More proof the fix was in for Hillary to win the primary

[Tennesseer]

Analysis | The ‘dossier’ and the uranium deal: A guide to the latest allegations

As a service to readers bound to be confused by an increasingly tangled story, here’s a brief guide to the latest developments in the tangled allegations involving Russia, President Trump and Hillary Clinton.

The Dossier
Background: The “dossier” is a collection of 17 memos concerning President Trump and Russia written by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer, between June 20 and Dec. 13, 2016. Steele produced his memos under a contract with Fusion GPS, a strategic intelligence firm run by former journalists.

The memos are written as raw intelligence, based on interviews Steele had with unidentified Russian sources (identified, for instance, as “Kremlin insider”), some of whom he paid for information. Raw intelligence is essentially high-grade gossip, without the expectation it would be made public unless it is further verified.

Complete article here: Analysis | The ‘dossier’ and the uranium deal: A guide to the latest allegations

[Tennesseer]

[dezii]

Oct 24, 2017 18:37:49 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Oct 24, 2017 18:34:50 GMT -5 Opti said:

Your title and your OP seem to have nothing in common. Winning the Democratic primary has nothing to do with Trump who ran as a Republican.

It has to do with the fix in for Hillary over Bernie. DNC and Clinton campaign were directly working together.

Your reaching...just like your guru...never able to admit making a mistake..

as far as the DNC favoring Hillery over Bernie...I believe that..realistically they..[ I] felt she was a much stronger candidate then Bernie...For me, Bernie , a socialist at the time...now he says he's a independent...I am a middle to the left..not a socialist..and I felt his wants...free college/university tuition...medicare for all...and other wants...while nice...for me impractical...especially when it came to pay for them. Possible he could do it but for me...to over the top , though I liked his ideas..remember , I do swing left..The DNC has a responsibility to look out for the Democratic Party...same as the opposte committee for the Pubs..

I remember when a candidate was chosen not by primaries before the convention..basically deals in the " smoke filled " back rooms...How Kennedy was chosen...

The head of the DNC at the time was from Connecticut...his name escapes me...did smoke big cigars..very powerful man politically..

[Value Buy]

Oct 30, 2017 2:54:56 GMT -5 dezii said:

Oct 24, 2017 18:37:49 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

It has to do with the fix in for Hillary over Bernie. DNC and Clinton campaign were directly working together.

Your reaching...just like your guru...never able to admit making a mistake..

as far as the DNC favoring Hillery over Bernie...I believe that..realistically they..[ I] felt she was a much stronger candidate then Bernie...For me, Bernie , a socialist at the time...now he says he's a independent...I am a middle to the left..not a socialist..and I felt his wants...free college/university tuition...medicare for all...and other wants...while nice...for me impractical...especially when it came to pay for them. Possible he could do it but for me...to over the top , though I liked his ideas..remember , I do swing left..The DNC has a responsibility to look out for the Democratic Party...same as the opposte committee for the Pubs..

I remember when a candidate was chosen not by primaries before the convention..basically deals in the " smoke filled " back rooms...How Kennedy was chosen...

The head of the DNC at the time was from Connecticut...his name escapes me...did smoke big cigars..very powerful man politically..

Oh wow! Since it is no longer smoke filled rooms and is in wine tasting rooms doing the same thing, it's ok now.......

[dezii]

Oct 30, 2017 6:30:43 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Oct 30, 2017 2:54:56 GMT -5 dezii said:

Your reaching...just like your guru...never able to admit making a mistake..

as far as the DNC favoring Hillery over Bernie...I believe that..realistically they..[ I] felt she was a much stronger candidate then Bernie...For me, Bernie , a socialist at the time...now he says he's a independent...I am a middle to the left..not a socialist..and I felt his wants...free college/university tuition...medicare for all...and other wants...while nice...for me impractical...especially when it came to pay for them. Possible he could do it but for me...to over the top , though I liked his ideas..remember , I do swing left..The DNC has a responsibility to look out for the Democratic Party...same as the opposte committee for the Pubs..

I remember when a candidate was chosen not by primaries before the convention..basically deals in the " smoke filled " back rooms...How Kennedy was chosen...

The head of the DNC at the time was from Connecticut...his name escapes me...did smoke big cigars..very powerful man politically..

Oh wow! Since it is no longer smoke filled rooms and is in wine tasting rooms doing the same thing, it's ok now.......

