Pops: Your thoughts

[Sir X]

About her message - i said her messaging wasnt viewed as favourable as Trumps, with all what you said , the other part of the message was " I am not as bad as trump with all my faults".Her problem was that of an alligator in a swamp telling you , its safe to cross trust me , its comparable to her being a Wallstreet/washington insider and telling people upset with the shitstem , give me a chance I can fix it .


I wont go into her message - deal with what people voted on , the messaging! It didnt connect .Two seperate issues , though connected by delivery, she was weak.You would be forced to look at the persona of the messenger and of course history, all factors in giving you some truth as to how people viewed the two candidates as options.Hers was weaker than Trump, not that he was better.

You need to deal with those truths if you want to move forward with the Bern's.

[Islandman]

Re the Obamacare replacement, I expect the benefits to be more or less the same. Other than the name the other change will likely be how the program tries to force/encourage healthy people to sign up and start paying premiums before they get sick and need health insurance.

This has always been the most difficult problem to solve and Republicans have no slam dunk answer to it . Obamacare, with Romneycare as its inspiration, does it with the individual mandate and this is what has been labelled as socialism and challenged as unconstitutional. Republicans think they can find a "free market" solution to this problem but I highly doubt it.

In the end it is mostly about the optics. They put themselves in a situation where they pretty much have to repeal the law now that they have the power to do so. Some see it as a complete scrubbing of Obamas legacy on reforming healthcare but I don't think that is accurate because there is no going back to how things were before the ACA.

[Karl]

About her message - i said her messaging wasnt viewed as favourable as Trumps, with all what you said , the other part of the message was " I am not as bad as trump with all my faults".Her problem was that of an alligator in a swamp telling you , its safe to cross trust me , its comparable to her being a Wallstreet/washington insider and telling people upset with the shitstem , give me a chance I can fix it .

Let me accept your above as your position on Hillary - So who is Trump? How does his resume = track record compare with Hillary's on hobnobbing with Wall Street? Trump is the ultimate insider. Sure Trump is branded with the Real Estate investor, developer...successful guy but who does not realise that his being in pole position to make all those deals has to do with his insider connections granting him preferred treatment and sweet deals on tax abatements, land use changes, permitting, etc. The man makes no secret of that. He brags about it and in his canvassing across the country he openly spoke on is greasing the wheels by advancing cash to politicians.

Surely you must have asked yourself questions or at least mused on who else did he have to court? ...and what of his other investments, wheel and dealing there?

Hillary Clinton v Trump who had more interests with insiders - In different sectors of the economy and the associated power-brokers?

To underline his position, Trump told the voters exactly what he was going to attempt by how he planned to handle his business interests while President and thus privy to inside information his vaunted position as President would put in his hands.

I wont go into her message - deal with what people voted on , the messaging! It didnt connect .Two seperate issues , though connected by delivery, she was weak.You would be forced to look at the persona of the messenger and of course history, all factors in giving you some truth as to how people viewed the two candidates as options.Hers was weaker than Trump, not that he was better.

You need to deal with those truths if you want to move forward with the Bern's.

If she was weaker than Trump in the eyes of the American people, how do you square that with her receiving from the American people more than 1,000,000 votes in excess of that Trump received?

The fact is, she was not as strong as she needed to be in places she needed to win the Electoral College vote. ...but listening to the talking heads and following on their lead that she was rejected by the Americans who voted does not square with the facts.

[Gamma]

Well she got the popular vote, what consolation is that?

[Sir X]

Stop listening to talking heads,she was rejected as you stated in places where she needed to win,in fact she campaigned relentlessly to win,your Florida,N. Carolina PA,Ohio and the unexpected !

As for the messaging.Again the swamp comparison,she is the alligator that people don't believe will guide her along been there for years,a wolf in sheep's clothing come along and says,she is lying,crooked,going to rig the crossing,dont care about you but the swamp and I am going to drain it.

She couldn't run from being defined as such and people voted according to her percieved negatives.

That's it in a nutshell,that and other racist ,xenophobic strains.You have to look at not only HRC messaging and that would lead you to look at Trumps,Warts and all ,the only conclusion is people were scared of the alligator more than the wolf in sheep's clothing.

Now we are left to deal with the persona of the Wolf and we need to admit ,where blame lies in order to move forward The DNC/ HRC politricks machine have alot to answer for.

[Don1]

Dear Elda,

You completely mis-state her message.
Here it is:
- Here are my plans for the country that shall improve your (each citizen's life)
i) Increasing job availability by investing in new technologies as we move forward on being a world leader;

ii) We tool and buildout infrastructure;

iii) fix and expand access to health care - i.e. move ObamaCare (Note: Medicare and Medicaid are vital components of ObamaCare);

iv) tackle student debt and improve delivery of education for all;

v) Improve and expand trade-agreements (Our largest markets reside outside of the USA and domestic US employment levels depend on same to a major extent);

vi) Take new growth industries to depressed former industrial areas of the country - e.g. clean energy, tech laboratories, etc;

vii) Immigration reform (as economic and moral effort);

viii) Others - All are her website....foreign policy, national security - financial and personal safety, cyber security, military strength & world hot-spots, etc.

b) Trump has told us who he is and here are reminders both of his positions on the issues, his temperament and unsuitability for the job of being your president.

NB: Bernie's faction?
Besides Bernie, who are they?

(On both sides) The established representatives both in the senate and the house remain firmly in control. Yes, adjustments are being made in response to the incoming Trump administration but that is a far cry from ceding control.

With this and many other of your previous ruminations in this Rum Bar...you have conclusively demonstrated that tribalism is an intrinsic part of your DNA.

You morph seamlessly from PNP-related tribalism now to DemonCrat Party sycophancy. This of course is your inalienable right.

D1 abhors political tribalism as an abomination upon Black people...not to mention a manifestation of epic logic-fail. Consequently I will (reluctantly) be forced to treat you in the manner I treat tribalists...with a certain disdain.

Happily though, your agreeable personality will no doubt spare you from the more severe blows... fram mi Tims...reserved for Grade A tribalists

So fret not in your tribal affairs...you're not (yet) in the category of disagreeable tribalists e.g. Jawge, Lazie & Ben & Co

Hope springs eternal for your eventual redemption

Yours in logic,

D1

[Gamma]

Mi haffi agree wid yuh on that

Karl mek up his mind first and then mek up the facts after