Slashdot Mirror
Top DNC Staffers Leave Following WikiLeaks Email Scandal (usatoday.com)
An anonymous reader writes from a report via USA Today: Following the leak of nearly 20,000 Democratic National Committee emails and the resignation of DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, several more staffers are leaving their positions. USA Today reports Amy Dacey, the chief executive officer of the DNC, Luis Miranda, the party's communications director, and Brad Marshall, chief financial officer, are all leaving the DNC. The statement announcing the staff changes praises the outgoing aides and makes no mention of the email issue. "Thanks in part to the hard work of Amy, Luis, and Brad, the Democratic Party has adopted the most progressive platform in history, has put itself in financial position to win in November, and has begun the important work of investing in state party partnerships. I'm so grateful for their commitment to this cause, and I wish them continued success in the next chapter of their career," said Donna Brazile, the party's interim chairwoman. Some of the leaked emails from party staffers depicted officials favoring now-Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders during their primary campaign.
When you fire the entire executive staff for rigging a primary, wouldn't it be a good idea to invalidate the results of the primary? Just saying. I mean that would seem prudent.
"Thanks in part to the hard work of Amy, Luis, and Brad, the Democratic Party has adopted the most progressive platform in history, has put itself in financial position to win in November, and has begun the important work of investing in state party partnerships."
You mean the money left over after they gave all the donations to Hillary's campaign, violating FEC rules?
Rumor is they'll stop using all email and switch to smoke signals. Elizabeth Warren is an alleged expert on that tech.
Table-ized A.I.
He needs to quit before he wins.
The American public are the ones who need to be embarrassed.
...of being forced to take high-paying jobs with the Hillary campaign, the Clinton Foundation, or being hired as big-money lobbyists for the numerous Fortune 500 companies and foreign potentates who have donated to Clinton.
What a rough fate...
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
The real reason to have the Clinton Foundation: Give these people USD500K a year jobs while they wait for this to blow over.
Both parties having Yuuuuge communication issues: Dems plagued by email, Trump by his mouth.
It's like a boxing match between a quadriplegic and a blind dude.
Sad sad sad.
Table-ized A.I.
" In spite of the hard work of Amy, Luis, and Brad, the Democratic Party has been forced to adopt a platform that's still more conservative than Richard Nixon's ", has put itself in financial position to win in November, and has begun the important work of investing in state party partnerships.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Wait until the RNC completely collapses after the disaster Trump has brought to the party. Now he is saying that the election is going to be rigged. This casts doubt on the entire electoral process in the US. What a scumbag. He needs to quit to save himself from further embarrassment.
I dunno, looking at the way the DNC violated FEC rules in order to beat Sanders, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that they paid to rig the elections.
Remember those Trump protestors? The ones starting fights at Trump rallies? DNC paid staffers.
Remember Trump making his hats in China? Complete and total fabrication.
Remember all the lies, hatred, and general bad mouthing he spews? Mostly made up.
The Democrats are spewing a deluge of lies and misdirection at Trump, because it's all they got. Trump beats Hillary on pretty-much every political position, and the voters know it.
Keep with the insults, we need the public to get tired of this and see it for what it really is: the last ditch efforts of a morally bankrupt campaign.
(Here's a good one that was top news yesterday: Trump having a conversation with the devil. Republicans should totally start throwing insults back at Clinton, because that's what the election is all about!)
Like it matters. Both parties will build back up and be even worse next round with their scheming. The only thing they will take out of this is how far they can push their corrupt methods to their own gain. People that aren't scheming and aren't behaving like assholes enough will look weak and have absolutely no chance. This just ends up corrupting the rest of the government with it (not like it needed help). Slippery slope + Feedback loop + whatever else. The only way to vote anymore is with your ass by leaving the country and not continue paying taxes to these horrible representatives of greed, power, and fud.
And this just came in.
Apparently the Clinton foundation took in tons of donation money in return for letting the Russians get access to advanced technology.
From that article:
“The Clintons, they get their donations and speaking fees in the millions of dollars. The Russians get access to advanced US technology. The tech companies [that participated in the reset, including Cisco, Intel, Microsoft] get special access to the Russian market and workforce.
“But the American people get nothing. In fact, we get a rival — Russia — with enhanced technological capabilities. At best, that makes them a tougher competitor [in legitimate commerce],” Schweizer said.
“At worst, they get a more robust military, with technologies that we helped develop, and that can be sold to our enemies.”
Sad.
1) Term Limits
2) Campaign Finance Reform
The reason why Clinton and Trump are both the candidates are for the two items I mention but for VERY different reasons.
I was going to vote for Trump because Hillary has led such a dishonest life without any challenge from the only source which normally would have kept her kind out of office, but the media is so corrupt she skates by... but the sum of all Trump-isms has pushed me over the edge. He does not have the intelligence - i mean the common sense type - to be president of this once great USA.
I will be staying home.
The elections are rigged. Why do you think super delegates and the electoral college exist?
.... such as a sham primary, extensive money laundering to get around contribution limits, racist commentary on various groups, condescension towards unions, and so on.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
Nobody wants Hillary to lose more than me, but lets be real. The system is rigged. It doesn't matter who wins. It will either be republican or democrat. Nothing will change. So says the Bilderberg group.
"investing in state party partnerships"
This sounds a lot like bribery to me.
Non sequitur: Your facts are uncoordinated.
Sticks and stones. For someone who is supposed to be one of those tolerant progressives you sure can spew the vitrol. All you seem to do is call names and spread hate. If you want people to consider your position on any stance its best to use an adult attitude and start respecting other people even if you disagree with them. Hypocrisy in such magnitude only undermines any point you're hey ng to make.
Wasserman Scultz's "resignation" was smug and facile. She and her cronies had already achieved their mission of handing the nomination to Hillary on a platter. And there was Hillary praising her and promising to reward her and ongoing role.
Only fit punishment is expulsion from the party and rehosting the convention. To let Hillary keep it is to let her keep stolen goods. Sure, maybe she would have got them anyway, but they weren't Wasserman Scultz's to give to her.
The whole thing is a disgrace but the DNC elite will make sure Hillary gets to the stolen goods. It's too bad Hillary is only facing Trump because she's so disliked any half-decent Republican would whip her ass in the polls.
Remember all the lies, hatred, and general bad mouthing he spews?
Yes I do. And the Pulitzer-Prize-winning site Politifact confirms the extent of his habitual lying.
Here's politifact dilligently checking Jeff Sessions' comment "there are about 350,000 people who succeed in crossing our borders illegally each year,".
[politifact:] The number of immigrants illegally in the country is staying the same or getting smaller. We rate Sessions’ statement False.
Let's go see what Wikipedia says about illegal immigration:
[DHS, from Wikipedia] Numbers of new illegal immigrants per year crossing the border illegally are not directly countable, and are estimated from the number who are caught trying. For FY 2015, DHS reported 337,117 apprehensions. [3] Using an estimated catch rate of 33%, the number crossing without detection would be 510,000 per year (337,000 / 0.67).
So, he's basically citing DHS numbers and being conservative, yet Politifact determined it was "false".
Additionally, note that the previous paragraph is not in the current version of the Wikipedia article, it was removed *after* Sessions' speech!
I took the trouble to look at the edit history right after the speech (wondering myself how many illegals come into this country each year), and noted that the page had not been substantially edited in over a month, and that paragraph had been there for quite a long time.
So I don't really see Politifact as a neutral observer any more.
I mean, they didn't even *bother* to look at Wikipedia pages that are available when they write their results!
What other things do they get wrong, and do they have a hidden agenda?
Remember all the lies, hatred, and general bad mouthing he spews?
So, yes, I do remember his extensive bad-mouthing of many people over the past 9 months or so. Thanks for asking.
You're remembering the press reports, not what he actually said.
Dog down to the truth - you'll get there eventually.
The party needs to purge its entire leadership, and make Bernie the chairman. Yeah, he may make the party a Euro style Social Democrat party, but that's where the popular Dem opinion is, if one removes the 'super-delegates'.
If you must know:
The electoral college exists because it is directed so in the US Constitution, one of the compromises which allowed the acceptance of the Constitution by all the US states at the time.
The super delegates exist because the Democratic Party didn't want a repeat of 1972 where by the existing rules they nominated McGovern who then was demolished in the general election, only winning one state plus DC.
Sanders spent most of his campaign reiterating that the system is rigged. The DNC and Clinton proved him right.
I'll start with that. I will follow by saying I acknowledge that Hillary Clinton won the endorsement of the party. If we dropped the superdelegates completely, and went only on the representative state delegates, she still wins. Yeah, the party very strongly preferred her but the vote is what it is. The party was not greatly receptive towards Bernie but it wasn't openly preventing him from running his campaign either.
More importantly, by doing so well in the primaries, Bernie was able to significantly influence Hillary's platform, and the DNC platform as a whole. Now things that would not have been discussed are front-and-center, with official party stances. For this Bernie backer, this makes it much more palatable to vote for Hillary as now she represents some of what Bernie was running for.
It's a shame that in the end the DNC nominated a candidate who the GOP could defeat with a ficus tree. Literally any other republican could have wiped the floor with Hillary just by the number of republicans who would turn out in massive innumerable droves simply to vote anti-Clinton. Similarly Trump could be defeated by a ficus tree, based only on the number of people who cannot stand him. However when we have a race between two greatly un-liked (arguably un-likeable) people it is hard to say which way it will break.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
The only way to vote anymore is with your ass by leaving the country and not continue paying taxes
Unfortunately simply leaving the country isn't good enough to avoid paying taxes. You gotta keep your income down below the minimum that requires you to file, or you have to renounce your citizenship, which they make pretty difficult, and it means you need to acquire citizenship somewhere else. The sociopaths that rule will not allow you to live, much less travel freely on planet earth without papers.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
It's not a resignation if you're moving to another position for more money.
That's called a promotion.
skip election day at play
or check a bad box
the choice is yours all the same
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
Jeb just wasn't good enough to make the sale. The guy/gal with the best connection to the brain stem will always win. That's demagoguery for ya...
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Let's imagine if Hillary wins. If all or part of Congress ends up in Republican hands, we'll have more of the same, lots of grandstanding but ultimately compromise (which is what politics is all about, at least in a democracy). If the Democrats control the White House, she'll have a bit more liberty to move, but not as much as people often think. Many Presidents have been just as constrained when their party controls Congress as when the other party does.
Now, let's imagine Trump. Unless he suddenly starts actually behaving like a rational human being, he's going to be abusing Executive powers in who knows how many ways. The courts will be stacked up for years with challenges against the Executive branch. It probably won't even matter who controls Congress, because Trump is doing his best to alienate just about every important Republican in Congress. He might get a bit more leeway with the Republicans, but if he tries to build big monster walls or starts trying to abridge liberties for certain groups, Congress and the courts are just going to make his life a paralyzed hell. By that point he will have alienated many of the US's major foreign allies, probably fueled a nuclear arms race in East Asia as Japan and South Korea take their fates into their own hands, leading to more instability. He'll leave the US paralyzed domestically, weakened internationally, and in general much worse off.
Unless you're one of the people that imagines, even at this point, that Trump is just having a bit of fun and will, like, be totally serious when he gets sworn in. But I remember everyone saying "once he becomes the front-runner, then he'll be presidential", and he didn't. Then it was "when he clinches enough delegates in the Primaries, then he'll be presidential", and he didn't. And then it was "when he actually gets the nomination, then he'll be presidential", and he hasn't. Simply put, he has no interest in campaigning like someone who is looking to occupy the Oval office. He's campaigning like he's on a TV show.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Because he lost? He lost in absolute numbers, and so far as I can tell, none of the delegates or superdelegates had a gun to their head.
It seems for Sanders and Trump supporters "rigged" translates literally to "my candidate didn't/won't win." At least Bernie was big enough to realize that however much he might personally dislike Clinton, she remains by a wide margin a better presidential candidate than Trump. Trump, on the other hand, is doing his best to even convince his fellow Republicans (if there are any left that actually believe he is a Republican) that he's not fit for the job.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The debates are really the next big pivot point in the campaign. That's when the feeling of opposition between the two parties will really set in.
There's never been a better time to vote third party. (Except maybe in 1859)
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
If Hillary wins, she'll go on a rampage against her perceived enemies. She'll institute purges like Erdoan is doing now. She's a Stalin wannabe and a genuinely terrifying psychopath.
Actually, Trump winning was a classic "run out" phenomena when with a huge field of candidates, name recognition and fame is the most important factor because there's always a tangible percentage of the voters that vote based on name recognition alone. This is why Arnold S. won in CA against a hundred other candidates and Jessie Ventura won in MN in a four-way race.
So basically more of the same which has been going on for awhile. It's just becoming more and more public knowledge now. Suddenly the tin-foil hat people aren't appearing so tinfoilly and more.
When you fire the entire executive staff for rigging a primary ...
They are being rewarded not fired. Like Debbie Wasserman Schultz has already done, they are probably moving from the DNC to Hillary's campaign, and ultimately on to positions in the Clinton administration. Like Tim Kaine, another former DNC chair who has supported the Clintons for many years.
Hillary's been nominated, the DNC's main work is done. The important folks move on to the presidential campaign. The less important folks stay behind at the DNC and work on state and congressional stuff. These people are leaving on schedule. Washerman Schultz had to leave a few days ahead of schedule, nothing more.
They fear no repercussions for any of this since Bernie's followers will be good little Democrats and vote for Hillary in the end. That is all that matters. The revolution is dead despite Bernie's claims to the contrary. He got on board with Hillary so he will not lose the committee positions and other advantages he has in the Senate. To go against her would mean he would be ostracized, so he plays ball. He talks of the platform, platforms never mean a damn thing. They are just symbolic appeasements for the fringe elements of the party. Always has been, now Bernie's revolution joins those ranks.
A Hillary victory means everything Bernie fought for was for nothing, everything Hillary and company did vindicated. Hillary and the party machine will have forgotten Bernie in a matter of days, any pain or embarrassment he caused fading by the day, soon to be forgotten. Soon to be remembered as nothing more than a defeated tough opponent. What he stood for forgotten, just that he was somehow a "tough opponent", no one remembering precisely why.
Because the primary was rigged. A laughable number of debates compared to 2008, and scheduled to air at times guaranteed to have few viewers. A primary schedule front-loaded with conservative southern states (most of which would never vote for Hillary in the general) to give the conservative candidate an early claim to "frontrunner" status. And that was right out in the open, before any of the DNC's outright ratfucking was revealed.
That's what Hillbots said in 2008, too. Sanders has a solid record and his positions are popular with far more voters than Hillary. Whereas Hillary's record is solid shit, and her positions are unpopular with voters. But hey, waddya know - when you start with the Mt. Everest of name recognition, have the banks/media/neocons/party bosses all lined up behind you - it is possible to beat a senator that most Americans had never heard of eight months ago!
Hillbots keep saying that too, but the Dem candidate is no lesser evil, not this time. Trump attacks the Iraq war as a stupid idea; Hillary replicated it in Syria and Libya. Hillary loves the TPP, Trump does not.
And every attack that can be made against Trump can be thrown right back in Hillbot faces. He's a racist? So is she - superpredators and deporting children - to the country she helped overthrow - to "send a message to their parents". He's corrupt? Cattle futures, pay-to-play with the Clinton Foundation, Goldman Sachs speeches, and so on.
I don't think anyone voted third party in 1859.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
I got the date wrong by a year, it was 1860.
That year, four candidates actually won electoral votes, but it was a brand new party that won the election.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
and to the dismay (and I'm sure, disgust) of liberals everywhere Rush Limbaugh called it once again: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/da...
This whole thing was in the can for Hillary right from the get go. It just goes to show that liberals will stop at absolutely nothing in the pursuit of political power. And spare me the "sore loser" speech. It's one thing to try and screw Republicans over - they screwed Bernie and his followers. People in their own party.
The current Democrat strategy is to try and discredit Trump. There is no mention of Clinton achievements - because there are none. Everything she has touched has been a colossal fuck up. Including, but not limited to, the death of four Americans in Libya on her watch as Secretary of State. Followed by a cover up that she continues to lie about.
All the while, her and Bill are operating a sham of a "charity" that only donates 10 cents out of every dollar it takes in. Funded in large part by corrupt foreign governments that treat women and gays like shit. While maintaining, with a straight face, that they are the party that actually cares about women and gays.
I, for one, can't wait for the next round of WikiLeaks emails. You can bet there there will be plenty more evidence of lying and corruption in the Clinton camp. So keep up the Trump attack ads and various head fakes. Nobody is buying it.
But no, go on, rant about irrelevant nonsense and just ignore the fact that they are effectively above the law at this point.
What laws are you referring to? There aren't any. Aside from party bylaws (which the party leaders generally can change at a whim), we're not talking about actual laws for the most part. If the DNC leadership want's to be a bunch of douchebags who pick favorites, they're allowed to do that. If they want to funnel all the money one way or the other, there is really nothing stopping them. Anyone who gets involved with a political party and has the slightest belief that a party is a representative democracy is delusional. When you are talking about real power expecting people to play nice is absurdly naive.
Personally I have no use for political parties. The R's and D's offset each other and effectively make my vote more valuable which is fine by me. Unfortunately I still have to pick which turd is the shiniest.
Because the primary was rigged.
Expecting a fair fight in politics is idiotic. The only people who think that ever happens are naive rubes. Those who are realistic about winning scramble for every advantage they can get, fair or not. Those who can rig the game, will rig the game. If Bernie or his supporters actually thought they were going to get a fair fight and wouldn't have to get their hands dirty then they were too dumb to deserve the nomination. I hugely respect the moral stance but the real world doesn't work that way.
Because that "New Party" Had the majority of the membership of the previously major party but now defunct Whigs, the remainders forming the Constitutionalist Party, Meanwhile the Democrats were split into the main pro-abolitionist northern democrats and the southern pro-slavery democrats. The southern democrats being a new party grouping as well. The Republican Party was kind of new but had run a candidate four years prior. It wasn't really a third party as it was the real successor of the Whig Party which collapsed in 1854. The GOP had barely had time to form in 56, and the remainder of the Whigs joined the Know-Nothings to form the American Party in 56 and the Constitutionalist party in 60. Thus the Dems walked to the win in 56, but then were split by their own party collapse in time for the 1860 election. Four parties, the Republicans, the Constitutionalist which was a fraction of the size of the Republicans and the Democrats who split when the main party nominated an abolitionist ticket.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
we'll have more of the same, lots of grandstanding but ultimately compromise
We haven't seen any compromise from the republicans in over a decade. If a republican shows any inclination to compromise, he/she is immediately voted out during the next primary and replaced with some ideologically pure tea party douchebag who promises to be even less willing to compromise. The only upside is that a Congress that can't get anything done is a Congress that can't cause any new problems.
I agree though that while Hillary is basically a status quo vote and that sucks, Trump would be an unmitigated disaster. I feel like I'm trying to pick the prettiest turd but Trump is just post-chili diarrhea in that competition.
There is a literal media blackout on the primary fraud by the DNC. You can't find it on anything, if you even see it a tiny bit, its follow with, that was all a fairy tale made up to make Hillary look bad. Its is not a Joke when you realize the propaganda is so complete that only Bill's 1996 law change could let this happen. Allowed media outlets to be consolidated, where prior we had a law put in place to keep someone like Hitler from taking over the US via propaganda. yea, thats exactly what that law he changed was for.
OMG someone looks like a racist or bigot, funny when the person they are running against was a Gold Girl and is directly responsible along with her husband bill, for putting more black men in prison than were slaves in the US or ever anywhere in the world.
