• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Democratic Candidates for POTUS, 2016 edition

It's a bigger deal for people to meet the pope than it is for the pope to meet people. Sanders didn't spin it as an endorsement. At the most he embellished meeting a famous person.
 
Clooney's neighbor throwing Saturday fundraiser for Sanders
sanders_party_la.png

George Clooney’s next door neighbor is planning to hold his own fundraiser — to benefit Bernie Sanders — during the actor’s posh Hollywood soiree Saturday night with Hillary Clinton.

Howard Gold, whose family founded the 99 Cents Only store chain, is calling his bash the “99% Party,” with tickets selling for $27 per person.

An email invite sent to Sanders supporters Saturday reads: “Swimming pools, Movie Stars, and merriment for all! This is happening right next door to Clooney's party for Hillary!”

The invite also notes that "no-one (will be) turned away for a lack of funds."

Hollywood’s power brokers, meanwhile, have spent weeks selling high-dollar tickets, starting at $33,4000 per person, to the Clooney event in Studio City. Co-hosts include Jeffrey and Marilyn Katzenberg, Steven Spielberg and Kate Capshaw and Haim and Cheryl Saban.
Click to expand...
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/276571-clooneys-neighbor-throwing-saturday-fundraiser-for-sanders
 
Masterful troll job.
 
Hundreds of New York state voters to file suit calling the closed primary 'a threat to our democratic system' after claiming their party affiliation mysteriously changed
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/hundreds-ny-voters-file-lawsuit-alleged-voter-fraud-article-1.2603876
Joanna Viscuso, 19, from Seaford, L.I., said she registered to vote as a Democrat during her college orientation at Adelphi University in 2014.

She noticed earlier this week that now her voter registration online says she is “not affiliated” with a party.
She called Nassau Board of Elections and they told her that she had filled out a form in September change her party affiliation and sent it in October, but she claims she never did that. She’d be a first-time voter.

“As soon as I noticed it was changed I was infuriated and then when they said there was nothing I could do I was still infuriated,” she said. “All of a sudden we can't vote? That’s ridiculous!”

Fabrizio Milito, another voter who signed up with the suit, registered as a Democrat in 2009 and voted in local elections as recent as last year.

The 25-year-old construction worker from Bayville, L.I., noticed his registration now says “not affiliated.”

“I got really upset and I went to call them (the Nassau board of elections) and even the guy on the phone was pretty baffled,” Melito said. “He told me I must have changed it but I never did.”

Some voters involved in the lawsuit — who are primarily Democratic — also claim they their voter registration had been canceled altogether.
Click to expand...
 
So why are most American news-watchers under the distinct impression that Ted Cruz has a much better chance of catching Trump in pledged delegates than Sanders does of catching Clinton?

I don’t know — ask Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com.
Click to expand...

Aren't all the Republican states from here on winner take all?
 
BillBrasky said:
And I thought disenfranchisement was only a Republican thing. Keep electing the same establishment types you sheep.
Click to expand...

Dems count every vote....right before they water them down with made-up superdelegates. But they're super-upset when voting requires the same safeguards as buying a draft beer. Because they care. Or something.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
Safeguards from what?
Click to expand...

^ This is how you avoid the point of a post.

Superdelegates washing out results for an entire state? "Yawn."

Somebody has to show all of the responsibility necessary to buy cold medicine? "OMG WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA????"

Save it for someone who isn't over this tired noise, bro.
 
Sanders is about to get his clock cleaned in NY, so to keep the energy going, the Sanders partisan media is going to its tried and true formula of blaming election fraud.
 
Last edited:
ChrisL68 said:
Sanders is about to get his clocked cleaned in NY, so to keep the energy going, the Sanders partisan media is going to its tried and true formula of blaming election fraud.
Click to expand...

You really have to, ahem, dig deep, to find evidence that the establishment media doesn't want Clinton elected.
 
I am a big Sanders fan, but I can understand and accept that each party has its own nominating and delegate allocation rules. Sanders wasn't even officially a Democrat until about a year ago and the reality is that he is trying to use the Dem infrastructure to get his issues heard and his name on the ballot. If long time dedicated democrats want to protect their party's image and message, that is their right. Freedom to assemble with like minded people, or something like that. It is a rigged system though, and the part that is quite difficult to accept is that state and local governments are paying for the exclusionary practices of these political parties. To me, it is fine for a political party to protect its message and image, but having local governments pay for it seems ridiculous. Especially when they don't pay a dime for the Green Party or the Libertarian Party, etc. nominating processes. Bernie probably would have run as an independent except that he knew that, 20 years after Nader's first run, in a national election you need the massive political partys' infrastructure.
 
jhmd2000 said:
^ This is how you avoid the point of a post.

Superdelegates washing out results for an entire state? "Yawn."

Somebody has to show all of the responsibility necessary to buy cold medicine? "OMG WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA????"

Save it for someone who isn't over this tired noise, bro.
Click to expand...

Although I don't really agree with the concept of super delegates, the Democratic party is a private organization that can select its candidate by whatever means it so desires.

The ability to vote in a presidential election is a constitutionally protected right.

So yes, one's ability to vote for President should be as unencumbered as possible.

Again, what existing problem does mandating picture IDs safe guard against? And not a hypothetical problem, a real world problem.
 
I had my first canvasser come by last night. It was a very chill Bernie dude who is preparing to vote for the first time in 20 years. It takes some kind of inspiration to go from not voting to knocking on doors.
 
birdman said:
I am a big Sanders fan, but I can understand and accept that each party has its own nominating and delegate allocation rules. Sanders wasn't even officially a Democrat until about a year ago and the reality is that he is trying to use the Dem infrastructure to get his issues heard and his name on the ballot. If long time dedicated democrats want to protect their party's image and message, that is their right. Freedom to assemble with like minded people, or something like that. It is a rigged system though, and the part that is quite difficult to accept is that state and local governments are paying for the exclusionary practices of these political parties. To me, it is fine for a political party to protect its message and image, but having local governments pay for it seems ridiculous. Especially when they don't pay a dime for the Green Party or the Libertarian Party, etc. nominating processes. Bernie probably would have run as an independent except that he knew that, 20 years after Nader's first run, in a national election you need the massive political partys' infrastructure.
Click to expand...

Clooney correctly admitted that there's too much money in politics. A constitutional amendment on campaign finance could fix a broken system, but neither parties' establishment wants any part of that. Obama barely got Obamacare passed even with 59 Dem Senators. Bernie may hate the system, but he can't do jack shit on Wall Street reform without 60 Senators who weren't bought and paid for by Wall Street. Both sides aren't going to unilaterally disarm. Until there's real campaign reform, it's in Bernie's best interest that Dems raise huge funds for House and Senate candidates. Bernie has good ideas in theory, but they're loosely tethered to reality.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
Although I don't really agree with the concept of super delegates, the Democratic party is a private organization that can select its candidate by whatever means it so desires.

The ability to vote in a presidential election is a constitutionally protected right.

So yes, one's ability to vote for President should be as unencumbered as possible.

Again, what existing problem does mandating picture IDs safe guard against? And not a hypothetical problem, a real world problem.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is, it is best when the government doesn't overreach beyond its enumerated powers and start micro-managing how privately held and operated entities run their affairs? Getting warmer...

But if we can "agree" that the government gets to tell you who gets to spray their pee where, do you think we can also agree that it might have a say as to who gets to be President of America? Just a thought.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
Need an irony ruling. Irish?
Click to expand...

Avoiding the lies you all tell yourselves to preen yourselves ever more guilty-tolerant is not the same thing as avoiding an actual point. Points tend to have data. You all jump on message boards and pretend to be afraid to call the cops.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top