Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿

[Kari Kamiya]

For what? For FUCKING what? I know this question gets asked all the time but what's the crime?

Nearly bankrupting them just by beating their sacred cow in the election. That's all it comes down to in the end because he foiled their plans. He wasn't supposed to win, and he did anyway.

 

[Ebonic Tutor]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...n-letters-love-trump-disdain-mueller-n1014761

Archive: http://archive.fo/MT6sQ

Badman liked Trump, Trump badman.

 

[X Prime]

Well yes, I too would feel disdain for a guy who put innocent people in jail to hide who the FBI used as an informant and how.

Reminder that Bulger was murdered, allegedly for saying he was going to out officials in the FBI informant program.

EDIT: Adding link.

Mueller-Connected Boston Mobster Whitey Bulger Killed in Prison... As He Was About to Out FBI Officials

Legendary Boston mobster Whitey Bulger was killed in prison overnight on Tuesday. 89-year-old Boston mob boss James ‘Whitey’ Bulger was killed in prison by a ‘fellow inmate with mafia ties’ shortly after he was transferred to a West Virginia federal prison. Bulger was reportedly wheeled away...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[Judge Holden]

Whats the matter Robert upset that you couldn't even beat Ted Cruz despite the wildly optimistic polling data?
And on that note their actually trying this bullshit again with their exceptional Biden can win Texas guy! push because they truly learned nothing from 2016.

To be fair though, Ted Cruz has lowkey become something of a shitpost king in the past few years since losing to Trump so beto the furfag never stood a chance, no matter how many omega-cringe music videos his campaign funded...

 

[Ebonic Tutor]

To be fair though, Ted Cruz has lowkey become something of a shitpost king in the past few years since losing to Trump so beto the furfag never stood a chance, no matter how many omega-cringe music videos his campaign funded...

I'm not so sure if it's really Ted doing those tweets truth be told. It comes off more as an astro-turf shit-poster.

 

[MirrorNoir]

Beto not being able to beat Ted Cruz can be chalked up to the fact that Beto was a horrible candidate. The skateboarding, the SJW pandering, the fact that he cared more about pandering to outside forces, mainly from Hollywood, who were sending him more money than any other non-Hillary candidate running for Senate that year which showed that the man didn't care much about the state of Texas and was clearly a ringer being pushed by rich elites who DESPERATELY wanted Cruz gone.

Cruz himself is a garbage person, but the irony remains that that running a slightly more photogenic, but still sleazy version of Fred Armisen is not the answer to defeat him......

 

[BR55]

Beto not being able to beat Ted Cruz can be chalked up to the fact that Beto was a horrible candidate. The skateboarding, the SJW pandering, the fact that he cared more about pandering to outside forces, mainly from Hollywood, who were sending him more money than any other non-Hillary candidate running for Senate that year which showed that the man didn't care much about the state of Texas and was clearly a ringer being pushed by rich elites who DESPERATELY wanted Cruz gone.

Cruz himself is a garbage person, but the irony remains that that running a slightly more photogenic, but still sleazy version of Fred Armisen is not the answer to defeat him......

Oh I agree absolutely I was just pointing out that it's looking like the Dems are going to once again waste time in States like Texas, Georgia and Arizona because muh polling data instead of going to where they actually need to campaign.
Because learning from your past mistakes so you don't repeat them is for losers. Presumably they will be shocked when the result is no different then 2016.

 

[Jigglyjogglers]

Oh I agree absolutely I was just pointing out that it's looking like the Dems are going to once again waste time in States like Texas, Georgia and Arizona because muh polling data instead of going to where they actually need to campaign.

I have this feeling that they believe if they can "flip" a longtime red stronghold that will somehow break the Republicans' backs forever. Because the DNC is never satisfied with trying to win the next election, they have to try and usher in one party rule, which is why they always govern as if they're going to be in power forever.

 

[IV 445]

This headline kind of says it all.

Challenging religious liberty in the public square could open the door to Satan. Good.

The public square is dominated by Christianity. We should welcome efforts from the Satanic Temple to have religious minorities be part of public life.

www.usatoday.com

“Challenging religious liberty in the public square could open the door to Satan. Good.”

‘Good.’

This is how much they hate you.

I don’t believe it’s hyperbole to say they have lost their souls if they would side with Satan to cause harm to their opponents.

 

[MirrorNoir]

I have this feeling that they believe if they can "flip" a longtime red stronghold that will somehow break the Republicans' backs forever. Because the DNC is never satisfied with trying to win the next election, they have to try and usher in one party rule, which is why they always govern as if they're going to be in power forever.

To be fair, those states ARE flippable and one of the biggest complaints made against the Democrats (one I'm guilty of screaming in my blue pilled days) is the idea that the Democrats need to go back to the 50 State strategy days and go after ALL of the states. Not just the ones that are already Blue and the media appointed "Purple States" (IE flip states) who consistantly go back and forth from Red to Blue every couple of election cycles.

Kansas is a good example of a state that the Democrats flat out stated "fuck you, you are on your own" in terms of conceding it to the GOP for DECADES. And getting pissy if you ask why they don't try and flip it. Same with Texas after W won the governorship.

It's one of the chief flaws of the Democrats, in that their SJW/neoliberal navel gazing basically causes them to write off a good portion of the electoral map because so long as their Big Blue Wall holds and they get X-Number of Purple States, they can write off the rest of the nation. Even with the temptation of turning Blue and creating an unstoppable firewall of Texas/California, they still pretty much have written off Texas in favor of waiting until the demographic shift reaches the point of no return in leui of actually working towards winning it.

 

[heyitsmike]

It's one of the chief flaws of the Democrats, in that their SJW/neoliberal navel gazing basically causes them to write off a good portion of the electoral map because so long as their Big Blue Wall holds and they get X-Number of Purple States, they can write off the rest of the nation. Even with the temptation of turning Blue and creating an unstoppable firewall of Texas/California, they still pretty much have written off Texas in favor of waiting until the demographic shift reaches the point of no return in leui of actually working towards winning it.

First of all, they've been waiting on demographic changes to carry them to one party rule since... well forever. The 'the GOP is about to go the way of the Whigs' trope is decades old, yet when Trump won in 2016 the Republican party had the most power at the state and federal levels since the 1920s. They gave a little back in 2018, but I think they'll be back up to a new historic high in 2020.

Secondly, they're playing whack-a-mole. They may get Texas to turn slightly blue, but to do that they will need to further alienate working class whites which make the Rust Belt turn even redder than Texas will be blue. Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin are far whiter than the rest of the country and their electoral votes would cancel out Texas plus a couple. So it would be a wash. Hardly the victory Democrats believe it would be.

But I think it's all moot anyway. I don't believe the Democratic Party will survive in its present form after 2020.

A party that nominates Trump for the presidency is in bad shape.
But a party that loses the presidency to Trump is in worse shape.
And a party that loses the presidency to Trump *twice* is not fit to be in politics, at all.

 

[Vorhtbame]

This headline kind of says it all.

Challenging religious liberty in the public square could open the door to Satan. Good.

The public square is dominated by Christianity. We should welcome efforts from the Satanic Temple to have religious minorities be part of public life.

www.usatoday.com

“Challenging religious liberty in the public square could open the door to Satan. Good.”

‘Good.’

You know, you'd think they'd want us to be wrong in our predictions; but they go out of their way to make those predictions come true.

 

[BR55]

You know, you'd think they'd want us to be wrong in our predictions; but they go out of their way to make those predictions come true.

Quiet Christcuck! Your petty morality has no place in the modern age! Our petty morality on the other hand...
The Left's attacks on Christianity have always been nothing more than a means of control and sowing division. Theres no further meaning to it.

 

[TowinKarz]

I have this feeling that they believe if they can "flip" a longtime red stronghold that will somehow break the Republicans' backs forever. Because the DNC is never satisfied with trying to win the next election, they have to try and usher in one party rule, which is why they always govern as if they're going to be in power forever.

If it were perpetually 1995... that idea of "We'll be in charge forever if we just convince the key youth and tech demos that we're really really REALLY concerned about your feelings and the Reps are racist old Dinosaurs" , may have worked. But it isn't 1995, and they still persist in this strategy, having completely failed to notice that "appeal to hipness" only works when the economy is doing good and that quite recently, their own party leaders were saying 90's economic numbers will never happen again in human history and McJobs awaited those relics of Middle America who refused to learn to code...... so get used to "managed decline" of the old, racist, white-dominated Western Empire that was America and good riddance!

So not only is the battle plan 20 years out-of-date, but they threw it out when they got a black President, because to them, that was the "win" condition, the Culture War was over, and Republicans lost. And now, pushed back on the defensive, the only thing they can think is to dig that crumpled-up 90's strategy out of the trashcan and run it for another few cycles, and by then, SURELY, the Republicans will be extinct....

THey STILL don't have a platform beyond obstruct...obstruct....obstruct.... and eventually your opponents will die off because muh demographics!

 

[Syaoran Li]

See, the Democrats did manage to flip Virginia back in the mid-2000's and a lot of people thought it was impossible beforehand, given that Virginia was a staunchly conservative state and had voted Republican for generations.

This was the state that gave us Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson and has a higher rate of executions than fucking Texas, and so nobody thought it would ever be anything other than a red stronghold.

But the DNC flipped the script by tapping into the large populations of blacks and liberals in Richmond, the Tidewater (Virginia Beach, Norfolk, etc.) and ESPECIALLY the suburbs of Washington DC in Northern Virginia.

Problem is that they think they can do the same with Texas since Austin is a left-wing hipster shithole.

Texas is more conservative overall than Virginia and despite Virginia going blue in the national elections for the past decade or so, it is still very much a swing state overall.

The Democrats really only have strength in Richmond, DC/NoVA, and the Tidewater cities, and possibly a few college towns like Charlottesville and Blacksburg.

There are a few centrist areas that can go either way like Roanoke and the towns of the Shenandoah Valley (Staunton, Winchester, etc.) and the rest of the state still leans Republican, especially Lynchburg (home of Liberty University) and the Appalachian coal counties (Dickenson, Wise, Buchanan, Russell, and Tazewell) flipped the opposite direction and went deep red thanks to Obama's remarks about the coal industry (and Trump capitalized on that)

As strange as this sounds, Appalachia used to lean more Democrat before the 2000's, although the region was still socially conservative at the time (and still is) and most of the Appalachian Democrats were your old-school "Blue Dog Democrats" or "Union Democrats", guys like Jim Webb and Joe Manchin who have become a dying breed in the Democratic Party thanks to both the neoliberal types like Pelosi and Schumer and the younger Justice Democrats who have nothing but utter contempt for the Appalachian people (and indeed most of Middle America)

But yeah, Virginia flipping to the Democrats on the national level (and being a swing state on the state level) was one of those random "lightning in a bottle" scenarios that could not be replicated easily, especially in a state like Texas or the less religiously-inclined red states like Arizona and Montana.

 

[heyitsmike]

So not only is the battle plan 20 years out-of-date,

That battle plan was 20 years out-of-date 20 years ago!

From Politico:

In 1968, as in 2016, Democrats narrowly lost the White House after nominating a relatively moderate, establishment candidate instead of a more liberal alternative who had inspired a raging enthusiasm among younger voters. Democrats spent much of the next four years arguing about what direction the party should take. White working-class voters—traditionally a Democratic bloc—were sluicing away, and progressives, convinced the party needed to change both its policy direction and its coalition of supporters, demanded a new approach: a “loose peace coalition” of minorities, young voters and educated white Democrats, as strategist Fred Dutton wrote in his 1971 book, Changing Sources of Power. One year later, the party’s presidential nominee, the ultra-liberal Senator George McGovern of South Dakota, went on to lose 49 states in one of the most lopsided victories in American history.

By the time of the 1972 Democratic National Convention, the party’s platform was perhaps further left than it had ever been, calling for, among other planks, “a decent job for every American” and income supports for those out of work, as well as a universal single-payer health care system.

McGovern won the battle, but lost the working class. He was never able to escape Nixon’s characterizations of him as a supporter of liberal causes [...] Misrepresenting McGovern’s positions to some extent, Nixon tarred the Democrat as the candidate of “acid, amnesty and abortion.”

I also point out those exact same younger, radical voters in 1968 are now 50 years older. They are the moderate Democrats worried their party is swinging too far left. Those radicals didn't stay radical forever. (Except Bernie. He became more radical!)

 

[BR55]

See, the Democrats did manage to flip Virginia back in the mid-2000's and a lot of people thought it was impossible beforehand, given that Virginia was a staunchly conservative state and had voted Republican for generations.

This was the state that gave us Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson and has a higher rate of executions than fucking Texas, and so nobody thought it would ever be anything other than a red stronghold.

But the DNC flipped the script by tapping into the large populations of blacks and liberals in Richmond, the Tidewater (Virginia Beach, Norfolk, etc.) and ESPECIALLY the suburbs of Washington DC in Northern Virginia.

Problem is that they think they can do the same with Texas since Austin is a left-wing hipster shithole.

Texas is more conservative overall than Virginia and despite Virginia going blue in the national elections for the past decade or so, it is still very much a swing state overall.

The Democrats really only have strength in Richmond, DC/NoVA, and the Tidewater cities, and possibly a few college towns like Charlottesville and Blacksburg.

