• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

DNC changes rules on superdelegates

 
 
 
I'm mostly amused by the idea that it was "PC hysteria" or some evil scheming that made Clinton highly popular, as opposed to the simple fact that she was simply a popular candidate back in 2015-2016. Sanders, and everyone else, had an uphill fight and simply weren't up to it, while Dolt 45 had already shown in 2011 that appealing to crass bigotry was popular among GOP voters when he became the presidential frontrunner by yelling about how Obama couldn't possibly be American/a good student/a decent writer/etc.

This was also, of course, before we were all told about what a lovable scamp Dolt 45 was, and we shouldn't take him literally and he won't be that bad, and oh my god look at these horrible emails Hillary and the DNC all had.
 
Sarpedon said:
A bunch of losers. That election will be remembered for the poor quality of the candidates. The Republicans really didn't have anyone credible. The Democrats might have if they all hadn't decided or been pressured to step aside for Hilary.
Click to expand...

I think that aliens from the planet Mork brain washed everyone into voting for HRC rather than Sanders! I had the honor to personally meet both Sanders and Hillary in 2016. I introduced both at separate times to a large group voters in Washington. Most of the audience was reservation folk. HRC was very warm, inviting, and funny. She was hilarious. Too bad that she didn't show this more during the rest of her campaign. But I can tell you that she won the audience over. She did an opening speech then Q&A. Most of the audience questions were related to the res and other local issues. She addressed them expertly with compassion and truth. Bernie presented three days later. Maybe I was brain washed by aliens: but I found Sanders to be fake and not genuine. He didn't address our issues well. The audience would ask questions. He'd ignore and just hammer on economy inequality. Fixing that will solve everything. It won't.

Sadly, I think that HRC was one of those politicians who was much warmer and personable in person and in smaller groups. But when crowds got larger, and the press threw on their spotlight, she would rely on her prepared statements and dogma and would become uninspiring.

Anyway, I met both Sanders and HRC at a personal level. I knew the issues. I have nothing against Bernie. I would have voted for him in the general. But I voted for HRC. Fine if you want to think that I was brainwashed. But the right is going to continue winning as long as the left continues to be divided and buying the Russian meme that Sanders was screwed...
 
Harry Bosch said:
I introduced both at separate times to a large group voters in Washington. Most of the audience was reservation folk. HRC was very warm, inviting, and funny. She was hilarious. Too bad that she didn't show this more during the rest of her campaign. But I can tell you that she won the audience over. She did an opening speech then Q&A. Most of the audience questions were related to the res and other local issues. She addressed them expertly with compassion and truth.
Click to expand...

I would actually bet money that she did exactly that on her campaign. No one knew about it though because none of it got any coverage. It was all Trump 24/7.
 
The problem with super delegates are the perception of allowing a political elite to have a final say on everything. Apparently another change is deciding to go with primaries and no more caucuses. Caucuses favor activists supposedly, and make it hard for mere voters to support their favored candidates. It looks like 2020 with have lots of Democratic candidates running. It is going to be interesting to see if this all energizes more voters or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom