Hilldawg blamed the DNC on Wed. for her L.

PLEASE STFU AND GO AWAY WOMAN!!!!


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/06/01/ex-dnc-aide-hits-back-hard-at-clinton-says-her-campaign-ignored-its-data-on-michigan-pennsylvania-wisconsin/?utm_term=.a0e754aefcb3


“I set up my campaign and we have our own data operation. I get the nomination. So I’m now the nominee of the Democratic Party. I inherit nothing from the Democratic Party,” Clinton said, according to a transcript. “I mean it was bankrupt, it was on the verge of insolvency, its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it — the DNC — to keep it going.”



...Another Therriault tweet captured by the Tax Foundation's Alan Cole and another Twitter user pointed to the Clinton campaign ignoring DNC warnings about Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Therriault said the DNC data never had those states as “even close to safe,” but the Clinton team “thought they knew better.”

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

when she runs in 2020.

---------------------------
Signature

you just aren't built to win

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

but in that article a reporter asked Rahm Emanuel if she would run in 2020 and he danced around it.

---------------------------
Signature

do better. It's Friday lol

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

Despite the fact she won the working class vote over Trump.


____________

Dallas Cavericks LETS GO!!

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

____________

Dallas Cavericks LETS GO!!

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

comes from all kinds.

"Someone is saying something critical about Hilary?? Must be a Bernie Bro!"

It is legit strange.


Who did they blame before the primary?

I mean, we all know Sev isn't the brightest...but I see it a lot.


They can't get Bernie out of their heads.

And the whole reason yal even bringing her up is cause yak still mad over Bernie

I don't see how yal can't even admit that

And how the fuk u trying to question my intelligence when yal stupid muhfuggas were saying the whole election that Hillary and Trump were one of the same

I honestly would be laying low if I were yal

Still bashing Hillary at this point is just a reminder how dumb and naive yal were about politics in the 1st place


____________

Dallas Cavericks LETS GO!!

the fuck you yapping about bruh?

This ain't got shit to do with the primaries.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

Politically.
Obama always was on some "Even though you didn't vote for me, I'm your president too"

And yeah, most of them slapped his hand away, but I think Obama's constant decency even towards people who were hostile towards him was more effective politically than it will ever get credit for.

For "people cling to guns and religion."

He said it more politely (in other words, more seriously, and in a way that was more obviously condescending), but it infuriated people just as much, and for the same reason.

I agree that he hasn't gotten nearly as much credit as he deserves for his basic human decency (or for a few dozen other deeply honorable features of his psyche). But even a decent person, and the smartest candidate in modern history, can still say things without realizing their effects.

it was clumsy politically, and came off condescending, but he was trying to explain reasons dems have trouble reaching a certain voter base and why we they feel how they feel.

"basket of deplorables" was just saying fuck these racist hicks. it's more comparable to Mitt's 47%. completely dismissive.

i agree they were similar in how they were received but they're not the same.

That line needed to be drawn

It's way more honest than what Bernie is going around doing and saying racism and sexism played no part in the election






____________

Dallas Cavericks LETS GO!!

especially for someone who prides herself so much on being a public servant. And especially for someone like her who's always so guarded, and overly cautious, she coudln't afford for her non-scripted moments to be shit like that.

We never learn.

I guess it makes her feel better?
Does it position her better for a 2020 run?

_______________________________________

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

All she is doing is proving folks like us right- she was a terrible candidate.

Even if you just focus on the POLITICAL OPTICS of it...

she could do a lot better by taking more responsibility and doing an honest self-reflection.

OR

just saying "you know...I think it is important as a country we look to the future. We need to unite and work to make sure Democrats regrain...." blah blah blah

She doesn't even have a message now!


OR

Lay the f*ck low.


There are so many things she could be doing better EVEN NOW


Lets say she decides to run in 2020 (God help us), not only will she have the stink of here horrible 2016 campaign on her...but she will also have her finger pointing horse sh!t to answer for.


Unreal

but she is out here shitting on the DNC even tho she hired Debbie Wasserfaceshultz the moment she was fired as chair of the DNC.

it really shows why folks don't fuck with her too tough. Imagine what she is like day to day? smh..

