this article dumb long and it's got a lot of charts. i for one am shocked that he lied to coal country.

http://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/3/17/14951892/trump-budget-coal-country

here's the intro

During the campaign, Donald Trump billed himself as the “last shot” for coal country. He alone could save regions like Appalachia that had long suffered from poverty and dwindling coal jobs. And voters in West Virginia and eastern Kentucky believed him — choosing Trump over Hillary Clinton by wide, wide margins.

So it’s striking that President Trump’s first budget proposal would slash and burn several key programs aimed at promoting economic development in coal regions — most notably, the Appalachian Regional Commission and the Economic Development Administration. In recent years, these programs have focused on aiding communities that have been left behind as mining jobs vanished.

Even some of Trump’s staunchest allies were livid at the proposed cuts. “I am disappointed that many of the reductions and eliminations proposed in the President’s skinny budget are draconian, careless and counterproductive,” said Rep. Hal Rogers, a senior House Republican from a key coal-mining district in southeastern Kentucky.

So what gives? It’s possible Trump just didn’t put much thought into these reductions — and didn’t realize (or didn’t care) that he was backhanding his biggest supporters. Or it’s possible Trump genuinely believes he’s going to bring back coal jobs in Appalachia, as he’s promised, and hence figured there’s no need for all those other government programs.

Except Trump can’t bring back all the mining jobs that have disappeared over the past 30 years — it’s just not feasible. That’s a promise he won’t keep. And now he’s cutting the region’s safety net, too.

already knew about trump: trump is out to serve trump.

They should be asking for their job to become obsolete and to be re-trained in something else that has a future.

Trump has a gold fucking toilet - why could the possibly think he gave any shits about them??

>Trump has a gold fucking toilet - why could the possibly think
>he gave any shits about them??
>
>

That's why they showed up for him with kike 75% of the vote in the primary.

After he was eliminated it because Hillary's coal is dead/anti coal gaffe vs Trump promising them the world. Of course they voted for Trump, but they wanted different.

>That's why they showed up for him with kike 75% of the vote
>in the primary.

And Sanders (who's NOT a Democrat) lost the primary.

>After he was eliminated it because Hillary's coal is dead/anti
>coal gaffe vs Trump promising them the world. Of course they
>voted for Trump, but they wanted different.

Well fuck them if they voted for Trump.

Wanting different is FUCKING STUPID - vote for the lesser of two evils.

And Hillary Clinton is only *evil* if you're a FUCKING moron.


Maybe they'll get lucky and die in a mining accident BEFORE Trump gets rid of insurance payments to their families and instead actually chargers their family to remove their dead bodies.

Like many rural places in this country.

The DNC and Hillary were goobers for not being able to make a more compelling argument than Trump.

I know Bernie (not a Democrat) lost the primary. I stated as such above. The point is that those West Virginians (some not Democrats) were willing to vote for him and the party. But the only reason I brought him up is because the thing you are now telling them they should have done is exactly what they tried to choose.

On POLICY, one candidate made the exact argument you are making, and they chose him until they couldn't. Once they couldn't have that choice anymore, then it again came down to 2 choices: one person saying he would do anything for them (though it was clearly a lie) and one saying their industry was dead, then tried to walk back the comments. The Clinton campaign are goobers for not being able to reach those desperate voters who could have been won with just rhetoric.

Besides, if you were able to hear lies and vote with your gut for a candidate against your core interests, why can't they? No lesser of 2 evils, but a vote for Hillary was always a vote for Trump. She was always the candidate he could possibly beat. So thanks for helping to get us in this position. You are just as complicit as they are.

>Like many rural places in this country.
>
>The DNC and Hillary were goobers for not being able to make a
>more compelling argument than Trump.

No, the GOOBERS just didn't see the OBVIOUS bullshit from Trump. They willing believed only what they like about him. "He's a rich man who cares about US - I know what he said about Mexicans or Women or the EPA or climate change was wrong - but Hillary runs a charity that helps people - I'll bet she's doing that to line her pockets with money. Trump's going to let us go underground and get black lung for pay that only puts me in the third highest tax bracket."

>I know Bernie (not a Democrat) lost the primary. I stated as
>such above. The point is that those West Virginians (some not
>Democrats) were willing to vote for him and the party. But the
>only reason I brought him up is because the thing you are now
>telling them they should have done is exactly what they tried
>to choose.

Primary was fine - they got to vote and their guy was not the candidate.

So they then go vote for the most corrupt salesman they can?? Fucking babies.

Fuck them.


>On POLICY, one candidate made the exact argument you are
>making, and they chose him until they couldn't. Once they
>couldn't have that choice anymore, then it again came down to
>2 choices: one person saying he would do anything for them
>(though it was clearly a lie) and one saying their industry
>was dead, then tried to walk back the comments. The Clinton
>campaign are goobers for not being able to reach those
>desperate voters who could have been won with just rhetoric.

Again, fuck them. I only hope the poverty and death they voted for affects only the Trump voters. It won't -- but it SHOULD.

P.S. The coal industry should be dead - or done by robots.


>Besides, if you were able to hear lies and vote with your gut
>for a candidate against your core interests, why can't they?
>No lesser of 2 evils, but a vote for Hillary was always a vote
>for Trump. She was always the candidate he could possibly
>beat. So thanks for helping to get us in this position. You
>are just as complicit as they are.

This is your GOOBER logic. A vote for Hillary would have been a vote for a competent person who would have made things better - or AT LEAST not much worse.

You've fallen pray to Republican LIES that they've spread for many many years.

LITERALLY the WORST PERSON EVER running in modern times won. Worse than Reagan. Worse than Bush Jr. A literal maniac who only does what a villian in parody movie does.

And fuck you blaming it on ME for VOTING for the person who was the best choice available.

