14th February 2017, 12:00 PM
I know it was hyperbole, but nothing anyone else does can ever be called the height of idiocy when Trump is president. They reached a small camp on the way to that height, sure, but they've no hope of reaching that particular flag. Not enough oxygen up there to support brain activity, you see.
On a serious note, democrat diehards are still telling me she's a proven candidate because "she won". Yes, we can't discount that she won the popular vote, but that's an argument for changing the electoral system itself, not for using Hillary again. In terms of percentage, she barely squeaked out that symbolic victory, and the democrats can't be satisfied with "just barely inched ahead". They need someone who promises a much bigger margin than that. More fundamentally, yeah but she didn't win though. She lost, because she's not in the white house making executive decisions. The rules may be unfair, but until change comes to the system, those are the only rules the democrats should care about, not the hypothetical ones where her cabinet picks are rousing republican rabble. THAT is why the democrats can't be satisfied with the candidate that just barely ekes out a victory. They need one that's got enough overwhelming support that their victory is all but assured. Clinton is not that candidate, for better or worse. They need the charismatic one that promises to actually make the democratic party stick with their supposed values.
On a serious note, democrat diehards are still telling me she's a proven candidate because "she won". Yes, we can't discount that she won the popular vote, but that's an argument for changing the electoral system itself, not for using Hillary again. In terms of percentage, she barely squeaked out that symbolic victory, and the democrats can't be satisfied with "just barely inched ahead". They need someone who promises a much bigger margin than that. More fundamentally, yeah but she didn't win though. She lost, because she's not in the white house making executive decisions. The rules may be unfair, but until change comes to the system, those are the only rules the democrats should care about, not the hypothetical ones where her cabinet picks are rousing republican rabble. THAT is why the democrats can't be satisfied with the candidate that just barely ekes out a victory. They need one that's got enough overwhelming support that their victory is all but assured. Clinton is not that candidate, for better or worse. They need the charismatic one that promises to actually make the democratic party stick with their supposed values.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)