• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT5| Archdemon Hillary Clinton vs. Lice Traffic Jam

Status
Not open for further replies.

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
In Jesus name I pray Hillary wins Kentucky tonight and a deluge of supers wash away this campaign.
 
But aren't there hours and hours of footage that you have not watched? There are reports and accounts of violence which you have disregarded as untrue based on your incomplete viewing of the proceedings.

There are hours of stalling that wasn't recorded, but I saw the majority of what happened when the body was assembled and in order, according to the scheduling of the agenda as laid out by the state party.

And I should add that I've reviewed what is currently available online (that I know of). If there is more footage, I would be more than happy to review it.
 
Okay, 'indefensible' is probably a bit hyperbole. However, I find the arguments in defense of the NSDP's conduct to be tenuous at best.

But, like, if you had to choose between delegates being awarded correctly, and making sure Roberts Rules of Order were adhered to, which is more important.

100% agree on "gimme a primary" though. Caucus are a messy fat big thing.
 
It's 2016 and we still use delegates in our primaries/elections.

This is so fucking antiquated.

Could you imagine if my fantasy football league had delegates sent to a convention in order to vote on rule changes!?!?

Why do we even bother with this shit. We know the vote. Affirm the results, put it on computer, be done with it.
 

Zornack

Member
Actually, I'd be fine with Hillary winning the state flat out according to the popular vote. The actual results aren't the problem. It's the conduct of the state party that I take issue with.

I'm more talking about the motion to change the rules of the convention from the temporary ones to the rules the Sanders' supporters wanted.

Yes, the rules of order were not followed correctly, but the rules the Sanders' supporters were in favor of would have not passed given the split in representation and the chair's final say in deciding the outcome of a voice vote.

I'm just struggling to see how you can take a "both sides were bad" stance when the conduct of the state party, though improper, had no bearing on the results. No rules would have been different nor delegate counts changed had the state party followed the rules of order correctly.
 

pigeon

Banned
on an unrelated note:

has anyone been paying attention to Al Giordano's Twitter lately?

apparently he's mulling over challenging Sanders in 2018

I tend to think that if Sanders pitches a huge fight at the convention the DNC will probably run somebody against him in 2018. This is probably a trial balloon.
 

Wilsongt

Member
But, like, if you had to choose between delegates being awarded correctly, and making sure Roberts Rules of Order were adhered to, which is more important.

100% agree on "gimme a primary" though. Caucus are a messy fat big thing.

Cock uses are indeed big, fat, and messy.
 
But, like, if you had to choose between delegates being awarded correctly, and making sure Roberts Rules of Order were adhered to, which is more important.

100% agree on "gimme a primary" though. Caucus are a messy fat big thing.

The former of course, but only in a perfect world where correct is absolute and not subjective. I do not approve of the unilateral rulings of a body when the structure of the body is supposed to be governed by the body.

In other words, if the decision were left up to me, I'd choose the former. If not, I'd choose the latter.
 
I'm more talking about the motion to change the rules of the convention from the temporary ones to the rules the Sanders' supporters wanted.

Yes, the rules of order were not followed correctly, but the rules the Sanders' supporters were in favor of would have not passed given the split in representation and the chair's final say in deciding the outcome of a voice vote.

I'm just struggling to see how you can take a "both sides were bad" stance when the conduct of the state party, though improper, had no bearing on the results. No rules would have been different nor delegate counts changed had the state party followed the rules of order correctly.

It's a matter of principle. That the outcome was correct is merely coincidental. With the way the rules were manipulated, it could have just as easily favored Bernie and that would have been just as wrong.
 
In Jesus name I pray Hillary wins Kentucky tonight and a deluge of supers wash away this campaign.

tumblr_n5ha8cNMYH1qlvwnco1_500.gif
 
Screw it!

Doug Johnson Hatlem's, from CounterPunch, just concluded six part investigation on possible election fraud in this year's Democratic primaries, is too juicy to sit on (an interesting read), which even includes an interview with lead Edison exit pollster, Joe Lenski, Executive Vice-President and lead researcher for Edison Research, and will you look at that, the article even highlights the NY election oddity I wrote about the [post=202315457]other day[/post]:

Intriguingly, after I began this series on election fraud allegations, a reader who would like to remain anonymous, emailed to point out similar irregularities in New York’s Democratic primary this year:

Results for Kings County and Bronx county [show] deviation from perfect 60-40 and 70-30 results was the same 0.035% The increase in votes in Kings (Brooklyn) from 2008 is incredible, almost a perfect 10%. Not only that but that’s where over a 100,000 voters lost their right to vote. Another 20,000 votes in Kings would mean almost a 20% increase which would be amazing compared to other counties that experienced decreases or mild increases.

Unless someone else beats me to the punch, I'll probably follow up with a post that highlights the most interesting points, but the fact that the Republican primaries are not exhibiting the same wide difference between the exit poll results and the recorded vote is possibly quite telling.
 

Zornack

Member
It's a matter of principle. That the outcome was correct is merely coincidental. With the way the rules were manipulated, it could have just as easily favored Bernie and that would have been just as wrong.

This just seems like a situation where a person running down the street knocks someone over and in response a gun in drawn. Yes, everyone involved did something wrong but one person is clearly much more in the wrong.

We're talking death threats, obscenities, violence and threats of violence versus following rules in a way that, though improper, in no way changed the outcome.

If the representation wasn't so split I think you might have a point. If it were 80/20 Sanders and everything that could favor Clinton did favor Clinton then yeah, there'd be room for some anger (though still not death threats). But that isn't what happened.
 

hawk2025

Member
Daniel B·;203940261 said:
Screw it!

Doug Johnson Hatlem's, from CounterPunch, just concluded six part investigation on possible election fraud in this year's Democratic primaries, is too juicy to sit on (an interesting read), which even includes an interview with lead Edison exit pollster, Joe Lenski, Executive Vice-President and lead researcher for Edison Research, and will you look at that, the article even highlights the NY election oddity I wrote about the [post=202315457]other day[/post]:



Unless someone else beats me to the punch, I'll probably follow up with a post that highlights the most interesting points, but the fact that the Republican primaries are not exhibiting the same wide difference between the exit poll results and the recorded vote is possibly quite telling.


No, it isn't.
 

Wilsongt

Member
Daniel B·;203940261 said:
Screw it!

Doug Johnson Hatlem's, from CounterPunch, just concluded six part investigation on possible election fraud in this year's Democratic primaries, is too juicy to sit on (an interesting read), which even includes an interview with lead Edison exit pollster, Joe Lenski, Executive Vice-President and lead researcher for Edison Research, and will you look at that, the article even highlights the NY election oddity I wrote about the [post=202315457]other day[/post]:



Unless someone else beats me to the punch, I'll probably follow up with a post that highlights the most interesting points, but the fact that the Republican primaries are not exhibiting the same wide difference between the exit poll results and the recorded vote is possibly quite telling.

Really?
 

mo60

Member
I tend to think that if Sanders pitches a huge fight at the convention the DNC will probably run somebody against him in 2018. This is probably a trial balloon.

The DNC is probably going to find a way to make sure that doesn't happen at the convention. They may try to get both the Hilary and Bernie campaign teams together right after the primaries and try to figure out what happens at the convention and to possibly reconcile their differences. I'm probably being optimistic about this but I expect something like that to happen before the convention unless Bernie decides to support her after the June 7th primaries.

And lol at trump's plan to rehabilitate his public image. It's not going to work.Trump has a history of acting the way those recently released SuperPAC described.
 

hawk2025

Member
The DNC is probably going to find a way to make sure that doesn't happen at the convention. They may try to get both the Hilary and Bernie campaign teams together right after the primaries and try to figure out what happens at the convention and to possibly reconcile their differences. I'm probably being optimistic about this but I expect something like that to happen before the convention unless Bernie decides to support her after the June 7th primaries.


The man can't even do a denouncing statement paragraph without writing a fucking conspiracy over bullet holes and break-ins from months ago on the same paragraph.

How do you "reconcile differences" with that kind of thinking?
 
And the hits keep coming. A third northern KY friend complaining about being disenfranchised. She says on FB (paraphrased): "WTF I changed my registration 15 years ago to (R) so I could vote for a friend that was running for a lower office. Tried to vote in the (D) primary today and got turned away!".

All I hear is well I haven't voted in a primary in 15 years so I shouldn't be voting anyway and have no right to complain about not being able to spread the Bern.

You don't participate for a decade and a half and now and now all of a sudden you care because of some bullshit cult of personality? You're part of the problem.
 

gcubed

Member
the speed at which brainchild has pivoted from every failed argument he's posted today has been astonishing. If only Trump was that deft at moving between layers of bullshit, i may be nervous about the general.
 

mo60

Member
The man can't even do a denouncing statement paragraph without writing a fucking conspiracy over bullet holes and break-ins from months ago on the same paragraph.

How do you "reconcile differences" with that kind of thinking?

That statement was awful and made me not like sanders that much anymore. I think that is something the DNC may try unless both camps do it after the June 7th because I don't think the DNC wants their convention to be too chaotic and/or violent like the Nevada Democratic caucus that was held over the weekend.
 
Sanders has at every turn refused to work with the DNC. He has continually criticized them whenever things haven't gone his way. He has shown zero ability to either force them into doing what he wants, or meeting them in the middle to come up with something equitable.

And he thinks he'd be able to get shit done with the Republican party?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
 
Really? This is PollGAF you are talking about. They knew Romney was losing before Rmoney.
No I'm talking about Bernie folks, specifically that post about "fraud."

Seems like an entire movement built around the assumption that political parties should completely appease to outsiders and that black people do not exist (outside of three black people who endorsed Sanders of course).
 
Sanders has at every turn refused to work with the DNC. He has continually criticized them whenever things haven't gone his way. He has shown zero ability to either force them into doing what he wants, or meeting them in the middle to come up with something equitable.

And he thinks he'd be able to get shit done with the Republican party?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I mean if you look at his record it seems like this was pretty what he did in congress as well.
 

Sibylus

Banned
Bernie gave the blandest, briefest condemnation of violence he possibly could before he began painting his campaign as the victim in length again with added sprinkles of victim blaming.

Guy is a piece of shit and it's nauseating he has such a following.
 
This just seems like a situation where a person running down the street knocks someone over and in response a gun in drawn. Yes, everyone involved did something wrong but one person is clearly much more in the wrong.

We're talking death threats, obscenities, violence and threats of violence versus following rules in a way that, though improper, in no way changed the outcome.

If the representation wasn't so split I think you might have a point. If it were 80/20 Sanders and everything that could favor Clinton did favor Clinton then yeah, there'd be room for some anger (though still not death threats). But that isn't what happened.

The problem with this analogy is that you cannot assume that all of the dissenting Sanders delegates resorts to violence after the convention. During the convention, the amount of people yelling obscenities was very, very small. That doesn't make their actions acceptable, but there is a difference in the people who responded during the convention and afterward. And we don't even know how many of the extremists were delegates at the convention anyway.
 

royalan

Member
Wow, seems like I missed quite a day.

Can't say I'm surprised though.

Anyway, someone a few pages ago said that the White House released a statement on all this?
 

Bowdz

Member
Bernie's the kind of guy who always complains about lag online when he gets rolled despite being a scrublet. "No bro, I'd totally beat you if you'd stop lagging and map hacking!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom