CNN Poll: More see Trump win likely as Biden leads crowded Democratic field

Well, she had some inside help, so that must be considered.

For me, after calling the election for trump, public record here on this forum, it is my opinion that trump would have lost to sanders. He had as much energy on his side as trump did, in crowds, in excitement. MSM was against him, as was obvious, and observable. He was attacked constantly for being an FDR democrat, something that no longer exist outside a few in DC today.

If he were younger, and ran as FDR did, you would have some real fears as a conservative, IMO.

 

This is true, but I think his unwillingness to attack Clinton was what doomed his campaign. I imagine this must have been extremely frustrating for a lot of Sandersistas who had no problem ripping her themselves. We saw a lot of that around here, as you may recall.

Sanders was attacked for being an FDR Democrat?

That's strange. He always struck me as more of a Henry Wallace Democrat, i.e., one of the socialists who marched out of the DP in 1948 to form the Progressive Party.

That aside, I agree with you that he generated a lot of excitement, and I guess that should be expected in a year when anti-establishment sentiment was running high and your base consists largely of young, idealistic (and naive) people who tend to bring a lot of energy to a campaign. Personally, I wouldn't have minded seeing Trump and Sanders duke it out - in many ways such a race would have reflected the competition between the two dominant political currents running in this country today.

I also agree that his age is a problem. You've probably heard the talk in some circles in the Democratic Party who want to see a younger/fresher face leading the party, and there are a few that fit the bill. I think Sanders' best shot at the White House was in 2016 - I'm not confident that he can rally that kind of support in the future.

 

I can't say that Biden would be as bad as Hillary - mind you I do not even know if that could be possible.

That said - I agree with most of your criticisms. The Dems need a fresh face .. preferably someone who has at least some anti establishment street cred.

 

Watch this video and repeat "I like the guy". Anyone who likes this guy should be certified and kept away from children. Why has he never been arrested?

 

Still way to early....but it's clear it's going to take something major to keep Trump from winning in 2020.

 

Well to be fair, all Comey reported was the truth. Did the truth sway the polls that much? One can only hope.

 

Because there have been no claims of misconduct by anyone other than conspiracy youtube videos.

 

Comey's revelation in the last week that they needed to review more emails absolutely played a significant influence on the election. And you can see that in the polling data during the last two weeks in nearly every state.

 

I have to admit, I almost spit up my beer when one of the news channels broadcast Liz's pod cast with her sucking back a bud. I feel traumatized. Think I can sue her???

 

No, they do not need to demonstrate that Republican propaganda and Russian disinformation are false.

 

Her campaign was flawed to its core. She alienated swaths of the electorate, she assumed she would get the votes of the Democratic base without working for it, and she did not even go to all of the states that she needed to. Comey's "revelation" did not cost her the election because most of America already had made up their minds on that topic. The next candidate for the Democrats should perhaps actually go to all the states, actually ask and try to motivate the minority voter for support, oh and try not to insult the working class blue collar Democrat voter. That person will have a shot at beating Trump.

 

stats please, kindly keep it confined to voter eligible citizens and remember that not all democrats are prog socialists so please don't include them in 'the majority of socialist loving progs"... oh, almost forgot, & deduct the 3 million ineligible, illegally registered in cali...

 

That's a video of Biden molesting children. It's not a "conspiracy". Have you not seen the videos?

 

Trumpery has an incorrigible, fanatical hardcore that makes the re-election of Lyin' Don, if he is not forced to resign or is impeached, a real possibility at this juncture.

However, the prospects - given Trump's relentless unpopularity, legal jeopardy, and the American people's recent empowerment of opposition in Congress - offer tangible hope.

It's far to soon to indulge in auguries about November, 2020.

 

Yes, I saw the youtube videos. I have also seen youtube videos that prove the Earth is flat and hollow at the same time!

He was not molesting any children, nor has he ever been accused of molesting any children by anyone other than youtube conspiracy morons.

 

I have never seen a more insane comment.

Hillary DID NOT visit the rural areas in KEY STATES that Trump did to win the only vote that MATTERS. The ELECTORAL vote.

Your popularity contest has never been how a President wins. Obviously, Hillary was way too stupid to understand this. She spent her time trying to gather every single vote in California (a liberal state she would have won anyway) that she neglected the key areas that needed her to speak in their counties.

Hillary lost because she's a moron.

 

If Dems are stupid enough to put Warren forward as their nominee - they deserve another 4 years of Trump.

 

Calling Hillary a moron is a kind way of putting it. This woman is so arrogant and condescending that many Dem women do not like her - although many of these held their nose and voted for her over Trump.

Her campaign consisted of nothing but repeating "Bad Trump, Bad Trump" over and over like a broken record / Parrot. She gave nothing to vote for .. no plan, no message ... nothing but "Bad Trump"

I find it exceedingly hard to believe that her hoard of 6-7 figure advisers told her to do this - in fact I find it hard to believe that they did not beg her not to do only this. In this respect Hillary's unwillingness to listen to anyone - other than those who agree with her - is very similar to Trump ... and this makes her a moron.

 

Hillary is just a failure in all aspects. She tried to cheat, she tried to steal, she lies constantly, her book is filled with everyone else she blamed aside her self...She's just horrible. And with all that blame and lying, she STILL lost!

 

Impossible videos you claim to exist are not videos of people physically doing something. Biden is on video molesting children - how else to you describe putting his hands on a young girls chest?

Do you even know what s conspiracy is? That is video evidence.

I can understand giving Clinton a free pass when it was too late and he was already in office. But why would you support a child molester before he's even IN office? Isn't anything better than a child molester?

 

How is it that face book ads - most of which did little but post "The Truth" - and none that I have seen that were direct lies/ propaganda - pass the bar of "meddling with our electoral process" yet - what Hillary/DNC did to Bernie Sanders ... doesn't ?

One ad which was claimed to be "Russian Propaganda" was a pic of Bernie sanders with the caption "The Clinton foundation is a problem".

How many clown pundits did we hear claiming " Russia has harmed our electoral process". Forgive me but, one thing no proponent of this nonsense has ever been able to answer is ... "How does the US voter knowing THE TRUTH - harm our electoral process".

https://alethonews.com/2018/04/23/msnbc-where-journalism-goes-to-die/

The editors of our major networks control content and these folks are influenced by the BOD - which normally contains foreign interest - or at least was appointed by a foreign interest. This is certainly the case when GE owned MSNBC.

This is obviously meddling in our electoral process but, how is this not meddling by a foreign interest ? Same goes with many of the big money interests that influence our electoral process.

Crying "Russian Propaganda" is like focusing on a single raindrop in the middle of a hurricane.

 

Russian disinformation is apparently the model for Democrat campaigns now.

"Last week the New York Times revealed that money from tech billionaire Reid Hoffman was used to run a small disinformation “experiment” aimed at helping Democrat Doug Jones win last year’s Alabama special Senate election. That resulted in Facebook suspending five accounts and Hoffman issuing an apology.

But left unmentioned in the Times story was that one of its authors learned about the Alabama campaign when he spoke at an off-the-record meeting organized by the same group who ran the operation. A copy of a confidential report about the Alabama effort, obtained by BuzzFeed News, raises new questions about whether the project was — as the Times said — an “experiment,” or whether it was a straightforward Democratic attempt to replicate the model of the Russian Internet Research Agency."

BUZZFEED, A NY Times Reporter Spoke At An Event Organized By Alabama Dirty Tricksters, New York Times reporter Scott Shane spoke at an event organized by the group who ran a disinformation op aimed at helping defeat Roy Moore in Alabama., By Craig Silverman, BuzzFeed News Reporter, Posted on December 27, 2018, at 9:45 p.m. ET.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...-tricksters-invited-a-new-york-times-reporter

 

Never mind - In 2013 it became legal for our intelligence agencies to create and disseminate propaganda on US citizens.

What .. What now ? Do we think they did this because the intelligence agencies did not want to do this ? This is not some experiment .. it is a full on propaganda war.

The intelligence agency budget is roughly 80 Billion - if we include so called "dark projects" it is 130 Billion. To put this in perspective - this is double the entire Federal spend of Mexico - a nation who is 11th in the world with respect to purchasing power.

The CIA is just one actor. Our mainstream media is a propaganda arm of the Establishment ... and anyone who does not realize (which is most) is not paying attention.

 

We've been told many times, though, that it's not wrong for the Russians to buy ads to influence our elections, and that their efforts had no effect on the outcome of the 2016 election. What do you think about those claims?

But no, it's not a model for Democrat campaigns if this was run and financed by private parties without any direct involvement of a candidate or of campaign members, as appears to be the case here.

The source said that during the meeting Dickerson told the group that the report was prepared in collaboration with New Knowledge, a cybersecurity company that says it helps protect companies from online disinformation campaigns. Jonathon Morgan, New Knowledge’s CEO, described the Alabama effort to the Times as “a small experiment” and, contrary to claims in the report, said they designed it “to have almost no impact.”

Morgan subsequently had his Facebook account suspended by Facebook due to his involvement in the campaign. (He did not respond to a request for comment from BuzzFeed News.)

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...-tricksters-invited-a-new-york-times-reporter
​

What is worrying to me is the idea of private individuals conducting covert political "campaigns" of their own, which is what this looks like. I for one wouldn't want this happening on behalf of any candidate or party, and I would hope that it's already illegal to do so, and that, if it is not, it will be clamped down on through legislation.

 

That's the kind of crap the Russians spread through their disinformation, the notion that we can't trust mainstream media. It leads to people being confused, not knowing what is real and what is not, now knowing who to trust, and therefore being more likely to believe some off-the-wall nonsense that could have them up in arms, causing more chaos on our soil and within our society, tearing their own nation apart, doing the Russians' work for them.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/1...an-spreads-government-made-news-to-americans/

BBG spokeswoman Lynne Weil insists BBG is not a propaganda outlet, and its flagship services such as VOA "present fair and accurate news."

"They don’t shy away from stories that don’t shed the best light on the United States," she told The Cable. She pointed to the charters of VOA and RFE: "Our journalists provide what many people cannot get locally: uncensored news, responsible discussion, and open debate."

A former U.S. government source with knowledge of the BBG says the organization is no Pravda, but it does advance U.S. interests in more subtle ways. In Somalia, for instance, VOA serves as counterprogramming to outlets peddling anti-American or jihadist sentiment. "Somalis have three options for news," the source said, "word of mouth, al-Shabab, or VOA Somalia."

This partially explains the push to allow BBG broadcasts on local radio stations in the United States. The agency wants to reach diaspora communities, such as St. Paul, Minnesota’s significant Somali expat community. "Those people can get al-Shabab, they can get Russia Today, but they couldn’t get access to their taxpayer-funded news sources like VOA Somalia," the source said. "It was silly."​