Printable View
The total vote in Democrat primaries was 55.2% for Clinton against 43.1% for Sanders, which is a very decisive margin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Result...rimaries,_2016 Are you seriously suggesting this was due to manipulation, and on what evidence?Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFanti
The DNC manipulated the primaries to favor Clinton over Sanders read about it below (your asked for evidence).Quote:
Originally Posted by filghy2
http://observer.com/2017/08/court-ad...ainst-sanders/
If the DNC had abstained from manipulation of the primaries, then there's good chance we'd be seeing President Sanders instead of Trump.
Don't waste your time Fanti, the cunt is a hardcore Troll & seriously fucked-up!
Never said I was a Hillary fan.Quote:
Originally Posted by peejaye
I'm just pointing that had Sally Wasserman and the DNC remained impartial during the Democratic primaries, we might be talking about President Sanders instead of President Trump.
It is my perspective that Sanders had the better shot of defeating Trump - especially since a few upset Sanders voters voted Trump instead of Hillary.
The DNC misunderstood the veracity of the Sanders camp and how a portion of them preferred Trump over Hillary. It didn't help Hillary's cause either when Sanders supporters discovered that the Democratic primaries were manipulated to favor Hillary.
Bernie Sanders sits as an Independent in Congress, and for all his fan base was not so different on some issues from the other independent running on the Republican ticket. That in the end Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by close to 3 million votes undermines your claim. That someone else in the Democrat Party might have won the nomination is the question that has no answer, even though Barrack Obama came 'from nowhere' in 2008 so it might have been possible for a younger candidate to emerge if he or she were prepared to challenge Mrs Clinton. Just as the prospect of Joe Biden becoming the nominee for 2020 may make sense, but yet again defers the opportunity for a younger candidate with appeal to first time voters.
Unfortunately I know "Jack shit" about US politics & I'm not going to pretend I do by surfing the internet.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFanti
All I will say; If I was a US citizen I'd of voted Trump 1,000 times over before I voted Clinton. I think you would of been at war with someone already if that blood thirsty warmongering bitch had been elected.
[QUOTE=peejaye;1838510
If I was a US citizen I'd of voted Trump 1,000 times over before I voted Clinton. [/QUOTE]
Your boy wants a trade deal so his rich buddies can raid the NHS and transform our public service into a profitable business. Is that what you want?
You're fucking obsessed! The Tories, whom you helped cling to power, are doing that anyway! Shameful cunts!
I said it before, I might end up saying it again, but if I'm a compleat moron, the world will hardly notice. Hillary would have been the best prepared President in all of history, on deck since 1992, Secretary of State, Senator, her rolodex is a who's who of the Democratic Party. Her choices for cabinet positions and appointees would have been twenty years in the making. And she had an eight year head start with Obama. As bad as Trump seems, it's worse.
When Trump thinks ahead, he must be thinking about a nice retirement making license plates.
We’re close to war with the orange moron in office...nuclear war at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by peejaye
Aaaahh..You're a Clinton fan, well that's explained. I'm afraid the media & experts here. for what it's worth, didn't agree with you. They said, & I agreed, you had two fucking awful candidates, it was a case of which one voters hated the least!
With whom exactly? Enlighten me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben in LA
Guys; Listen to someone who knows, I've got the cunting scars to prove it;
You DON'T want fucking bitches running your country! Believe me! :hide-1:
I would slow down with that statement if I was you. I get the sense that there are people in the Trump administration who are just looking for a reason to go to war with Iran.Quote:
Originally Posted by peejaye
When I think about the cabinet Clinton would have picked, the Judges, ...........after 8 years of Obama you would see a team 20 years in the making, Clinton really would have been the best prepared President ever.... 8 years in the White House, State Senator, State Department, what a preparation, what a rolodex. And while millions would complain and condemn, the World would see what "as good as it gets" looks like.
Instead we get a guy who is the worst prepared President in History.
Valid point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
But I would still debate that had the DNC and Sally Wasserman not interfered with the primaries, Sanders could have won the nomination - not Hillary.
And it's my opinion (yes everyone has one) that Sanders stood a better chance of defeating Trump than Hillary.
I think Joe Biden would have been the better President.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttslinger
Oh and speaking of Biden....Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFanti
Had he ran, I also believe he would have defeated Trump also......
You don't seem to have read that article because it doesn't say what you claim it says. The court made no finding on whether the DNC had actually rigged the primaries. The basis for the decision to dismiss the case was that even if the allegation was assumed to be true, the DNC would have had the legal right to choose their preferred candidate.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFanti
This article seems to provide a better discussion of what happened.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.e4d712c0ad14
Your complete lack of self-awareness is hilarious. According to Wikipedia "a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion."Quote:
Originally Posted by peejaye
Six posts from you in this thread in the past day alone, and none of them relate to the issue that MrFanti raised. But if you enjoy being a laughing stock then keep going.
The court basically decided that the allegations weren't true.Quote:
Originally Posted by filghy2
The court also said O.J. Simpson was innocent too..
Considering how much Legal power (read $$$) Simpson and the Clintons held/hold, of course they're going to be deemed innocent...
No, the reported judgement did not say that either. But in any case, you were the one who offered it as your sole piece of evidence that the primaries were rigged! Shall we take it that you have no evidence then?Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFanti