If you aren't riling the fuck out of dems then you ain't doing something right.

Yeah, I don't get the "play nice or else" mentality a lot of people seem to propagate.

It is exactly why we are in this mess.

It is exactly why even in local politics that affect me things are an absolute mess.  When discussing it the first thing I said was A) I believed it wouldn't fully affect me (idiocy on my part) and B) I should have spoken up and called them out when I saw what I perceived to be an issue.

The response was well, they'll just get you.  They'll just drag your name through the mud!  Yes, they would (and currently are), but the questions need asked and shitbird behavior and abuse of tax payer money needs called out period.  Trump has no hesitation to call BS what it is; BS.

Trying to play nice and be "professional" and "educated" got us where we are.  Now, will the elites learn from their past bad choices that led to a President Trump or will they continued to double and triple down?

A lot of people seem to forget it wasn't republicans that got Trump elected. They voted for McCain, The Voted for Ryan how did that work out? What pushed Trump over the top was the people that were and still are sick of politicians on both sides of the same coin. Run any of them three idiots and Hillary wins, sorry but the never Trumpers  don't have enough clout to carry an election

No

Any upset to the status quo uniparty and chicken littles start to find common cause with the progressive movement to get in control of the narrative.

Weak and sad.

You are a liar.  I can’t stand liars.  It goes right to the heart of their integrity.

Voter turnout was higher in 2016 than it was in 2012.

When the votes were certified in late December 2016, Trump had 2 million+ more votes than Romney did in 2012, and Hillary only had 71+ thousand votes less than Obama did in 2012.  I underlined the important part in red in the second picture.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/12/29/2016-vs-2012-how-trumps-win-and-clintons-votes-stack-up-to-obama-and-romney/#873768f1661e





Trump also go more votes than Romney in 38 states, including New York.



You lied about voter turnout.

1) Trump got 2 million more votes than Romney.

2) Hillary got slightly more than 71,000 votes less than Obama.

Hopefully this is all starting to sink in.

I added pictures so maybe it will sink in.

Liar.

FPNI.

Romney had already lost, Jeb! and Cruz couldn't even beat Trump in the primaries.

Of the three Cruz would have had the best chance but I don't see how he would have won in the upper Midwest.

Liar, no it wasn’t.

Trump got 2 million more votes than Romney and voter turnout was higher in 2016 than in 2012!

Trump pulled in more votes from various traditionally Dem demographics than prior GOP candidates, including Romney.    All three of them would have lost, and Romney and Jeb would have been fucking worthless in office anyways.

Cruz would not have necessarily been bad, but he was not who we needed in office.   We needed someone to force a bunch of issues - either fix it from within the system, or arm-twist the Dems into making irreversible fuckups.   Which they are doing left and right.

 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 

	D	R	Total
2008	69,498,516	59,948,323	129,446,839
2012	65,915,795	60,933,504	126,849,299
2016	65,853,514	62,984,828	128,838,342

What Trump managed to do was somehow win with at least 3M votes less that the previous two winners (and 3M less votes than the last loser, Hillary), and only 2M more votes than the previous two losers.

lol Trump had 2M more votes than the previous loser.  But somehow didn't come close to the votes the previous winner had x2.

Was lower than 2008.

NO

No, I think we’d have President Hillary if anyone but Trump won the nomination.

I’m a fan of Ted Cruz. But when it comes down to it, a lot of people don’t find him very likable. He would have easily won over the Republican base, but he would have had a hard time bringing the “fence sitters” to his side.  You can’t win an election without getting those votes.

So higher and lower, so average for the 8 years, so it wasn’t “low”.

Still lying.

Nothing you posted refutes his claim.

I had a point to make, that the 2016 election was more of a race to the bottom, and Hillary won, but them I realized she actually had 3,000,000 more votes than Trump so that wasn't actually valid. I just didn't want to waste all that working making a table, which still looks like shit.

Again - Trump under-performed the GOP candidate in ~90 percent of Congressional races.  There was plenty of room for a less-terrible GOP candidate to pick up more votes.

Trump was lucky Clinton was an awful candidate running a terrible campaign.

Those are your feelings.

Not facts.

Any candidate running against Trump will be awful and terrible at campaigning.

Trump has an uncanny ability of tarnishing people's political ambitions, especially if they are criminals.

Nope. Not a chance. Everybody else would have run a standard campaign, and no standard campaign could have beat the dems, even Hitlery.

The Dems knew how to counter that style campaign, how to silence and corner the candidates.

They had no idea how to deal with Trump, he did things nobody else has done, and nobody else could have done and gotten away with.

I said it during the primaries, and paraphrasing myself, " There is a populist, nationalist wave among the people, and Trump is the Big Kahuna. Only Trump knows how to ride this wave. Everybody else will be swept under it trying to swim around it."

I also said, that anyone that could see what the people wanted, and sell them on the idea that he would get it for them, would be able to do the same thing. Trump, being a businessman, and a salesman, can read the customer, and can formulate his product to satisfy them. they're buying him because he is the embodiment of what they ( we ) want.