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

She appointed her to an unpaid ceremonial position.

The fact that this kind of misinformation persists so long in your bubble is a very bad sign. It's not exactly pizzagate, but it's the same dynamic.

“I am glad that she has agreed to serve as honorary chair of my campaign’s 50-state program to gain ground and elect Democrats in every part of the country,” Mrs. Clinton said in the statement.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

What a scandal!

Knowledge, discussion, and facts are good things. Not all progressives have left the reality-based community behind.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

Many have claimed the exact opposite. That their data operations were good and that the Clinton campaign largely ignored it.

Secondly, what good does this do? Throwing the already fractured DNC under the bus.
For the past couple of months it's been this group, it's been that person. Did Mitt Romney play the blame game like this and throw the RNC under the bus? What about John Kerry? How many times has John McCain publicly blamed Sarah Palin for destroying his campaign?

They moved on to other stuff instead of rehashing it over and over again because there is nothing to be gained from this stupid blame game.

_______________________________________

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

Because unlike some people, I don't flip out with rage and mansplaining every time she responds to questions about the dynamics of the campaign.

But she was making a specific, quantitative statement. One that could be confirmed or disputed with an unemotional look at the numbers.

(Whereas others blamed the DNC for 'rigging' primaries over which they had no control, or of 'favoring' this it that candidate, with no specific claims about how this favor went into effect.)

>Many have claimed the exact opposite. That their data
>operations were good and that the Clinton campaign largely
>ignored it.

Many claim all sorts of shit.

>Secondly, what good does this do? Throwing the already
>fractured DNC under the bus.

In three days nobody will be talking about this. How exactly does this hurt the DNC? If there's anything to these claims about the DNC not being prepared to support the general election campaign, they'll work to address it in the coming years. If not, they won't. No need to get worked up.

>For the past couple of months it's been this group, it's been
>that person.

You really think that, don't you?

She's done two public interviews. Calm down.

>Did Mitt Romney play the blame game like this and
>throw the RNC under the bus?

Nobody thought Mitt Romney was going to win.

>What about John Kerry?

Do you know how many times John Kerry answered questions about the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth?"

>How many
>times has John McCain publicly blamed Sarah Palin for
>destroying his campaign?

Nobody thought John McCain was gonna win. And you know enough about politics to know that it would have seriously endangered his Senate career to blame Sarah Palin.

>They moved on to other stuff instead of rehashing it over and
>over again

Over and over again, meaning... two interviews.

>because there is nothing to be gained from this
>stupid blame game.

Then why are you doing it?

It doesn't matter how many times she is asked the question- once, twice, a million times....

Her blaming Russia, the media,etc... and now the DNC (which is all kinds of ridiculous and you KNOW it. Not that they don't share blame, but that she, of all people would dare go there)

is helping nothing.


This "progressive hero who gets things done"...

this "most prepared candidate in history"

etc etc


Can't even handle defeat right. She doesn't even have a message now.

She can't even come across as like-able or sympathetic in defeat.


And don't play the mansplaining card. Don't be that person. You KNOW that isn't what is going on here.


She was a terrible candidate who ran a horrible campaign.

She faced unfair challenges, yes- I don't deny that.


But she literally lost to an orange, racist, pu$$y grabbing, reality TV star and now the country is f*cked. (May explain the emotional responses, no?)


She could literally handle these questions 100 different better ways...

"Its time to move forward..."

"We made some mistakes, of course, we are determined to learn from them..."

etc etc


But she is, for some odd reason, determined to look like the victim of MANY.

Even of her own party, which again, is ludicrous. They didn't even run a real primary for her.




And again, its not just a bad look for Dems in general when she does this...


but for HER. SH!T LIKE THIS IS WHY PEOPLE DON'T LIKE HER


IF she really does have any inkling to run for office again, this is more dislikable/out-of-touch/ entitled ammo for the other side to use.


This makes her look bad to anyone who isn't a hardcore Hilary supporter still celebrating the popular vote.


She is literally a lost cause when it comes to this sh!t.


I really hope to God she has no plans to run again.


Also, I hope people in her campaign, people in the DNC, and at least some of her supporters have at least learned some lessons.

when somebody doesn't see all the details the same way you do.

>
>It doesn't matter how many times she is asked the question-
>once, twice, a million times....
>
>Her blaming Russia, the media,etc... and now the DNC (which is
>all kinds of ridiculous and you KNOW it. Not that they don't
>share blame, but that she, of all people would dare go there)

What's wrong with her "going there"?

Oh, it has to do with your conspiracy theory that the DNC intervened in her favor in the primary.

To those of us in the reality-based community, that's not a place to go. That's a Berniebro fever dream.

>is helping nothing.
>
>
>This "progressive hero who gets things done"...
>
>this "most prepared candidate in history"
>
>etc etc
>
>
>Can't even handle defeat right. She doesn't even have a
>message now.
>
>She can't even come across as like-able or sympathetic in
>defeat.

DOESN'T SHE KNOW SHE JUST NEEDS TO SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP AND LET ME AND MY "MOVEMENT" FIX ALL THIS SHIT THAT SHE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND?!

Nah, that's not mansplaining. I apologize.


>And don't play the mansplaining card. Don't be that person.
>You KNOW that isn't what is going on here.

In your particular case, I'm pretty sure that's a big part of what's going on here. As usual with this sort of thing, the fact that you don't see it doesn't make it any less true.

>
>She was a terrible candidate who ran a horrible campaign.

How? You've still never explained that. You certainly haven't justified words like "terrible" and "horrible."


>She faced unfair challenges, yes- I don't deny that.
>
>
>But she literally lost to an orange, racist, pu$$y grabbing,
>reality TV star and now the country is f*cked. (May explain
>the emotional responses, no?)
>
>
>She could literally handle these questions 100 different
>better ways...
>
>"Its time to move forward..."
>
>"We made some mistakes, of course, we are determined to learn
>from them..."
>
>etc etc

Thanks for mans.. er, EXplaining. (Sorry, wouldn't want to be THAT person!)

>
>But she is, for some odd reason, determined to look like the
>victim of MANY.
>
>Even of her own party, which again, is ludicrous. They didn't
>even run a real primary for her.
>

They didn't?! Stop the presses!

But wait, what the fuck was I voting in then? I coulda sworn both she and Bernie were on the ballot.

>
>
>And again, its not just a bad look for Dems in general when
>she does this...
>
>
>but for HER. SH!T LIKE THIS IS WHY PEOPLE DON'T LIKE HER

For her, huh?

She just needs to ignore what actually happened and pretend it was all because she was "unlikable." Then a lot of people on the left and the right will feel better. Check.

>
>IF she really does have any inkling to run for office again,
>this is more dislikable/out-of-touch/ entitled ammo for the
>other side to use.

SHE JUST THINKS SHE'S SO BIG!! WHAT IS WRONG WITH HER?! DOESN'T SHE KNOW HER PLACE?! She should go back to working as a secretary.

>
>This makes her look bad to anyone who isn't a hardcore Hilary
>supporter still celebrating the popular vote.

Or, by complete coincidence, anybody who has an ingrained fear of a woman disagreeing with them.

>
>She is literally a lost cause when it comes to this sh!t.

And sadly, she's not alone in that.

>
>I really hope to God she has no plans to run again.

I'm sure some of her minions from the DNC are combing OKP to get your opinion on the matter.

>
>Also, I hope people in her campaign, people in the DNC, and
>at least some of her supporters have at least learned some
>lessons.

Thank you for enlightening us.

Our country is completely f*cked, dog.

Thanks to your sh!t candidate who managed to lose to this sh!t show.

You continue to ignore things, FACTS, like her...I dunno...her unfavorable ratings.

The fact that, despite the Hilary legion, she is DISLIKED on both sides of the aisle.

AND IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT IT IS FAIR OR RIGHT

She just isn't liked. Thems the breaks.

Ignnore that. Or ignore that a lot of these "sexists on the left" would have given their left n*t for Warren to run (not that I agree) or have huge hopes for Kamala ( on that point, I agree)

Keep ignoring all of this.

Or the fact that actual challengers...from Booker to Warren to Castro to whoever...conveniently sat this one out.


You think people were really going to pick O'Malley?? Webb?? Word?LOL LOL LOL

It took a self-described socialist to even give her a minor challenge.


It was her turn. That party that she is currently sh!tting on, made sure any real challenge didn't happen so her turn didn't get stolen like that inconvenient black guy stole here last turn.


And why do you dip sh!ts keep trying to make it about Bernie??


I could give a F*CK less about Bernie Sanders. Straight up. Please, write it down.

Matter of fact-


Please, please write this on your hand.

"NOT EVERY HILARY CRITIQUE IS COMING FROM A BERNIE BRO"


Write it down, study it, commit it to memory.



Your sh!t candidate can't even come across as qualified or likable in defeat.

She is incapable of even presenting herself, in the shadow of the sh!t show that is our country, as someone American should regret not voting for.

She is proving everyone right.

She is entitled.

She is incapable of self-reflection.

She is inacpable of presenting a POSITIVE MESSAGE


You get salty thinking about lefties who stayed home or didn't vote for her, right?

The only one making them regret is Trump. While, that should certainly be enough


She, and her mindless drones such as yourself, make it impossible to focus on her and say "she won me over"


Am I mad? F*ck yeah I am mad. I am furious.


A lot of loved ones are impacted by this bullsh!t. The country is more f*cked than ever.


And Hilary, and her arrogant hard-liners such as yourself, refuse to even engage in any kind of less-learning, honest, self-critique so that the party might learn next time.

The DNC is to blame. For forcing Hilary on us. Not at the expense of Bernie, but at the expense of a real primary.


The Democrats literally ran the only candidate on the planet unlikable enough (RIGHT OR WRONG) to lose to Donald f*cking Trump.

So yeah, I'm mad.

I can't soothe myself with empty popular vote victories. Wish I could.

>Our country is completely f*cked, dog.

If you really thought our country was completely fucked, you wouldn't be censoring your own cuss words. You just want to be told you're right.


>Thanks to your sh!t candidate who managed to lose to this sh!t
>show.
>
>You continue to ignore things, FACTS, like her...I dunno...her
>unfavorable ratings.

Unfavorable ratings that were, well, lower than the other candidate, and consistent with all other modern serious candidates short of Barack Obama?

I don't know what general election candidate you think would have been more popular. Well, yeah I do, but you'd be ridiculously naive to think that.


>The fact that, despite the Hilary legion, she is DISLIKED on
>both sides of the aisle.
>
>AND IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT IT IS FAIR OR RIGHT
>
>She just isn't liked. Thems the breaks.
>
>Ignnore that. Or ignore that a lot of these "sexists on the
>left" would have given their left n*t for Warren to run (not
>that I agree) or have huge hopes for Kamala ( on that point, I
>agree)

No, you don't agree on Warren, do you? It's funny how so many people dropped Elizabeth Warren like a rock when she didn't see the need to endorse the correct person before the Massachusetts primary. Smart, strong women are great as long as they listen to reason.


I like Kamala, too. For the record, I think she's our most likely 2020 candidate, and probably the smartest pick all around. But I worry a bit about what kind of minor disagreement it might take for her to offend the sensibilities of, well, certain people.


>Keep ignoring all of this.
>
>Or the fact that actual challengers...from Booker to Warren to
>Castro to whoever...conveniently sat this one out.
>
>
>You think people were really going to pick O'Malley?? Webb??
>Word?LOL LOL LOL
>
>It took a self-described socialist to even give her a minor
>challenge.
>
>
>It was her turn. That party that she is currently sh!tting
>on, made sure any real challenge didn't happen

How did they do that? Some cloak and dagger shit?

I'd love to hear who you think would have been a stronger candidate. Either in the primary or the general election.

Bernie couldn't even win an election against your shit-show candidate Hillary Clinton! How was he gonna defeat Trump? Especially once the attack ads start going his way instead of purely being pointed at Hillary?

Liz Warren? The Massachusetts college professor? There's a great idea! I love Liz Warren, but everybody including her knew that she'd be a much weaker national candidate than Hillary Clinton. That's the only reason she didn't run. No need for conspiracy theories.

