Hillary won more votes for President
Comments
-
But the platform isn't decided until after the primary. It literally just happened in the last few weeks so I don't understand what you're saying.Cliffy6745 said:
No, they are supposed to be pushing a platform
That's not the DNC's job. They're not suppose to be pushing one person. I don't know what is so hard to understand about this.Cliffy6745 said:I don't necessarily have a problem with the DNC pushing a candidate they feel has the best chance to win and represent their agenda. Pushing the platform is their mission. Even with that said, Hillary won by millions of votes.
looking to hear of the earth0 -
Come on. The DNC pushed the candidate that they felt best reflected their agenda. Who fucking cares. She won by millions of votes.
But the platform isn't decided until after the primary. It literally just happened in the last few weeks so I don't understand what you're saying.Cliffy6745 said:
No, they are supposed to be pushing a platform
That's not the DNC's job. They're not suppose to be pushing one person. I don't know what is so hard to understand about this.Cliffy6745 said:I don't necessarily have a problem with the DNC pushing a candidate they feel has the best chance to win and represent their agenda. Pushing the platform is their mission. Even with that said, Hillary won by millions of votes.
0 -
Who infringed on your right to know? You know. I know. It was on the boards and internet pages where lots of people get their information. You are saying THIS PARTICULAR story must be on the 30 minute news? Why? It's not relevant in the grand scheme compared to what else is happening.
So that means that the country doesn't have a right to know how things were happening? You say staffers, as if it were a bunch of low level people. It was the heads of the DNC doing this.mrussel1 said:
In a week following BLM protests, Police shootings, the RNC, France attack, Germany attack, etc., you think the 30 minutes of evening News at 630PM is going to find time talk about some emails between staffers at the DNC on how to attack Bernie Sanders? That hardly seems relevant in the big picture and won't change who the candidate is next week. Do you think these emails change the outcome? Did you change your vote based on what someone in a 3 min appearance on the Chris Hayes show said?I'm talking about mainstream media on TV where the average person gets their news. Not websites that are mostly for political junkies, who quite frankly already knew this. So the DNC is supposed to be a fair and unbiased committee helping all nominees equally. That clearly didn't happen.
You'll have to explain to me what is democratic about sending people on TV and other news outlets to demonize one of your parties candidates. Because that is exactly what happens. I thought America was about getting a fair shake. Whether it be in politics or your job.
After all this the fact that you think Hillary and the DNC are separate entities is laughable.
Shall I remind you of all the demonizing of HRC that took place by the actual Sanders campaign?
You'll have to remind me of the demonizing that took place by Sanders. Probably wouldn't really compare to the stuff Hillary did in 08. Didn't her campaign send out that photo of Obama in Muslim garb?
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/sanders-under-fire-supporters-whores-remarks-n555846
Did this story make the nightly news? I guess not since you didn't know about it. I think Americans have a right to know and not have it suppressed to only internet and cable tv.0 -
absolutely, cant go wrong wit a DiNic's pork.Cliffy6745 said:
Word up. Awesome area.rustneversleeps said:
nice. belated welcome to the area....Cliffy6745 said:
Relocated. New Yorker at heart but 10 years in philly now.rustneversleeps said:
cliff, PA? whats with that Yankees picture? also PA, and i am not looking forward to voting.Cliffy6745 said:
As am I. Pennsylvania. Very much looking forward to votingwhat dreams said:
It is so dangerous to think this way. Sure, Clinton will easily win California. California is irrelevant. This election, like the ones in recent history, will come down to about four or five states. People in those states will fight for every vote. It's not going to be easy in my neck of the woods. I'm in one of those states.brianlux said:
Gotta admit though, that last one was a bit Hillaryous (thread integrity).josevolution said:Whoa I came here to Getaway from the Picts bomber and no it's here too !
And now, we resume our regularly scheduled show...
Totally agree. He hasn't got a chance. It's all for ego and show. HRC is a shoe in and a Big Foot shoe at that.Degeneratefk said:You're correct that her VP pick is irrelevant. But not for the reason you think. Clinton could have picked OJ Simpson and she will still beat the donald. He has no chance.
which way to the beach? get me away from this interweb train wreck.
Indeed. Actually being a dumbass and hoping on the bike in 100 degree heat to head around the city and check out all things DNC going up. Perhaps a little lunch at the reading terminal thrown in.0 -
To a certain extent, I very much agree with cp3. I think Clinton is going to annihilate Trump the election and I'm not at all thrilled with the thought that she may win by the biggest landslide in the history of the United States. That alone is reason enough for me to vote for someone other than the two crooks. On the other hand, as we near election time if I think there is anywhere near a chance that Trump could win I will vote for HRC simple because the only thing worse than a crook in the White House would be a lunatic crook.rgambs said:
To a pragmatist like me, that comes off like a Trump endorsement!cp3iverson said:I hope third party voting is huge in this election. Two awful candidates from the big parties. Two crooks.
Either dont vote or vote third party
The rubes will vote, if the enlightened abstain the rubes will win the day."It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
You most definitely cannotrustneversleeps said:
absolutely, cant go wrong wit a DiNic's pork.Cliffy6745 said:
Word up. Awesome area.rustneversleeps said:
nice. belated welcome to the area....Cliffy6745 said:
Relocated. New Yorker at heart but 10 years in philly now.rustneversleeps said:
cliff, PA? whats with that Yankees picture? also PA, and i am not looking forward to voting.Cliffy6745 said:
As am I. Pennsylvania. Very much looking forward to votingwhat dreams said:
It is so dangerous to think this way. Sure, Clinton will easily win California. California is irrelevant. This election, like the ones in recent history, will come down to about four or five states. People in those states will fight for every vote. It's not going to be easy in my neck of the woods. I'm in one of those states.brianlux said:
Gotta admit though, that last one was a bit Hillaryous (thread integrity).josevolution said:Whoa I came here to Getaway from the Picts bomber and no it's here too !
And now, we resume our regularly scheduled show...
Totally agree. He hasn't got a chance. It's all for ego and show. HRC is a shoe in and a Big Foot shoe at that.Degeneratefk said:You're correct that her VP pick is irrelevant. But not for the reason you think. Clinton could have picked OJ Simpson and she will still beat the donald. He has no chance.
which way to the beach? get me away from this interweb train wreck.
Indeed. Actually being a dumbass and hoping on the bike in 100 degree heat to head around the city and check out all things DNC going up. Perhaps a little lunch at the reading terminal thrown in.0 -
I didn't know you were in charge of choosing what's relevant. And yeah I heard plenty about the guy at the NYC rally who used that term.mrussel1 said:
Who infringed on your right to know? You know. I know. It was on the boards and internet pages where lots of people get their information. You are saying THIS PARTICULAR story must be on the 30 minute news? Why? It's not relevant in the grand scheme compared to what else is happening.
So that means that the country doesn't have a right to know how things were happening? You say staffers, as if it were a bunch of low level people. It was the heads of the DNC doing this.mrussel1 said:
In a week following BLM protests, Police shootings, the RNC, France attack, Germany attack, etc., you think the 30 minutes of evening News at 630PM is going to find time talk about some emails between staffers at the DNC on how to attack Bernie Sanders? That hardly seems relevant in the big picture and won't change who the candidate is next week. Do you think these emails change the outcome? Did you change your vote based on what someone in a 3 min appearance on the Chris Hayes show said?I'm talking about mainstream media on TV where the average person gets their news. Not websites that are mostly for political junkies, who quite frankly already knew this. So the DNC is supposed to be a fair and unbiased committee helping all nominees equally. That clearly didn't happen.
You'll have to explain to me what is democratic about sending people on TV and other news outlets to demonize one of your parties candidates. Because that is exactly what happens. I thought America was about getting a fair shake. Whether it be in politics or your job.
After all this the fact that you think Hillary and the DNC are separate entities is laughable.
Shall I remind you of all the demonizing of HRC that took place by the actual Sanders campaign?
You'll have to remind me of the demonizing that took place by Sanders. Probably wouldn't really compare to the stuff Hillary did in 08. Didn't her campaign send out that photo of Obama in Muslim garb?
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/sanders-under-fire-supporters-whores-remarks-n555846
Did this story make the nightly news? I guess not since you didn't know about it. I think Americans have a right to know and not have it suppressed to only internet and cable tv.
