Aren't Dem SuperDelegates as bad as Citizens United in their ability to pervert democracy?

[jon_berzerk]

Aren't Dem SuperDelegates as bad as Citizens United in their ability to pervert democracy? They may even be worse! Citizens United is just about money and buying ad time, these SuperDelegates buy elections and pervert Democracy to their own ends

definitely worse

citizens united is free speech

whereas superdelegats are just tyrannical

 

[Skylar]

Aren't Dem SuperDelegates as bad as Citizens United in their ability to pervert democracy? They may even be worse! Citizens United is just about money and buying ad time, these SuperDelegates buy elections and pervert Democracy to their own ends

definitely worse

citizens united is free speech

whereas superdelegats are just tyrannical

Tyranny, huh? Can you give us an example?

 

[hadit]

Support Citizens United, that just letting people spend $ and I don't care about democrat Superdelegates, we know it's a Party that thrives on fraud elections

So both do the same thing but you only support one. Based, coincidentally of course, on political party.


Shocker

They are distinct animals. The DNC is a private organization and can make whatever rules they want to screw their voters. CU relates to organizations being able to petition the government.

Is there an instance of them screwing over the voters I dont know about or are you just being colorful?

I'm saying that the voters need to realize the DNC is a private organization and the party leadership has ways to make sure their preferred candidate wins. I hope Sanders' supporters realize this and make a really big stink about it.

So, you were just being colorful and have no examples of "Screwing over the voters". Thats good, I got worried for a second there

I thought what I wrote was clear. The DNC CAN screw their own voters. I didn't say they have already done it. They're just not going to let 2008 repeat itself this year.

 

[Skylar]

So both do the same thing but you only support one. Based, coincidentally of course, on political party.


Shocker

They are distinct animals. The DNC is a private organization and can make whatever rules they want to screw their voters. CU relates to organizations being able to petition the government.

Is there an instance of them screwing over the voters I dont know about or are you just being colorful?

I'm saying that the voters need to realize the DNC is a private organization and the party leadership has ways to make sure their preferred candidate wins. I hope Sanders' supporters realize this and make a really big stink about it.

So, you were just being colorful and have no examples of "Screwing over the voters". Thats good, I got worried for a second there

I thought what I wrote was clear. The DNC CAN screw their own voters. I didn't say they have already done it. They're just not going to let 2008 repeat itself this year.

And republicans CAN screw over their own voters, giving the nomination to a person that *didn't* get the most votes. And unlike the DNC, you have GOP candidates talking about doing *exactly* that:

"In order to be the nominee, you have to have a certain number of votes," Kasich said. "Not like, a plurality. You’ve got to have a certain number. You know, it’s like anything else in life, there’s certain rules. You take a driving test, you don’t pass the driving test, you don’t get your license. It’s not like, well, that’s good enough for government. You’ve got to win. You don’t just say, 'Well, I have more than anybody else, therefore I’m in.' "

Kasich: I wouldn’t need a delegate lead to win at a brokered convention

But you're concered about *democrats*? Remember, Clinton is leading in pledged delegates AND the popular vote. Kasich is running 6% of the popular vote and about 37 delegates to Trumps 380. Yet he's the one talking about how the person with the most votes SHOULDN'T win the nomination.

Wouldn't any rational person be far more concerned with the RNC fucking over its constituency, with the GOP already laying the groundwork for a brokered convention to do exactly that.....rather than the DNC where the leading candidate is, you know, actually leading?

 

[hadit]

They are distinct animals. The DNC is a private organization and can make whatever rules they want to screw their voters. CU relates to organizations being able to petition the government.

Is there an instance of them screwing over the voters I dont know about or are you just being colorful?

I'm saying that the voters need to realize the DNC is a private organization and the party leadership has ways to make sure their preferred candidate wins. I hope Sanders' supporters realize this and make a really big stink about it.

So, you were just being colorful and have no examples of "Screwing over the voters". Thats good, I got worried for a second there

I thought what I wrote was clear. The DNC CAN screw their own voters. I didn't say they have already done it. They're just not going to let 2008 repeat itself this year.

And republicans CAN screw over their own voters, giving the nomination to a person that *didn't* get the most votes. And unlike the DNC, you have GOP candidates talking about doing *exactly* that:

"In order to be the nominee, you have to have a certain number of votes," Kasich said. "Not like, a plurality. You’ve got to have a certain number. You know, it’s like anything else in life, there’s certain rules. You take a driving test, you don’t pass the driving test, you don’t get your license. It’s not like, well, that’s good enough for government. You’ve got to win. You don’t just say, 'Well, I have more than anybody else, therefore I’m in.' "

Kasich: I wouldn’t need a delegate lead to win at a brokered convention

But you're concered about *democrats*? Remember, Clinton is leading in pledged delegates AND the popular vote. Kasich is running 6% of the popular vote and about 37 delegates to Trumps 380. Yet he's the one talking about how the person with the most votes SHOULDN'T win the nomination.

