Hearing Set For Class Action Lawsuit Against DNC

Who determines who is a 'Democratic voter'?

Keep in mind various states have caucuses, open primaries, closed primaries etc.

I'm asking why if the majority of folks supported him he ran as a Democrat (a label both before and after he rejects) instead of an independent?

You're inability to answer with anything more than froth is telling.

There have been vast numbers of books dedicated to how the two parties rig the system against third parties. In my state one of the big problems is only allowing two candidates to stand in the general election. A corrupt bd fraudulent system which you supported in this very thread, you immoral partisan shill. There are numerous other ways, setting a very high bar to get federal matching funds is one, setting massively high signature requirements to gain ballot access is another, but most people go are not completely ignorant already know this.

I am forced to wonder if youclaiming not to know this means you are just an ignorant baffoon or if you do know this and are so.ply a disengenuiously liar. I am leaning towards the later.

That is also defined by law. A democratic voter is anyone who registers as a member of the Democratic Party on their voter registration form?

Why do you keep asking for simple common knowledge things to be explained to you?

Please cite the law.

Sigh.

I guess you are too dumb to get there on your own.

A party at it's basest is infrastructure. It's a year's worth of local hall rentals for monthly meetings, volunteer lists, watxg parties, PCOs, district VPs,, counties, states. This structure must be nurtured and maintained (and funded!), not just every 4 years but 24/7.

The NGP/VAN platform the Bernie team got locked out of* after their chief data guy got busted hacking into Hillary's data, who built that? Who maintained it?

Bernie didn't build that.

In fact he spent most of his career attacking it and its nominees.

And if a party isn't going to support party nominees, how long will it survive? If there are no indians but only chiefs, how much work gets done *cough*LP*cough*? If you don't have ro support the party to get the support of the party, what is the incentive to support the party? Why buy the cow if you can get the milk for free?

*and let back into once they proved they had deleted the stolen data.

It will be the voter registration laws of each state. If you register for a party on your voter registration form then you are now a member of that party.

You are floundering here, man. It isn't a complex issue but you are desperately trying to pretend it is more complex than reality because reality doesn't fit your argument. Democratic members are people who register as democratics, end of story.

The Hillary and company tried to prevent members of the Democratic Party from freely voting for their own pick for party nominee is both the crime and the problem. That you keep trying to dismiss and excuse that act is your moral failing.

In many states you are not required to register with a party to vote in a primary so try again.

Proving it is easy, my not so bright friend. A court already found it was an illegal and unjustified act.

It took several weeks to get the court order for the DNC to unblock access to the system Bernie's campaign bought and paid for (not to mention populated with data) with their own money and volunteer effort. By then the primaries in question were already over and the crime complete.

Again I have to wonder what your major malfunction is?

It was less than two days idiot. Once the Bernie camp fired the hacker and proved they had deleted the stolen Hillary data they were let back into NGP/VAN.

I think we've already seen that he lacks any integrity.

Anyone the party lets vote, obviously. It's the party in each state that's calling the shots there.

Anc, you're calling for a buy-in to be allowed on ballot? Unexpected.

Interesting point. As an unaffiliated California voter, I could vote in Democratic primaries prior to 2016. In 2016 the rules suddenly changed. Curious.

Not so suddenly if you had been awake. They went to an open primary format where everyone gets to vote for whoever they want for any reason they want. Then only the top two vote getters go to the general election.

It has pretty much been a shit sandwich designed to kill third parties. Which is what it has done. Also, I believe e you got the year wrong.

Let me put it this way: I have been an unaffiliated voter for my entire adult life. I was able to vote in the '08 primary and the '12 primary. In 2016 I had to register as a Democrat in order to vote for Bernie in the primary (currently reregistered as unaffiliated).

You're doing a lot of vague hand-waving about "they" without mentioning a year. You'll have to do better.

Both parties have changed primary rules in recent years because they don't want the other side voting for someone less desirable.

Your memory, like most of the arguments you make, is faulty. Prop 14 passed in 2010 and has been in effect since 2012 onwards. Thus why I told you you were wrong about 2016 and that it happened earlier.

So either you are senile like everyone says or you don't actually vote in primaries as claimed. Either way you are way off the mark.

Btw the two parties have been pushing this open primary, top two system in this state for close to 30 years. The first time the state supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional, the second time voters voted the prop down, and in 2010 a nearly identical prop was barely passed. Mysteriously, this one was found constitutional despite being largely the same as the one reviously ruled unconstitutional. It is a shit sandwich anyway you look at it.

Right, so you're going to completely ignore the fucking over that Ron Paul got at the GOP convention, as well as the other stuff I mentioned, because it fits your narrative.

I know you won't believe me, but I'm going to say it anyway, if there was a political party out there which built its platform on actual evidence, rather than "philosophy," I'd be all over that shit, regardless of what I might have believed beforehand. Such a party doesn't exist. I know this because after the Republicans joined in the chorus of people condemning Snowden for revealing the illegal shit the government was doing, I went looking for a party to support. I read their platforms, and all of them were in love with some idea that wasn't supported by evidence.

Because American politics is structured such that if you're not a Republican or a Democrat, you've got no shot at winning the Presidential election. If the DNC was so pissed at Bernie (and if Bernie was so opposed to the Democratic Party), then WTF are Bernie and Tom Perez (ya know, the current head of the DNCC) doing a speaking tour together?

And yet, as an unaffiliated voter, I was able to vote in the 2012 Democratic primary. Go figure.

Why are you so stupid? That is a serious question. Do you not know what an open primary is or something?

What the RNC did to Ron Paul is equally disgraceful.

I'll add that the media also had a hand in that as well.

Actually, more so. Paul didn't have a chance of winning the nomination, and to deny him the right to speak at the convention was bullshit. The Dems at least allowed Bernie to speak at the convention.

It was utter bullshit, but Paul would have stood a better chance had he been covered properly.

I know that as an unaffiliated voter I was able to vote in the 2012 primary, but had to re-register as a Democrat – however briefly – in order to vote in the 2016 primary.

What part of that is giving you comprehension problems?

If I post it a few more times, will the go off?

The fact that you are wrong and the open primary.ary means evyone gets to vote. You know, the prop 14 part I previously mentioned specifically to you.

I suspect you are in error or someone gave you false information as what you described would violate state law wrt Prop 14.