Thread: 2016 Democratic US Presidential Candidates

Originally Posted by billy the kid

Obama has endorsed Clinton wtf going on now.

I would consider that a President's obligation so as to not unduly influence the primaries in his party. Once the party's over (pun intended) throwing his weight fully and sincerely behind his party's candidate, will be more influential closer to the convention than any other time.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Snubby will be jumping up and down with glee...

Prolly smash up his living room again.

A quiet burst of activity from the Sanders campaign seems to all but guarantee that Sanders will run as an independent this election cycle. All across the country Sanders’ core infrastructure of volunteers and paid staff are mobilizing to collect signatures and perform necessary paperwork to get him on the general election ballots in the states.

Sanders Campaign Prepares For Run As An Independent

looks like sanders has read 'the art of the deal'

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Snubby will be jumping up and down with glee...

Prolly smash up his living room again.

A quiet burst of activity from the Sanders campaign seems to all but guarantee that Sanders will run as an independent this election cycle. All across the country Sanders’ core infrastructure of volunteers and paid staff are mobilizing to collect signatures and perform necessary paperwork to get him on the general election ballots in the states.

Sanders Campaign Prepares For Run As An Independent

Dubious source

Hillary and her cronies stole it, plain and simple.

How California is being stolen
from Sanders right now


Tuesday, June 7, 2016
Special bulletin from Greg Palast
[Los Angeles] It's not some grand conspiracy, but it's grand theft nonetheless. Sen. Bernie Sanders’ voters will lose their ballots, their rights, by the tens of thousands.

The steal is baked into the way California handles No Party Preference –"NPP" voters –what we know as "independents."
There are a mind-blowing 4.2 million voters in California registered NPP – and they share a love for sunshine and Bernie Sanders. According to the reliable Golden State poll, among NPP voters, Sen. Sanders whoops Sec. Hillary Clinton by a stunning 40 percentage points.

On the other team, registered Democrats prefer Clinton by a YUGE 30 points. NPP's can vote in the Democratic primary, so, the California primary comes down to a fight between D's and NPP's. And there's the rub. In some counties like Los Angeles, it's not easy for an NPP to claim their right vote in the Democratic primary – and in other counties, nearly impossible.
Example: In Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, if you don’t say the magic words, “I want a Democratic crossover ballot,” you are automatically given a ballot without the presidential race. And ready for this, if an NPP voter asks the poll worker, “How do I get to vote in the Democratic party primary, they are instructed to say that, “NPP voters can’t get Democratic ballots.” They are ordered not to breathe a word that the voter can get a “crossover” ballot that includes the presidential race.
I’m not kidding. This is from the official Election Officer Training Manual page 49:
"A No Party Preference voter will need to request a crossover ballot from the Roster Index Officer. (Do not offer them a crossover ballot if they do not ask)."
They’re not kidding. Poll worker Jeff Lewis filed a description of the training in an official declaration to a federal court:
Someone raised their hand and asked a follow-up question: ‘So, what if someone gets a nonpartisan ballot, notices it doesn't have the presidential candidates on it, and asks you where they are?’ The answer poll workers are instructed to give: ‘Sorry, NPP ballots don't have presidential candidates on them.’ That's correct: even when people ask questions of that nature, obviously intending to vote with a party.
This affidavit, and several even more horrifying, come from Election Justice USA, a non-partisan watchdog, hoping to get injunctions to stop this nonsense. [Hear my talk with the group’s spokesman, Paul Thomas, on a special edition of the The Best Democracy Money Can Buy: Elections Crime Bulletin, which I host with Dennis Bernstein on the Pacifica Radio Network.]
Let me throw in another complication. Nearly half of Californians vote by mail, ballots sent to your home automatically. Most NPP voters don’t realize that, to vote in the Democratic primary today, they must bring in their NPP ballot with the envelope, and say these magic words: “I want to surrender my ballot in return for a Democratic ‘crossover’ ballot.”
Got that memorized? Because if you don’t, if you say the wrong syllables, in some counties, you will be denied a Democratic presidential ballot.
Bruce C. Carter is losing his mind over this. I interviewed Carter who arrived in his Black Men for Bernie bus, decorated with a giant image of Bernie’s arrest while demonstrating for civil rights. Carter warns that, If an NPP voter doesn’t say they are “surrendering” their NPP ballot, the clerk can take it and count it, blank, instead of giving the voter a new one.

It gets far worse. There are simply not enough “crossover” ballots printed. If they run out of ballots, Carter his telling voters to demand a recorded vocal vote using the voice recorders set up for the disabled.
Unfortunately, the games hardly end there. Election Justice filed still more declarations with the courts of poll workers being told to give NPP voters “provisional” ballots even if they say the magic words, “I want a crossover Democratic ballot.” As I’ve previously reported, provisional ballots are “placebo” ballots that let you feel like you’ve voted, but you haven’t. Provisional ballots are generally discarded.
Minutes ago I got a note from NPP voter Olga Martinez in Contra Costa County where she was told she must take a “provisional” ballot. She heard our reports and demanded the Democratic ballot and got it. ML King told us, you don’t get your rights unless you demand them.
And this note just came in minutes ago from my KPFK co-host, Cary Harrison.
“I am in West Hollywood and was just denied voting twice! I’m NPP. I do not even appear on the voting rolls nor does my STREET on the voting rolls. Voting suppression is in full swing.”
Cary just called. He drove to a new precinct as directed: and was again denied a ballot.
And dig this: Some counties are demanding that some of the first-time voters show official voter ID—as if California is now New Alabama. New voters are, in the main, the young Sanders supporters who are now finding out what it’s like to be treated as if they’ve turned Black.
There is no evidence this ‘Grand Theft Voto’ is part of a massive scheme by Hillary supporters to swipe the election. The voting system is run mostly by the Democratic Party which is totally in Hillary’s pocket. So while the establishment party officials know of the absurd impediments to voting, they see no reason to solve these problems because it doesn’t harm “their” voters.
Most of this procedural nonsense, like the need to surrender an NPP ballot with an envelope and request a “crossover” ballot – well, frankly, Bernie’s campaign has known about that all year.
The Sanders campaign was spending time talking policy at giant rallies instead of educating their voters on how to vote. In the rat maze called the American voting system, the painfully amateur Sanders campaign never provided a vote-guiding map.
I don’t believe Clinton booster Governor Jerry Brown intended to play Bull Connor. Nevertheless, Brown and the Democratic establishment’s mad hunger to see their candidate wrap up the nomination, has led them to turn a blind eye to a catastrophe for our democracy.

Greg Palast | Investigative Reporter

With only Washington DC left, Bernie has no chance to win a majority of pledge votes. The super delegate issue is a nonissue now. Bernie will attempt to gain support from super delegates at the convention but no way will he succeed given Clinton has majority of pledged delegates and popular vote. At this point Bernie needs to inject some of his platform points into the Democratic platform and work to have his supporters to get out the vote to defeat Trump and GOP Congressional candidates.

Originally Posted by pickel

Hillary and her cronies stole it, plain and simple.

How California is being stolen
from Sanders right now


Tuesday, June 7, 2016
Special bulletin from Greg Palast
[Los Angeles] It's not some grand conspiracy, but it's grand theft nonetheless. Sen. Bernie Sanders’ voters will lose their ballots, their rights, by the tens of thousands.

The steal is baked into the way California handles No Party Preference –"NPP" voters –what we know as "independents."
There are a mind-blowing 4.2 million voters in California registered NPP – and they share a love for sunshine and Bernie Sanders. According to the reliable Golden State poll, among NPP voters, Sen. Sanders whoops Sec. Hillary Clinton by a stunning 40 percentage points.

On the other team, registered Democrats prefer Clinton by a YUGE 30 points. NPP's can vote in the Democratic primary, so, the California primary comes down to a fight between D's and NPP's. And there's the rub. In some counties like Los Angeles, it's not easy for an NPP to claim their right vote in the Democratic primary – and in other counties, nearly impossible.
Example: In Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, if you don’t say the magic words, “I want a Democratic crossover ballot,” you are automatically given a ballot without the presidential race. And ready for this, if an NPP voter asks the poll worker, “How do I get to vote in the Democratic party primary, they are instructed to say that, “NPP voters can’t get Democratic ballots.” They are ordered not to breathe a word that the voter can get a “crossover” ballot that includes the presidential race.
I’m not kidding. This is from the official Election Officer Training Manual page 49:
"A No Party Preference voter will need to request a crossover ballot from the Roster Index Officer. (Do not offer them a crossover ballot if they do not ask)."
They’re not kidding. Poll worker Jeff Lewis filed a description of the training in an official declaration to a federal court:
Someone raised their hand and asked a follow-up question: ‘So, what if someone gets a nonpartisan ballot, notices it doesn't have the presidential candidates on it, and asks you where they are?’ The answer poll workers are instructed to give: ‘Sorry, NPP ballots don't have presidential candidates on them.’ That's correct: even when people ask questions of that nature, obviously intending to vote with a party.
This affidavit, and several even more horrifying, come from Election Justice USA, a non-partisan watchdog, hoping to get injunctions to stop this nonsense. [Hear my talk with the group’s spokesman, Paul Thomas, on a special edition of the The Best Democracy Money Can Buy: Elections Crime Bulletin, which I host with Dennis Bernstein on the Pacifica Radio Network.]
Let me throw in another complication. Nearly half of Californians vote by mail, ballots sent to your home automatically. Most NPP voters don’t realize that, to vote in the Democratic primary today, they must bring in their NPP ballot with the envelope, and say these magic words: “I want to surrender my ballot in return for a Democratic ‘crossover’ ballot.”
Got that memorized? Because if you don’t, if you say the wrong syllables, in some counties, you will be denied a Democratic presidential ballot.
Bruce C. Carter is losing his mind over this. I interviewed Carter who arrived in his Black Men for Bernie bus, decorated with a giant image of Bernie’s arrest while demonstrating for civil rights. Carter warns that, If an NPP voter doesn’t say they are “surrendering” their NPP ballot, the clerk can take it and count it, blank, instead of giving the voter a new one.

It gets far worse. There are simply not enough “crossover” ballots printed. If they run out of ballots, Carter his telling voters to demand a recorded vocal vote using the voice recorders set up for the disabled.
Unfortunately, the games hardly end there. Election Justice filed still more declarations with the courts of poll workers being told to give NPP voters “provisional” ballots even if they say the magic words, “I want a crossover Democratic ballot.” As I’ve previously reported, provisional ballots are “placebo” ballots that let you feel like you’ve voted, but you haven’t. Provisional ballots are generally discarded.
Minutes ago I got a note from NPP voter Olga Martinez in Contra Costa County where she was told she must take a “provisional” ballot. She heard our reports and demanded the Democratic ballot and got it. ML King told us, you don’t get your rights unless you demand them.
And this note just came in minutes ago from my KPFK co-host, Cary Harrison.
“I am in West Hollywood and was just denied voting twice! I’m NPP. I do not even appear on the voting rolls nor does my STREET on the voting rolls. Voting suppression is in full swing.”
Cary just called. He drove to a new precinct as directed: and was again denied a ballot.
And dig this: Some counties are demanding that some of the first-time voters show official voter ID—as if California is now New Alabama. New voters are, in the main, the young Sanders supporters who are now finding out what it’s like to be treated as if they’ve turned Black.
There is no evidence this ‘Grand Theft Voto’ is part of a massive scheme by Hillary supporters to swipe the election. The voting system is run mostly by the Democratic Party which is totally in Hillary’s pocket. So while the establishment party officials know of the absurd impediments to voting, they see no reason to solve these problems because it doesn’t harm “their” voters.
Most of this procedural nonsense, like the need to surrender an NPP ballot with an envelope and request a “crossover” ballot – well, frankly, Bernie’s campaign has known about that all year.
The Sanders campaign was spending time talking policy at giant rallies instead of educating their voters on how to vote. In the rat maze called the American voting system, the painfully amateur Sanders campaign never provided a vote-guiding map.
I don’t believe Clinton booster Governor Jerry Brown intended to play Bull Connor. Nevertheless, Brown and the Democratic establishment’s mad hunger to see their candidate wrap up the nomination, has led them to turn a blind eye to a catastrophe for our democracy.

Greg Palast | Investigative Reporter

Sore loser. Not understanding the rules is a pathetic excuse.

Originally Posted by Norton

At this point Bernie needs to inject some of his platform points into the Democratic platform and work to have his supporters to get out the vote to defeat Trump and GOP Congressional candidates.

Nicely summarised.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by bsnub

^ your happy about this why...?

Because he's not a proper Democrat.

He's been leeching off their platform since he started.

Shows that you have not clue what you are talking about, he is more of a proper democrat than Hillary or Obama could ever be. He is a "new deal democrat" in the vain of FDR, JFK and LBJ. He has more in common with those great presidents than Hillary could ever dream of. Hillary is right of center and is a "new democrat" in the mold of her husband. She is more closely aligned with Reagan era neocons. You may know a little about American politics of today but you know jack shit of its history.

A proper democrat. What a dufus.

Originally Posted by bsnub

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by bsnub

^ your happy about this why...?

Because he's not a proper Democrat.

He's been leeching off their platform since he started.

Shows that you have not clue what you are talking about, he is more of a proper democrat than Hillary or Obama could ever be. He is a "new deal democrat" in the vain of FDR, JFK and LBJ. He has more in common with those great presidents than Hillary could ever dream of. Hillary is right of center and is a "new democrat" in the mold of her husband. She is more closely aligned with Reagan era neocons. You may know a little about American politics of today but you know jack shit of its history.

A proper democrat. What a dufus.

You're being a moron again Snubby.

I said Democrat not democrat.

Clinton is the one who has been doing meaningful fundraising for down-ballot Democrats and Bernie's done fuck all. He only supported three candidates and that was only because he was embarrassed into it and they were supporters.

He's done fuck all for the Democratic Party. He's only interested in his own agenda.

Do some reading you brainwashed slubberdegullion.

It is obvious that Harry, a non American, knows far more about US politics than snubby ever will.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

slubberdegullion

I'm stealing that.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by Cold Pizza

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by Cold Pizza

I'm talking delegates. We know about the popular votes in the US - and - I'm glad we have the electoral system and not a popular vote.

We're talking primaries you twit.

So am I, twit.

Delegates are only allocated in the primaries. That was a primary reference.

The electoral system that I referred is for the general election - you noted the popular vote in the primaries.

I went on to discuss the National elections as well.

So you acknowledge that your oligarchy comment was stupid and Clinton won the popular vote? Milky, you're a retard.

The US has been defined by some as an Oligarchy for some time.

Few deny it.

Add the Supers - and this is the case - and it's even more of an elitist oligarchy:

Pentagon
MIC coporations
Big Pharma
Loggyists
Wall St.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Clinton is the one who has been doing meaningful fundraising for down-ballot Democrats and Bernie's done fuck all.

Move on. You have no clue you idiot. Bernie has a huge down ballot campaign it takes no superpac money unlike any bullshit contribution that Hillary might make. It would do you some good to actually read the links in my previous post you might learn something.

Originally Posted by Cold Pizza

The US has been defined by some as an Oligarchy for some time.

Derp

Originally Posted by bsnub

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Clinton is the one who has been doing meaningful fundraising for down-ballot Democrats and Bernie's done fuck all.

Move on. You have no clue you idiot. Bernie has a huge down ballot campaign it takes no superpac money unlike any bullshit contribution that Hillary might make. It would do you some good to actually read the links in my previous post you might learn something.

