I was right: President Elect Trump

[Tennesseer]

A Flint Michigsn, black, female pastor put Trump in his place today.


Election 2016NationWorldOur TeamCNN.com Pastor interrupts Trump to stop him from attacking Clinton in church

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sept 14, 2016 19:32:49 GMT -5 dondub said:

Govt. is going to be responsive to problems like Flint? HAHAHAHAHA

The conservative govt. in charge there caused the problem in the first place due to felonious malfeasance.

As Republicans and conservatives take over failed Democratic party controlled blue states, and failed Democratic party controlled "blue" states, the mess left behind from decades of bad policy, corruption, and just plain old incompetence will not be fixed overnight. Just as George W. Bush inherited UBL's years long plot to fly planes into the World Trade Center, we can't always predict the breadth and depth of the Democratic party messes we're going to inherit.

As I've made very clear- Trump was not my candidate. I'm voting for him primarily to stop Hillary Clinton (if the angel of death doesn't stop her first). However, it would be unfair and dishonest to say I don't like anything about Donald Trump-- and one thing I do like is I suspect he's going to "Wollman Ice Rink" a whole bunch- maybe an astonishing bunch- of bullshit like this. I don't know Mr. Trump personally, but I'm very good at reading between the lines-- and there are some consistencies which are observable in between his ideological inconsistencies (paid maternity leave? really? this is how Democrats are finally going to get that one- Trump's just going to hand it over?) and one of them is that he does not suffer incompetence well at all. There will be some Reagan v. PATCO moments with Trump where people that are supposedly planted like the Cedars of Lebanon in the bureaucracy are going to discover that Trump's found a way to fire their asses. As an aside, I do know people who know Trump-- including the first female winner of The Apprentice, Kendra Todd who came and spoke at my Chicago investor's club back in the day. We've stayed acquainted over the years, and she assures me I'm reading it right on the competence deal. He will not put up with it.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

I'll add this: if you're very good on the whole, Trump is not without mercy. He's a giver of second and third chances. You notice that Cruz immediately fired Rick Tyler over the Rubio video which was edited to make him sound, of all things, "anti-Christian"; however Corey Lewandowski was kept on even when he was accused, and even charged with allegedly assaulting a woman. Of course the former was actually guilty, and the latter would eventually see all charges dropped after video clearly revealed that nothing like the account of the alleged victim ever occurred.

[dondub]

As Republicans and conservatives take over failed Democratic party controlled blue states, and failed Democratic party controlled "blue" states, the mess left behind from decades of bad policy, corruption, and just plain old incompetence will not be fixed overnight. Just as George W. Bush inherited UBL's years long plot to fly planes into the World Trade Center, we can't always predict the breadth and depth of the Democratic party messes we're going to inherit

I see that you are completely unaware of what happened in Flint and that it had nothing at all to do with liberals, democrats, or anybody other than conservatives choosing to poison minorities. I guess this is another 'blame the victim' skit, like being punched in the face at a Trump rally.

[weltschmerz]

Sept 15, 2016 0:36:50 GMT -5 dondub said:

As Republicans and conservatives take over failed Democratic party controlled blue states, and failed Democratic party controlled "blue" states, the mess left behind from decades of bad policy, corruption, and just plain old incompetence will not be fixed overnight. Just as George W. Bush inherited UBL's years long plot to fly planes into the World Trade Center, we can't always predict the breadth and depth of the Democratic party messes we're going to inherit

I see that you are completely unaware of what happened in Flint and that it had nothing at all to do with liberals, democrats, or anybody other than conservatives choosing to poison minorities. I guess this is another 'blame the victim' skit, like being punched in the face at a Trump rally.

Well, if they didn't want to be poisoned, they didn't have to live there!
They could have moved somewhere else, but Nooo! They sat around and chose to be poisoned!
Poor planning on their part, wouldn't you say?

[Opti]

Sept 14, 2016 22:31:39 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I'll add this: if you're very good on the whole, Trump is not without mercy. He's a giver of second and third chances. You notice that Cruz immediately fired Rick Tyler over the Rubio video which was edited to make him sound, of all things, "anti-Christian"; however Corey Lewandowski was kept on even when he was accused, and even charged with allegedly assaulting a woman. Of course the former was actually guilty, and the latter would eventually see all charges dropped after video clearly revealed that nothing like the account of the alleged victim ever occurred.