To bad nobody is angry enough about their crapped up wage scales always altered to make people feel like they are middle class, while they tell you that Joe in the Union is the reason the Chinese work for rice or 14cents an hour, but feel free to attack the teachers, its clearly thier fault, not Nafta or the top 1%.
We have these things called opinion polls that help us determine if anyone has rigged an election to the extent that the election result changed. Pretty much all opinion polls have showed that Clinton was ahead amongst Democratic voters over Sanders. If they rigged it, they didn't make any difference.
It sucks. I'd rather it have been the opposite too, but whatever (dubious) evidence there is that the DNC "rigged" anything, the reality is that the primaries reflected the will of the people.
Bear in mind that Clinton is seen as an experienced, level headed, leader who's worked at almost every level of government, while Sanders was seen, for the most part, as a wildcard, ranting and raving about injustices. Even with the polls showing Sanders as a better candidate to defeat Trump, it's not hard to believe that Clinton both had more natural Democratic support (especially amongst so-called Centrists) and that others were genuinely scared of Sanders.
Also ask yourself why the DNC was so heavily pro-Clinton. Is it possible that the DNC reflected the mood of the Democratic Party itself?
Sanders did well. His Republican equivalent would probably be Ron Paul, and Ron Paul never did anything like as well amongst Republicans. It was impressive, but it wasn't enough.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Ahh, the standard whine of insecure conservatives immediately before or after they say something idiotic.
My post has nothing to do with being conservative, being liberal, being left, or being right (I don't identify with any of these things, by the way.) It just goes to show that maybe, just maybe, your starry ideas about a perfect world probably aren't as perfect as you think they are.
I find this so interesting. For over a decade now on /. you'd get a +5 Insightful for talking about black box voting and diebold and Bruce Schneier and how easy it is or likely it is our elections are rigged. Trump says gee I think maybe the election might be rigged and everybody's clutching their pearls, how dare he suggest our election process is anything other than rock solid and completely legitimate!
Do you think Trump is wrong, and that there's no chance of our election being rigged?
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
And these people are rearranging the deck chairs.
Umm Jeb Bush...
Doubt has been cast a long time ago, it's just been made public. When the two parties (Republicans and Democrats) control the political process, you no longer have a Democracy.
Except when the DNC works with the Clinton campaign against the Sanders' campaign and conceals money laundering by the Clinton Super PAC. Moron.
Yes there was a chance. 3 million people could not vote in NYS primary - 120,000 were purged from the voter rolls. Millions others were denied access to vote in other primaries. So yes Bernie had a real chance. You can fuck off now.
I would bet that both sides were rigged (probably by the same people). If Trump is "Hitler", does that make Hillary "Joseph Stalin"? Which would make Bernie "Vladimir Lenin"...
Vulgarity is the fool's fig leaf.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Why are you so worried about Liberal media? The Koch's won't back him, and now Meg Whitman is backing Clinton. Trump is literally hemorrhaging support. But hey, let's blame the media and Clinton, because that's a lot easier than looking at how absolutely idiotic the man is behaving.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
As a stupid idea now. Back in 2003-2005 on the other hand....
The only way his answer is any better than Hillary's is if (a) you ignore history or (b) if you get Hillary confused with "If I knew then what I know now I would still support the war" Jeb
I guess I just would like more than hindsight in a president.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
You know, cites would add credibility to what you said.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Except c) that dog still don't hunt. Trump wasn't privy to classified intelligence as a U.S. Senator - Hillary was, she just didn't bother to read it. John Edwards had an unequivocal "yeah, I fucked up that vote" confession back in 2005. Whereas right now Hillary still engages in the chickenshit cop-out of blaming Bush, when she was too lazy to read the briefings she was given. And she can't blame Bush for repeating the Iraq clusterfuck in Syria and Libya, which she did as SOS. So, any way you wish to split the hair, Trump is better than Hillary on the Iraq War.
No lesser evil. Not this time.
Just leave, stop paying US taxes and never come back.
You would have a problem if they catch you here.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I can only assume he's either a fucking lunatic, or he really is a Democrat plant intent on tearing the still-beating heart out of the Republicans.
Occam is on line 1 for you.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Platforms are nothing. They are universally ignored once in office. Its a placebo offered at conventions to "give a voice" to fringe elements. Nothing more. A "voice" that lasts about as long as the convention.
Bernie bowed to protect his Senate position. He would have been ostracized, a pariah. No good committee positions, no role in caucusing when legislation is being drafted or considered, few if any Democrats willing to work with him, etc. He had a choice, the "revolution" or his "career". He chose "career".
I know lots of Bernie supporters like myself who are disgusted that our vote doesn't count at all and are now more likely to vote for Trump or not vote at all. If all Bernie supporters fail to vote at all, that is still a vote for Trump. It will take all of us Bernie supporters to bring a democrat to the white house. I don't see that happening.
The anger of Bernie supports will fade and by November they will be good little Democrats and vote for their party's choice. They are just going to complain for a while but come November they will vote for Hillary. Her and he supporter's actions will be vindicated.
They don't have to; Trump says rude things out loud for the world to hear.
Table-ized A.I.
Reminds me of a quote:
We "get" to see the meat grinders of politics in action here.
Table-ized A.I.
Well then this is the RNC's own stupid fault for allowing that many candidates, and for using first-past-the-post voting combined with winner-takes-all for the delegate awarding.
I don't care if he didn't have access to classified intelligence. He supported it in 2003-2005. And he has the same intelligence now (well, any minute now he'll get classified intelligence) that he's saying "it was horrible, I was always against it."
I also, honestly, don't care about it. If it wasn't a point that other people cared about, I wouldn't consider it relevant to the discussion of who should be POTUS. It's just a wash between them.
I mean, I guess it would be nice if we elected a president who opposed the war at the time... but after 8 years of a president like that, would we even care about that issue?
Also, I have no idea why you think Iraq was anything like Syria or Libya.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
and the voters aren't the same thing. There's a _lot_ of voter suppression in America :(. And googling "Diebold voter fraud" is terrifying.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Nobody has proven that Warren has no native Americans ancestors*, and there's no record of Dolezal claiming to be black. The NAACP even said being black is NOT a qualification for the position. They didn't fire her, she left on her own volition.
You are off base.
* There is no clear-cut definition of that anyhow. Humans are all mutts. At the very most, DNA tests can show that one is probably related to a particular group of people at a particular place and time.
Table-ized A.I.
Some of the leaked emails from party staffers depicted officials favoring now-Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders during their primary campaign.
This makes it sound like each DNS staff member must all either be for Hillary or for Bernie. Just stating in an email that some prefer one over the other shouldn't matter.
The day Microsoft creates a product that doesn't suck, it will be known as the Microsoft Vaccuum Cleaner!
So you care more about the storyline than the facts or accountability?
And why might that be. You only had both parties and the entire establishment media supporting the invasion - shocking development that most Americans also supported the war, given that they weren't privy to the actual intelligence briefings.
Who was privy? Hillary Rodham Clinton. So, yeah, having access to information the common citizen did not does matter. And of course, Trump's 2003 support for the Iraq War made no difference in the invasion - as opposed to the yea vote from a U.S. Senator. And yeah, if Trump had been the one in office at the time while Hillary was a private citizen, the same rules would apply to Trump in her place.
We shouldn't care about the possibility of another warmongering fool getting thousands more Americans killed, and between one and two million people getting killed in more illegal wars?
How were they not like Iraq? Big Ebul Dictator needs to be overthrown and his country made safe for democracy, because he was abusing his own people, clamped down on civil rights, was a threat to his neighbors, blah blah blah. The fake concern over WMD's was copied straight from the Iraq playbook to Syria. Want to say the lack of boots (special forces use moccasins, not boots) and a long occupation makes those two regional instabilities too different from Iraq? Okay....but you know who really wanted boots on the ground in Syria, right?
HRC.