DNC Chair Schultz Loses Speaking Spot at Convention

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Serious question Boreas, how long are we Clinton supporters going to have to walk around on eggshells around you Bernie supporters?

Bernie basically wrote 90% of the Democratic party platform and it still isn't enough apparently for the irreconcilables.

Is that what you call what you're doing because I don't. For a start you (collective you) can stop referring to people you disagree with as whiners, insane or liars. Stop with the "yaaaaaawn" or the "Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz" and any of the sarcastic little "mini-insults" you've been throwing around.

You'll have to ask someone else to comment on the irreconcilable part. I don't know how often I have to say that I'm reconciled to Hillary being the candidate and that I'm planning to vote for her.

My major concern at this point is that she'll lose. As of today were looking at a dead heat and she is a weak campaigner and a profoundly unpopular figure that she can't seem to pull of Trump and has even managed to squander what lead she has.

[Rajoo]

Of the regulars on this forum, John, TJ, Mr. Pots, Nailer, myself and probably Mr. Noone are not exactly in Hillary's camp. Marc and Dave (Bluestreak) may not be all in for Hillary either. Besides TJ and I do not plan on voting for Hillary.

Have we all lost our faculties?

[donquixote99]

I don't see Hillary as a weak campaigner. i see her as bucking strong trends this year that are adverse to her. There are some parallels to the 1968 election. Humphrey also faced a progressive insurgency that damaged him, and had to deal with a right wing candidate that drew great strength from the hatred of the right for the incumbent.

Conventional wisdom is Hillary needs to go negative on trump like crazy, but I don't think that will work--the negatives on Trump are already out there, and have already done what they are going to do. I think Hillary needs to sell her ability to really analyze complexity and come up with good solutions--glittering good solutions that can be sold as having real substance if you drill down. in other words don't sell Trump as insane--sell yourself as sane. Humphrey the Happy Warrior almost closed the gap with Nixon this way--if he'd have had a little more time, he'd have done it.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Serious question Boreas, how long are we Clinton supporters going to have to walk around on eggshells around you Bernie supporters?

Do whatever you want.

The pooch has been screwed dude.

Walking on eggshells isn't going to change that.

[Pio1980]

We can survive four years of Hillz, four years of an immature narcissistic con man backed by a hard right wing hack is something I'm just not willing to risk.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Is that what you call what you're doing because I don't. For a start you (collective you) can stop referring to people you disagree with as whiners, insane or liars. Stop with the "yaaaaaawn" or the "Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz" and any of the sarcastic little "mini-insults" you've been throwing around.

You'll have to ask someone else to comment on the irreconcilable part. I don't know how often I have to say that I'm reconciled to Hillary being the candidate and that I'm planning to vote for her.

My major concern at this point is that she'll lose. As of today were looking at a dead heat and she is a weak campaigner and a profoundly unpopular figure that she can't seem to pull of Trump and has even managed to squander what lead she has.

First off, I'm not responsible for the 'collective', whatever that may be. As to my 'little' sarcastic responses to you, grow a thicker skin or stop spouting nonsensical claims such as your last paragraph. You are comparing polls that follow the RNC without waiting for a similar time span after the DNC.

I guess I've gotten my eggshell answer, it's never.
Fine, whatever floats your dinghy.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by bobabode

First off, I'm not responsible for the 'collective', whatever that may be. As to my 'little' sarcastic responses to you, grow a thicker skin or stop spouting nonsensical claims such as your last paragraph. You are comparing polls that follow the RNC without waiting for a similar time span after the DNC.

I guess I've gotten my eggshell answer, it's never.
Fine, whatever floats your dinghy.

You asked a question and I gave you an honest answer. If you don't like the answer, maybe you shouldn't have asked the question.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by Boreas

You asked a question and I gave you an honest answer. If you don't like the answer, maybe you shouldn't have asked the question.

Sure you did, by assigning blame for other people's comments to me.
Pardon me while I don my hipwaders.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Sure you did, by assigning blame for other people's comments to me.
Pardon me while I don my hipwaders.

I wasn't talking about just you (collective). And, after all, the question you asked was rather argumentative so a similar response to the question is only to be expected.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

I don't see Hillary as a weak campaigner. i see her as bucking strong trends this year that are adverse to her. There are some parallels to the 1968 election. Humphrey also faced a progressive insurgency that damaged him, and had to deal with a right wing candidate that drew great strength from the hatred of the right for the incumbent.

The importance of the riots at the convention and the nomination of HHH, who had not run in a single primary, instead of McCarthy cannot be underestimated in any post mortem of the 1968 campaign.

Hillary has spent $57 million on campaign ads. The Trump campaign has spent $4 million..... and he's winning. That is a bad campaigner.