the next democrat has to offer tangibles to men and openly reject lgbt feminism babble.. or they will lose

[Roger king]

What is wrong with you? Seriously, do you have a mental problem?

If what you are saying is true, you could easily find actual experts supporting your position. It should not be an inconvenience at all for you to find any political pundit to take your side of the issue, if your position is based in facts. If you are an educated man, I expect you to be able to support your position with actual sources. If your next response lack any sources, I will consider your position void and ignore your antics from now on. Since you have demonstrated to me that you do not have the ability to even use the computer right in front of you to do research on an issue that you are supposedly so convinced you are right about.

I will point out you are the first to resort to ad hominems and name calling, i have not and will not partake in that. I can discuss politics and debate the issues without that course. I have told you to look up wikpedia on previous us elections and electoral history, i specifically cited numerous political elections where it was considered a blow out and a substantial victory and others it were not and use the same comparison you ignored that because it didnt support your narrative, same when i cited any credible newspapers. Again point me to the credible poltiical analsyst that calls this election a landslide, and i dont refer to any right wing partisan like tucker carlson or shapiro, you have not shown that. You are using terms like blow out that for generations or at least decades have a specific connotation or meaning and ascribing it faslely to this, i repeat by your own logic mitt romney and john kerry lost their elections in a blow out fashion. Karl rove ran the bush campaign not even the man has described bush 2004 election victory as an electoral landslide and that is what you are now implying

 

[Da_Eggman]

Canadians always know best

 

[Malcolmxxx_23]

You can't give any single political party or ideology too much control for too long. Human nature will eventually take over and along with it hubris.

I worked with a guy who was born in Canada but lives in the US now. His family has no intention of ever going back.

Bro we getting taxed extra when pumping gas
13percent sales tax on goods
50 percent on capital gains
3million new nap types

 

[Uachet]

You can't give any single political party or ideology too much control for too long. Human nature will eventually take over and along with it hubris.

I worked with a guy who was born in Canada but lives in the US now. His family has no intention of ever going back.

Exactly. That is why I like my state to remain purple. I don't want either side to have cart blanche, because each side will start pushing through absolute BS policies when they have the full power to do so. Was why I wanted Kamala to win, to at least balance out that Supreme Court if the chance arises. Well unfortunately for us, she ran such a poor campaign, that now Trump may be able to make that court completely conservative for the rest of my life.

 

[LadyJ2]

“Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for YOU”

That shyt slapped, not even gonna lie.

 

[Fillerguy]

"A new report shows the Harris-Walz campaign and its Democratic allies spent nearly $1.4 billion on aired political ads in their failed bid to defeat President-elect Trump, outspending the 45th president and Republicans by nearly $460 million."



She spent more than $460million than Trump, so even with Elon Musk spending it did not even come close to what her spending was. She ran a bad campaign that did not ignite the Democratic electorate to come out and vote for her. One main problem was her inability to articulate solutions to problems many Democrats had, because her Corporate handlers would not allow her.

This problem will remain with every candidate in the Democratic party, if they are beholden to corporate money. It also shows though, that the most money does not always translate into the most votes.

Stop it.

Elon Musk purchased one of the largest and most influential social media platforms in history with the explicit purpose to elevate Right wing rhetoric. He dumped $44 billion the proceed to stan Donald Trump for 4 years.

 

[Uachet]

I will point out you are the first to resort to ad hominems and name calling, i have not and will not partake in that. I can discuss politics and debate the issues without that course. I have told you to look up wikpedia on previous us elections and electoral history, i specifically cited numerous political elections where it was considered a blow out and a substantial victory and others it were not and use the same comparison you ignored that because it didnt support your narrative, same when i cited any credible newspapers. Again point me to the credible poltiical analsyst that calls this election a landslide, and i dont refer to any right wing partisan like tucker carlson or shapiro, you have not shown that. You are using terms like blow out that for generations or at least decades have a specific connotation or meaning and ascribing it faslely to this, i repeat by your own logic mitt romney and john kerry lost their elections in a blow out fashion. Karl rove ran the bush campaign not even the man has described bush 2004 election victory as an electoral landslide and that is what you are now implying

I asked you a question, I did not say you were. You could have answered in the affirmative or negative. Still, you can't find a source, can you? You definitely have a problem, when you simply refuse to actually support your position with any expert take, when I have done so with mine. You are trying to argue without basis in reality, and thinking that you are arguing in good faith. Something is definitely wrong with that.

