Dem Debate Group #2- Comments

[ReplayRandall]

So, we have 2 Dem Debates, with 2 different threads and we get little or no opinion from the Left here on this site....Excluded are Ely, Barahona and H4C.

So Sad, but when you can't defend the 20 candidates put forth by the Dem Party, it truly says it all.....
It's like a bad dream, it just keeps getting worse and worse.

[fast4522]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

So, we have 2 Dem Debates, with 2 different threads and we get little or no opinion from the Left here on this site....Excluded are Ely, Barahona and H4C.

So Sad, but when you can't defend the 20 candidates put forth by the Dem Party, it truly says it all.....
It's like a bad dream, it just keeps getting worse and worse.

They all know that there is not a rock star in the bunch that can beat President Donald J. Trump, and they now need a insurance policy against Bernie Sanders because if he gets the nomination they will lose the house big time guaranteed. They also know that once Joe Biden is gone they might not be able to stop Bernie without tricks and that will keep a majority of his following to stay home and stew. A Sanders nomination will drive the same sane democrat's to vote for President Donald J. Trump that did the last time and then some. No matter how they view things it is looking like more of them will be staying home smoking reefer instead of voting.

[barahona44]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...hed-w-n2549176

It’s over!

Just like the Republicans in 1964, the Republicans in 1976, the Democrats in 1984, the Republicans in 1996, the Democrats in 2004, the Republicans in 2008.And on and on.

Losing elections has a wonderful way of sharpening skills and getting priorities straight.

And I've always loved the "one" narrative.Óne'black voter says nice things about Trump, so of course multitudes of our African American brethren are going GOP.(Refresh my memory on the last mid terms).And one voter in a crowd questions where the Democrats are heading , so the conclusion is all the sensible centrists are heading towards the exits. Not so fast.


Trump should be cruising towards a 2020 victory.But he won't.He'll probably win but independents are looking for an excuse NOT to vote for him.Economic downturns and stock market dives don't send out "Save the Date" invitation cards.It would take very little to turn the tide against him.He ran on a "We're building a wall and Mexico 's paying for it" platform and with next election 16 months away, have any cinder blocks been ordered? Don't put a lot of stock in campaign promises from any politician.

[barahona44]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

So, we have 2 Dem Debates, with 2 different threads and we get little or no opinion from the Left here on this site....Excluded are Ely, Barahona and H4C.

So Sad, but when you can't defend the 20 candidates put forth by the Dem Party, it truly says it all.....
It's like a bad dream, it just keeps getting worse and worse.

Glad you're thinking of me, big guy!

[jimmyb]

Free stuff for all without discussing costs and a way to pay for it all. The free healthcare for the undocumented is absurd.


This is a winning formula for Trump 2020.

[Tom]

We can't afford all this free stuff!

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

So, we have 2 Dem Debates, with 2 different threads and we get little or no opinion from the Left here on this site....Excluded are Ely, Barahona and H4C.

So Sad, but when you can't defend the 20 candidates put forth by the Dem Party, it truly says it all.....
It's like a bad dream, it just keeps getting worse and worse.

I'm not left but I'm a pol so I do watch them. My opinions are mostly like that of a handicapper. I've got no emotional or rooting interest in any of these.

Winners of the week in order:

Harris - dinged the front runner and best at big kid table

Castro - massively overperformed his polling

Warren - front runner who performed well

Buttigieg - unlike Beto showed he's more than a suit

Booker - similar to Castro but was outperformed by him and polls higher already.

[davew]

After watching some of both 'debates', I finally figured out what the democrat plan for unwanted immigration. They are going to bankrupt the country and turn it into a shithole, so that people will not want to come here. They are already starting with some of the cities.

[reckless]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

I'm not left but I'm a pol so I do watch them. My opinions are mostly like that of a handicapper. I've got no emotional or rooting interest in any of these.

Winners of the week in order:

Harris - dinged the front runner and best at big kid table

Castro - massively overperformed his polling

Warren - front runner who performed well

Buttigieg - unlike Beto showed he's more than a suit

Booker - similar to Castro but was outperformed by him and polls higher already.

Kamala the Ugandan Giant is already walking back her 'raised hand' for yes vote when asked about taking away private health insurance from tax paying American citizens. The next day Kamala said 'she didn't understand or expect that question'.

Kamala may be the current front-runner, yes, but she has already proved she cannot think on her feet. But, sadly, Kamala has already been proved that she could think off her feet and on her back, which explains why she is loved by Democrats and the hate Trump dim wits on PA OT General.

Castro was one of the over achievers but it isn't saying much considering the lack of class, brains and common sense of the 20 Democrat presidential wannabes. He'll go as far as the demographic-centric media wants him to. The media should ask him if Julian identifies as an American or a Chicano -- if it is the latter he needs to learn Spanish. His woke attempt on Wednesday was a joke.

Warren did not do well in her debate, especially considering she was deliberately placed in the JV bracket solely to excel and stand out against the 9 other '16' seeds. She didn't excel and she most definitely didn't stand out -- except to those who want to take away health care for 180 million paying American citizens and give it to illegals.

Faux squaw still will get a hard push from the media but she's a goner in due time. This country doesn't want a fraud lecturing to us -- someone who gamed the system by checking the box. Just wait until the rest of the country gets to know how she foreclosed on the homes of disabled veterans and war widows and threw them out in the streets. She's more Wall Street than Warren Buffett. Simply put, Warren -- Lizzie, not Buffett -- is an angry, vicious, lying woman.

Mrs. Pete Buttigieg just raised about $25 million since the debate so he must have connected very well to the sissy wing of the hate America base. He didn't say anything profound or presidential and showed typical weakness when asked about the police officer problem he's facing -- as expected of most Democrat city mayors.

Before long, polling could show the Mayoress will be the most popular of all the women running for the nomination.

Booker is another A-Number One phony who lacks the smarts and the goods to compete on the national stage. But he is another light-skinned and non-threatening preferred minority that lacks the goods -- but could still do better than expected in the upcoming debates.

Not mentioned by the OP but whenever you like you could put a fork in Biden, Bernie, Bayh-toe, Gillibrand, Yang, Ryan, Murphy, deBlasio, Bennet, the two old looking governors, the nice-looking self-help lady at the end, and everyone else for that matter.

[FantasticDan]

Originally Posted by reckless

Mrs. Pete Buttigieg just raised about $25 million since the debate so he must have connected very well to the sissy wing of the hate America base. He didn't say anything profound or presidential and showed typical weakness when asked about the police officer problem he's facing -- as expected of most Democrat city mayors.

Before long, polling could show the Mayoress will be the most popular of all the women running for the nomination.

Homophobia is not a good look for you.

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by FantasticDan

Homophobia is not a good look for you.

What are you talking about?
It's his only look.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by FantasticDan

Homophobia is not a good look for you.

Why is it called Homophobia by the way?

All the definitions I read state something to the effect "dislike of or prejudice against homosexual people." That's the google definition and most others in oh-so-many words.

So why is it called a "phobia." A phobia is a FEAR.

If you dislike someone or are prejudice against them, that doesn't automatically mean you FEAR them, does it? I would think not.

What a queer little definition that is...(see what I did there?)

Now, is reckless being homophobic? I mean, ely wrote in a recent post that I was running around screaming (or was it squealing?) like a LITTLE GIRL.

I personally have no problem with that...although I razzed him for being sexist. Maybe I should have upped it to misogynist?

So what reckless wrote automatically qualifies him as being homophobic? Because he made fun of one particular gay man?

In liberal land, I guess it does.

TIL

TIL

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Why is it called Homophobia by the way?

All the definitions I read state something to the effect "dislike of or prejudice against homosexual people." That's the google definition and most others in oh-so-many words.

So why is it called a "phobia." A phobia is a FEAR.

If you dislike someone or are prejudice against them, that doesn't automatically mean you FEAR them, does it? I would think not.

What a queer little definition that is...(see what I did there?)

Now, is reckless being homophobic? I mean, ely wrote in a recent post that I was running around screaming (or was it squealing?) like a LITTLE GIRL.

I personally have no problem with that...although I razzed him for being sexist. Maybe I should have upped it to misogynist?

So what reckless wrote automatically qualifies him as being homophobic? Because he made fun of one particular gay man?

In liberal land, I guess it does.

TIL

TIL

There was absolutely nothing "sexist" or misogynist about my post opining that you sound similar the shrill of a little girl scream.

The fact that you can't even identify racism, homophobia, xenophobia, and real sexism is both quite sad and self-explanatory.

Much like your need to invoke me in your quasi-defense of reckless' post.

Seriously dude... either you're closeted bigot or just have such a obsession with me you can't help yourself.

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

All the definitions I read state something to the effect "dislike of or prejudice against homosexual people." That's the google definition and most others in oh-so-many words.

Fits reckless like a glove, then.

[barahona44]

Originally Posted by reckless;2486312

[B

Warren[/B] did not do well in her debate, especially considering she was deliberately placed in the JV bracket solely to excel and stand out against the 9 other '16' seeds. She didn't excel and she most definitely didn't stand out -- except to those who want to take away health care for 180 million paying American citizens and give it to illegals.

Faux squaw still will get a hard push from the media but she's a goner in due time. This country doesn't want a fraud lecturing to us -- someone who gamed the system by checking the box. Just wait until the rest of the country gets to know how she foreclosed on the homes of disabled veterans and war widows and threw them out in the streets. She's more Wall Street than Warren Buffett. Simply put, Warren -- Lizzie, not Buffett -- is an angry, vicious, lying woman.

.

She's not the only one.
https://bipartisanreport.com/2017/05...-memorial-day/