777Jet wrote:

salttee wrote:

777Jet wrote:

I wonder why all of these left-wingers, liberals, Democrats and Hillary supporters say they are going to move to Canada but not Mexico?

Maybe that's just a media perception.

From Wikipedia:

According to the Canada 2006 Census, 316,350 Canadians reported American as being their ethnicity, at least partially. There are also between 900,000 and 2 million Americans living in Canada, either as full-time or part-time residents.

It's estimated that 1 million or so American citizens live in Mexico

I'm just talking about the ones, including many celebrities, who stated that they would move to Canada if Trump wins. Why not Mexico? Are they racist all of a sudden? They sure attacked Trump for wanting to build a wall, secure the border, and deport illegals. Why don't they flee to Mexico then instead of Canada?

A lot of Mexico is a crime filled dump, makes sense to head to Canada, plus them canooks also speaks English, have guns and watch the same sports.

777Jet wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

Hillis wrote:

It was the white turnout that turned this election, but barely, in Trump's favor.

I'd say it was more down to the failure of black and other ethnic minorities to turn up and vote that won it for Trump, you can't hold whites responsible when others don't bother turning up. BTW less blacks and latinos voted for Hillary than Obama and more blacks and latinos voted from Trump than Romney.

I wonder why all of these left-wingers, liberals, Democrats and Hillary supporters say they are going to move to Canada but not Mexico?

I don't know. I wonder why all of these right-wingers, conservative, Republicans and Romney supporters said they'd move to Canada but not Mexico if Obama won reelection (and still haven't done so)?

It is easy, they just need to remember, that the average citizen just wants a job that pays enough for a car, a flat, the insurance and for the kids to get education. Gay marriage is nice, but having a job is important. Politicians needs to remember that some things are essential, others are not.

I guess riots are next. Throw a big tantrum first before you see what he will actually do in office. Maybe they should be restricted to their safe spaces to chill. Give the man a chance.

Job One? Start looking at the 2018 Election. Go for the Senate & House and look at traditional Red States. In the last month of the Campaign I kept looking at Texas which was moving to a "lighter red - and I didn't see any news about Hillary adding them to "fight for" list. Might have been a huge mistake for the Dems.

Two. Develop aggressive Loyal Opposition plans and grow them. Make Trump publicly eat all of those gross promises that he has no chance of delivering. (Also get that deposition on his lawsuit unsealed ASAP before Trump can settle.

Three. Block USSC appointments. The GOP has already established the acceptability of blocking appointments so we need to block any appointment that is not moderate, especially in major issues like Roe -v- Wade.

Work with major donors to build a war chest for 2018.

We need to get the Constitution amended to throw out the Electoral College. AND block USSC hearings....is anything comes of this disaster, at least it is only for 4 years...thge USSC is for life...play the lil GOP games...fair is fair

NLCFFX wrote:

I guess riots are next. Throw a big tantrum first before you see what he will actually do in office. Maybe they should be restricted to their safe spaces to chill. Give the man a chance.

The unbelievable hypocrisy from the right the last 2 days is glaring. Had this been a Hillary Clinton win, his supporters would be doing the same thing using his claims of a rigged election as an excuse. Not to mention they would never give her a chance, as they have made it clear in the last couple months they would all but move to impeachment on day 1 of her presidency. It's been only 2 days since this election came to a less than ideal ending, back off...

Many good proposals, but the top Democrat officials won't heed any of them.
Why? Because the Democrat party-Mainstream Media-Hollywood/Entertainment-Legal system all have been co-opted by ultra leftists and are radicalized.
Moreover, they would rather die by the sword, and continue their campaign of name calling to non-elites than truly look in the mirror and change.

So, its not happening. Just look at the major networks and the papers since President-Elect Trump's election victory.
Has there been ANY soul searching whatsoever? None.

It's been all "America's voters are racist" and "What Trump needs to do to moderate?" Rinse, lather, and repeat.

Liberals gonna lib.

OK, been able to take a breath from this week and collect my thoughts, so I'll just put some bullet points in here.

-Completely dump leadership, both at the DNC and in Congress. Schumer, Pelosi, Hoyer, et al, need to go. They don't need Howard Dean coming back, imho. They need new faces. Now they can certainly get help from those that are in leadership, especially in the bruising battles that are coming up in the House and Senate, but younger, fresher faces need to start stepping to the forefront:

-Put together a team, and it doesn't have to be a big team, to not only study the election results, the demographics of the results, current Democratic policies, and in doing a comprehensive voter survey and focus groups of what really is driving voters, especially white, working-class voters, and within 6 months, presenting it to the DNC for review.

-Spending a lot of time and resources to keep registering voters, and coming up with a program that will ensure that minority voters do turn out on elections. One resource they should use for this is President Obama. He should become a "voter ambassador" to minority areas, to talk with minority voters and find ways to get them to the polls every time.

-Come up with bold, sustainable policy positions on improving our infrastructure, which includes roads and bridges, sewers, and the power grid, which can employ thousands of American for years to come. Show how you will pay for it. Show the benefits that it will bring.

-Come up with bold, sustainable policy that will help convert the coal regions to become a center for renewable energy research, and production for solar panels, wind turbines and future renewable energy programs. Again, make it concrete, show how you'll do it in detail, and include how you would like to pay for it.

-Continue to push the idea of tuition-free college. Other nations are killing us with this, and are putting out the engineers, scientists, and in other disciplines that will take us through this century into the 22nd Century. We can't afford to crush students and families with debt, which denies talented students a chance to pursue a discipline that they could do, and hurts our economy as well. The money should come from the $93 billion that we give in Corporate Handouts each year. The money would be better spent educating future generations so we can lead, not follow the world, in those areas that will propel us into the next century.

Just some ideas. I'm trying to work on some ideas myself, and to pass them on to some people of importance. Maybe it gets ignored, but maybe it won't. Right now, the Democratic Party cannot afford to ignore anyone with ideas that might help them.

A332DTW wrote:

NLCFFX wrote:

I guess riots are next. Throw a big tantrum first before you see what he will actually do in office. Maybe they should be restricted to their safe spaces to chill. Give the man a chance.

The unbelievable hypocrisy from the right the last 2 days is glaring. Had this been a Hillary Clinton win, his supporters would be doing the same thing using his claims of a rigged election as an excuse. Not to mention they would never give her a chance, as they have made it clear in the last couple months they would all but move to impeachment on day 1 of her presidency. It's been only 2 days since this election came to a less than ideal ending, back off...

Ok? So you're saying the Democrats are just a big pieces of hypocritical shit as the Republicans. Awesome logic.

LittleFokker wrote:

cledaybuck wrote:

Let the Republicans take power (mission accomplished). When things don't magically change in 2018 or 2020, reap the rewards.

Bad idea: Ignorant Republicans don't hold their candidates responsible (except when they aren't crazy far enough right). No matter how badly Republicans screw this country up, it will always be the liberal's fault and they will still vote for them. Unless we get rid of Gerrymandering, Democrats will never hold the House again - Republicans have been programmed to think all things liberal are wrong and nothing will change their minds. I am powerless to change this, so I'm out, done with this miserable country.

Have you forgotten the 2006 elections already? The 2006 election resulted in a sweeping victory for the Democratic Party which captured control of the House of Representatives, the Senate, and won a majority of governorships and state legislatures from the Republican Party. Reason #1 - the Wars, Reason #2 - How stupid they look in the response to Katrina Reason #3- Propose cuts to Medicare and Social Security.

Veetwo wrote:

A332DTW wrote:

NLCFFX wrote:

I guess riots are next. Throw a big tantrum first before you see what he will actually do in office. Maybe they should be restricted to their safe spaces to chill. Give the man a chance.

The unbelievable hypocrisy from the right the last 2 days is glaring. Had this been a Hillary Clinton win, his supporters would be doing the same thing using his claims of a rigged election as an excuse. Not to mention they would never give her a chance, as they have made it clear in the last couple months they would all but move to impeachment on day 1 of her presidency. It's been only 2 days since this election came to a less than ideal ending, back off...

Ok? So you're saying the Democrats are just a big pieces of hypocritical shit as the Republicans. Awesome logic.

You really have a bone to pick, don't you. Looking at it as an Independent, sure, yeah. So what's your point?

Hillis wrote:

-Continue to push the idea of tuition-free college. Other nations are killing us with this, and are putting out the engineers, scientists, and in other disciplines that will take us through this century into the 22nd Century. We can't afford to crush students and families with debt, which denies talented students a chance to pursue a discipline that they could do, and hurts our economy as well. The money should come from the $93 billion that we give in Corporate Handouts each year. The money would be better spent educating future generations so we can lead, not follow the world, in those areas that will propel us into the next century.

You'll lose a big base of voters with this. While the idea of tuition free is good, it sends the wrong message. Tuition free? What do tax payers get in return? And what degrees are eligible for this?

