Hillary talked to,the employee as soon as she was aware, made sure the employee was safe and comfortable in her job after moving the harrasser.
1 Like
No, I’m not a Sanders Sycophant. But I did live through 2016, and the reality is much different than the historical re-write that Hillary supporters seem to have dreamed up, adopting this victimhood which is simply not in line with actual history, and in which she bears absolutely no responsibility for her loss-- it’s Sanders, Comey, Putin and the Pope, presumably.
I’m not trying to work the room, I’m pissed off to see that the Hillary supporters are as fanatical and insane as the Trump supporters.
And I sincerely hope that they don’t gift us with another weak candidate in 2020 who can’t make it across the finish line against the worst possible candidate in history.
Um, Sanders’ candidacy went down like a rock. Funny you choose to disparage Clinton, yet leave Sanders blameless for losing.
Yeah. Funny.
"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger
1 Like
He lost. What’s to blame anywhere? He went up against a rigged system (front-loaded and rules in Hillary’s favor, including the limited debates, a Party Chair in her back pocket, and the Super-dels to be the presumptive winner before Iowa and actual voters had a say), did pretty darned well in spite of that, but came up short.
I’m not saying Hillary won illegitimately, but she certainly had a party apparatus set up with the odds stacked heavily in her favor.
And to the detriment of the Party, because it denied us a good cross-section that may have brought a stronger candidate against Trump.
Well, according to you, it never should have been a close contest. Why, if he was so ‘special’ did people fail to rally to his side? As it turned out, it was one non-Democratic-Party faction against the Democratic Party.
You’re surprised that the Democratic Party won?
You sound just like Trump: “The system is rigged!” No, sorry: “THE SYSTEM IS RIGGED!! DEEP STATE!! UNFAIR!!”
Keep whining about that. It’s not going to work this time. Your attempts to sow discord will fail. The Democratic Party belongs to Democrats.
"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger
2 Likes
Bernie was sexist and misogynist in his treatment of Hillary and his Bros were certainly sexist. I’m tired of expounding on this. How many times do I have to do it?
1 Like
I’m pissed off because I am so sick of the sexism/misogyny and the denial of it.
1 Like
I was there in 2016, too. I saw the reality. Trump’s “rigged election” terminology was lifted directly from Sanders’ rhetoric directed towards Ms. Clinton. For you to deny the historic confluence of events that conspired to defeat Hillary Clinton is either delusional or mendacious.
The derangement emanates from those who created, perpetuated, and defended the #NeverHillary cabal. I’m “pissed off” to see that the Sanders fanatics deny their complicity in the election of a proto-fascist. And I sincerely hope that they don’t again petulantly destroy the Democratic nominee if their preferred candidate once again fails to receive more votes than their opponent.
2 Likes
Yes. The future belongs to the AOCs and the Tlaibs. And the Establishment can just take your fainting pills now.
Again with the victimhood. Nowhere in there do you acknowledge that she might have been a flawed candidate, it’s all everyone else’s fault but her own.
And so what if Trump used a line? It happened to be absolutely true. The Democrats had rigged the setup for 2016 to be as favorable to Hillary as possible. She should have been prepared to respond to that (and ideally, shouldn’t have been a recipient of a rigged system, then he wouldn’t have had that attack line).
So you’re saying we shouldn’t have acted as a Democracy, we should have just anointed her from the start? So that Trump couldn’t say mean things to her later???
He went up against a rigged system (front-loaded and rules in Hillary’s favor, including the limited debates, a Party Chair in her back pocket, and the Super-dels to be the presumptive winner before Iowa and actual voters had a say), did pretty darned well in spite of that, but came up short.
This is a crock of sh*t.
The first big criticism this year was that the DNC had sponsored “only” six debates between Clinton and Bernie Sanders in some sort of conspiracy to impede the Vermont senator. This rage was built on ignorance: The DNC at first announced it would sponsor six debates in 2016, just as it had in 2008 and 2004. (In 2012, Barack Obama was running for re-election. Plus, while the DNC announced it would sponsor six debates in 2008, only five took place.) Debates cost money, and the more spent on debates, the less available for the nominee in the general election. Plus, there is a reasonable belief among political experts that allowing the nominees to tear each other down over and over undermines their chances in the general election, which is exactly what happened with the Republicans in 2012
Still, in the face of rage by Sanders supporters, the number of DNC-sponsored debates went up to nine—more than have been held in almost 30 years. Plans for a 10th one, scheduled for May 24, were abandoned after it became mathematically impossible for Sanders to win the nomination.
the argument that the DNC rigged the debates is, by any rational analysis, garbage. For those who still believe it, hats made of tin foil are available on Amazon.
