That is not continuing Obama's legacy, it is undermining it on the same day as sanctions were lifted but while there are still FOUR hostages in Iran.

In this, she is ahead of any GOP criticism! She is a neocon through and through. Do you or any Hillary fan approve? I call bullshit on her continuing President Obama's legacy; she is more in line with Dick Cheney with respect to Iran, calling Iranians her enemies in a recent debate.

How can you support this type of foreign policy?

As for SC, it is good that the folks she bused in have short memories of Bill's racist dog whistles there in 2008, although I am sure Sen. Clyburn has not.

Yes?

...the article notes that Clinton received a very enthusiastic response to her statement that she would "defend Obama's legacy". But on the very day that the Obama administration announced that Iran would be releasing 4 prisoners and only hours after sanctions had been formally lifted, Clinton said we need more sanctions -- clearly undermining Obama's efforts w.r.t. Iran.

... what's the issue here?

Polite applause for both Hillary and Bernie throughout both of their speeches. Boisterous? Hardly.
The article linked makes it sound like a shutout, which is not what the video shows. They both gave fine speeches and the audience looked to me like they were receptive to both. We should judge the speeches on the merits and not on the cheerleaders reviews!


Sanders

I linked both speeches so you don't have to take anyone's word for it. The audio is quite good!

And no, the audio is actually quite poor.

The audio was fine.

It's the fingers in the the ears and the blinders on the eyes that are causing the problem.

You had enough of that strong java.

I have the volume turned incredibly low because I don't want to wake up the house. The audio is fine.

I very clearly heard Hillary play the "vote for me because I'm a woman" card again.

I did not hear boisterous applauding for either candidate like suggested in your linked article.

I live in North Carolina and have see the growing support for Senator Sanders. I have seen lots of Bernie bumper stickers not one Clinton bumper sticker and unfortunately a few Trump bumper stickers. Although my employor does not allow political discussions at work I have heard customers talk about supporting Sanders no one is talking about Clinton. Unfortunately this is an Red state. But many of us are working to change that.

Again.

Sanders may have spoken at that event as well, but a couldn't find one.

For some reason my opinion regarding this event and what is going on in my own neighborhood is reason for another Duer to send me unsolicited pms, that are insulting and confrontational.

The pms disappeared with a notice that the account was terminated and name removed. Funny thing is that the person who was sending the pms has the same name or very similar as another duer. They were upset with me for posting in this thread. Claimed I was putting myself out as an "authority" on South Carolina.


edited to add another strange thing regarding the pms. The poster who sent me the pms just a few minuets ago seems to have been removed Jan 1, 1970. I'm in a time warp

Name removed Message auto-removed 8:13 AM
Name removed Message auto-removed 8:13 AM
Name removed Message auto-removed 8:13 AM
Name removed Message auto-removed 8:13 AM
Name removed Message auto-removed 8:13 A

It also stated that privileges were revoked when clicking on name removed in my inbox.
yet my sent mail folder had the name of sender and content still there. The person who sent me the pms is still an active member. I posted a question regarding this in ATA forum.

.





.

But anything that points HRC in any kind of a positive light will get the usual swarm if posted in GD-P.

It makes one wonder whether some stay on-line 24/7 just for the chance to trash HRC.

Carry on.

DSB

others, including members of each 'side' and not a term that has any validity when self applied. 'I am fair and unbiased, because I say so. Also gorgeous, brilliant and witty.'
You support one of the candidates, thus you are not unbiased, which is word meaning 'impartial'. To be impartial you have to be neutral. If you have a preference you are not neutral, not impartial and not unbiased.
It is not honest to both have a preference and claim to have no preference.

It definitely needed to be said. Thank you.

Please see 'run up to the Iraq War' and 'New York Times' for materials supporting my assertion.

What materials support your assertion that reporters are always perfectly honest and direct in reporting?

If it's in the "news" it's true. I read it on the innernetz.

winner. I trust their political instincts.

If Hillary win by red state votes? - what does that mean?

Party delegates are an essential element in the nomination process.

think about the general election

to the Democratic National Convention?

sad fact - i do not like it - but it is a fact

delegates to the Democratic National Convention to select the Democratic Party's nominee for the GE. Perhaps in that small way they can be under the illusion that they are participants in our democracy.