It is amazing that you consider your position valid when you can't even bring up a source to substantiate it. I will leave you to your rambling, because you have shown that you will only ramble and not actually research.

 

[Uachet]

Stop it.

Elon Musk purchased one of the largest and most influential social media platforms in history with the explicit purpose to elevate Right wing rhetoric. He dumped $44 billion the proceed to stan Donald Trump for 4 years.

You think twitter changed minds? You said yourself that it was not that more people in numbers voted for Trump, it was that less Democrats came out and voted for Kamala. Twitter had nothing to do with that. It was her and her lack of policies that caused that problem.

Actually pay attention to the reasons why people decided to not vote for Kamala, and a hint to you, it was not only because she was a woman or non-White. Look in the Areas of California, Chicago, New York City, the areas hit by the Hurricanes this year, and the Arab communities to get a picture of what may have caused people to not vote at all this election. Again, Twitter had nothing to do with their reasonings.

 

[Trojan 24]

“Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for YOU”

GOAT Tier ad if we being honest

 

[Still Benefited]

I think they gotta chill on the woman candidate. Americans are not mature enough to vote for a woman. Trump was never going to lose to a woman. Dems are dumb as fukk.

Hillary just won the popular vote and she isnt even well liked. And alot of people stayed home in that election too. Bad things happen when black people are infifferent to your nominee. Do yall still not see the pattern? Name the last time a Democrat lost when black people were engaged and loved the candidate? Ill wait

 

[Busted_Toes]

they won't get of the lgbt push because they want to usher in pedophilia..

 

[Roger king]

I asked you a question, I did not say you were. You could have answered in the affirmative or negative. Still, you can't find a source, can you? You definitely have a problem, when you simply refuse to actually support your position with any expert take, when I have done so with mine. You are trying to argue without basis in reality, and thinking that you are arguing in good faith. Something is definitely wrong with that.

It is amazing that you consider your position valid when you can't even bring up a source to substantiate it. I will leave you to your rambling, because you have shown that you will only ramble and not actually research.

You were implying i was mentally insane because i didn't go along with your talking points and narratives and now you act coy after the fact. No good faith conversation debating the issues would resort to that. Still cant look up Wikipedia can you? still cant spend 10 minutes to look up news papers of records to what is assign to the term electoral landslide? Still cant do the basic research on those specific elections i cited as examples? Let me bite on that one so you wont use it to hold up this paper weight arguement, you cited any expert you got it.
Eric levitz senior news correspondent from vox and political analyst was asked by a voter few days prior to the election what would be considered a blow out or electoral landslide and his direct quotation was ''
What counts as a landslide? Your biggest election questions, answered.
I guess there’s a distinction here between an Electoral College landslide and a “landslide” as colloquially understood. If Trump had won the popular vote by 1 percent in 2020, he would have probably swept every swing state (because the Electoral College was heavily biased toward the GOP that year).

But it would be a little misleading to call that an electoral landslide, given that nearly half of the country would have voted against him in that alternate scenario. I think that, due to polarization, genuine landslides like Reagan’s 1984 reelection are no longer possible.

Half of the country voted for kamala harris over 69 million in number she won 17 states, her opponent was within 1-3 percentage point of her in nearly every crucial swing state and within the popular vote margin, for reference biden beat trump by 5 million votes and won over 300 electoral votes and no one called 2020 a landslide or blowout election. Now will you do the basic level of research before using political terms that have certain connotations set over several decades of american political history?

 

[RedCloakBlackWraithe]

this is the way.

 

[Max Power]

“Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for YOU”

During FOOTBALL as well

Masterful campaign ad

 

[Rekkapryde]

Democrips have two problems:

1. They've completely left the center. Way too liberal and black men that vote aren't exactly the most liberal. You want the full black vote, get back to the center or somewhere close it. Keep pandering to these small groups and this will continue to happen.

2. Democrip voters are way too fukkin smart and what I've noticed and learned in the past 8 years is America isn't smart. Hell, people in general aren't smart when it comes to voting. Hardly anyone votes with any intelligent interest. It's all emotional.

And one last thing:

You can't fullmonger Democrips. Saying shyt like "Haitians are eating the pugs" don't work on them. But that goes back to my second point. Democrips are too cotdamn smart.

on point.

but what do you do with the Latinos? they're more important voting wise than even us now.