• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Donna Brazile: I found 'proof' the DNC rigged the nomination for Hillary Clinton

pillars said:
There are plenty of people left in the middle. There is a reason that the category of independent is now larger than either party.
Click to expand...

And yet they always choose one or the other main parties because no third party can carve a successful niche for itself.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
And yet they always choose one or the other main parties because no third party can carve a successful niche for itself.
Click to expand...

Third parties have carved niches here and elsewhere, and could in the future.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
If the liberals and conservatives are the most politically active, don’t they dictate the framing of political debate? In order to win office as a democrat or republican on has to play to their base because they are the most politically active. Trying to run as a moderate works if there is common ground, but when politics is polarized into two completely different visions of what the country stands for moderates are forced to choose between which side best represents them.
Click to expand...

Yup! There are only very few who can manage those waters and those few are the ones who get to be President.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
And yet they always choose one or the other main parties because no third party can carve a successful niche for itself.
Click to expand...
pillars said:
Third parties have carved niches here and elsewhere, and could in the future.
Click to expand...

To find out why we often devolve into two dominate party rule, you guys may consider familiarizing yourself with Diverger's Law - if you already haven't:

Wikipedia: Duverger's Law

Edit: UnitedWeStand, are the member that turned me on to Duverger's?
 
Chomsky said:
Actually, his statement seemed reasonably clear and concise.

He's claiming partisanship would seem to preclude moderation, which I think has some truth to it. But IMO the terms do not have finite mutually exclusive lines of demarcation.
Click to expand...

The issue is simple how can I moderate my positions without desecrating everything I claim to stand for?

A similar dilemma existed in the play fiddler on the roof, the main character, tevye, had three daughters and each of them go against tradition in their choice of lover.

Tevye goes againist his traditions and allows the first two daughters to fall in love with the person that they wanted. The third daughter however, wanted her father to allow her to marry a Russian, someone outside the Jewish faith.

This was his dilemma

 
Chomsky said:
To find out why we often devolve into two dominate party rule, you guys may consider familiarizing yourself with Diverger's Law - if you already haven't:

Wikipedia: Duverger's Law

Edit: UnitedWeStand, are the member that turned me on to Duverger's?
Click to expand...

I think so, duvergers law is precisely the reason why third parties don’t succeed in America.
 
iliveonramen said:
No...Democrats are pretty pissed off at their party. Hence the change in leadership.
Also, I'm not sure how the Democratic Part ****ed America.
Click to expand...

I think he's trying to blame democrats for Trump. wow, talk about the party of accountability.
 
iliveonramen said:
No...Democrats are pretty pissed off at their party. Hence the change in leadership.
Also, I'm not sure how the Democratic Part ****ed America.
Click to expand...

There is no change, all the old failed people are still at the top of the party, and as I have said for at least two years they ****ed America by attempting to coronate the very corrupt and the very low quality Hillary Clinton, which was a gross abuse of America that still to this date has not been addressed hardly at all.

The sore festers.
 
Last edited:
Abbazorkzog said:
The American political elite are ****ing morons.
Click to expand...

Low quality people generally, a lot of them cant do much better than the crap work they turn out, but the best of the best in the D Branch of the DC ELITE should have known 1) HILLARY SUCKS and 2) that the people deserve and must get a primary if the Elite expect to be seen as credible.
 
Last edited:
maxparrish said:
The good news for Democrats is that the Clinton era is both shamed and dead. Donna Brazile was a part of that cabal of political corruption, and FINALLY someone has a thimble of courage to tell the truth. The DNC was bought and paid for by Clinton.

Brazeile no onger fears the Clintons...and like the death of Stalin, the repressed and fearful are getting out their knives on those who they secretly hated.
Click to expand...

Well, now all we need is for the Republic Party to stop being afraid of Trump and all will be good in the world of American politics...well, almost.
 
Objective Voice said:
Well, now all we need is for the Republic Party to stop being afraid of Trump and all will be good in the world of American politics...well, almost.
Click to expand...

It's not Trump they are afraid of, it is the American people that scare the crap out of them now that they have lost control completely, now that their long record of incompetence , lies and betrayals generated the Rebellion which Trump leads.
 
maxparrish said:
Yes. I understand that his originals were done with a layered technique that no copy does justice too.
Click to expand...

Having seen more than a few - that is correct. A truly great illustrator and artist.
 
Donna has learned from Obama...

 
The most interesting part is Brazille claiming that Obama left the DNC $24 million in debt, $8 million of it owed to vendors.
 
Sometimes corruption doesn't pay off. Even such brazen manipulation of the Democratic party as engaged in by Hillary Clinton couldn't overcome her shortcomings as a candidate. She was horrible. Just an angry grandma. And she managed to alienate half the people who would normally vote Democratic. She was a Godsend to Trump. His best asset.
 
So, can we all stop pretending that Hillary isn't corrupt/unethical, now?
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
Obviously they knew Bernie had no chance.
Click to expand...

Nah, they knew that Bernie had a chance. They wanted the establishment and Sanders wasn't it. They also owed Hillary for the deal she made with Obama back in 2008. She bows out and becomes the Secretary of State, only to bow out towards the end in order to prepare for the election? This was obvious as hell last year when it happened.

Anybody but Trump would have destroyed Clinton. But when it came to "shaking things up" it would have been a toss up between Sanders and Trump. And most of the non-tribal voters would have gone with the Independent who was running as the DNC nominee. As it was, we had to choose between the lame or the buffoon.
 
She's kinda late to the party, isn't she?
I mean, most everyone else had already figured this out.
 
American said:
Donna Brazile: I found 'proof' the DNC rigged the nomination for Hillary Clinton | Fox News

Looks like Democrat voters really got screwed.
Click to expand...

Yes, those of us who voted in the Democratic primary really were cheated. Truthfully, I don't even want to read the mundane idiocy from the Hillary supporters who're still in denial over what a cheating piece of **** Hillary Clinton is. I can't waited for the deranged justifications for this from her ilk. I mean, Hillary Clinton really is an unbelievable piece of ****. Jesus Christ, how can anyone defend her behavior during the primary? She bought the party apparatus off to gain an immeasurably unfair advantage, essentially violate campaign funding law, and then destroyed the party apparatus while doing so.

Honestly, the most depraved thing is that the actual details of what happened are even worse than I imagined, I like the commentary by the former Sanders campaigner who said, "If you had told me this during the primary — that they're using the joint fundraising committee to get veto power over DNC functions — I would have called you a conspiracy nut." Well, sadly, that person would have been 100% correct. The other sad news is that we may never get to the illegal voter purges, the intentional misinformation over crossover ballots in California that caused almost a million people to lose their vote, and the closure of polling stations, and related voting irregularities.

But yeah, Hillary Clinton is a cheating piece of ****. The 2016 election from start to finish was a huge ****ing sham.
 
Last edited:
Waddy said:
Sometimes corruption doesn't pay off. Even such brazen manipulation of the Democratic party as engaged in by Hillary Clinton couldn't overcome her shortcomings as a candidate. She was horrible. Just an angry grandma. And she managed to alienate half the people who would normally vote Democratic. She was a Godsend to Trump. His best asset.
Click to expand...

Trump would not have beaten anyone else. Think about it. She badly lost a huge part of the white, blue collar, union sympathetic vote in three democratic states. In areas where Obama polled 40 to 45 percent of the vote, she polled 20 to 25 percent. The turnout for Trump and against her was stunning in those areas; no one seems to have notice how hated she was among traditional and old culture blue collar whites.

If, for example, Joe Biden had been nominated he would have won by landslide proportions - easily winning approval from the democratic states. Even sanders would have likely won. Hillary was old news; her last chance being in 2008. But in 2016, the "I'm a woman vote for me" mantra was worn out.

Will Clinton run again? Most likely not, but who really knows? The sense of entitlement is strong (as it was with Jeb Bush) so anything is possible... perhaps D.B. saw that and wanted to put a stake in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom