No it's not, the disdain for Palin was that she was dumb as a rock. that question does not reflect that at all.
You will always find a lot of people who want to up and move to Galt's Gulch. They end up cashing their social security checks just the same.
Any incumbent has tremendous advantages. Basically, they have to seriously fumble the ball to lose. And yes, only a centrist has a prayer of beating Trump.
I still stand by my statement as centrist policies are popular too as indicated. I can already see the right wing media going with mantra “Be more like Europe” in response to Sanders/Warren. And guess what, progressivism in Europe isn’t doing too well. And I’ll still stick to fightin’ Joe Biden because I am more moderate and prefer more centrism/incrementalism.
Well, when they've had it stolen out of all their paychecks for all their working lives, yes, they say: "Ima gonna get it back." Which was part of the original plan.
Idk... the GOP lost the midterms because of Trump during a strong economy. Trump isn’t that bullet proof. I just think more centrism is the best antidote to Trump’s extreme style and frankly the country would be better off. I am tired of wildly swinging back and forth between left and right. The throw the baby out with the bath water mentality is terrible.
I believe that for starters the economy and job outlook has improved in those areas, as it has for most of the country as a whole. Then there's the tax cut, then there's some foreign policy successes; and then if the Dems nominate an extreme left winger...there you go.
There are a few moving parts here to consider. First, it is a sign of how insane the Republican Party is that Schultz, a standard issue low-taxes-for-us-plutocrats up to this point, has zero chance of getting the Republican nomination over a manifestly incompetent, corrupt buffoon who is compromised by a foreign power who is tremendously unpopular going into a tough reelection fight. It is worth noting further just why Schultz is so unacceptable to today’s Republican Party with his plain and sensible talk about the debt, deficits, and the fantasy of "free market" healthcare. (By the way, how come nobody ever advocates Free Healthcare? Someone ought to ask. . .) Hang around a college campus as I do (so that you don’t have to), you soon discover that the alt-right doesn’t just hate Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, and the ideas of Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek—they also hate George W. Bush and Dick Cheney . Say what?
BTW, anyone that runs for president is going to be a "rich" person, in terms of financial assets. So the charge of "not representing the common man" (or woman) is pretty ridiculous. No one that gets near or into the WH is going to remotely resemble "the common man" -- whatever party they represent.
That's manifestly nonsense. First there's no tangible center as a practical matter between Trump's outright corruption, flirtation with nazism, incompetence - you either are willing to tolerate these things or are against them. There's no inherent virtue in being "a 50% nazi" or "50% climate change denialist" centrist. It doesn't exist Second, as stated ad nauseum, no voters actually occupy the sparse ideological "middle ground" that Schultz thinks they want. Frankly the only reason why it's generating press at all is because it's so absurdly symbolic of our current epoch, - super rich out of touch old white guy dilettante thinks he has all the answers! And the only tangible answer he seems to ahve so far is "protect teh super rich guys like me!" We'll look back and laugh about his candidacy less than a year from now.
Just a quick thought -- I think those losses have more to do with which seats become open (ie, where the races were). In essence, the GOP prolly never had that good a shot in a lot of those races.
Actually they have not improved in those areas with auto plants still closing, Carrier plant moving to Mexico and Foxconn deal collapsing. Why do you think most voters in those states benefited from the tax cuts and if it is a winning policy why did the Democrats win overwhelmingly last November? none of those things won in November why will they win in 2 years?
Ya, it's the wellfare queen who whispers "do this or find another way to finance your next election" to establisment politicians. One of the most out of touch posts I've ever seen. Look at the historical trend of the percentage of wealth owned by the top .1% over the last century. It's trending in one direction. There will be a point when that percentage is unsustainable where there will be no other likely outcome other than a violent Bolshevik revolution. If you want to continue to kick the can down the road, and wait for that time, you are an idiot. For some reason, even during the height of the red scare, Americans was quite happy with marginal tax rates for the top bracket above 70%, happy enough to experience the most successful manufacturing boom in the 20th century. It shows how brainwashed you are that you believe that corporate wellfare doesn't exist.
Usually when a president can brag about a relatively surging stock market and consistent gdp growth, they will consistently see aproval ratings well above 50%. Trump can't even do that. I'm sorry, but I think many Trump supporters are in for a very harsh reality. The moment the market trends downward, he has no legs to stand on.
There was nothing preventing Shultz from running as a Democrat. Nothing except for Shultz. The idea that he was or is somehow kept from doing so by "the Left" is outright nonsense. Now that Shultz has stepped into it to the neck with his "independent" run to somehow "save" the Democratic Party from "left wing" extremists, and making comments attacking the party, what chance he may have had if the man had simply announced that he was running as a Democrat has vanished, in my opinion. I don't think some folks here realize just how determined Democrats and a lot of independents are to defeat trump. The party is as united as I've seen it in decades. United by trump and his insane presidency. Sure, we'll fight among ourselves nominating a candidate, but that's business as usual. What we won't put up with is a Democrat deciding that he'll run as an independent because he's rich and doesn't want to dirty his hands by actually running in the primaries against the men and women who are also interested in being president and defeating trump. He claims that he wants to "save" the party from itself. Again, what utter nonsense. All Shultz will do, if he's stupid enough to carry out his plan (and I suspect that ultimately he won't), is help trump. That's not going to fly. In my opinion. boycott Starbucks!
You know we can disagree without you immediately resorting to insults, right? It doesn't make your position stronger by attacking me.
Ironic when you just labeled over 80% of Americans as "takers" and characterized them as akin to mob rule. Really no legs to stand on. So do you have any actual rebuttals? Let me ask you in another way. If I told you politicians are corrupt, would you agree? Probably. Now ask yourself "how are they corrupt?" .
