Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

'16 Democratic Nomination Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • If I was a Dem I would be irate with the DNC. Their mismanagement and inability to budget and spend accordingly essentially left them open to the highest bidder. They were going to follow whoever could get them out of their financial woes. This isnt the group thats paying of the debt wanting a say in the activities. It was a hostile takeover.

    Quote from the article:

    “Gary, how did they do this without me knowing?” I asked. “I don’t know how Debbie relates to the officers,” Gary said. He described the party as fully under the control of Hillary’s campaign, which seemed to confirm the suspicions of the Bernie camp. The campaign had the DNC on life support, giving it money every month to meet its basic expenses, while the campaign was using the party as a fund-raising clearinghouse. Under FEC law, an individual can contribute a maximum of $2,700 directly to a presidential campaign. But the limits are much higher for contributions to state parties and a party’s national committee.

    Individuals who had maxed out their $2,700 contribution limit to the campaign could write an additional check for $353,400 to the Hillary Victory Fund—that figure represented $10,000 to each of the 32 states’ parties who were part of the Victory Fund agreement—$320,000—and $33,400 to the DNC. The money would be deposited in the states first, and transferred to the DNC shortly after that. Money in the battleground states usually stayed in that state, but all the other states funneled that money directly to the DNC, which quickly transferred the money to Brooklyn.

    “Wait,” I said. “That victory fund was supposed to be for whoever was the nominee, and the state party races. You’re telling me that Hillary has been controlling it since before she got the nomination?”

    Gary said the campaign had to do it or the party would collapse.



    Seems pretty crappy if you ask me.
    It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years and we must stop it.
    Bill Clinton 1995, State of the Union Address


    "When they go low - we go High" great motto - too bad it was a sack of bullshit. DNC election mantra

    Comment


    • bg, what sounds pretty crappy to me is 1) Donna Brazile trying to pretend she had no idea how the DNC worked and exactly what was going on over there when she took over, and 2) Donna Brazile trying to pretend she is anything other than a cold-blooded political operative. For crying out loud, this is the woman who was forced to resign from the Dukakis campaign for dirty politics...spreading the claim that Bush41 was an adulterer and being particularly nasty about it.

      Donna Brazile thinks that the way to help herself is to sling as much mud on the Hillary campaign as possible, to distance herself from that train wreck, and to align herself with what she thinks is on trend. Whether she screwed Bernie is a matter for discussion, but the idea that she looked out for his interests is ridiculous.
      If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. - Karl Popper

      Comment


      • Hilarious also how all the semi-GOP guys are concerned about DNC finances while in Trump world the donations of the rank and file to the Party are being spent to pay the criminal lawyers for Donald Trump Jr. (I recognize this is whataboutery, but it is directed more at the mote in the eye of my fellow junkies who don't see the irony.) (As some pundit pointed out, equally ironic is the title of Brazile's new book, when "Hack" describes exactly what she has been throughout her professional life, whether one agrees or disagrees with the ones who have hired her.)
        If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. - Karl Popper

        Comment


        • RF -
          I dont doubt much of what you are saying about Brazile. Honestly I dont know much about her. That said, if the DNC hadnt nearly bankrupted themselves none of this would likely have happened. Your party was broke and if they hadnt sold themselves out to HRC - they likely would have collapsed.

          This is no shot at HRC specifically - she took advantage of a situation, bought her nomination and lost anyway. Its ironic that the party that is screaming and kicking about Trump is also partially complicit in his being elected. HRC was the only way out for the party, but not the country. Your party was hi-jacked by HRC - but hey its not her fault - she saved the party.

          Your party was for sale to the highest bidder! Are you comfortable with that? Is that really how your political leader is supposed to be selected?
          It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years and we must stop it.
          Bill Clinton 1995, State of the Union Address


          "When they go low - we go High" great motto - too bad it was a sack of bullshit. DNC election mantra

          Comment


          • Originally posted by baldgriff View Post
            RF -
            I dont doubt much of what you are saying about Brazile. Honestly I dont know much about her. That said, if the DNC hadnt nearly bankrupted themselves none of this would likely have happened. Your party was broke and if they hadnt sold themselves out to HRC - they likely would have collapsed.

            This is no shot at HRC specifically - she took advantage of a situation, bought her nomination and lost anyway. Its ironic that the party that is screaming and kicking about Trump is also partially complicit in his being elected. HRC was the only way out for the party, but not the country. Your party was hi-jacked by HRC - but hey its not her fault - she saved the party.

            Your party was for sale to the highest bidder! Are you comfortable with that? Is that really how your political leader is supposed to be selected?
            I'm not 100% sure what you are saying here.

            The Joint Financing Agreement (which is what Brazile is talking about) was signed by the Clinton campaign and the Sanders campaign. It was a way to put the party back on its feet financially. HRC put money into the party under the terms of the agreement. Bernie didn't. If you think Bernie got an equal say by not putting any money into the pot, you have an unusual perspective.

            Assuming the HRC campaign exercized a lot of control over the party, does that mean the election was rigged? It doesn't necessarily follow, at least outside the mind of the fervent Bernie fan. But, assuming such control, does that mean Bernie would have (or even could have) won the nomination otherwise? What is the factual, non-emotional argument for this? Do we have to go over the primary-by-primary results again and show how Bernie only had a chance in a world of caucuses?

            You talk about the Party collapsing, which I assume was a joke. The DNC isn't the party. It's just the Democratic National Committee. The Democrats across the U.S.A. and our elected officials are the Democratic Party. The DNC could go bankrupt tomorrow and the Democratic Party wouldn't collapse.

            Remember this when Trump runs for re-election in 2020. He will be the leader of the GOP. Despite all of the Republicans who run against him in the Primaries, the RNC will support Trump. It supports the incumbent running for re-election, regardless of how crazy he may be or how great the other candidates may be.

            Are you comfortable with that? Is that really how your political leader is supposed to be selected? Maybe not, but that is the way that political parties work.

            Two thoughts: 1) We should bear in mind that Bernie wasn't a Democrat. As a thought experiment, we should imagine how things may have transpired had he decided to run as a Republican last time. Would his supporters be any happier with the treatment he received from the RNC?; and 2) we should remind ourselves that politics didn't begin with the 2016 election. It is helpful to keep things in the context of past elections and practices. Neophytes (present company excepted) tend to be outraged easily when they lack historical perspective and an understanding of the process.
            Last edited by Redbirds Fan; 11-03-2017, 01:06 PM.
            If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. - Karl Popper

            Comment


            • The DNC is the committee that represents the interests of the Democratic Party. I realize that if they went bankrupt the "party" would still exist. Im not an idiot!

              From Wiki:
              The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is the formal governing body for the United States Democratic Party. The committee coordinates strategy to support Democratic Party candidates throughout the country for local, state, and national office. It organizes the Democratic National Convention held every four years to nominate and confirm a candidate for president, and to formulate the party platform. While it provides support for party candidates, it does not have direct authority over elected officials.[3]

              So yes the party would still exist (people would identify themselves as Dems) However the governing body that coordinates support and formulates the platform was broke and HRC bought it. She may have done it within the "rules of engagement" - but she did buy her nomination. You can call this politics as normal - which would be a sad commentary on our politics.


              Also as a thought - if there wasnt the need to bail out the DNC because the party would still exist - why is it the HRC agreed to put up the money?
              Last edited by baldgriff; 11-03-2017, 01:31 PM.
              It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years and we must stop it.
              Bill Clinton 1995, State of the Union Address


              "When they go low - we go High" great motto - too bad it was a sack of bullshit. DNC election mantra

              Comment


              • Originally posted by baldgriff View Post
                The DNC is the committee that represents the interests of the Democratic Party. I realize that if they went bankrupt the "party" would still exist. Im not an idiot!

                From Wiki:
                The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is the formal governing body for the United States Democratic Party. The committee coordinates strategy to support Democratic Party candidates throughout the country for local, state, and national office. It organizes the Democratic National Convention held every four years to nominate and confirm a candidate for president, and to formulate the party platform. While it provides support for party candidates, it does not have direct authority over elected officials.[3]

                So yes the party would still exist (people would identify themselves as Dems) However the governing body that coordinates support and formulates the platform was broke and HRC bought it. She may have done it within the "rules of engagement" - but she did buy her nomination. You can call this politics as normal - which would be a sad commentary on our politics.


                Also as a thought - if there wasnt the need to bail out the DNC because the party would still exist - why is it the HRC agreed to put up the money?
                Hey, they were your words, not mine.

                That said, if the DNC hadnt nearly bankrupted themselves none of this would likely have happened. Your party was broke and if they hadnt sold themselves out to HRC - they likely would have collapsed. (emphasis added)

                As I made clear, the Financing Agreement provided for both HRC and Bernie to provide funding for the campaign. Bernie failed to do so. Why did Hillary decide to honor her obligation? To keep the DNC running. But don't confuse the convenient with the necessary. It was a good idea to ensure the DNC's continued existence, but not a strategic imperative.

