Nothing about the #DNCLeaks?

PSU · July 22, 2016, 06:09:58 PM

Liberal biased forum.

challengerX · July 22, 2016, 06:12:10 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Elai · July 22, 2016, 06:13:37 PM

Idk man we're pretty conservative dude

PSU · July 22, 2016, 06:26:23 PM

Quote from: Callous on July 22, 2016, 06:13:37 PM

Idk man we're pretty conservative dude

Lol I know I'm jk. Was just suprised no one posted about it

Luciana · July 22, 2016, 07:19:35 PM

Boo Tim Kaine

Hillary is a filthy moderate

not voting for this corrupt party either

Alternative Facts · July 22, 2016, 07:27:53 PM

I was going to post it when I got home.

Not much to share

Casper · July 22, 2016, 08:28:15 PM

Nothing much of Trump being right again with the party being rigged against Bernie. But we already knew that.

big sponge · July 22, 2016, 10:28:03 PM

It basically just confirmed everything we already knew.

Flee · July 23, 2016, 03:31:55 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

nosejob · July 23, 2016, 11:04:14 AM

It's #DNCleak now (without the s) because Twitter doesn't like anti Hillary tags trending

Tyger · July 23, 2016, 02:04:34 PM

Quote from: nosejob on July 23, 2016, 11:04:14 AM

It's #DNCleak now (without the s) because Twitter doesn't like anti Hillary tags trending

Jacks pinned tweet is #blacklivesmatter #dallas so he's obviously retarded

Tyger · July 23, 2016, 02:12:29 PM

"Enough with the damn emails"

-Bernie Sanders

I bet he's regretting that one

challengerX · July 23, 2016, 02:56:43 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Luciana · July 23, 2016, 02:59:08 PM

She did break the law now basically confirmed. Had it been anyone else lower than her power, they'd be in jail.

Alternative Facts · July 23, 2016, 03:41:19 PM

Not going to defend the DNC here, but is anyone surprised that they were against Sanders from the start? Do they somehow think the RNC doesn't have similar emails against Trump?

Luciana · July 23, 2016, 05:37:29 PM

Only they tried to mostly treat it fair with scheduling. Senators were more vocal yeah, but they didn't do foolish things like call states early and try to put the debates at times they know no one will be watching.

Azumarill · July 23, 2016, 05:40:06 PM

Quote from: Icy on July 23, 2016, 03:41:19 PM

Not going to defend the DNC here, but is anyone surprised that they were against Sanders from the start? Do they somehow think the RNC doesn't have similar emails against Trump?

a carpetbagger who joined a year ago out of convenience or hillary, who has been working with the dems for decades.. easy decision for the DNC

Ender · July 23, 2016, 05:44:26 PM

The what

challengerX · July 23, 2016, 05:44:34 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Luciana · July 23, 2016, 06:05:44 PM

That's one hell of a post

Alternative Facts · July 23, 2016, 06:07:18 PM

Quote from: Holo on July 23, 2016, 05:37:29 PM

but they didn't do foolish things like call states early.

If you're gonna make some conspiracy, don't look stupid when doing it.

big sponge · July 23, 2016, 07:31:27 PM

Quote from: Icy on July 23, 2016, 06:07:18 PM

Quote from: Holo on July 23, 2016, 05:37:29 PM
but they didn't do foolish things like call states early.

If you're gonna make some conspiracy, don't look stupid when doing it.

It's not a conspiracy. MSNBC flat out said they were going to call it for Hillary in CA before the polls even closed.

Alternative Facts · July 23, 2016, 07:38:09 PM

Quote from: LC on July 23, 2016, 07:31:27 PM

Quote from: Icy on July 23, 2016, 06:07:18 PM
Quote from: Holo on July 23, 2016, 05:37:29 PM
but they didn't do foolish things like call states early.

If you're gonna make some conspiracy, don't look stupid when doing it.

It's not a conspiracy. MSNBC flat out said they were going to call it for Hillary in CA before the polls even closed.

I'm going to assume that you're talking about the Chris Matthews statement?

You know, when it was known that Clinton would have the number of delegates (pledged and super) once New Jersey and the other states voting that day were announced?

News agencies have never waited to declare a presumed winner of anything, whether it's Fox, CNN, MSNBC, or the New York Times. If they have the numbers to back up their claim (be they exit polls, private statements from supporters, etc), they will run with it. It's happened for decades, and everyone knew that Clinton would have hit the magic number with or without California.

big sponge · July 23, 2016, 08:12:50 PM

Super Delegates don't matter. Without them Hillary still didn't have the numbers required for the nomination. It was a ploy to disenfranchise voters plain and simple.

I know you don't like talking about how corrupt Hillary and the DNC are, but you're going to have to get over it. There's going to be a lot of talk about it during this election cycle and over the next 4 years regardless of who wins.

Alternative Facts · July 23, 2016, 08:25:48 PM

Quote from: LC on July 23, 2016, 08:12:50 PM

Super Delegates don't matter. Without them Hillary still didn't have the numbers required for the nomination. It was a ploy to disenfranchise voters plain and simple.

Again, it's not like superdelegates are a new concept to 2016. They were around in 2008, 2004, 2000, 96...

Just because a chunk of the voting base is now annoyed with them does not mean it was a ploy to disenfranchise voters. If people are that uneducated as to the electoral process, then I can't help that. And if we get rid of them? Great, it makes no difference to me.

Quote from: LC on July 23, 2016, 08:12:50 PM

I know you don't like talking about how corrupt Hillary and the DNC are, but you're going to have to get over it. There's going to be a lot of talk about it during this election cycle and over the next 4 years regardless of who wins.

Oh, there's corruption. But the folks that are going "They're calling the primaries with 0% in!" is not corruption, and the idiots that say it is are just that - idiots with a lack of understanding on how it works.

maverick · July 23, 2016, 08:30:10 PM

Quote from: Azumarill on July 23, 2016, 05:40:06 PM

Quote from: Icy on July 23, 2016, 03:41:19 PM
Not going to defend the DNC here, but is anyone surprised that they were against Sanders from the start? Do they somehow think the RNC doesn't have similar emails against Trump?
a carpetbagger who joined a year ago out of convenience or hillary, who has been working with the dems for decades.. easy decision for the DNC

Interesting point. Never thought about that.

big sponge · July 23, 2016, 08:36:05 PM

Super delegates aren't a new concept, but they still don't matter since they'll aren't beholden to anybody and they'll side with whoever has the magic number of regular delegates or in the event of a hung convention whoever has the better chance to win the general.

The fact that you keep trying to side step this is amusing. Including the super delegates in the count for this election cycle was nothing more than a tactic to keep the people the DNC didn't want voting out of the voting booth.

Alternative Facts · July 23, 2016, 08:44:21 PM

Quote from: LC on July 23, 2016, 08:36:05 PM

Including the super delegates in the count for this election cycle

Except as far as I've seen, it's always been factored in. Below is an image from the in-depth New York Time's 2008 delegate tracker

There is also here at Politico:

Quote

The running totals for the two, which includes previous contests and the party officials known as “superdelegates,” are only about 70 delegates apart, Russert said.

And Here at RealClearPolitics

Superdelegates were factored in, the same way they are now. That didn't change this cycle because of corruption. So let's not pretend that it was, unless you have images to prove otherwise.

MyNameIsCharlie · July 23, 2016, 09:31:51 PM

The biggest issue here is voter disenfranchisement. Bernie and Trump get the support they do because too many Americans feel the system is rigged. Stuff like this proves them right. It's hard to say what the fallout will be. Some may go and vote against Hillary just to show their displeasure. They may give up on the system entirely. Who knows?

Alternative Facts · July 23, 2016, 09:35:11 PM

Quote from: MyNameIsCharlie on July 23, 2016, 09:31:51 PM

The biggest issue here is voter disenfranchisement. Bernie and Trump get the support they do because too many Americans feel the system is rigged. Stuff like this proves them right. It's hard to say what the fallout will be. Some may go and vote against Hillary just to show their displeasure. They may give up on the system entirely. Who knows?

Voter disenfranchisement isn't the right word - that implies people are being prevented from voting. Voter dilution is a better choice; certain groups of people are discouraged, but not prevented.

But yes, this isn't a shock