RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened"

RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Edwird -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/4/2017 2:39:07 AM)
The Washington Post and the NY Times can present as being all agog all they want, but the Reagan dicksuckers can't expect any thinking person to miss out on the fact that those fuckwits have been pushing this all along. All the media know how to do is to repeatedly say "Oh! look at this!

heavyblinker -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/4/2017 4:56:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker And wow, I hadn't seen this, but it's official: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/10/22/sanders-keeps-em-guessing-bernie-to-seek-senate-reelection-as-independent-amid-2020-talk.html Wow, what a surprise. Why didn't the DNC want him as their nominee? He's so dedicated! Do you blame him? The DNC and Hillary fucked him over and rigged the Democratic nomination to Hillary. He may not have won the nomination without it being rigged, but he also may have. There's no way to prove it one way or the other. Why does it surprise you that he's not going to play ball with the same group that fucked him over before? Plus, his age may be playing a part in his decision to run or not. If he has his full faculties (and I'm not insinuating he does or doesn't), wouldn't you think that just might be something he's going to wait and see how he ages over the next year or so? Trump was 70 at his inauguration (oldest President at the start of a Presidency ever; Reagan, technically was the oldest person to be inaugurated, being almost 74 at his re-election inauguration). If Bernie wins in 2020, he'll be 79 at his inauguration. Frankly, I'm amazed that people like Bernie and Ron Paul are as active and engaged as they are at their ages (Ron Paul retired at the age of 77, but is still politically active). He was the one who chose not to follow through with participation in the joint fundraising program, despite having agreed to do so. He fucked himself over. He was also never a Democrat to begin with... he was just pretending to be one because nobody votes for Independents.

JVoV -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/4/2017 11:45:42 AM)
FR - because I'm still lmao [image]http://www.collarspace.com/photos/2203616p02.jpg[/image]

DaddySatyr -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/4/2017 12:32:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV FR - because I'm still lmao [image]http://www.collarspace.com/photos/2203616p02.jpg[/image] Did she actually post that or did someone doctor it?

JVoV -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/4/2017 12:35:31 PM)
Doctored, I'm sure. But I'm not following her on Twitter.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/4/2017 9:47:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker He was the one who chose not to follow through with participation in the joint fundraising program, despite having agreed to do so. He fucked himself over. He was also never a Democrat to begin with... he was just pretending to be one because nobody votes for Independents. Really? So, rather than allowing the two candidates to debate each other on a level playing field, because Hillary paid to keep the DNC afloat, she gets the playing field tilted towards her? The nomination race was rigged heavily in her favor. Why have a race at all if it's not going to be a fair one? Just tell Bernie to take some Pepto when he feels the Bern and let her run, right? Nothing wrong with that at all, is there? [8\|]

heavyblinker -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 2:05:55 AM)
No, as I said, it happened because Bernie DIDN'T try to keep the DNC afloat... or support any Democratic candidates he didn't think were up to his standards, which were many. He would have had more influence in the party if he had been willing to help them financially, lived up to his PROMISE or at least not openly rebelled against the party's identity. He could have turned things around at any moment, but chose not to. At the time, there was no way to know if he would do this, so yes... they let him run.

Edwird -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 3:27:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri So, rather than allowing the two candidates to debate each other on a level playing field Oh, STOP!

BoscoX -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 4:39:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker No, as I said, it happened because Bernie DIDN'T try to keep the DNC afloat... or support any Democratic candidates he didn't think were up to his standards, which were many. He would have had more influence in the party if he had been willing to help them financially, lived up to his PROMISE or at least not openly rebelled against the party's identity. He could have turned things around at any moment, but chose not to. At the time, there was no way to know if he would do this, so yes... they let him run. Yeah, how dare a socialist try to stand up against the oligarchs running the Democrat party It's okay, they paid Crazy Uncle Bernie off in the end, he has his mansions with their massive carbon footprints and his fat wads of cash and everything else that he was after He's all smiles these days

heavyblinker -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 4:48:16 AM)
The issue isn't whether or not he's a socialist, the issue is that he didn't help the party. FFS even socialists do whatever they can to raise money for their socialist party. Bernie should have run as an independent from the very beginning.

BoscoX -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 4:54:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker The issue isn't whether or not he's a socialist, the issue is that he didn't help the party. FFS even socialists do whatever they can to raise money for their socialist party. Bernie should have run as an independent from the very beginning. And in the end, even though your prize hag had all of her donations from mother Russia and Saudi Arabia in a row she still lost

heavyblinker -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 5:13:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoscoX quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker The issue isn't whether or not he's a socialist, the issue is that he didn't help the party. FFS even socialists do whatever they can to raise money for their socialist party. Bernie should have run as an independent from the very beginning. And in the end, even though your prize hag had all of her donations from mother Russia and Saudi Arabia in a row she still lost Way to stay on topic, syrup-sucker.

