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.
Since Trump has the attention span of a goldfish, wonder who in his 'WARMONGERING' Administration could possibly put together and offer a sensible peace treaty......now that would be something to see, LOL, LOL,LOL!
warmongering? seriously? trump makes a few tough comments, then imposes, and gets china to impose sanctions on north korea, and now NK is ready to talk about a peace treaty, AND denuclearization as well. sounds to me like bargaining from a position of strength is the way to go. something obama never did in anything. and by the way, how many wars did this administration start again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by natalie469
[/b]
It won't matter. Independents decide the election. And why would republicans be energized.
why wouldnt republicans be energized this election cycle? if the democrat candidates start campaigning on impeaching trump, they are going to lose in november. if the campaign on republican platforms, they may win in november, but the people in their districts are going to hold their feet to the fire, and if the dems get out of line, there will be a backlash against them in 2020.
The Democrats aren't going to be running on impeaching Trump this year.
Why would they? There is an investigation that is well under way that has not ended, and if it ends with anything worthy of bringing impeachment charges, there is a Congress already seated that would address the issue.
If impeachment is even considered, the time frame will come into play. If the investigation ends early this summer, an impeachment commission may be formed. But if the investigation ends in late summer or early fall, no one will touch it until after the election.
I'm not say there couldn't be some candidate who's so stupid as to make impeachment a campaign issue, but if one does, he'll lose.
Impeachment is like a cast-iron skillet that has been left too long on the fire; anyone who grabs the handle will be burned. The fire has to cool before the skillet can be taken off.
If this is a "blue wave," how come your candidate lost?
More nonsense. Apparently you do not understand this, so let me lay it all out for you.
While the Democrat lost, that Democrat should have never even gotten into spitting distance. The swing in voters was HUGE. And if reflected elsewhere will result in massive Republican loses. Not 100%. but enough to gain control in at least the house. And thats whats being referred too. not winning every election, but winning enough.
As for the money...most studies I have read say that as long as you have enough money to get your message and name out, the spending by your opponent can only swing the vote by about 5%. Now normally that is a pretty big deal in most voting scenarios. Its not as big of a deal if the swing in voting is in the double digits.
And I think the DNC has had some issues in that their base does not trust them. So more folks are donating to candidates then to the DNC.
More nonsense. Apparently you do not understand this, so let me lay it all out for you.
While the Democrat lost, that Democrat should have never even gotten into spitting distance. The swing in voters was HUGE. And if reflected elsewhere will result in massive Republican loses. Not 100%. but enough to gain control in at least the house. And thats whats being referred too. not winning every election, but winning enough.
As for the money...most studies I have read say that as long as you have enough money to get your message and name out, the spending by your opponent can only swing the vote by about 5%. Now normally that is a pretty big deal in most voting scenarios. Its not as big of a deal if the swing in voting is in the double digits.
And I think the DNC has had some issues in that their base does not trust them. So more folks are donating to candidates then to the DNC.
Democratic donations aren't going to the DNC. They're going to the candidates now, bypassing the DNC.
It's the same thing that happened to the Republicans in 2010. When a Central Committee loses touch with its base, that's the way the committee is whipped back into line. Money always talks when all else fails.
GOP had to spend $1 million to barely hold a deep red seat in Arizona
Since the RNC raised 289 million in 2017, it looks like they will have enough money to clobber the Dems!
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.
