2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSo Debbie and the DNC got their marching orders from the boss
What a sick, corrupt joke this whole thing is.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/dnc-to-sanction-additional-debates
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)Please make up your mind. It's very confusing. I never know what you want from day to day, and that's very important to me.
cali
(114,904 posts)Hillary's control?
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)That's what everyone said. I'd think you'd want more debates. You can understand my confusion, I'm certain.
cali
(114,904 posts)And not honest. Ugh.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)tex-wyo-dem
(3,190 posts)Must feel nice and fuzzy to support a candidate who has to resort to such measures to try to win.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)Is the DNC in Hillary's camp? I do not know. I know that there will apparently be some more debates. I would think that would be something supporters of all candidates would like to have happen.
For a long time, people were clamoring for more debates. Now that appears to be what will happen. Sounds fine to me. Hillary has done well in the debates, and Bernie Sanders has done well, also. I don't see a problem in any way with some more of them, although I doubt they will affect support to any large degree.
I have no knowledge of how the DNC works. I have nothing to do with that level of the Democratic Party. I'm just a lowly precinct chair in Minnesota. I haven't even been a delegate to the state convention here, where members of the DNC from this state are elected. So, I have little knowledge of DNC operations.
That's the best answer I can offer to cali's question.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Last edited Sun Jan 31, 2016, 10:11 PM - Edit history (1)
cali
(114,904 posts)immoderate
(20,885 posts)--imm
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)Bernie was able to get 3 additional debates out of Team Hillary, so we are very happy.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)DWS spit in all of our faces, and gave the finger to Bernie and Martin.
But when Hillary calls, DWS instantly reverses course. If I was an O'Malley supporter
I would be infuriated.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...and I'm sure that O'Malley and his supporters are indeed infuriated.
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)MineralMan
(146,317 posts)I also remember what I have read in the past, too. Thus my question.
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)By the way I remember what you wrote in the past about Clinton, not very nice by the way.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)JRLeft
(7,010 posts)Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)JRLeft
(7,010 posts)Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)JRLeft
(7,010 posts)Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)JRLeft
(7,010 posts)Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)JRLeft
(7,010 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)But, I am controlling my blood pressure.... Went to the gym today, plus kayaked in 49 degree weather. right knee is sore..
So I can say aaarrrrrrrrrrrrgghhhhhhhhhhhhh
How this not just sink her and the whole damn ship is beyond me.
MEDIA ????????????????
Ok,, Thanks Cali... carry on
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)NowSam
(1,252 posts)Doesn't mean that they aren't corrupt and running a rigged game. Bernie is filling stadiums in state after state with people who believe the whole system is corrupt. Are we all paranoid? When 3 million separate donors contributed to his campaign - more than any other candidate in history - are all of us paranoid? I could go on but why waste my breath.
I think if you aren't paranoid in 2016 you aren't paying attention.
`I"m Paranoid too
NowSam
(1,252 posts)I think the mood is lightening up around here. Whew.Thanks for the great picture! Fun.
rateyes
(17,438 posts)her numbers in NH and wanted a debate. Sanders said "no, unless we get more debates before the elections in what Clinton considers her firewall. It is obvious that DWS is in the tank for Hillary and is running scared. Wasn't it she who just recently said "six and no more?" Now she is implying (lying) that she has always been open to more. She has done nothing for Democrats but lose elections.
riversedge
(70,242 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)And Debbie's collusion and.corruption. for months advocates, two of the candidates agitated for more debates. Hilly lifts her crooked finger and puts it on the scale and Debbie scurries up to ask "how many, your highness?
Hillary is corrupt.
riversedge
(70,242 posts)is nothing I --or anyone could say to cut though. So bye. Enough.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)And compare them to her actions once Hillary! demanded more debates. She does whatever Hillary wants.
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)Clinton wants and it is disgusting.
You know, we know it, and we know you know it.
Disgusting.
nolabels
(13,133 posts)That way one can prepare for what might come next. Pretty sure in that next round Bernie might just need to be a ...........
Matariki
(18,775 posts)I think Sanders had a wonderful hand in getting this to happen. He negotiated for the additional debates and forced the issue for the DNC to sanction them.
And I am very happy that Rachael Maddow will be moderating the next one. I expect it to be respectful and substantive.
TeamPooka
(24,229 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)The stink of bullshit was heavy in the air regarding the debate schedule.
randome
(34,845 posts)I bet hardly anyone watches the additional debates, though. Especially if Clinton wins NH. But there's always the possibility that she won't and that might make more people tune in.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]
cali
(114,904 posts)laserhaas
(7,805 posts)Unlike Bill - obviously - you did inhale...
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)...damned debates when DWS was saying categorically that there would be no more debates?
This only shows that when Hillary wants more debates, the rules go out the fucking window!
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Hillary only wanted one.
Bernie will make a great Commander in Chief. He knows how to negotiate.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)They need a purge.
I will be voting for Bernie to purge the corrupt antidemocratic power hungry filth from this once great party.
laserhaas
(7,805 posts)tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)This tells me that HRC can indeed remind Debbie who runs this show. GOOD! If she has to dress down Debbie military style to win, then HELL YES!
msongs
(67,413 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)Eko
(7,315 posts)no where in your link does it show that at all.
mythology
(9,527 posts)Facts like your just get in the way.
cali
(114,904 posts)lobbied for more debates. DWS as chair of the DNC, consistently refused. Hillary told little Debbie that she wanted more. Little debbiekins immediately said yes.
Eko
(7,315 posts)Another one would be she was waiting for all of them to call for more debates. Both are possibilities and not fact.
laserhaas
(7,805 posts)to be in charge of picking the U.S. Attorney General
On the one side, HRC, who has taken boo'koo monies from Wall Street fraudsters
Or the side that refuses to do so, promising a proper review of the financial industry's ways.
Just sayin..........
Recursion
(56,582 posts)That always struck me as strange.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Ohhhh. You meant the head of the Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton. Yeah, she rocks big time. Lots and lots of clout.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)Darb
(2,807 posts)I would be for none. I don't need to put candidates on the spot to decide what they believe in and what they hope to accomplish. It's as if some of you believe that candidates can actually do the everything they propose. What counts is how they think things through, not how they respond off the cuff. Or what they memorize. Or how clever their zingers.
tex-wyo-dem
(3,190 posts)It appears the economy isn't the only thing that's rigged.
Thanks for the OP, cali.