As we all knew (well everyone but Ancalagon) Hillary rigged the primary.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...nton-rigged-nomination-process-broke-my-heart

Poor @Ancalagon. He is so often wrong on so many topics.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774

Second source.

I'm sure everyone is simply shocked.

I doubt it will change the minds of the idiots who were so sure Hillary was going to win.

Wait, you mean the Clintons are ruthless and under-handed when they want to win?

Oo-oooh!

*clutches pearls*

Oh come on! Anc always knew DNC was #RIGGED.

Did you actually read the piece?

I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, but I could not find any in party affairs or among the staff. I had gone department by department, investigating individual conduct for evidence of skewed decisions, and I was happy to see that I had found none.

Yes the joint fundraising agreement was presumptive, but even someone looking to find efforts to throw the primary to Hillary (and as interim DNC chair had ability to thoroughly search) couldn't find any.

What Anc said.

I wouldn't really be surprised if there was proof Hillary rigged the process, but this isn't it.

No, Hillary Didn't "Rig" the Primary Against Bernie By Signing That Fundraising Agreement

lol, you guys still in denial that Hillary rigged your shit... even after the DNC chair tells you point blank?

Of course the usual suspects are in denial.

I'm not sure whether to treat this as a call-out thread or another buttery males thread.

Either way, 2:37 pm is way too early to start happy hour, @Dinner.

Despite no distinct paper trail that would stand up in a court of law I am pretty sure Hillary did everything in her power to call in favors from the DNC and that the DNC itself was never going to allow a person like Sanders to win the primary over an establishment princess who supported rich donors to the party and who would work for their best interest. It is also clear the party is very resistant to candidates who are looking to fight against bank regulation and corporate welfare.

It is also quite obvious that by doing so the DNC cut their own throats in many battleground states because many people saw what they did and did not feel right voting for Hillary. This caused the surge Obama saw to not manifest itself for Hillary as trump did not increase republican votes from Romney. Instead there were less votes over all and Hillary took the losses over all for her douchebaggery. Those lacking votes were amplified in battleground states where they really mattered.

Worse yet the dems have not realized their error and are still fighting against progressives that would boost interest in voting. If trump did not scare people to get out and vote for the dems I do not see how you can continue to run on the "look at the other guy" motto they are using. Obviously both guys are so hopeless new voters and minority voters are just staying home because you really cannot get much more than poor. Well, you can in the US but the poor here have not experienced real crippling poverty since the depression. They do not know what it will look like when welfare and social security disability vanish.

yes that sums it up pretty well. I think if Bernie were twenty years younger (giving him a few more election opportunities) he might have a real chance.

You better be happy the DNC and their fanboys are. Had they run Bernie you would have lost. Bernie would have excited the voters instead of them staying home. Minorities loved him, he did not suffer from the sexism that hurt Hillary, and he would have been a non establishment candidate that would have pulled from the anti establishment anger that aided trump. Bernie was also competent and decent. Trump would have never been able to beat him because every place trump was good in was a place Bernie was also good in.

I will agree with you that the dems are clearly staying with their pro corporation bias and running right wing conservatives. You are never going to electrify the liberal base running right wing candidates. You can call them progressive all you want but they are not exciting as progressives. Just because you do not like them for not being white supremacists (which Hillary was not too far away from) does not mean they are left wing darlings.

The agreement, according to Brazile, specified that Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, communication director, staff and all the money raised. (Obviously not rigged!)

The formal agreement signed by the DNC and the Clinton campaign was executed in August 2015, two months before Biden would declare himself out of contention in October.

The dems will not let someone like him take the primaries. It is just obvious they are very pro bank and pro corporation because of the money. There is a movement out there to primary democrat congressman with progressive candidates and the party is using dirty tricks on them to protect their pro corporate incumbents. The democrat party is fighting against the youngest voters who are really their biggest supporters. You are just not going to win when trying to fight for the conservative vote against the republicans.

I think that the time is right for a socially progressive fiscally conservative party that seeks common sense regulation of the money markets to protect against economic collapse by eliminating risky stock market gambling by banks and other federally insured money. I think you would pull the middle out from the republicans and the socially progressive from the dems leaving the corporatist democrats and the alt right republicans in their own parties and killing them both.

Happy? I’m ELATED!

Not only did Crooked Hillary hand us 2016 on a silver platter, but apparently she has enough power and gullible sycophants to do it all over again in 2020.

Bernie wasn’t just competing against Clinton but the entire apparatus of his own party. Nobody’s going to throw their name in the hat for 2020 with Crooked controlling the party!

Yes but if you made a third party most dems are not particularly loyal. They are just unmotivated. You would also get a large number of independents who do not really like the big parties. I do not know if anyone has the courage to do it, but given how much support Bernie did get with a lack of big party funding I would say it is only a matter of time before someone figures out how to do it. When they do nothing is going to save anyone with their head in their ass, and that includes both the dems and the republicans. Given your love for the alt right you would lose the only thing allowing the republicans to win and that is a rigged system that allows them to just barely compete with the democrats. A third party composed of the alt right racists is only going to damage the republicans and it is not going to catch the independents and haters of the establishment.

Lol, what Republican party? Their party was blown to smithereens and now they’re cannibalizing themselves. After DJT, I don’t expect to vote again. I certainly didn’t vote before (except “on principle” for Ron Paul, and other 3rd party long-shots).

The country has outlived its life expectancy. We have AIDs from a century of Dem/Rep, Rep/Dem leadership, dude. We’ve been successfully divided by more races, group interests, ideological factions, and class warfare than a nation can survive — and in such a way that our differences are irreconcilable. Next comes divorce.

As for the viability of an honest 3rd party, Fuckerberg and Fake MSM aren’t going to permit a 3rd party unless they control it (as they control DNC and historically have the RNC).

Isn't that a bit over the top?

I don't know why some of you are so hell bent on denying Hillary rigged things.

The Democrat Party system is designed to be rigged. That's why it has so many super delegates that can override the voters in the primaries.

Deborah Wasserman Schultz, the former head of the DNC during the primary, was locked on getting Hillary the nomination.

The Democrats want to deny it because there are Bernie supporters still upset about it. Apparently they thought the process was supposed to be fair.

And the Republicans would have done the same to Trump if they had the Super Delegate system the Democrats had.

I'm just not seeing the big deal in saying it was rigged.

Sorry Dinner, I'm still not buying it. You're missing a step. Having the means to commit an act doesn't automatically make you guilty of it. Show me how Hillary used this apparent control to directly fuck over Sanders, and we'll talk.

Superdelegates have rarely if ever decided the nomination. (Walter Mondale in 1984 is arguable, and that's the only case that's even close.)

Ironically, even though the Bernie crowd likes to act as if superdelegates gave the nomination to Hillary, Sanders himself considered making a bid for superdelegates in an effort to win the nomination despite Clinton having won a majority of the actual votes.

Insert links to countless Mexican crime stats, routine Muslim terror, BLM riots, struggle to define white identity, Far left violence, far right violence, rising number of billionaires, rising number impoverished (temporarily reversed), waning middle class (again, temporarily reversed), corrupt leadership, lying corporate media, and gullible citizen base... do you think I’m mischaracterizing or overstating the problem? Is it unreasonable to suggest the inevitable approaching tech revolution could be the spark that lights the powder keg?

It was more than just super delegates. The DNC tried denying Bernie access to their data for campaigning purposes and pulled a few dirty tricks in places like Nevada designed to bring Hillary some victories as Bernie was gaining momentum. The idea superdelegates were the only problem is bullshit. Bernie was shafted time and time again by the dems which did not help him recover for late campaigning. Had he started a lot earlier he might have been able to overcome the hurdles the DNC tossed at him, but his late start and hamstringing by his party cost him. You have to remember the dems created the Bernie bros rumor designed to paint Bernie and his supporters as sexist. That was not republicans, that was the democrat party going against Bernie for Hillary.

It was rigging because Bernie was badmouthing the big money donors and denying big campaign contributions. Bernie was also very pro regulation and anti money in politics while Hillary was very pro corporation and pro political money. That whole argument of Hillary being corporatist did not start with the republicans. It started because she was giving speeches to Goldman sachs and Bernie supporters began to call her out on it while Bernie tried to avoid using it because he was trying to run a decent campaign. The calls for those speech transcripts were not new when trump made them. There is no doubt the money behind the dems was against Bernie due to his stand on banking regulations and against predatory loan practices. The Clinton's were always big money darlings and very conservative hawks on the left.

This. It's less "rigged" and more "foregone conclusion," because it was assumed from the beginning that Hillary would clinch the nomination. As many of us know, in politics perception is reality. Hillary was the weighted favorite, and Bernie the dark horse. Dark horses rarely win nominations because their chances are so slim. Hillary having a metric fuckton of political connections helped, something Bernie didn't foster over his 30 years to any appreciable degree, and there was no question that outside of a major upset, Hillary was going to get the nod.

Yes its unreasonable. The U.S. has made it through much, much, much worse than any of the problems that bedevil it today.

Have you forgotten a civil war that killed nearly 2% of the American population and devastated fully one third of the country?

More recently have you forgotten the "long hot summers" from the late 1960s to early 70s where there were American cities burning every summer?

Have you forgotten a Great Depression that lasted nearly a decade and for a sustained period had fully one quarter of Americans unemployed and countless millions more simply hanging on?
Have you forgotten the 1920s where the reincarnation of the Ku Klux Klan actually controlled half a dozen American states?

You sound like some fundamentalist "prophet" who is announcing these are the end times. The root of this is actually wishful thinking on your part. You want to believe the times you are a part of are actually of more monumental significance than they actually are.