Seriously, go fuck yourself. You are the fucking problem.

Hillary won with 2.8 MILLION more votes. Democrats picked up 2 senate seats. Democrats picked up six house seats. And 90,000k Goobers who live in babyland fucked the country real good.

Next election the need to ALL vote Dem or realize they'll ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS BE FUCKED.

Dems may make things better over a long time - but Republicans can fuck your life up with the QUICKNESS.

But yeah, that was my fault for not going Clinton in 2016.

I know she got 2.8 million more votes, in the primary and general. She's still not President. She convinced you that was a W when in reality a non Democrat came into her party and won almost HALF of it in about 9 months. She barely won her own party but she was supposed t9 win the general?

I don't give a shot about Republican lies. For that party to posture over THEIR mistakes and try to scape goat Russia for their own ineptitude? THAT was supposed to show how much better they were than Trump? They cherry bombed their own cause, and doubled down by getting someone as unpopular as him, to the point where they couldn't even take advantage of his negatives.

Either way, what happened, but ine of us predicted that it would go down as it did, and the other is blaming everybpdy but their own flawed party as to why their"the Repubs leave 24 million uninsured with their unpopular plan - our unpopular plan only leaves 10 million uninsured = we're better" messaging was SO off and uninspiring, and silent to the legit criticisms people made.

I just hope next opportunity we get we vote for ISSUES we care about, ALL of us, and don't wake up after the fact in Trump's 2nd term wondering what happened, and why Americans couldn't choose Oprah or Mark Cuban and be "blue no matter who".

hes telling you what happened and why, hes doing it without insulting your simple binary mind-having ass

you should be thanking him rather than pouring unclever insults on him

Which is "Goobers be goob'in'."

Any WORKERS think that The Republicans will help them are simply goobers.

And fuck you for trying to put this on me.

In a worst case Democratic scenario some people lose their outmoded coal jobs and get unemployment or retraining and the "Union Bosses/THUGS" get slightly wealthier.

In a Republican administration they cut food aid to the poor because ti doesn't generate profits.

My predictions for the next election: "Goobers still be goob'in'."

also acknowledge that it also takes a DUMB campaign to take desperate people looking for help who were willing to vote for your party, yet not be able to out-rhetoric and outwork and outwit the likes of DONALD TRUMP.

Plenty of stupid to go around if that is the only standard and we are relinquishing nuance.

>Like many rural places in this country.
>
>The DNC and Hillary were goobers for not being able to make a
>more compelling argument than Trump.

How would Hillary and the DNC make an argument to someone like this

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/who-to-trust-when-it-comes-to-health-care-reform-trump-supporters-put-their-faith-in-him/2017/03/16/1c702d58-0a64-11e7-93dc-00f9bdd74ed1_story.html?utm_term=.b5043fb0c259

"Ware is a landscaper and often works near Section 8 housing in the Nashville area, and she becomes furious when she sees residents who “drive better cars than I do, they have weaves and hair color better than I can, they have manicures.” As Ware, who is white, waited in line for the rally to start, a group of young African American protesters walked by, and she yelled at them, “Go cash your welfare checks!”

“He gets penalized on his income taxes, while these people that don’t know how to pull their pants up can go get it for free,” said Ware, whose employer covers the full cost of her health care. “Make it even. Make it balanced.”

>
>I know Bernie (not a Democrat) lost the primary. I stated as
>such above. The point is that those West Virginians (some not
>Democrats) were willing to vote for him and the party. But the
>only reason I brought him up is because the thing you are now
>telling them they should have done is exactly what they tried
>to choose.
>

How does someone who was willing to vote for Bernie ignore all the lies and everything else Trump did before and during the campaign ?

>On POLICY, one candidate made the exact argument you are
>making, and they chose him until they couldn't. Once they
>couldn't have that choice anymore, then it again came down to
>2 choices: one person saying he would do anything for them
>(though it was clearly a lie) and one saying their industry
>was dead, then tried to walk back the comments. The Clinton
>campaign are goobers for not being able to reach those
>desperate voters who could have been won with just rhetoric.
>

It's one thing to go from Bernie to not voting at all but to pick Trump given his history and actions. Why would anyone believe them or take them serious when they used that excuse ?

>Besides, if you were able to hear lies and vote with your gut
>for a candidate against your core interests, why can't they?
>No lesser of 2 evils, but a vote for Hillary was always a vote
>for Trump. She was always the candidate he could possibly
>beat. So thanks for helping to get us in this position. You
>are just as complicit as they are.
>
>

That argument works for the base of the Republican party but it falls apart with people who say they were going to vote for Bernie.

>>Like many rural places in this country.
>>
>>The DNC and Hillary were goobers for not being able to make
>a
>>more compelling argument than Trump.
>
>How would Hillary and the DNC make an argument to someone like
>this
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/who-to-trust-when-it-comes-to-health-care-reform-trump-supporters-put-their-faith-in-him/2017/03/16/1c702d58-0a64-11e7-93dc-00f9bdd74ed1_story.html?utm_term=.b5043fb0c259
>
>"Ware is a landscaper and often works near Section 8 housing
>in the Nashville area, and she becomes furious when she sees
>residents who “drive better cars than I do, they have weaves
>and hair color better than I can, they have manicures.” As
>Ware, who is white, waited in line for the rally to start, a
>group of young African American protesters walked by, and she
>yelled at them, “Go cash your welfare checks!”
>
>“He gets penalized on his income taxes, while these people
>that don’t know how to pull their pants up can go get it for
>free,” said Ware, whose employer covers the full cost of her
>health care. “Make it even. Make it balanced.”
>

Clearly Hillary and the DNC couldn't because they didn't. 1. Because they didn't really care. And 2. Because they spent a primary delegitimizing the exact policy that would have made a difference in their lives. I think Bernie reaches that voter where Hillary and the establishment DNC can't because he's willing to redirect the anger from other poor people to the other people who are responsible for the plight.

>>I know Bernie (not a Democrat) lost the primary. I stated as
>>such above. The point is that those West Virginians (some
>not
>>Democrats) were willing to vote for him and the party. But
>the
>>only reason I brought him up is because the thing you are
>now
>>telling them they should have done is exactly what they
>tried
>>to choose.
>>
>
> How does someone who was willing to vote for Bernie ignore
>all the lies and everything else Trump did before and during
>the campaign ?

Because the popular narrative pushed by most people (including the corporate media and DNC) people needed to make a choice. Not voting was also smeared as a choice. Trump was able to succeed because the success of Sanders' populism and all the enthusiasm it entailed was left to diffuse, unless someone else harnessed it. He was able to grab it and put it into his outsider image, but more importantly - he showed up. He went to these rural areas sometimes 4 and 5 times, making empty promises, but at least showing up. Again, if one person promised you everything, and someone else promises you nothing, and you are told you MUST choose, how can you blame them for voting Trump? They were given 2(?) unpopular choices and picked the one that best represented their interests from what they were being told. Had Hillary spent more than 30% of her ads on policy and not negative messaging maybe what she to offer them would have struck a nerve.


>>On POLICY, one candidate made the exact argument you are
>>making, and they chose him until they couldn't. Once they
>>couldn't have that choice anymore, then it again came down
>to
>>2 choices: one person saying he would do anything for them
>>(though it was clearly a lie) and one saying their industry
>>was dead, then tried to walk back the comments. The Clinton
>>campaign are goobers for not being able to reach those
>>desperate voters who could have been won with just rhetoric.
>>
>
>It's one thing to go from Bernie to not voting at all but to
>pick Trump given his history and actions. Why would anyone
>believe them or take them serious when they used that excuse
>?


See above. They were only given 2 choices, and the shame campaign of "you MUST choose one of these two" backfired on the DNC. They chose the other way.

>>Besides, if you were able to hear lies and vote with your
>gut
>>for a candidate against your core interests, why can't they?
>>No lesser of 2 evils, but a vote for Hillary was always a
>vote
>>for Trump. She was always the candidate he could possibly
>>beat. So thanks for helping to get us in this position. You
>>are just as complicit as they are.
>>
>>
>
>That argument works for the base of the Republican party but
>it falls apart with people who say they were going to vote for
>Bernie.
>

That argument was made for Clinton supporters who saw her campaign unravel near the end, and the lies be exposed, yet still marched into the booth and punched their ticket for her. If Clinton supporters can reconcile it, I'm sure Trump supporters can as well. I couldn't, which is why I didn't vote for either of them.

>>
>
>Clearly Hillary and the DNC couldn't because they didn't. 1.
>Because they didn't really care. And 2. Because they spent a
>primary delegitimizing the exact policy that would have made a
>difference in their lives. I think Bernie reaches that voter
>where Hillary and the establishment DNC can't because he's
>willing to redirect the anger from other poor people to the
>other people who are responsible for the plight.
>


Hillary and the DNC couldn't without alienating the base. I agree they didn't care but they couldn't out Trump Trump even if they wanted to use dog whistles. Trump is one of those people responsible for thier plight and he has spent a lifetime doing that, if they couldn't see it with Hillary running against him I don't believe Bernie would change their minds.


>> How does someone who was willing to vote for Bernie ignore
>>all the lies and everything else Trump did before and during
>>the campaign ?
>
>Because the popular narrative pushed by most people (including
>the corporate media and DNC) people needed to make a choice.
>Not voting was also smeared as a choice. Trump was able to
>succeed because the success of Sanders' populism and all the
>enthusiasm it entailed was left to diffuse, unless someone
>else harnessed it. He was able to grab it and put it into his
>outsider image, but more importantly - he showed up. He went
>to these rural areas sometimes 4 and 5 times, making empty
>promises, but at least showing up. Again, if one person
>promised you everything, and someone else promises you
>nothing, and you are told you MUST choose, how can you blame
>them for voting Trump? They were given 2(?) unpopular choices
>and picked the one that best represented their interests from
>what they were being told. Had Hillary spent more than 30% of
>her ads on policy and not negative messaging maybe what she to
>offer them would have struck a nerve.
>

Those who voted for Trump don't trust the media anyway and the ones who voted for Bernie didn't trust the DNC so how could the narrative doing anything when they don't trust the source of that narrative. Trump is the opposite of everything Bernie was pushing, so going from Bernie to Trump is picking the insider not the outsider. It makes a difference who that person is that promises everything. You think they would vote for Al Sharpton if he was running against Hillary and promised everything. I can blame them for Trump because he represents everything they claim they don't like. Lies check, ship jobs overseas check, rich elite check, he doesn't represent their interests and they know it. What ad could Hillary run that would appeal to someone in a bubble fantasy land where a billionaire that was off and on friends with the Clintons, is an outsider ? Who would she convince at the rally ?


>>
>>It's one thing to go from Bernie to not voting at all but to
>>pick Trump given his history and actions. Why would anyone
>>believe them or take them serious when they used that excuse
>>?
>
>See above. They were only given 2 choices, and the shame
>campaign of "you MUST choose one of these two" backfired on
>the DNC. They chose the other way.
>

The media didn't have that much control over them. They had several choices.

>>>Besides, if you were able to hear lies and vote with your
>>gut
>>>for a candidate against your core interests, why can't
>they?
>>>No lesser of 2 evils, but a vote for Hillary was always a
>>vote
>>>for Trump. She was always the candidate he could possibly
>>>beat. So thanks for helping to get us in this position. You
>>>are just as complicit as they are.
>>>
>>
>>That argument works for the base of the Republican party but
>>it falls apart with people who say they were going to vote
>for
>>Bernie.
>>
>
>That argument was made for Clinton supporters who saw her
>campaign unravel near the end, and the lies be exposed, yet
>still marched into the booth and punched their ticket for her.
>If Clinton supporters can reconcile it, I'm sure Trump
>supporters can as well. I couldn't, which is why I didn't vote
>for either of them.

The Trump supporters are not saying that, they try to downplay or deflect his lies. This is the same lady from the Washington Post article

"Ware hopes that Trump can change this, although she says she won’t fault him if he can’t. She doesn’t believe news reports saying that 24 million people could lose their coverage under his plan.

“Nothing is in concrete yet. Give the man a chance,” she said. “Until you hear it from Donald J. Trump himself — and not the news media — then don’t even worry about it. Wait until you hear the man say it, because he will tweet it, he will Facebook it or he will go onto national television and tell everybody at the same time.”

>
>>>
>>
>>Clearly Hillary and the DNC couldn't because they didn't. 1.
>>Because they didn't really care. And 2. Because they spent a
>>primary delegitimizing the exact policy that would have made
>a
>>difference in their lives. I think Bernie reaches that voter
>>where Hillary and the establishment DNC can't because he's
>>willing to redirect the anger from other poor people to the
>>other people who are responsible for the plight.
>>
>
>
>Hillary and the DNC couldn't without alienating the base. I
>agree they didn't care but they couldn't out Trump Trump even
>if they wanted to use dog whistles. Trump is one of those
>people responsible for thier plight and he has spent a
>lifetime doing that, if they couldn't see it with Hillary
>running against him I don't believe Bernie would change their
>minds.
>

I agree, the DNC couldn't make that appeal without alienating their base. So why is appealing to the working class alienating their base? This was the entire conversation during the primary: can you be for Main Street and Wall Street at the same time? The establishment Democrats don't have those people's interests at heart beyond platitudes and incremental progressivism.

The people are for $15 an hour. The DNC says $12 is more pragmatic. Meanwhile, all around you, through the will and action of the PEOPLE, cities are adopting $15 an hour minimum wage. We are experiencing it right now with healthcare. There are clear problems with Obamacare, but they didn't get to start the conversation. Bernie did. Medicaid for All is an expansion within Obamacare, but they painted Bernie as an idealist and unrealistic the entire primary. Then when Trump poked holes in rising costs, they had to eat their stance because they had already delegitimized the perfect counter argument to that. Same with taking marijuana out of a schedule 1 narcotic. There is overwhelming support for that.

However, for ALL of those issues, they are in the interest of working people, but against the interest of Wall Street, the Insurance Companies, and Pharmaceutical Industries. So at this point, based on the DNC's response, which is the base they didn't want to alienate? They are being exposed and they are embracing damage control over real systemic change, because ultimately, they like the way things are. Even if they lose, they win.


>>> How does someone who was willing to vote for Bernie ignore
>>>all the lies and everything else Trump did before and
>during
>>>the campaign ?
>>
>>Because the popular narrative pushed by most people
>(including
>>the corporate media and DNC) people needed to make a choice.
>>Not voting was also smeared as a choice. Trump was able to
>>succeed because the success of Sanders' populism and all the
>>enthusiasm it entailed was left to diffuse, unless someone
>>else harnessed it. He was able to grab it and put it into
>his
>>outsider image, but more importantly - he showed up. He went
>>to these rural areas sometimes 4 and 5 times, making empty
>>promises, but at least showing up. Again, if one person
>>promised you everything, and someone else promises you
>>nothing, and you are told you MUST choose, how can you blame
>>them for voting Trump? They were given 2(?) unpopular
>choices
>>and picked the one that best represented their interests
>from
>>what they were being told. Had Hillary spent more than 30%
>of
>>her ads on policy and not negative messaging maybe what she
>to
>>offer them would have struck a nerve.
>>
>
>Those who voted for Trump don't trust the media anyway and the
>ones who voted for Bernie didn't trust the DNC so how could
>the narrative doing anything when they don't trust the source
>of that narrative. Trump is the opposite of everything Bernie
>was pushing, so going from Bernie to Trump is picking the
>insider not the outsider. It makes a difference who that
>person is that promises everything. You think they would vote
>for Al Sharpton if he was running against Hillary and promised
>everything. I can blame them for Trump because he represents
>everything they claim they don't like. Lies check, ship jobs
>overseas check, rich elite check, he doesn't represent their
>interests and they know it. What ad could Hillary run that
>would appeal to someone in a bubble fantasy land where a
>billionaire that was off and on friends with the Clintons, is
>an outsider ? Who would she convince at the rally ?
>

I agree, and I think it is why Bernie would have won. People talk about a protest vote, but don't consider enough that some people voted for Trump purely because he wasn't Hillary, especially in the Rust Belt. Trump is an outside because YES he was a billionaire and establishment, but he was NOT a Washington insider. He was not a politician. People rejected Congress and the status quo. Trump knocked down 16 Washington insiders on his way to the nomination, plenty of whom were far more qualified. But the people showed that they wanted a change from the beginning. People are never against success. Many of his supporters point to his financial and business status as credibility, well acknowledging that it doesn't demonstrate an ability to govern. But again, given the choice between him and Hillary, plenty of people were inclined to lean towards him who weren't Democrats. As we screamed the entire primary, this country consists of more than Democrats and Republicans; 47% of Americans don't fit in those boxes, and plenty of them chose that designation because of people like Hillary Clinton and her husband's Presidency. It was a severe miscalculation to assume they could be appealed to purely on platitudes and juxtaposition to Trump.

Also, the media cannot be discounted in its role. The plan all along was to prop up Trump as a legitimate candidate, and get him against Hillary, because again, he was the only person as unfavorable she was. Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush: ANY of those people strongly beat Clinton. She lost to Trump of all people. However they are just as complicity. They gave Hillary her insurmountable lead in the primary, and focused on Trump's empty podium more than Bernie's 10k capacity crowds. I remember going to his surprise rally in the Bronx that pulled about 20 thousand people on 6 hours notice. Got home that night and almost all coverage was on Trump. Bernie's rally was only mentioned briefly on local news. This was a complete dismantling of the political process. To not even take advantage of voter drives in the primary because they were concerned about voters potentially going to Sanders, and then to suspend their own "Get Out The Vote" campaigns in the general because they assumed certain Blue states were a lock. Man, there is going to be so much written about this election, but it was definitely orchestrated. All in all, she was the wrong candidate. She wouldn't convince anyone on that rally. Bernie is slowly recruiting them, so I hope there is an educated populace for 2018 ready to vote in some progress.

>>>
>>>It's one thing to go from Bernie to not voting at all but
>to
>>>pick Trump given his history and actions. Why would anyone
>>>believe them or take them serious when they used that
>excuse
>>>?
>>
>>See above. They were only given 2 choices, and the shame
>>campaign of "you MUST choose one of these two" backfired on
>>the DNC. They chose the other way.
>>
>
>The media didn't have that much control over them. They had
>several choices.
>
>>>>Besides, if you were able to hear lies and vote with your
>>>gut
>>>>for a candidate against your core interests, why can't
>>they?
>>>>No lesser of 2 evils, but a vote for Hillary was always a
>>>vote
>>>>for Trump. She was always the candidate he could possibly
>>>>beat. So thanks for helping to get us in this position.
>You
>>>>are just as complicit as they are.
>>>>
>>>
>>>That argument works for the base of the Republican party
>but
>>>it falls apart with people who say they were going to vote
>>for
>>>Bernie.
>>>
>>
>>That argument was made for Clinton supporters who saw her
>>campaign unravel near the end, and the lies be exposed, yet
>>still marched into the booth and punched their ticket for
>her.
>>If Clinton supporters can reconcile it, I'm sure Trump
>>supporters can as well. I couldn't, which is why I didn't
>vote
>>for either of them.
>
>The Trump supporters are not saying that, they try to downplay
>or deflect his lies. This is the same lady from the Washington
>Post article
>
>"Ware hopes that Trump can change this, although she says she
>won’t fault him if he can’t. She doesn’t believe news
>reports saying that 24 million people could lose their
>coverage under his plan.
>
>“Nothing is in concrete yet. Give the man a chance,” she
>said. “Until you hear it from Donald J. Trump himself —
>and not the news media — then don’t even worry about it.
>Wait until you hear the man say it, because he will tweet it,
>he will Facebook it or he will go onto national television and
>tell everybody at the same time.”
>

To be fair, I agree that can be said of Trump supporters in general. I absolutely agree that many Trump supporters are obstinate and secure in their decision, even giving him credit for things presently that he had nothing to do with (some that are even Obamacare). However my comments in this thread are localized to the initial post of West Virginia coal country. THAT Demographic is representative of states that could have gone Blue had there been a proper policy and messaging position to resonate with these depleted rural areas. Hillary going to the big blue dot cities and holding rallies doesn't cut it, especially when the rest of the state is read. That is a terrible ELECTORAL strategy, and that is exactly what happened. However, in coal country West Virgina, Sanders won by 40+ points in the primary. He won Michigan, and other Rust Belt states that went to Trump, because of policy. My argument is that it is not fair to simply call THESE Trump supporters stupid for going Donald when they tried to adopt a policy that is exactly what Handle believes they should have wanted. They did want it, and it was systematically taken away from them. Trump is not the first person of industry to come into small towns and promise jobs and health care. They fell for it because they needed it to be true. Hillary didn't even go to the county after he gaffe. Trump had a better 50 state strategy than she did. My friend used to live in WV for a while, and it doesn't have much going for it other than coal. These are people's livelihoods. I get why they did what they did, just like I get why the Rust Belt turned on the Democratic Party. Some Dems are pro TPP, but not former GE employees who saw their jobs shipped overseas.

Man, it was such a poorly run campaign.

Those goobers voted for immediate you're-fucked-ism.

Hope they enjoy the right for corporations to not be sued when they have toxic waste run off from the mine.

Seriously - if a genie showed up and stipulated I could not change the election result I'd wish for these goobers to get fucked before anyone who voted for Clinton.

>>Hillary and the DNC couldn't without alienating the base. I
>>agree they didn't care but they couldn't out Trump Trump
>even
>>if they wanted to use dog whistles. Trump is one of those
>>people responsible for thier plight and he has spent a
>>lifetime doing that, if they couldn't see it with Hillary
>>running against him I don't believe Bernie would change
>their
>>minds.
>>
>
>I agree, the DNC couldn't make that appeal without alienating
>their base. So why is appealing to the working class
>alienating their base? This was the entire conversation during
>the primary: can you be for Main Street and Wall Street at the
>same time? The establishment Democrats don't have those
>people's interests at heart beyond platitudes and incremental
>progressivism.
>

The base is bigger than white blue collar workers which some call the working class. That group(white working class) was looking for proof she would favor them over all the others that make up the base. That's why Bill Clinton had his Sistah Souljah moment when he ran the first time.

>The people are for $15 an hour. The DNC says $12 is more
>pragmatic. Meanwhile, all around you, through the will and
>action of the PEOPLE, cities are adopting $15 an hour minimum
>wage. We are experiencing it right now with healthcare. There
>are clear problems with Obamacare, but they didn't get to
>start the conversation. Bernie did. Medicaid for All is an
>expansion within Obamacare, but they painted Bernie as an
>idealist and unrealistic the entire primary. Then when Trump
>poked holes in rising costs, they had to eat their stance
>because they had already delegitimized the perfect counter
>argument to that. Same with taking marijuana out of a schedule
>1 narcotic. There is overwhelming support for that.
>

Trump was all over the place on minimum wage, so it's no way in the world that someone who was going to vote for Bernie would believe he would support 15 an hour.

Clinton offered to fix Obamacare, but once again it's hard to believe any Bernie supporter or someone looking for a politician that will help would go from Hillary to Trump, when he would never include any specifics, after saying repeal and replace 100 times or talking about how bad Obamacare is for America. When did Trump poke holes in rising cost ? Did Trump say he would take marijuana out of a schedule 1 narcotic ? If he did and if he poked holes in the rising costs, it is not enough to convince anyone he was worth voting for given everything he did and said on other issues.

>However, for ALL of those issues, they are in the interest of
>working people, but against the interest of Wall Street, the
>Insurance Companies, and Pharmaceutical Industries. So at this
>point, based on the DNC's response, which is the base they
>didn't want to alienate? They are being exposed and they are
>embracing damage control over real systemic change, because
>ultimately, they like the way things are. Even if they lose,
>they win.
>

The base they didn't want to alienate is the people who are not white blue collar workers, that's why Hillary had to drop that All Lives Matter line and switch to Black Lives Matter. It's also the reason she was running around with the mothers of Blacks killed by racist cops and citizens.


>>
>>Those who voted for Trump don't trust the media anyway and
>the
>>ones who voted for Bernie didn't trust the DNC so how could
>>the narrative doing anything when they don't trust the
>source
>>of that narrative. Trump is the opposite of everything
>Bernie
>>was pushing, so going from Bernie to Trump is picking the
>>insider not the outsider. It makes a difference who that
>>person is that promises everything. You think they would
>vote
>>for Al Sharpton if he was running against Hillary and
>promised
>>everything. I can blame them for Trump because he represents
>>everything they claim they don't like. Lies check, ship jobs
>>overseas check, rich elite check, he doesn't represent
>their
>>interests and they know it. What ad could Hillary run that
>>would appeal to someone in a bubble fantasy land where a
>>billionaire that was off and on friends with the Clintons,
>is
>>an outsider ? Who would she convince at the rally ?
>>
>
>I agree, and I think it is why Bernie would have won. People
>talk about a protest vote, but don't consider enough that some
>people voted for Trump purely because he wasn't Hillary,
>especially in the Rust Belt. Trump is an outside because YES
>he was a billionaire and establishment, but he was NOT a
>Washington insider. He was not a politician. People rejected
>Congress and the status quo. Trump knocked down 16 Washington
>insiders on his way to the nomination, plenty of whom were far
>more qualified. But the people showed that they wanted a
>change from the beginning. People are never against success.
>Many of his supporters point to his financial and business
>status as credibility, well acknowledging that it doesn't
>demonstrate an ability to govern. But again, given the choice
>between him and Hillary, plenty of people were inclined to
>lean towards him who weren't Democrats. As we screamed the
>entire primary, this country consists of more than Democrats
>and Republicans; 47% of Americans don't fit in those boxes,
>and plenty of them chose that designation because of people
>like Hillary Clinton and her husband's Presidency. It was a
>severe miscalculation to assume they could be appealed to
>purely on platitudes and juxtaposition to Trump.

True Hillary had a lot of baggage and Trump is not a politician but how did the people reject Congress when they sent most of those who were up for re-election back to Washington. The people voted for a clown at the top of the ticket and made the claim they are rejecting the establishment for an outsider, as they kept the Congress establishment in place. Trump beat 16 Washington insiders coming off two Presidential campaigns they lost because the RNC pushed a candidate they didn't want, the same way the DNC ignored Bernie's support this time. It's not a change, they want just a win.

Even if people bought into Trumps title and label, went along with it and called it success, that doesn't explain why they ignored everything else he did(lies,tweets..etc) during his circus campaign. I'm not surprised Trump's supports would go along with his contradictions and call it success but it does not explain those outside of the Trump bubble buying into it, when he is doing everything to prove he would be terrible if elected. If anyone had a reason to vote in large numbers against Hillary it would be Blacks given what the Clinton's did, but it was white women and some Bernie people who voted Trump.

>Also, the media cannot be discounted in its role. The plan all
>along was to prop up Trump as a legitimate candidate, and get
>him against Hillary, because again, he was the only person as
>unfavorable she was. Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Marco Rubio, Jeb
>Bush: ANY of those people strongly beat Clinton. She lost to
>Trump of all people. However they are just as complicity. They
>gave Hillary her insurmountable lead in the primary, and
>focused on Trump's empty podium more than Bernie's 10k
>capacity crowds. I remember going to his surprise rally in the
>Bronx that pulled about 20 thousand people on 6 hours notice.
>Got home that night and almost all coverage was on Trump.
>Bernie's rally was only mentioned briefly on local news. This
>was a complete dismantling of the political process. To not
>even take advantage of voter drives in the primary because
>they were concerned about voters potentially going to Sanders,
>and then to suspend their own "Get Out The Vote" campaigns in
>the general because they assumed certain Blue states were a
>lock. Man, there is going to be so much written about this
>election, but it was definitely orchestrated. All in all, she
>was the wrong candidate. She wouldn't convince anyone on that
>rally. Bernie is slowly recruiting them, so I hope there is an
>educated populace for 2018 ready to vote in some progress.
>

I agree the media did play a big part in getting Trump elected but if you say they gave Hillary her lead against Bernie, how can you say Trump beat 16 Washington insiders because the people wanted an outsider ? If the lack of coverage hurt Bernie in the Dem's primary then the same is true for the 16 in Repub's primary

It's true Hillary give people plenty of reasons to vote against her and she was the wrong candidate but why would anyone who had issues with her ignore everything Trump did and vote for him ? The Republican base and the racist who do not hide would never say Trump's list of con is worst than his pro, but those who are not in that group like Bernie voters, the white women who were not Trump supporters, the 47 percent that don't fit in those boxes, what would make them think anything in his campaign would help anyone who needs the help ?

Need an educated populace and a big turnout going forward.



>>>
>>>See above. They were only given 2 choices, and the shame
>>>campaign of "you MUST choose one of these two" backfired on
>>>the DNC. They chose the other way.
>>>

It backfired on anyone who voted for Trump to make a point.



>>
>>The Trump supporters are not saying that, they try to
>downplay
>>or deflect his lies. This is the same lady from the
>Washington
>>Post article
>>
>>"Ware hopes that Trump can change this, although she says
>she
>>won’t fault him if he can’t. She doesn’t believe news
>>reports saying that 24 million people could lose their
>>coverage under his plan.
>>
>>“Nothing is in concrete yet. Give the man a chance,” she
>>said. “Until you hear it from Donald J. Trump himself —
>>and not the news media — then don’t even worry about it.
>>Wait until you hear the man say it, because he will tweet
>it,
>>he will Facebook it or he will go onto national television
>and
>>tell everybody at the same time.”
>>
>
>To be fair, I agree that can be said of Trump supporters in
>general. I absolutely agree that many Trump supporters are
>obstinate and secure in their decision, even giving him credit
>for things presently that he had nothing to do with (some that
>are even Obamacare). However my comments in this thread are
>localized to the initial post of West Virginia coal country.
>THAT Demographic is representative of states that could have
>gone Blue had there been a proper policy and messaging
>position to resonate with these depleted rural areas. Hillary
>going to the big blue dot cities and holding rallies doesn't
>cut it, especially when the rest of the state is read. That is
>a terrible ELECTORAL strategy, and that is exactly what
>happened. However, in coal country West Virgina, Sanders won
>by 40+ points in the primary. He won Michigan, and other Rust
>Belt states that went to Trump, because of policy. My argument
>is that it is not fair to simply call THESE Trump supporters
>stupid for going Donald when they tried to adopt a policy that
>is exactly what Handle believes they should have wanted. They
>did want it, and it was systematically taken away from them.
>Trump is not the first person of industry to come into small
>towns and promise jobs and health care. They fell for it
>because they needed it to be true. Hillary didn't even go to
>the county after he gaffe. Trump had a better 50 state
>strategy than she did. My friend used to live in WV for a
>while, and it doesn't have much going for it other than coal.
>These are people's livelihoods. I get why they did what they
>did, just like I get why the Rust Belt turned on the
>Democratic Party. Some Dems are pro TPP, but not former GE
>employees who saw their jobs shipped overseas.
>
>Man, it was such a poorly run campaign.

West Virginia has not gone blue since 1996. I'm not sure it was just policy that delivered these states and if it was policy these people heard something that was never said, since Trump didn't offer specifics. His policy was we are going to win and be great. If a secret policy was enough to get the Rust Belt vote where were they when Romney offered his secret with no detail plans ?

Hillary going in rural areas lying about bringing jobs back would have been the same as Kerry getting a gun for hunting, Dukakais in the tank with a helmet and Gore kissing his wife. They would see right through it.

These Trump supports are stupid because when you can't pick your first choice, nobody with any kind of common sense would go to the worst choice at the bottom of the list next. That goes for Trump supporters and all the others groups. White women don't like Hillary so they pick grab em Trump stupid, Evangelicals don't like Hillary so they pick two Corinthians Trump stupid.

The coal country people didn't just close their eyes when Trump came, they covered their ears and stop using their brain. What Trump strategy? He never offered details, attacked everyone who said anything he didn't like, lied, had violence at his rallies. Any GE supporter who votes Republican because Dems support TPP is the same as Trump supports. Not voting for Dems is one thing but picking Repubs because you are not voting for Dems doesn't make sense if you are not rich.

It was a terrible campaign but still no reason for anyone to vote for Trump.

>this article dumb long and it's got a lot of charts. i for
>one am shocked that he lied to coal country.


He doesn't care about them.

Since 1976

I hope all your coal jobs go away. I bet your extremist asses will stay clear the fuck away from the next Republican convention. Allow 45* and his treasonist communist leaning administration to use you as props again.

that word doesn't mean what you think it does.

THEY WERE THREATENING CASTRATION?!?! AM I WRONG?

They are polar fucking opposites.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kGtIJxAH3A

that was a quote from a movie of where one dude is incorrectly referring to guys as nazis

...but at least it's an ethos.

i had lost hope for a moment

>that word doesn't mean what you think it does.

Say it with me now: Intentional Hyperbole

Calling him a communist is a tad bit hyperbolic but Americans were told as much about Obama only to have someone that idolizes dictators and Andrew Jackson become President.

It's levels to 45*:

He consistently tries to censor the media from doing their job.
He's racist and xenophobic.
Sells out the poor/middle class to benefit the rich.

Trumpcare is Communism and proof that 45* is compromised. Pushing this legislation through Congress through budget reconciliation is an example of government overreach. Most Americans don't want Trumpcare and 24 million are going to lose health insurance.

Calling him a facist or a nazi would be hyperbole. Calling him a communist is like calling him a feminist. It's not an exaggeration if you're not going the right direction. It could be irony or sarcasm, but not hyperbole.
Trumpcare is not communism. Communism is not tax breaks for the rich.

