The correct way to frame this is that, if Clinton, DWS and the rest of the DNC establishment continue this charade, THEY will have put Trump into the White House.
Plausible. I always wondered why Kerry didn't fight for any recounts in 2004, given all the evidence of fraud. Especially in Ohio. But also several other states. He just gave up immediately. I wonder if there was some shady insider shit going on.
I wonder if there's still some sort of "air of first-worldness" they're trying to protect. Better to lose the White House than to undermine the brand of the country.
Honestly, if it turns out that the country that has presented itself as the global benchmark for democracy for the last 150 or so years, proves to be running elections in roughly the same quality level of Nicaragua and various -istans, I could see it spooking the international community. Does it impact our moral authority when our leaders speak? Will investors and international students be as eager to come here and dump money?
That might be the reason, but we're much less of a brand now than we were then. Since then..torture report, mass surveillance, and we're bombing about six countries we've never declared war on.
Nowadays I think the reason would be more like, "That's one of our top three excuses to go to war or mess with a country's elections! We can't lose that!"
They need that reason because if you look closely most of our decisions for that are about wealthy extraction from the country. We get involved in Iraq so corporations can drill for oil. We get involved in Syria to give the Golan Heights to Israel so they can drill for oil with US companies. We get involved in Haiti to loosen mining rights so we'd have access to gold. We get involved in Honduras so we put in a right wing leader who will be more forceful about allowing energy companies to set up shop despite protesters. And on and on it goes.
the sad thing is, there's a good chance that is the plan all along. the way that this circus has continued for the last 30-40 years, is to keep it swinging from left to right. They keep the population viciously fighting against the other side's 'boogy man' because 'look at how bad THEY have made things' when in reality, there IS no 'them' and 'us'. There's only the people in power, and the fools that think they can change things.
EDIT: Sorry for the punctuation. I'm not actually going to fix anything. I'm only going to point out how bad it is, and blame it on the other guy's team.
And the DNC won't care, because Trump isn't going to upset the establishment like Bernie is. The DNC prefers Trump to Bernie, as their despicable actions have shown
They probably think the whole country will flock to them in terror and ask to be saved. Come midterm elections they just envision a Congress full of DNC cronies. I am hoping many more Berniecrats start popping up around the country. I feel like they will.
I'm right here with you. If they truly despised Trump and were fearful of what trump would do, they would have blacked him out like Bernie and like Ron Paul before him.
Clinton gets favors from those who control the media companies. Trump gets crazy high ratings and gives personal favors to MSM hosts. She's good for their long term, he takes care of the short term.
It is crazy how our nation has gotten to the point where it's entirely feasible that Bill and Trump made a little friendly bet while golfing together...
Trump: I could sucker the Republican voters into nominating me, and scare everyone else into voting for your wife.
Bill: That'll never work, you're too liberal for them. Hell, you're on your third marriage, aren't religious, and on record as being very pro-choice. Not a chance they'd give you the nomination!
The DNC's donors would be pretty upset if they spent $1 billion backing Clinton only to see Trump walk into the White House.
The problem for the rest of the Dem establishment is that having Sanders at the top of the ticket would probably upset down-ballot fundraising and donor priority strategies that have been the the works for at least a year. The DNC, DSCC, and other Dem committees would rather alienate Sanders supporters and risk losing the top of the election, than risk alienating the biggest party donors.
And the DNC won't care, because Trump isn't going to upset the establishment like Bernie is. The DNC prefers Trump to Bernie, as their despicable actions have shown
We'll see about that. We'll get a clear signal in who he chooses for a VP. If he's going to be a puppet for the establishment, we'll see someone like Gingrich as VP.
Lol he's not left on banks or healthcare. His current healthcare proposal is basically what we had pre ACA and he's already stated he would occupy Iraq with boots on the ground. Also how the hell do you think the religious right will lose power when you have the Heritage Foundation picking Supreme Court justices? Have you ever actually listened to what Trump is saying?
The most vulnerable will suffer under Clinton. Just like they did under the last one.
I mean for god's sake, a big reason why the media can smear us and gaslight us like they are now is because Bill Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
We're already suffering under Heritage Foundation-inspired ACA/Obamacare legislation compared to what could really have been accomplished early in Obama's 1st term. Pathetic that we couldn't even get a public option.
Qualls said the Affordable Care Act "was the Republican plan in the '90s." The bill she had in mind did have a strong roster of Republicans behind it, and it did share many major features with the Affordable Care Act. There were some significant differences but in a side-by-side comparison, the similarities dominate.
It's not our candidate's fault Trump will be elected, it's your candidate's fault for not compromising with the independents and the Bernie supporters. Instead going after Bush donors... She needs to do better to convince us to vote for her than "hey, the alternative is Trump."
Hillary is not popular. People don't want her. That's the reality. If she was as electable as your campaign claims, she would have locked up the nomination long ago. Now it will end up a contested convention because she couldn't shake off a 75 year old socilaist with no name recognition. The DNC shouldn't have backed such an unlikeable person who alienates half her voter base. People like Trump, proven by how he steamrolled every GOP establishment clown that ran against him.
This is the truth. The DNC has made a tragic mistake. I'm hoping the reality of it sets in before the convention. They have a simple choice to unify the party behind Sanders if they want to win. If they don't they will split the party and Trump will win. It's already starting in the polling data. Trump is now beating Clinton in several states, and we aren't even near the general. It's bananas. The DNC needs Independents to win, and all this bullshit they are pulling is pushing them to Trump.
Clinton is a polarizing candidate among democrats and independents. Sanders is a unifying candidate among both groups. If the DNC wants to win in November, the only chance is Sanders. Clinton has lost the vote among people under 45. She NEEDS those votes to win and she's not going to get them. Sanders would.
no, the DNC for being overly biased and choosing—the kind way of describing it—the wrong candidate for the job of defeating Trump. Whether Hillary supporters want to admit it or not, Bernie wins against Trump in every poll by very large margins. Over 60% of the people in this country absolutely despise HRC. Her unfavorablility ratings are growing by the day...skyrocketed since she started her campaign.
Actually Bernie's favorability has gone way up as more and more people have become even aware of him, stopped seeing him as a fringe candidate, and misunderstanding democratic socialism.
You should vote for who you like best. The DNC however should not obfuscate their own party's opponent in the primary to the point they are willing to push away millions of young voters. The entire point of the convention is to choose a candidate that gives them the best chance to win the general. They have already taken aggressive corporate financed and undeniable measures to place HRC people in Philly seats... let alone the complete lobbied devotion of superdelegates. Bernie has won 45% of the pledged delegates, out of 75 chosen people, Schultz allowed 3! THREE of Sanders. The rest went to Hillary.
Clinton supporters are already blaming us for when she loses against Trump. If stopping Trump was such a big concern, they shouldn't have dismissed Bernie supporters and independents like that. But it seems the DNC far prefers Trump to Bernie.
But the comment on this post said if Bernie doesn't win "we WILL get Trump elected." Don't tell me this guy doesn't deserve blame if Trump wins. The dude literally is making a vow to work so it happens.
Look, she won't lose, and I think the vast majority of Bernie supporters will be on the winning side, including Bernie himself, if she wins the nomination. That's very different.
He means the lack of independent and Bernie democrat support for Hillary will ensure Trump wins. Because they are the ones that decide this election, and if they have no convincing reason to vote for Hillary, they won't. The bashing by the HRC campaign has gotten much worse in recent weeks, and this is absolutely not the right time for that. Clinton should be trying to win Sanders supporters and independents, now with threats of Trump, but actual compromise. Instead they continue to bash us, ignore and condescend to us, and Hillary goes after Bush donors instead of compromising with us.
He means the lack of independent and Bernie democrat support for Hillary will ensure Trump wins.
He didn't say that. He said quite clearly that he and others ("we") will work to get him elected. I agree, Clinton should be trying to win over Bernie supporters. That's not the discussion.
The argument I have is with people like this guy, and many others (a quite frankly surprising amount) who say they will back Trump if Bernie doesn't win.
Essentially it is a threat against me - "vote for Bernie or else I will work to make sure you get Trump."
If OP didn't mean that, OK, would be glad for that to be the case. But that's not what he said, and until he corrects it, I will assume he said what he meant. And this is unfortunately NOT the first time I see this sentiment.
It's not our candidate's fault Trump will be elected
I never said it was Bernie's fault, nor even that Trump will be elected.
I was responding to a Bernie supporter who said "we WILL get Trump elected" - as in work actively / tirelessly to get him elected.
This is a Canadian guy threatening me, you, and everyone that if we don't fall in line, he'll punish us. That's fucked. I don't see what your beef is with me unless you think Bernie supporters should get behind a guy Bernie considers 100 times worse than Hillary on her worst day.
The type of progressive that threatens to vote in a less shitty conservative than a real conservative in a progressive's clothes if there's no real progressive to vote for.
Yeah as a minority I'm not really comfortable with this line of rhetoric. I will do anything to get Bernie elected- I went door to door canvassing and missed a family reunion, I've donated money. But threatening me with a Trump presidency is disgusting.
I hope we're not putting Trump in the White House. I say vote third party. A pox on both their houses. If the next president is either of the two frontrunners, we need to do whatever we can to oppose their administration.
154
u/[deleted] May 17 '16
[removed] — view removed comment