- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 11/21/16 at 1:47 pm to DelU249
quote:
she would've gotten someone like Rubio or cruz that she could steamroll.
There is truth here. It was a foregone conclusion that any election involving a Clinton was going to be dirty and negative. Her "friends" in the media built up the exact candidate they thought couldn't possibly win. It's possible they built up the only candidate that could play her dirty political game even better than she could. Trump had no problems hitting her back. Every little thing he said or tweeted was covered for days by the media.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 1:47 pm to Hawkeye95
Sure. And if LSU scores 11 points they beat Bama earlier this month.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 1:49 pm to member12
quote:
Sure. Flip "a few" votes in Florida, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Ohio.....and she had it in the bag.
she only needed wisconsin, pa and michigan. Its not ridiculous to think she could have done something a little bit different and won those states. She barely visited Michigan and didn't do shite in wisconsin.
Don't make a play for arizona and instead shore up wisconsin and michigan? Or write off North carolina and invest in pennslyvannia.
Yall are acting like it was a blowout. It wasn't.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 1:49 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
I think she would have lost to rubio
Rubio is not Trump, but he's far from Romney....and not completely helpless against the kind of negative, filthy campaign that Clinton ran.
This post was edited on 11/21/16 at 1:51 pm
Posted on 11/21/16 at 1:50 pm to Jax-Tiger
For me personally, with all that you listed, each and every single person I knew voting for her before all this stuff did not change their vote even after all this happened.
Not
A
Single
One.
Not
A
Single
One.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 1:51 pm to Jax-Tiger
She overvalued the Clinton brand and being a woman as the best reasons people should have to vote for her. While I think a small percentage of voters will be turned away by the idea of a woman president, it had far less to do with that than the way media and celebrities were sucking her dick and basically celebrating her elitism. Trump appealed to the blue-collar workers and went around the country bringing his message to people. She mostly presented her message to people with money. I was not so far away from where she held her fundraiser on Cape Cod, I think that was the $25,000/plate event.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 1:57 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
she only needed wisconsin, pa and michigan. Its not ridiculous to think she could have done something a little bit different and won those states.
If onlys and justs were candies and nuts, then everyday would be Erntedankfest
quote:
Yall are acting like it was a blowout
She got steam rolled in the great lakes and came close to losing Minnesota and Virginia. Pennsylvania and Michigan had not voted for a republican president in almost 30 years (even more for Wisconsin).
That makes it a blowout.
This post was edited on 11/21/16 at 1:58 pm
Posted on 11/21/16 at 1:59 pm to member12
quote:
That makes it a blowout.
no it doesn't. Historic and trendmaking, but not a blow out.
I think for a blowout to occur you have to win the popular vote. but that is just me, and well almost everyone else.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 2:01 pm to Jax-Tiger
Just NOT being a stupid, self-centered, ignorant, entitled, haughty, willful, unpleasant, lying, greedy, unauthentic witch would have helped her tremendously.
Did I say dishonest...?
About half of the people of this country had her figured as above and voted Trump, many, as myself voted for him because he wasn't HER. MANY of the other half didn't like her for the reason above but voted for her cuz she wasn't Trump.
The other thing could have been NOT to attack the coal industry. In a close election, that was a horrible thing to do. Glad she did it tho.
Did I say dishonest...?
About half of the people of this country had her figured as above and voted Trump, many, as myself voted for him because he wasn't HER. MANY of the other half didn't like her for the reason above but voted for her cuz she wasn't Trump.
The other thing could have been NOT to attack the coal industry. In a close election, that was a horrible thing to do. Glad she did it tho.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 2:17 pm to Jax-Tiger
should have been aborted or run down someone's leg
Posted on 11/21/16 at 2:17 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
no it doesn't. Historic and trendmaking, but not a blow out.
> 
Also congrats on moving to the bargaining stage.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 2:18 pm to Jax-Tiger
I think she probably regrets that screeching "WHY AREN'T I FIFTY POINTS AHEAD, YOU MIGHT ASK" video 
Posted on 11/21/16 at 2:45 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
I think for a blowout to occur you have to win the popular vote. but that is just me, and well almost everyone else.
California was always going to support her by the millions. So was NY.
Take those two states out of the equation and NO democrat ever ever ever wins the White House again much less the popular vote.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 2:47 pm to Jax-Tiger
The better question would be: Was there any single thing that the Democratic Party would like to do over?
Answer: Yes, probably, stealing the primary from Bernie Sanders?
Answer: Yes, probably, stealing the primary from Bernie Sanders?
Posted on 11/21/16 at 2:59 pm to member12
quote:The whole point of this thread is "what if".
If onlys and justs were candies and nuts, then everyday would be Erntedankfest
Posted on 11/21/16 at 3:01 pm to Jax-Tiger
What difference, at this point, does it make? 
Posted on 11/21/16 at 3:23 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:Rubio wasn't winning PA, MI or WI
I think she would have lost to rubio
MN was within 40,000 votes
she ran against the one candidate that could beat her and he was there in part because she and her cronies thought he was the easiest mark they could run against.
Posted on 11/21/16 at 3:26 pm to Hawkeye95
all of this is semantics...a republican getting over 300 EVs was unthinkable no matter the candidate
in that sense it was a blowout
but that discussion is irrelevant. the vote totals in MN, WI, PA, OH, MI were a kick in the fricking balls for democrats. a fricking nightmare. those are states, especially MI and MN, that republicans cannot compete let alone win (within 40k of flipping MN for Christ's sake)
in that sense it was a blowout
but that discussion is irrelevant. the vote totals in MN, WI, PA, OH, MI were a kick in the fricking balls for democrats. a fricking nightmare. those are states, especially MI and MN, that republicans cannot compete let alone win (within 40k of flipping MN for Christ's sake)
Posted on 11/21/16 at 3:28 pm to Jax-Tiger
Keep her spot as Senator from NY and don't become Obama's Secretary of State.
Would've saved her from everything related to Benghazi, private server, deleted emails, some of the pay for play allegations
Would've saved her from everything related to Benghazi, private server, deleted emails, some of the pay for play allegations
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News