BoscoX -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 5:48:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker quote: ORIGINAL: BoscoX quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker The issue isn't whether or not he's a socialist, the issue is that he didn't help the party. FFS even socialists do whatever they can to raise money for their socialist party. Bernie should have run as an independent from the very beginning. And in the end, even though your prize hag had all of her donations from mother Russia and Saudi Arabia in a row she still lost Way to stay on topic, syrup-sucker. The very best "debate" leftist trash ever has to offer [;)] Do you really believe the post I replied to was about Donna Brazile throwing your precuious precious pussyhat queen and your affirmative action president under the bus

JVoV -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 6:34:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker The issue isn't whether or not he's a socialist, the issue is that he didn't help the party. FFS even socialists do whatever they can to raise money for their socialist party. Bernie should have run as an independent from the very beginning. Remember, it was primary season for the other campaigns too, Democrats competing with one another. Once the primaries we're over, Bernie's campaign raised money for progressive Democrats that shared his platform. To the point you'd think the Loch Ness Monsta hacked the campaign. Every other day, it was an email saying "I'ma need about tree fiddy".

heavyblinker -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 7:05:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoscoX The very best "debate" leftist trash ever has to offer [;)] Do you really believe the post I replied to was about Donna Brazile throwing your precuious precious pussyhat queen and your affirmative action president under the bus You ignore all valid debate. You do this because you are afraid of it, are incapable of participating in it, and it doesn't allow you to toss ignorant insults around. But I assure you, it exists. Usually it exists up until the point you enter the thread.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 9:39:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker No, as I said, it happened because Bernie DIDN'T try to keep the DNC afloat... or support any Democratic candidates he didn't think were up to his standards, which were many. He would have had more influence in the party if he had been willing to help them financially, lived up to his PROMISE or at least not openly rebelled against the party's identity. He could have turned things around at any moment, but chose not to. At the time, there was no way to know if he would do this, so yes... they let him run. Is it up to a Presidential candidate to raise money for other candidates? Hillary only did so to get control of the DNC. FFS, are you too blind to see that, or are you willfully ignoring it? That still does not make it okay for the DNC to do as much as it can to gift wrap the nomination for her.

Musicmystery -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 9:53:41 AM)
Right or wrong, winning support by raising money for others is common practice. A greater concern for me is the circumvention of the democratic process.

heavyblinker -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 10:05:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker No, as I said, it happened because Bernie DIDN'T try to keep the DNC afloat... or support any Democratic candidates he didn't think were up to his standards, which were many. He would have had more influence in the party if he had been willing to help them financially, lived up to his PROMISE or at least not openly rebelled against the party's identity. He could have turned things around at any moment, but chose not to. At the time, there was no way to know if he would do this, so yes... they let him run. Is it up to a Presidential candidate to raise money for other candidates? Hillary only did so to get control of the DNC. FFS, are you too blind to see that, or are you willfully ignoring it? That still does not make it okay for the DNC to do as much as it can to gift wrap the nomination for her. FFS you don't understand the point I am making. She did it because it was offered to her. It was offered to Bernie as well, but he refused. That is why it wasn't equal. He could have said YES, but he DIDN'T. If there had been a third candidate, and that candidate had taken the deal, then Hillary wouldn't have had such a big advantage. The advantage would have been shared between her and the third candidate. But instead it was the Democrat versus the nutjob outsider who doesn't care about the party he wanted to lead, and told everyone he would give them $100,000 and a car if they voted for him. I don't know how to express this in simpler terms. BERNIE REFUSED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE JOINT FUNDRAISING PROGRAM. HE REFUSED TO HELP THE PARTY AS A WHOLE AND SIMPLY SUPPORTED THE CANDIDATES HE PERSONALLY AGREED WITH. There are seriously Sanders supporters out there who think that because Bernie refused to help the DNC with their debts, Hillary should have done the same. She should have let the party go bankrupt, ruined the 2016 election campaign, sabotaged the down ballot candidates... and for what? Principles? Oh, and then Bernie finally gave in and signed the same deal, but Hillary had a huge lead on him by that time: https://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/bernie-sanders-2016-fundraising-dnc-215559 He was unsuccessful, stopped trying, realized he was going to lose, and then like the big baby he is, started screaming about Hillary being corrupt. FFS even Trump didn't stoop to the level of attacking the GOP (or at least, didn't make it a focus), but Bernie attacked the DNC while he was still campaigning. https://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/04/sanders-clinton-dnc-campaign-finance-laws-222102 I get that populist independents are the solution to all of America's woes (Trump is obviously doing wonders to bring everyone together and improve America's standing globally), but could you just get off of that for a few moments and stop pretending this is all a big good vs. evil battle? Bernie is not a fucking saint, not a fucking messiah... he is a politician, and he is an outsider. Hillary had an advantage and didn't give it up because she didn't have to. Bernie let her have it because it 'wasn't right', finally realized it was hurting him, couldn't turn it around in time, and then started whining about it in the press. Not only did he attack Hillary, he also undermined the entire party he was trying to lead! He HELPED TRUMP WIN. He was never ever ever going to win the nomination, and it isn't some neoliberal conspiracy... he's just that much of an idiot.

Marini -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 10:45:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Right or wrong, winning support by raising money for others is common practice. A greater concern for me is the circumvention of the democratic process. [sm=applause.gif] Thank you for making and getting an important "point".

heavyblinker -> RE: Donna Brazille: "What REALLY Happened" (11/5/2017 10:57:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Right or wrong, winning support by raising money for others is common practice. A greater concern for me is the circumvention of the democratic process. You mean the process that gave us Trump? It's overrated.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625