a question for Bernie supporters .

[yidnar]

the question for Bernie supporters is whether or not they believe they are getting railroaded by the DNC ? Do they believe the DNC is impartial when it comes to their support for Biden and Sanders ? or do they believe the deck is stacked once again against Sanders ?

 

[Pogo]

Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.

Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.

 

[Sunni Man]

I encourage all Democrats / liberals to get on the Bernie Bus and vote for him. ..

 

[yidnar]

Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.

Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.

well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .

 

[Pogo]

Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.

Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.

well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .

uh HUH.

Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?

Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.

Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I encourage all Democrats / liberals to get on the Bernie Bus and vote for him. ..

View attachment 310768

Operation Chaos....in effect!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.

Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.

well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .

uh HUH.

Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?

Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.

Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.

Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

the question for Bernie supporters is whether or not they believe they are getting railroaded by the DNC ? Do they believe the DNC is impartial when it comes to their support for Biden and Sanders ? or do they believe the deck is stacked once again against Sanders ?

For a Party that claims to be for "democracy" and protecting the "little people" they sure like to run roughshod over anyone who dares to oppose them....who does that?

 

[Pogo]

Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.

Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.

well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .

uh HUH.

Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?

Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.

Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.

Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?

It's up to the party as noted. But if you're going to claim "the RNC have more respect for the people" you can't run around cancelling the window of opportunity for those people to have a say when there are three nationally-prominent Republicans contending.

Can't have it both ways.

Last time we had an incumbent they still held the Democratic Party primary here. My choices were (1) Barack O'bama, or (2) "Uncommitted". Had there been, say, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Brown (former POTUS candy, prominent Rep and a governor, same as the present Republican roster), then it might have made more sense to vote in that primary. But they still held it even with no challengers.

They'll say it "saves them money". I'm not sure how it costs them money but hey, that's their problem. If they want to run a political party they're gonna need money. But you can't sit here and tell me "Republicans respect the will of the people" while they're cancelling primaries so they don't have to deal with challengers.

Having it both ways: nuh-uh.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.

Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.

well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .

uh HUH.

Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?

Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.

Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.

Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?

It's up to the party as noted. But if you're going to claim "the RNC have more respect for the people" you can't run around cancelling the window of opportunity for those people to have a say when there are three nationally-prominent Republicans contending.

Can't have it both ways.

Last time we had an incumbent they still held the Democratic Party primary here. My choices were (1) Barack O'bama, or (2) "Uncommitted". Had there been, say, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Brown (former POTUS candy, prominent Rep and a governor, same as the present Republican roster), then it might have made more sense to vote in that primary. But they still held it even with no challengers.

They'll say it "saves them money". I'm not sure how it costs them money but hey, that's their problem. If they want to run a political party they're gonna need money. But you can't sit here and tell me "Republicans respect the will of the people" while they're cancelling primaries so they don't have to deal with challengers.

Having it both ways: nuh-uh.

Not sure what point you think you made but Republicans don't run around telling everyone they're the champion of the "Little People" and are all for "deomcracy"

 

[Pogo]

Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.

Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.

well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .

uh HUH.

Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?

Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.

Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.

Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?

It's up to the party as noted. But if you're going to claim "the RNC have more respect for the people" you can't run around cancelling the window of opportunity for those people to have a say when there are three nationally-prominent Republicans contending.

Can't have it both ways.

Last time we had an incumbent they still held the Democratic Party primary here. My choices were (1) Barack O'bama, or (2) "Uncommitted". Had there been, say, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Brown (former POTUS candy, prominent Rep and a governor, same as the present Republican roster), then it might have made more sense to vote in that primary. But they still held it even with no challengers.

They'll say it "saves them money". I'm not sure how it costs them money but hey, that's their problem. If they want to run a political party they're gonna need money. But you can't sit here and tell me "Republicans respect the will of the people" while they're cancelling primaries so they don't have to deal with challengers.

Having it both ways: nuh-uh.

Not sure what point you think you made but Republicans don't run around telling everyone they're the champion of the "Little People" and are all for "deomcracy"

Nor could they, and not just because "deomcracy" doesn't exist

But in context ---- the previous poster Yidnuts had claimed the RNC has "more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC" and that's clearly not the case.

So I'm with you Frank --- the RNC is not all for deomcracy. Nor is the DNC.

 

[Dragonlady]

Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.

Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.

well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .

That's not what the RNC did. First off, Trump won primaries with 15% of the vote, because there were 17 people on the ballot, and got 100% of the delegates. 85% of the people in those states voted for someone other than Trump, but had more votes than anyone else so he got all of the delegates. How is that the "will of the people"?

There was a "Stop Trump" movement and an attempt to change the rules of the nominating convention, AFTER the convention already started. So don't say the RNC blithely went along with Trump winning the nomination, and did nothing to sabotage him along the way.

At least the DNC doesn't apportions the delegates according to votes. You don't get 100% of the delegates, unless you crush the opposition.

 

[Crepitus]

the question for Bernie supporters is whether or not they believe they are getting railroaded by the DNC ? Do they believe the DNC is impartial when it comes to their support for Biden and Sanders ? or do they believe the deck is stacked once again against Sanders ?

A. This is like the 25th thread on this subject, so you kids are starting to sound more than a little desperate.

2. I'm a Bernie supporter. I'm sure he can beat tRump. If the nominee is Biden, then Joe gets my vote in November.

III. I think everyone understands that the DNC would rather nominate someone with a "D" in front of his name. It's not the INC after all.

 

[Pogo]

Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.

Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.

well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .

That's not what the RNC did. First off, Trump won primaries with 15% of the vote, because there were 17 people on the ballot, and got 100% of the delegates. 85% of the people in those states voted for someone other than Trump, but had more votes than anyone else so he got all of the delegates. How is that the "will of the people"?

And then in the general election he failed to win even 50% of the vote in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida, Arizona, North Carolina and even UTAH --- and yet got 100% of ALL those states' electoral votes. That sure as hell wasn't the will of the people either.

 

[yidnar]

well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .

uh HUH.

Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?

Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.

Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.

Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?

It's up to the party as noted. But if you're going to claim "the RNC have more respect for the people" you can't run around cancelling the window of opportunity for those people to have a say when there are three nationally-prominent Republicans contending.

Can't have it both ways.

Last time we had an incumbent they still held the Democratic Party primary here. My choices were (1) Barack O'bama, or (2) "Uncommitted". Had there been, say, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Brown (former POTUS candy, prominent Rep and a governor, same as the present Republican roster), then it might have made more sense to vote in that primary. But they still held it even with no challengers.

They'll say it "saves them money". I'm not sure how it costs them money but hey, that's their problem. If they want to run a political party they're gonna need money. But you can't sit here and tell me "Republicans respect the will of the people" while they're cancelling primaries so they don't have to deal with challengers.

Having it both ways: nuh-uh.

Not sure what point you think you made but Republicans don't run around telling everyone they're the champion of the "Little People" and are all for "deomcracy"

Nor could they, and not just because "deomcracy" doesn't exist

But in context ---- the previous poster Yidnuts had claimed the RNC has "more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC" and that's clearly not the case.

So I'm with you Frank --- the RNC is not all for deomcracy. Nor is the DNC.

the POTUS is an outsider .... he was not unanimously accepted by the RNC he won because the will of the people overrode the RNC establishment and never Trumpers . your party and the DNC cant even treat the most sensible dem Gabbard fairly !

 

[yidnar]

Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.

Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.

well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .

That's not what the RNC did. First off, Trump won primaries with 15% of the vote, because there were 17 people on the ballot, and got 100% of the delegates. 85% of the people in those states voted for someone other than Trump, but had more votes than anyone else so he got all of the delegates. How is that the "will of the people"?

And then in the general election he failed to win even 50% of the vote in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida, Arizona, North Carolina and even UTAH --- and yet got 100% of ALL those states' electoral votes. That sure as hell wasn't the will of the people either.

he got the most votes of any candidate ! its a race he came in 1st .he wins !

 

[Pogo]

uh HUH.

Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?

Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.

Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.

Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?

It's up to the party as noted. But if you're going to claim "the RNC have more respect for the people" you can't run around cancelling the window of opportunity for those people to have a say when there are three nationally-prominent Republicans contending.

Can't have it both ways.

Last time we had an incumbent they still held the Democratic Party primary here. My choices were (1) Barack O'bama, or (2) "Uncommitted". Had there been, say, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Brown (former POTUS candy, prominent Rep and a governor, same as the present Republican roster), then it might have made more sense to vote in that primary. But they still held it even with no challengers.

They'll say it "saves them money". I'm not sure how it costs them money but hey, that's their problem. If they want to run a political party they're gonna need money. But you can't sit here and tell me "Republicans respect the will of the people" while they're cancelling primaries so they don't have to deal with challengers.

Having it both ways: nuh-uh.

Not sure what point you think you made but Republicans don't run around telling everyone they're the champion of the "Little People" and are all for "deomcracy"

Nor could they, and not just because "deomcracy" doesn't exist

But in context ---- the previous poster Yidnuts had claimed the RNC has "more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC" and that's clearly not the case.

So I'm with you Frank --- the RNC is not all for deomcracy. Nor is the DNC.

the POTUS is an outsider .... he was not unanimously accepted by the RNC he won because the will of the people overrode the RNC establishment and never Trumpers . your party and the DNC cant even treat the most sensible dem Gabbard fairly !

I don't have a "party", Shitnickel.

And btw I already voted for Tulsi so cram your ass-umptions back to the intestine from which they emigrated.

 

[Pogo]

the question for Bernie supporters is whether or not they believe they are getting railroaded by the DNC ? Do they believe the DNC is impartial when it comes to their support for Biden and Sanders ? or do they believe the deck is stacked once again against Sanders ?

A. This is like the 25th thread on this subject, so you kids are starting to sound more than a little desperate.

2. I'm a Bernie supporter. I'm sure he can beat tRump. If the nominee is Biden, then Joe gets my vote in November.

III. I think everyone understands that the DNC would rather nominate someone with a "D" in front of his name. It's not the INC after all.

There's still a difference between being the party nominee and being a "member of" a party, a characterization which has no meaning.

Ask Horace Greeley about that. Ask Andrew Johnson. Ask Harry Truman and Strom Thurmond. Being the nominee simply means your name is on that party's ballot.

Recall also that at least once, the Democrats and Republicans of Vermont, unable to unseat Bernie Sanders, ran a joint candidate against him endorsed by both parties (Bernie won anyway).

 

[HappyJoy]

Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.

Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.

well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .

"The will of the people" in the Democratic primaries is obviously not Sanders.

 

[yidnar]

Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?

It's up to the party as noted. But if you're going to claim "the RNC have more respect for the people" you can't run around cancelling the window of opportunity for those people to have a say when there are three nationally-prominent Republicans contending.

Can't have it both ways.

Last time we had an incumbent they still held the Democratic Party primary here. My choices were (1) Barack O'bama, or (2) "Uncommitted". Had there been, say, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Brown (former POTUS candy, prominent Rep and a governor, same as the present Republican roster), then it might have made more sense to vote in that primary. But they still held it even with no challengers.

They'll say it "saves them money". I'm not sure how it costs them money but hey, that's their problem. If they want to run a political party they're gonna need money. But you can't sit here and tell me "Republicans respect the will of the people" while they're cancelling primaries so they don't have to deal with challengers.

Having it both ways: nuh-uh.

Not sure what point you think you made but Republicans don't run around telling everyone they're the champion of the "Little People" and are all for "deomcracy"

Nor could they, and not just because "deomcracy" doesn't exist

But in context ---- the previous poster Yidnuts had claimed the RNC has "more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC" and that's clearly not the case.

So I'm with you Frank --- the RNC is not all for deomcracy. Nor is the DNC.

the POTUS is an outsider .... he was not unanimously accepted by the RNC he won because the will of the people overrode the RNC establishment and never Trumpers . your party and the DNC cant even treat the most sensible dem Gabbard fairly !

I don't have a "party", Shitnickel.

And btw I already voted for Tulsi so cram your ass-umptions back to the intestine from which they emigrated.

you voted for Tulsi !!! bwaaahaaahaaaahaaa no wonder you're so pissed ! i love causing dumb asses like you to melt down !