News Kamala Harris calls it quit

[Blackjack200]

And he’s leading in the National polls so that’s no surprise, correct?

No, not correct. The whole point of superdelegates is that they're free to support whoever they want, it has nothing to do with polling.

 

[hal2kilo]

DNC has done nothing but bend over backwards to show there is no favoritism to it own harm. You think what's been going on is how to pick a candidate to win back the WH? Don't make me laugh.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Nobody has proven that there is a conspiracy....

 

[Starbuck1975]

What’s building the narrative is the same thing that drives most political narrative, money. In this case, big money donors. No one is disputing that. I’m specifically talking about the claims against the DNC.

You’re asking him to prove that the DNC is not influenced by big money donors and where they choose to place their chips, when we all recognize that big money donors have an outsized influence on politics. No political party can service every candidate equally, and some emerge as clear favorites of the establishment.

 

[JEDIYoda]

You’re asking him to prove that the DNC is not influenced by big money donors and where they choose to place their chips, when we all recognize that big money donors have an outsized influence on politics.

Just because you recognize something does mean it is recognized in the same way by everyone......everybody knows that....

 

[Maxima1]

No, not correct. The whole point of superdelegates is that they're free to support whoever they want, it has nothing to do with polling.

Partially correct. The whole point is so that they can influence the polling. The endorsements and automatic delegates already pledged to the Hildabeast made her seem unassailable. So many people line up in the chow line. And any initial boost tends to snowball as people line up thinking that that candidate is the most electable.

Shee-it, even after the unique debacle with Donnie (I think he had zero endorsements?), Nate Silver still argues The Party Decides. The party establishment has always bought that hypothesis no question.

DNC has done nothing but bend over backwards to show there is no favoritism to it own harm. You think what's been going on is how to pick a candidate to win back the WH? Don't make me laugh.

If they truly did, they would advocate for at least runoff voting, preferably range voting. Even on the Democratic side, there's hardly any critique on how idiotic plurality voting is for the primaries.

 

[hal2kilo]

Partially correct. The whole point is so that they can influence the polling. The endorsements and automatic delegates already pledged to the Hildabeast made her seem unassailable. So many people line up in the chow line. And any initial boost tends to snowball as people line up thinking that that candidate is the most electable.

Shee-it, even after the unique debacle with Donnie (I think he had zero endorsements?), Nate Silver still argues The Party Decides. The party establishment has always bought that hypothesis no question.



If they truly did, they would advocate for at least runoff voting, preferably range voting. Even on the Democratic side, there's hardly any critique on how idiotic plurality voting is for the primaries.

In primaries? Really.

 

[blankslate]

In primaries? Really.

Here is a 2016 example of a question about Superdelegates from 2016....

Selina Vickers on How West Virginia Democrats Voted for Bernie But Ended Up with Hillary

In the West Virginia primary of 2016, all 55 counties voted for Bernie Sanders for President. But at the Democratic convention in Philadelphia, the West Virginia delegation pledged its support to Hillary Clinton.

Of course with the superdelegates sitting out the first round of voting things will be bet... wai... there's how many candidates running for 2020? wow....


_________________

 

[blankslate]

Like I thought, you’ve got nothing.


Bernie bro’s continue to be the equivalent of a trump supporter.

Like I thought you'll just play the game and ignore the money... like I said you do you... and ignore anything except for what is explicitly stated by the parties involved.... congrats. Establishment shills will continue to ignore the issues that allow a person like Trump to gain any traction with anyone.

Nick Hanauer as a person with a rare viewpoint considering his profession has pointed out in this video below

from about 2 minutes and 52 seconds into the video...
"[Trump] is a narcissistic thug and the sooner he is gone the better, but to be absolutely clear and honest he is not the cause of the trouble he is a symptom of the trouble."


Nick Hanauer is a venture capitalist who was an early investor into Amazon and also was an investor in a company which Microsoft bought for quite a nice sum of money...

____________

 

[Maxima1]

In primaries? Really.

Yes. There are a few states trying it out actually. How is plurality + superdelegate system better? There are articles talking about whether Sanders or Warren should drop out to defeat Biden. Moreover, amends to placate the negative perception of the superdelegates has potential issues come convention time. There is no way to fix plurality voting when you have multiple candidates.

https://twitter.com/x/status/939160679940001792

 

[ivwshane]

No, not correct. The whole point of superdelegates is that they're free to support whoever they want, it has nothing to do with polling.

I’m sure you are aware, being the super concerned democrat you are, that the new rules don’t give super delegates a vote unless there is no doubt as to the outcome. They will get to vote if the convention is contested.

 

[ivwshane]

Like I thought you'll just play the game and ignore the money... like I said you do you... and ignore anything except for what is explicitly stated by the parties involved.... congrats. Establishment shills will continue to ignore the issues that allow a person like Trump to gain any traction with anyone.

Nick Hanauer as a person with a rare viewpoint considering his profession has pointed out in this video below

from about 2 minutes and 52 seconds into the video...
"[Trump] is a narcissistic thug and the sooner he is gone the better, but to be absolutely clear and honest he is not the cause of the trouble he is a symptom of the trouble."


Nick Hanauer is a venture capitalist who was an early investor into Amazon and also was an investor in a company which Microsoft bought for quite a nice sum of money...

____________

I didn’t ignore anything, troll. Maybe you can find a YouTube video on reading comprehension.

 

[Blackjack200]

I’m sure you are aware, being the super concerned democrat you are, that the new rules don’t give super delegates a vote unless there is no doubt as to the outcome. They will get to vote if the convention is contested.

Thanks. What does that have to do with the discussion? Who fucking knows. But thanks.

 

[blankslate]

I didn’t ignore anything, troll. Maybe you can find a YouTube video on reading comprehension.

follow your own advice... really you should. or just get a dictionary.


___________

 

[BonzaiDuck]

For some people, country comes before personal benefits of federal policy. For some people the future consequences of federal policy is more important than any personal short term benefits of that same federal policy.

I’m sure we won’t find any posts from you criticizing Obama’s policies even though the same economy we have now was happening under Obama.

You've saved me some words, even making my response more possible because I've run out of energy over the last three years expounding about Trump. Compuwiz1 remarked "Lotta hate in one post". This arrives at an intersection where we had discussed -- sometime in the last few years -- the "limits of tolerance", when the intolerant take advantage of the tolerant in the thoughtless assumption that tolerance is a principle which has no limits. This is similar to the notion that Freedom is a principle which has no limits, but I won't belabor it.

So one can call it what they want. In this country, we might have thought that there are insufficient reasons for the emotion of "hate" -- race being one such baseless reason. The families of criminal victims often say in court that they "don't hate the criminal" who robbed their family of a victim. As laudable as that may seem, advocacy of the death penalty is not a loving inclination. However, one might say "I despise so-and-so", but then check the dictionary and thesaurus for synonyms.

The distress Trump caused many began immediately after the election, as he chose his language through the inauguration and thereafter to inflame, disparage and exclude against making reconciliation. The fact that he merely captured the White House as distinct from winning the popular vote would've been a rational imperative for more carefully chosen language. That he daily murdered the Truth about almost everything would inflame anyone who had been taught to put a high value on the Truth. That he literally asked in public for a geopolitical adversary to hack the e-mails of an opponent adds more to the outrage.

Did he hurt me personally, in some material way? I have a family member on the verge of losing a leg to amputation, and who depends on the ACA for decent health care. The tax cuts mean nothing; the rollback of environmental protection may not mean immediate harm to any single person, but affects collective well-being. Are we supposed to base all of our political inclinations solely on food on the table, gasoline in the tank and other niceties? I think not.

Constantly disparaging Obama three years after his exit, threatening Hillary with prosecution, hurling insults at John McCain before and after his burial, belittling members of Congress and defying Constitutional Congressional oversight -- these behaviors are not civil. In fact, they are monstrously uncivil. So the notion that capturing the White House -- with or without Russian assistance -- automatically entitles the Trump electorate to legitimate respect is preposterous. Squeaker elections and Electoral College captures literally require compromise and reconciliation. But what we have is incitement to riot.

Shall I continue? Let this stand as a fair sample of what would follow. There is no compromise with Crazy.