pathetic that Bernie didn't win?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SmartMuffin 05/09/18 6:10:35 PM #148:	Not smart enough to campaign in Michigan, xfd --- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://i.imgur.com/W66HUUy.jpg http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/ <cite>SmartMuffin posted [p:901074692] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote>Not smart enough to campaign in Michigan, xfd</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 05/09/18 6:15:07 PM #149:	SmartMuffin posted... Trump wasn't status quo at all. The media loudly yelled every day about how abnormal and not like a normal politician he was (because they thought that would hurt him, because theyre really fucking stupid) Are you talking just about marketing right now or do you think media defines reality? Trump is probably the 1 person more status quo than Hillary. Bernie was winning on that platform. But everyone else's "attacks" against Trump (especially from Hillary) were specifically about how completely different he was from everyone, which had literally only positive effects for his marketing. It was so perfect that it's not unreasonable to believe it was all a concerted effort to get Trump elected. But never attribute to malice what could be stupidity, etc. --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:901074864] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>SmartMuffin posted...</cite> <quote>Trump wasn't status quo at all. The media loudly yelled every day about how abnormal and not like a normal politician he was (because they thought that would hurt him, because theyre really fucking stupid)</quote> Are you talking just about marketing right now or do you think media defines reality? Trump is probably the 1 person more status quo than Hillary. Bernie was winning on that platform. But everyone else's "attacks" against Trump (especially from Hillary) were specifically about how completely different he was from everyone, which had literally only positive effects for his marketing. It was so perfect that it's not unreasonable to believe it was all a concerted effort to get Trump elected. But never attribute to malice what could be stupidity, etc.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kenri 05/09/18 6:19:30 PM #150:	SmartMuffin posted... Trump wasn't status quo at all. The media loudly yelled every day about how abnormal and not like a normal politician he was (because they thought that would hurt him, because theyre really fucking stupid) And did that overturn the status quo? What about anything else Trump's done? (I'd also argue that the media absolutely yelled that about Obama and Bush too so really it means nothing.) --- Congrats to BKSheikah, who knows more about years than anyone else. <cite>Kenri posted [p:901075057] in Obama's Le... [t:76589581]...</cite> <quote><cite>SmartMuffin posted...</cite> <quote>Trump wasn't status quo at all. The media loudly yelled every day about how abnormal and not like a normal politician he was (because they thought that would hurt him, because theyre really fucking stupid)</quote> And did that overturn the status quo? What about anything else Trump's done? (I'd also argue that the media absolutely yelled that about Obama and Bush too so really it means nothing.)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4

Board 8 > Obama's Legacy: FUCKING DEAD!!!!! (+) Yeah! (+)

Board 8 > Obama's Legacy: FUCKING DEAD!!!!!