Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The hate for Obama from all the racists. Now the hardcore racists have a voice with Trump Trump never says I do not need their support he should but will never do it.
It all boils down to one thing..........anger. A large segment of the population were mad at whatever, and Trump was their way to rub the noses of the establishment in the dirt.
They knew he was crude and rude, and the more he acted like an idiot, the better they liked it. It was the ultimate "We'll show you!" act to elect someone who would offend the status quo daily.
IMO, exactly. Trump won because the democrats nominated a P-poor candidate who believed all she had to do was win on the East Coast and theWest coast, and she had it made because it was "her time".
Middle America slapped her down, and Trump ran away with the Electoral College.
IMO, it is just that simple.
You right and the bitter divide continues because one side was but hurt and couldn't let it go. Many DEMS cannot stand the fact republicans won in 2016.
Is because Gore lost in 2000. Think about it. Maybe I wrong
But IMO, The controversial 2000 election put the country on the wrong track and is really when the country became so divided. The two parties became less willing to work together. If Gore had won in 2000, Obama most likely would not have rna for President in 2000 and if he did the changes are less likely he would have won in this scenario. Gore may have had a different reaction to 9/11 and not put Soldiers in Iraq.
I think Republicans would have been more willing to work with Gore then Democrats with Bush (and republicans with Obama) because he had been senator then VP for 8 Years. The two parties would not have beame so revengeful and veered so far off course from their original ideology. Instead of coming together and working for the better of the country the two parties (Most in both parties not everyone. there still some good people in the party) they are only looking out for their best interest and have became so corrupt. c
Obama won based on the incompetence of Bush and how unpopular he was because of the Two Wars and lying about WMDs. And then almost sending the country into a near depression at the end of his term. among other things.
It not to say Gore would have been even a great president. he may have ended up being worse than Bush for all we know but things would have likely played out differently and we probably still be a bit more united. Politics may not have became so partisan
I think it went back further. The GOP had the presidency for 12 years, then Clinton won. After the GOP got control of Congress, they investigated Clinton for 6 years--some of it merited, but a lot of it not. Gingrich was at war with Clinton and this 6-year investigation split the country, and was the beginning of the great divide.
Is because Gore lost in 2000. Think about it. Maybe I wrong
But IMO, The controversial 2000 election put the country on the wrong track and is really when the country became so divided. The two parties became less willing to work together. If Gore had won in 2000, Obama most likely would not have rna for President in 2000 and if he did the changes are less likely he would have won in this scenario. Gore may have had a different reaction to 9/11 and not put Soldiers in Iraq.
I think Republicans would have been more willing to work with Gore then Democrats with Bush (and republicans with Obama) because he had been senator then VP for 8 Years. The two parties would not have beame so revengeful and veered so far off course from their original ideology. Instead of coming together and working for the better of the country the two parties (Most in both parties not everyone. there still some good people in the party) they are only looking out for their best interest and have became so corrupt. c
Obama won based on the incompetence of Bush and how unpopular he was because of the Two Wars and lying about WMDs. And then almost sending the country into a near depression at the end of his term. among other things.
It not to say Gore would have been even a great president. he may have ended up being worse than Bush for all we know but things would have likely played out differently and we probably still be a bit more united. Politics may not have became so partisan
I think you're few years too late. I blame Newt Gingrich's rise for the breakdown of collegiality and compromise at the highest levels of government. He was a nasty piece of work then, and he's a nasty piece of work now.
You right and the bitter divide continues because one side was but hurt and couldn't let it go. Many DEMS cannot stand the fact republicans won in 2016.
If you understand history, you will understand that one side ALWAYS loses, generally one side only stays in power for 4 or 8 years, and then the other side takes over. Look at the past, it has always been that way.
We aren't mad at losing, we are mad at WHO your side put in that seat. Anyone else would never have seen this level of concern and discontent.
My point is if Gore had won in 2000 then there would have been no Obama which is the main reason Trump ran and won. the country would have been set on a different track and not have been so divided as we are now. Maybe we would have been just as decided who knows? Politicians may have been just as corrupt but I think there would be a bit more working together instead of one side wanting to get back at the toher.
I agree with other people about why Trump won. I did not vote for Hillary, never well. Too much baggage and corrupt. The Democratic have gone to far to the left for the most part. And in a lot of ways The Republicans have gone to far to the right
If you understand history, you will understand that one side ALWAYS loses, generally one side only stays in power for 4 or 8 years, and then the other side takes over. Look at the past, it has always been that way.
We aren't mad at losing, we are mad at WHO your side put in that seat. Anyone else would never have seen this level of concern and discontent.
I didn't say everybody. I said some. As I said earlier republicans were not happy with Obama winning and said they would make sure he was a 1 term president
I think it went back further. The GOP had the presidency for 12 years, then Clinton won. After the GOP got control of Congress, they investigated Clinton for 6 years--some of it merited, but a lot of it not. Gingrich was at war with Clinton and this 6-year investigation split the country, and was the beginning of the great divide.
Yes you right. The whole impeachment thing in 1998 didn't help either.
I think you're few years too late. I blame Newt Gingrich's rise for the breakdown of collegiality and compromise at the highest levels of government. He was a nasty piece of work then, and he's a nasty piece of work now.
You're getting warm, but the real answer was Lee Atwater. Evil incarnate.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