It wasn't the Lewandowski was innocent, it was because the prosecutor thought he couldn't win the case. Or because Trump paid him off.

www.cnn.com/2016/04/13/politics/corey-lewandowski-donald-trump-charges-dropped/

Aronberg said. "Our standard is higher than probable cause. ... Although the facts support the allegation that Mr. Lewandowski did grab Ms. Fields' arm against her will, Mr. Lewandowski has a reasonable hypothesis of innocence"

In other words, they declined to prosecute based on Mr. Lewandowski's intention. Same reason that Clinton was not prosecuted on the emails.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sept 15, 2016 8:07:18 GMT -5 Opti said:

Sept 14, 2016 22:31:39 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I'll add this: if you're very good on the whole, Trump is not without mercy. He's a giver of second and third chances. You notice that Cruz immediately fired Rick Tyler over the Rubio video which was edited to make him sound, of all things, "anti-Christian"; however Corey Lewandowski was kept on even when he was accused, and even charged with allegedly assaulting a woman. Of course the former was actually guilty, and the latter would eventually see all charges dropped after video clearly revealed that nothing like the account of the alleged victim ever occurred.

It wasn't the Lewandowski was innocent, it was because the prosecutor thought he couldn't win the case. Or because Trump paid him off.

www.cnn.com/2016/04/13/politics/corey-lewandowski-donald-trump-charges-dropped/

Aronberg said. "Our standard is higher than probable cause. ... Although the facts support the allegation that Mr. Lewandowski did grab Ms. Fields' arm against her will, Mr. Lewandowski has a reasonable hypothesis of innocence"

In other words, they declined to prosecute based on Mr. Lewandowski's intention. Same reason that Clinton was not prosecuted on the emails.

When you have someone willing to file a police report and press charges, and you have video-- you've got a case. Unless the video CLEARLY shows NOTHING happened. You notice how this was dropped almost immediately upon the revelations that the incident was video recorded-- and how quickly "grabbed and thrown to the ground" became "pulled back" (maybe)?  

Then we found out Mrs. Field's boyfriend is a Democratic activist, and wouldn't you know it-- she's got a book just out. Hardly a coincidence. But wait! There's more! Michelle Fields is a recidivist hoaxer who has falsely accused men on three other occasions. Oh, and holy shit- would you look at that? Michelle Fields' Honduran-born mother is pro-amnesty.

If I were Lewandowski, I'd be going after her for the false accusations / slander / libel. And I would not relent until I got a full, and unequivocal retraction and apology.

And the already biased media was and remains primed to fall for this kind of hoax.

Bottom line- you fell for it, too. Everything you believe happened is 100% false, and no longer debatable. All that's left is for you to accept the truth.

[Tennesseer]

Sept 14, 2016 19:43:52 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

A Flint Michigsn, black, female pastor put Trump in his place today.


Election 2016NationWorldOur TeamCNN.com Pastor interrupts Trump to stop him from attacking Clinton in church

And the trashing of the minister begins.

Trump: Pastor who stopped me from talking politics was 'nervous mess'

[happyhoix]

Sept 14, 2016 19:43:52 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

A Flint Michigsn, black, female pastor put Trump in his place today.


Election 2016NationWorldOur TeamCNN.com Pastor interrupts Trump to stop him from attacking Clinton in church

And of course, Trump can not resist painting the pastor as a 'nervous mess' who invited Trump there to deliberately try to make him look bad.

www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-pastor-who-stopped-me-from-talking-politics-was-nervous-mess/ar-BBwbv7r?li=BBnb7Kz

This is why Trump won't win. He knows he needs to try to win over minority and female voters. He's even promised an audacious pregnancy leave that he can't and won't deliver on, once he's in office, just to try to lull female voters into voting for him.

Then he turns around and undoes all that effort by belittling a black woman AND - just for the trifecta, a pastor who was attempting to keep him from launching into a political attack inside a house of worship.

Blacks, women and Christians - way to go, Donald!

[happyhoix]

Tennesseer got the jump on me

[Opti]

Sept 15, 2016 9:21:53 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Tennesseer got the jump on me

The sad thing is it appears she was being even-handed. She rebuked someone for trying to insult Trump and stopped him from talking about Clinton. But it appears he disses anyone who does something he doesn't like.

[happyhoix]

Sept 14, 2016 22:27:36 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sept 14, 2016 19:32:49 GMT -5 dondub said:

Govt. is going to be responsive to problems like Flint? HAHAHAHAHA

The conservative govt. in charge there caused the problem in the first place due to felonious malfeasance.

As Republicans and conservatives take over failed Democratic party controlled blue states, and failed Democratic party controlled "blue" states, the mess left behind from decades of bad policy, corruption, and just plain old incompetence will not be fixed overnight. Just as George W. Bush inherited UBL's years long plot to fly planes into the World Trade Center, we can't always predict the breadth and depth of the Democratic party messes we're going to inherit.

I love how the party stalwarts on both sides always manage to blame the other party, even for things that happened during their watch.

"This horrible thing happened because the other party made a mess and we didn't have time to fix it!!"

Unless it's a GOOD thing. Those are caused by the stalwart's party, but just happened to take so long to take effect that it APPEARED to happen on the other party's watch. Like the surge in the economy that happened when Clinton was president - NONE of that was due to ANYTHING Clinton did.

It would be refreshing to admit that some things, good and bad, that are not within the power of the president to completely control. Then we could just stop this ridiculous habit of arguing about who is REALLY responsible for everything.

You could go back to the actual source of the animosity between Muslims and Christians - the crusades - and blame the Catholic church for encouraging them, but really, what's the point? Let's just try to plot a good path forward.

[Tennesseer]

Sept 15, 2016 9:21:53 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Tennesseer got the jump on me

Just a continuation of the petulant child's 'Say nice things about me and I will say nice things about you (Putin). Say what I consider to be bad things about me, and I will say bad things about you (Pastor Green-Timmons).'

[ken a.k.a OMK]

He's paranoid and disgusting.

"Mr. Trump, I invited you here to thank us ... not to give a political speech," Green-Timmons said as she walked up to Trump.



The GOP presidential nominee said the incident didn't "bother" him, adding that "everyone plays their games."

[Tennesseer]

Sept 15, 2016 9:31:44 GMT -5 ken a.k.a OMK said:

He's paranoid and disgusting.

"Mr. Trump, I invited you here to thank us ... not to give a political speech," Green-Timmons said as she walked up to Trump.



The GOP presidential nominee said the incident didn't "bother" him, adding that "everyone plays their games."

Including petulant Donald.

[happyhoix]

Sept 14, 2016 22:27:36 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sept 14, 2016 19:32:49 GMT -5 dondub said:

Govt. is going to be responsive to problems like Flint? HAHAHAHAHA

The conservative govt. in charge there caused the problem in the first place due to felonious malfeasance.

As Republicans and conservatives take over failed Democratic party controlled blue states, and failed   I don't know Mr. Trump personally, but I'm very good at reading between the lines-- and there are some consistencies which are observable in between his ideological inconsistencies (paid maternity leave? really? this is how Democrats are finally going to get that one- Trump's just going to hand it over?)

Don't worry too much about women getting any commie hand out like paid for maternity leave.

That will never happen. It's just shit he says to try to coax women into voting for him.

And building a wall will never happen - that's just shit he says to make the white nationalists vote for him.

Kicking all the Muslims out will never happen - that's just shit he says to make islamophobics vote for him.

He won't fire all the bureaucrats. That's just shit he says to make the anti-government crowd vote for him.

Trump likes things exactly the way they are, because he's made a lot of money in the status quo. He won't run the illegals out because he needs their cheap labor at his resort properties and golf courses. He won't do anything against the Muslims because he has business deals active with Muslims in Turkey and Bahrain, and he won't do anything to endanger his business interests. He won't fire the bureaucrats because he can't fire everyone, even if he wants to.

Trump approaches campaigning in the same way he tried to juice his TV ratings - say or do whatever outrageous thing you need to do to attract attention, which to him = approval. He doesn't actually have any policy plans or agendas, other than to change the liability laws to make it easier to sue newspapers and to tweak the tax code in favor of the 1%. Everything else is puffery that he'll discard the instant his butt hits the chair in the oval office.

[Opti]

Sept 15, 2016 8:33:38 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sept 15, 2016 8:07:18 GMT -5 Opti said:

It wasn't the Lewandowski was innocent, it was because the prosecutor thought he couldn't win the case. Or because Trump paid him off.

www.cnn.com/2016/04/13/politics/corey-lewandowski-donald-trump-charges-dropped/

Aronberg said. "Our standard is higher than probable cause. ... Although the facts support the allegation that Mr. Lewandowski did grab Ms. Fields' arm against her will, Mr. Lewandowski has a reasonable hypothesis of innocence"

In other words, they declined to prosecute based on Mr. Lewandowski's intention. Same reason that Clinton was not prosecuted on the emails.

When you have someone willing to file a police report and press charges, and you have video-- you've got a case. Unless the video CLEARLY shows NOTHING happened. You notice how this was dropped almost immediately upon the revelations that the incident was video recorded-- and how quickly "grabbed and thrown to the ground" became "pulled back" (maybe)?  

Then we found out Mrs. Field's boyfriend is a Democratic activist, and wouldn't you know it-- she's got a book just out. Hardly a coincidence. But wait! There's more! Michelle Fields is a recidivist hoaxer who has falsely accused men on three other occasions. Oh, and holy shit- would you look at that? Michelle Fields' Honduran-born mother is pro-amnesty.

If I were Lewandowski, I'd be going after her for the false accusations / slander / libel. And I would not relent until I got a full, and unequivocal retraction and apology.

And the already biased media was and remains primed to fall for this kind of hoax.

Bottom line- you fell for it, too. Everything you believe happened is 100% false, and no longer debatable. All that's left is for you to accept the truth.

I don't know what you read, but I always read it as being grabbed, which is true. Because of his intent, its deemed not actionable. Done.

The videos I watched showed the grab, but nothing more.

[Deleted]

Sept 14, 2016 15:43:04 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sept 14, 2016 12:13:46 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

And to an aging pilot's inability to react or respond correctly and quickly enough to a possibly life ending situation.  I once either forgot to set the altimeter to a runway altitude or entered an erroneous number on approach and was off by a couple hundred feet at night and clipped a treetop with the landing gear.  I did however sell the plane two years ago which was the follow up, correct response, after it happened. 

The point is that Hillary is an extraordinarily weak candidate, who crumbles at the first sign of a real challenge. She would have lost her Senate bid in a landslide if JFK, Jr. had lived to oppose her. He was a shoe-in to the carpet bagger from Arkansas. Obama beat her badly. Sanders, but for what we now know was the total rigging of the primary process in favor of Hillary, would have beaten her. And Trump's going to wallop her.

I remember reading something a little while back about delegates during the Democrat convention that weren't allowed to vote due to the fact that they were two late to qualify or something like that, and Bernie would of won otherwise.  I don't know if it's true or not, but I never see anything about the voting that took place at that convention in the media.  It makes me wonder about it.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 15, 2016 13:10:57 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Sept 14, 2016 15:43:04 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

The point is that Hillary is an extraordinarily weak candidate, who crumbles at the first sign of a real challenge. She would have lost her Senate bid in a landslide if JFK, Jr. had lived to oppose her. He was a shoe-in to the carpet bagger from Arkansas. Obama beat her badly. Sanders, but for what we now know was the total rigging of the primary process in favor of Hillary, would have beaten her. And Trump's going to wallop her.

I remember reading something a little while back about delegates during the Democrat convention that weren't allowed to vote due to the fact that they were two late to qualify or something like that, and Bernie would of won otherwise.  I don't know if it's true or not, but I never see anything about the voting that took place at that convention in the media.  It makes me wonder about it.

what you read is false.  i can find an article on it, if you like, but here is the basic conclusion of the analysis:

even if you assume that the tardy delegations would vote 100% for Bernie, he was still a couple % short of winning.

now, would that have been bad for Clinton?  OF COURSE.  the closer Sanders got to winning, the better his case well of brokering a deal.  but one should keep in mind that Trump didn't have 50% of the delegates until his two opponents dropped out, and it seems reasonable to conclude that he would not have made 50% had they stayed in.  therefore, the same case can be made on the Trump side of the fence.

here is a little reality check for every partisan who posts here:

PARTIES GET TO DECIDE WHO THEIR CANDIDATE IS.

PERIOD.

if you don't like that, find another party.  but don't criticize the opposing party for their decisions.

[Deleted]

Sept 15, 2016 13:39:40 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 15, 2016 13:10:57 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

I remember reading something a little while back about delegates during the Democrat convention that weren't allowed to vote due to the fact that they were two late to qualify or something like that, and Bernie would of won otherwise.  I don't know if it's true or not, but I never see anything about the voting that took place at that convention in the media.  It makes me wonder about it.

what you read is false.  i can find an article on it, if you like, but here is the basic conclusion of the analysis:

even if you assume that the tardy delegations would vote 100% for Bernie, he was still a couple % short of winning.

now, would that have been bad for Clinton?  OF COURSE.  the closer Sanders got to winning, the better his case well of brokering a deal.  but one should keep in mind that Trump didn't have 50% of the delegates until his two opponents dropped out, and it seems reasonable to conclude that he would not have made 50% had they stayed in.  therefore, the same case can be made on the Trump side of the fence.

here is a little reality check for every partisan who posts here:

PARTIES GET TO DECIDE WHO THEIR CANDIDATE IS.

PERIOD.

if you don't like that, find another party.  but don't criticize the opposing party for their decisions.

I wasn't criticizing the decision. I'm aware parties get to decide their candidates. No need to find an article. It was just mild curiosity on my part. I would vote for Trump regardless who he ran against.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 15, 2016 13:47:40 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Sept 15, 2016 13:39:40 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

what you read is false.  i can find an article on it, if you like, but here is the basic conclusion of the analysis:

even if you assume that the tardy delegations would vote 100% for Bernie, he was still a couple % short of winning.

now, would that have been bad for Clinton?  OF COURSE.  the closer Sanders got to winning, the better his case well of brokering a deal.  but one should keep in mind that Trump didn't have 50% of the delegates until his two opponents dropped out, and it seems reasonable to conclude that he would not have made 50% had they stayed in.  therefore, the same case can be made on the Trump side of the fence.

here is a little reality check for every partisan who posts here:

PARTIES GET TO DECIDE WHO THEIR CANDIDATE IS.

PERIOD.

if you don't like that, find another party.  but don't criticize the opposing party for their decisions.

I wasn't criticizing the decision. I'm aware parties get to decide their candidates. No need to find an article. It was just mild curiosity on my part. I would vote for Trump regardless who he ran against.

really?  if the Democrat was the second coming of Jesus, you would vote for Trump? 

[Deleted]

Sept 15, 2016 13:49:21 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 15, 2016 13:47:40 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

I wasn't criticizing the decision. I'm aware parties get to decide their candidates. No need to find an article. It was just mild curiosity on my part. I would vote for Trump regardless who he ran against.

really?  if the Democrat was the second coming of Jesus, you would vote for Trump? 

I did mean either Bernie or Hillary, but it could be taken as "anybody" the way I worded it. 

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sept 15, 2016 13:10:57 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Sept 14, 2016 15:43:04 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

The point is that Hillary is an extraordinarily weak candidate, who crumbles at the first sign of a real challenge. She would have lost her Senate bid in a landslide if JFK, Jr. had lived to oppose her. He was a shoe-in to the carpet bagger from Arkansas. Obama beat her badly. Sanders, but for what we now know was the total rigging of the primary process in favor of Hillary, would have beaten her. And Trump's going to wallop her.

I remember reading something a little while back about delegates during the Democrat convention that weren't allowed to vote due to the fact that they were two late to qualify or something like that, and Bernie would of won otherwise.  I don't know if it's true or not, but I never see anything about the voting that took place at that convention in the media.  It makes me wonder about it.

Wikileaks published the emails that confirm it: www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-23/leaked-dnc-emails-confirm-democrats-rigged-primary-reveal-extensive-media-collusion

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sept 15, 2016 13:39:40 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 15, 2016 13:10:57 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

I remember reading something a little while back about delegates during the Democrat convention that weren't allowed to vote due to the fact that they were two late to qualify or something like that, and Bernie would of won otherwise.  I don't know if it's true or not, but I never see anything about the voting that took place at that convention in the media.  It makes me wonder about it.

what you read is false.  i can find an article on it, if you like, but here is the basic conclusion of the analysis:

even if you assume that the tardy delegations would vote 100% for Bernie, he was still a couple % short of winning.

now, would that have been bad for Clinton?  OF COURSE.  the closer Sanders got to winning, the better his case well of brokering a deal.  but one should keep in mind that Trump didn't have 50% of the delegates until his two opponents dropped out, and it seems reasonable to conclude that he would not have made 50% had they stayed in.  therefore, the same case can be made on the Trump side of the fence.

here is a little reality check for every partisan who posts here:

PARTIES GET TO DECIDE WHO THEIR CANDIDATE IS.

PERIOD.

if you don't like that, find another party.  but don't criticize the opposing party for their decisions.

I agree. And I thought Curly Hogan did a great service bluntly reminding voters of that fact. However, the parties PERSIST IN MAINTAINING THE ILLUSION THAT THERE'S A VOTE and for that there should be some ACCOUNTABILITY.

PERIOD.

If they don't like being exposed, have a more honest process. But don't criticize your own (Bernie Sanders) voters for exposing it and calling you out on it.

And speaking of illusions-- probably the most disturbing thing we learned from the Wikileaks exposure of the DNC primary rigging was the EXTENSIVE MEDIA COLLUSION. Media bias is now FACT. And anyone that thinks DNC - Media collusion ended with the nomination of Hillary Clinton is a damn fool. www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-23/leaked-dnc-emails-confirm-democrats-rigged-primary-reveal-extensive-media-collusion

[djAdvocate]

Sept 15, 2016 15:53:19 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sept 15, 2016 13:10:57 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

I remember reading something a little while back about delegates during the Democrat convention that weren't allowed to vote due to the fact that they were two late to qualify or something like that, and Bernie would of won otherwise.  I don't know if it's true or not, but I never see anything about the voting that took place at that convention in the media.  It makes me wonder about it.

Wikileaks published the emails that confirm it: www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-23/leaked-dnc-emails-confirm-democrats-rigged-primary-reveal-extensive-media-collusion

this is precisely the issue i was responding to.  there is smoke there, but no fire.

even if Sanders got every vote in question (it is not clear he would have), he would have fallen short.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 15, 2016 15:57:38 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sept 15, 2016 13:39:40 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

what you read is false.  i can find an article on it, if you like, but here is the basic conclusion of the analysis:

even if you assume that the tardy delegations would vote 100% for Bernie, he was still a couple % short of winning.

now, would that have been bad for Clinton?  OF COURSE.  the closer Sanders got to winning, the better his case well of brokering a deal.  but one should keep in mind that Trump didn't have 50% of the delegates until his two opponents dropped out, and it seems reasonable to conclude that he would not have made 50% had they stayed in.  therefore, the same case can be made on the Trump side of the fence.

here is a little reality check for every partisan who posts here:

PARTIES GET TO DECIDE WHO THEIR CANDIDATE IS.

PERIOD.

if you don't like that, find another party.  but don't criticize the opposing party for their decisions.

I agree. And I thought Curly Hogan did a great service bluntly reminding voters of that fact. However, the parties PERSIST IN MAINTAINING THE ILLUSION THAT THERE'S A VOTE and for that there should be some ACCOUNTABILITY.

PERIOD.

If they don't like being exposed, have a more honest process. But don't criticize your own (Bernie Sanders) voters for exposing it and calling you out on it.

And speaking of illusions-- probably the most disturbing thing we learned from the Wikileaks exposure of the DNC primary rigging was the EXTENSIVE MEDIA COLLUSION. Media bias is now FACT. And anyone that thinks DNC - Media collusion ended with the nomination of Hillary Clinton is a damn fool. www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-23/leaked-dnc-emails-confirm-democrats-rigged-primary-reveal-extensive-media-collusion

accountability to whom?  voters?  no way.  that is not the objective of parties.

if you want to get into this at length, we should start a thread on it, but it goes back to the idea of a Republic.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Could be why trust in the media hit an all time low recently-- most notably among Republicans who tend to be more open minded, tolerant, and thoughtful.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sept 15, 2016 15:58:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 15, 2016 15:53:19 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Wikileaks published the emails that confirm it: www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-23/leaked-dnc-emails-confirm-democrats-rigged-primary-reveal-extensive-media-collusion

this is precisely the issue i was responding to.  there is smoke there, but no fire.

even if Sanders got every vote in question (it is not clear he would have), he would have fallen short.

I will have to do some research, but my understanding is that Hillary only won via "super delegates".

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sept 15, 2016 15:59:45 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 15, 2016 15:57:38 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I agree. And I thought Curly Hogan did a great service bluntly reminding voters of that fact. However, the parties PERSIST IN MAINTAINING THE ILLUSION THAT THERE'S A VOTE and for that there should be some ACCOUNTABILITY.

PERIOD.

If they don't like being exposed, have a more honest process. But don't criticize your own (Bernie Sanders) voters for exposing it and calling you out on it.

And speaking of illusions-- probably the most disturbing thing we learned from the Wikileaks exposure of the DNC primary rigging was the EXTENSIVE MEDIA COLLUSION. Media bias is now FACT. And anyone that thinks DNC - Media collusion ended with the nomination of Hillary Clinton is a damn fool. www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-23/leaked-dnc-emails-confirm-democrats-rigged-primary-reveal-extensive-media-collusion

accountability to whom?  voters?  no way.  that is not the objective of parties.

if you want to get into this at length, we should start a thread on it, but it goes back to the idea of a Republic.

Sure- and I think we agree on the objective of the parties. 

[ken a.k.a OMK]

most notably among Republicans who tend to be more open minded, tolerant, and thoughtful.

 

I won't discuss why this statement is wrong right now, but will ask how Trump demonstrates any of these traits.