Corey Booker? The Castro brothers? As you so aptly said: LOL LOL LOL


>so her turn
>didn't get stolen like that inconvenient black guy stole here
>last turn.

Oh, so back then the DNC WASN'T all powerful! The jack-booted thugs arrived at some point between 2008 and 2016. The game is afoot!


>And why do you dip sh!ts keep trying to make it about
>Bernie??
>
>
>I could give a F*CK less about Bernie Sanders. Straight up.
>Please, write it down.
>
>Matter of fact-
>
>
>Please, please write this on your hand.
>
>"NOT EVERY HILARY CRITIQUE IS COMING FROM A BERNIE BRO"

But this one is.


>Write it down, study it, commit it to memory.
>
>
>
>Your sh!t candidate can't even come across as qualified or
>likable in defeat.
>
>She is incapable of even presenting herself, in the shadow of
>the sh!t show that is our country, as someone American should
>regret not voting for.

Lol. I think you have a bias issue here.


>She is proving everyone right.
>
>She is entitled.
>
>She is incapable of self-reflection.
>
>She is inacpable of presenting a POSITIVE MESSAGE

Wait, is there still a campaign going on?! I wanna get to a stump speech!

You're spewing the same vapid talking points that you always have been, and that you would still be spewing regardless of whether she agreed to do these two minor interviews.


>You get salty thinking about lefties who stayed home or didn't
>vote for her, right?
>
>The only one making them regret is Trump. While, that should
>certainly be enough
>
>
>She, and her mindless drones such as yourself, make it
>impossible to focus on her and say "she won me over"


And how might we go about winning her over to someone like you? Do we just need to repeat the same talking points? "I'm so sorry! You were right all along! She's unlikable! She has a funny laugh! She's too calculating; she doesn't fight for anything! And sometimes she needs to calm down and lower her voice; she's too shrill!"

Because you never had a substantive criticism of her, she can't be blamed for not having a substantive defense. Write that on your fucking hand.




>Am I mad? F*ck yeah I am mad. I am furious.
>
>
>A lot of loved ones are impacted by this bullsh!t. The
>country is more f*cked than ever.
>
>
>And Hilary, and her arrogant hard-liners such as yourself,
>refuse to even engage in any kind of less-learning, honest,
>self-critique so that the party might learn next time.


PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE tell us the lesson we need to learn! Is it just the conspiracy theory that there somehow wasn't actually a Democratic primary?


>The DNC is to blame. For forcing Hilary on us. Not at the
>expense of Bernie, but at the expense of a real primary.


Gotcha.


>The Democrats literally ran the only candidate on the planet
>unlikable enough (RIGHT OR WRONG) to lose to Donald f*cking
>Trump.

Sure they did. "If only (somebody else) had run! And I'm not talking about Bernie god dammit! Just somebody else. There must have been someone!"


>So yeah, I'm mad.
>
>I can't soothe myself with empty popular vote victories. Wish
>I could.


But you can clearly soothe yourself with the certainty that you were right all along, that you're smarter than the clear majority of Democratic party voters, and that the world would be a better place if not for the stupidity and shadowy forces of the left.

Must be nice.

after the Primary?

If that is the case (and not a byproduct of the DNC being drained of money because Clinton and DWS redirected contributions to Clinton's campaign) then that is ALL THE MORE REASON you should have picked the candidate who raised more money during that point.

I don't see what her angle is here, except polling showing that Democrats are unpopular right now so she's trying to displace more blame on everyone involved.

Insanity. She is as culpable as her party and handlers.

She has YET to be honest in this whole matter.

________________________________________________
R.I.P. Soulgyal <3
SUPA NERD LLC.
Knowledge Meets Nature
Musica Negra
#13irteen

>
>Knowledge, discussion, and facts are good things. Not all
>progressives have left the reality-based community behind.
>


Re-read this statement. Print it out, even. Consider it before going into your next Hilary defense mode.

People like you are why the tea party thrives on the modern era. You preselect your reality and pretend it's objectivity.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

Captain Save-a-Hilary, who I am beginning to think is SoWhat's alias by the way...

just accused me of being...Cultish?


hahahaha


A lot of things you can call me and not be wrong, but this dude calling me, or anyone, cultish is...hilarisad.


I'm legit wondering if its just trolling at this point.


No way he can have that little self-awareness.

about your vague ideas about how there wasn't a primary, your vague ideas about how we ran a terrible candidate. You don't have an argument for ANY of this that holds water outside of your childish movement of political neophytes.

They are in the middle of damage control over this fraud lawsuit. They have already basically said in court that if they DID help tilt the scales in her favor, as a corporation, they have no obligation to do by the will of their constituents or supporting/donating citizens.

They stand the risk of that admission going non guilty in a verdict, or guilty and have to refund the money they fraudulently took from supporters by misrepresenting a fair process.

I think her trying to do this is a way to go "what help? The DNC is why I lost!". I mean, some folks believe this Russia nonsense still......you miss 100% of the shots you don't take (c)

________________________________________________
R.I.P. Soulgyal <3
SUPA NERD LLC.
Knowledge Meets Nature
Musica Negra
#13irteen

shoulda never let her gangster the party in 2016

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Yup. I agree.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Last I heard, Bernie Sanders (and a lot of OKPs) were entirely blaming the DNC for his loss.

i never see you anywhere unless there's a post about hilldawg. how do you do that?

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

Kinda weird that nothing here interests you other than Hillary posts, but aiight.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

Shit's disgusting smh

_______________________________________

(a) The DNC isn't carrying out a criminal investigation into the Clinton campaign.

(b) Nobody is getting fired here. All she did was answer a question.

the DNC DID conspire to tilt the scales in favor of Clinton. Fact.

They did NOT conspire to keep Hillary down. Fact.

They DID funnel money through the DNC and away from down ticket Democrats to pool into Hillary's campaign via Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. Fact.

They DID ignore half of the booing constituents in the Democratic Convention who were protesting the candidate chosen for the general. FACT.

When the DNC had to drop DWS over the collusion discovered via WikiLeaks, CLINTON decided to pick her up and make her an honorary chair of her campaign. FAACCTT.

To blame this on the DNC or on poor data when 1. The DNC worked 100% in favor of Clinton, even to the point of getting Sanders supporters within the DNC (Ellison, Turner, Jealous) to throw support behind her, and 2. for HILLARY'S Brooklyn headquarters to deny GOTV and door to door canvassing for which they could have obtain vital feedback from the majority of the country which they thought they could ignore because they had it in the bag....ALL of that is Clinton's campaign's fault.

So does Hillary want a new party too? Can we all agree that the Democrats are terrible at this point? Even your leader thinks so.

________________________________________________
R.I.P. Soulgyal <3
SUPA NERD LLC.
Knowledge Meets Nature
Musica Negra
#13irteen

we've had a full year of talk about how the DNC is stupid and going in the wrong direction, as soon as hillary agrees boom the DNC is a shining tower on the mountain that must be protected.



www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

>we've had a full year of talk about how the DNC is stupid and
>going in the wrong direction, as soon as hillary agrees boom
>the DNC is a shining tower on the mountain that must be
>protected.
>
>
>


This is why Hilbots have no leg to stand on.

They often can't engage in conversation without either A)playing the sexism card or B)inventing strawmans

The DNC are terrible. I could go on and on at how bad they are at getting Democrats elected.

The problem, though, is that one of the biggest mistakes they made in this election

was forcing Hilary on us.


And again, not a Bernie thing.


I'm talking about early on, when no real challenger stepped up.

When no one was going to steal her turn. Again.

So, if Hilary ever says "The DNC f*cked up by not encouraging a real primary" you hit me up, I'll agree and give her props.


Oh the other thing, of course


Is that THE DNC, RUSSIA, AND THE MEDIA ALONE ARE NOT TO BLAME FOR HER LOSS

A lot of us have pointed out that her inability to even come across as likable now...

that her inability to take any responsibility OR AT THE VERY LEAST SAY SOME BS LIKE "LETS FOCUS ON THE FUTURE" ET ETC

You know, her inability to come up with a positive message, even now (like her campaign-- even Bubbas a$$ agrees with that)

ONLY PROVES HOW WRONG SHE WAS FOR THE SPOT





I mean, a lot of it is present in these posts (you'd have to read them)...

but that's the gist.


(In other words, literally no one in here is defending the DNC)

In fact, are ya'll turning on the DNC?

When the rest of us criticized the party, we were yelled down and talked down to.

So were we wrong then or is Hillary wrong now?

You know what, it doesn't matter.

I'll never get any candidate, hell any public personality, getting this kind of unconditional love and praise.


Hillary can't fail she can only be failed, right?


Lets all spend the next 4 years, well assuming we last that long, celebrating the popular vote.

That should make my kids feel better.

but that's what you're going to do.

you're going to talk a lot, and blame hillary clinton and make sure that anyone who says anything about sexism knows that they're wrong.

y'all couldn't win the primary, couldn't win the DNC chair, and never ever win anything anywhere, but you know all about winning everything.



www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

^^^SAME THING CLINTON TEAM SAID WHEN PRESENTED WITH VOTER DATA^^^

________________________________________________
R.I.P. Soulgyal <3
SUPA NERD LLC.
Knowledge Meets Nature
Musica Negra
#13irteen

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

Bernie.


Her campaign took zero "public" chances.



Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg


Just trying to share the world - www.JySbr.net

tried to keep all the money.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

in the bits where she was to keep up with Bernie

"oh, the berniebros are blaming the DNC? Down with the DNC!"

it's weird how your priorities shift


www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Straviskian did the Comey defense better

_______________________________________

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

except that she's still wrong because you don't like her.

because it's exactly what everyone can see.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

>except that she's still wrong because you don't like her.
>
>because it's exactly what everyone can see.


lol....

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

when the DNC was in control, they were able to collude and manipulate THEIR party and primary to steer Hillary to the finish line to win the nomination. In optic it was "She got 3 million more votes". In the other optic it was "She lost 48% of her own party to a socialist!". The DNC and superdelegates decided to roll with her anyways.

In the general they didn't get to make the rules. It was an open election. So their "blue no matter who" and "I'm with Her" didn't work on people who were non-Democrats. The Democratic strategy isn't that complicated. 27% of the country is Dems, 23% is Repubs, the rest are Indies or unaffiliated. They had a 3 point lead just on math, and I think even though Hillary and Trump have been virtual ties since after the conventions, they felt the math would work out, despite her and their tumbling popularity. That and the low voter turnout, especially the media which was so hard on Hillary by telling folks she had a 97% chance of winning on election (who's going to miss work and overtime for something she has in the bag, right?) that 1 percent lead she was clinging to dried up quick, and the electoral map cared nothing for her popular vote win.

So in the end, they BOTH are culpable. The DNC and HIllary and her campaign are both terrible, but she is wrong to say THEY are why she lost. THEY are why she was in position to compete. She lost because she is terrible. They are terrible because we SCREAMED that she was terrible and they pushed her anyway, and they lost.

over the #themocrats.

________________________________________________
R.I.P. Soulgyal <3
SUPA NERD LLC.
Knowledge Meets Nature
Musica Negra
#13irteen

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

you just...can't win any elections.

huh

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

colludes toanipulate the outcome. Even if it is your position that they have the right the do so, CLEARLY they miscalculated. I backed a guy who got cheated and still almost won a party he wasn't a party of. You back a candidate who LOST almost a majority of her own party inherited from Barack Obama and then lost to DONALD TRUMP.....so better question is can YALL win elections?

AND Bernie would have won *shrugs*

________________________________________________
R.I.P. Soulgyal <3
SUPA NERD LLC.
Knowledge Meets Nature
Musica Negra
#13irteen

They didn't want a guy who wasnt a Democrat and loyal the party

Even to this day he refuses to do so

There was nothing nefarious in those hacked emails

Democrats didn't trust Bernie and rightfully so

He's a fraud


____________

Dallas Cavericks LETS GO!!

that the DNC had the right to choose their candidate, and back the REAL Democrat.

If that is your position, then cool, we disagree. I didn't give money to Sanders' campaign for the DNC to set the primary up against him but that is being hammered out in court right now.

However, if they basically did everything they could to ensure Hillary the nomination - how is she blaming THEM for her loss? If not for them she wouldn't have been the candidate in the first place!

________________________________________________
R.I.P. Soulgyal <3
SUPA NERD LLC.
Knowledge Meets Nature
Musica Negra
#13irteen

I voted in one, you voted in one, all of us voted in a primary or a caucus, and your guy lost. SeV is saying he lost in part because real progressives were suspicious of him, and there's something to that. But he lost the primary fair and square.

You still haven't listed a single thing that the nefarious DNC did to tilt the scales, or even anything that they plausibly could have done.

Yes I participated in one and you participated in one. 5 of my immediate coworkers attempted to participate in one and were given provisional ballots which were never counted. One who lived in upstate New York at the time had his polling place change its hours of operation and didn't open its doors until 12 noon instead of 6AM. Exit polls were disgarded once it was discovered that the tallies didn't match the paper ballots, in some states as off by 20+ percentage points. That is a matter of record and fact, not conspiracy.

The only conspiracy is that it appears the entity with the power, coordination, and bias to do so for those manipulations was the DNC, FOR the benefit of making Hillary Clinton their nominee. Even if you think they are within their right to do so which appears to be what SeV is saying (and on that point I disagree) then on what grounds can Hillary come back and say that same entity is why she lost when it is SOLELY responsible for her having been in position to lose in the first place?

This talking point that she secured some sort of mandate for her ideas when she got "3 million more votes" although she lost a 90 point lead and ended in a virtual tie against a man who wasn't in her party (a man who still has 80 percent favorability among Democrats to her 34%) is utterly asinine. She lost half her party where he would have kept his base + a majority of her supporters + independents + people who defected to Trump's populist message. To think otherwise is to assert that he wouldn't have won and Hillary was our best shot AND SHE LOST, so Democrats need to do better no matter your stance. They BOTH were/ate terrible and complicit and they made their own beds and need to lie on their pissy mattress. Period.

________________________________________________
R.I.P. Soulgyal <3
SUPA NERD LLC.
Knowledge Meets Nature
Musica Negra
#13irteen

context?

Cool.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

there used to be a time, not so long ago, when Democrats could co-exist in one party with a spectrum of differing ideologies, positions, and ideas. Democrats even worked and caucused with Independents who found grounds for agreement and resonance.

Trump can tweet and flood the airwaves with lies and ignorance-- but an intelligent woman, who some may not like or agree with needs to be quiet? nearly all of the LOSING candidates who ran during the election are still around opening their big mouths for better or worse. most of them are saying dumb and hateful things. they are no more "morally" acceptable than clinton; and certainly no more morally acceptable in ways that give them some right or privilege to speak that she shouldn't have. no one has asked those candidates to give a groveling post mortem of their campaigns and "take responsibility" for their inconceivable losses against the so-called "worst candidate ever," either. clinton, a former secretary of state and senator, can say whatever she wants and to whoever.

clinton was the target of a successful Russian campaign to ruin her election chances (and assumed eventual presidency). and outrageously, she may have been defeated by her Republican opponent not because of his merits (or lack thereof) or *hers*-- but because her opponent, to put it mildly, may have "cheated" and possibly conspired with an antagonistic foreign country to win.

i won't blame Clinton for losing or for losing to Trump-- i won't blame her for our current state of affairs as a nation. the election was an extraordinary phenomena. when it comes to Trump, Americans (those who voted and those who didn't) have to look to themselves for that. because he's the wrong choice, every single damn time. maybe if there's a universe where he has an identical twin that's just like him, i might think differently...but yea...every damn time.

americans should be upset Clinton lost in the way that she did...if they're indeed upset that Russia meddled. people should defend clinton. party over country--and i mean that on both sides of the aisle. and *we* have to take part in our responsibility for this just as much as we want to scour whoever else.

forget clinton. if the target of Russia's meddling campaign was Trump (meaning they wanted Trump to lose and candidate x to win)-- i would cry foul.

what's missed, often, i think, is that not only did Russian meddling help Trump, it created a wedge in the Democratic party that swung interests toward Sanders-- and the nature of that faction continues to divide. Dems need to get it together and focus-- and stop being a pawn.