There are a few centrist areas that can go either way like Roanoke and the towns of the Shenandoah Valley (Staunton, Winchester, etc.) and the rest of the state still leans Republican, especially Lynchburg (home of Liberty University) and the Appalachian coal counties (Dickenson, Wise, Buchanan, Russell, and Tazewell) flipped the opposite direction and went deep red thanks to Obama's remarks about the coal industry (and Trump capitalized on that)

As strange as this sounds, Appalachia used to lean more Democrat before the 2000's, although the region was still socially conservative at the time (and still is) and most of the Appalachian Democrats were your old-school "Blue Dog Democrats" or "Union Democrats", guys like Jim Webb and Joe Manchin who have become a dying breed in the Democratic Party thanks to both the neoliberal types like Pelosi and Schumer and the younger Justice Democrats who have nothing but utter contempt for the Appalachian people (and indeed most of Middle America)

But yeah, Virginia flipping to the Democrats on the national level (and being a swing state on the state level) was one of those random "lightning in a bottle" scenarios that could not be replicated easily, especially in a state like Texas or the less religiously-inclined red states like Arizona and Montana.

Virginia isn't the only State that changed like that. Colorado used to be pretty Red as well. They could be both go Red again depending on how well Trump does the second time around.
As for where Texas goes in the future who knows but pissing money down the drain in Texas and other States like it cost the Dems in 2016, it cost them again last year and it will cost them yet again next year.

 

[Jigglyjogglers]

As for where Texas goes in the future who knows but pissing money down the drain in Texas and other States like it cost the Dems in 2016, it cost them again last year and it will cost yet again next year.

Which is a big concern for them, I think. They spent a truly insane amount of money in 2016, and then for some reason decided to immediately throw even more money into a handful of special elections because they were absolutely desperate to prove that people didn't REALLY want Republicans in office. They're broke, Hillary's not going to finance them again unless she's the candidate, they're desperately hoping that fielding over 20 candidates is going to net them a huge bunch of donations they can ultimately throw entirely behind Biden, and of course they're going to wind up spending a ton of money yet again and it's quite likely that it will literally cost them dearly.

 

[Syaoran Li]

Virginia isn't the only State that changed like that. Colorado used to be pretty Red as well. They could be both go Red again depending on how well Trump does the second time around.
As for where Texas goes in the future who knows but pissing money down the drain in Texas and other States like it cost the Dems in 2016, it cost them again last year and it will cost yet again next year.

True. Colorado also flipped to the Democrats but Colorado was not a red state that was typically associated with the "Bible Belt" like Virginia was.

Colorado was a Republican stronghold back in the day, but from what I can tell, it attracted a different brand of Republicans than Virginia.

Most of the Western red states have a more libertarian or populist flavor compared to the Southern red states which were historically associated with the Religious Right (and in some places, still are on the state and local levels)

Also, Boulder has always been a magnet for hippies and leftists even back in the 1960's and 1970's so I could see why the Democrats could flip Colorado fairly easily, whereas Virginia turning was a lot more unexpected and also happened a lot quicker, since unlike Colorado then or Texas now, there weren't any major cities in Virginia commonly associated with leftism like Boulder or Austin.

Richmond sort of leaned Democrat locally because of its historically large black population and the rural coalfields were mostly Blue Dog Democrats until Trump flipped them, but aside from small and mid-sized college towns like Blacksburg or Charlottesville, there weren't many major cities that were lefty strongholds until the NoVA suburbs started rapidly turning blue in the 90's because so many wealthy liberals were leaving Washington DC in droves because of how much of a crime-ridden shithole DC was (and still is in some places)

Yes, Colorado Springs was fairly heavy on the Evangelical presence but the rest of the Colorado Republicans tended to lean more towards your gun-toting libertarian-type conservatives similar to Montana or Alaska (or even Oregon and Washington State until Portland and Seattle became so dominant in their politics)

At this point, the only Southern state that could go blue by 2024 would be Florida, since it's already a key swing state (and has been for a good long while) and is in a similar position as Virginia with a few cities being deep blue, a few areas being deep red, and the rest of the state being mostly centrist swing districts.

Basically, Virginia and Florida are swing states in practice but are the only Southern states that can reliably carry Democrats in national elections and depending on if Trump wins 2020 and how well he does in his second term (and how the Democrats handle the aftermath and the 2022 midterms) both states could start going red again.

 

[X Prime]

Any state with a large and significant urbanite and ethnic minority population is not going to go back red anytime soon after turning blue.

It is simply not happening due to A) the demographic shifts guaranteeing D votes and B) the dire intolerance and social penalties that are carried for voting R.

The simple truth is that there is no social penalty virtually anywhere for toeing the Democrat line. There are massive ones for the opposite, which depresses whatever R turnout there is.