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.
Then avail yourself of President Trump and live with the consequences.
There are too many people who will NEVER identify with Sanders because he identified himself as a 'Democratic Socialist'. Do you understand that a large portion of the country hear only the word 'socialist'?
That is all they need to hear to turn them off. Specifically Republicans who would consider crossing over and right-leaning independents.
And, YES, there are Republican trolls attempting to divide the party on most social media. I did not specifically point to you. Don't be so self-absorbed.
I'm well aware of the existence of social media trolls of innumerable varieties. As to your reference to people who are not too bright/Republican trolls, it was made in direct response to a quote of mine. Thus, it seems reasonable to assume that you were inferring that I belonged to one of those groups. With that said, I really don't get too worked-up about minor insults directed at me on internet forums by people who have strong disagreement with my opinions. It goes with the territory.
Back to the actual issue at hand:
If your primary fear is the prospect of Donald Trump (or any other Republican candidate) as President, the logical thing to do would be to support the one opposing candidate who, based upon nationwide surveys, would soundly defeat him (and all other Republican candidates) in the general election: Bernie Sanders. Those same surveys, by their very results, also dispel the notion that being referenced as a "socialist" carries insurmountable stigmatization in regards to the general election. I would also point out that Sanders has significantly higher favorability ratings than does Clinton among those voters who characterize themselves as independents.
LOLOL!! Chelsea holds her new baby while wearing a blue dress and her usual hair style, and all the celebrity tabloid sites think there's a conspiracy!! Someone must have kicked over that rock THEY all live under ..
No conspiracy. It's quite obvious.
I'm not a tabloid and it's the first thing I thought of when I saw those pics of her leaving the hospital in the news.
I can't and won't vote for Hillary since I don't want Bill Clinton in the White House again.
She stood over the bodies of four honorable loyal Americans and blamed their deaths on a video when she knew that was not true because her e-mails showed she told her daughter another story.
No similarities? You must live under a rock. Here, I'll do some work for you. They include side by side pictures, so you can remind yourself what each new mother looked like a few years ago when they debuted their babies - one mother, a future Queen following royal protocol, and another, an American whose dad was president and mom Secretary of State, not following any type of protocol. It's okay, many probably have forgotten by now, but here's a reminder for you (actually many):
The glowing new mom, 34, emerged from New York City's Lenox Hill Hospital on Monday evening cradling her newborn daughter, Charlotte, in a printed aquamarine short-sleeved dress and fresh blowout. She polished off her new mom look with a set of green flats and her happy husband, Marc Mezvinksy beside her. Sound familiar?
Kate Middleton received widespread praise for her ensemble as she exited St. Mary's Hospital in London in July 2013 carrying newborn, Prince George. Middleton donned a custom-made Jenny Packham baby blue polka dot shift dress and a softly-style mane for her and George's big debut.
Intentionally or not Clinton and Mezvinksy looked nearly identical to the royal family."
How "petty" of the media. How dare they accuse the Great Chelsea Clinton, daughter of the Great Bill and Wonderful Hillary, of resembling the Duchess of Cambridge and baby Prince, future King George Louis. Not the same thing at all! I'm sure it was a total coincidence!
Look, I don't care what the Clintons do in their private time - but this clearly mirrored the royal family. And I thought it was pathetic. It wasn't just leaving the hospital with the baby in her arms all casually, it was wearing a blue dress like Kate, having her hair and makeup impeccable, it was debuting the baby as if their baby is important an not just another average American baby born that day. Her husband at her side, both beaming and waving for the cameras. Her parents right behind her, the same. Coming out a side door right onto the NYC sidewalk. As if everyone cares as much as they care about a future king (if anyone really even cares that much about the future king, especially over here). The second I saw these pictures in the media, I thought - hey, that reminds me of something...
I get that they were happy and excited and proud - and they should be. But it so pathetically resembled the royal family and how they debut their babies, debuting actual royalty. The Clintons are no royalty. Her baby is genuinely no more important than anyone else's - so why the special debut reminiscent of Kate and George? Down to the dress color?
Why do you assume I would have a problem if she walked out in a "sackcloth and ashes"? I would have had no problem if she just quietly left the hospital like any normal new mom, but no. She had to make it a whole spectacle reminiscent of what royalty does - it's tacky. That's why I have a problem with it. It's tacky. And painfully obvious despite you claiming to not see any similarities. If Jenna Bush did the same thing as Chelsea, I would still say it's tacky. It's tacky to debut an American baby born into a political family the same way they debut the future king and any princes and princesses.
You are determined to see a conspiracy where there is none. NO - it does not remind me of the Royals just becuase she wore a blue dress. But then again, tabloid journalism is not my thing.
It IS petty and no, I found no similarities with the London Royals. Please. If she walked out in a sackcloth and ashes ~ you would find something wrong with it.
And if she walked out with a tiara and a scepter you'd see nothing wrong. Pot, meet kettle...
You are determined to see a conspiracy where there is none. NO - it does not remind me of the Royals just becuase she wore a blue dress. But then again, tabloid journalism is not my thing.
Yes, I still think it's ridiculous and petty.
And you are determined to see no wrong with the Clintons.
Pray tell, what is the "conspiracy"? I don't see any "conspiracy" here. I see Chelsea Clinton strongly resembling the royals in the way she introduced her baby to the world. It doesn't necessarily mean anything, it's just a fact. And despite you desperately claiming otherwise, yes she did resemble the royals. In pretty much every way. I don't know how you can deny this. It's not just about the dress which I have said multiple times but keep simplifying it due to your pathetically loyal support of the Clintons.
And you are determined to see no wrong with the Clintons.
Pray tell, what is the "conspiracy"? I don't see any "conspiracy" here. I see Chelsea Clinton strongly resembling the royals in the way she introduced her baby to the world. It doesn't necessarily mean anything, it's just a fact. And despite you desperately claiming otherwise, yes she did resemble the royals. In pretty much every way. I don't know how you can deny this. It's not just about the dress which I have said multiple times but keep simplifying it due to your pathetically loyal support of the Clintons.
Whatever.
I see plenty wrong with the Clinton's. Walking out of the hospital with a blue dress on is not one of them.
Trying to make hay with that using US Weekly is the definition of pathetic.
I see plenty wrong with the Clinton's. Walking out of the hospital with a blue dress on is not one of them.
Trying to make hay with that using US Weekly is the definition of pathetic.
Whatever yourself.
Funny how this bothers you so much. I make a simple observation and you get all defensive for someone else. I guess me and every poster who agreed with me and gave me rep comments saying they thought the same thing are all pathetic.
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.