Wouldn't any rational person be far more concerned with the RNC fucking over its constituency, with the GOP already laying the groundwork for a brokered convention to do exactly that.....rather than the DNC where the leading candidate is, you know, actually leading?

Of course, but they're not the subject of the thread.

 

[Skylar]

Is there an instance of them screwing over the voters I dont know about or are you just being colorful?

I'm saying that the voters need to realize the DNC is a private organization and the party leadership has ways to make sure their preferred candidate wins. I hope Sanders' supporters realize this and make a really big stink about it.

So, you were just being colorful and have no examples of "Screwing over the voters". Thats good, I got worried for a second there

I thought what I wrote was clear. The DNC CAN screw their own voters. I didn't say they have already done it. They're just not going to let 2008 repeat itself this year.

And republicans CAN screw over their own voters, giving the nomination to a person that *didn't* get the most votes. And unlike the DNC, you have GOP candidates talking about doing *exactly* that:

"In order to be the nominee, you have to have a certain number of votes," Kasich said. "Not like, a plurality. You’ve got to have a certain number. You know, it’s like anything else in life, there’s certain rules. You take a driving test, you don’t pass the driving test, you don’t get your license. It’s not like, well, that’s good enough for government. You’ve got to win. You don’t just say, 'Well, I have more than anybody else, therefore I’m in.' "

Kasich: I wouldn’t need a delegate lead to win at a brokered convention

But you're concered about *democrats*? Remember, Clinton is leading in pledged delegates AND the popular vote. Kasich is running 6% of the popular vote and about 37 delegates to Trumps 380. Yet he's the one talking about how the person with the most votes SHOULDN'T win the nomination.

Wouldn't any rational person be far more concerned with the RNC fucking over its constituency, with the GOP already laying the groundwork for a brokered convention to do exactly that.....rather than the DNC where the leading candidate is, you know, actually leading?

Of course, but they're not the subject of the thread.

The subject of the thread is accusing the democrats of doing what they've never done......48 hours after GOP candidates lay the ground work for the GOP doing exactly what the OP condemns.

That timing is awfully convenient.

 

[hadit]

I'm saying that the voters need to realize the DNC is a private organization and the party leadership has ways to make sure their preferred candidate wins. I hope Sanders' supporters realize this and make a really big stink about it.

So, you were just being colorful and have no examples of "Screwing over the voters". Thats good, I got worried for a second there

I thought what I wrote was clear. The DNC CAN screw their own voters. I didn't say they have already done it. They're just not going to let 2008 repeat itself this year.

And republicans CAN screw over their own voters, giving the nomination to a person that *didn't* get the most votes. And unlike the DNC, you have GOP candidates talking about doing *exactly* that:

"In order to be the nominee, you have to have a certain number of votes," Kasich said. "Not like, a plurality. You’ve got to have a certain number. You know, it’s like anything else in life, there’s certain rules. You take a driving test, you don’t pass the driving test, you don’t get your license. It’s not like, well, that’s good enough for government. You’ve got to win. You don’t just say, 'Well, I have more than anybody else, therefore I’m in.' "

Kasich: I wouldn’t need a delegate lead to win at a brokered convention

But you're concered about *democrats*? Remember, Clinton is leading in pledged delegates AND the popular vote. Kasich is running 6% of the popular vote and about 37 delegates to Trumps 380. Yet he's the one talking about how the person with the most votes SHOULDN'T win the nomination.

Wouldn't any rational person be far more concerned with the RNC fucking over its constituency, with the GOP already laying the groundwork for a brokered convention to do exactly that.....rather than the DNC where the leading candidate is, you know, actually leading?

Of course, but they're not the subject of the thread.

The subject of the thread is accusing the democrats of doing what they've never done......48 hours after GOP candidates lay the ground work for doing exactly what the democrats are accused of.

That timing is awfully convenient.

Someone else possibly doing something similar is irrelevant to what the democrats are doing, is it not?

 

[Skylar]

So, you were just being colorful and have no examples of "Screwing over the voters". Thats good, I got worried for a second there

I thought what I wrote was clear. The DNC CAN screw their own voters. I didn't say they have already done it. They're just not going to let 2008 repeat itself this year.

And republicans CAN screw over their own voters, giving the nomination to a person that *didn't* get the most votes. And unlike the DNC, you have GOP candidates talking about doing *exactly* that:

"In order to be the nominee, you have to have a certain number of votes," Kasich said. "Not like, a plurality. You’ve got to have a certain number. You know, it’s like anything else in life, there’s certain rules. You take a driving test, you don’t pass the driving test, you don’t get your license. It’s not like, well, that’s good enough for government. You’ve got to win. You don’t just say, 'Well, I have more than anybody else, therefore I’m in.' "

Kasich: I wouldn’t need a delegate lead to win at a brokered convention

But you're concered about *democrats*? Remember, Clinton is leading in pledged delegates AND the popular vote. Kasich is running 6% of the popular vote and about 37 delegates to Trumps 380. Yet he's the one talking about how the person with the most votes SHOULDN'T win the nomination.

Wouldn't any rational person be far more concerned with the RNC fucking over its constituency, with the GOP already laying the groundwork for a brokered convention to do exactly that.....rather than the DNC where the leading candidate is, you know, actually leading?

Of course, but they're not the subject of the thread.

The subject of the thread is accusing the democrats of doing what they've never done......48 hours after GOP candidates lay the ground work for doing exactly what the democrats are accused of.

That timing is awfully convenient.

Someone else possibly doing something similar is irrelevant to what the democrats are doing, is it not?

The democrats aren't doing it. The GOP is laying the ground work to do *exactly* that.

So naturally, conservatives blame the democrats.

 

[hadit]

I thought what I wrote was clear. The DNC CAN screw their own voters. I didn't say they have already done it. They're just not going to let 2008 repeat itself this year.

And republicans CAN screw over their own voters, giving the nomination to a person that *didn't* get the most votes. And unlike the DNC, you have GOP candidates talking about doing *exactly* that:

"In order to be the nominee, you have to have a certain number of votes," Kasich said. "Not like, a plurality. You’ve got to have a certain number. You know, it’s like anything else in life, there’s certain rules. You take a driving test, you don’t pass the driving test, you don’t get your license. It’s not like, well, that’s good enough for government. You’ve got to win. You don’t just say, 'Well, I have more than anybody else, therefore I’m in.' "

Kasich: I wouldn’t need a delegate lead to win at a brokered convention

But you're concered about *democrats*? Remember, Clinton is leading in pledged delegates AND the popular vote. Kasich is running 6% of the popular vote and about 37 delegates to Trumps 380. Yet he's the one talking about how the person with the most votes SHOULDN'T win the nomination.

Wouldn't any rational person be far more concerned with the RNC fucking over its constituency, with the GOP already laying the groundwork for a brokered convention to do exactly that.....rather than the DNC where the leading candidate is, you know, actually leading?

Of course, but they're not the subject of the thread.

The subject of the thread is accusing the democrats of doing what they've never done......48 hours after GOP candidates lay the ground work for doing exactly what the democrats are accused of.

That timing is awfully convenient.

Someone else possibly doing something similar is irrelevant to what the democrats are doing, is it not?

The democrats aren't doing it. The GOP is laying the ground work to do *exactly* that.

So naturally, conservatives blame the democrats.

Blame? Hardly. Simply noting that the fix is already in for Hillary and Sanders is just window dressing and that he has no chance. So of course you want to talk about Republicans.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

And republicans CAN screw over their own voters, giving the nomination to a person that *didn't* get the most votes. And unlike the DNC, you have GOP candidates talking about doing *exactly* that:

But you're concered about *democrats*? Remember, Clinton is leading in pledged delegates AND the popular vote. Kasich is running 6% of the popular vote and about 37 delegates to Trumps 380. Yet he's the one talking about how the person with the most votes SHOULDN'T win the nomination.

Wouldn't any rational person be far more concerned with the RNC fucking over its constituency, with the GOP already laying the groundwork for a brokered convention to do exactly that.....rather than the DNC where the leading candidate is, you know, actually leading?

Of course, but they're not the subject of the thread.

The subject of the thread is accusing the democrats of doing what they've never done......48 hours after GOP candidates lay the ground work for doing exactly what the democrats are accused of.

That timing is awfully convenient.

Someone else possibly doing something similar is irrelevant to what the democrats are doing, is it not?

The democrats aren't doing it. The GOP is laying the ground work to do *exactly* that.

So naturally, conservatives blame the democrats.

Blame? Hardly. Simply noting that the fix is already in for Hillary and Sanders is just window dressing and that he has no chance. So of course you want to talk about Republicans.

Except there is no "fix" in. Where's the fix?

 

[Skylar]

And republicans CAN screw over their own voters, giving the nomination to a person that *didn't* get the most votes. And unlike the DNC, you have GOP candidates talking about doing *exactly* that:

But you're concered about *democrats*? Remember, Clinton is leading in pledged delegates AND the popular vote. Kasich is running 6% of the popular vote and about 37 delegates to Trumps 380. Yet he's the one talking about how the person with the most votes SHOULDN'T win the nomination.

Wouldn't any rational person be far more concerned with the RNC fucking over its constituency, with the GOP already laying the groundwork for a brokered convention to do exactly that.....rather than the DNC where the leading candidate is, you know, actually leading?

Of course, but they're not the subject of the thread.

The subject of the thread is accusing the democrats of doing what they've never done......48 hours after GOP candidates lay the ground work for doing exactly what the democrats are accused of.

That timing is awfully convenient.

Someone else possibly doing something similar is irrelevant to what the democrats are doing, is it not?

The democrats aren't doing it. The GOP is laying the ground work to do *exactly* that.

So naturally, conservatives blame the democrats.

Blame? Hardly. Simply noting that the fix is already in for Hillary and Sanders is just window dressing and that he has no chance.

If he can convince enough of the pledged delegates to vote for him, he wins. If Hillary does, she wins. As the super delegates don't vote against the pledged delegates.

But the GOP is laying the ground work to override the the pledged delegates. And give the nomination to someone who *didn't* get the most votes.

The democrats have done nothing you've accused them of. The GOP is actively laying the groundwork to do *exactly* what the OP condemns. Which is why this thread exists.

 

[Skylar]

Of course, but they're not the subject of the thread.

The subject of the thread is accusing the democrats of doing what they've never done......48 hours after GOP candidates lay the ground work for doing exactly what the democrats are accused of.

That timing is awfully convenient.

Someone else possibly doing something similar is irrelevant to what the democrats are doing, is it not?

The democrats aren't doing it. The GOP is laying the ground work to do *exactly* that.

So naturally, conservatives blame the democrats.

Blame? Hardly. Simply noting that the fix is already in for Hillary and Sanders is just window dressing and that he has no chance. So of course you want to talk about Republicans.

Except there is no "fix" in. Where's the fix?

And this is exactly why this thread exists, why conservatives are focused so mypoically on 'super delegates'.

Because they're trying to convince themselves that the Democrats have already done what the GOP is laying the ground work to do: give the party nomination to a candidate that didn't get the most delegates.

The problem is....the democrats have *never* done this. Nor is there the slightest indication that they will. While GOP candidates are already making the argument that the candidate with the most delegates shouldn't get the nomination.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Aren't Dem SuperDelegates as bad as Citizens United in their ability to pervert democracy? They may even be worse! Citizens United is just about money and buying ad time, these SuperDelegates buy elections and pervert Democracy to their own ends

This is as ignorant as it is ridiculous, a clear lack of understanding of the issue.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The subject of the thread is accusing the democrats of doing what they've never done......48 hours after GOP candidates lay the ground work for doing exactly what the democrats are accused of.

That timing is awfully convenient.

Someone else possibly doing something similar is irrelevant to what the democrats are doing, is it not?

The democrats aren't doing it. The GOP is laying the ground work to do *exactly* that.

So naturally, conservatives blame the democrats.

Blame? Hardly. Simply noting that the fix is already in for Hillary and Sanders is just window dressing and that he has no chance. So of course you want to talk about Republicans.

Except there is no "fix" in. Where's the fix?

And this is exactly why this thread exists, why conservatives are focused so mypoically on 'super delegates'.

Because they're trying to convince themselves that the Democrats have already done what the GOP is laying the ground work to do: give the party nomination to a candidate that didn't get the most delegates.

The problem is....the democrats have *never* done this. Nor is there the slightest indication that they will. While GOP candidates are already making the argument that the candidate with the most delegates shouldn't get the nomination.

This thread is pure insanity. Either these folks are shilling or they're as dumb as a box of rocks. Either way they look dumb.

 

[GHook93]

Aren't Dem SuperDelegates as bad as Citizens United in their ability to pervert democracy? They may even be worse! Citizens United is just about money and buying ad time, these SuperDelegates buy elections and pervert Democracy to their own ends

Super Delegates are far worse!

How so?

I don't like super pacs, but they only use media to shift public support and attention towards one candidate or another. Many times it works, many times it doesn't (Trump has no super pacs and is cleaning up while Rubio and Bush had many and neither has done anything in this election).

Super Delegates absolute subversion Democracy! They go against the will of the people, which is the fundamental aspect of Democracy. The Mullahs in Iran pick all the candidates who can run for any office, so a single mindset is guarantee to win. Super Delegates make sure that any Democratic candidates follows the party lines and only elitist will win.

While I can't stand Sanders, he should be in spitting distance of the felon, the felon is running away with it because of the party elites pick who they want and the will of the people be damned!

 

[GHook93]

Aren't Dem SuperDelegates as bad as Citizens United in their ability to pervert democracy? They may even be worse! Citizens United is just about money and buying ad time, these SuperDelegates buy elections and pervert Democracy to their own ends

This is as ignorant as it is ridiculous, a clear lack of understanding of the issue.

Another red herring from the grand mental midget!