Of course, that ‘worst candidate’ was running the party holding the primaries at the time. But I’m sure that’s just a coincidence. After all, it’s not like there is any advantage in runnng the party, right?
Of course, that ‘worst candidate’ was running the party holding the primaries at the time. But I’m sure that’s just a coincidence. After all, it’s not like there is any advantage in runnng the party, right?You were denied the opportunity to vote for him because he lost the primary by millions of votes.
I always find it funny that Sanders supporters are so sure he could have beaten Trump and that Clinton was the ‘worst candidate in history’. Guess what? Sanders got crushed by that ‘worst candidate’.
Of course, that ‘worst candidate’ was running the party holding the primaries at the time. But I’m sure that’s just a coincidence. After all, it’s not like there is any advantage in runnng the party, right?
I like Sanders more than I like most politicians (which is to say not a lot) but isn’t it time to let it go? We had two horrible choices this time around (well, except for those like me who voted for the pothead) but even notwithstanding Clinton and DNC malfeasance, Sanders made a pretty good showing considering that he was running against an icon in a party he had personally and publicly rejected. His campaign always was a horse so dark as to cause an eclipse, and while personally I agree that he would have made a stronger general election candidate than did Clinton, I don’t see 2016 America electing a self-proclaimed socialist. He might well have lost even worse. In any case, it is no longer relevant to anything.No, losing to Clinton by 50 points doesn't suggest that he didn't appeal to them, it suggests that they preferred her to him. I think that there's a lot of possible reasons that they might have preferred her to him, but I don't think there's any plausible reason that would suggest weakness among those voters in a GE.
The bottom line is that Sanders is among the most appealing politicians to non-white voters, so any suggestion of a weakness there is unfounded.
No malfeasance you are capable of seeing.Yes, unifying the party behind you is an advantage in the primary election. It is also an advantage in the general election, by the way. Are you claiming there was some malfeasance that would have otherwise delivered the election to Sanders? If not, you’re basically saying his inability to marshal political support was the problem... making him a bad candidate.
I feel like you often don’t think things through. Trust me, it’s time well spent.
Perhaps you don’t realize that was exactly the case with Hillary? Want to see the SecState? Hmm, don’t see you on our donor list . . .I heard this the other morning, but it also seems to be the case that his properties in and around DC have seen heavy traffic and seem to be booked at a very high rate. I missed numbers or specifics, but the dude reporting this suggested that his properties in DC might now be compensating for heavy losses everywhere else.
Now, obviously, this creates a huge problem for Trump and his family, because this is some serious influence-peddling. People well know that all it takes to get the fucker to listen to you is to shove some money his way. And these criminals in the trump family are just pathetically bad at hiding it.
No malfeasance you are capable of seeing.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/11/democrast-anti-clinton-bias-fbi-290475
Democrats seek alleged evidence of anti-Clinton 'bias' at the FBI
Amid GOP attacks on the bureau, House Democrats say the FBI's real prejudice was against their party's 2016 presidential nominee.
It's about time. They're going to look into the BS that True Pundit peddled that led to Comey letter. Many actors in this besides possible active FBI/retired FBI agents that include: Prince, Ghouliani, possibly Pirro et al.
Mmmmm... That's duh-version, right? And an opening for Werepossum's usual innuendo, of course.
It's an interesting topic, however, & worthy of its own thread...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...als-wife-nellie-ohr-hired-to-probe-trump.html
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fbi-officials-said-clinton-win-race-white-house-044941646.html
No wonder Hillary and others were not charged with several crimes including working with Russian agents to influence the 2016 election. I guess selling out to Russia was better than Trump being president.
And the double down on Duh-version. It's easy to start a new thread.
The truth is the truth, no matter who finds it. That's apparently a big problem for TrumpCo. If it weren't that way they wouldn't be so desperate to discredit honest investigation by people of proven integrity. Both the DoJ and Mueller are apparently doing their best to remove any hint of bias. Yet you manage to represent that as bias in a way that only a right wing conspiracy theorist could love.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...als-wife-nellie-ohr-hired-to-probe-trump.html
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fbi-officials-said-clinton-win-race-white-house-044941646.html
No wonder Hillary and others were not charged with several crimes including working with Russian agents to influence the 2016 election. I guess selling out to Russia was better than Trump being president.
Is that like closing the barn door back after the horses have gotten out? Starting to look more and more everyday that top DOJ officials did everything they could to prevent Hillary and several other Dems from facing charges and facilitating the "Trump colluded with the Russians" story.
I guess in Libtard land facts = right wing conspiracy.
Funny how to gloss over the facts that have emerged the last few weeks about members of Mueller's team and top DOJ officials.So when will the trial happen and when will they be locked up? I keep hearing this but your guys never do anything about it.
So what? Innuendo is not fact other than for conspiracy theory believers. It's just a triple down on duh-version.
How does it feel to be on the same side of the election as Russian state media, A Russian advertising campaign, an army of propaganda trolls, bots & hackers deployed to help trump get elected? That demonstrably happened. Do you somehow believe that they want to MAGA?
How does it feel to help fund Russian agents that provided a FAKE dossier of information used as proof of Trump's collusion with Russia? We know that Hillary, the DNC and possible members of Obama's DOJ did that. We have no proof that Trump worked with the Russians to influence the election. Why didn't several close associates of Clinton get charged with lying to the same FBI agent that Flynn lied to? Those are the facts and not some innuendo and right wing conspiracy. This isn't one of your flat earther meetings.
Can't face the truth, huh? I made no claim of collusion. I pointed out what the Russians did on Trump's behalf. It's demonstrable fact. They endeavored mightily to get him elected. The notion that they intended to do America any good is absurd. They love Trump for his divisiveness & basic incompetence. They love what he does to the minds of all too many Americans like yourself. The more screwed up this country gets the more they like it.
The rest of what you offer is just an attempt to justify your state of denial.
Seems like your mind is made up and so I should stop confusing you with facts. They seem to provide Clinton with a lot of money and information while working on Trump's behalf. Clinton was the Russian's pick because she and several high ranking democrats have been compromised.
Funny how to gloss over the facts that have emerged the last few weeks about members of Mueller's team and top DOJ officials.
Funny how it's perpetual innuendo from you but no actions. Your guys control every aspect of Government & Justice yet they still can't lock anyone up. What does that say to you?
Seems like your mind is made up and so I should stop confusing you with facts. They seem to provide Clinton with a lot of money and information while working on Trump's behalf. Clinton was the Russian's pick because she and several high ranking democrats have been compromised.
Even were we in your therapist's office with dolls, you'd only see a string of unrelated coincidences, as always.By all means explain it to me.
How is the dossier fake if many of the facts of the dossier have been confirmed during this investigation?How does it feel to help fund Russian agents that provided a FAKE dossier of information used as proof of Trump's collusion with Russia? We know that Hillary, the DNC and possible members of Obama's DOJ did that. We have no proof that Trump worked with the Russians to influence the election. Why didn't several close associates of Clinton get charged with lying to the same FBI agent that Flynn lied to? Those are the facts and not some innuendo and right wing conspiracy. This isn't one of your flat earther meetings.
Even were we in your therapist's office with dolls, you'd only see a string of unrelated coincidences, as always.
Seems like your mind is made up and so I should stop confusing you with facts. They seem to provide Clinton with a lot of money and information while working on Trump's behalf. Clinton was the Russian's pick because she and several high ranking democrats have been compromised.