Toups

The Politics Thread

16,407 posts in this topic

17 minutes ago, Vee said:

It's a primary. People lose. The inept, coddled bureaucrats at the DNC have never been capable of a grand conspiracy to tie their shoes until suddenly Bernie Sanders has a problem winning the black and Democratic vote - then they're masterminds.

 

 

Shh, best not to say that too loudly, as we're not supposed speak too much about diversity- remember talking about diversity too often is what lost the election.:ph34r: Best to talk in generalities and assume that everybody will 'get' it. 

 

10 minutes ago, JaneAusten said:

I never said they didn't and I do think they 'encouraged' some to stay out of the race to leave an open field for her. And yes that was wrong. But there is zero evidence including the leaked emails that anything else was done including the debates, which there were more of than in 2008 when she and Obama ran head to head. Anyone believing the DNC is some kind of mastermind to influence 4 million voters is smoking something powerful.

 

Sanders ran a crappy campaign his first 6 months, something those in his bubble refuse to recognize. They held an event at a black college in the south which the college wanted to invite it's students and give them first priority, only to be overruled by the Sanders camp. Guess what skin color the majority of the audience ended up being. Sanders lost by 4 million votes. And I will again say Clinton was also the favored candidate in 2008 but somehow  Barack Obama won the nomination.

 

And once Obama won, some people were almost hoping for Clinton to dig in her heels but she somehow convinced even her most loyal base to vote for Obama, which even the voters who felt bitter about her loss did vote for Obama. Funny how that worked, huh? 

 

Could it be that the two primary candidates actually agreed to work in concert to get the party's nominee elected and not just pay lip service to the idea?

Could it also be that Clinton's voters were more interested in securing the White House, rather than spiting Obama?

Hmm, I wonder....

Edited by DramatistDreamer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still frustrated at the need to regurgitate all this. We have a real scandal with the Russian interference in our elections and people want to make it about Clinton supporters not getting over her loss(like Russian interference is not a big deal) and how the Clinton's ruined the DNC.

 

Seriously Lara Trump was just hired by Cambridge Analytica and people are we are still arguing about this?

Edited by JaneAusten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JaneAusten said:

I'm still frustrated at the need to regurgitate all this. We have a real scandal with the Russian interference in our elections and people want to make it about Clinton supporters not getting over her loss(like Russian interference is not a big deal) and how the Clinton's ruined the DNC.

 

Seriously Lara Trump was just hired by Cambridge Analytica and people are we are still arguing about this?

 

Yeah, I'm over it too. Wasn't sure why an article from December of last year was posted but *shrugs*.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, rhinohide said:

I don't see Bernie approving of Russia's involvement in the election in any way. Try again. 

Do you deny that the DNC establishment preferred HRC?  Do you deny that their preference showed every step of the way?  I don't blame them. The RNC preferred Cruz or Rubio to Trump. Did everything to defeat him. And failed. The DNC succeeded in their mission. While the RNC failed. But ultimately the RNC's failure gave them complete and total ownership of our government. 

Clinton had a long history within the party, so of course she would have support among the establishment. Sanders has never been a Democrat and called for Obama to be primaried in 2012, which certainly isn't a great thing to do if you want Democratic support. Sanders was never going to win the Democratic nomination, so the talk of rigged elections is bunk. At this point, none of that matters, since the last election cycle is finished.

Edited by ReddFoxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that Sanders called for Obama to be primaried in 2012 doesn't sit right with me (how insulting!) and it probably didn't sit well with the other groups that didn't vote for Sanders in the '16 Democratic primary.

There are definitely factions within the Democratic party that are either Democrats in name only (e.g. the Joe Manchins) or only use Democratic party apparatus when it suits them (Democratic Socialists like Sanders who Caucus with the Democrats).

 

Anywho, everyone's talking about the 'nuclear option' but this is an interesting fact- and I like actual facts (not alternative facts :P).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernie is a demagogue and a loser. He perpetuated this victim narrative about elections being rigged but said NOTHING about the fact that the majority of his wins were in caucus states that disenfranchises MANY voters. 

 

Washington state held a Caucus and a Primary but only the Caucus results counted. Bernie won the Caucus but Hillary won the Primary where over 400,000 more people were able to participate. How could Hillary win many caucuses though when voters are unable to attend the meeting times or they have psycho Bernie bros yelling at them? Sanders and his crew can go f-ck off.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/washington-primary-bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton/484313/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More trouble at Fox News

 

It would be nice to see this as the start of O"Reilly's downfall but we see how fox "punished" Ailes so I am not very encouraged but advertisers like Hyundai and Mercedes pulling is a start 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Eric83 said:

Bernie is a demagogue and a loser. He perpetuated this victim narrative about elections being rigged but said NOTHING about the fact that the majority of his wins were in caucus states that disenfranchises MANY voters. 

 

Washington state held a Caucus and a Primary but only the Caucus results counted. Bernie won the Caucus but Hillary won the Primary where over 400,000 more people were able to participate. How could Hillary win many caucuses though when voters are unable to attend the meeting times or they have psycho Bernie bros yelling at them? Sanders and his crew can go f-ck off.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/washington-primary-bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton/484313/

 

This is why you hear them all complaining about "identity" politics and barely speak a word about voter suppression particularly in states like NC and WI where over 100 thousand voters in each state were disenfranchised due to it. Nor do they ever talk about those broken voting machines in Detroit. Ask why. It's like voter suppression doesn't exist.

Edited by JaneAusten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, the only thing that matters to TV networks is advertising revenue.

 

3 minutes ago, marceline said:

We are all that ranger.

 

Except Maxine Waters.  She's giving Trump a whole 'nother kind of side-eye.

Edited by Khan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Bernie is not a loser. They were rigged and Hilary got those stupid debate questions. Hilary Clinton was a joke she still couldnt win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm:

 

[T]he Obama administration was at the time focused on seeking cooperation for a last-ditch effort by the Department of Homeland Security to avoid Russian tampering in the actual voting process. But the administration, she said, faced a backlash from state and local governments who viewed the DHS cybersecurity election push as “a big federal takeover” and were reluctant to cooperate. That was the case that she, FBI Director James Comey and DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson made in a secret briefing of top members of Congress in the fall, during a session at which Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) reportedly balked at their characterization of the evidence of Russian involvement in the hack.

 

The headline is a typical Politico gotcha line but the piece is much more damning to the GOP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

14 minutes ago, Vee said:

Hmm:

 

 

 

 

The headline is a typical Politico gotcha line but the piece is much more damning to the GOP.

The fact is they don't really care that Russia impacted our elections. Next go around they will be tampering with voter rolls and it will again be the brown people and women who are impacted for the most part. Hey it allows the GOP to enable voter suppression without doing a damn thing.

Edited by JaneAusten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More Fox Advertisers pull

 

"Six more marketers said they were withdrawing ads from “The O’Reilly Factor,’’ making a total of eight that have suspended sponsorship in the last 24 hours. Mercedes-Benz and Hyundai announced their decisions Monday night, and on Tuesday they were joined by BMW of North America; GlaxoSmithKline; Allstate; Constant Contact, an online marketer; Untuckit, a men’s clothing distributor; and Sanofi Consumer HealthCare, which advertised products like ACT mouthwash on Mr. O’Reilly’s show."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now