We the deplorable

[abc123]

by 2 percentage points less than the majority who repudiated donald trump and his policies. see how that works?

[mark blazejewski]

by 2 percentage points less than the majority who repudiated donald trump and his policies. see how that works?

You are the one who attached significance to the irrelevant popular vote regarding a so-called endorsement of the Obama-Clinton policies. I just pointed out that, by your own valued measure, those endorsing a Clinton Presidency and/or the Obama policies fall short of a majority.

[Lee Chowaniec]

abc123

the popular vote is relevant because claims are being made about how the people have spoken and rejected obamas policies (socialist policies, apparently), how it was an electoral college "landslide", how foolish the democrats are for not becoming republicans right away, etc.

The Michigan recount fiasco is over. Trump is president, get over it.

You declare that Clinton lost because of Obama’s apparently socialist policies; seriously?

lee, i can't believe you have gone on for 23 pages about a single comment that hillary clinton made months ago....and yet still continue to claim independence and even handedness

She may have apologized for the deplorable remark after the fact, but she said it and that was a huge factor in her loss. I had already posted ‘anyone but Hillary’ sentiments but was glad this corrupt and pathological liar shot herself in the foot with the undecided voters. And be serious the discussion on this thread has evolved to more than the deplorable remark - but that sure sticks in the craw of the libs!

As to your questioning my independence, I have posted numerous times over the years that I posted on this site that I have never registered under any political party, have voted for candidates from both major political parties, stated that with rare exception that all politicians suck and that too often my voting choice was based on the lesser of two evils and this election bore that out as both candidates were undeserving of being elected.
I voted for Trump simply because he was the reform candidate and I had had enough of Obama’s policies and direction.

But you should know all this as well as anyone as you have been posting on this site for the past several years and especially considering we were both on the same page on a few social justice issues. That was ok with you but now that I dare to take a stance opposite your liberal one you question my independence.

I enjoy political discourse. Are you now saying I am not entitled to my opinion; that I am politically incorrect because our opinions are dissimilar on certain outlooks?

[Lee Chowaniec]

buffalopundit wrote:

Well, if you have a cursory knowledge of Roe v. Wade, you know that a state's decision to prohibit "late-term abortions" - or any 3rd trimester abortion - is already constitutionally permitted. These "partial-birth" abortions are only performed in the eventuality that the mother's life is in danger. They are exceedingly rare and only done out of medical necessity.

Of course I am familiar with the Roe v Wade decision but you clearly know I was not speaking on medical emergencies. Please, no double-speak allegations.

I'm not the one who's triggered by the raw vote count.

Ah, you sure defend it and include it in your posts; with updates to boost.

Then why complain that "fake news" isn't a problem? Someone could have been murdered over it this week.

I didn’t say that, Allen. Don’t put words in my mouth. Both sides participate in the practice; as well as the biased mainstream media. It’s politics and you of all people know better.

What would you have Pelosi do differently in the House?

Resign! The same individual who uttered those never to be forgotten words on Obamacare: “You have to vote for it to know what’s in it.” And now her message after losing Congress and the presidency is that the party’s direction was true but more effort was needed to sell it.

Self-aggrandizing? You're like the tinpot emperor of this space, and your original post about "we the deplorables" underscores that.

Tsk, tsk, getting testy, eh? I rarely post on any other Speakup threads, posting on the Lancaster thread as I have doing for at least 15 years. Now I don’t know the format on your blog because I have never read it. Whether you just blog with or without readership commentary, I have no idea.

But on Speakup the thread is open to all posters and they are free to express their diverse opinions. Lancaster is my town so I post in this thread. In all those 15 years of posting I have never been told that I am limited in the number of posts or have been sanctioned because of topic.

Perhaps if you truly believe I am the ‘tinpot’ emporer of this space (whatever that implies) perhaps you should troll elsewhere or stick to your own blog. That would disappoint me, Alan as I enjoy sharing ideas and facts, as one is never too old to learn.

Relax, it’s only politics and you and I don’t amount to fly **** on an elephants ass in making any changes!

Until such time Trump takes office and acts officially all else is political BS. Trump is reaching out to DEMS as well as REPS to unite the country. People like you and the mainstream media go out of their way to further polarize this country.
No, no. You're thinking of Caudillo Trump.

[buffalopundit]

You're supposed to be a lawyer??? Wow....

When you are 'independent' you simply are NOT registered with your democratic or republican local offices. And you can vote for any candidate you want. In other words, I'm a registered voter who is NOT registered with the Democrat or Republican offices. Also known as Independent.

You getting this?? Geez-uz, no wonder Res rides your ass all the time

Any Illinois voter can vote for any candidate they want. You can even vote in any primary you choose - you just have to pick the ballot you want. There is no such thing as "registered with your democratic or republican local offices". I mean, I'm sure they'll accept your money or help, but they don't "register" anyone.

[buffalopundit]

Nope. From what I observed, wedged between your previous and subsequent Trump-bashing posts (most of which resembled tantrums), you casually, maybe aimlessly, or perhaps even traumatically, posted vote returns showing a Clinton national popular vote plurality without comment. Hmmmmm?

Yes. I'm invading your safe space to trigger you with that particular microaggression.

[buffalopundit]

Clinton received 48.2%. I think 50% plus 1 is a majority. Better than half the country, represented by Trump, Johnson and Stein repudiated Hillary Clinton and/or her policies.

Better than half the country, plus 2%, including Johnson and Stein, repudiated Donald Trump and his policies. He has the office, but he has no mandate.

[buffalopundit]

Of course I am familiar with the Roe v Wade decision but you clearly know I was not speaking on medical emergencies. Please, no double-speak allegations.

There is no such thing as a voluntary, non-emergency partial-birth abortion. Women about to give birth don't suddenly decide to end the pregnancy on some whim. Ever. That never happens. Partial-birth abortions are only done in medical emergencies, and to ban the procedure is to (1) essentially commit homicide on the at-risk mother; and (2) the federal government interfering in the doctor/patient relationship.

Ah, you sure defend it and include it in your posts; with updates to boost.

It's a fact. I'm not "defending" it - just stating it, because it triggers you all so. It's so funny. You guys are great.

I didn’t say that, Allen. Don’t put words in my mouth. Both sides participate in the practice; as well as the biased mainstream media. It’s politics and you of all people know better.

Um...

Resign! The same individual who uttered those never to be forgotten words on Obamacare: “You have to vote for it to know what’s in it.” And now her message after losing Congress and the presidency is that the party’s direction was true but more effort was needed to sell it.

When the Republicans repeal the ACA, 30 million people will lose their health insurance. That ought to go over well.

Tsk, tsk, getting testy, eh? I rarely post on any other Speakup threads, posting on the Lancaster thread as I have doing for at least 15 years. Now I don’t know the format on your blog because I have never read it. Whether you just blog with or without readership commentary, I have no idea.

You can dish it out but you can't take it.

Until such time Trump takes office and acts officially all else is political BS. Trump is reaching out to DEMS as well as REPS to unite the country. People like you and the mainstream media go out of their way to further polarize this country.
No, no. You're thinking of Caudillo Trump.

He isn't reaching out to Democrats in any meaningful way. Saying it isn't the same as doing it. Trump is selecting his cabinet and chief advisors - for the EPA, a guy who doesn't believe in climate change. They sought a security clearance for Michael Flynn - the retired general's son - even though he's busy repeating conspiracy theories and can't get their story straight as to whether he worked on the transition. So far, four (4) retired generals make up part of the proposed cabinet, which is more how you make a junta than a cabinet.

You might think he's trying to unite the country, but pogroms like this prove otherwise.

[mark blazejewski]

Better than half the country, plus 2%, including Johnson and Stein, repudiated Donald Trump and his policies. He has the office, but he has no mandate.

I am not the one raising the popular vote issue. But, he he does have a mandate for directional change; If one equates the Clinton vote with the Obama vote, popular support for the Clinton-Obama policies have certainly DECREASED greatly since 2012, and surely since 2008. You may also want to focus on the 2010 and 2014 mid terms and the state houses.

BUT AGAIN, I'M NOT THE ONE CARPING ABOUT THE POPULAR VOTE.

[mark blazejewski]

Yes. I'm invading your safe space to trigger you with that particular microaggression.

Not at all; there is plenty of room out here. I agreed that you never directly stated that you support "direct popular vote," your suggestive posts not withstanding. I merely provided evidence supporting my perception.

[mark blazejewski]

It doesn't matter what party affiliation you claim - you're a Trump cultist.



So let's find out: do you believe that Muslim Americans should be subject to a federal registry that records their personal data and whereabouts? If so, under what Constitutional provision is that permitted?

.

Here you go!



Well, if you have a cursory knowledge of Roe v. Wade, you know that a state's decision to prohibit "late-term abortions" - or any 3rd trimester abortion - is already constitutionally permitted. These "partial-birth" abortions are only performed in the eventuality that the mother's life is in danger. They are exceedingly rare and only done out of medical necessity.



I'm not the one who's triggered by the raw vote count.



Then why complain that "fake news" isn't a problem? Someone could have been murdered over it this week.



What would you have Pelosi do differently in the House?



Self-aggrandizing? You're like the tinpot emperor of this space, and your original post about "we the deplorables" underscores that.



No, no. You're thinking of Caudillo Trump.

"Tinpot emperor of this space." Wow, how petty yet witty. It must be time for the one-liners, like " if Lee is a tinpot emperor, you must be a competing Caesar; a hostile one at that. If your purpose is to offer a compelling argument(s) in support of your views, you need to re-write Caesar: 'I thought, I wrote, I floundered.' "

[abc123]

The Michigan recount fiasco is over. Trump is president, get over it.

You declare that Clinton lost because of Obama’s apparently socialist policies; seriously?

i haven't said anything about the recount or anything challenging trump's win. you are all over the place, lee. you are asserting that the people have spoken and why they have spoken and further what the dems need to do in response. pointing out the popular vote is in response to your rhetoric which is obviously way off base. nothing more, nothing less.

i say "apparently" because you are claiming his policies are socialist with no further justification for what policies you are talking about. as an senior citizen would you support immediately privitizing medicare and social security? the two largest socialist programs we have in this country? why or why not?

She may have apologized for the deplorable remark after the fact, but she said it and that was a huge factor in her loss. I had already posted ‘anyone but Hillary’ sentiments but was glad this corrupt and pathological liar shot herself in the foot with the undecided voters. And be serious the discussion on this thread has evolved to more than the deplorable remark - but that sure sticks in the craw of the libs!

you continuously bring it up, casting yourself as a victim. because someone who lost the election and is barely in the news anymore said something months ago and walked it back the next day. not that you are obsessed or anything...

As to your questioning my independence, I have posted numerous times over the years that I posted on this site that I have never registered under any political party, have voted for candidates from both major political parties, stated that with rare exception that all politicians suck and that too often my voting choice was based on the lesser of two evils and this election bore that out as both candidates were undeserving of being elected.

I voted for Trump simply because he was the reform candidate and I had had enough of Obama’s policies and direction.

lol at rare exception. its 20 pages of ridiculous over the top criticism of clinton - the pathological liar - and deflection of criticism of trump. a tepid "both candidates were undeserving" hardly makes up for that. there ain't nuthin' independent about you, lee.

But you should know all this as well as anyone as you have been posting on this site for the past several years and especially considering we were both on the same page on a few social justice issues. That was ok with you but now that I dare to take a stance opposite your liberal one you question my independence.

I enjoy political discourse. Are you now saying I am not entitled to my opinion; that I am politically incorrect because our opinions are dissimilar on certain outlooks?

the difference between now and then is not that we had more agreement. the difference then was that you could talk about issues where there was disagreement and defend your position. the opponents of your position then argued like you do now. it is sad to see you get so polarized and lose the ability to have any reasonable discourse. pages ago i invited you to discuss any of trump's positions but you had no interest. buffalopundit asked you if you supported a muslim registry when you cried about being thought of as xenophobic but you declined to answer. you doubted net zero illegal immigration, evidence was presented, you had nothing to say. i am sure the late term abortion discussion and why it is legal will go the same way. you would rather just continue your diatribe about hillary clinton and playing the victim because she said something mean 3 months ago. over...and over...and over.

[Lee Chowaniec]

ABC wrote:

i haven't said anything about the recount or anything challenging trump's win. you are all over the place, lee. you are asserting that the people have spoken and why they have spoken and further what the dems need to do in response. pointing out the popular vote is in response to your rhetoric which is obviously way off base. nothing more, nothing less.

And, I didn’t say anything that indicated that you had, but it is an issue and one that has gained national attention and on this thread.

i say "apparently" because you are claiming his policies are socialist with no further justification for what policies you are talking about. as an senior citizen would you support immediately privitizing medicare and social security? the two largest socialist programs we have in this country? why or why not?

I am not in favor of Medicare or SS privatization. But they are in need of reform/change to remain vital in the future. As for your not realizing that Obama's policies were not socialist, how sad.

you continuously bring it up (Clinton’s deplorable statement), casting yourself as a victim. because someone who lost the election and is barely in the news anymore said something months ago and walked it back the next day. not that you are obsessed or anything...

So, the biased mainstream media, the DEM pundits, the wacko celebrity crown continue to cast Trump as not fit for office, that he has a mental problem, and in so many other demeaning terms and that’s ok with you because that is your crowd?

lol at rare exception. its 20 pages of ridiculous over the top criticism of clinton - the pathological liar - and deflection of criticism of trump. a tepid "both candidates were undeserving" hardly makes up for that. there ain't nuthin' independent about you, lee.

It is about one election, one candidate and you generalize. Yawn!

the difference between now and then is not that we had more agreement. the difference then was that you could talk about issues where there was disagreement and defend your position. the opponents of your position then argued like you do now. it is sad to see you get so polarized and lose the ability to have any reasonable discourse. pages ago i invited you to discuss any of trump's positions but you had no interest. buffalopundit asked you if you supported a muslim registry when you cried about being thought of as xenophobic but you declined to answer. you doubted net zero illegal immigration, evidence was presented, you had nothing to say. i am sure the late term abortion discussion and why it is legal will go the same way. you would rather just continue your diatribe about hillary clinton and playing the victim because she said something mean 3 months ago. over...and over...and over.

Considering Trump has not taken office yet, has not issued one policy, what would you like me to criticize on his administration? Should I have criticized all his campaign rhetoric and when any politically informed person knows that all make promises they have no intention to keep, can’t keep because of constitutional and legal restrictions. Trump has already walked back many of the promises he made on the campaign trail. You may want to fry his ass based on speculative information, others will wait until he actually does something official.

And gee, I didn't realize I had to respond to buffalopundit on matters I already I already posted on; closed borders favoring legal immigration policies, deportation of the felon illegal immigrants, and a delay of allowing immigrants from terrorist countries until a system is in place to properly vet them. Now which ones do you favor or oppose?

You had 8 years of Obama, social engineering and political correctness – and Hillary was going to double-down on his failed policies. The country voted to go in a different direction. Trump won, get over it.

[Save Us]

ABC wrote:



And, I didn’t say anything that indicated that you had, but it is an issue and one that has gained national attention and on this thread.

i say "apparently" because you are claiming his policies are socialist with no further justification for what policies you are talking about. as an senior citizen would you support immediately privitizing medicare and social security? the two largest socialist programs we have in this country? why or why not?

I am not in favor of Medicare or SS privatization. But they are in need of reform/change to remain vital in the future.



So, the biased mainstream media, the DEM pundits, the wacko celebrity crown continue to cast Trump as not fit for office, that he has a mental problem, and in so many other demeaning terms and that’s ok with you because that is your crowd?



It is about one election, one candidate and you generalize. Yawn!

the difference between now and then is not that we had more agreement. the difference then was that you could talk about issues where there was disagreement and defend your position. the opponents of your position then argued like you do now. it is sad to see you get so polarized and lose the ability to have any reasonable discourse. pages ago i invited you to discuss any of trump's positions but you had no interest. buffalopundit asked you if you supported a muslim registry when you cried about being thought of as xenophobic but you declined to answer. you doubted net zero illegal immigration, evidence was presented, you had nothing to say. i am sure the late term abortion discussion and why it is legal will go the same way. you would rather just continue your diatribe about hillary clinton and playing the victim because she said something mean 3 months ago. over...and over...and over.

Considering Trump has not taken office yet, has not issued one policy, what would you like me to criticize on his administration? Should I have criticized all his campaign rhetoric and when any politically informed person knows that all make promises they have no intention to keep, can’t keep because of constitutional and legal restrictions. Trump has already walked back many of the promises he made on the campaign trail. You may want to fry his ass based on speculative information, others will wait until he actually does something official.

And gee, I didn't realize I had to respond to buffalopundit on matters I already I already posted on; closed borders favoring legal immigration policies, deportation of the felon illegal immigrants, and a delay of allowing immigrants from terrorist countries until a system is in place to properly vet them. Now which ones do you favor or oppose?

u had 8 years of Obama, social engineering and political correctness – and Hillary was going to double-down on his failed policies. The country voted to go in a different direction. Trump won, get over it.

Lee,

I was away for a while running a business so that it could be taxed and regulated to the liberal's satisfaction... So what are the lefties crying about now?
I figured you could give a cogent summation.

[HipKat]

If Hillary had won the electoral college, and Trump had won the popular vote, I bet the Dems wouldn't be saying a word about "the people spoke...." "won by 2%......", etc, etc