The Clinton Thread II

[Legendver2]

Ironically, this came from a Bernie source.

To be quite honest, if this is true, then THIS is how you make a deal lol. For all of Clinton's faults, at the end of the day, I'm a realist. She's been in the game long enough to know how to pull strings to get things done. Obama didn't learn that until the second term. Clinton has the clout and experience to make deals with both Democrats and Republicans alike to get things passed. She's pragmatic. For all of Trump's talk about making deals, I find it really hard to believe that someone of his temperament can make the sort of deals that he speaks of.

 

[Raiden]

To be quite honest, if this is true, then THIS is how you make a deal lol. For all of Clinton's faults, at the end of the day, I'm a realist. She's been in the game long enough to know how to pull strings to get things done. Obama didn't learn that until the second term. Clinton has the clout and experience to make deals with both Democrats and Republicans alike to get things passed. She's pragmatic. For all of Trump's talk about making deals, I find it really hard to believe that someone of his temperament can make the sort of deals that he speaks of.

Trump doesn't make deals; he just bullies you into submission, which might work in the corporate world but not in DC. A man like him who has a short fuse and thin skin won't be able to get anything done in the government.

 

[chaseter]

There is nothing ironic about that at all....

******** Sanders supporters and Conspiracy seeking Trump supporters are simply two sides of the same coin. Neither seem to be thinking clearly these days.

It's not ironic.

It's gross and incestuous politics that keep the elites in power. All hail Clinton.

 

[Kelly]

It's not ironic.

It's gross and incestuous politics that keep the elites in power. All hail Clinton.

And WTF is Trump?

 

[SV Fan]

I am guessing this won't happen but...

http://kutv.com/news/local/utah-could-vote-democrat-for-president-for-first-time-in-50-years

(KUTV) The Republican and Democrat national conventions are over and as the dust starts to settle, it looks like Hillary Clinton has a chance to carry Utah in the U.S. presidential election.

A new Hinckley Institute-Salt Lake Tribune poll shows the two are virtually tied with 35 percent for Donald Trump and 36 percent for Hillary Clinton. That is as close as a Democratic candidate has been to victory in more than half a century.

 

[chaseter]

And WTF is Trump?

What does Trump have to do with Clinton rigging the DNC primary?

Money in politics is a problem that keeps the two party system in power. When one of those two parties rigs the primary so the people have no say in that process, then we have reached a new low in "Democracy".

 

[Unbreakable Lex]

Yes, because there is no difference between a nuanced policy discussion and saying "they're drug dealers, rapists, and murderers."



Come on man, you're just being intellectually dishonest.

Again, Trump never said every Mexican is a murderer and rapist. Who is being intellectually dishonest here? This drives me nuts that this simple fact has been so completely flipped by liberals. You all have lied to yourself so much you are believing it as fact now. And back to calling a spade a spade, isnt it a bit racist to say Mexico has no rapists and murderers which is, in fact, your stance when you say Trump was wrong?

 

[SV Fan]

Again, Trump never said every Mexican is a murderer and rapist.

This is what he said:

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Did he say every Mexican is a murderer or rapist? No. But he basically said that most of the people that cross the border illegally are terrible people(and maybe a couple are decent, although he isn't 100% sure about that). If you can't see how if somebody is Mexican would find this comment offensive then I don't know what to say

There is ways he could have worded his statement if he believes that a couple bad apples will get across the border but he went for over the top rhetoric acting like this is more the norm rather then the exception

 

[DarthSkywalker]

That he has to assume some are good people means that most are not good people. It is not hard to understand.

 

[SV Fan]

That he has to assume some are good people means that most are not good people. It is not hard to understand.

Yeah throwing in that "I assume" takes a terrible statement and makes it 100 times worse

 

[The Incredible Hulk]

Not to mention if only Mexico's worst people want to come here, that's more of an indictment on us than anything.

 

[Legendver2]

Can someone explain to me how the primaries were rigged if there's no voter fraud (I'm assuming). What I gather was the DNC was openly (but not publicly) throwing their support behind Hillary and not Bernie. But I guess actively sabotaging his campaign through whatever means counts as "rigging" really. But aside from that, was there an actual "rigging"? And isn't the DNC a private organization? Meaning they can pretty much do whatever the heck they want anyway? It just seems the American public is so not-in-the-know and short on facts nowadays that they probably think the DNC, RNC, and Federal Reserve are actual government entities.

 

[Kelly]

Again, Trump never said every Mexican is a murderer and rapist. Who is being intellectually dishonest here? This drives me nuts that this simple fact has been so completely flipped by liberals. You all have lied to yourself so much you are believing it as fact now. And back to calling a spade a spade, isnt it a bit racist to say Mexico has no rapists and murderers which is, in fact, your stance when you say Trump was wrong?

Trump says things in a way that....

1. Those that ARE actually racist, misogynistic bullies, understand and agree with......AND
2. Those that aren't, or don't want to be seen that way can explain it away....

 

[chaseter]

I have a proposition to your question. The lottery is a private organization funded by private donations and governed by law...much like the DNC. However, I know the lottery officials and I make a deal with them to give me an advantage over everyone else on how to win. We don't know the full extent of those advantages but it could range from statistical help to weighting done some balls to give me a greater shot (much like super delegates). In exchange, I will give them a cut that they currently can't take. Voila, I win...shocking.

 

[summerteeth]

Again, Trump never said every Mexican is a murderer and rapist. Who is being intellectually dishonest here? This drives me nuts that this simple fact has been so completely flipped by liberals. You all have lied to yourself so much you are believing it as fact now. And back to calling a spade a spade, isnt it a bit racist to say Mexico has no rapists and murderers which is, in fact, your stance when you say Trump was wrong?

Please, the implication he was making was that MOST were rapists and murderers. He flat out said they aren't sending their best and that he assumed that SOME were good people. How about most of the people coming here are good, hard working people looking for better opportunity for their children and themselves. It's one thing to call for immigration reform, one thing to call for border security, it's absolutely another to disparage many of the people that have immigrated here legally or illegally. You have to realize that he's talking about people's grandparents, parents, aunts, uncles, and neighbors. My grandparents are now citizens and they came here from Mexico but I guess they aren't some of Mexico's "Best" whatever that means. He's an elitist clown that doesn't understand anything.

I mean just think about it fill in the blank for any other ethnicity or race or religion a bunch of disparaging comments and then I assume some are good. How is that not racist?

 

[Kelly]

I have a proposition to your question. The lottery is a private organization funded by private donations and governed by law...much like the DNC. However, I know the lottery officials and I make a deal with them to give me an advantage over everyone else on how to win. We don't know the full extent of those advantages but it could range from statistical help to weighting done some balls to give me a greater shot (much like super delegates). In exchange, I will give them a cut that they currently can't take. Voila, I win...shocking.

Apples and oranges....

What did the DNC do, tangible, as in changed votes? kept people out of primaries? paid people off? what did they do that is quantitative....

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Apples and oranges....

What did the DNC do, tangible, as in changed votes? kept people out of primaries? paid people off? what did they do that is quantitative....

Nothing. And definitely nothing to make up the distance Clinton ended up with.

 

[The Incredible Hulk]

I have a proposition to your question. The lottery is a private organization funded by private donations and governed by law...much like the DNC. However, I know the lottery officials and I make a deal with them to give me an advantage over everyone else on how to win. We don't know the full extent of those advantages but it could range from statistical help to weighting done some balls to give me a greater shot (much like super delegates). In exchange, I will give them a cut that they currently can't take. Voila, I win...shocking.

Well except that the lottery isnt a private organization, they're all run by states or terriotorial govt's, and in the case of the Powerball, a group of govt officials from various states.

But assuming they were anything like the DNC, how is rigging the winner of a state lottery even at all analogous to the DNC showing somewhat preferential treatment (no fraud mind you) towards a life-long party member over a guy who was independent up until a year ago?

 

[chaseter]

They are a non-profit organization. The employees are not appointed or elected. They are outside of the government but are jurisdicted by law and rules agreed upon by the coalition of members.

The DNC should be unbiased until the people choose their representative. Otherwise, what's the point of a primary if bias exists? I know why, I'm asking you.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

They are a non-profit organization. The employees are not appointed or elected. They are outside of the government but are jurisdicted by law and rules agreed upon by the coalition of members.

The DNC should be unbiased until the people choose their representative. Otherwise, what's the point of a primary if bias exists? I know why, I'm asking you.

They are allowed to influence voters. The idea that they aren't is well, insane. When a delegate endorses a candidate is that not influence, is that not bias? Do you have a problem with that?

 

[chaseter]

Delegates should vote according to their constituents. If they don't, that's not Democracy and yes...that would be bias.

The DNC shouldn't influence voters to pick one candidate over the other in a primary race. What's the point of a primary race if the leaders already picked a winner? You didn't answer my question so I assume you're dodging it. The answer is because the DNC want the people to feel like they chose a candidate to rally behind them in the general. It's why Sanders supporters are deflecting. It's a facade. It's all for show. In reality, money rules politics and now those elite few are picking which two people you can vote for in the general. Sad thing is, people are complacent because it's their "team" and winning is more important.

 

[Zur-en-Arrh]

what proof do you have that the dnc influenced voters? did they use mind control to get 3.7 million more votes for hillary? sanders problem was he's an avowed socialist who joined the party months before the primary, and had no appeal to black and latino voters over the age of 35, especially in the south. clinton's name and good old fashioned math is what did bernie sanders in, not underpaid staff and interns at the dnc.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Delegates should vote according to their constituents. If they don't, that's not Democracy and yes...that would be bias.

The DNC shouldn't influence voters to pick one candidate over the other in a primary race. What's the point of a primary race if the leaders already picked a winner? You didn't answer my question so I assume you're dodging it. The answer is because the DNC want the people to feel like they chose a candidate to rally behind them in the general. It's why Sanders supporters are deflecting. It's a facade. It's all for show. In reality, money rules politics and now those elite few are picking which two people you can vote for in the general. Sad thing is, people are complacent because it's their "team" and winning is more important.

Super Delegates make the game day bucket go boom.

The DNC watched Hillary in 2008. Who won? Obama. There is nothing wrong with them pitching who they want as long as they don't actually interfere with the voting.

 

[The Incredible Hulk]

They are a non-profit organization. The employees are not appointed or elected. They are outside of the government but are jurisdicted by law and rules agreed upon by the coalition of members.

Most government entities exist as non-profits, and many govt ee's aren't appointed nor elected. I'm not sure what you're getting at here? The state lottery and DNC thing still isn't making sense.

The DNC should be unbiased until the people choose their representative. Otherwise, what's the point of a primary if bias exists? I know why, I'm asking you.

You're asking me because apparently you're unclear. The DNC had a preference for the life-long Democrat. Not a surprise. However, there's nothing to show they did anything irregular towards voting in the primaries. Sometimes, the preferred candidate wins, sometimes they don't, just ask Reince Preibus.

 

[Kelly]

They are a non-profit organization. The employees are not appointed or elected. They are outside of the government but are jurisdicted by law and rules agreed upon by the coalition of members.

The DNC should be unbiased until the people choose their representative. Otherwise, what's the point of a primary if bias exists? I know why, I'm asking you.

Well, you will be happy to know that Sanders got a Super delegate reform package through the DNC. What does that mean? Under the reform package, in future Democratic conventions about two-thirds of super delegates would be bound to the results of state primaries and caucuses. The remaining one third—Democratic senators, Democratic governors and Democratic U.S. representatives—would remain unbound and free to support the candidate of their choice. But guess, that would not have gotten him a win either.

As far as the DNC and their candidates this year, I find it very hard to swallow when one who has NEVER been a member of said party decides they want to run for the candidacy of that party because they know they can't win it any other way. Either join the party, or run on your own.

It just so happens in this particular election year, the DNC got the candidate that has been the most loyal, in fund raising, supporting other candidates etc.....and the RNC didn't. Too ****in bad for the RNC. Maybe they will rethink the 7% only super delegates they have.

The RNC needs to adopt something similar so that they do not get an ass-hat like Trump. They just get semi-asshats.....