NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
No she hasn't!Hillary Clinches!
But I'm glad they picked such a smug expression for that photo.
No she hasn't!Hillary Clinches!
Bernie is not upset about this.. This just feeds the narrative that it's a rigged system and will likely invigorate his voters, while in no way shape or form will it help HRC get votes tomorrow.Hillary's people are very upset about this. They think it will suppress the vote in California. Bernie's people are upset too- claiming this is proof of the system being rigged.
Nobody's happy (except me!)
I'm guessing the superdelegates were waiting for something - who knows what. It fell into place after PR had its vote. I wonder if this signifies a fear Hillary might lose CA... not sure.Hillary's people are very upset about this. They think it will suppress the vote in California. Bernie's people are upset too- claiming this is proof of the system being rigged.
Nobody's happy (except me!)
But the Bernie votes still matterOn the minus side, once again, for the zillionth time, our vote here means nothing.![]()
No she hasn't!But- history has been made. A woman has received the nomination for the Presidency from one of the major two political parties.
You're arguing against yourself again.On the minus side, once again, for the zillionth time, our vote here means nothing.![]()
Hillary's people are very upset about this. They think it will suppress the vote in California. Bernie's people are upset too- claiming this is proof of the system being rigged.
Nobody's happy (except me!)
Thanks.If he's got transactional immunity, he can be compelled to testify. If he's got use and derivative use immunity, it's forum and state dependent. Those are the basics. But absent seeing the agreement itself, it's hard to know more.
I hope they somehow find the strength to carry on.Hillary's people are very upset about this.
Didn't I read that you were personally to be blamed for the nominee being Hillary?On the minus side, once again, for the zillionth time, our vote here means nothing.![]()
The headlines are contradicting you, sir.No she hasn't!
Meh, 3 tomato cans and Bernie. Basically they cleared the field for her then the party worked against the one who rebelled. Still, congrats are in order.But- history has been made. A woman has received the nomination for the Presidency from one of the major two political parties.
I'm guessing DWS/DNC drove this.Wow. Really would have assumed that Clinton would have kept the remaining supers on lock down until tomorrow night once she officially wins popular vote and pledged delegates.
That said, truly tremendous achievement.
It wasn't her. It was the news media. She had no control over the Supers, despite what some people here think.Wow. Really would have assumed that Clinton would have kept the remaining supers on lock down until tomorrow night once she officially wins popular vote and pledged delegates.
That said, truly tremendous achievement.
So, @SaintsInDome2006 what is tomorrow's deadline? Is it for Pags to produce his immunity agreement to Judge Sullivan?
That would be quite a compliment but, no, I had nothing to do with it.Didn't I read that you were personally to be blamed for the nominee being Hillary?
She had the party in her back pocket and couldn't close the deal until June. Safe to say this was a colossal failure on her part.No it isn't!
Considering she had the party in her back pocket in 2008 and lost in June, I think it was a pretty big win. Although I think Obama was an infinitely better candidate than Sanders.She had the party in her back pocket and couldn't close the deal until June. Safe to say this was a colossal failure on her part.
That's more a tribute to Bernie than anything else. He caught the attention of young people in a way few candidates have in recent years. His movement will be a force for the future.She had the party in her back pocket and couldn't close the deal until June. Safe to say this was a colossal failure on her part.
Oh, it's not even a question. Hillary had no business struggling against this guy, not with all the institutional advantages, presumption that she was owed the nomination, this was "her time," etc. Whenever we decide she clinches, whether it's today, tomorrow, or at the convention, this primary exposed her as a very weak candidate with historically abysmal favorability ratings. She will win (won) the nomination despite herself. And, she weakened the (D) party in the process. This is not a day to celebrate. She is a dumpster fire.Considering she had the party in her back pocket in 2008 and lost in June, I think it was a pretty big win. Although I think Obama was an infinitely better candidate than Sanders.
Thanks Cobalt - that's very kind of you and I appreciate you trying to make me feel better. This is a sad day for democracy. Just leave me to my pain.She had the party in her back pocket and couldn't close the deal until June. Safe to say this was a colossal failure on her part.
Okay, winning the Democratic nomination for president and entering the election as a heavy favorite is losing.Oh, it's not even a question. Hillary had no business struggling against this guy, not with all the institutional advantages, presumption that she was owed the nomination, this was "her time," etc. Whenever we decide she clinches, whether it's today, tomorrow, or at the convention, this primary exposed her as a very weak candidate with historically abysmal favorability ratings. She will win (won) the nomination despite herself. And, she weakened the (D) party in the process. This is not a day to celebrate. She is a dumpster fire.
No. That's a cute narrative, but the Bernie phenomenon was born from a #NeverHillary bloc of voters. He doesn't exist without her.That's more a tribute to Bernie than anything else. He caught the attention of young people in a way few candidates have in recent years. His movement will be a force for the future.
If anything Bernie was a failure at locking up more support outside of his core base.
He did a good job of riling up angry white men, and liberals who identify as independents and that haven't voted before. That was his base. He wasn't able to draw support from the latino or black communities, or Obama democrats like me that think the country is going in the right direction and doesn't think the sky is falling.![]()
Bernie did a good job of bringing in indies and new voters.
July 25. You'll have your day, assuming Hillary's not indicted. But, that day isn't today. It's not tomorrow. Mathematically, she doesn't earn anything until July 25th at the earIiest.I assume none of you felt comfortable calling Obama the D nominee until the convention in 2008 correct?
Okay, could you present a case to prospective SDs on Sanders behalf that wouldn't completely violate the will of the voter? No matter how you slice it, he has lostAnyway, the DNC has said repeatedly not to count presumed votes of SDs. So, until Hillary reaches the threshold necessary, it's premature to suggest she's won anything.
Probably. But, nobody has clinched, and it's not official. One very good case would be, "The DOJ just indicted Hillary."Okay, could you present a case to prospective SDs on Sanders behalf that wouldn't completely violate the will of the voter? No matter how you slice it, he has lost
Spoiler: It ain't happening. The longer the email stuff goes on the more the American public will begin to see it as the witch hunt that it is.Probably. But, nobody has clinched, and it's not official. One very good case would be, "The DOJ just indicted Hillary."
The longer this goes, the worse it is for Hillary. Your analysis also suggests you're confused by how FBI investigations work and the #### they don't give about public opinion.Spoiler: It ain't happening. The longer the email stuff goes on the more the American public will begin to see it as the witch hunt that it is.
It's been going on for well over a year now and it's only gaining steam. And this "witch hunt" was started by progressive outlets, not the VRC Hillary supporters are so fond of throwing out there.Spoiler: It ain't happening. The longer the email stuff goes on the more the American public will begin to see it as the witch hunt that it is.
Case for Clinton: more votes, more pledged delegates, more pledged delegates if it were a winner take all, more superdelegates, more superdelegates even if they had to vote as their district voted, more states won
Case for Sanders: better rallies
And therefore...?@Cobalt 27 I went and checked out the Obama 2008 thread and I just couldn't find the part where you were warning everyone that Obama is not the nominee until the convention.
I did see the delegate countdown including supers provided by @adonis (side note where the hell did this guy go?) And lots of dancing pickles from various board members after Montana and south Dakota voted and Obama clinched though.
It's been going on for over a year and what do we have? A convoluted quagmire that has cost taxpayers millions, that will do nothing to promote the United States interest or net a criminal case.It's been going on for well over a year now and it's only gaining steam. And this "witch hunt" was started by progressive outlets, not the VRC Hillary supporters are so fond of throwing out there.
Wow. You didn't read the OIG report, nor have you read the FBI findings. Patience, grasshopper.It's been going on for over a year and what do we have? A convoluted quagmire that has cost taxpayers millions, that will do nothing to promote the United States interest or net a criminal case.
Definition of a witch hunt IMO
We have nothing but opinions on grey areas, link up something criminal.Wow. You didn't read the OIG report, nor have you read the FBI findings. Patience, grasshopper.
Sure.We have nothing but opinions on grey areas, link up something criminal.
Uhm...no. Convoluted in your eyes because you're an HRC supporter - but that's to be expected of her sycophants. However, The State Dept. IG report was very clear that HRC broke the law - there is no dispute about that. The debate is literally over on that issue. Now it's just a matter of the FBI weighing in.It's been going on for over a year and what do we have? A convoluted quagmire that has cost taxpayers millions, that will do nothing to promote the United States interest or net a criminal case.
Definition of a witch hunt IMO
A highly biased blog (lol at that homepage) that doesn't specifically list a criminal charge but speculating on a mabye violation of the FRA, which cited IG's report which included long running and widespread compliance issues and isn't even criminal. A lot of people want to take her down, and there are only so many straws left to grasp at.