You're talking shit Snubby.

Read it and weep big boy.

Like Night and Day: Comparing Bernie Sanders' Down-Ballot Fundraising to That of Hillary Clinton

Trevor LaFauci April 14, 2016
Better late than never, I guess?

That seems to be the growing consensus after Bernie Sanders announced yesterday that he would finally(!) begin to support down-ballot Democratic candidates after failing to do so for the previous ten months. Of course, the timing of this decision couldn't have been more obvious: Sanders has recently faced harsh criticism over his appearance with Rachel Maddow on MSNBC where Sanders responded with a noncommittal "We'll see" as to whether or not he would work to help elect fellow down-ballot progressive candidates who could help him enact his political revolution.

Combine that with Sanders' monumentally disastrous New York Daily News interview as well as his egregious claim that the Pope invited him to speak at a conference at the Vatican which was later proven to be false and Sanders needed something, anything, to get back on the public's, and more specifically, New Yorkers' good graces.

Yet right away there seemed to be something odd about this newfound political charity in which Sanders became engaged. The first oddity was the fundraising method itself. Rather than use the joint fundraising account that Sanders had opened with the DNC for the sole purpose of helping to elect down-ballot candidates,

Sanders opted instead to send out an email to his supporters, asking them to make a special contribution that would go toward three candidates that Sanders had selected to help join him in his movement. That special contribution was being done through a web page paid for by ActBlue which is "not authorized by any candidate or any candidate's committee."

What's odd about this is that it appears, at least initially, that Sanders won't be using any of his existing campaign funds to help the candidates but will instead be relying on an entirely new batch of contributions. For a campaign that has $17 million on hand as well as an already established means for raising funds, it seems strange for the campaign to go out of its way and use a third party vendor while claiming to be supporting these candidates in their upcoming races.

In addition to the means of supporting the candidates, there also arises a question as to why these three candidates in particular were chosen. Being a political junkie, I can tell you right off the bat that I have no idea who Lucy Flores, Zephyr Teachout, and Pramila Jayapal are or what state they are from.

Upon doing some research, it seems that Flores is a candidate for Congress in Nevada's 4th congressional district and will face state senator Ruben Kihuen in the Democratic primary in an effort to replace a Democratic congressman who chose not to seek reelection. Next, it appears that Teachout actually challenged Andrew Cuomo for governor in 2014 and is now is a candidate for Congress in New York's 19th congressional district, a swing district with a retiring Republican congressman.

And lastly, it looks like Jayapal is a candidate for Congress in Washington's 7th district, a liberal district that will have two additional candidates along with Jayapal vying to replace a retiring Democratic congressman.

On the surface, these would appear to be odd choices for Sanders to support. After all, only Teachout is the clear frontrunner as well as the only candidate being from a true swing district. For Flores and Jayapal, it appears that even if they lose, the seats in question will remain blue so Sanders' support doesn't help swing the seat in any meaningful way. Plus, it seems strange for a presidential candidate to intervene in a primary that has yet to be decided. After all, this is the exact reason why President Obama hasn't intervened in the Democratic primary: he wants to remain neutral and let the voters decide.

For Sanders to openly intervene in two yet to be decided races seems particularly unusual, especially when Sanders himself has unquestionably benefited from President Obama's neutrality throughout the primary process.

Why then did Bernie Sanders decide to support these three candidates in particular?

The answer: politics. Sanders' first foray into supporting the Democratic Party was done so in an effort to single out three congressional candidates who have all gone on the record in support of his candidacy. Jayapal has openly supported Sanders since August and recently introduced him at a rally in Seattle ahead of the Washington caucus. Along those same lines, Teachout has been supporting Sanders since December and even contributed an article on The Huffington Post on her reasons in doing so. And Flores went on record supporting Sanders in January ahead of the Nevada caucus. In the eyes of Bernie Sanders, these people are the kinds of candidates he feels could best help enact his political revolution should he be elected president.

