Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
42 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Did Hillary Clinton steal Arizona? (Original Post) Cali_Democrat Mar 2016 OP
No. Agschmid Mar 2016 #1
Yet she had no problem delivering a 'victory' speech while thousands still waited to vote? Has she AzDar Mar 2016 #7
Has Bernie claimed a victory in a caucus state? Agschmid Mar 2016 #11
Not answering my question, answered the question... AzDar Mar 2016 #12
... So you are okay with disenfranchising thousands of caucus state voters. Agschmid Mar 2016 #14
... AzDar Mar 2016 #15
The media is the one who should be denounced for announcing a winner while voting was in process still_one Mar 2016 #31
No. The Az govt suppressed voters. jillan Mar 2016 #2
And the local Democrats let it slide randr Mar 2016 #16
Sooooo Proud Liberal Dem Mar 2016 #24
If you don't fight for your rights randr Mar 2016 #40
+1 RepubliCON-Watch Mar 2016 #27
It just happened yesterday!! Things are starting to move today. Protests, local media, organizing jillan Mar 2016 #42
And this will happen again in the general NWCorona Mar 2016 #3
Yup. Agschmid Mar 2016 #6
No, she didn't. NuclearDem Mar 2016 #4
Right now, this looks more like GOP voter suppression. Lizzie Poppet Mar 2016 #5
nice - a smart person MariaThinks Mar 2016 #18
Except... PCPrincess Mar 2016 #21
No, she just benefitted from voter suppression. 7wo7rees Mar 2016 #8
How do you know she benefited? nt Cali_Democrat Mar 2016 #9
Many of voters standing in line were Independents. They 7wo7rees Mar 2016 #25
So it's Clinton's fault that there are un-informed voters? n/t SFnomad Mar 2016 #28
Not at all Clinton's "fault". Did she benefit, maybe, probably. 7wo7rees Mar 2016 #35
We've already been told that "low information" voters vote for Hillary, so wouldn't these have too? grossproffit Mar 2016 #36
If they were independent, they couldn't have voted anyway 72DejaVu Mar 2016 #30
sure - because Hillary hasn't won any states on her own and her husband was never President MariaThinks Mar 2016 #19
So you also think Sanders benefits from suppression mythology Mar 2016 #29
its kinda hard to steal a 20% win ericson00 Mar 2016 #10
that's what i said. MariaThinks Mar 2016 #20
I honestly don't know. Someone or something did. nc4bo Mar 2016 #41
Of course not. However that doesn't change the fact that AZ's primary was a total shit show. phleshdef Mar 2016 #13
Is this the 4th or 404th time GD-P has jumped the shark? snooper2 Mar 2016 #17
4004th Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Mar 2016 #23
Always able to count on you. . W. 7wo7rees Mar 2016 #26
I think you should have included 'maybe' as an option whatchamacallit Mar 2016 #22
A couple of things to consider... Garrett78 Mar 2016 #32
No, however Bjornsdotter Mar 2016 #33
I think the poll is a bit too black and white. bobbobbins01 Mar 2016 #34
"I wouldn't even begin to speculate" brooklynite Mar 2016 #37
Read much? bobbobbins01 Mar 2016 #38
No, but a precedent must be set for all elections Bad Thoughts Mar 2016 #39
 

AzDar

(14,023 posts)
7. Yet she had no problem delivering a 'victory' speech while thousands still waited to vote? Has she
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:48 PM
Mar 2016

made a statement denouncing AZ for yesterday's third-world clusterfuck?

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
11. Has Bernie claimed a victory in a caucus state?
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:54 PM
Mar 2016

Because in many of those states people aren't even allowed to vote at all.

The whole system is broken.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
14. ... So you are okay with disenfranchising thousands of caucus state voters.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:57 PM
Mar 2016

That sort of (passive aggressively) answers my question too.

Goes both ways.

still_one

(92,062 posts)
31. The media is the one who should be denounced for announcing a winner while voting was in process
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:24 PM
Mar 2016

In addition, Congress needs to pass legislation where any media outlet that reports result while people are still voting, needs to be penalized heavily

jillan

(39,451 posts)
42. It just happened yesterday!! Things are starting to move today. Protests, local media, organizing
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 04:48 PM
Mar 2016

reports of disenfranchisement being taken.

We need more than 12 hours to fight back.

 

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)
4. No, she didn't.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:42 PM
Mar 2016

What happened last night is what happens when you let Republicans run elections and let a Supreme Court dominated by Republican appointees decide the fate of the VRA.

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
5. Right now, this looks more like GOP voter suppression.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:43 PM
Mar 2016

It may well have helped Hillary, but I don't believe her campaign or the AZ Democratic Party had anything to do with it.

PCPrincess

(68 posts)
21. Except...
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:10 PM
Mar 2016

Didn't the issue of voters registered as democrats and showing up to find they were now registered as 'none' happen in Florida as well? So, now its the governments of Florida and Arizona?

7wo7rees

(5,128 posts)
8. No, she just benefitted from voter suppression.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:50 PM
Mar 2016

Honestly, how many here could afford to spend 3 to 4 hours in a line?
Jobs to go to, kids waiting at day care, elderly parents to take care of.....

What they hell America? Just WTF??

7wo7rees

(5,128 posts)
25. Many of voters standing in line were Independents. They
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:15 PM
Mar 2016

we're un-informed voters.

Lack of information, severe lack of places to vote, college students denied

Come on, Cali. We all get it. Nothing new, it has been going on for years now.

See Greg Palast or visit bradblog.

7wo7rees

(5,128 posts)
35. Not at all Clinton's "fault". Did she benefit, maybe, probably.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:44 PM
Mar 2016

Instead of get out the vote, more like don't bother, "I've got this".

grossproffit

(5,591 posts)
36. We've already been told that "low information" voters vote for Hillary, so wouldn't these have too?
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:49 PM
Mar 2016


It's so hard to keep the BS talking points straight.

72DejaVu

(1,545 posts)
30. If they were independent, they couldn't have voted anyway
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:19 PM
Mar 2016

So how does their not voting benefit Hillary?

 

mythology

(9,527 posts)
29. So you also think Sanders benefits from suppression
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:18 PM
Mar 2016

Via caucuses? If the definition of suppression Is spending hours in line to vote, every caucus is guilty.

 

ericson00

(2,707 posts)
10. its kinda hard to steal a 20% win
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:52 PM
Mar 2016

stolen elections are usually close enough to be MoE in an opinion poll (FL 2000, etc.)

nc4bo

(17,651 posts)
41. I honestly don't know. Someone or something did.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 02:29 PM
Mar 2016

There are way too many people(indies?) who said they registered, in a timely fashion and according to Az. election laws as Democrats only to find out when it was time to vote, that they did not qualify to vote. Some of them have proof.

Not sure of the GOPs numbers to know if this Charlie Foxtrot effected their voters.

Clear evidence of voter suppression if one can go by the voters' information, 60 polling places instead of 200 and any other abnormalities.

That MSM called the election on just early voting returns while voters were still standing in hours long lines at the polls seems like evidence of election fraud or more suppression.

I think the total of 1.2 million(?) were disenfranchised.

Who could possibly benefit from that nonsense.......in a presidential pic (or primary? )

I feel confident to say that our elections are lacking in intergity.

Who benefits? Spin the wheel.

 

phleshdef

(11,936 posts)
13. Of course not. However that doesn't change the fact that AZ's primary was a total shit show.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:57 PM
Mar 2016

I'm sure there were plenty of voters for both Hillary and Bernie that got screwed last night.

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
32. A couple of things to consider...
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:28 PM
Mar 2016

...polls leading up to the contest suggested Clinton would win the state easily. Also, it was pointed out at 538 that the results - in primaries - in Arizona more or less mirror the results in Florida, historically-speaking (and Clinton also won Florida by a wide margin). So, the results were in line with what was expected.

Bjornsdotter

(6,123 posts)
33. No, however
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:40 PM
Mar 2016

....there was voter suppression.

I do not believe the Hillary campaign had anything to do with it.

bobbobbins01

(1,681 posts)
34. I think the poll is a bit too black and white.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:43 PM
Mar 2016

Do I think she specifically had a hand in it? Probably not. Do I think there was voter suppression that helped her an hurt Bernie? Absolutely. Do I think it was done purposefully to aid her campaign...more than likely. I think the important question is did Arizona act in corroboration with the Clinton Campaign if not Clinton directly to facilitate this...we'll probably never know the answer to that, and I wouldn't even begin to speculate.

brooklynite

(94,384 posts)
37. "I wouldn't even begin to speculate"
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:51 PM
Mar 2016

"Do I think it was done purposefully to aid her campaign...more than likely"

Don't stop now...

bobbobbins01

(1,681 posts)
38. Read much?
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:55 PM
Mar 2016

I said I believe it was done to help her campaign, but I wouldn't speculate on if/how much of a hand her campaign had in it. Groups can help other groups without their tacit approval or input.

Don't stop now...purposefully misinterpret me more!

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Did Hillary Clinton steal...