We wanted someone to finally fight back and tell the left to go to hell. We wanted someone that wouldn't back down and that would give as good or better than he got. We were sick of the "high road" politicians, that got mowed down, or ducked and ran when the left took a swing. We were tired of the pussies.

Cruz was closer to our beliefs as far as policy goes, and was smarter on the constitutional issues than Trump.

Cruz was a pussy like the rest of them.

He showed that when he parroted the left and blamed Trump and his supporters for the violence at the Trump rallies when it was Antifa and Bernie / Hillary supporters starting the crap.

That is when he lost me. He bowed down to the left, accepted their position on the issue.

He would have been a bump in the road to Hilary, because he would have wussed out just like the rest of them.

What we needed was a wrecking ball, and we got one. He's dangerous to both sides, which is why both wings of the globalist bird have attempted to beat him to death.

The only problem we have, is that the swamp was much deeper than we ever expected, much deeper. And the RINOs were more beholden to it than they were us. We had both houses, and while not a super majority, had they worked for us instead of against Trump, we'd have a wall, we'd have the HPA, and we'd have a lot more. We'd not have had a bumpstock ban or any of that, because had they been able to be counted on, there would have not been a need to offer a sacrifice to the left. Even the NRA abandoned us on that, and on the red flag laws.

When you're a leader, and you look back and your team has left the field, leaving you and a handful of your team exposed, you have to fall back to a better defensive position. I don't like it, but that's the reality. Otherwise you get killed.

Control your emotions.  And watch your mouth.

Voter turnout was low, as a percentage of eligible and registered voters.

That’s a fact.

That he outperformed Romney in no way changes that fact.

The electorate was unenthusiastic about both candidates, that is undeniable.

No because they would have all rolled over and played dead no matter what lies were said about them.  Trump was aggressive and a great counter puncher.  Something that republicans had never done before.  It is also why he won the nomination in the first place.  If for nothing else, I will be forever grateful to him for defeating she who will not be named.

UN-fuck yourself.

You define turnout as beating Romney’s dismal performance.

THAT is intellectually dishonest.

Sorry  your girl lost...

I voted for Trump.

I vote for the most conservative candidate is every election.

You can’t say the same.

Anyone could have beat Hillary, given what they did to Sanders.   They unabashedly cheated in the primary.  The hate for Hillary was palpable after that.

If they hadn’t cheated Sanders and she had somehow still won in the primary, it would have been a tougher race and she would likely be President. And that, is a scary thought.

Or if Sanders had won against her in the primary, he would likely be President.  Even more scary perhaps.

Having 2 million more votes does equate to higher turnout unless there is a large increase in eligible voters in 4 years.  I previously linked a 2017 study that found turnout in 2016 was higher than 2012.

You have no integrity and continue to lie even after being shown proof of your lies.

And you’re the one who is getting emotional for being called out with facts, voter turnout 2016 > 2012.

Keep living in the fantasy world you made up for yourself.

No.

Cruz would have probably put up a fight, but the other two would have turtled up like the little bitches they are and let hitlery peg them on live TV.

Higher than 2012 does not equal “high voter turnout.”

Funny you say that....

I would guess we exist in the same political circles.  Everyone I know, (with the exception of my leftists friends),  voted for Trump.

My old UAW friends voted for Trump.  Those guys were never voting for Cruz.

Cruz never had a chance.

They screwed the pooch on their primary as i think more Bernie supporters would have voted for Hillary.  I think a lot of the Dems would not vote for Bernie.  A lot of them realize Socialism takes money out of their pocket.  We shall see soon enough.

I don't think so but we will never know. History has been written and what has transpired cannot be changed.

Yes it does if the increase in eligible voters is less than the increase in votes.

I never have used the ignore feature until a kangaroo showed me the light.

You’ve proven nothing other than an inability to control your emotions.

The Romney election was a dismal low point.  Out performing Romney is no feat.

The turnout as a percentage of the electorate was LOW.  That is a fact.

Not Bob Dole low, but not GWB 2004 high.

Now you're making yourself look foolish in front of everyone.

I presented facts and you are the one getting emotional.

Voter turnout 2016 > 2012.

Did you really think none of us would look it up.

One midget being taller than another midget does not make that midget TALL.

No, it wasn’t.  It was average.  So in your mind posting facts and using civil language is being “emotional”.  I even linked it for you earlier that you obviously didn’t bother to read.

Not compared to 2008 and 2004.  A higher of percentage voted in those two elections.  MUCH higher percentage in 2008.

Be careful, you’re going to be accused of being “emotional” by posting sterile facts.

2008 was high and that's been an anamoly since the 60s

Yes, your stats show low turnout compared to 2004 and 2008.  2012 was low turnout, and 2016 was, too.

Three other posters have tried to explain it to you.  Stay ignorant.

They also went out and voted for Trump.  I know many liberal life long democrats who voted for him over Clinton.  None of them would have voted for Cruz or any of the other Republican candidates.