Eric83

Members
  • Content count

    10,792
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Eric83

  • Rank
    Lifetimer
  • Birthday 06/19/1983

Recent Profile Visitors

11,427 profile views
  1. Hillary Clinton campaign joining recount effort. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-recount_us_5839ad95e4b09b605600a69b
  2. Hillary won Virginia, we don't need to worry about that state and have Trump turn it red lol
  3. I donated to the recount in the Rust Belt states. It probably won't change anything but f*** it! This is the future of the country we are talking about.
  4. Predictions do not make a site credible. Lord we really do live in a post-fact society. If a news source isn't stanning for your candidate it is a conspiracy or an outright lie.
  5. Hillary's tenacity is just so admirable. America really screwed themselves out of a great president.
  6. Myths Democrats Swallowed That Cost Them the Election http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044 Some of my favorite tidbits from the article: The first big criticism this year was that the DNC had sponsored “only” six debates between Clinton and Bernie Sanders in some sort of conspiracy to impede the Vermont senator. This rage was built on ignorance: The DNC at first announced it would sponsor six debates in 2016, just as it had in 2008 and 2004. (In 2012, Barack Obama was running for re-election. Plus, while the DNC announced it would sponsor six debates in 2008, only five took place.) Debates cost money, and the more spent on debates, the less available for the nominee in the general election. Plus, there is a reasonable belief among political experts that allowing the nominees to tear each other down over and over undermines their chances in the general election, which is exactly what happened with the Republicans in 2012. Still, in the face of rage by Sanders supporters, the number of DNC-sponsored debates went up to nine—more than have been held in almost 30 years. Plans for a 10th one, scheduled for May 24, were abandoned after it became mathematically impossible for Sanders to win the nomination. Almost every email that set off the “rigged” accusations was from May 2016. (One was in late April; I’ll address that below.) Even in the most ridiculous of dream worlds, Sanders could not have possibly won the nomination after May 3—at that point, he needed 984 more pledged delegates, but there were only 933 available in the remaining contests. And political pros could tell by the delegate math that the race was over on April 19, since a victory would require him to win almost every single delegate after that, something no rational person could believe. Sanders voters proclaimed that superdelegates, elected officials and party regulars who controlled thousands of votes, could flip their support and instead vote for the candidate with the fewest votes. In other words, they wanted the party to overthrow the will of the majority of voters. That Sanders fans were wishing for an establishment overthrow of the electorate more common in banana republics or dictatorships is obscene. (One side note: Sanders supporters also made a big deal out of the fact that many of the superdelegates had expressed support for Clinton early in the campaign. They did the same thing in 2008, then switched to Obama when he won the most pledged delegates. Same thing would have happened with Sanders if he had persuaded more people to vote for him.) According to a Western European intelligence source, Russian hackers, using a series of go-betweens, transmitted the DNC emails to WikiLeaks with the intent of having them released on the verge of the Democratic Convention in hopes of sowing chaos. And that’s what happened—just a couple of days before Democrats gathered in Philadelphia, the emails came out, and suddenly the media was loaded with stories about trauma in the party. Crews of Russian propagandists—working through an array of Twitter accounts and websites, started spreading the story that the DNC had stolen the election from Sanders. (An analysis provided to Newsweek by independent internet and computer specialists using a series of algorithms show that this kind of propaganda, using the same words, went from Russian disinformation sources to comment sections on more than 200 sites catering to liberals, conservatives, white supremacists, nutritionists and an amazing assortment of other interest groups.) She was playing the long game—attacking Sanders strongly enough to win, but gently enough to avoid alienating his supporters. Given her overwhelming support from communities of color—for example, about 70 percent of African-American voters cast their ballot for her—Clinton had a firewall that would be difficult for Sanders to breach. When Sanders promoted free college tuition—a primary part of his platform that attracted young people—that didn’t mean much for almost half of all Democrats, who don’t attend—or even plan to attend—plan to attend a secondary school. In fact, Sanders was basically telling the working poor and middle class who never planned to go beyond high school that college students—the people with even greater opportunities in life—were at the top of his priority list. I have seen the opposition book assembled by Republicans for Sanders, and it was brutal. The Republicans would have torn him apart. And while Sanders supporters might delude themselves into believing that they could have defended him against all of this, there is a name for politicians who play defense all the time: losers. Here are a few tastes of what was in store for Sanders, straight out of the Republican playbook: He thinks rape is A-OK. In 1972, when he was 31, Sanders wrote a fictitious essay in which he described a woman enjoying being raped by three men. Yes, there is an explanation for it—a long, complicated one, just like the one that would make clear why the Clinton emails story was nonsense. And we all know how well that worked out. Then there’s the fact that Sanders was on unemployment until his mid-30s, and that he stole electricity from a neighbor after failing to pay his bills, and that he co-sponsored a bill to ship Vermont’s nuclear waste to a poor Hispanic community in Texas, where it could be dumped. You can just see the words “environmental racist” on Republican billboards. And if you can’t, I already did. They were in the Republican opposition research book as a proposal on how to frame the nuclear waste issue. Also on the list: Sanders violated campaign finance laws, criticized Clinton for supporting the 1994 crime bill that he voted for, and he voted against the Amber Alert system. His pitch for universal health care would have been used against him too, since it was tried in his home state of Vermont and collapsed due to excessive costs. Worst of all, the Republicans also had video of Sanders at a 1985 rally thrown by the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua where half a million people chanted, “Here, there, everywhere/the Yankee will die,’’ while President Daniel Ortega condemned “state terrorism” by America. Sanders said, on camera, supporting the Sandinistas was “patriotic.” The Republicans had at least four other damning Sanders videos (I don’t know what they showed), and the opposition research folder was almost 2-feet thick. (The section calling him a communist with connections to Castro alone would have cost him Florida.) In other words, the belief that Sanders would have walked into the White House based on polls taken before anyone really attacked him is a delusion built on a scaffolding of political ignorance. The people who hate Trump but proclaimed they were #NeverHillary played themselves. They are not the same person, they are not friends, Hillary did not ask him to run so she could win easily, and Hillary would not have put someone from Breitbart as her chief strategist and have a bunch of Ku Klux Klan supporters as potential cabinet picks. But carry on with your conspiracy theories that Bernie was robbed because he won caucus states where 500 people voted in a high school gymnasium statewide.
  7. Hillary's concession speech and President Obama acknowledging the win today made me cry. I was crying with a runny nose and everything. The first black POTUS will be followed by a candidate endorsed by a KKK.
  8. Trump could win Maine, New Hampshire, Iowa, North Carolina, Ohio , and Florida and still lose in the electoral college 271-267. He has conceded Virginia and Colorado, and is trailing Clinton by double digits in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. He has no path. This isn't even covering the fact that Hillary is nipping on his heels in states he shouldn't have to worry about like Arizona, Georgia, and Utah. He's toast.
  9. Moderator: "What do you think will happen if Aleppo falls?" Trump: "I'll think it has fallen" Fix it Jesus.
  10. Barely. Lucious is the primary reason I can't take this show. He is so over the top evil, he is a diabolical sociopath. He makes it very hard to watch.
  11. I'm here for Sheree vs Kenya and the drama with Riley's dad. Also here for Porsha's meltdown. Looks good and better than boring Season 8.
  12. RIP! I hope she was in comfort when she passed. For some strange reason I felt like she'd live forever.
  13. You might want to goto twitter and look at the shitstorm this article is causing. And Nina Turner is a disgruntled Bernie supporter. Check out Darren Hutchinson and Tom Watson. Black people are getting TIRED of being told they only show up when an when a black is running. This is the same narrative the press ran all primary season when Bernie became the hot ticket. I'm not suggesting not being concerned but all we can do it vote and support ALL OF US. I'm actually volunteering to work phone banks something I have NEVER done before rather than sit back and stress myself out along with 2 AA colleagues who are actually tied of hearing how unenthused they are by the press. I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiment. I think social media has skewed perception of what elections were really like before 2008. Obama was a historic candidate---- Hillary is too but I think many have become desensitized to how truly patriarchal our society was and is. Hillary's base is older voters. They are not on Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram shouting and making memes. They are at the polls. Articles like those are honestly hogwash to me. Hillary is very popular among Black Women (this is the group that cost her the primary in 2008 and won her several primary races in 2016), and I also read how she is very popular with Spanish-speaking Latinos who are under polled. She led Trump like 70-30 in households with Spanish and English speaking people.
  14. What was the general consensus on this Paul and Sonny storyline on DAYS? I haven't regularly watched the show since at least 2012. I was so shocked to see there has been an Asian gay male on this show? LOL!

    1. Show previous comments  2 more
    2. AlexElizabeth

      AlexElizabeth

      Surely you don't mean their current storyline because they don't have one. They're background characters!

    3. Soapsuds

      Soapsuds

      Paul and Sonny are another disappointed where Days is concerned. Will unfortunately was a terrible recast. Either his acting got worse or the part was just not for him. I would have loved a triangle with CM's Will and Paul/Sonny. Sonny and Will marrying with a past love returning in Paul. Instead we got a paranoid Will acting like a total fool.

    4. DRW50

      DRW50

      The only thing that I remember fondly was a few hot sex scenes. Massey and his replacement couldn't act and Massey's unease with other men got in the way of all of his scenes in that department. Paul is a decent character but has never had any real role beyond a second or third string stand-in compared to Will or Sonny, or compared to John's other kids, etc. Sonny is a very thin character. 

  15. Hillary and Donald are the most polarizing candidates in modern (post FDR) history. This debate tomorrow isn't changing any minds, it's just providing the media with another week of material to over analyze.