It's what it is..you are playing with the big boys now..this is seriouse shit...[ just see for most of us..possible not you ] what a cluster f we have now...You still have the primaries...if Bernie wins those by enough he gets the nomination...as far as the extra delegates...he knew when he started out what the games rules were...so with the primaries we are away from the smoke or wine filled rooms...but as said..this is seriouse shit..not a game..not a sand box.

[thyme4change]

I was told that it wasn't my business how a political party of which I was not a member chose their candidate. I guess that doesn't apply when it sounds all juicy or whatever.

[Gardening Grandma]

Conservatives are like a dog with a bone about Hillary.  They can't let go of the fact that she lost the election and is therefore irrelevant.  

[thyme4change]

Oct 30, 2017 10:10:03 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Conservatives are like a dog with a bone about Hillary.  They can't let go of the fact that she lost the election and is therefore irrelevant.  

Maybe by the time I die they will stop talking about her.

[dezii]

Oct 30, 2017 10:06:21 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

I was told that it wasn't my business how a political party of which I was not a member chose their candidate. I guess that doesn't apply when it sounds all juicy or whatever.

Of course it's your business..right to question...Just realize u have less influence then a member of the party..in my case am a member...but beyond my one vote ..which I rarely use in primaries...it doesn't mean much.

There are folks...money types and others who are active in party doings, politics who do have more influence in party doings...call em the movers and shakers..Same thing in both parties...your thoughts on this web site don't really count for much in the big picture of party politics IMHO.

[billisonboard]

Oct 30, 2017 11:21:18 GMT -5 dezii said:

... ..in my case am a member...but beyond my one vote ..which I rarely use in primaries...it doesn't mean much.
...

What exactly makes one "a member" of a political party in the United States? Do you have a membership card? Do they come in different colors? I know when I was younger in Idaho, when I registered to vote they asked what party I "was". Is that self identifying to a state what makes you a "member". Does it matter if you pick the one that actually has contested primaries so you vote for someone better or worse and not the one you tend to vote for in the general election? My current home state of Washington doesn't register people by party so that can't work here. I did go to the Democratic Caucus last year. Am I now a member of the Democratic Party? If so, what could I do to resign from them and be Independent if I wanted to do so? Does just announcing to the wind, "I am a or no long am a (fill in the blank)" qualify to make you a member or not a member?

[thyme4change]

Oct 30, 2017 16:35:25 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Oct 30, 2017 11:21:18 GMT -5 dezii said:

... ..in my case am a member...but beyond my one vote ..which I rarely use in primaries...it doesn't mean much.
...

What exactly makes one "a member" of a political party in the United States? Do you have a membership card? Do they come in different colors? I know when I was younger in Idaho, when I registered to vote they asked what party I "was". Is that self identifying to a state what makes you a "member". Does it matter if you pick the one that actually has contested primaries so you vote for someone better or worse and not the one you tend to vote for in the general election? My current home state of Washington doesn't register people by party so that can't work here. I did go to the Democratic Caucus last year. Am I now a member of the Democratic Party? If so, what could I do to resign from them and be Independent if I wanted to do so? Does just announcing to the wind, "I am a or no long am a (fill in the blank)" qualify to make you a member or not a member?

In my head, if you register as that party affiliation, you are eligible to participate in their primaries, etc, you are a member of the party. If you agree with everything they say, but don't register and therefore can't participate in their "members only primary votes" then you are not a member.

[dezii]

Oct 30, 2017 16:35:25 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Oct 30, 2017 11:21:18 GMT -5 dezii said:

... ..in my case am a member...but beyond my one vote ..which I rarely use in primaries...it doesn't mean much.
...

What exactly makes one "a member" of a political party in the United States? Do you have a membership card? Do they come in different colors? I know when I was younger in Idaho, when I registered to vote they asked what party I "was". Is that self identifying to a state what makes you a "member". Does it matter if you pick the one that actually has contested primaries so you vote for someone better or worse and not the one you tend to vote for in the general election? My current home state of Washington doesn't register people by party so that can't work here. I did go to the Democratic Caucus last year. Am I now a member of the Democratic Party? If so, what could I do to resign from them and be Independent if I wanted to do so? Does just announcing to the wind, "I am a or no long am a (fill in the blank)" qualify to make you a member or not a member?

No card...just register as a...me I am a registered Democrat....allows , where u have closed conventions, the right to vote ...many States now have open primaries...Personally makes no sense to me...Doesn't mean one has to vote for Partys selection but for me it makes sense for all to pick a party...suggest how one normally vote...your vote means something vs the national election..especially since its not popular vote but electorial vote...how outdated that is...but probably be that way forever..