But the question for Sanders then becomes what now? He has identified three candidates who support him, so will he continue to fundraise for others who have done the same? Will he specifically target swing districts or simply support whoever has gone on records supporting him? Would he support someone who may have previously supported Hillary Clinton if it means picking up a seat in the House or Senate? And what happens if one of the other Democratic candidates win in Nevada or Washington? Will they feel spurned by Sanders? What motivation would they then have to support a president who openly supported their opponent during their state's democratic primary should they be elected to Congress?

Odds are, Sanders hasn't considered any of this.

So let's then compare Sanders' approach to down-ballot fundraising with Hillary Clinton.

In addition to fundraising for her own political campaign, Clinton created what has become known as the Hillary Victory Fund in August of 2015. The Victory Fund, as it is called, is a joint fundraising committee for Hillary for America, the Democratic National Committee, and 33 state Democratic Party committees and is designed to raise funds for Democratic candidates from the top of the ticket on downwards.

The establishment of this fund was actually seen as unusual, as previous "victory funds" had not been established by presidential candidates until after they had been formally nominated at their party's convention. However, Clinton and the DNC wanted to raise funds early in an effort to identify key races and to also help support already established candidates in their effort to go up against the big money of the Koch Brothers, whom they knew would be targeting select competitive House and Senate races.

With her Victory Fund, Clinton was essentially creating an early political roadmap to retake the Senate and to make gains in the House come the November election.

To do this, the first step was to raise funds and this is where the Victory Fund differs from what Bernie Sanders has chosen to do. First off, Clinton has a link to the Victory Fund on her website so potential donors knows right away that the campaign is involved.

Once funds come in, they are divvied up from top to bottom with Hillary for America getting up to $5,400 (the maximum amount allowable by law with $2,700 going toward the primary and $2,700 going toward the general election). Should an individual choose to give more, the next $33,400 would then go to the Democratic National Committee to be delegated in a way that best fit their needs. Lastly, each addition $10,000 over that amount would then go to one of the 33 state parties, which would decide the best way to spread out those funds. Putting all those potential contributions together, the maximum annual donation an individual could give would be $356,100. In addition to individuals, PACs are also allowed to donate to the Victory Fund and their maximum amounts end up being $5,000 for Hillary for America, $15,000 for the DNC, and $5,000 per state party.

As you can see, the Victory Fund is an all-encompassing fundraising endeavor, designed to bring in large amounts of money to spread throughout the Democratic Party. Therefore, in order to bring in these large amounts of money, large-scale fundraisers are held. These normally involve celebrities and are held at fancy locations. Among those who have hosted events have been George and Amal Clooney, Elton John and Katy Perry, and Sting, just to name a few. These events have helped raise over $26 million through 2015 and with additional events having being held in 2016 that number is likely close to $40 million by this point.

To get a sense for how the Victory Fund then uses the money, take September of 2015 as an example. During that month the Victory Fund spent $800,000 on fundraising and campaign salaries, gave $600,000 to the DNC, and left $1.75 million to be divided amongst the state parties, depending upon their needs. At the end of 2015, the Victory Fund had spent roughly $14 million of the $26 million it had raised as it was in the process of determining which races to specifically target in the spring of 2016.

What's most ironic about all this is the fact that Bernie Sanders constantly denigrates Hillary Clinton for having these expensive fundraising events for the Victory Fund, but it is these events that may very well elect a Democratic president and Democratic Senate.

While Bernie Sanders hoards the six million contributions his campaign had collected and refuses to use his joint DNC account, Hillary Clinton is out raising money up and down the Democratic ballot regardless of whom the Democratic candidates may be supporting. Yes, that's right: someone like Lucy Flores may very well be receiving campaign help from Hillary Clinton's Victory Fund via the Nevada State Democratic Party even though she's gone on record as supporting Bernie Sanders. Because to Hillary Clinton, it doesn't matter who these Democratic candidates support now, it's that they win at all costs come November.

Unfortunately, that is what Bernie Sanders still doesn't get. You can't create a political revolution three candidates at a time. You can't help fundraise for two candidates in solidly blue districts and expect that will make all the difference come November.

You can't continue to criticize Hillary Clinton's "fancy George Clooney fundraisers" when a single fundraiser does more for the Democratic Party in one night than you've done for the party during your 25 years in Congress.

You can't rely on millions of people to rise up and overthrow the political establishment if you're not going to help elect progressive candidates up and down the ballot. And you can't continue to run on the Democratic ticket if the only person you truly support is Bernie Sanders.

Because a revolution of one isn't a revolution at all. It fails at every level. A candidate wanting to create a political revolution should not be shamed into supporting his fellow progressive candidates. Much like his New York Daily News interview, Sanders' lack of support for his fellow Democratic candidates shows he has never thought through his revolution.

He doesn't care about a democratic House or a democratic Senate, all he cares about is Bernie Sanders. To financially aid candidates simply because they support you isn't a revolution; it's political nepotism. It shows that Sanders would rather back people he agrees with rather than ones locked in tight races. That's not helping the Democratic Party. That's not even helping Bernie Sanders. That's simply political pandering and it doesn't do anyone a bit of good. Because in order to do actual good for the Democratic Party, Sanders would have to conclude that his revolution is reliant upon others rather than himself.

And to admit that would absolutely crush everything Bernie Sanders has come to believe about himself, his campaign, and his political revolution.

Like Night and Day: Comparing Bernie Sanders' Down-Ballot Fundraising to That of Hillary Clinton ? The People's View

^ who gives a fuck you dimwitted moron. Like I want more right wing values on the down ticket. Are you that fucking stupid? BTW you retard that was from April. Ancient garbage.

Originally Posted by bsnub

^ who gives a fuck you dimwitted moron? Like I want more right wing values on the down ticket. Are you that fucking stupid?

Lot of hostility there, Snub. Incapable of having a civil political discussion?

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

Incapable of having a civil political discussion?

Apparently. Harry is a clueless cut and paste moron anyway.

Originally Posted by bsnub

^ who gives a fuck you dimwitted moron. Like I want more right wing values on the down ticket. Are you that fucking stupid? BTW you retard that was from April. Ancient garbage.

Well it's pretty clear from that juvenile foaming at the mouth response that you have nothing snubby.

So it's better that you just stop spouting shit and learn to read.

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

Originally Posted by bsnub

^ who gives a fuck you dimwitted moron? Like I want more right wing values on the down ticket. Are you that fucking stupid?

Lot of hostility there, Snub. Incapable of having a civil political discussion?

I need sleep...

Originally Posted by bsnub

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

Originally Posted by bsnub

^ who gives a fuck you dimwitted moron? Like I want more right wing values on the down ticket. Are you that fucking stupid?

Lot of hostility there, Snub. Incapable of having a civil political discussion?

I need sleep...

Well you've had plenty to drink so go to bed.

Originally Posted by Troy

Bernie had a good run for his money...

...time to tell his supporters to get behind Ms Clinton in the Presidential election.

Magnanimous in defeat Mr Sanders ...Please.

Yes he has considering it came from individuals rather than special interest groups. Just my two bits worth. Carry on with the status quo now , no blow too low.

Wait, that's what Billy said. Lucky bastard.

Originally Posted by bsnub

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

Originally Posted by bsnub

^ who gives a fuck you dimwitted moron? Like I want more right wing values on the down ticket. Are you that fucking stupid?

Lot of hostility there, Snub. Incapable of having a civil political discussion?

I need sleep...

Remember, you can contribute, even when on the sauce.

See you tomorrow and take an aspirin.

Originally Posted by Cold Pizza

The US has been defined by some as an Oligarchy for some time.

Maybe so Milky and we know what a sucker you are for big words that you found on You Tube but it has nothing to do with the Democratic Party rules.

Shilary is a slubberdegullion.