JaCrispy Posted July 25 Posted July 25 (edited) First, they screwed Bernie over in 2016, when he was leading Hillary, and the Democrat Party just decided to give it to her… Then, Bernie bent over in 2020, and asked for it again, but this time with no lube… And now this…Knowing the whole time that Biden was not healthy enough to run, the Democrat Party waited until after the primary, so that the donors could select the candidate, and not the people… While Gerald Ford predicts the future, Gen Z voices displeasure over rigged election process… Edited July 26 by JaCrispy 2 3
ChiGoose Posted July 25 Posted July 25 Maybe it’s just me, but Dem voters being forced to coronate a guy they were telling pollsters they didn’t want seems like it represents the voice of the voter less than a change that something like 80% of voters wanted… 1
B-Man Posted July 26 Posted July 26 2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Maybe it’s just me, but Dem voters being forced to coronate a guy they were telling pollsters they didn’t want seems like it represents the voice of the voter less than a change that something like 80% of voters wanted… It’s just you. Yes more than half of democrats didn’t want Joe to run by July 2024. Now address where those same voters had any input into the Harris coronation. They were disenfranchised no matter how you spin it goose. . 4 3
ChiGoose Posted July 26 Posted July 26 16 minutes ago, B-Man said: It’s just you. Yes more than half of democrats didn’t want Joe to run by July 2024. Now address where those same voters had any input into the Harris coronation. They were disenfranchised no matter how you spin it goose. . They seem pretty happy with how things turned out. If you want to argue that our electoral system is stupid and doesn't deliver the will of the voters, I'll join hands with you on that. If you want to argue that a decision that more than 80% of voters supported was anti-democratic, then it seems like you're arguing that a process that makes almost everybody unhappy is better than a decision that almost everyone agrees with.
4th&long Posted July 26 Posted July 26 I’m with the guys on the right on this one. I’ve been wondering when someone was going to bring this up? They voted for Biden in the primary. In the end I think he went willingly only because he knew he had no choice. He lost a lot of the Dems but even worse he lost the donors. I think he would have stayed in if it wasn’t for losing the big donors. But the people voted for him. and why does Harris automatically get the delegates? why did the get stuck with her? shouldn’t there be some sort of vote between her and a few other Dems to see who gets the nod? What if the majority of the Dems don’t like her? was it just because she on ticket with Biden? Something stinks here. It seems like the constitution is getting run over. 3 1 4
ChiGoose Posted July 26 Posted July 26 5 minutes ago, 4th&long said: I’m with the guys on the right on this one. I’ve been wondering when someone was going to bring this up? They voted for Biden in the primary. In the end I think he went willingly only because he knew he had no choice. He lost a lot of the Dems but even worse he lost the donors. I think he would have stayed in if it wasn’t for losing the big donors. But the people voted for him. and why does Harris automatically get the delegates? why did the get stuck with her? shouldn’t there be some sort of vote between her and a few other Dems to see who gets the nod? What if the majority of the Dems don’t like her? was it just because she on ticket with Biden? Something stinks here. It seems like the constitution is getting run over. It's just a matter of the ideal vs the pratical. Like the majority of Democrats, I did not want Joe Biden to run for re-election. Like the majority of Democrats, I voted for him in the primary because he was (sadly) the best choice. Like the overwhelming majority of Democrats, I wholeheartedly support his decision to end his campaign. Once he steps down, it becomes an open spot. Harris does not automatically get the delegates, they are released from their commitment to Biden. Any of the big names could have announced a challenge. Instead, basically every top Dem, including her potential rivals, endorsed her. The nomination is *not* decided yet. She is just the presumptive nominee, as Biden was before her. There can still be a challenger (I assume that nutjob Marianne Williamson will try to throw her hat in the ring), but it seems that enough people have endorsed her to give her the nomination. We will see when the delegate voting starts, but it looks like she has it. Also, party primaries aren't in the Constitution because for the first ~200 years of America, party nominees were decided in smoked filled back rooms, not by the voters. 2
