• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

What did Democrats do wrong?

What did Democrats do wrong?

  • Didn't fight inflation enough.

    Votes: 13 14.9%

  • Didn't fight illegal immigration enough.

    Votes: 24 27.6%

  • Too much focus on abortion.

    Votes: 2 2.3%

  • Too much transgender stuff.

    Votes: 31 35.6%

  • America not ready for Progressive women leader.

    Votes: 31 35.6%

  • Should have kept Joe.

    Votes: 3 3.4%

  • Not enough focus on new jobs.

    Votes: 2 2.3%

  • Nothing, Trump cheated & played dirty!

    Votes: 16 18.4%

  • Didn't stop Gaza War.

    Votes: 9 10.3%

  • I can be Agent M.

    Votes: 6 6.9%
  • Total voters
    87
It's a weird thing to have not done if he really did not do it. The dose makes the poison, and a mouthful of pretty gross city water isn't going to have an impact on anyone, unless there's actual microorganisms in it. Unless a spook told him it was actually poisoned or something, IDEK.
 
Last edited:
The Atheist said:
There's another video taken from the side that show his lips are tightly closed.

But I repeat, this was a bloke asking multiple times for a drink. Even if 0.05 ml passed his lips it ain't no "drink".
Click to expand...
Why didn't you show that video then, instead of one where nobody could possibly tell?

Rubio was clearly desperate for a drink, but also took a small sip. Obama's small sip is consistent with him following media training, consistent with the sips of other thirsty politicians, and consistent with someone caught in the appearance of a stunt and wishing to downplay it.
 
As suspected, the DNC is owned by the billionaire donors:
The DNC Voted. Now You Know Whose Party It Is. | AIPAC, Dark Money & the Vote They Hoped You'd Miss (Chelle on YouTube, April 11, 2026 – 6:23 min.)
The DNC held its spring meeting in New Orleans on April 9, 2026. The resolutions committee voted on three measures connected to AIPAC and U.S. policy toward Israel. All three failed.
What failed: a resolution condemning AIPAC by name for spending $14 million in Illinois Democratic primaries. A resolution conditioning U.S. military aid to Israel. A resolution recognizing what is happening in Gaza as genocide.
What passed: a dark money resolution that adds zero new requirements beyond existing FEC law, and feeds into a 2028 platform. I looked into it. Nothing changed.
In this video I break down exactly what was voted on, what the resolution language actually says, who voted which way and why, what Democratic leaders said publicly, and what the polling tells us about how far the party has drifted from its own voters.
Click to expand...


In case somebody isn't familiar with one of the acronyms DNC, AIPAC or FEC (Wikipedia).

(incomplete) List of politicians funded by AIPAC (Wikipedia)
AIPAC began directly funding congressional candidates during the 2022 midterm elections, in which it spent $13 million and played a role in unseating Israel critics Marie Newman and Andy Levin. The group was one of the largest outside donors in the 2024 elections, spending $100 million in 389 congressional races (26 in the Senate, 363 in the House). The group has funded Republican, Democratic and independent candidates. According to AIPAC, 318 candidates backed by AIPAC were elected that year.
Click to expand...
 
Shrinker said:
Why didn't you show that video then, instead of one where nobody could possibly tell?
Click to expand...

It's pretty obvious from the video I posted, but quibble over it as much as you like.

People trusted him. He threw that back at them with a smile.
 
Tero said:
Trump voters were a basket of deplorables.
Click to expand...
That isn't really what she said, though. She talked about the people who had legitimate gripes against the system, who felt left behind, like they had no voice. and were desperate for some sort of change.

Then she mentioned how a lot of Trump supporters are dumb, racist trolls and they go in the "basket of deplorables". And millions of Americans jumped and with their full chests, declared themselves part of a latter.

was it a dumb thing to say for someone who is supposed to be so practiced at public speaking and politically savvy? Yes. But was she wrong?
 
Donal said:
That isn't really what she said, though. She talked about the people who had legitimate gripes against the system, who felt left behind, like they had no voice. and were desperate for some sort of change.

Then she mentioned how a lot of Trump supporters are dumb, racist trolls and they go in the "basket of deplorables". And millions of Americans jumped and with their full chests, declared themselves part of a latter.

was it a dumb thing to say for someone who is supposed to be so practiced at public speaking and politically savvy? Yes. But was she wrong?
Click to expand...
Clinton's comment boils down to "Some of the other party's supporters are well-meaning but have been deceived and are too naive to know it; the rest of them are all evil ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊".

I could similarly say that some progressives are well-intentioned but naive and haven't thought through the consequences of their proposals, and the rest are just evil commies. Do you think that's a reasonable enough statement to justify me saying "but am I wrong?" Because I don't think it is - it leaves no possibility of genuine disagreement about what the right solution is to a given problem. Both alternatives that Clinton presented were an insult toward republican voters.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Clinton's comment boils down to "Some of the other party's supporters are well-meaning but have been deceived and are too naive to know it; the rest of them are all evil ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊".
Click to expand...
...and...? Like I said, not a politically savvy comment, but was she wrong?
Emily's Cat said:
I could similarly say that some progressives are well-intentioned but naive and haven't thought through the consequences of their proposals, and the rest are just evil commies.
Click to expand...
Ya, and that would line up with your track record. I shan't be raising my expectations.
Emily's Cat said:
Do you think that's a reasonable enough statement to justify me saying "but am I wrong?" Because I don't think it is - it leaves no possibility of genuine disagreement about what the right solution is to a given problem. Both alternatives that Clinton presented were an insult toward republican voters.
Click to expand...
And then Republican voters open their mouths and prove her right.
 
i mean, if clinton had won and put a bunch of evil communists in her cabinet and they started enacting their evil communist agenda, would you be sitting here today saying you were wrong to have said that?
 
Emily's Cat said:
Clinton's comment boils down to "Some of the other party's supporters are well-meaning but have been deceived and are too naive to know it; the rest of them are all evil ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊".
Click to expand...
About 72 hours between this post and yours. Hell on crackers with cheese.

NO IT DID NOT boil down to that.

Say what you like but I CHALLENGE you to pull a quote from that interview where she even IMPLIED what you just said.

In fact I'd say the most damaging off the cuff thing she did say was that it was half and half. You've just invented it being worse than that with only 'some' being well-meaning. And you've completely invented the backhandedness of it.
 
Lithrael said:
About 72 hours between this post and yours. Hell on crackers with cheese.

NO IT DID NOT boil down to that.

Say what you like but I CHALLENGE you to pull a quote from that interview where she even IMPLIED what you just said.

In fact I'd say the most damaging off the cuff thing she did say was that it was half and half. You've just invented it being worse than that with only 'some' being well-meaning. And you've completely invented the backhandedness of it.
Click to expand...
Agreed. She said that a significant percentage of Trump voters were bigots,racists and homophobes and whatnot, not too stupid or naive to know what they were voting for. A damaging statement, but also pretty certainly true. Trump has talked hate, revenge, violence and the rescinding of rights and recognitions from the start, and a number of his base have supported it and continue to do so. Enough to sway an election.

It was, no doubt, an insult to Republican policies, if not the voters themselves, but an insult in this case to their ideas, not their grasp of them.
 
Thermal said:
Ya ok but isn't 'deplorable' a pretty fitting descriptor of anyone still supporting him now?
Click to expand...
No one said it wasn't fitting, they absolutely are deplorable, just that it was an insulting thing for a Democrat to say. It's the usual tone policing crap, made especially ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ because this is a ten year old grievance getting dragged out and beaten again whenever the current DARVO isn't gaining enough traction.
 
Thermal said:
Ya ok but isn't 'deplorable' a pretty fitting descriptor of anyone still supporting him now?
Click to expand...

Bit mild, if you ask me.

People supporting him now are plain misanthropes revelling in their death cult. Sick mother......s is more like it and now Trump's broken the mould on F bombs I think you could safely say it.

Let's face it, calling them deplorable didn't cost Hillary a single vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom