Election 2020

[TS Garp]

I am sure no one will use this to discredit him. Hopefully there are some details in the reports

Spoiler alert: there aren't.

First 3 paragraphs:

U.S. officials have told Sen. Bernie Sanders that Russia is attempting to help his presidential campaign as part of an effort to interfere with the Democratic contest, according to people familiar with the matter.

President Trump and lawmakers on Capitol Hill have also been informed about the Russian assistance to the Vermont senator, according to people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence.

It is not clear what form that Russian assistance has taken. U.S. prosecutors found a Russian effort in 2016 to use social media to boost Sanders’s campaign against Hillary Clinton, part of a broader effort to hurt Clinton, sow dissension in the American electorate and ultimately help elect Donald Trump.

[The Feral Slasher]

Spoiler alert: there aren't.

First 3 paragraphs:

U.S. officials have told Sen. Bernie Sanders that Russia is attempting to help his presidential campaign as part of an effort to interfere with the Democratic contest, according to people familiar with the matter.

President Trump and lawmakers on Capitol Hill have also been informed about the Russian assistance to the Vermont senator, according to people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence.

It is not clear what form that Russian assistance has taken. U.S. prosecutors found a Russian effort in 2016 to use social media to boost Sanders’s campaign against Hillary Clinton, part of a broader effort to hurt Clinton, sow dissension in the American electorate and ultimately help elect Donald Trump.

I wonder how much this Russian interference will compare to Mike Bloombergs interference in the election

[Sour Masher]

A brokered convention favors everyone expect Bernie, which you can't tell me this isn't about. The DNC and other candidates don't want Sanders as the Nominee, it's clear as they haven't encouraged anyone to drop out. Warren is till polling in the tank, but she's supposed to get the nomination over Sanders because the progressive wing get's more votes that the single moderate candidate? I absolutely guarantee a brokered convention in ANY respect will NOTend with Sanders being the Candidate in the General.

You're not going to get many if any sanders supporters on board with a brokered convention, even if he's behind going into it.

How did you feel about Sanders advocating for super delgates to vote for him when HRC had more votes than him? In a vacuum, it seems hypocritical of him, but I know your experience exposed you to the possibility that Sanders did not, in fact, fairly lose to her, so that complicates things.

[Sour Masher]

Also, I have established, I am no Bloomberg fan at all, but not cool for Sanders people to say he has had heart attacks. Lying is never cool.

[The Feral Slasher]

Also, I have established, I am no Bloomberg fan at all, but not cool for Sanders people to say he has had heart attacks. Lying is never cool.

Lol. It is getting a bit heated. I am not familiar with this claim....but cmon all sides are spewing shit at this point and hoping something sticks. I could run off a list of 10 or 20 bogus claims off the top of my head

[GwynnInTheHall]

Also, I have established, I am no Bloomberg fan at all, but not cool for Sanders people to say he has had heart attacks. Lying is never cool.

Sanders PEOPLE--He'll take care of it. HE is ethical, HE has integrity for a multitude of reasons, others around him or in his camp might not be as ethical. HOW he addresses them and what they said will speak to his authenticity. If he handles it like Warren, he's no better than her. I doubt we'll see that though.

Can you post a link to where Sanders courted the Supers PRIOR to the convention--I can't seem to find anything except how they shouldn't commit before the convention anywhere.

[GwynnInTheHall]

Has Bloomie had any heart issues that are documented? I have no idea. Bernie has--Kicked it's ass too.

[The Feral Slasher]

Lol. It is getting a bit heated. I am not familiar with this claim....but cmon all sides are spewing shit at this point and hoping something sticks. I could run off a list of 10 or 20 bogus claims off the top of my head

Although i do agree people should stick to facts and be truthful. So if they are not they should be called out. If sanders is out right lying shame on him, it should be corrected

[GwynnInTheHall]

Has Bloomie had any heart issues that are documented? I have no idea. Bernie has--Kicked it's ass too.

EDIT. I didn't even know a guy like Bloomberg could have a heart he's suck a fucking dickweed.

[Sour Masher]

Can you post a link to where Sanders courted the Supers PRIOR to the convention--I can't seem to find anything except how they shouldn't commit before the convention anywhere.

Well, he was all for whoever had the most delegates winnings back in 2016 before HRC had more. Then, he and his campaign said that superdelegates should decide, or why do they exist? I'm not pointing this out to attack Bernie, because I think he is just human, and I'd expect this from any politician who wants to win and thinks it is much better for the country if they do win. That is a lot of weight, you know? If you think HRC will be bad for millions of people, I get doing this. But it is a reminder of what we have talked about before--no one is morally pure. Everyone compromises for various reasons and justifications. Even Bernie (who I agree may be the most morally consistent of the candidates). It is important to remember in case a non-Bernie wins. They should not have to be morally perfect to get Sanders' supporters to support them.

https://www.npr.org/2016/05/19/478705022/sanders-campaign-now-says-superdelegates-are-key-to-winning-nomination

"It's a sharp contrast from earlier in the campaign when Sanders supporters called superdelegates "undemocratic" and petitioned for them to support the candidate who has the most votes by the Democratic convention this July.

"When they get to the convention," Weaver continued, "nobody has the delegates to win with pledged delegates. It's going to be the superdelegates who are going to have to decide this."

"Now we can argue about the merits of having superdelegates," Weaver continued, "but we do have them. And if their role is just to rubber-stamp the pledged-delegate count then they really aren't needed. They're supposed to exercise independent judgment about who they think can lead the party forward to victory."

[The Feral Slasher]

Well, he was all for whoever had the most delegates winnings back in 2016 before HRC had more. Then, he and his campaign said that superdelegates should decide, or why do they exist? I'm not pointing this out to attack Bernie, because I think he is just human, and I'd expect this from any politician who wants to win and thinks it is much better for the country if they do win. That is a lot of weight, you know? If you think HRC will be bad for millions of people, I get doing this. But it is a reminder of what we have talked about before--no one is morally pure. Everyone compromises for various reasons and justifications. Even Bernie (who I agree may be the most morally consistent of the candidates). It is important to remember in case a non-Bernie wins. They should not have to be morally perfect to get Sanders' supporters to support them.

https://www.npr.org/2016/05/19/478705022/sanders-campaign-now-says-superdelegates-are-key-to-winning-nomination

"It's a sharp contrast from earlier in the campaign when Sanders supporters called superdelegates "undemocratic" and petitioned for them to support the candidate who has the most votes by the Democratic convention this July.

"When they get to the convention," Weaver continued, "nobody has the delegates to win with pledged delegates. It's going to be the superdelegates who are going to have to decide this."

"Now we can argue about the merits of having superdelegates," Weaver continued, "but we do have them. And if their role is just to rubber-stamp the pledged-delegate count then they really aren't needed. They're supposed to exercise independent judgment about who they think can lead the party forward to victory."

I was hoping he would just say "we have rules in place we should follow them" but i dont think it is a big deal either way

[GwynnInTheHall]

Well, he was all for whoever had the most delegates winnings back in 2016 before HRC had more. Then, he and his campaign said that superdelegates should decide, or why do they exist? I'm not pointing this out to attack Bernie, because I think he is just human, and I'd expect this from any politician who wants to win and thinks it is much better for the country if they do win. That is a lot of weight, you know? If you think HRC will be bad for millions of people, I get doing this. But it is a reminder of what we have talked about before--no one is morally pure. Everyone compromises for various reasons and justifications. Even Bernie (who I agree may be the most morally consistent of the candidates). It is important to remember in case a non-Bernie wins. They should not have to be morally perfect to get Sanders' supporters to support them.

https://www.npr.org/2016/05/19/478705022/sanders-campaign-now-says-superdelegates-are-key-to-winning-nomination

"It's a sharp contrast from earlier in the campaign when Sanders supporters called superdelegates "undemocratic" and petitioned for them to support the candidate who has the most votes by the Democratic convention this July.

"When they get to the convention," Weaver continued, "nobody has the delegates to win with pledged delegates. It's going to be the superdelegates who are going to have to decide this."

"Now we can argue about the merits of having superdelegates," Weaver continued, "but we do have them. And if their role is just to rubber-stamp the pledged-delegate count then they really aren't needed. They're supposed to exercise independent judgment about who they think can lead the party forward to victory."

Again, you know exactly why he changed positions. I don't understand this feigned ignorance of events and outcome by everyone (or most) in here to in someway, anyway, indict sanders, impune his integrity and award the nomination to ANYONE else but him.

It's just bullshit.

[GwynnInTheHall]

Next up in the Sanders isn't Saint series.

You said Sanders never acted like an asshole!!

Well I have it on good authority that once he farted in a crowded room, to fart your asshole must have acted, so Sanders has indeed acted with/as an asshole.

Flog him, you're all Hypocrites Hillary for President!

[Sour Masher]

Again, you know exactly why he changed positions. I don't understand this feigned ignorance of events and outcome by everyone (or most) in here to in someway, anyway, indict sanders, impune his integrity and award the nomination to ANYONE else but him.

It's just bullshit.

I actually am having a mental lapse it seems. Why did he change positions? Honest question on why you think he did it. He repeatedly stated he did it, because he thought super delegates should base their decision on who would be the most likely candidate to beat Trump, not who most people voted for. He flat out stated as much in the video below to a question about whether super delegates should go against the will of the voters. He stated they should vote based on who they think would be Trump, and thus they should vote for him, because he could beat Trump and she could not.

[Ken]

It's just bullshit.

I think bullshit stinks.