Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.
Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.
well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.
Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.
I encourage all Democrats / liberals to get on the Bernie Bus and vote for him. ..
View attachment 310768
well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.
Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.
uh HUH.
Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?
Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.
Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.
the question for Bernie supporters is whether or not they believe they are getting railroaded by the DNC ? Do they believe the DNC is impartial when it comes to their support for Biden and Sanders ? or do they believe the deck is stacked once again against Sanders ?
well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.
Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.
uh HUH.
Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?
Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.
Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.
Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?
well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.
Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.
uh HUH.
Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?
Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.
Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.
Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?
It's up to the party as noted. But if you're going to claim "the RNC have more respect for the people" you can't run around cancelling the window of opportunity for those people to have a say when there are three nationally-prominent Republicans contending.
Can't have it both ways.
Last time we had an incumbent they still held the Democratic Party primary here. My choices were (1) Barack O'bama, or (2) "Uncommitted". Had there been, say, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Brown (former POTUS candy, prominent Rep and a governor, same as the present Republican roster), then it might have made more sense to vote in that primary. But they still held it even with no challengers.
They'll say it "saves them money". I'm not sure how it costs them money but hey, that's their problem. If they want to run a political party they're gonna need money. But you can't sit here and tell me "Republicans respect the will of the people" while they're cancelling primaries so they don't have to deal with challengers.
Having it both ways: nuh-uh.
well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.
Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.
uh HUH.
Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?
Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.
Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.
Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?
It's up to the party as noted. But if you're going to claim "the RNC have more respect for the people" you can't run around cancelling the window of opportunity for those people to have a say when there are three nationally-prominent Republicans contending.
Can't have it both ways.
Last time we had an incumbent they still held the Democratic Party primary here. My choices were (1) Barack O'bama, or (2) "Uncommitted". Had there been, say, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Brown (former POTUS candy, prominent Rep and a governor, same as the present Republican roster), then it might have made more sense to vote in that primary. But they still held it even with no challengers.
They'll say it "saves them money". I'm not sure how it costs them money but hey, that's their problem. If they want to run a political party they're gonna need money. But you can't sit here and tell me "Republicans respect the will of the people" while they're cancelling primaries so they don't have to deal with challengers.
Having it both ways: nuh-uh.
Not sure what point you think you made but Republicans don't run around telling everyone they're the champion of the "Little People" and are all for "deomcracy"
well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.
Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.
A. This is like the 25th thread on this subject, so you kids are starting to sound more than a little desperate.the question for Bernie supporters is whether or not they believe they are getting railroaded by the DNC ? Do they believe the DNC is impartial when it comes to their support for Biden and Sanders ? or do they believe the deck is stacked once again against Sanders ?
well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.
Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.
That's not what the RNC did. First off, Trump won primaries with 15% of the vote, because there were 17 people on the ballot, and got 100% of the delegates. 85% of the people in those states voted for someone other than Trump, but had more votes than anyone else so he got all of the delegates. How is that the "will of the people"?
the POTUS is an outsider .... he was not unanimously accepted by the RNC he won because the will of the people overrode the RNC establishment and never Trumpers . your party and the DNC cant even treat the most sensible dem Gabbard fairly !well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .
uh HUH.
Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?
Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.
Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.
Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?
It's up to the party as noted. But if you're going to claim "the RNC have more respect for the people" you can't run around cancelling the window of opportunity for those people to have a say when there are three nationally-prominent Republicans contending.
Can't have it both ways.
Last time we had an incumbent they still held the Democratic Party primary here. My choices were (1) Barack O'bama, or (2) "Uncommitted". Had there been, say, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Brown (former POTUS candy, prominent Rep and a governor, same as the present Republican roster), then it might have made more sense to vote in that primary. But they still held it even with no challengers.
They'll say it "saves them money". I'm not sure how it costs them money but hey, that's their problem. If they want to run a political party they're gonna need money. But you can't sit here and tell me "Republicans respect the will of the people" while they're cancelling primaries so they don't have to deal with challengers.
Having it both ways: nuh-uh.
Not sure what point you think you made but Republicans don't run around telling everyone they're the champion of the "Little People" and are all for "deomcracy"
Nor could they, and not just because "deomcracy" doesn't exist
But in context ---- the previous poster Yidnuts had claimed the RNC has "more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC" and that's clearly not the case.
So I'm with you Frank --- the RNC is not all for deomcracy. Nor is the DNC.
he got the most votes of any candidate ! its a race he came in 1st .he wins !well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.
Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.
That's not what the RNC did. First off, Trump won primaries with 15% of the vote, because there were 17 people on the ballot, and got 100% of the delegates. 85% of the people in those states voted for someone other than Trump, but had more votes than anyone else so he got all of the delegates. How is that the "will of the people"?
And then in the general election he failed to win even 50% of the vote in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida, Arizona, North Carolina and even UTAH --- and yet got 100% of ALL those states' electoral votes. That sure as hell wasn't the will of the people either.
the POTUS is an outsider .... he was not unanimously accepted by the RNC he won because the will of the people overrode the RNC establishment and never Trumpers . your party and the DNC cant even treat the most sensible dem Gabbard fairly !uh HUH.
Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt?
Again the RNC could have told Rump to go pound orange sand, IF they had the balls. Like they did when TR came to the convention after winning the primaries.
Oh and speaking of the RNC and their "respect for the will of the people" --- they've already CANCELLED primaries/caucuses in several states sooooooooooooo don't think so.
Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?
It's up to the party as noted. But if you're going to claim "the RNC have more respect for the people" you can't run around cancelling the window of opportunity for those people to have a say when there are three nationally-prominent Republicans contending.
Can't have it both ways.
Last time we had an incumbent they still held the Democratic Party primary here. My choices were (1) Barack O'bama, or (2) "Uncommitted". Had there been, say, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Brown (former POTUS candy, prominent Rep and a governor, same as the present Republican roster), then it might have made more sense to vote in that primary. But they still held it even with no challengers.
They'll say it "saves them money". I'm not sure how it costs them money but hey, that's their problem. If they want to run a political party they're gonna need money. But you can't sit here and tell me "Republicans respect the will of the people" while they're cancelling primaries so they don't have to deal with challengers.
Having it both ways: nuh-uh.
Not sure what point you think you made but Republicans don't run around telling everyone they're the champion of the "Little People" and are all for "deomcracy"
Nor could they, and not just because "deomcracy" doesn't exist
But in context ---- the previous poster Yidnuts had claimed the RNC has "more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC" and that's clearly not the case.
So I'm with you Frank --- the RNC is not all for deomcracy. Nor is the DNC.
A. This is like the 25th thread on this subject, so you kids are starting to sound more than a little desperate.the question for Bernie supporters is whether or not they believe they are getting railroaded by the DNC ? Do they believe the DNC is impartial when it comes to their support for Biden and Sanders ? or do they believe the deck is stacked once again against Sanders ?
2. I'm a Bernie supporter. I'm sure he can beat tRump. If the nominee is Biden, then Joe gets my vote in November.
III. I think everyone understands that the DNC would rather nominate someone with a "D" in front of his name. It's not the INC after all.
well thats certainly not true about the RNC ! many in the top leadership didnt like Trump but they went with the will of the people ! i guess even if you dont like the RNC they have more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC .Hey, a political party is going to nominate who it wants to nominate, period. Any impression that the voters have a say in that is illusion.
Hell in my own state, and quite a few others, you don't have to be even affiliated with a party to vote in its primaries. The so-called "open primary" states.
you voted for Tulsi !!! bwaaahaaahaaaahaaa no wonder you're so pissed ! i love causing dumb asses like you to melt down !the POTUS is an outsider .... he was not unanimously accepted by the RNC he won because the will of the people overrode the RNC establishment and never Trumpers . your party and the DNC cant even treat the most sensible dem Gabbard fairly !Trump's an incumbent, the most successful one since 1984. Why have primaries?
It's up to the party as noted. But if you're going to claim "the RNC have more respect for the people" you can't run around cancelling the window of opportunity for those people to have a say when there are three nationally-prominent Republicans contending.
Can't have it both ways.
Last time we had an incumbent they still held the Democratic Party primary here. My choices were (1) Barack O'bama, or (2) "Uncommitted". Had there been, say, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Brown (former POTUS candy, prominent Rep and a governor, same as the present Republican roster), then it might have made more sense to vote in that primary. But they still held it even with no challengers.
They'll say it "saves them money". I'm not sure how it costs them money but hey, that's their problem. If they want to run a political party they're gonna need money. But you can't sit here and tell me "Republicans respect the will of the people" while they're cancelling primaries so they don't have to deal with challengers.
Having it both ways: nuh-uh.
Not sure what point you think you made but Republicans don't run around telling everyone they're the champion of the "Little People" and are all for "deomcracy"
Nor could they, and not just because "deomcracy" doesn't exist
But in context ---- the previous poster Yidnuts had claimed the RNC has "more respect for who the people vote for in their primary than the DNC" and that's clearly not the case.
So I'm with you Frank --- the RNC is not all for deomcracy. Nor is the DNC.
I don't have a "party", Shitnickel.
And btw I already voted for Tulsi so cram your ass-umptions back to the intestine from which they emigrated.