It's so disappointing how complacent people are with collusion and underhandedness in this "democracy" we live in. Yeah I think people have a right to know what was happening behind the scenes because it effected how the primary was covered by the mainstream media, who whether you wanna believe or not, is where the majority of americans get their news from.looking to hear of the earth0 -
Cliffy6745 said:
Come on. The DNC pushed the candidate that they felt best reflected their agenda. Who fucking cares. She won by millions of votes.
But the platform isn't decided until after the primary. It literally just happened in the last few weeks so I don't understand what you're saying.Cliffy6745 said:
No, they are supposed to be pushing a platform
That's not the DNC's job. They're not suppose to be pushing one person. I don't know what is so hard to understand about this.Cliffy6745 said:I don't necessarily have a problem with the DNC pushing a candidate they feel has the best chance to win and represent their agenda. Pushing the platform is their mission. Even with that said, Hillary won by millions of votes.
The DNC chose Clinton well before this primary happened and that's not how this country and process are supposed to work.looking to hear of the earth0 -
Dude, that's called politics. It has even going on for 225 years or so.
You obviously haven't seen them. Talking about demonizing Sanders over his religious beliefs, trying to control what is said on certain news programs about how the DNC chair is handling the primary fairly.It's pretty sad so many are fine with this kind of behavior.what dreams said:
Probably because there is nothing in the emails except boring shit, like Clinton going to work everyday and doing her job.Just imagine if the media actually reported on the wiki leaks of the DNC emails. I hate trump but if he was smart he would pound that home.
will myself to find a home, a home within myself
we will find a way, we will find our place0 -
Highways. Military. Both of those fall under the "common wealth" clause in the Constitution. Free birth control for everybody? Nah. Not so so much.
Oh, you don't care for socialism? Try not to drive on any roads this weekend. Or depend on our military at all. There are so many aspects of socialism ingrained in our society already. Good luck.what dreams said:
The DNC is a political organization . . . For Democrats. Who cares if they were emailing each other about how to defeat the Socialist who hijacked their party? Personally, I wish they had never even allowed the Socialist to run under the Democrat banner.
So that means that the country doesn't have a right to know how things were happening? You say staffers, as if it were a bunch of low level people. It was the heads of the DNC doing this.mrussel1 said:
In a week following BLM protests, Police shootings, the RNC, France attack, Germany attack, etc., you think the 30 minutes of evening News at 630PM is going to find time talk about some emails between staffers at the DNC on how to attack Bernie Sanders? That hardly seems relevant in the big picture and won't change who the candidate is next week. Do you think these emails change the outcome? Did you change your vote based on what someone in a 3 min appearance on the Chris Hayes show said?I'm talking about mainstream media on TV where the average person gets their news. Not websites that are mostly for political junkies, who quite frankly already knew this. So the DNC is supposed to be a fair and unbiased committee helping all nominees equally. That clearly didn't happen.
You'll have to explain to me what is democratic about sending people on TV and other news outlets to demonize one of your parties candidates. Because that is exactly what happens. I thought America was about getting a fair shake. Whether it be in politics or your job.
After all this the fact that you think Hillary and the DNC are separate entities is laughable.
Shall I remind you of all the demonizing of HRC that took place by the actual Sanders campaign?0 -
You're correct that the 'news' is in the recepients which in it of itself does add a ton more fuel. But...this shows that there are still things to 'know' and for good journalists to probe. Probing may lead to nothing or it might lead to something? Do these aides have security clearances? Did they share info outside the chain? Will tomorrow's reporting discuss content of the emails? If so is that content so top secret (drone strikes, satellite info, agents names) that it's clear national security was jeopardized? And finally does a foreign government or group like Guccifer 2.0 drop knowledge of this info a week before the election similar to what happened this week prior to the DNC. These links are not evidence of additional scandal for the time being but it demonstrates that this as a real issue is not dead regardless of the FBI. The democratic party has put all their eggs in this basket and it still has the potential to explode beyond what has already occurred.mrussel1 said:
This article wasn't completely clear (or I read it too fast). It appears that it is 'outing' the names of the people with whom she exchanged emails. But it isn't saying that these are email threads that the FBI investigation missed. Are you sure the 'news' here isn't just the recipients? Or is this newspaper claiming it found emails not evaluated by the FBI?BS44325 said:
Those emails will become a problem with time. Meanwhile these one's are not going away.Just imagine if the media actually reported on the wiki leaks of the DNC emails. I hate trump but if he was smart he would pound that home.
https://news.vice.com/article/exclusive-hillary-clinton-exchanged-classified-emails-on-private-server-with-three-aides0 -
Demonizing?!?! This guy is delusional.
So that means that the country doesn't have a right to know how things were happening? You say staffers, as if it were a bunch of low level people. It was the heads of the DNC doing this.mrussel1 said:
In a week following BLM protests, Police shootings, the RNC, France attack, Germany attack, etc., you think the 30 minutes of evening News at 630PM is going to find time talk about some emails between staffers at the DNC on how to attack Bernie Sanders? That hardly seems relevant in the big picture and won't change who the candidate is next week. Do you think these emails change the outcome? Did you change your vote based on what someone in a 3 min appearance on the Chris Hayes show said?I'm talking about mainstream media on TV where the average person gets their news. Not websites that are mostly for political junkies, who quite frankly already knew this. So the DNC is supposed to be a fair and unbiased committee helping all nominees equally. That clearly didn't happen.
You'll have to explain to me what is democratic about sending people on TV and other news outlets to demonize one of your parties candidates. Because that is exactly what happens. I thought America was about getting a fair shake. Whether it be in politics or your job.
After all this the fact that you think Hillary and the DNC are separate entities is laughable.
Shall I remind you of all the demonizing of HRC that took place by the actual Sanders campaign?
You'll have to remind me of the demonizing that took place by Sanders. Probably wouldn't really compare to the stuff Hillary did in 08. Didn't her campaign send out that photo of Obama in Muslim garb?0 -
Then start a new party if you don't like the ones we have. I'm so sick of people acting like the current parties are the only options, America can't accommodate more than two. Bullshit. You want a Socialist party? Start one. Work it.Cliffy6745 said:
Come on. The DNC pushed the candidate that they felt best reflected their agenda. Who fucking cares. She won by millions of votes.
But the platform isn't decided until after the primary. It literally just happened in the last few weeks so I don't understand what you're saying.Cliffy6745 said:
No, they are supposed to be pushing a platform
That's not the DNC's job. They're not suppose to be pushing one person. I don't know what is so hard to understand about this.Cliffy6745 said:I don't necessarily have a problem with the DNC pushing a candidate they feel has the best chance to win and represent their agenda. Pushing the platform is their mission. Even with that said, Hillary won by millions of votes.
The DNC chose Clinton well before this primary happened and that's not how this country and process are supposed to work.0 -
Precisely... I didn't say I was in charge of relevancy. And neither are you. The producer of the evening news IS in charge. But that's what is so great about today, which wasn't true in generations past. There are lots of places to get your news, so if it doesn't hit the front page or the lead in with Dan Rather, you still can find out about it.
I didn't know you were in charge of choosing what's relevant. And yeah I heard plenty about the guy at the NYC rally who used that term.mrussel1 said:
Who infringed on your right to know? You know. I know. It was on the boards and internet pages where lots of people get their information. You are saying THIS PARTICULAR story must be on the 30 minute news? Why? It's not relevant in the grand scheme compared to what else is happening.
So that means that the country doesn't have a right to know how things were happening? You say staffers, as if it were a bunch of low level people. It was the heads of the DNC doing this.mrussel1 said:
In a week following BLM protests, Police shootings, the RNC, France attack, Germany attack, etc., you think the 30 minutes of evening News at 630PM is going to find time talk about some emails between staffers at the DNC on how to attack Bernie Sanders? That hardly seems relevant in the big picture and won't change who the candidate is next week. Do you think these emails change the outcome? Did you change your vote based on what someone in a 3 min appearance on the Chris Hayes show said?I'm talking about mainstream media on TV where the average person gets their news. Not websites that are mostly for political junkies, who quite frankly already knew this. So the DNC is supposed to be a fair and unbiased committee helping all nominees equally. That clearly didn't happen.
You'll have to explain to me what is democratic about sending people on TV and other news outlets to demonize one of your parties candidates. Because that is exactly what happens. I thought America was about getting a fair shake. Whether it be in politics or your job.
After all this the fact that you think Hillary and the DNC are separate entities is laughable.