[dezii]

Oct 30, 2017 17:40:25 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Oct 30, 2017 16:35:25 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

What exactly makes one "a member" of a political party in the United States? Do you have a membership card? Do they come in different colors? I know when I was younger in Idaho, when I registered to vote they asked what party I "was". Is that self identifying to a state what makes you a "member". Does it matter if you pick the one that actually has contested primaries so you vote for someone better or worse and not the one you tend to vote for in the general election? My current home state of Washington doesn't register people by party so that can't work here. I did go to the Democratic Caucus last year. Am I now a member of the Democratic Party? If so, what could I do to resign from them and be Independent if I wanted to do so? Does just announcing to the wind, "I am a or no long am a (fill in the blank)" qualify to make you a member or not a member?

In my head, if you register as that party affiliation, you are eligible to participate in their primaries, etc, you are a member of the party. If you agree with everything they say, but don't register and therefore can't participate in their "members only primary votes" then you are not a member.

correct...

[thyme4change]

I'm considering registering as a RINO. But then if they call me, I can be the Republican that doesn't support Trump, or doesn't support heavy handed evangelical policies, but can be big on balancing the budget and spending cuts.

[kadee79]

We only "declare" at primary votes....you "declare" which ballot you want.  I often "declare" for the opposing party so I can have some say in local & state positions up for votes.  That's what you have to do in my RED state to get a chance to 'count' at all.

[Deleted]

Oct 30, 2017 10:10:03 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Conservatives are like a dog with a bone about Hillary.  They can't let go of the fact that she lost the election and is therefore irrelevant.  

As long as she's alive and unpunished for her crimes... she'll be relevant... as proof that those with ehough political power don't get properly punished for their unlawful acts.

Want Hillary to become irrelevant? Put her in jail for 20 years. People will stop talking about her then.

[Tennesseer]

Oct 30, 2017 20:37:38 GMT -5 kadee79 said:

We only "declare" at primary votes....you "declare" which ballot you want.  I often "declare" for the opposing party so I can have some say in local & state positions up for votes.  That's what you have to do in my RED state to get a chance to 'count' at all.

Careful. You will be accused of subterfuge like I was when I mentioned change parties to vote in the republican primary for the lesser candidate..

[dezii]

Oct 30, 2017 21:31:27 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Oct 30, 2017 20:37:38 GMT -5 kadee79 said:

We only "declare" at primary votes....you "declare" which ballot you want.  I often "declare" for the opposing party so I can have some say in local & state positions up for votes.  That's what you have to do in my RED state to get a chance to 'count' at all.

Careful. You will be accused of subterfuge like I was when I mentioned change parties to vote in the republican primary for the lesser candidate..

A little subterfuge in ones life is a good thing...actually that  reregistering is a smart thing if Tenn is as u say politically...only one vote but it will make u feel better and u accomplished something...

[Deleted]

I'm registered "Independent", but usually vote in primaries of the party with the WORST candidate... so I can vote against them. Doing what I can, as one sole voter, to try and minimize the damage that the worst candidate can do.

This past Primary, I voted Democrat so I could vote for Sanders (which was, in reality, a vote AGAINST Hillary)... not that it mattered, what with the DNC "fixing" the primaries.

[dezii]

Oct 31, 2017 0:49:27 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

I'm registered "Independent", but usually vote in primaries of the party with the WORST candidate... so I can vote against them. Doing what I can, as one sole voter, to try and minimize the damage that the worst candidate can do.

This past Primary, I voted Democrat so I could vote for Sanders (which was, in reality, a vote AGAINST Hillary)... not that it mattered, what with the DNC "fixing" the primaries.

Nope not fixing...playing by the rules all knew....also DNC wanting best candidate to win....naturally Hillery lost but to think country is ready for Sanders and his programs...this middle to the left person has doubts...then how about middle America..

Fact is, Hillery who did lose...lost by 70,000 votes divided in three States, this landside that our Donald and friends totes is pure BS and he has no interest in bringing the country together...none, nil...that idea in his mind is "verboten"

[Deleted]

Oct 31, 2017 1:49:22 GMT -5 dezii said:

Oct 31, 2017 0:49:27 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

I'm registered "Independent", but usually vote in primaries of the party with the WORST candidate... so I can vote against them. Doing what I can, as one sole voter, to try and minimize the damage that the worst candidate can do.

This past Primary, I voted Democrat so I could vote for Sanders (which was, in reality, a vote AGAINST Hillary)... not that it mattered, what with the DNC "fixing" the primaries.

Nope not fixing...playing by the rules all knew....also DNC wanting best candidate to win....naturally Hillery lost but to think country is ready for Sanders and his programs...this middle to the left person has doubts...then how about middle America..

Fact is, Hillery who did lose...lost by 70,000 votes divided in three States, this landside that our Donald and friends totes is pure BS and he has no interest in bringing the country together...none, nil...that idea in his mind is "verboten"

LOL... Hillary, Debbie (Wassermam schultz), and company wouldn't know how to "play by the rules" If you glued a rule book to each of their foreheads.

The breach of the Democratic committee’s emails, made public on Friday by WikiLeaks, offered undeniable evidence of what Mr. Sanders’s supporters had complained about for much of the senator’s contentious primary contest with Mrs. Clinton: that the party was effectively an arm of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign. The messages showed members of the committee’s communications team musing about pushing the narrative that the Sanders campaign was inept and trying to raise questions publicly about whether he was an atheist.

www.nytimes.com/2016/07/25/us/politics/debbie-wasserman-schultz-dnc-wikileaks-emails.html

[Opti]

Oct 31, 2017 0:49:27 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

I'm registered "Independent", but usually vote in primaries of the party with the WORST candidate... so I can vote against them. Doing what I can, as one sole voter, to try and minimize the damage that the worst candidate can do.

This past Primary, I voted Democrat so I could vote for Sanders (which was, in reality, a vote AGAINST Hillary)... not that it mattered, what with the DNC "fixing" the primaries.

Both the DNC and the RNC wanted real party candidates to win. The DNC was successful in that and the RNC wasn't. Bernie is an independent. The goal of the DNC and RNC is to survive, not to be fair.

Bernard Sanders is an American politician who has been the junior United States Senator from Vermont since 2007. Sanders is the longest serving independent in U.S. congressional history. Wikipedia

The RNC tried pushing a narrative as well. They failed, so rallied behind Trump.

[dezii]

Oct 31, 2017 6:17:38 GMT -5 Opti said:

Oct 31, 2017 0:49:27 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

I'm registered "Independent", but usually vote in primaries of the party with the WORST candidate... so I can vote against them. Doing what I can, as one sole voter, to try and minimize the damage that the worst candidate can do.

This past Primary, I voted Democrat so I could vote for Sanders (which was, in reality, a vote AGAINST Hillary)... not that it mattered, what with the DNC "fixing" the primaries.

Both the DNC and the RNC wanted real party candidates to win. The DNC was successful in that and the RNC wasn't. Bernie is an independent. The goal of the DNC and RNC is to survive, not to be fair.

Bernard Sanders is an American politician who has been the junior United States Senator from Vermont since 2007. Sanders is the longest serving independent in U.S. congressional history. Wikipedia

The RNC tried pushing a narrative as well. They failed, so rallied behind Trump.

Thank u Opt...well explained...Fairness??  We are talking politics here and yes...there are rules regarding the extra delegates...Bernie knew it...

In the mean time...this dog and pony show has been running since this administrations FIRST DAY ..the Donald's insistence that Spicer  destroy his credibility and say the attendance for the inauguration was the largest ever...then the pictures of comparison were shown and the Donald and friends kept repeating the claim....and we were off and running and still are...[sheesh]

..and we would be worse off if Hillery was POTUS...[OH YEAH.. ]

[dezii]

Oct 31, 2017 6:17:38 GMT -5 Opti said:

Oct 31, 2017 0:49:27 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

I'm registered "Independent", but usually vote in primaries of the party with the WORST candidate... so I can vote against them. Doing what I can, as one sole voter, to try and minimize the damage that the worst candidate can do.

This past Primary, I voted Democrat so I could vote for Sanders (which was, in reality, a vote AGAINST Hillary)... not that it mattered, what with the DNC "fixing" the primaries.

Both the DNC and the RNC wanted real party candidates to win. The DNC was successful in that and the RNC wasn't. Bernie is an independent. The goal of the DNC and RNC is to survive, not to be fair.

Bernard Sanders is an American politician who has been the junior United States Senator from Vermont since 2007. Sanders is the longest serving independent in U.S. congressional history. Wikipedia

The RNC tried pushing a narrative as well. They failed, so rallied behind Trump.

Ok stand corrected...always thought he considered himself as a socialist and was so referred as one...me bad...sorry.
================================
A bit of historic trivia for my friends here...In Bridgeport , Connecticut there was a SOCIALIST Mayor.., "Jasper  McLevy"...very popular...served from 1933 to 1957...24 years...fiscal conservative...24 years[whew].

One of the stories associated to this beloved Mayor...Connecticut one year got hit by a late Spring snow blizzard...Snow budget had already been depleted...When asked by the forth estate what the Mayor was going to do about the accumulated snow..[guess a lot fell ] he replied..

"The good lord put it there...the good lord can take it away"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasper_McLevy
-------------------------------------------------

Good morning and all have a good and great day...

[billisonboard]

Oct 31, 2017 8:40:23 GMT -5 dezii said:

Oct 31, 2017 6:17:38 GMT -5 Opti said:

... Bernard Sanders is an American politician who has been the junior United States Senator from Vermont since 2007. Sanders is the longest serving independent in U.S. congressional history. ...

Ok stand corrected...always thought he considered himself as a socialist and was so referred as one...me bad...sorry.

Note the difference between socialist and Socialist.  There is a Socialist Party in the US. Sanders does not run for office on their ticket. He runs for the Senate as an individual without party affiliation. Thus he is identified as "independent". I think that Sanders does consider himself a socialist, just not a Socialist. 

[dezii]

Oct 31, 2017 10:06:34 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Oct 31, 2017 8:40:23 GMT -5 dezii said:

Ok stand corrected...always thought he considered himself as a socialist and was so referred as one...me bad...sorry.

Note the difference between socialist and Socialist.  There is a Socialist Party in the US. Sanders does not run for office on their ticket. He runs for the Senate as an individual without party affiliation. Thus he is identified as "independent". I think that Sanders does consider himself a socialist, just not a Socialist. 

ok.....I guess

[Deleted]

Oct 31, 2017 6:17:38 GMT -5 Opti said:

Oct 31, 2017 0:49:27 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

I'm registered "Independent", but usually vote in primaries of the party with the WORST candidate... so I can vote against them. Doing what I can, as one sole voter, to try and minimize the damage that the worst candidate can do.

This past Primary, I voted Democrat so I could vote for Sanders (which was, in reality, a vote AGAINST Hillary)... not that it mattered, what with the DNC "fixing" the primaries.

Both the DNC and the RNC wanted real party candidates to win. The DNC was successful in that and the RNC wasn't. Bernie is an independent. The goal of the DNC and RNC is to survive, not to be fair.

Bernard Sanders is an American politician who has been the junior United States Senator from Vermont since 2007. Sanders is the longest serving independent in U.S. congressional history. Wikipedia

The RNC tried pushing a narrative as well. They failed, so rallied behind Trump.

The fact that they wanted a "true believer" is irrelevant to my point though... the point was "the fix was in, at the DNC, for Hillary". You can't honestly argue against that reality.

And many Democrats did NOT want her... so much so that they voted in the primaries (43.14% {from Wikipedia}) for an Independent over her, and then many defected the Party when she was the Heiress apparent. You can't argue against that reality either.

As far as meeting the goal of "survival"... how's that turning out for both sides? Less voters (by percentage) want anything to do with either side than ever before.

[billisonboard]

Oct 31, 2017 19:04:04 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

... the point was "the fix was in, at the DNC, for Hillary". You can't honestly argue against that reality.

...

There was clearly a preference for Hillary . I don't agree that it was possible to fix the results of the Democratic Party nomination process in 2016.

[Deleted]

Oct 31, 2017 20:13:25 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Oct 31, 2017 19:04:04 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

... the point was "the fix was in, at the DNC, for Hillary". You can't honestly argue against that reality.

...

There was clearly a preference for Hillary . I don't agree that it was possible to fix the results of the Democratic Party nomination process in 2016.

Even an unsuccessful "fix" is still a "fix"... in cheater's parlance. If you use a "cheat sheet" on a test and still fail because you screwed up your cheat sheet... are you saying you didn't cheat? I'd say you still cheated... you just weren't successful.

[billisonboard]

Oct 31, 2017 22:13:27 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Oct 31, 2017 20:13:25 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

There was clearly a preference for Hillary . I don't agree that it was possible to fix the results of the Democratic Party nomination process in 2016.

Even an unsuccessful "fix" is still a "fix"... in cheater's parlance. If you use a "cheat sheet" on a test and still fail because you screwed up your cheat sheet... are you saying you didn't cheat? I'd say you still cheated... you just weren't successful.

I am saying that the Democratic Party's presidential primary season is an essay test.