Influencing and rigging are two separate things. And I do find it surprising just how many people from all sides are in favor of the tyranny of the majority. It's wholly un-American to blindly follow the will of the people. The reason the founders set up a republican form of govt was to avoid a election like the one we are about to endure. Generations of ignorant people voting thier own interests and leaders ignoring thier noblesse oblige in favor of gaining more power have destroyed all of the safety mechanisms the constitution and founding fathers had in place.
Just looking at all the silly people claiming the will of the voters must be obeyed almost makes me wish that Trump would win and burn this country to the ground. Yall deserve it.
The Founders and the government they set up have no connection to the rules set up by any Party. The Democrats set their party up in order for the majority of member's votes to decide their candidate.
Please don't conflate or confuse our Constitution and the Democratic Party rulebook. Two different animals.
They were both founded with the same ideals of a representative govt that can reject the tyranny of the majority
I'm trying my utmost not to devolve into Conspiracy Theory, but it almost seems as if the DNC is challenging me to do that.
Take this MSM article for instance: Is it truly shocking the Party preferred Clinton?
They RIGGED the primary and they GLOAT ABOUT IT, like in this quote:
You sick ****s.
People have DIED fighting for Democracy.
MILLIONS have died fighting for it.
Not bothered by this?
Consider seeking mental help.
Huh? Of course it is. The DNC is supposed to be neutral and simply support whatever candidate the Dems vote for.
While it wouldn't surprise me if Hillary and DWS were directly involved in voter fraud I have not suggested that they were.
It was entirely possible that Bernie would have secured the nomination had the DNC and Hillary not interfered with an impartial process. We don't know what the outcome might have been. What we do know is DWS, DNC and Hillary colluded to make sure the process was not impartial.
No, it's not. The job of the Democratic National Committee is to get Democrats elected.
What am I missing? I'm not, nor have I ever been, a HC fan. Or a Democrat, for that matter. But what's all the fuss about? The DNC doesn't have a vote. Their job is to support a Democrat to the White House. Makes sense the powers that be would want HC as the nominee. No question she has the best chance than any OTHER Dem.
Maybe we ought to start looking behind the curtain for the smoke screen. This just isn't a big deal...
Howard Dean was on Morning Joe's show talking about his time as head of the DNC and what rules they're supposed to follow. Yesterday, Ed Rendell was also on the show - he was head of the DNC at one time too.
Dean said he was supposed to be so neutral that he didn't even vote that year in the Vermont primaries, because a vote, even a private one, implied a lack of neutrality.
Rendell said that prior to getting the job as head of the DNC, he donated $1000 to Al Gore's political campaign. As soon as he got the nod, Bill Bradley, who was opposing Gore in the primaries, came to him and pointed out that the staff of the DNC is supposed to remain completely neutral during the primaries. Rendell said he agreed and immediately made a $1000 donation to Bradley's campaign.
Both of those men, who were in that role in the past, said the rules were quite clear. Neither the head of the DNC nor any DNC staffers were to take any kind of position during the primaries - period.
No, it's not. The job of the Democratic National Committee is to get Democrats elected.
They were both founded with the same ideals of a representative govt that can reject the tyranny of the majority
The DNC promised political appointments to high level donors. That's a crime and it's a big deal.
DNC Planned To Reward Big Donors With Federal Appointments | The Daily Caller
That's worthy of its own thread, apdst.
You're right. You want to do the honors?
You found it. You da man!
Is this a recipe for another or multiple additional parties, or what?A political party doing what it can to get its preferred members elected is, basically, just like Hitler.
What am I missing? I'm not, nor have I ever been, a HC fan. Or a Democrat, for that matter. But what's all the fuss about? The DNC doesn't have a vote. Their job is to support a Democrat to the White House. Makes sense the powers that be would want HC as the nominee. No question she has the best chance than any OTHER Dem.
Maybe we ought to start looking behind the curtain for the smoke screen. This just isn't a big deal...
It's not "lefists" it's the DNC specifically.
A lot of liberals here want to do right.
There is no, "tyranny of the majority", when it comes to elections.
At least not today. More likely, a "tyranny of special interests".
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?