>>that word doesn't mean what you think it does.
>
>Say it with me now: Intentional Hyperbole
>
>Calling him a communist is a tad bit hyperbolic but Americans
>were told as much about Obama only to have someone that
>idolizes dictators and Andrew Jackson become President.
>
>It's levels to 45*:
>
>He consistently tries to censor the media from doing their
>job.
>He's racist and xenophobic.
>Sells out the poor/middle class to benefit the rich.
>
>Trumpcare is Communism and proof that 45* is compromised.
>Pushing this legislation through Congress through budget
>reconciliation is an example of government overreach. Most
>Americans don't want Trumpcare and 24 million are going to
>lose health insurance.

they dont see the fucking writing on the wall and they never will.

i keep reading article after article of these assholes being surprised. Shit there was an article in the Washington Post today where this Trump supporter who is a a former teacher was giving Trump credit for her son's insurance prices going down. She said it was because of the new healthcare bill. If this dumb ass with a college education is this stupid how the fuck do we convince the other morons that Trump is no good? There was some other article about his Trump supporter out holding a sign saying Im sorry. Fuck you! You and your dumb ass friends put this man in office and he is ruining this country. Sorry aint enough. This shit drives me crazy.

___________________________________________________________


DJTB YOMM

and that was before the election.

Sooo, Can dolt 45 singlehandedly raise the white folk mortality rate?

I'm sure he could, I just don't know if he can do it in 4 years.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/meals-on-wheels-trump-budget-cut-impact-on-voters/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab6a&linkId=35604188

Will ABSOLUTELY make it harder for people to get durable medical goods.

Those Rascals will see a decrease or elimination of subsidization - so it will hurt older (or fatter) folks.

Sidebar- who knew that the poor white folks (36million??) was getting special dedicated doublewelfare. I wonder how this compares to the halfbaked promise zones Obama pushed for the hood

,####
In rural Appalachia, people are so poor that there is a federal program dedicated to lifting them out of poverty. Through the Appalachian Regional Commission, the government pitches in on projects that these rural communities badly need but can’t quite afford — everything from fixing roads, to building computer labs, to training workers, to opening health clinics.

These efforts have become so widely admired that in recent years Congress launched, with bipartisan backing, sister agencies to help other rural regions stuck in generational cycles of poverty. Together the programs spend about $175 million each year bringing jobs and opportunities to places that long have felt left behind.

President Trump, who won rousing victories in these same parts of rural America, would eliminate that funding.

In his budget outline for 2018 unveiled Thursday, none of the rural development agencies — the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Delta Regional Authority, the Northern Border Regional Commission — would receive any money. In effect, it would eliminate these programs, which are completely subsidized by the federal government.


more-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/03/17/president-trump-won-big-in-these-places-now-he-wants-to-eliminate-3-agencies-dedicated-to-helping-them/?utm_term=.6af2e7b39e1e

.
.

Wake up, Pray! Go to work, Pray! Go home, Pray! Love, Pray! Eat, Pray! Live, Pray!

LOL

http://www.vox.com/world/2017/3/20/14982018/comey-fbi-investigation-russia-trump-campaign

most of these people still get their news from the same sources Trump does.

the one where Trump has already fixed Obama's failing economy, and Russia is just some libtard sore loser which hunt.

Will be interesting once they start actually feeling the impact of his policies tho

There's probably some folks who are starting to see that they made the wrong move, but the majority of his supporters? They don't see shit... they got no regrets.

its fucking incredible

*checks*

looks like alot of "Ryan must go!"

along with the usual stuff about cucks and what not

>its fucking incredible

that it is

times


like "u mad"

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Times Square and his followers wouldn't leave him.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/03/cnn-analyst-sources-say-mike-flynn-has-turned-on-trump-and-become-witness-for-the-fbi/

gotten to

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/25/business/alex-jones-pizzagate-apology-comet-ping-pong.html?_r=0

what do you mean by gotten to?
looking like a damn fool? Then yes.

alex jones is the freedom warrior!

busting up the deep state!

exposing jade helm!
e
xposing the pedo sex cult pulling the strings of the world from the shadows!


oh hes apologizing for the pizzagate "hoax" now?

obviously hes either working for the evil SJWS and their leftist pedo sex cult or hes a complete fraud i dunno

yeah, i know, alex jones and 'reasoning' lol

i've just never seen him backpedal on any of his psycho shit

but he's also never really been in a position where he's defending the president and calling criticisms of the administration 'conspiracy theories'

maybe he's just having an identity crisis.

or he's an... identity crisis actor (I'm here all week)

slander/libel or whatever


the whole thing is incredibly funny and ironic

i mean imagine some other rando in the media all of a sudden backtracking

jones would have enough material for a years worth of shows screaming about it

>slander/libel or whatever
>
>
>the whole thing is incredibly funny and ironic
>
>i mean imagine some other rando in the media all of a sudden
>backtracking
>
>jones would have enough material for a years worth of shows
>screaming about it


^^^
Jones didn’t say what prompted his apology but it may have been motivated by a letter Alefantis wrote to him in February. The letter demands an apology and retraction for InfoWars’ postings about Pizzagate; it does not threaten legal action, but refers to what Alefantis describes as “defaming” comments by InfoWars.

But the timing of Jones’s apology suggests he was concerned about a potential lawsuit. Under Texas law, the Austin-based Jones had to retract or apologize for the stories by Friday — one full month after receiving Alefantis’s letter — to avoid exposing InfoWars to punitive damages in a libel suit.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/conspiracy-theorist-alex-jones-backs-off-pizzagate-claims/2017/03/24/6f0246fe-10cd-11e7-ab07-07d9f521f6b5_story.html?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.d96a0e6fe494

legal action letter



good times