Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, November 01, 2017

On n the morning of October 5th, President Trump was on one of his Twitter rants from the White House, denying as "fake news" an NBC report that his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, had called him a "moron" and threatened to resign. Elsewhere in Washington, the drama over whether Tillerson was actually on his way out threatened to overwhelm other news stories for a second straight day. But, when I arrived at the townhouse of Stanley Greenberg, the veteran Democratic strategist, on Capitol Hill, later that morning, it was not the distractions of the Trump White House that had him worked up. Greenberg was still fuming about Hillary Clinton.

Clinton was guilty of "malpractice" in how she conducted her 2016 Presidential campaign, Greenberg told me.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Even worse, he said, Democrats were repeating the same political mistakes a year later. "Look at Virginia right now," Greenberg said, as soon as we sat down in his second-floor office. "We have a candidate" -- Ralph Northam, the Democratic gubernatorial nominee -- "running as Hillary Clinton. He is running on the same kind of issues, and has the same kind of view of the world. It's the Republicans who talk about the economy, not the Democrats."

This was the approach that doomed Clinton against Trump. The electorate was angry in 2016 and remains angry now, Greenberg said, and Northam, a Norfolk doctor, didn't get it. Neither did Clinton and the team of Obama veterans who staffed her Brooklyn headquarters. "If you live in the metro areas with the élites, you don't wake up angry about what's happening in people's lives," Greenberg said.

His rant was notable for a variety of reasons, not least because Greenberg was the pollster who helped Bill Clinton win the White House in 1992, and he has been a participant in every Democratic nominee's Presidential campaign since, including Hillary Clinton's. His criticism illuminates an urgent question for the Democratic Party, not just in next week's governor's race in Virginia but in the midterm elections of 2018 and beyond.

Could Trump, as deeply polarizing and unpopular as he is, even be reëlected?

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

This, to me, is the most important issue on the table right now, not the collusion investigation or the sexual harassment stories. 2018 elections are one year away and we are mindlessly focused on tax evasion and unpaid campaign volunteers pleading guilty to lying to the FBI.

If we are going to get rid of Hair Fuhrer in 2020 we need to focus on what is important---the Midterm races and building towards recapturing all we lost in Statehouses, Governorships and Congress over the past 9+ years.

#1 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 03:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Greenberg, who was instrumental in getting Bill Clinton elected in 1992 and was Hillary's inner circle in 2008 and 2016, had this to say:

Greenberg and other prominent Democrats still furious about last year's Clinton campaign think it's entirely possible, unless the Party figures out, and fast, a way to tackle the problem that sealed Clinton's fate in 2016: how to appeal to the disaffected white working-class voters who provided Trump's unlikely win a year ago.

"That debate," Greenberg told me, "which would have been pushed off had she won, is immediate."

Here was Bill Clinton's pollster accusing Hillary Clinton's campaign of strategic errors, mismanagement, and failure to heed the advice of him and others to appeal to the Party's traditional working-class voters in the Midwest. Compounding the errors, Clinton's team conducted no state polls in the final three weeks of the campaign, relying instead on flawed data analytics to predict turnout and the vote. As a result, it didn't even know that final disaster loomed. "Malpractice and arrogance contributed mightily to the election of Donald Trump," Greenberg concluded.

Greenberg disclosed in the piece that he was speaking as more than an outside critic. He had served as "invited noodge" throughout the 2016 campaign, Greenberg revealed, secretly critiquing Clinton's speeches for months at her request, pushing for more attention to be paid to the economic struggles of the white working class, and advising her campaign chairman, John Podesta. In our interview, Greenberg elaborated, saying Podesta had sought his counsel after it became clear that Podesta was failing to sway Clinton's campaign manager, Robby Mook -- a young, data-driven veteran of Barack Obama's two winning Presidential runs -- whose strategy was to focus on turning out loyal Obama voters rather than persuading wavering Rust Belt voters. "It came out of his needing to win the argument internally," Greenberg told me. Both Podesta and Greenberg had worked for the Bill Clinton White House, where Podesta served as chief of staff, and had been allies ever since.

#2 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 04:01 PM | Reply

#1 It's not going to happen. Zed and Donnerboy believe I might be a Russian agent.

#3 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2017-11-01 04:02 PM | Reply

To do that, you need to win back the Caucasians. You won't, especially when the DNC is deliberately going out of its way to SHUN white people:

townhall.com

Keep up the good work. Identity Politics Rules - right, guys?

#4 | Posted by cookfish at 2017-11-01 04:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

tRump is that you?

#5 | Posted by fresno500 at 2017-11-01 04:03 PM | Reply

Zed and Donnerboy pray to the same gargoyle every night, but every morning, President Trump is still there.

#6 | Posted by cookfish at 2017-11-01 04:04 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Does this sound familiar...? I see it every day here on the DR:

Recently, another former Bill Clinton adviser, the onetime White House political director Doug Sosnik, published an op-ed in the Washington Post arguing that, as the headline put it, "Trump is on track to win reelection." Sosnik contended that Democrats needed to immediately start figuring out how to appeal to voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, where a shift in votes for Trump won him the election. I mentioned the Sosnik article when I recently ran into a Washington operative who had also served as a key White House aide to Clinton. "Of course, Trump could win," he said. "We're the party that doesn't have a message that speaks to the country or stand for anything other than being against Trump."

#7 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 04:07 PM | Reply

"We're the party that doesn't have a message that speaks to the country or stand for anything other than being against Trump."

I've said many times, we need to come up with policies that Americans want and benefits us all.

Snoofy replied, "Somebody give him a pony."
Zed replies, "I question your nationality"
Donner replies, "Check with your Kremlin contacts, Comrade"

That's why Trump will win again.

#8 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2017-11-01 04:11 PM | Reply

Keep up the good work. Identity Politics Rules - right, guys?

#4 | POSTED BY COOKFISH AT 2017-11-01 04:02 PM

Even the blind pig finds the acorn once and a while:

"The Democratic Party today is divided over whether it wants to focus on the economy or identity," Greenberg said when we talked. That is, as he pointed out, just what the Clinton campaign was fighting about a year ago. Greenberg and others who came out of the Bill Clinton era -- like the former President himself -- had never really let go of the economy-first mantra that got them to the White House in a different time, and they felt that there was a generational conflict with the Obama operatives who held sway over Hillary Clinton's 2016 strategy. It was a fight that dogged the Clinton campaign all the way until its final days, when Greenberg and his allies inside the campaign pushed unsuccessfully to close with a focus on her plans for the economy.

"The caricature of this debate is, Bill Clinton says you have a problem and the numbers people say you don't," Jake Sullivan, who served as Clinton's top policy adviser for the campaign after working with her closely at the Obama State Department, recalled. But it wasn't that Hillary Clinton's team disagreed over the problem, he insisted, just over what to do about it: "Everybody recognized we had a huge working-class, non-college white issue. The question was, How do you add up to victory? Do you attack it head-on or by compensating elsewhere? That was the fundamental strategic debate."

And it still is.

Pretty sure I believe Hillary's top policy advisor when he says "Everybody recognized we had a huge working-class, non-college white issue", regardless of what various talking heads have to say about it.

So what are we going to do about it?

#9 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 04:14 PM | Reply

Here's the guy I wanted Hillary to pick for VP since I knew she wouldn't pick Sanders or Warren:

Stop Listening to Trump and Start Listening to Real Populists Like Sherrod Brown

In case you missed it, the Ohio senator made a powerful speech this week against forced arbitration.
www.thenation.com

And here's the guy I phoned and asked my Congressman to vote for to replace Pelosi as leader of the Dems in the House;

Congressman Tim Ryan‏ @RepTimRyan

Congressman Tim Ryan Retweeted Paul Bland
This is a disgrace. If @realDonaldTrump cared about working people he'd veto this swampy legislation.

Paul Bland‏ @FPBland

1/10 Later today, @POTUS is expected to sign bill killing @CFPB #RipOffClause rule:
Trump to sign repeal of consumer bureau arbitration rule
thehill.com

#10 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-11-01 04:14 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

It's not going to happen. Zed and Donnerboy believe I might be a Russian agent.

#3 | Posted by SheepleSchism

If not a Russian agent then a Russian bot but more likely just a useful idiot.

#11 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-01 04:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

That's why Trump will win again.

#8 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Trump will barely make it to the end of his first term if he makes it at all.

That is why Trump will not win again.

#12 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-01 04:18 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"This, to me, is the most important issue on the table right now, not the collusion investigation or the sexual harassment stories. 2018 elections are one year away and we are mindlessly focused on tax evasion and unpaid campaign volunteers pleading guilty to lying to the FBI."

The Democratic party can walk and chew gum at the same time.

#13 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-11-01 04:19 PM | Reply

"I've said many times, we need to come up with policies that Americans want and benefits us all"

You should try reading the Democratic Party Platform some time.

Because they're in there.

#14 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-01 04:19 PM | Reply

#10

I like Sherrod Brown but don't think he could appeal to a national electorate. As for Tim Ryan, time will tell if he is an empty suit or not, if any of these people really wanted to effect change on the CFPB arbitration issue they would introduce legislation that restores the arbitration clauses in a way that addresses the very real issue of the trial lawyers class action bar and their abuse of class actions solely to pad their own pockets (but that is a discussion for a different thread.)

#15 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 04:20 PM | Reply

The Democratic party can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Sadly, I don't agree, we keep getting drawn down the rabbit holes that Trump is digging and that is distracting us from coming together with one voice. I see it every day here on the DR, and these are people who are addicted to politics.

#16 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 04:22 PM | Reply

#9

Yeah, it was yuuge! Or maybe it was a statistical fluke.

"According to the final tallies, Trump won Pennsylvania by 0.7 percentage points (44,292 votes), Wisconsin by 0.7 points (22,748 votes), Michigan by 0.2 points (10,704 votes). If Clinton had won all three states, she would have won the Electoral College 278 to 260."

www.weeklystandard.com

But hey, panic if you like.

#17 | Posted by Corky at 2017-11-01 04:22 PM | Reply

#12

I am not banking on Trump going anywhere while the GOP controls Congress and neither should you.

#18 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 04:23 PM | Reply

If we are going to get rid of Hair Fuhrer in 2020 we need to focus on what is important---the Midterm races and building towards recapturing all we lost in Statehouses, Governorships and Congress over the past 9+ years.

More people voted for Democrats, not just Hillary but overall in House and Senate races as well, than voted for Republicans, but due to the electoral college and gerrymandering, the composition of the federal government does not reflect those numbers.

#19 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-11-01 04:23 PM | Reply

#17

But Clinton didn't win those very winnable states, which is the point of the article Corky.

Instead of continuing to call it a fluke, why don't you start listening to the people who worked on the Campaign who are saying that changes need to be made.

Your continued adherence to the "fluke" argument makes you just as relevant as Cookfish and Sniper and their continued denial that Trump is dangerous to our country.

#20 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 04:26 PM | Reply

"I've said many times, we need to come up with policies that Americans want and benefits us all."

Have you ever even looked into what the Democrats policies are?

The economy generally does better under a Democrat and Democratic policies generally benefit the middle class more.

It is tough to win against party that will vote against it's own best interests. But, the Republicans are usually more unified and as a result usually come out of the gate more powerful.

#21 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-01 04:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Sadly, I don't agree, we keep getting drawn down the rabbit holes that Trump is digging and that is distracting us from coming together with one voice. I see it every day here on the DR, and these are people who are addicted to politics."

It's because people here are addicted to politics that you don't see people here coming together with one voice. For me, getting to the bottom of what happened in 2016 is of vital national importance. I won't trust the electoral process until we do.

#22 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-11-01 04:27 PM | Reply

More people voted for Democrats, not just Hillary but overall in House and Senate races as well, than voted for Republicans, but due to the electoral college and gerrymandering, the composition of the federal government does not reflect those numbers.

#19 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY AT 2017-11-01 04:23 PM

Noted.

How do we fix that?

By winning the State races so that we have more say in drawing the districts.

By winning Senate races that are immune to gerrymandering.

By beating an idiot like Trump by having a message that appeals to everyone, not just those of us on the coasts.

We don't fix it by making excuses and accusing the other side of cheating, even if it is so.

#23 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 04:29 PM | Reply

"Instead of continuing to call it a fluke, why don't you start listening to the people who worked on the Campaign who are saying that changes need to be made."

I thought the whole problem according to many people is that Hillary was lousy candidate and that anybody else, especially Bernie, would have won. If so, I don't understand what all this angst and wringing of hands is about. Hillary won't be the candidate in 2020.

#24 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-11-01 04:31 PM | Reply

LCL's point is that the Democratic Party has suffered tremendous losses since '10, yet it and many of its supporters seem incapable of any introspection, even after losing to arguably the worst presidential candidate in this country's history.

The response always seems to be: "Everything is fine. All we need to do is oppose Trump and push identity politics and we'll be fine."

Yes, at some point there will be some pendulum-swing, but when?

#25 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-11-01 04:31 PM | Reply

It seems to me that Bernie had much better policies, and Hillary even tried to copy them in a half-hearted way. All the while taking huge sums of money from wall-street and billionaires, supporting globalization and open borders, and having a "private policy and a public policy", as she assured the bankers.

That's what sank her. Not the e-mails, not the Russians, not the private server. She was given $145 million by some of the most evil countries on Earth in a pay-for-play scandal while she was secretary of state, she wanted to invade Libya when Obama opposed it (and got her way, which came out the Hillary e-mails when she said she needed a foreign policy victory under her belt for 2016), and look how Libya turned out?

Trump said he would end illegal immigration and bring back industrial jobs. And his hair does sort of look like a lemming, which are sort of adorable. Plus he's orange, so there is the diversity factor. It wasn't too hard of a choice.

#26 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2017-11-01 04:43 PM | Reply

Have you ever even looked into what the Democrats policies are?

The policies are all there, but the candidates need to sell them to the voters...they are not going to look them up and say, "hey, these make sense", especially in the middle of the country.

Like it or not, the focus, as noted in the article, was more on analytics and less on "the economy first mantra that got [Bill Clinton] in the White House" in 1992.

#27 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 04:43 PM | Reply

If so, I don't understand what all this angst and wringing of hands is about. Hillary won't be the candidate in 2020.

From the article

: In the wake of Trump's win, it's easy to blame Hillary Clinton for being a flawed candidate with a tin ear for politics. Or to rationalize Trump's unexpected victory as an accident of history. But I haven't talked with a single Democrat or independent analyst who doesn't think that the Party remains in serious danger of another electoral catastrophe.

Senator Elizabeth Warren, of Massachusetts, could appeal to this fervent new activist base, and conceivably win the nomination in 2020. But more centrist Democrats worry that she couldn't do so without forever alienating not only the Trump base but also the Wall Street moneymen who have provided the Party with key financial backing ever since Bill Clinton introduced his New Democrats to the nation, in 1992. As for Trump's angry white working class, no one's sure if there are any Democrats at all in the mix for 2020 who can really speak to them. And to the extent that there are such politicians, figures like Biden or Senator Sherrod Brown, of Ohio, no one's sure there's a real place for such a candidate in a party moving left quickly.

#28 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 04:47 PM | Reply

#25

Introspection is difficult but necessary, both for the Hillary and Bernie supporters. Regardless of where the party ends up, a unified voice is necessary that appeals to the voters. "Vote for us because we aren't Trump" isn't going to work outside of areas that are already Democratic strongholds.

#29 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 04:50 PM | Reply

DNC: White men shouldn't apply for tech jobs - www.foxnews.com

#30 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2017-11-01 04:52 PM | Reply

#23 Here's what I am going to do as step 1:

Vote this year. I'm guilty of not always vote in odd year elections. Not anymore.

Warren, Biden, Brown, even Bernie, I think they may all be too old and seen as yesterday's news. We need new blood, rising stars, and it is hard to know who will emerge.

I pointed to Brown and Ryan as Democrats who are working everyday to support working and middle class families. We need more of those people on the state and local levels. Right now the Dems don't have a standard bearer. Obama and Biden are no longer in office. Hillary didn't win and is out of politics. Bernie is running as an Independent in the Senate race in VT.

#31 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-11-01 04:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

More people voted for Democrats, not just Hillary but overall in House and Senate races as well, than voted for Republicans, but due to the electoral college and gerrymandering, the composition of the federal government does not reflect those numbers.

#19 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY AT 2017-11-01 04:23 PM | REPLY (X)You forgot "cross-check", Danni, uh, I mean, Gal.

#32 | Posted by cookfish at 2017-11-01 04:56 PM | Reply

Here's what else I am going to do:

Adopt a district. This campaign is spinoff of the adopt a district approach that occurred during the healthcare debate. www.indivisible.org Only in this adopt a district campaign, people who live in safe districts are encouraged to adopt a district that is either a swing district or a district that is known to go GOP, and then do what you can to support the Democratic candidate in that district. I actually live in a swing district myself that is currently in Democratic hands, but the district next to me is in GOP hands. It is important that both are Democratic after 2018.

Take to the streets if Mueller gets fired:

Nobody is above the Law -- Mueller Firing Rapid Response act.moveon.org

#33 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-11-01 05:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#28 | POSTED BY LEFTCOASTLAWYER

Look for a lefty out of California (i.e., 'out of left field'). Gavin Newsom has a great shot at Governor and, I believe, the political craziness stemming from 2016 will continue into 2020, giving him a viable shot at POTUS.

The candidate 'coming out of left field' has a strong winning precedent in recent political history (save for Bush the First).

#34 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2017-11-01 05:06 PM | Reply

#31

The funny thing, Gal, is that if as many Democrats voted in the mid-terms in 2010 and 2014 as Republicans, the Democrats would still control both the House and the Senate.

Democrats Are Bad at Midterm Turnout. That Seems Ready to Change.

Your vote always counts.

#35 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-11-01 05:19 PM | Reply

Rsty-

Newsome will probably be CA's next Governor, but he isn't ready for the National stage just yet.

My money is on Kamala, she is smart, appeals to the left but knows she has to capture the center to win.

#36 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-11-01 05:20 PM | Reply

but he isn't ready for the National stage just yet.

He's good looks are, though ;-)

And in this political environment (leading into 2020), I'd be surprised if he needed anything more.

#37 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2017-11-01 05:23 PM | Reply

#37

I agree, Gavin was counted out in the SF Mayor and Lt. Governor races but always seemed to pull it out, it would be a mistake to ignore him for 2020 if he becomes Governor of California.

That being said, Sen. Harris has a huge timing and fundraising advantage that leads me to believe that he would be better served waiting, but who knows at this point.

#38 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 05:31 PM | Reply

#31 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

You also forgot the tens of thousands who lost their ID's that morning, and were marched outside by the nazi's.

#39 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2017-11-01 05:33 PM | Reply

There is no "denial involved in acknowledging that the policies the Dems ran on are not only better for America than GOP policies, and they won't be changed much for the next election.

And the idea that all we need is a better salesman for those policies is just as weak.

What we need is Dem voters who don't sit on their hands and/or throw away their votes because Dem policies aren't liberal enough, in their opinion, or the Dem candidate isn't perfect enough.

Those margins in the 3 Rust Belt states could have easily been made up by those voters.

Going farther left in policy or looking for the perfect candidate is fool's gold.

#40 | Posted by Corky at 2017-11-01 06:25 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Those margins in the 3 Rust Belt states could have easily been made up by those voters.

Or...

Hillary could have tried to campaign in those states a lot more than she did, that might have helped put her over the top.

The Clinton campaign could have emphasized her economic policies in the run up to the election in the fly over states, rather than rely on analytics that said she was going to win those states so why bother.

The Clinton campaign could have worked to turn the so called "Obama crossover voters" away from Trump in those three states, rather than focusing on increasing turnout of Obama voters in states that were safe for her.

Going farther left in policy or looking for the perfect candidate is fool's gold.

This I agree with 100%

#41 | Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2017-11-01 06:49 PM | Reply

#40 "Going farther left in policy or looking for the perfect candidate is fool's gold."

- Corky, on why he fell from grace.

Sentiments like that are exactly why I voted for Trump.

#42 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2017-11-01 07:52 PM | Reply

"Your vote always counts."

I know. I always vote in the midterms but not always in odd year elections like this one. This year in NY we have a vote on holding a state constitutional convention, and I am motivated to get out and vote against that. This year as well the local Democratic party has a great campaign for getting out the vote. I have received 2 mailers that show how many Republican and Democratic representatives we have on the town and county level versus how many voters are registered as Democrats, Republicans, Independents, etc., and it's makes for a very lopsided chart (way more Republicans in elected office versus the percentage of registered Republican voters). And that's on Democrats like myself who don't go out and vote in these off-year elections. The mailers say thing like: "Democrats are dangerously underrepresented." "What's wrong with this picture?" "It's time to change. End one party rule." And my favorite: "Does our government have you seeing red? Get out and vote on November 7. Your Republican neighbors will." (The Republicans are of course represented in red on the charts.)

#43 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-11-01 08:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Another thing I try to do on here is post positive news stories about Dems. For example, I posted about Bernie's trip to PR and his call to have the Whitefish contracted revoked. I posted about Ellison and Warren doing a rally together in MN in honor of Paul Wellstone (Wellstone Remembrance Day). I've posted Bernie's comments on the "grotesquely immoral" Republican budget. On FB I posted a lot about the GOP's attempts to repeal and replace Obamacare. I also called my Senators and representative about that issue, more than once.

#44 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-11-01 08:45 PM | Reply

#44 If Warren runs in 2020 she would win, even if she has to caucus against Bernie. If she doesn't, we still have Bernie. At first I thought he might be to old to run in 2020, but now I'm convinced he's some sort of spry ageless mummy animated solely by his terribly powerful and inhuman will, which is probably what our country needs right now to lead us of the darkness.

#45 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2017-11-01 08:55 PM | Reply

*out of, not into

#46 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2017-11-01 08:56 PM | Reply

Ah, hell, what the difference? I'm not looking for fool's gold.

#47 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2017-11-01 08:57 PM | Reply

Going farther left in policy or looking for the perfect candidate is fool's gold.
#40 | POSTED BY CORKY

That's one for the ages. a real McCain Democrat!

#48 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2017-11-01 10:27 PM | Reply

The people who hate the DNC are really Trump voters but don't really understand that yet.

#49 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-11-02 07:06 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"The people who hate the DNC are really Trump voters but don't really understand that yet." - #49 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-11-02 07:06 AM

Actually, some people here even admit it:

"...I voted for Trump." - #42 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2017-11-01 07:52 PM

#50 | Posted by Hans at 2017-11-02 10:36 AM | Reply

That is why Trump will not win again. - #12 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-01 04:18 PM

Go review your postings of 1 year ago today. Maybe plus or minus a week. Rethink your certainty.

Trump won Pennsylvania by 0.7 percentage points (44,292 votes), Wisconsin by 0.7 points (22,748 votes), Michigan by 0.2 points (10,704 votes).
#17 | Posted by Corky at 2017-11-01 04:22 PM

That was against the strongest, most capable and experienced candidate to ever run for the presidency. Who is going to run in 2020 that is a stronger choice than her and expect to do better?

As a resident of Virginia, I'll be voting. I feel relatively confident that Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam will get the win.

#51 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-02 10:42 AM | Reply

The people who hate the DNC are really Trump voters but don't really understand that yet.
#49 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

The perfect bumper sticker for 2018 and beyond.

Brilliant, Bruce Wayne. To the Batcave!

#52 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2017-11-02 12:11 PM | Reply

#43

Great post, the only way for anyone desiring change is to vote. Period.

As a Red-ish voter in a solid Blue city and state it would be easy for me to just skip voting but the only way for me to try to effect change is to cast a vote. Since we have open primary voting, I at least get to vote for the least objectionable Dem on the ballot if that is my only option and hope for the best, but I vote on everything.

#53 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-11-02 12:31 PM | Reply

Now with the disclosure of possible FEC violations by the DNC and the Clinton Campaign, this war is only going to get worse in the near term.

#54 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-11-02 01:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

What we need is Dem voters

You don't have enough in Red States or the middle of the country, thank God.

And when you say "Dem" Voters, you are talking far left wing, not the Blue Dog Dems of old. And that's who you need.

If Warren runs in 2020 she would win

The far left has no chance to win the Presidency. Period. End of story. Even with Trump in office. And that's the problem with the Dems today.

#55 | Posted by boaz at 2017-11-03 09:37 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort