Was Biden a good choice or was he the only choice?

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
But fairly?
You sound like the Trump voter who refuses to believe Biden won.

"it wasn't illegal but sure looks unethical". That is the worst one can honestly say. She also said the primary was not rigged.

I voted for Bernie in 2016. He won Oregon's measly few delegates and they voted for him at the convention where he lost.

Bernie lost. Get over it.

If you don't like the rules then work to change them. But nobody is going to just give the nomination to a small fraction of the party's electorate. Maybe Republicans do shit like that but not Democrats.
 

SmichiganOG

Well-Known Member
I really like Elizabeth Warren. She's right about the need to fix the process by which we pick political leaders. I have No disagreement that the process is biased toward people who have been in power for a while. No disagreement that elections are heavily influenced toward a few big donors/lobbyists/well funded PACs. So, it comes down to what is meant by "rigged".

Clinton had a heavy advantage over Bernie because she had been working as a politician for something like 20 years. Reaching out, talking to anybody who would talk with her. Sticking her neck out on controversial issues. She made some enemies but many more allies and that is why she beat Bernie. She worked for it and played by the rules at the time. Did she have too much of an advantage over Bernie? I don't think so. Bernie was a terrible politician. Said dumb things about Black people, did not reach out to people who questioned him and in fact he was a big nothing in Congress. A senator for 12 years with nothing to show for his time except a changed name on a post office? Really? That's your guy?

Yet, Sanders did look to beat Clinton for a while there. His problem was the he had zero credibility with Democratic voters in the South. He lost every primary election there. So here it is again. White Bernie Babies are disregarding Black people and their concerns. We saw their racial bias when they complained about "people not voting in their own self interest", even some Bernie Bro opinion pieces calling them ignorant.

So, if Warren says the election was rigged because the system is biased toward entrenched politicians, then that's a positive way to look at the problem. If you are saying the election was rigged because a nobody politician was at a disadvantage when running against an experienced one. Yes, Bernie was at a disadvatage when he ran against a hard working and canny Hillary. By demanding a level field between two politicians with such disparity in their records, you are just demanding free stuff. That's a common complaint I've heard about Bernie's bros.

Elections are hard to win. They are meant to be hard to win. You have to work for it. Sorry, the presidency will not be given to Bernie because a tiny fraction of the Democratic Party likes him. Not sorry.

Going back to what the head of the DNC said, including what she said in her book:

Brazile: I found no evidence Democratic primary was rigged

If you read it, you'd find she was most upset about the DNC being shuffled aside after Clinton bailed them out because they wasted a ton of money on "consultants". She makes some good points. But Clinton's team was right about that.
For one thing Clinton was given control of the DNC funds 15 months before she won the primary. The cards are stacked against the working class and we lose more every year. Bernie seems to be the only politician that realizes the obvious. There are other reasons to not like the Clintons. What do you think The Clinton Foundation pays Chelsea? Have you noticed who their big donors are?
 

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
For one thing Clinton was given control of the DNC funds 15 months before she won the primary. The cards are stacked against the working class and we lose more every year. Bernie seems to be the only politician that realizes the obvious. There are other reasons to not like the Clintons. What do you think The Clinton Foundation pays Chelsea? Have you noticed who their big donors are?
After someone just gave that man $1b, asking how Chelsea gets paid is a bit ripe.
 

SmichiganOG

Well-Known Member
You sound like the Trump voter who refuses to believe Biden won.

"it wasn't illegal but sure looks unethical". That is the worst one can honestly say. She also said the primary was not rigged.

I voted for Bernie in 2016. He won Oregon's measly few delegates where they voted for him at the convention where he lost.

Bernie lost. Get over it.

If you don't like the rules then work to change them. But nobody is going to just give the nomination to a small fraction of the party's electorate. Maybe Republicans do shit like that but not Democrats.
It was certainly unethical. And the DNC, as well as the Clintons, are corrupt. Or the DNC was under DWS. A Hillary pal.
 

HGCC

Well-Known Member
I feel her (Hillery) mistake was talking down to "deplorable's", when she should of been building them up.
I think the Clinton name is poison with working class people, the group called deplorable. My guess is there are still a bunch of cars on the road in the midwest with anti nafta stickers from the 90s. (Or not...their cars were bad quality) That really did do quite a bit of damage and was a big driver for working class white people to abandon the Democrats.
 

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
I think the Clinton name is poison with working class people, the group called deplorable. My guess is there are still a bunch of half-dead Mopar K-cars on the road in the midwest with anti nafta stickers from the 90s. (Or not...their cars were bad quality) That really did do quite a bit of damage and was a big driver for working class white people to abandon the Democrats.
Fify
 

SmichiganOG

Well-Known Member
I think the Clinton name is poison with working class people, the group called deplorable. My guess is there are still a bunch of cars on the road in the midwest with anti nafta stickers from the 90s. (Or not...their cars were bad quality) That really did do quite a bit of damage and was a big driver for working class white people to abandon the Democrats.
Well, she "lost" against Trump. I really think that says a lot.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
For one thing Clinton was given control of the DNC funds 15 months before she won the primary. The cards are stacked against the working class and we lose more every year. Bernie seems to be the only politician that realizes the obvious. There are other reasons to not like the Clintons. What do you think The Clinton Foundation pays Chelsea? Have you noticed who their big donors are?
Clinton was not given control of DNC funds.

You are either lying or don't know the facts.
 

SmichiganOG

Well-Known Member
Once you correct for gerrymandering, please tell me what it says.
Gerrymandering or not, she was not that popular. Still Trump flags in S. Michigan. I'll add that her gun control was ignorant. A gun manufacturer can be sued if a gun made by them killed someone? Who would make guns after all the makers went under? The government?
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Well, she "lost" against Trump. I really think that says a lot.
Oh yes, she "lost" against Trump. It does say a lot. It says a lot more than just about Clinton.

I'm still reeling over the fact that 72 million people voted for Trump in 2020. I'm still reeling over the fact that the Republican Party mounted a coup on Jan 6, nearly pulled it off and most of the people who supported Trump before the coup still do. I'm still reeling over the tolerance that Republicans have for Putin's and Russian cyber ops to influence our election. I'm still reeling that Republicans gave Trump the powers of a King when they let him off the hook for his abuses of power including his phone call to Ukraine's PM where he asked for a personal favor while withholding funds from Ukraine that were critical to US national security.

So, yes, Clinton "lost" the election but you are being mendacious to say that as if it's all on Clinton.
 

CatHedral

Well-Known Member
Gerrymandering or not, she was not that popular. Still Trump flags in S. Michigan. I'll add that her gun control was ignorant. A gun manufacturer can be sued if a gun made by them killed someone? Who would make guns after all the makers went under? The government?
I am deeply ambivalent about gun law.
After seeing civilian guns on the news in 2020, I’m a lot less of a 2A activist.

The one thing I’d like to see is the abolition of classes of “privileged or exempt civilians” who get to flout the law, notably police.
 

SmichiganOG

Well-Known Member
Oh yes, she "lost" against Trump. It does say a lot. It says a lot more than just about Clinton.

I'm still reeling over the fact that 72 million people voted for Trump in 2020. I'm still reeling over the fact that the Republican Party mounted a coup on Jan 6, nearly pulled it off and most of the people who supported Trump before the coup still do. I'm still reeling over the tolerance that Republicans have for Putin's and Russian cyber ops to influence our election. I'm still reeling that Republicans gave Trump the powers of a King when they let him off the hook for his abuses of power including his phone call to Ukraine's PM where he asked for a personal favor while withholding funds from Ukraine that were critical to US national security.

So, yes, Clinton "lost" the election but you are being mendacious to say that as if it's all on Clinton.
I think she is/was out of touch. I'm shocked too though. And no. It's not all on her. Some of it is.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
That's according to an article I posted. Brazile made the statement. Since you were there set me straight.
Post your source. What I think you are referring to is mind numbing minutia that is mean to seed doubt.

Hillary Clinton did not have control of DNC funds and Donna Brazille did not say she did.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Read it.
lulz

I read that bit of fluff and much more informative articles too., such as this one:


The optics on this scandal are terrible. Political opponents to the established Democratic Party leaders had a field day. But I knew when you started spouting the extreme propaganda lines from Clinton's most extreme critics where you were going. I knew that I owned you.

Hillary Clinton's campaign agreed to rescue the DNC after they ran out of money. In exchange for keeping the DNC on life support and saving the Democratic Party the embarrassment of a public bankruptcy they gave the money with strings attached. It was legal. It was sure as hell sketchy. If one wants to point out that Hillary Clinton was embroiled in sketchy but legal scandals, I'd agree.

What else is said about this scandal is nobody was hurt. Bernie wasn't even using funds from the DNC. He had agreed to pay the DNC a certain amount to use DNC infrastructure, which he used but didn't pay for. He broke an agreement with the DNC and "Clinton's controlled DNC" just looke the other way.

Clinton did not control DNC's funds, she controlled her campaign's funds. Donna Brazille said so. You can take things out of context and pull a sentence out that looks like you are speaking truth. In context and in Brazille's own words, she described a sketchy but legal and reasonable funding mechanism to keep the DNC running during the primary.

I just owned you, bitch. Go make me a sammich.
 
Last edited:
Top