Quote :

"There's really only one viable explanation for Hillary Clinton bringing on a disgraced DNC chair to her campaign: DWS has dirt on her. She knows something that can bring down the whole campaign, and most likely, put Clinton in jail. Hillary Clinton may be tone deaf, but I don't think it's possible for her to have brought on DWS without understanding the consequences."

Noooooope. Nope, nope, nope.

It's the exact opposite. She's not bringing her on to silence her. She's bringing her on to reward her for her loyalty and efforts during the primaries. You know, just like how congressmen and senators who do all the dirty bidding for financial firms or oil industries get plush jobs after their political careers end? It's the exact same thing.

DWS isn't extorting Clinton. She's collecting her reward.


It's not that difficult to understand, people.

7/25/2016 9:14:22 PM

Douche chills from the awkwardness

7/25/2016 9:25:17 PM

Quote :

"Poll after poll have shown the overwhelming majority of Sander's voters support Hillary for President in the general. This isn't nearly as big of a "revolt" as the media would like us to believe."

7/25/2016 11:31:16 PM

eleusis is trying way too hard ITT.

7/25/2016 11:41:18 PM

I get how college educated people hate Trump but I can't fucking fathom how college educated people like Hillary

7/26/2016 1:26:58 AM

I like how Shrike's main concern in all of this DNC leak stuff is how it's just so unfair and so wrong how those evil people hacked the DNC's servers. Nevermind the heinous corruption of what was supposed to be a primary election. We need to focus on those evil people who revealed the truth about what was going on. I'll bet he thinks Snowden should be hung for treason, too.

7/26/2016 1:27:09 AM

Quote :

"I get how college educated people hate Trump but I can't fucking fathom how college educated people like Hillary"

because she's not Trump?

not exactly rocket science.

7/26/2016 2:40:57 AM

Good lord, all the Ls you people have taken the last 8 years have made you super bitter. I'm not your enemy!

7/26/2016 6:43:59 AM

you have an established track record of following the establishment party line like a perfect little sheep

7/26/2016 8:20:26 AM

Let me ask you a simple question, do you believe Sanders will accomplish more with a Democrat in the WH or a Republican? Forget about Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton for a second, just consider the chances of any part of his platform becoming law with anyone other than that the Democratic nominee for President winning in November.

7/26/2016 10:15:44 AM

democrat

what a stupid question

serious question - what is your relationship to the party? you obviously work for someone connected to the DNC, either a politician, party, or organization

[Edited on July 26, 2016 at 10:36 AM. Reason : .]

7/26/2016 10:35:26 AM

^^ who do you think you're arguing with here? The only one who is crazy when it comes to Sanders relationship with Democrats is Earl. I feel like you're making up a position and arguing against it.

7/26/2016 10:38:21 AM

Shrike, do you agree that while probably not illegal, the Hillary Victory Fund was basically laundering money for the campaign and allowed the campaign to seek donations beyond normal limits? Do you agree that campaign finance rules should be changed to not allow this in the future?

7/26/2016 10:50:53 AM

^^^None? I donated to Clinton in the summer '15, again after that ridiculous 11 hour Benghazi hearing, and one more time after Trump's acceptance speech. That's about the extent of my direct contribution/connection to the party.

^^Clearly not when I still hear people who call themselves progressives or liberals shilling for the GOP propaganda machine that's been slandering Clinton for the last 30 years, most of it total and utter bullshit.

^Sure, if you agree that Sanders was given the same exact offer by the DNC, refused, and then went on to complain about the system being "rigged" against him in the most dishonest way possible.

[Edited on July 26, 2016 at 10:53 AM. Reason : .]

7/26/2016 10:51:42 AM

wait wait wait, the talking point now is "Sanders could have laundered money too!"?

7/26/2016 10:54:45 AM

No, the talking point is that if actually intended to win the Democratic nominating process, he should have actually run a campaign designed to do so.

7/26/2016 10:59:49 AM

...by laundering money from big money donors

I'm also not convinced he could have if he wanted to, it only worked for Clinton because of the party colluding with the campaign and Sanders didn't have that inside connection

[Edited on July 26, 2016 at 11:24 AM. Reason : .]

7/26/2016 11:23:32 AM

yes he should have spent 25 years building up political favors and corporate ties, and then colluded with the DNC to squash his anti-establishment opponent

wait

7/26/2016 11:25:18 AM

Well that's the crux of the issue isn't it? Bernie Sanders was an Independent until 2015, whereas Hillary Clinton has been supporting the Democratic party since most of our parents were still learning where to stick it. Despite that, he was given the exact same fundraising opportunities and voice for his platform as any lifelong Democrat. He didn't lose because of emails, he lost because as you noted, Hillary has spent decades working towards this moment and won the Democratic nomination process by earning more votes than he did. That's how our political system works, and the only thing I thought Sanders did wrong was resorting to nasty and dishonest attacks against Clinton when it was obvious he wasn't going to win.

7/26/2016 11:38:19 AM

It's amazing to me that some people continue believe than Sanders was the nasty and dishonest one. He could have gone so much further, in my view.

7/26/2016 11:41:12 AM

Sure, he could have. But unlike many of his supporters, I think he eventually realized that doing so would have been counterproductive to his own cause.

I mean, you guys do realize we live in a representative democracy, right? Even a President Sanders wouldn't have been able to accomplish jack shit without a Democratic majority in the House and Senate. Railing against the DNC, calling them corrupt, claiming the system is rigged, and using practically the same language against Hillary/Democrats as Trump and the GOP is tantamount to sabotage. I'm glad he finally came around and hope the remaining vocal minority follow suit.

[Edited on July 26, 2016 at 12:08 PM. Reason : .]

7/26/2016 11:53:14 AM

I want to know how Mrs. Clinton is preparing for the first debate with Mr. Trump - like, who do you get as a stand-in for Trump in debate prep? I don't think she has it in her to freestyle a la Christie taking down Rubio, but you have to throw out traditional debate prep against Trump, right?

[Edited on July 26, 2016 at 12:11 PM. Reason : ...]

7/26/2016 12:11:24 PM

can we go ahead and decide when its okay for liberals and progressives to take a stand against the oligarchy and establishment that supports them, to take a stand against wall street and increasing globalization

So Trump is too bad that we have to support Clinton this election, how about if the candidate was Cruz? Bush? What is the GOP candidate that isn't too bad for liberals and progressives in the democratic party to take a stand? I think we need to decide this now, because if we always make this argument that we have to vote for the establishment democratic candidate because the candidate is worse then why should we ever expect the party to take a stand on those serious pressing issues? Let's set the bar now. Maybe someone like Romney could be the cut off line where democrats are allowed to take a stand?

7/26/2016 12:14:12 PM

Why do liberals have to decide? Why can't the conservatives just put up a decent candidate? Trump is obviously bottom of the barrel, but Cruz, Carson, and Christie weren't too far behind. I would have straddled the fence with Rubio...but probably would have voted for Kasich over Hillary.

7/26/2016 12:22:30 PM

^^^^Given that midterms usually go to the opposite party, Clinton might put us worse off than Trump. Hated by conservatives, incapable of enthusing liberals. Midterms will be a disaster.

7/26/2016 12:25:42 PM

We'll see, before the smear campaign got into high gear, Hillary was polling nearly as well as Obama with Democrats (actually better at one point). Note that we got crushed in 2010 and 2014, even with a very popular Democrat in the WH. I have no idea how to fix that problem, it goes well beyond one candidate or election cycle.

[Edited on July 26, 2016 at 12:33 PM. Reason : .]

7/26/2016 12:31:16 PM

Smear campaign or not, the answer isn't to nominate a massively unpopular establishment candidate in this cycle.

I cheered on Bernie, cheered on the FBI, now I'm cheering on Wikileaks. O well

7/26/2016 12:40:11 PM

Quote :

"So Trump is too bad that we have to support Clinton this election, how about if the candidate was Cruz? Bush? What is the GOP candidate that isn't too bad for liberals and progressives in the democratic party to take a stand? I think we need to decide this now, because if we always make this argument that we have to vote for the establishment democratic candidate because the candidate is worse then why should we ever expect the party to take a stand on those serious pressing issues? Let's set the bar now. Maybe someone like Romney could be the cut off line where democrats are allowed to take a stand?"

I think most people have picked a side to support no matter what and it will stay that way. Charles Manson could run as a liberal against Jesus Christ and the liberals would vote for Charles Manson just because he is a liberal. The reverse would happen too.

7/26/2016 12:59:05 PM

Quote :

"Why do liberals have to decide? Why can't the conservatives just put up a decent candidate? "

i'm saying that liberals need to decide now what kind of opponent is okay to take a stand against the establishment

i'm bringing this up, because the argument now is that trump is so bad that progressives must get behind clinton so i want to know in advance when its okay to take a stand. what about romney, was he maybe okay enough that it would have been okay then?

if its never okay, then i guess we just accept our oligarchy? accept no accountability for wall street? accept TPP and globalization?

7/26/2016 1:01:18 PM

Quote :

"i'm saying that liberals need to decide now"

Why?

7/26/2016 2:26:57 PM

To create a metric before they have a candidate in future elections

7/26/2016 3:24:54 PM

Meh...just let it happen.

7/26/2016 3:40:27 PM

But then every GOP candidate is too dangerous to not get in line behind the democratic candidate

[Edited on July 26, 2016 at 4:34 PM. Reason : .]

7/26/2016 4:34:25 PM

That's your opinion.

7/26/2016 4:58:25 PM

^
hes posing a hypothetical to DNC hardliners who guilt trip people into voting for shitty candidates every election

7/26/2016 5:18:08 PM

Hillary instantly finger pointing at Russia over her own scandal doesn't bode very well for what she'll be like as president.

7/26/2016 7:04:17 PM

DNC emails are her scandal? K.

7/26/2016 7:24:32 PM

^^This! She is a pretty sketchy person wen it comes to stuff like that. Trump needs to learn to act more like a politician and not open his mouth so much, but I would still rather have him over her.

[Edited on July 26, 2016 at 7:26 PM. Reason : .]

7/26/2016 7:26:17 PM

You do realize that, in all likelihood, the Russians did hack the DNC's email server, right?

7/26/2016 7:45:02 PM

Quote :

"Protesters inside the media tent touch their hands to those locked outside"

It's a party filled with victims.

7/26/2016 8:27:18 PM

In all likelihood, the Russians did hack the DNC, but they didn't turn that over to Wikileaks. It was probably an intern that didn't like what they saw when they looked under the hood.

Quote :

"DNC emails are her scandal?"

DNC officials sliding a primary in her favor is her scandal, regardless of whether or not she was complicit in it.

7/26/2016 8:31:45 PM

Quote :

"but they didn't turn that over to Wikileaks"

lol what information are you going off of here haus?

Quote :

"DNC officials sliding a primary in her favor is her scandal, regardless of whether or not she was complicit in it."

That logic is pretty fucked.

7/26/2016 8:39:11 PM

The funny thing about the "Russians gave it to them" thing is that there isn't any proof. But any time there is strong indication that Clinton/the DNC did something shady, the kneejerk reaction is "where's the concrete evidence."

The media has done a good job of distracting from the content.

7/26/2016 8:51:34 PM

Quote :

"That logic is pretty fucked."

Except one of the main offenders in this scandal is now on her payroll. And she'll likely be given a big role in her administration (perhaps Chief of Staff?)

Look, Hillary will have her political cover, and it's very likely that there will never be a direct connection to her. Mostly because that would require some bush league level incompetence, and a Clinton ain't going out like that.

Nothing will come of this. And that's entirely the problem. Party officials intentionally subverting the will of their own constituents should offend anyone who subscribes to the idea of free and Democratic election process. The fact that the self proclaimed "party of the people" no longer gives a fuck about their own base should be the real issue here.

7/26/2016 9:08:55 PM

Quote :

"Except one of the main offenders in this scandal is now on her payroll."

No shit? What is DWS's salary from HRC's campaign?





[Edited on July 26, 2016 at 9:11 PM. Reason : (hint: it rhymes with hero)]

7/26/2016 9:10:37 PM

You're right. I got ahead of myself, there.


All in due time.

7/26/2016 9:27:54 PM

^^
lol you really think she won't be paid?

7/26/2016 9:30:30 PM

Why in the fuck does CNN let Jeffrey Lord on their panel?

[Edited on July 26, 2016 at 10:35 PM. Reason : ^ lol did I say that? lol]

7/26/2016 10:29:15 PM

Bill giving a helluva political endorsement to his wife. Most of his personal/family endorsement seems to be for Chelsea though.


[Edited on July 26, 2016 at 10:48 PM. Reason : i missed the first 10 minutes though]

7/26/2016 10:47:34 PM

Slick Willy is gonna go on and on all night.

Hope you all packed a lunch.

7/26/2016 10:48:22 PM