4th&long Posted July 26 Posted July 26 2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: It's just a matter of the ideal vs the pratical. Like the majority of Democrats, I did not want Joe Biden to run for re-election. Like the majority of Democrats, I voted for him in the primary because he was (sadly) the best choice. Like the overwhelming majority of Democrats, I wholeheartedly support his decision to end his campaign. Once he steps down, it becomes an open spot. Harris does not automatically get the delegates, they are released from their commitment to Biden. Any of the big names could have announced a challenge. Instead, basically every top Dem, including her potential rivals, endorsed her. The nomination is *not* decided yet. She is just the presumptive nominee, as Biden was before her. There can still be a challenger (I assume that nutjob Marianne Williamson will try to throw her hat in the ring), but it seems that enough people have endorsed her to give her the nomination. We will see when the delegate voting starts, but it looks like she has it. Also, party primaries aren't in the Constitution because for the first ~200 years of America, party nominees were decided in smoked filled back rooms, not by the voters. Good to know, I have been wondering about a lot of this. Thanks. 1
ChiGoose Posted July 26 Posted July 26 6 minutes ago, 4th&long said: Good to know, I have been wondering about a lot of this. Thanks. No problem. I think there's a lot of confusion between "presumptive nominee" and "nominee." Under the laws and party rules, "presumptive nominee" isn't a thing. The media uses it to denote that the candidate is assured to become the nominee once the voting starts. Nobody is the nominee until they get the delegate votes. Something I've found interesting is that Obama has not endorsed Harris yet. Reports are that he will soon, but I get the impression that he was hoping for a more open convention and pushing for another candidate (I'm thinking Mark Kelly). Based on that, I'm guessing that Biden following up his announcement with an endorsement of Harris was not just a move to secure his legacy and support his colleague, but also an FU to Obama since they seem to have had a bit of a falling out since 2016.
BillsFanNC Posted July 26 Posted July 26 It's ALWAYS just you King. That's why you're the friggin King! 1 1 1
Big Blitz Posted July 26 Posted July 26 Never forget it’s only Harris bc at this point the money could only go to her - which btw could be a violation of several federal laws. Not the least of which is whether or not Biden was coerced and threatened to drop out. Pelosi saying “it’s going to be the hard way” if that were a Republican it would be the biggest scandal since the government covering up the Trump assassination attempt. 2 1 1
ChiGoose Posted July 26 Posted July 26 8 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: Never forget it’s only Harris bc at this point the money could only go to her - which btw could be a violation of several federal laws. Not the least of which is whether or not Biden was coerced and threatened to drop out. Pelosi saying “it’s going to be the hard way” if that were a Republican it would be the biggest scandal since the government covering up the Trump assassination attempt. I'm old enough to remember when Harris received about $100 million *after* Biden dropped about. For those who are fewer than a couple of days old, like apparently Big Blitz here, had it been someone else, the Biden-Harris money could have been converted into a Super PAC and everything earned for the non-Harris candidate would be in their new campaign coiffeurs. As far as Republican scandals go, after 34 felony convictions, being found guilty of sexual assault, huge judgements for defamations, having to shut down a charity due to stealing from kids with cancer, allegations of raping a 13-year old who looked like his daughter, being buddy-buddy with Epstein, serious allegations of money laundering, self-evident violations of the emoluments clause, and the lyingest liar who ever lied as the three-time GOP nominee... I'm not sure *any* allegation against a Republican would actually do anything. 1 2
Irv Posted July 26 Posted July 26 1 hour ago, 4th&long said: I’m with the guys on the right on this one. I’ve been wondering when someone was going to bring this up? They voted for Biden in the primary. In the end I think he went willingly only because he knew he had no choice. He lost a lot of the Dems but even worse he lost the donors. I think he would have stayed in if it wasn’t for losing the big donors. But the people voted for him. and why does Harris automatically get the delegates? why did the get stuck with her? shouldn’t there be some sort of vote between her and a few other Dems to see who gets the nod? What if the majority of the Dems don’t like her? was it just because she on ticket with Biden? Something stinks here. It seems like the constitution is getting run over. Post of the year! Thank you. 1 1
JaCrispy Posted July 26 Author Posted July 26 1 hour ago, ChiGoose said: They seem pretty happy with how things turned out. If you want to argue that our electoral system is stupid and doesn't deliver the will of the voters, I'll join hands with you on that. If you want to argue that a decision that more than 80% of voters supported was anti-democratic, then it seems like you're arguing that a process that makes almost everybody unhappy is better than a decision that almost everyone agrees with. You’re really stretching it with this… Ever heard the saying “A stale piece of bread is the most delicious food ever, to a starving person”? Dem voters were “starving”, with Joe Biden as their candidate, and would have settled for just about anyone but him… But do not mistake your “80%” statistic to mean that in an open democratic process, they wanted Kamala… Remember, in the 2020 Democrat primary field of roughly 20 candidates, Harris was the first to drop out, because she couldn’t get a single vote- and polling at just 1% black support. 1
ChiGoose Posted July 26 Posted July 26 6 minutes ago, JaCrispy said: You’re really stretching it with this… Ever heard the saying “A stale piece of bread is the most delicious food ever, to a starving person”? Dem voters were “starving”, with Joe Biden as their candidate, and would have settled for just about anyone but him… But do not mistake your “80%” statistic to mean that in an open democratic process, they wanted Kamala… Remember, in the 2020 Democrat primary field of roughly 20 candidates, Harris was the first to drop out, because she couldn’t get a single vote- and polling at just 1% black support. Fun fact: Harris is *not* the nominee. Dem voters can put pressure on their delegates to vote for someone else once voting started. Dem leaders who don’t want Harris can declare to challenge her. The fact is that when Biden dropped out, his delegates became unpledged. They can vote for anyone. They still can, but it seems she has probably locked it up. I don’t know why people don’t trust Dems saying they are happy with this and being upset on the behalf of Dems who are perfectly happy
JaCrispy Posted July 26 Author Posted July 26 19 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Fun fact: Harris is *not* the nominee. Dem voters can put pressure on their delegates to vote for someone else once voting started. Dem leaders who don’t want Harris can declare to challenge her. The fact is that when Biden dropped out, his delegates became unpledged. They can vote for anyone. They still can, but it seems she has probably locked it up. I don’t know why people don’t trust Dems saying they are happy with this and being upset on the behalf of Dems who are perfectly happy Again, you’re missing the point… Dem voters ARE happy that Biden is gone, but they ARE NOT happy they had to settle for Kamala, without having a say…And I don’t blame them… 2
ChiGoose Posted July 26 Posted July 26 (edited) 36 minutes ago, JaCrispy said: Again, you’re missing the point… Dem voters ARE happy that Biden is gone, but they ARE NOT happy they had to settle for Kamala, without having a say…And I don’t blame them… Can you cite support for your claim that Dem voters are not happy with Kamala? I gotta say, fundraising, polling, and general enthusiasm seems to disagree with you Edited July 26 by ChiGoose 1
Big Blitz Posted July 26 Posted July 26 Cilizza is a democrat. He should understand rewriting of history and why they are doing it.
Doc Brown Posted July 26 Posted July 26 (edited) It's so amusing how Republicans are more ticked off about this than Democrats. Hillary and Biden saved us from the chance of a crazy socialist nominee that would've sent this country into a depression if elected. They also had more votes. As for Biden this year, has a politician ever re-signed from running after winning the primaries? 3 hours ago, ChiGoose said: Can you cite support for your claim that Dem voters are not happy with Kamala? I gotta say, fundraising, polling, and general enthusiasm seems to disagree with you The 2020 primaries where she performed so poorly she withdrew before the primaries. LOL. I think Dem voters would've been happy with pretty much anybody after the Biden debate debacle. Edited July 26 by Doc Brown
K D Posted July 26 Posted July 26 Dems want no voter ID and mail in ballots. Gee, I wonder why. Just wait until Trump wins the electoral college again before the final tallies and they are going to cry about how they need to get rid of that just like how they cry about stacking the courts. They hate the democratic process clearly
All_Pro_Bills Posted July 26 Posted July 26 Dem leadership picked Harris because they think she has the best chance of winning, at the moment. The choice has less to do with next in line thinking, qualifications, or ideas. She had little of this going for her. If that changes before the convention and they think there is someone else that has a better chance of winning they'll dump her in a heartbeat. In this case, the democratic process is superceded by the necessity to win the crusade against orange man. By any means necessary. And I mean ANY means. 2
Recommended Posts