Shall I remind you of all the demonizing of HRC that took place by the actual Sanders campaign?
You'll have to remind me of the demonizing that took place by Sanders. Probably wouldn't really compare to the stuff Hillary did in 08. Didn't her campaign send out that photo of Obama in Muslim garb?
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/sanders-under-fire-supporters-whores-remarks-n555846
Did this story make the nightly news? I guess not since you didn't know about it. I think Americans have a right to know and not have it suppressed to only internet and cable tv.
It's so disappointing how complacent people are with collusion and underhandedness in this "democracy" we live in. Yeah I think people have a right to know what was happening behind the scenes because it effected how the primary was covered by the mainstream media, who whether you wanna believe or not, is where the majority of americans get their news from.
And the bold comment is dripping with self righteousness.0 -
Radical Liberals? Constant hate of what? The facts? The facts are the facts bro. There is a reason why she and Trump are both polling so poorly on subjects such as trustworthiness and such. Don't be fooled. We weren't radical liberals when we supported Obama and other Democrats.rustneversleeps said:
just as im fed up with radical liberals and their constant hate, im fed up with conservatives bitching about emails.tonifig8 said:
Email nonsense? That easy huh. How about the DNC email nonsense? Just brush it off as no big deal, huh. All the shadiness and red flags surrounding the party and Clinton, yet we accept it as no biggie. That's amazing.rustneversleeps said:
very true. while my choice is not made yet, the email nonsense will not be a factor in deciding.Degeneratefk said:
The email conspiracy is dead. Yes, trump will pounce on it. But people's opinion are already set, for the most part. I don't see anyone that was considering voting for Clinton not voting for her because trump is going to try to keep the email scandal alive.BS44325 said:
Those emails will become a problem with time. Meanwhile these one's are not going away.Just imagine if the media actually reported on the wiki leaks of the DNC emails. I hate trump but if he was smart he would pound that home.
https://news.vice.com/article/exclusive-hillary-clinton-exchanged-classified-emails-on-private-server-with-three-aides0 -
Trump could very well win.Be Excellent To Each OtherParty On, Dudes!0
-
Absolutely! It's a scary thought, but very well possible. I just heard today that He has taken a lead in UT.Jason P said:Trump could very well win.
A lot of these Clinton supporters think that sanders supporters are simply going to suck it up and just vote for her because she's the only option. Some will, but polls show that a majority of us will not. Green Party has raised 500k in like 7 days or so. Their candidate is starting to reach the national stage.
We will not vote for the lesser of the two evils
0 -
Utah? Hillary was never going to win Utah. Good lord.tonifig8 said:
Absolutely! It's a scary thought, but very well possible. I just heard today that He has taken a lead in UT.Jason P said:Trump could very well win.
A lot of these Clinton supporters think that sanders supporters are simply going to suck it up and just vote for her because she's the only option. Some will, but polls show that a majority of us will not. Green Party has raised 500k in like 7 days or so. Their candidate is starting to reach the national stage.
We will not vote for the lesser of the two evils
Good for anybody who votes their conscience by voting for a third or fourth party. It’s America. Anyone can vote for whomever. We will see where the chips fall in November. Right now there are 20% undecideds, and those are the only voters Clinton or Trump care about at this point.0 -
then you will be casting a vote for trump.tonifig8 said:
Absolutely! It's a scary thought, but very well possible. I just heard today that He has taken a lead in UT.Jason P said:Trump could very well win.
A lot of these Clinton supporters think that sanders supporters are simply going to suck it up and just vote for her because she's the only option. Some will, but polls show that a majority of us will not. Green Party has raised 500k in like 7 days or so. Their candidate is starting to reach the national stage.
We will not vote for the lesser of the two evils
write in sanders, waste a vote. vote for jill stein, waste a vote. you think republicans are going to waste votes or write people in? fuck no. they are in anti-democrat mode and will be voting to crush hillary.
voting 3rd party now in this election will be stupider than voting for nader in 2000.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
i apologize if it appears that i am jumping your shit toni. i wasn't. i have always liked you and respected your opinions. i just think it would be a terrible decision to siphon votes from hillary because you are giving the white house to trump, which will be infinitely worse than hillary, and nothing like bernie or jill stein."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help