And lets not forget that when actual voters had a say, Clinton trounced sanders by 4 million votes.
Where Sanders did well is in caucuses which are designed to suppress the vote. Caregivers, voters with disabilities, working folks, the elderly, and those unwilling to be harangued by others who may be more verbose and physically demonstrative are denied the opportunity to have their votes matter in these caucus arrangements.
face it, your preferred candidate lost and the thought of his opponent becoming President left many of your ilk willing to endure the election of a proto-fascist to “teach us all a lesson”. Congratulations, you did. just not the one thought it would be.
3 Likes
God, I love the internet. Check out an easy quote, back from Aug 2015, with the complaints already happening about the schedule on its release. This wasn’t something invented after the fact or anything, and I remember it well. More examples available with the help of Google. If facts matter to you.
"O’Malley senior strategist Bill Hyers criticized the proposed schedule in a statement released Thursday.
“By inserting themselves into the debate process, the DNC has ironically made it less democratic. The schedule they have proposed does not give voters - nationally, and especially in early states - ample opportunity to hear from the Democratic candidates for President. If anything, it seems geared toward limiting debate and facilitating a coronation, not promoting a robust debate and primary process,” he said. “Rather than giving the appearance of rigging the process and cutting off debate, the DNC should take themselves out of the process. They should let individual and truly independent news, political, and community organizations create their own debates and allow the Democratic candidates for President to participate.”
He wants to make sure one of them isn’t Debbie Wasserman-Schultz!
Keep digging, Bernie!
1 Like
And you obviously bought into the russkie propaganda back in 2016 if you believe that (and yes, there was propaganda pushed internally to put wedges in). There was no Bernie Bro thing to push votes to Trump or anything.
Almost all of us bit our tongues and votes for Hillary anyway, not that your folks were at all welcoming to us.
That doesn’t change a damned thing. The Democratic Party STILL belongs to Democrats.
"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger
1 Like
Clinton wasn’t "anointed’. She defeated her primary opponent by 4 million votes. She defeated her general election by 3 million votes but lost in the execrable Electoral College, an anachronistic sop to the slave-holding states, by 70,000 votes in 3 EC states.
Her flaw to many was that she wasn’t a man. She ran against a racist, natavist, and proto-fascist who appealed to the worst elements of our society. He was aided and abetted by Russian chicanery and the useful idiots of the Bernie Bros/Jill Stein/#NeverHillary cabal.
And as has been previously presented, none of the process was “rigged”. Sanders and his supporters were the ones that tried to get “super delegates” to overturn the Democratic electorate to make him the nominee. He was the one who desired anointment.
You clutch to the “rigged” fairy tale because it assuages your butthurt in having the Democratic electorate overwhelmingly reject your beloved candidate.
Next you can apologize to all of us women who were insulted and abused by H.A. Goodman on your behalf.
2 Likes
There were more debates in 2016 than there had been in 30 years. If Sanders couldn’t make his case in that amount of time it was because voters weren’t buying what he was selling or maybe the one who was doing the selling.
I wish people would stop with the sexist crap.
Her flaw wasn’t that she was a woman, it was that she didn’t have a clear and cogent vision for the country-- a reason to vote for her:
Trump? Easy. He’ll build you a wall, keep the brown people out.
Bernie? Free college for everyone, free healthcare too (and probably a pony).
Obama? “Yes, we can”, that we can do big things together.
Hillary?-- It’s my turn, and I’m a woman. She never had the simple message or visionary statement that voters could connect with and understand WHY the candidate was running and WHY the voter should vote for her.
And if anything, the constant messaging from those around her that people should vote for her BECAUSE she was a woman was sexist in and of itself.
There shouldn’t be an obligation-- implied or otherwise-- that someone should be supported because of their race/gender/sexual orientation/religion/other. We should be selecting the best person for the job, period. And that’s about what’s inside their head and their heart, not their pants.
1 Like
Did you want a participation trophy? Perhaps the realization that you were going to vote for someone who was opposing a proto-fascist who may end up appointing 4 Supreme Court justices who will direct the court for decades, should have been enough motivation.
2 Likes