Hillary .. Berns .. Who Won.. ?

[Lumpy 1]

How many dead people caucused for Hillary?

Well, she IS backed by George Soros.
Scytl: Voter Fraud Facts and Fiction

I heard Soros just handed her a 6 million dollar (campaign .. wink) payoff, Bernie has a point, she's bought and payed for by Banks, Wall Street and Corporations, is there any doubt?

Nope

I guess I was wrong...

George Soros donates $8 million to boost Hillary

 

[Kat]

How many dead people caucused for Hillary?

Well, she IS backed by George Soros.
Scytl: Voter Fraud Facts and Fiction

I heard Soros just handed her a 6 million dollar (campaign .. wink) payoff, Bernie has a point, she's bought and payed for by Banks, Wall Street and Corporations, is there any doubt?

Nope

I guess I was wrong...

George Soros donates $8 million to boost Hillary

Naw, that's just a recent add.

 

[Lumpy 1]

With the Democratic Party in control of their Iowa Caucasus we may .. Never Know....

Hillary up 696 delegates to Bernie's 693

Sheesh, even MSNBC is embarrassed

When both of you come away with 690-odd delegates there is no "winner" in numbers.

Bernie won in terms of momentum though, regardless how the numbers settle.

The funny part is that the Democratic Party screwed up all on their own, Hillary announced that she won and it's another liberal failure. Also, Democrats are saying that those votes don't count..explain that.

Politicians claiming victory have nothing to do with "liberal" or "conservative". Or with a party.
And nobody said the votes "don't count" -- they're counted up a different way. Because it's a caucus, not an election. We had
'em in Vermont too.

This your first rodeo then?

You usually claim victory when you win.. in the real world...

What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts.

The way this works isn't a straight count of "votes". It's more like committees pull together and hash out what they'll say as a unit, and then that result is what's counted. Think of it as a zillion little electoral college cells.

And that's done locally --- not by a political party, and not by any candidate. And certainly not by any political philosophy, which has zero to do with such a design.

I mean, damn.

Sometimes Lumpers --- it's like trying to explain string theory to a five-year-old.

"What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts."

Sooo you have a new policy, that's good?


Are you trying to say that the election apparatus and responsibility doesn't rest with the Democratic Party?

 

[gipper]

How many dead people caucused for Hillary?

Well, she IS backed by George Soros.
Scytl: Voter Fraud Facts and Fiction

I would hope that Soros giving her pac $6 million, would disqualify her with a lot of D voters.

George Soros gives $6 million to pro-Clinton super-PAC

 

[S.J.]

How many dead people caucused for Hillary?

Well, she IS backed by George Soros.
Scytl: Voter Fraud Facts and Fiction

I would hope that Soros giving her pac $6 million, would disqualify her with a lot of D voters.

George Soros gives $6 million to pro-Clinton super-PAC

You would think so but the D voters don't have any more integrity than the candidates. Just look at some of the crap they post here.

 

[gipper]

How many dead people caucused for Hillary?

Well, she IS backed by George Soros.
Scytl: Voter Fraud Facts and Fiction

I would hope that Soros giving her pac $6 million, would disqualify her with a lot of D voters.

George Soros gives $6 million to pro-Clinton super-PAC

You would think so but the D voters don't have any more integrity than the candidates. Just look at some of the crap they post here.

Maybe, but they sure love to bitch about the Koch brothers giving money to Rs. Could it be D voters are hypocrites too?

 

[S.J.]

How many dead people caucused for Hillary?

Well, she IS backed by George Soros.
Scytl: Voter Fraud Facts and Fiction

I would hope that Soros giving her pac $6 million, would disqualify her with a lot of D voters.

George Soros gives $6 million to pro-Clinton super-PAC

You would think so but the D voters don't have any more integrity than the candidates. Just look at some of the crap they post here.

Maybe, but they sure love to bitch about the Koch brothers giving money to Rs. Could it be D voters are hypocrites too?

I think it would be safe to say that, yes.

 

[alpine]

Hillary did go from 55% to 49%
Sanders did go from 5% to 49%

Considering the rep caucus, seems like communism on the way for America....

 

[Lumpy 1]

Well, it seems the Democratic Party, "selected" their coronation candidate as the winner.

Bernie got screwed over by the DNC establishment, Hillary's owners and the liberal media...

 

[Claudette]

Pretty close for Clinton lovers. Clinton lovers who say she has it in the bag.

Kinda sorta doesn't look that way. Of course it all just starting.

 

[Pogo]

When both of you come away with 690-odd delegates there is no "winner" in numbers.

Bernie won in terms of momentum though, regardless how the numbers settle.

The funny part is that the Democratic Party screwed up all on their own, Hillary announced that she won and it's another liberal failure. Also, Democrats are saying that those votes don't count..explain that.

Politicians claiming victory have nothing to do with "liberal" or "conservative". Or with a party.
And nobody said the votes "don't count" -- they're counted up a different way. Because it's a caucus, not an election. We had
'em in Vermont too.

This your first rodeo then?

You usually claim victory when you win.. in the real world...

What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts.

The way this works isn't a straight count of "votes". It's more like committees pull together and hash out what they'll say as a unit, and then that result is what's counted. Think of it as a zillion little electoral college cells.

And that's done locally --- not by a political party, and not by any candidate. And certainly not by any political philosophy, which has zero to do with such a design.

I mean, damn.

Sometimes Lumpers --- it's like trying to explain string theory to a five-year-old.

"What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts."

Sooo you have a new policy, that's good?


Are you trying to say that the election apparatus and responsibility doesn't rest with the Democratic Party?

I'm "trying" to say --- actually already did say, for the slow kids --- that what they did in Iowa is not a simple "vote" that you count in absolute numbers ..... and that I find out stuff like that (or any other topic) before I go on the internets to wax eloquent on the subject, so that I don't end up looking like an eejit.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, if that's what yer into.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[SmokeALib]

Everybody loses if either one of these incompetent boobs gets in the White House.

 

[Lumpy 1]

The funny part is that the Democratic Party screwed up all on their own, Hillary announced that she won and it's another liberal failure. Also, Democrats are saying that those votes don't count..explain that.

Politicians claiming victory have nothing to do with "liberal" or "conservative". Or with a party.
And nobody said the votes "don't count" -- they're counted up a different way. Because it's a caucus, not an election. We had
'em in Vermont too.

This your first rodeo then?

You usually claim victory when you win.. in the real world...

What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts.

The way this works isn't a straight count of "votes". It's more like committees pull together and hash out what they'll say as a unit, and then that result is what's counted. Think of it as a zillion little electoral college cells.

And that's done locally --- not by a political party, and not by any candidate. And certainly not by any political philosophy, which has zero to do with such a design.

I mean, damn.

Sometimes Lumpers --- it's like trying to explain string theory to a five-year-old.

"What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts."

Sooo you have a new policy, that's good?


Are you trying to say that the election apparatus and responsibility doesn't rest with the Democratic Party?

I'm "trying" to say --- actually already did say, for the slow kids --- that what they did in Iowa is not a simple "vote" that you count in absolute numbers ..... and that I find out stuff like that (or any other topic) before I go on the internets to wax eloquent on the subject, so that I don't end up looking like an eejit.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, if that's what yer into.

What you're missing is the districts that Bernie alleges were unreported when I wrote the OP and as it turns out when she was declared possible winner by the DNC. Were those alleged caucus results included or not?

You're distraction of the individual caucus procedures (coin flips included) was interesting, a tad on the obnoxious side and missed the mark as usual.

 

[Rozman]

With the Democratic Party in control of their Iowa Caucasus we may .. Never Know....

Hillary up 696 delegates to Bernie's 693

Sheesh, even MSNBC is embarrassed

99 Democratic precinct results are missing. Check out new thread.

Ninety Democratic precinct results missing from Iowa Caucus

I find comfort in the fact knowing that Rachel Maddow will get to the bottom of this.....
This is something that gets her all fired up.....

Yeah right!..... LOL

 

[Siete]

Caucus ...

Government Election ...

for all the quintessential IDIOTS out there, elections are WON.


hope that helps even though it WON'T.



attention morons ...


A caucus is a local meeting where registered members of a political party in a city, town or county gather to vote for their preferred party candidate and conduct other party business. Caucuses typically are used in combination with a state convention to elect delegates to the national nominating convention for presidential elections.

The caucus is the oldest method of choosing delegates in the U.S., widely acknowledged as originating in the English colonies before the American Revolution. Sixteen states hold caucuses to determine political party candidates.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Caucus ...

Government Election ...

for all the quintessential IDIOTS out there, elections are WON.


hope that helps even though it WON'T.



attention morons ...


A caucus is a local meeting where registered members of a political party in a city, town or county gather to vote for their preferred party candidate and conduct other party business. Caucuses typically are used in combination with a state convention to elect delegates to the national nominating convention for presidential elections.

The caucus is the oldest method of choosing delegates in the U.S., widely acknowledged as originating in the English colonies before the American Revolution. Sixteen states hold caucuses to determine political party candidates.

If the individual caucus results go unreported and he DNC okay's Clinton's win (up to 90 caucuses unreported according to Bernie Sanders), what then?

Much like Pogo you missed the point. If the the caucus results go unreported voters/caucus members are cut out of the process and not represented.

 

[whitehall]

How about the coin flip? Hillary won six out of six? The DNC pulled out all the stops to keep Hill's head above water this time

 

[Pogo]

Politicians claiming victory have nothing to do with "liberal" or "conservative". Or with a party.
And nobody said the votes "don't count" -- they're counted up a different way. Because it's a caucus, not an election. We had
'em in Vermont too.

This your first rodeo then?

You usually claim victory when you win.. in the real world...

What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts.

The way this works isn't a straight count of "votes". It's more like committees pull together and hash out what they'll say as a unit, and then that result is what's counted. Think of it as a zillion little electoral college cells.

And that's done locally --- not by a political party, and not by any candidate. And certainly not by any political philosophy, which has zero to do with such a design.

I mean, damn.

Sometimes Lumpers --- it's like trying to explain string theory to a five-year-old.

"What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts."

Sooo you have a new policy, that's good?


Are you trying to say that the election apparatus and responsibility doesn't rest with the Democratic Party?

I'm "trying" to say --- actually already did say, for the slow kids --- that what they did in Iowa is not a simple "vote" that you count in absolute numbers ..... and that I find out stuff like that (or any other topic) before I go on the internets to wax eloquent on the subject, so that I don't end up looking like an eejit.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, if that's what yer into.

What you're missing is the districts that Bernie alleges were unreported when I wrote the OP and as it turns out when she was declared possible winner by the DNC. Were those alleged caucus results included or not?

You're distraction of the individual caucus procedures (coin flips included) was interesting, a tad on the obnoxious side and missed the mark as usual.

 

[TNHarley]

corrupt cankles was full of lies, contradictions and fallacies. Her "anti-establishment" bullshit was the icing on the cake. Bernie ate her ass up.
She handled herself well.. if you are a naïve dumbfuck.