“odd. in 2016, 10-15% of primary opponent voters not voting for Clinton was an insurmountable deficit.

Obviously nets aren’t enough.  Bulletproof glass from pole is the only solution.

Am I? Or are you failing to realize, that in 2016 just like in 2008, there were a group of voters, whom no matter what Clinton would have done, that were just flat out not going to vote for her because reasons? The only difference is that in 2016 there were enough of those people to swing the election to Trump.

yes, yes, Not Mad, Actually Laughing.

I’m not screaming...its more of a chuckle at your premise actually. The thing is I’m all for a candidate who will run a better campaign that HRC did, but the Dem nominee, whomever it ends up being, will not be the perfect candidate to every voter on the left,regardless of whether its far left or center left or…

Complete and total bullshit. A POTUS election isn’t a TV or a phone. There is an inherent importance to it, and if people don’t understand its impact and the responsibility they have then they are idiots. A candidate’s bad campaign doesn’t absolve those voters of their idiocy.

A two year old has no place at a baseball game. The kid isn’t going to get anything out of it, or remember any of it. That is 100% on the parents. 

Look up at the ceiling and you’ll see the point flying directly over your head. If you PAY ATTENTION you KNOW that presidents appoint SCOTUS judges, and anyone who NEEDED a candidate, or in the case of your example a tv ad, to convince them that those judges are extremely important is PART OF THE PROBLEM.

Yeah, but she didn’t promise them a unicorn in their garage and a money tree in their yard.

Man, sure would have been great if you had paid attention, huh?

Yeah, but she didn’t promise them a unicorn in their garage and a money tree in their yard. So keeping the SCOTUS out of the Federalist Society just wasn’t enough of a consolation.

It ended the day Scalia dropped dead and Kochaine Mitch grinned and proudly declared democracy to be dead.

Never. This is all going pretty much according to plan for people like him.

The real geniuses are the people who were too stupid to realize that Clinton offered them the chance to appoint two SCOTUS justices who weren’t Federalist Society zealot hacks.

But don’t you see? People need to vote based on who inspires them, and who is pure. Not on silly things like the Supreme Court and control of the Senate. /s

You’re not wrong, but (at least to me anyways) “but her e-mails” has become shorthand for attacking those who didn’t vote, voted Stein, etc, because of any real or perceived dislike of HRC.

Thinking the loss had anything to do with her email is a disingenuously farcical. Just another sign of our “representative democracy” letting us down, when you win by 3 mil plus votes , but still “lose”. Just like gerrymandering. These fucks can’t win on the issues, they can’t win on election night, they can ONLY win…

This is worse than Citizens United. This is the end of the Republic. Call me hyperbolic if you want to, but this is where it ends. This means that Republicans have a green light to cheat to maintain power, and prevent themselves from ever losing that power.

If California embraced gerrymandering and went nuts, the whole thing would be over the next day. 

“Of all times to abandon the Court’s duty to declare the law, this was not the one. The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government. Part of the Court’s role in that system is to defend its foundations. None is more important than free and fair elections. With respect but deep sadness, I…