Nebraska Democratic Party official ousted after controversial

Ah yes, the usual "We are sorry". Not sorry it was said, just sorry that people found out.
>"Our country is better than the political rhetoric that is out there from both the far right and the far left,"
And ending the whole charade with a good old "but the right does it too!". Fuck off.

Really can't wait for the civil war. At this point we deserve it.

>Thread about Democrat hypocrisy
>two replies

>"TRUMP CAN STILL LOSE GUYS"
>Still being bumped after 16 days

>>151791
>Dem hypocrisy
>News
Lynch is being investigated and the fbi has Bernie by the balls but they really arnt interesting enough for discussion on this board. Its not like anyone paying attention didnt know this stuff was happening.

>>151791
>>151794

The Sanders thread is still fresh with active discussion. This isn't getting bumped because it's a literally who whose career is now over and everyone agrees is a complete fucking retard. What do you want, a bipartisan circle jerk about how this guy is a complete dumbass?

If that's what you want, then:
>ha ha oh wow what complete fucking dumbass

>>151632
>>151791
The thing I got out of this was when a Democrat acts like a chode he gets ousted and abandoned by the party. Very different from when a conservative acts like a dick and gets the part making excuses for them and supporting them.

>>151632
Is this the end of the Democrats?

>>151802
Hardly. If anything, Trump has the potential to be the worst thing that ever happened to the Republicans.

>>151801
This. Having double standards is practically a Republican tradition at this point, if only to stop massive cognitive dissonance from ripping up party and doctrine. Think Newt Gingrich, who led the charge in the Clinton scandal yet subscribes to an 'open marriage' policy (read: treat your wife like dogshit).

>>151805
>Hillary losing was actually a good thing for the Democrats, her campaign was too smart to win anyways
>Gianefort winning was just further proof of the idiocy of rural voters, it doesn't change anything
>Ossof losing was actually a good thing for the Democrats because he trailblazed the next election
>Brexit was actually a good thing for the EU because it'll prove how vital it is to the world

And now:

>Trump winning was the worst thing to happen to the Republicans

"Said the nervous liberal for the 50th time this year, fuckin kek

>>151805
>Hardly. If anything, Trump has the potential to be the worst thing that ever happened to the Republicans.
4-0.

>>151808
While I get that history is on your side, for the moment, there are many more vulnerable seats open in the 2018 midterms. These special elections would've been nice wins, but they're hardly indicative of what'll happen in 2018. Trump is poison.

Now, if the Democrats still lose in 2018 then they're dead. This is the limit.

>>151838
>Now, if the Democrats still lose in 2018 then they're dead. This is the limit.

My optimistic side says that the hate that burns twice as hot, lasts half as long. I don't see red states turning blue any time soon.

>>151801
>The thing I got out of this was when a Democrat acts like a chode he gets ousted and abandoned by the party. Very different from when a conservative acts like a dick and gets the part making excuses for them and supporting them
I disagree. We see the same thing with Dems, but only if the person in question is important enough. Look at how hard they circled the wagons for Clinton.

>>151801
????
The Clinton's? Weiner? Huma abedin? Podesta?

>>151869
Clinton was thrown under a bus by the American people. She's a loser. Most of the left only reluctantly voted for her in the first place as a "lesser of two evils" candidate after their actual choice got fucked by a corrupt establishment.

The rest of your list are "literally who"s that were never relevant in the first place outside of fringe-right conspiratard theories circling back to Clinton.

To be honest I'm confused every time I hear anyone on the right still mention Hillary as if anything about her s still some sort of meaningful counterpoint. That dead horse is bonemeal at this point.

>>151871
It was a conspiracy that Huma was communicating with the Muslim brotherhood and that Weiner is a pedophile?

>>151879
Huma Abedin's alleged ties to the Muslim Brotherhood are the definition of conspiracy theory. Also let's say hypothetically that she was in communication with some rando spokesperson from the muslim brotherhood (she isn't), how would it be relevant to anything?

Weiner is a pervert and a predator, but not a pedophile. You should probably learn what words mean before you attempt to throw them around for slanderous effect. And again, how is Weiner relevant to anything?

>>151838
>Now, if the Democrats still lose in 2018 then they're dead. This is the limit.

Think longer term. Even in the event of a worst case scenario next year, conservatives will downward spiral out of office once their boomer voter bases die off in 10-15 years, and they won't regain power for at least another generation. Most of your adult life will be during that time.

>>151894
You're assuming that the incoming younger generations won't have conservatives in them and that the next generation in the boomers' former age bracket wouldn't generally become more conservative as well.

>>151887
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/312211/huma-abedins-muslim-brotherhood-ties-andrew-c-mccarthy

Huma Abedin’s mother, Dr. Saleha S. Mahmood Abedin (hereafter, Saleha Abedin), is an influential member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s division for women, the Muslim Sisterhood.

Saleha Abedin is aboard memberof the International Islamic Council for Dawa and Relief. The IICDR has been long banned in Israel for supporting Hamas

Huma Abedin herself was, until late 2008, a member of another of her mother’s Islamist organizations, the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs.

Huma Abedin’s brother, Hassan Abedin, besides also being part of the IMMA, was a fellow at the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies. On the board at the Oxford Center when Hassan Abedin was a fellow were the aforementioned Brotherhood heavyweights and terror promoters, Sheikh Qaradawi and Abdullah Omar Naseef.

Huma was an editor for a Muslim Brotherhood promoted magazine for several years soon with her mother

WikiLeaks emails of Huma to her constituents in the middle east mentioned her disdain for Hillary and desire for Saudi Arabia to rise above the US

>>151894
>>151898

Neither of you are exactly right. While people certainly shift conservative with age, there's only so much they'll move on a topic. For instance, is someone believes in gay marriage, will age really turn them into a proponent of traditional marriage? Will age really turn a communist into a anarcho-capitalist? In reality the communist will become a socialist or an advocate of a heavily regulated economy and nobody shifts into anarcho-capitlism because the political shift actually cuts both ways; anyone who was an extreme conservative will mellow out with age, just like their liberal counterparts, so nobody will really shift into an extremist ideology like narcho-capitlism.

As such, political parties will naturally have to shift their policies. Hell, some of them will be radically different: the Democrats in the 1860's where a southern white conservative party (with the Republicans being more liberal and northern with minority votes), and now today is a liberal northern party (with the Republicans having the strong southern white voter base). Of course, this dramatic shift took over a hundred years to happen, with economic liberals jumping on the Democratic train in ~1900 and the Teddy Roosevelt progressives leaving the Republican boat when Teddy ran as an independent, with the final change in the late 1960's when Johnson jumped on the civil rights bus. Neither party will remain the same in 20 or so years, barring a sudden rightward twist in American demographics, the Republicans will probably find themselves no longer advocating for traditional marriage (and other right wing social views, economically they won't really change) while the Democrats will mellow out hard-line left-wing social policies to win over non-urban voters again (though they will most likely remain economically liberal).