                And what exactly do you mean when you say she "bought her nomination"? Did you follow the primaries? Have you looked at the numbers? Were you aware that she got nearly 4 million more votes than Bernie and that he was never in a position to top her in delegates? Only the most partisan of #neverhillary voters believed he had a chance once they were well into the primaries, as Bernie couldn't draw support in the big open primaries. But, a lot of people believe Trump when he says that his election was rigged, too. It's an easy thing to claim without proof. People believe what they want to believe.

                Now, if you have some proof, I'll be happy to consider it. But don't give me that "one DNC staffer talked to another DNC staffer about doing something nasty" which they never actually did stuff.

                Hey, I'm not an idiot either. I voted for Bernie, and then watched in horror as he stabbed the Democratic Party in the back. I have a hard time forgiving that, and I'll never trust him again. (And I also understand better now why there were so many hysterical anti-Hillary posts showing up on my facebook page, as well as so many bizarre pro-Jill Stein posts. Commie bastards.)
                Last edited by Redbirds Fan; 11-03-2017, 01:56 PM.
                If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. - Karl Popper

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Redbirds Fan View Post
                  I'm not 100% sure what you are saying here.

                  The Joint Financing Agreement (which is what Brazile is talking about) was signed by the Clinton campaign and the Sanders campaign. It was a way to put the party back on its feet financially. HRC put money into the party under the terms of the agreement. Bernie didn't. If you think Bernie got an equal say by not putting any money into the pot, you have an unusual perspective.
                  Nothing I see in the article below mentions anything about the Sanders campaign signing on to these agreements. Anyway, I don't think that will change anyones mind, but wondering if you have seen different reports elsewhere.



                  http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewir...sing-agreement



                  In a scathing piece in Politico Magazine Thursday, Brazile wrote that Clinton’s campaign manager, Robby Mook, signed an agreement with the DNC and the Hillary Victory Fund, a joint fundraising operation between the DNC and Clinton’s campaign, in August 2015 — nearly a year before the July 2016 Democratic National Convention — pledging financial support for the DNC in exchange for the Clinton campaign controlling large swaths of the DNC’s internal operations:

                  The agreement—signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and Robby Mook with a copy to Marc Elias—specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.

                  Later in the piece, Brazile recalled a phone call she had with Bernie Sanders following Clinton’s nomination: “[T]he cancer was that [Clinton] had exerted this control of the party long before she became its nominee,” she told Sanders. Sanders, she said, “took this stoically.”

                  Politico reported on Hillary Victory Fund in May 2016. The joint fundraising operation, Politico reported, citing FEC filings, had claimed to fundraise on behalf of state Democratic parties. In reality, according to Politico, those states benefitted little from the operation. The vast majority of the funds went to the national Democratic Party and the Clinton campaign.

                  Brazile said her own investigation of the DNC’s fundraising operation had confirmed Politico’s work:

                  I kept asking the party lawyers and the DNC staff to show me the agreements that the party had made for sharing the money they raised, but there was a lot of shuffling of feet and looking the other way.

                  When I got back from a vacation in Martha’s Vineyard I at last found the document that described it all: the Joint Fund-Raising Agreement between the DNC, the Hillary Victory Fund, and Hillary for America.
                  ---------------------------------------------
                  Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
                  ---------------------------------------------
                  The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
                  George Orwell, 1984

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Redbirds Fan View Post
                    Hilarious also how all the semi-GOP guys are concerned about DNC finances while in Trump world the donations of the rank and file to the Party are being spent to pay the criminal lawyers for Donald Trump Jr. (I recognize this is whataboutery, but it is directed more at the mote in the eye of my fellow junkies who don't see the irony.) (As some pundit pointed out, equally ironic is the title of Brazile's new book, when "Hack" describes exactly what she has been throughout her professional life, whether one agrees or disagrees with the ones who have hired her.)

                    All? There’s one of those generalizations again. I, for one, don’t really care about this, but I do find the interapsrty bickering and backstabbing interesting. My guy Charlie Skyes said it best yesterday when he said that one party is in civil war while the other party needs an exorcism. I think he’s probably close.
                    I know in my heart that man is good. That what is right will always eventually triumph and there is purpose and worth to each and every life.

