Where do the Democrats go from here?

I was reading an interview with a former Trump
employee. He was close to Trump in the late 90's,
and said the one thing Donald drilled into his
head was, there is no such thing as bad publicity.
Keep them talking about you no matter what.

That's how Trump got elected. He kept saying
and tweeting wild things and got millions of
dollars worth of free media time. He knew exactly
what he was doing, keep them talking about him
no matter what. Brilliant, wouldn't you say? Where
Hillary turned down 99% of the invites she got
to appear for interviews on networks, Trump accepted
99%. No matter who they were. Keep them talking,
keep his face out there. P T Barnum politics.

Quote: TheCesspit

We've seen how well the wife-of-a-former-president thing went down well. I have no doubts she'd be pretty good, but don't expect it to happen at all without a lot more distance.

Hillary Clinton isn't black. And in her case, being the wife of a former President didn't exactly help her. It's disgusting, but Trump's sexist attacks on her because of her husband's infidelity were quite effective.

So Michelle would benefit by being the wife of a very popular former President, but she would be hurt by being a goddamn darkie. I think you could factor out maybe a good fifth of the electorate who would never vote for a black person, and maybe another fifth who would never vote for a woman. That's quite the handicap, but probably equal to the handicap of I-hate-bitches + I-hate-Bill-Clinton that Hillary had to overcome.

I do think that she could definitely incite the passions that Bernie did and Hillary failed to. God knows, she would absolutely savage Trump, assuming his party even nominates him in 2020. I would also like to see Elizabeth Warren take a shot, but unfortunately, if she runs, the Democrats lose another Senate seat.

Quote: TheCesspit

And I just mentioned this likelyhood in another reply... seems likely to me that revolution, counter-revolution and synthesis will happen on the Democrat side. If they can eliminate the corporatists, they are doing the US a favour, even if what emerges is still the same overall centrist/centre-left party.

I caught hell on the other site for telling a Clintonite that no serious historian would rate Clinton as a POTUS yet as you need at least 30 years to look back objectively. Almost there, and the corporatist wing seems to have been born in 1992. For some reason, Bill Clinton embraced NAFTA and WTO after it. Since then both parties have pushed any kind of trade agreement. Dems also the party of the "cool" companies. Don't think the Bernie wing, until we get a better name, did not know to feed off this.

The party will not split into two but I expect a return to the fractured party of pre-1992.

The main thing that got Trump elected was he won the rust belt states. He won those states because Bill Clinton brought in NAFTA which cost union jobs and the unions were the primary bankers of the Dems. In 2008 Obama promised to tear up NAFTA and got the unions to open their cheque books again. He as we all know never mentioned that promise again. The union membership who lost their good paying jobs had been shafted twice by what they thought was their party. They decided to give Trump a try since he was a republican party outsider and they certainly couldn't trust the Dems who were running the wife of the man who brought in NAFTA.

Quote: kenarman

The main thing that got Trump elected was he won the rust belt states. He won those states because Bill Clinton brought in NAFTA which cost union jobs and the unions were the primary bankers of the Dems. In 2008 Obama promised to tear up NAFTA and got the unions to open their cheque books again. He as we all know never mentioned that promise again. The union membership who lost their good paying jobs had been shafted twice by what they thought was their party. They decided to give Trump a try since he was a republican party outsider and they certainly couldn't trust the Dems who were running the wife of the man who brought in NAFTA.

Unions are kind of screwed with Dems. On one hand, they go way back. OTOH, Democrats have sold out unions from NAFTA to the global warming scam. Their rank and file is probably more interested in gun rights than rights of men to be in the ladies room with their wives. A crack was bound to happen.

Quote: AZDuffman

the global warming scam.

Doesn't your ignorance become painful at some point? Who or what is making the entire planet heat up as some kind of "scam"?

I'll confide with you. I used to think global warming wasn't really happening. But I actually looked at the evidence. I read dozens of studies. And now, it's obvious. I was wrong when I thought it was inaccurate to say that anthropogenic global warming was a real threat. But unlike Republicans, I can see when the evidence is clear, and admit when I'm wrong.

I wonder if you realize that the Republican opposition to climate change science is simply because they think that coping with carbon emissions will cost some businesses money. But instead of being honest about that, they try to say that global warming is some kind of hoax. Remember when industries said there was no such thing as pollution? When the drug industry said that there was no need for the FDA because they tested their own drugs thoroughly enough? It's all about the profit motive, and to hell with who gets hurt.

The highest aspirations of society should NOT be all about making businesses as profitable as possible, regardless of the social and environmental costs. But you obviously think otherwise. Tell me: who is generating this "scam"? How are they making the entire planet heat up? How do they have such immense resources? Are they a consortium of James Bond villains? And what do they hope to gain? Could it be that Donald Trump is making the planet heat up so that people will flock to his beachfront hotels?

Quote: stinkingliberal

Tell me: who is generating this "scam"?

Take a look at who is making money off of it, from Algore to Warren Buffet to George Soros to any college getting a research grant

Quote:

How are they making the entire planet heat up?

Same way as the last 4.5 billion years. The sun heats and cools in cycles, affecting the earth. People easily fooled think 100 years of this cycle means something. Instead of wondering how 100 years matters in a 4.5 billion cycle they yell "FOUR LEGS GOOD, TWO LEGS BAD!"

Quote: stinkingliberal

I used to think global warming wasn't really happening. But I actually looked at the evidence. I read dozens of studies.

I was an atheist and was told to read
the New Testament for proof that
god exists. I did, and I'm still an atheist.

I can hardly wait for the world to warm up a little more. It will only hurt those that believe in it so millions of liberals will die and the world will become a better place.

Quote: Evenbob

I was an atheist and was told to read
the New Testament for proof that
god exists. I did, and I'm still an atheist.

The New Testament is not science. I doubt that you've read any actual science on global warming.