As Margaret Thatcher said: NO! NO! NO!

Make college affordable. Make students understand that, while the government can help them with college, there's no such thing as a free ride, that hours of community service should be done, and that degrees that leave you equipped with a set of skills are the ones eligible. You want free college? Qualify for STEM/business degrees by getting a good GPA and give back one way or another.

This notion that someone can get a degree in women's role in 16th century literature, take 8 years to finish it, and expect tax payers to foot the bill will not sit well with people. There is a thing as a "collective good", but degrees in liberal arts do not serve that purpose, especially when its holders expect to land cushy jobs and complain that other generations are screwing them.

I think that the next move for the Dems is to watch and wait. And especially to keep an eye on how the press is treating the Trump camp, that's kind of how we wound up in the situation we're in. A New York Times article today jumps out as being a cover up for some Trump BS spin.

The byline for the article reads:
Trump Floats an Olive Branch: Might Keep Parts of the Health Law

And within that byline is BS of the highest order, this is no olive branch, this is just some of Trump's bullshit coming home to roost.
The only alternative is to turn Emergency Rooms into aid stations and first line care: not good. In the end this would also provide the vehicle for socialized medicine to anyone who already has a trashed credit score.

But we knew that already.

So the NYT is calling the end result of Trump's lies a concession to the other side. Now we can all hold hands and be thankful that our next president is throwing us a bone. Not!

Some NYT stories permit comments, probably only the opinion pieces, that story didn't have open comments even though it seems to be offering opinion. Somebody should probably raise this on social media.

I guess the very next thing the Dems should do is raise a stink about this.
And watch and wait, there'll be more.

Hillis - I have never made a direct response about an individual's posting before but I have to say that the type of thinking you espouse is exactly why the Dems lost the election. We need to focus on issues that affect us all such as jobs, education, health and security. I do believe that part of the "whitelash" was exactly because millions of decent white males have been vilified for more than two decades as the cause of the entire world's ills. It is a simplistic and essentially racist view to take. Ultimately any winning party needs to focus on what unites is rather than divides us and that's what the Dems need to do.

Ken777 wrote:

Job One? Start looking at the 2018 Election. Go for the Senate & House and look at traditional Red States. In the last month of the Campaign I kept looking at Texas which was moving to a "lighter red - and I didn't see any news about Hillary adding them to "fight for" list. Might have been a huge mistake for the Dems.

Two. Develop aggressive Loyal Opposition plans and grow them. Make Trump publicly eat all of those gross promises that he has no chance of delivering. (Also get that deposition on his lawsuit unsealed ASAP before Trump can settle.

Three. Block USSC appointments. The GOP has already established the acceptability of blocking appointments so we need to block any appointment that is not moderate, especially in major issues like Roe -v- Wade.

Work with major donors to build a war chest for 2018.

All good points. I think priority should be given to try and listen to people's concerns more. Instead of a politician getting on stage and saying these are your problems and this is how we intend to solve them more effort should be made to connect. And I mean with all people not just people who are guaranteed to vote democrat.

steveinbc wrote:

Hillis - I have never made a direct response about an individual's posting before but I have to say that the type of thinking you espouse is exactly why the Dems lost the election. We need to focus on issues that affect us all such as jobs, education, health and security.

Up until now all you've focused on was Benghazi and Hillary's E-mails. Now all of a sudden you want to focus on (the actions needed to create) good paying jobs and how to pay for healthcare.My My isn't this something? Now you want to do what you had no interest in even talking about before.

steveinbc wrote:

I do believe that part of the "whitelash" was exactly because millions of decent white males have been vilified for more than two decades as the cause of the entire world's ills.

The paradigm here has been that the informed conservatives chose not to educate and inform those of your camp who haven't had the time to keep abreast of international events. The truth is that the world has changed, as was inevitable. And while the world was evolving the few, knowledgeable conservatives, were busy selling a propaganda line to the rank and file crowing whatever was helpful to make them tools in an ideological war with liberals. Rather than explaining that it was always there in Ayn Rand and Adam Smith from the beginning: that as developing nations joined the capitalistic system as participants, they would undercut the bidding for labor intensive industries. Fighting this trend would be like a person or group shunning the automobile in 1910. Living in the past wouldn't work then and it won't work now. Yet that's what you have been telling your rank and file needs to be done. It's right there in the slogan "Make America Great Again", let's bravely march forth into the past. And you wave protectionism as a solution, but everyone knows that is a bogus strategy, the economists tell us that it is always counterproductive.

So you don't tell your rank and file the truth; instead you tell them that the Dems have just put you on the backburner. You don't tell them that the current generation is in the process of experiencing an adjustment period and that we need to find the best way forward in the 21st century; instead, you tell them that you can turn back the clock and provide a 20th century world for them to live in. And you further tell them that they are being made chumps by the Democrats, vilified in fact, that the dems are favoring immigrants over native born Americans.

You enmesh two separate dynamics and place the cause for the loss of manufacturing jobs on the new immigrants. You also intentionally and knowingly discount the effects of the lost war that the Republicans sold to the nation. I have to assume that you know what you are doing, at least some of you. And what you are doing is underhanded and detrimental to the nation.

steveinbc wrote:

Ultimately any winning party needs to focus on what unites is rather than divides us and that's what the Dems need to do.

Big brother tells us that up is down. But look who has been doing the dividing.

Kiwirob wrote:

777Jet wrote:

salttee wrote:

Maybe that's just a media perception.

From Wikipedia:

I'm just talking about the ones, including many celebrities, who stated that they would move to Canada if Trump wins. Why not Mexico? Are they racist all of a sudden? They sure attacked Trump for wanting to build a wall, secure the border, and deport illegals. Why don't they flee to Mexico then instead of Canada?

A lot of Mexico is a crime filled dump, makes sense to head to Canada, plus them canooks also speaks English, have guns and watch the same sports.

It's actually because they are racist hypocrites.

They are exactly what they call those on the right.

A332DTW wrote:

NLCFFX wrote:

I guess riots are next. Throw a big tantrum first before you see what he will actually do in office. Maybe they should be restricted to their safe spaces to chill. Give the man a chance.

The unbelievable hypocrisy from the right the last 2 days is glaring. Had this been a Hillary Clinton win, his supporters would be doing the same thing using his claims of a rigged election as an excuse. Not to mention they would never give her a chance, as they have made it clear in the last couple months they would all but move to impeachment on day 1 of her presidency. It's been only 2 days since this election came to a less than ideal ending, back off...

Have you ever seen Republicans riot? They work and have little time. They have faith in the system even when things do not go their way. When Obama was elected, life went on even with disappointment. I do not know any conservatives who threw a tantrum. I live in the DC area and did not see anyone angry, only disappointed and trying to understand why. I didn't see people burning flags, threatening to fire employees who voted a certain way, beating people up. Just didn't happen. If you give the kiddos safe spaces, they will never be able to handle reality. If you disagree with his actions, fine, that is your right and responsibility. All the well educated conservatives I know disagreed with President Obama but none had anything bad to say about him or any member of his family. Ad hominem attacks are for those with low intelligence. Treat those you disagree with respect first, otherwise you only discredit your position.

Ed

The Democratic party must not make hasty or harsh moves just for appearance, but they also must note their serious issues.
Clearly they don't control the majority of the state governments and that is mainly over taxes and spending polices many White working and middle class voters don't want to pay for. They need to become more fiscally responsible.
They supported trade and other agreements that destroyed too many real decent paying jobs.
Too many took too much money from the elites, the rich, corporations and special interests and not from real people and have thrifty campaign budgets.
Too much attention and pandering to non-Whites, immigrants, GLTBQ's rather than paying attention to the real financial and economic issues for the voters.
They contributed with a lackluster and terribly personally flawed person in HRC as the candidate. Trump got slightly higher percentages of Latino/Hispanic and Black voters that typical for R's due to his points on immigration and trade issues, both seeing how D's policies have hurt their economic chances.
Sadly, about the only things they can do now is get a new national party leader and obstruct Pres. Trump worse than the R's did with Obama in the short term. Long-term they need to become a more moderate-progressive party that puts economics as it affects most voters first.

ltbewr wrote:

They need to become more fiscally responsible. They supported trade and other agreements that destroyed too many real decent paying jobs.
Too many took too much money from the elites, the rich, corporations and special interests and not from real people and have thrifty campaign budgets.

I understand the points you make and would be very comfortable walking away from any civilized debate simply agreeing to disagree. However, the points you make above are what I can't walk away from simply because the proof points don't exist. The GOP takes money from vested interests in equal measure to the Democratic machine. The Wall Street tycoons that Clinton was supposedly indentured to are currently bound by financial regulations enacted by the Democratic party. These regulations are designed to protect the working class, and really the whole goddamned planet, from another banking greed-driven nuclear meltdown like we saw under Bush. And now Republicans are claiming they will dissolve Dodd-Frank. So you tell me which party is truly, and in practice, is more fiscally responsible and beholden to the special interests of the wealthy elites. Come on brother, it isn't the Democrats. The GOP was simply better at making the people believe it.

Trade and other agreements have also been supported and even enacted by Republican presidents. Trade is a good thing, it makes the world go around. People in Indiana may be hurt because they can't make teddy bears as cheaply as people in Guangzhou, and people in Tennessee may be hurt because strip mining is too expensive to get at essential minerals compared to Nigeria..but that's not the future. And if these folks think that Trump shutting down global trade to bring back teddy bears and strip mining is good for the country they've got another thing coming. Those economic promises he made are complete rubbish and they'll never come to pass. Blocking trade would send tis country into a death spiral, and consumer prices skyrocketing into the stratosphere. Markets would plummet and unemployment would soar into double digits. Republicans know this as well as anyone, but they were smart enough to promise the undeliverable to enough sheep willing to believe it and vote for it. A real tragedy for the sheep as they will soon learn.

And lastly, look at the past 28 years and show us a spreadsheet with real non-partisan numbers that compares national fiscal performance under Democratic and Republican presidents. Again, the very exact argument from the one you're making is more truthful. What is so mind-boggling to me is how easily Trump voters got duped into thinking these statements were true, the Democrats were to blame, and that Trump would fix it all. There is zero basis in fact to support these claims, they are a myth created by the extreme Right and perpetrated on a wholly uninformed and uninquisitive segment of the voting public.

Again, I respect anyone using your other points to justify their preference for one party over another, but not the above points.

wingman wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

They need to become more fiscally responsible. They supported trade and other agreements that destroyed too many real decent paying jobs.
Too many took too much money from the elites, the rich, corporations and special interests and not from real people and have thrifty campaign budgets.

I understand the points you make and would be very comfortable walking away from any civilized debate simply agreeing to disagree. However, the points you make above are what I can't walk away from simply because the proof points don't exist. The GOP takes money from vested interests in equal measure to the Democratic machine.
.

That is all well and good but remember that the Republican Establishment was staunchly against Trump. And the voters rejected them as well. Republican voters pulled off what leftists never could do, they actually overthrew the Establishment (or hope they have).

mham001 wrote:

Republican voters pulled off what leftists never could do, they actually overthrew the Establishment (or hope they have).

It looks to me more like they attempted to overthrow reality. They engaged in magic thinking and bought into the idea that Trump could overturn modernity.

salttee wrote:

mham001 wrote:

Republican voters pulled off what leftists never could do, they actually overthrew the Establishment (or hope they have).

It looks to me more like they attempted to overthrow reality. They engaged in magic thinking and bought into the idea that Trump could overturn modernity.

What exactly is this thing you call "modernity"? If it's liberal western world view, then I have bad news for you. Due to demographic change more conservative countries are becoming stronger, while liberal western countries are becoming weaker.

pvjin wrote:

What exactly is this thing you call "modernity"?

In this case it is the fact that as developing nations industrialized, manufacturing jobs moved offshore of the United states; it was not a plan by Obama to disenfranchise the middle class American worker. It is also the fact that the US, along with the rest of the planet, is becoming more populous - and this affects the way of life for all.

salttee wrote:

pvjin wrote:

What exactly is this thing you call "modernity"?

In this case it is the fact that as developing nations industrialized, manufacturing jobs moved offshore of the United states; it was not a plan by Obama to disenfranchise the middle class American worker. It is also the fact that the US, along with the rest of the planet, is becoming more populous - and this affects the way of life for all.

I see. Well, in this situation a bit of healthy protectionism would be good for developing nations, as the only alternative is a drop of living standards that would result in developing countries not being so developed anymore. It would help American people to enjoy a higher quality of life until climate change finally wipes off modern civilization in a couple of centuries.

I did not follow the Us presidential elections until a few days ago, I was expecting a narrow victory for Hillary as that was what I read in the polls. A part from snippets of politics with comical value I do not follow Us politics at all. Some good stuff here . Most of which has already been talked about, but my views here.

I was shocked how divided the Us , the vitriol that is coming out makes me better understand the stuff I have seen until now.

Heads should roll at the DNC for their mismanagement .

Hillary was unpopular and had a lot of downsides . Why was there no one else very like her who might have been less known than Hillary but still have a strong political background. Seems like they did not work at all on future successors. A lot of top people around 70. They need to have a stronger pool of candidates to select from for different political situations. Also this makes them less vulnerable if some key political careers would be cut short suddenly unexpectedly due to scandals etc. I wonder if this might have anything to do with these developing political dynasties and be a result of long term power consolidation. You don't want to have a situation with an elderly leader surrounded by their elderly friends who do not want to change the direction of the ship when they are all to retire very soon too. Many similar examples of this , monarchies businesses and sports teams have to work this out too.

Separate racial , economic and social issues more and try to offer different solutions to all of them. A homeless white american may have more or different kind of privileges to some other race homeless person in the us. Police violence and blm , atlantic slave trade , college admissions etc , All of this does not negate nor is this fully contradictory of the economic issues in say the rust belt or rural areas. Those economic issues affect everyone who has to make a living. Additionally many of the economic issues of white blue collar people are shared by different races too. The appearance of Bernie is a symptom of ignoring the left wing vote too. Other side of possible democrat voters must have looked elsewhere say with Trump.

NLCFFX wrote:

A332DTW wrote:

NLCFFX wrote:

I guess riots are next. Throw a big tantrum first before you see what he will actually do in office. Maybe they should be restricted to their safe spaces to chill. Give the man a chance.

The unbelievable hypocrisy from the right the last 2 days is glaring. Had this been a Hillary Clinton win, his supporters would be doing the same thing using his claims of a rigged election as an excuse. Not to mention they would never give her a chance, as they have made it clear in the last couple months they would all but move to impeachment on day 1 of her presidency. It's been only 2 days since this election came to a less than ideal ending, back off...

Have you ever seen Republicans riot? They work and have little time. They have faith in the system even when things do not go their way. When Obama was elected, life went on even with disappointment. I do not know any conservatives who threw a tantrum. I live in the DC area and did not see anyone angry, only disappointed and trying to understand why. I didn't see people burning flags, threatening to fire employees who voted a certain way, beating people up. Just didn't happen. If you give the kiddos safe spaces, they will never be able to handle reality. If you disagree with his actions, fine, that is your right and responsibility. All the well educated conservatives I know disagreed with President Obama but none had anything bad to say about him or any member of his family. Ad hominem attacks are for those with low intelligence. Treat those you disagree with respect first, otherwise you only discredit your position.

Ed

Barack Obama did not rely on hateful rhetoric to fuel his campaign. Your comparison is moot. While violence and property damage should be condemned, these protests should not come as a surprise. But I get it, protests are unfair only when you disagree with them. How quickly we forget: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_protests

A332DTW wrote:

NLCFFX wrote:

A332DTW wrote:

The unbelievable hypocrisy from the right the last 2 days is glaring. Had this been a Hillary Clinton win, his supporters would be doing the same thing using his claims of a rigged election as an excuse. Not to mention they would never give her a chance, as they have made it clear in the last couple months they would all but move to impeachment on day 1 of her presidency. It's been only 2 days since this election came to a less than ideal ending, back off...

Have you ever seen Republicans riot? They work and have little time. They have faith in the system even when things do not go their way. When Obama was elected, life went on even with disappointment. I do not know any conservatives who threw a tantrum. I live in the DC area and did not see anyone angry, only disappointed and trying to understand why. I didn't see people burning flags, threatening to fire employees who voted a certain way, beating people up. Just didn't happen. If you give the kiddos safe spaces, they will never be able to handle reality. If you disagree with his actions, fine, that is your right and responsibility. All the well educated conservatives I know disagreed with President Obama but none had anything bad to say about him or any member of his family. Ad hominem attacks are for those with low intelligence. Treat those you disagree with respect first, otherwise you only discredit your position.

Ed

Barack Obama did not rely on hateful rhetoric to fuel his campaign. Your comparison is moot. While violence and property damage should be condemned, these protests should not come as a surprise. But I get it, protests are unfair only when you disagree with them. How quickly we forget: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_protests

And take a look at your second sentence. Ad hominem attacks can be sneaky. You're suggesting those who are not Republicans are just lazy crybabies protesting in the streets instead of going to work. Don't lower your intelligence.

The best for the Democratic Party is for the Republicans to repeal/ heavily restrict Obamacare - and not provide a workable replacement available to most Americans.

If the Republicans remove key provisions, and tens of millions of people lose all healthcare coverage - the next Congressional election will be the largest turnover of seats from one party to the next in history.