                    Ronald Reagan

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Redbirds Fan View Post
                      Two thoughts: 1) We should bear in mind thatBernie wasn't a Democrat. As a thought experiment, we should imagine how things may have transpired had he decided to run as a Republican last time. Would his supporters be any happier with the treatment he received from the RNC?; and 2) we should remind ourselves that politics didn't begin with the 2016 election. It is helpful to keep things in the context of past elections and practices. Neophytes (present company excepted) tend to be outraged easily when they lack historical perspective and an understanding of the process.
                      In response to the highlighted comments, first and foremost, Republicans have been saying the same thing about Trump since well before the primaries. The Liberals seem to remind us (former us) when we do this, that he in fact won the nomination as a Republican and therefore he is a Republican. Trump is no more Republican, than Bernie is a Democrat. I’ll stipulate to that. As for your comment, or thought experiment, who would ever think such a thing! Hillary is closer to being a Republican than Bernie is. OK, it’s been a long day and maybe I’m not playing the thought experiment game properly!
                      Last edited by Bernie Brewer; 11-03-2017, 07:59 PM.
                      I know in my heart that man is good. That what is right will always eventually triumph and there is purpose and worth to each and every life.

                      Ronald Reagan

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Bernie Brewer View Post
                        All? There’s one of those generalizations again. I, for one, don’t really care about this, but I do find the interapsrty bickering and backstabbing interesting. My guy Charlie Skyes said it best yesterday when he said that one party is in civil war while the other party needs an exorcism. I think he’s probably close.
                        Bernie, I would never count you as a semi-GOP guy, and I understand completely the "any good Scotsman" fallacy. And I absolutely love Charlie Sykes.
                        If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. - Karl Popper

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Bernie Brewer View Post
                          I’m, as a reminder, many Republicans have said, and are now chastised when they do, that Trump wasn’/isn’t a Republican. And the second highlight is we saw how that worked with the DRM s for Bernie and with Trump for the GOP.
                          Dude, I have diagrammed those sentences five times just like my English teacher taught me and I still don't know what the hell you are trying to say. I'm into my fourth Crown Royal, but my guess is that you have been into the apricot soju.

                          NTTAWWT.

                          I love you, man.
                          If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. - Karl Popper

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by baldgriff View Post
                            The DNC is the committee that represents the interests of the Democratic Party. I realize that if they went bankrupt the "party" would still exist. Im not an idiot!

                            From Wiki:
                            The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is the formal governing body for the United States Democratic Party. The committee coordinates strategy to support Democratic Party candidates throughout the country for local, state, and national office. It organizes the Democratic National Convention held every four years to nominate and confirm a candidate for president, and to formulate the party platform. While it provides support for party candidates, it does not have direct authority over elected officials.[3]

                            So yes the party would still exist (people would identify themselves as Dems) However the governing body that coordinates support and formulates the platform was broke and HRC bought it. She may have done it within the "rules of engagement" - but she did buy her nomination. You can call this politics as normal - which would be a sad commentary on our politics.

                            Also as a thought - if there wasnt the need to bail out the DNC because the party would still exist - why is it the HRC agreed to put up the money?
                            Presumably, if either national political party were allowed by its members to go bankrupt, that would be a pretty damning statement for any candidate moving forward when talking about the deficit, budgeting, fiscal responsibility, etc. Well, almost any candidate!

                            What I find interesting is who was the DNC’s lender, or lenders, because I am certain banks are prohibited from contributing to political campaigns and politicians. Maybe we aren’t prohibited from lending campaigns or the DNC. Curious, I’ll have to look that up. While I’m a banker, my bank is small and we don’t deal with national credits.
                            I know in my heart that man is good. That what is right will always eventually triumph and there is purpose and worth to each and every life.

                            Ronald Reagan

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Redbirds Fan View Post
                              Dude, I have diagrammed those sentences five times just like my English teacher taught me and I still don't know what the hell you are trying to say. I'm into my fourth Crown Royal, but my guess is that you have been into the apricot soju.

                              NTTAWWT.

                              I love you, man.
                              LOL.

                              Typing on an iPhone isn’t always practical. Let me clean that up. Clean up on isle 7.
                              I know in my heart that man is good. That what is right will always eventually triumph and there is purpose and worth to each and every life.

                              Ronald Reagan

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Redbirds Fan View Post
                                Bernie, I would never count you as a semi-GOP guy, and I understand completely the "any good Scotsman" fallacy. And I absolutely love Charlie Sykes.
                                Are you giving me the full on GOP label? Just curious. I’ve been accused of worse, not recently, but whateves
                                I know in my heart that man is good. That what is right will always eventually triumph and there is purpose and worth to each and every life.

                                Ronald Reagan

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X