Democrats rig Tulsi Gabbard right out of their next debate

[flacaltenn]

Democrats always fix their elections so the preordained win.

Democrats rig Tulsi Gabbard right out of their next debate.

Dem's rigged the 2016 primary, is it any surprise they are rigging the 2020 primary? They got rid of Gabbard because she knifed Kamala in the back during the last debate.

The DNC had it out for her well before that. She backed Sanders in 2016 and condemned Obama's actions in Syria.

Oh YEAH.. Nobody brought that up... But you CANNOT diss the party and ever expect to rise in leadership ranks.. THAT's why they're revising "their criteria" to boot her from the debates...

I'm just hoping she's pissed enough and seen enough and is PRINCIPLED enough to consider running as an Independent in 2020... She's EXACTLY the type of competent politician that should be thru with being abused and used by the party bosses...

 

[busybee01]

Feb 10, 2017 · So while Hillary Clinton leads right now 394-42 over Bernie Sanders in total delegates, Bernie leads Hillary 36-32 in those delegates chosen by the people.

Yep.. The party ELITE lay a huge hand on the results... NOT the voters...

Those superdelegates were all the rock stars and the wounded warriors of the party battles.. It was so blatantly crooked and dishonest that even the Sandinistas in charge of the DNC now felt they had to reform the super delegate issue.... And they made some wimpy changes to make it LESS like a Politburo election in the old Soviet Union....

You had about 3 or 4 shake-ups in upper mgt at the DNC since then and a couple bloody purges... And this deal with Tulsi Gabbard is NAKED RETRIBUTION for her crime of crippling a front-runner on stage at a debate....

Superdelegates have never affected the nomination. In 2008, most of the super delegates were backing Clinton however as Obama won primaries and caucuses, he peeled off most of the super delegates. Sanders voters were just looking for excuses for their 2016 loss.

Before the election the DNC was out noting that Hillary already had wrapped up X amount of Super Delegates so anyone else thinking of running, don't bother. So no one did. The DNC wanted Sanders to run to be able to provide for televised debates so they could say "Hillary understands and Sanders has pulled her left". I backfired big time.

Sanders would have beat Trump. Many of us see the DNC still trying to manipulate things and trending third party again.

The same thing was true in 2008. Clinton had most of the superdelegates locked up. However they can change their minds as demonstrated in 2008. The difference between 2008 and 2016 was that Obama won primaries and caucuses while Sanders did not. Anyone other than Clinton would have beaten Trump including Biden.

Biden probably would have, maybe Sanders.

However, I think you'd be a fool to underestimate Donald Trump. He is one of those guys who wants to win, and he has done so in a far more competitive environment than politics. In politics you can have big backers make you, promote you, sell you. Trump had to sell himself and win in the world of Real Estate and self promotion.

His story is one of going from building low income housing developments in Brooklyn to building massive, global structures adoring his name in big, gold letters. He wisely turned his unique name into a household name.

So. Biden, Sanders, whoever he was against in 2016, I think Trump still has the edge. He would figure it out. More importantly, American voters have. His policies are needed and when he wins against China he can almost literally take credit for saving the West from itself.

I want to see him in for another 4 years. The pinnacle of a lifetime of being a classic go forward American, Like others before him, he will be in the history books at a grand scale rarely seen.

You are overestimating Trump. Democrats do have to take nothing for granted. That is why Clinton lost.

Trump has shattered the Reagan coalition. It consisted of rural and suburban voters. Voters with high school educations and 4 year degrees. We saw a break in 2016 as Republican support frayed in suburban districts. In Texas, Clinton won 3 Republican house districts for the first time. In 2018, Democrats took 2 of the 3 districts and 3 more suburban districts became very close.

Trump does not have the edge. Voters oppose Trump on almost every issue and he has gone further to the right. Suburban women will vote heavily against Trump and Republicans. Even Texas Republicans are saying Trump will have to spend time and money in Texas.

I do not want him in for another 4 years. We do not need dirty water and d9irty air and a oil well in every national park. We do not need Trump concentration camps that endanger people who are in fear for their lives.

 

[busybee01]

As far as I can tell, they doubled the requirements. I do not see how that is targeting one specific candidate or how it is a 'fix' for anything. If you cannot hit 2% in a national poll you really should not be on stage. They have to have someway of narrowing down the field throughout this entire process.

The real candidate hurt in narrowing the field is Biden anyway - the most likely establishment pick. He wins by default should the field remain as it is, splitting the hardcore lefties vote among many candidates. Narrow that down to just a few and Biden may face real competition.

I'm sorry, but are you really, really that DUMB/NAIVE/DISHONEST? The point is that the DNC is belatedly changing the rules. Under the previous rules that they announced just a few months ago, Gabbard qualifies for the next round of debates. But, if these belated rule changes are enforced, she will be excluded. If you can't see that this is aimed at her, I have some bridges I'd like to sell you.

Are you really that stupid? At some point the rules have to change. All the candidates were given their chance to make their case and the criteria should be tightened. There is no evidence that it is aimed at her as other candidates have been affected. You would be stupid enough to buy the Brooklyn Bridge.

Bullshit

I agree. You are bullshit.

 

[busybee01]

Democrats always fix their elections so the preordained win.

Democrats rig Tulsi Gabbard right out of their next debate.

At some point you have to draw a line. The standards are still ridiculously low. If she can't meet these ridiculously low standards then she is not a serious player.

No one is being cheated. At some point in time, you have to tighten the standards to get into the debate.

 

[busybee01]

Democrats always fix their elections so the preordained win.

Democrats rig Tulsi Gabbard right out of their next debate.

Dem's rigged the 2016 primary, is it any surprise they are rigging the 2020 primary? They got rid of Gabbard because she knifed Kamala in the back during the last debate.

I suppose the DNC ordered 75% of South Carolina voters to vote for Clinton. 67% in Texas and Florida. The DNC backed Clinton in 2008 and she lost. None of the primaries were rigged.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Democrats always fix their elections so the preordained win.

Democrats rig Tulsi Gabbard right out of their next debate.

At some point you have to draw a line. The standards are still ridiculously low. If she can't meet these ridiculously low standards then she is not a serious player.

No one is being cheated. At some point in time, you have to tighten the standards to get into the debate.

Why? Several people have already dropped out. The field will thin itself out. It is not up to the (corrupt) party to decide who is in and who is out. The people are who is to decide that.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Democrats always fix their elections so the preordained win.

Democrats rig Tulsi Gabbard right out of their next debate.

Dem's rigged the 2016 primary, is it any surprise they are rigging the 2020 primary? They got rid of Gabbard because she knifed Kamala in the back during the last debate.

I suppose the DNC ordered 75% of South Carolina voters to vote for Clinton. 67% in Texas and Florida. The DNC backed Clinton in 2008 and she lost. None of the primaries were rigged.

And Hillary some how won?

 

[Wyatt earp]

It was rigged and they blamed the aliens/ blackes / Russia

 

[Weatherman2020]

Democrats always fix their elections so the preordained win.

Democrats rig Tulsi Gabbard right out of their next debate.

Dem's rigged the 2016 primary, is it any surprise they are rigging the 2020 primary? They got rid of Gabbard because she knifed Kamala in the back during the last debate.

I suppose the DNC ordered 75% of South Carolina voters to vote for Clinton. 67% in Texas and Florida. The DNC backed Clinton in 2008 and she lost. None of the primaries were rigged.

When a candidate gets 60% of the votes and only 30% of the delegates, it’s rigged.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[FA_Q2]

Democrats always fix their elections so the preordained win.

Democrats rig Tulsi Gabbard right out of their next debate.

At some point you have to draw a line. The standards are still ridiculously low. If she can't meet these ridiculously low standards then she is not a serious player.

No one is being cheated. At some point in time, you have to tighten the standards to get into the debate.

Why? Several people have already dropped out. The field will thin itself out. It is not up to the (corrupt) party to decide who is in and who is out. The people are who is to decide that.

....

That is actually exactly what the party is for.

 

[flacaltenn]

Trump has shattered the Reagan coalition. It consisted of rural and suburban voters. Voters with high school educations and 4 year degrees. We saw a break in 2016 as Republican support frayed in suburban districts. In Texas, Clinton won 3 Republican house districts for the first time. In 2018, Democrats took 2 of the 3 districts and 3 more suburban districts became very close.

None of that has a damn thing to do with Trump... That's all those jobs Texas is winning from badly run Blue States... BIG influx of lefties with great incomes living in the suburbs and escaping the DISASTERS that are occurring in their badly run California, Oregon, New York, Illinois, etc....

My state of Tennessee is the same situation.. We LOVE the growth, need to "paper train" these "immigrants" to not screw up our states....

 

[P F Tinmore]

Even pollsters agree: DNC excluding Tulsi makes no sense

 

[lennypartiv]

The only credible Democrat candidate cannot get 1%. What a joke. She should switch parties and run as a Republican in 2024.

So she's going to campaign for Medicare for All as a Republican in 2024?

 

[P F Tinmore]

If The DNC Used Reputable Polls, Tulsi Would Be At The Next Debate

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

The only credible Democrat candidate cannot get 1%. What a joke. She should switch parties and run as a Republican in 2024.

So she's going to campaign for Medicare for All as a Republican in 2024?

She may with the private option on the table.

 

[pknopp]

The only credible Democrat candidate cannot get 1%. What a joke. She should switch parties and run as a Republican in 2024.

So she's going to campaign for Medicare for All as a Republican in 2024?

She may with the private option on the table.

She won't. She is one of the few with principles.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

The only credible Democrat candidate cannot get 1%. What a joke. She should switch parties and run as a Republican in 2024.

So she's going to campaign for Medicare for All as a Republican in 2024?

She may with the private option on the table.

She won't. She is one of the few with principles.

She was always for a UH with a private option I believe.

 

[pknopp]

The only credible Democrat candidate cannot get 1%. What a joke. She should switch parties and run as a Republican in 2024.

So she's going to campaign for Medicare for All as a Republican in 2024?

She may with the private option on the table.

She won't. She is one of the few with principles.

She was always for a UH with a private option I believe.

The principled part was addressing her becoming a Republican.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

The only credible Democrat candidate cannot get 1%. What a joke. She should switch parties and run as a Republican in 2024.

So she's going to campaign for Medicare for All as a Republican in 2024?

She may with the private option on the table.

She won't. She is one of the few with principles.

She was always for a UH with a private option I believe.

The principled part was addressing her becoming a Republican.

The Democrat party basically threw her to the curb. I supposed she could run as an Independent but that never works out.