Lol. I'm less worried about Russia undermining the Democratic process than I am Americans now.El Guapo wrote:
Drumpf is right, the election is getting rigged. It just seems that it's being rigged in his favour.
Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus
Lol. I'm less worried about Russia undermining the Democratic process than I am Americans now.El Guapo wrote:
Working as intended.Ralph-Wiggum wrote:Donald Trump’s campaign manager on Thursday grudgingly conceded that a story her candidate pushed on the trail about the FBI predicting an indictment for Hillary Clinton was baseless, but said that the political damage to the Democratic nominee was already done.
Except the jury never hears "objection" or the judge sustaining the objection.YellowKing wrote:I find it more equivalent to a lawyer in a criminal trial saying something he knows will be overruled by objection, but saying it anyway since the jury can never "unhear" it.
I guess the actual acts themselves, no matter how awful, seem less important to some people than if you are upfront about those acts or not. They can get away with anything at this point, and they know it. Hell, they are playing to that fact...just put it out there, loudly. As long as you own it, you can pretty much do or say anything apparently.GreenGoo wrote:Except the jury never hears "objection" or the judge sustaining the objection.YellowKing wrote:I find it more equivalent to a lawyer in a criminal trial saying something he knows will be overruled by objection, but saying it anyway since the jury can never "unhear" it.
What's the point of correcting misinformation, no one is going to believe the correction anyway, seems to be her position.
Lol. Totally awful and they just keep showing their complete disdain for reality. I find that personally offensive.
It's like the marketing department at a major corporation, except completely unrestrained by regulation/law.
Don't ever change. In my world, I like to believe you posted that just for me.Zarathud wrote:Because Republicans and Bernie Bros are whiny assholes.
To the Bernie camp, seeing her essence instantly enveloped into Clinton campaign was not the proper use of the sacrifice skill. For optics, that was about the worst thing you could do.RunningMn9 wrote:Because the DNC wants the Democrats that were in Bernie's camp to vote for Clinton. Sacrifices must be made at that altar.Smutly wrote:Then why did Debbie Wasserman Schultz immediately resign?
I know you don't count, but if you did, this would be an example of the hostile attitude that is seeing youth turning their backs partisan politics.GreenGoo wrote:This. Bernie, unlike Reps opposing Drumpf, had a substantial base from which to gather support. Opposing Bernie made the DNC and Bernie's supporters "enemies". If they could be appeased by a resignation, great. She can always return to the fold in another capacity.
Of course they haven't been appeased. Not completely. Not even with Bernie trying to get them to support Hillary. They want their free stuff and Hillary is the reason they're not going to get it.
For the record I support them getting *some* of their free stuff.
Maybe but it is expected and normal behavior in our system. Our first past the post Presidential system forces them to build coalitions before the election. Much like how Trump found a segment of disaffected and angry racists and merged them with people who should be ashamed of themselves.LordMortis wrote:To the Bernie camp, seeing her essence instantly enveloped into Clinton campaign was not the proper use of the sacrifice skill. For optics, that was about the worst thing you could do.
If the reason for the sacrifice was to expel charges of exclusion and collusion, then it's a failure of normal behavior that will not be soon forgotten by young voters who are voting in their 1st, 2nd, or even 3rd presidential election. It gives credence to all of republican noise centered on the idea that Clinton is the head of a party is built on exclusion and collusion, which then builds over time to become synonymous oligarch and corruption, which is the stuff young voters are trying to break away from most. The attempt to break away is the stuff they put Obama in office on and to a lesser extent the stuff they re elected him on.malchior wrote:Maybe but it is expected and normal behavior in our system. Our first past the post Presidential system forces them to build coalitions before the election. Much like how Trump found a segment of disaffected and angry racists and merged them with people who should be ashamed of themselves.LordMortis wrote:To the Bernie camp, seeing her essence instantly enveloped into Clinton campaign was not the proper use of the sacrifice skill. For optics, that was about the worst thing you could do.
I never meant to imply that they were good at it. I was just answering the question as to why she was fired. I just can't get worked up that the Democratic National Committee went out of their way to prevent a non-Democrat from winning their party's nomination. I'm surprised it took more than "Uh...no, you can't run for the nomination of our Party, because you aren't a member of our Party...why do we even have to explain that to you?"LordMortis wrote:To the Bernie camp, seeing her essence instantly enveloped into Clinton campaign was not the proper use of the sacrifice skill. For optics, that was about the worst thing you could do.
While I sympathize with the plight of Democrats here (the beef makes perfect sense, why would you let anyone in a club that doesn't pay due and do their time), I empathize with disenfranchised more, even if I think their energy is better served getting educated on and staying involved at he local level and ousting partisan politics there and letting that snowball into regional levels. At the same time, I won't lament the implosion of the democrats nearly (but not quite) as much as I'm not lamenting the implosion of the republicans (so long as neither party manages to take the whole country with them).RunningMn9 wrote:I never meant to imply that they were good at it. I was just answering the question as to why she was fired. I just can't get worked up that the Democratic National Committee went out of their way to prevent a non-Democrat from winning their party's nomination. I'm surprised it took more than "Uh...no, you can't run for the nomination of our Party, because you aren't a member of our Party...why do we even have to explain that to you?"LordMortis wrote:To the Bernie camp, seeing her essence instantly enveloped into Clinton campaign was not the proper use of the sacrifice skill. For optics, that was about the worst thing you could do.
I don't think that Bernie's supporters are being understanding enough of the realities of a non-Democrat trying to secure the nomination of the Democratic Party.
Shrug. They can hide in a safe zone where they don't have to listen to my opinion.LordMortis wrote:
I know you don't count, but if you did, this would be an example of the hostile attitude that is seeing youth turning their backs partisan politics.
I empathize with them right up to the point that I don't believe they have the right to just co-opt another political party like that in order to have their way.LordMortis wrote:I empathize with disenfranchised more
I am rather inclined to doubt that. I think the republicans have been courting this swell for decades and invited them to the table in 2007 (aka Tea Party) to increase their voting numbers.RunningMn9 wrote:The Republicans in this election have allowed it by having a non-Republican win the nomination on a swell of support from people that aren't Republicans. As a result, the party is now Republican in name only.
I think this is what happens when even the people in charge start claiming the system is rigged, everyone starts trying to manipulate things in their side's favor. Trump, his party's nominee, claims the election is rigged! How did he get nominated then? That's not important, I'm sure the conspirators have a clever reason for that. The important thing is his supporters believe it, so his supporters in whatever job they have with whatever power they have, attempt to compensate by trying to rig things in his favor. Then people against Trump try to compensate by doing what they can in Hliary's favor.GreenGoo wrote:Lol. I'm less worried about Russia undermining the Democratic process than I am Americans now.El Guapo wrote:
Drumpf is right, the election is getting rigged. It just seems that it's being rigged in his favour.
This swell isn't from the Tea Party.LordMortis wrote:I am rather inclined to doubt that. I think the republicans have been courting this swell for decades and invited them to the table in 2007 (aka Tea Party) to increase their voting numbers.
Weak sauce. Of course they do, but the "Oops! You caught us..." so here's your obligatory firing of appeasement would not, predictably, get them very far with Bernie voters. They forced her to resign because they knew the Bernie Sanders crowd would see this as "unfair" and "corrupt".RunningMn9 wrote:Because the DNC wants the Democrats that were in Bernie's camp to vote for Clinton. Sacrifices must be made at that altar.Smutly wrote:Then why did Debbie Wasserman Schultz immediately resign?
Let's all just stare at these definitions for a few seconds.RunningMn9 wrote:WTF?
OF COURSE BERNIE SANDERS SUPPORTERS WOULD SEE THAT AS UNFAIR AND CORRUPT.
That's not what makes something "unfair" or "corrupt".
Again, no one suggested that the firing would work to appease Bernie's supporters. I'm simply pointing out that she wasn't fired because OMG UNFAIRNESS AND CORRUPTION!?!
Okay. I think we are getting somewhere. How about this one?RunningMn9 wrote:No.
When a source intentionally misleads you and you embarrass yourself on the national stage based on the source's info, is it really unethical to out the source to the world? What's to protect? He played you and your trust in him for a chump.El Guapo wrote:Anatomy of a Leak.
Great story about the Bret Baier story about how Clinton was facing indictment over the Clinton Foundation, which he subsequently apologized for.
IMHO, also because she's an idiot.RunningMn9 wrote:Because the DNC wants the Democrats that were in Bernie's camp to vote for Clinton. Sacrifices must be made at that altar.Smutly wrote:Then why did Debbie Wasserman Schultz immediately resign?
Yes, this too.Pyperkub wrote:IMHO, also because she's an idiot.RunningMn9 wrote:Because the DNC wants the Democrats that were in Bernie's camp to vote for Clinton. Sacrifices must be made at that altar.Smutly wrote:Then why did Debbie Wasserman Schultz immediately resign?
According to NBC News, virtually all of the emails are duplicates and/or of a private nature.Anonymous Bosch wrote:According to CBS News, the FBI has reportedly found emails from Hillary Clinton’s private server on Weiner's notebook -- and they are not duplicates of those already found in the server probe (though it remains to be seen if/how they're related to the Clinton server scandal, or how many new messages were found)
They know it doesn't involve reading them and comparing them by eye, right?malchior wrote:My FB feed is already filling with folks talking how it is impossible they reviewed 635000 emails in a week, etc. That's why you don't open your trap in the first place.
That's somebody who doesn't know how on earth to do his job.malchior wrote:Thr biggest complainer is an IT email administrator. It took *all* my restraint. All of it.
He is honestly fine at his job. He just lives in the parallel universe. It isn't like he thought about...hey...if i did this could i do it in a week? Someone told him it was impossible. And the outrage began and oh btw Hillary is evil and all that.gbasden wrote:That's somebody who doesn't know how on earth to do his job.malchior wrote:Thr biggest complainer is an IT email administrator. It took *all* my restraint. All of it.
Does he work for a big company? I"d be willing to post as HR and letting him know his incompetence is duly noted.malchior wrote:Thr biggest complainer is an IT email administrator. It took *all* my restraint. All of it.
Whoa! Imagine if all programmers acted like that. "Well boss, I'd like to help but someone told me that job was impossible to do in a week. Sorry hombre."malchior wrote:He is honestly fine at his job. He just lives in the parallel universe. It isn't like he thought about...hey...if i did this could i do it in a week? Someone told him it was impossible. And the outrage began and oh btw Hillary is evil and all that.gbasden wrote:That's somebody who doesn't know how on earth to do his job.malchior wrote:Thr biggest complainer is an IT email administrator. It took *all* my restraint. All of it.