I'll Never Vote for Hillary Clinton

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

So you are saying that lopsided votes in states using a process that purposefully excludes the majority of voters is more meaningful than votes in states that, you know, let people vote? Again:

What's the lie part? Sanders has big rallies. Clinton has a big lead in the vote.

You read what I actually said. But you chose to build a straw man and tilt at windmills, and you know that makes your rebuttal wholly worthless. The claim that Hillary Clinton gets more people out to vote for her than Sanders does isn't fact, it's propaganda. The claim fails to take into account the very real fact that Bernie won in states that did not have elections by "popular vote". Delegates were assigned through caucus proceedings rather than popular vote. It also fails to take into account the voter suppression that took place in primary states. Long lines, closed polling locations, voters wiped from the rolls, and on and on....

I'm calling it what it is: propaganda and Hillary's version of the "big lie".

2 Replies

@Debra Law,

I would argue that the propaganda are the allegations of voter suppression, insinuations of influence peddling, the claims of anti-Sanders bias, the unsupported claims of dirty tricks, etc. The reality (fact) is that Clinton has a lot more votes. Sanders has big rallies, Clinton has lots of votes.

1 Reply

@Debra Law,

We can look at a state like Nebraska where there was a primary AND a caucus.

Sanders won the caucus (like he tends to do).
Hillary won the vote (like she tends to do).

0 Replies

@Debra Law,

Can you explain how long lines, closed polling stations and voters wiped off the rolls SPECIFICALLY helps Clinton?

It's not like there was a Sanders line and a Clinton line and only the Sanders line was long. I would think long lines would FAVOR Sanders voters, as they young, higher energy voters are more likely to stay in them.

0 Replies

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

I would argue that the propaganda are the allegations of voter suppression, insinuations of influence peddling, the claims of anti-Sanders bias, the unsupported claims of dirty tricks, etc. The reality (fact) is that Clinton has a lot more votes. Sanders has big rallies, Clinton has lots of votes.

Stick with your story. No one is stopping you from repeating the lie. Say it over and over again if you wish to do so. It apparently makes you happy to do so. But, don't expect others to accept it as truth rather than propaganda designed to manipulate public perceptions. You can fool some of the people, so keep on top of that mission. Good luck.

2 Replies

@maporsche,

Can you show where the system was designed to include parties?

1 Reply

@Debra Law,

What is the lie? Does Sanders secretly have more votes than Clinton?

1 Reply

@Debra Law,

So how many votes is Clinton or Sanders in the lead you think then Debra?

I guess we can't look at delegates because those aren't in Sanders favor either.

What should we be looking at?

1 Reply

@JPB,

Well, the first political party formed 9 years after the the Declaration of the Independence so like most things in America, if there isn't something to outlaw a practice then freedom and liberty tend to win out and people can choose to form a political party if they choose (and they chose awfully early in the history of the country).

1 Reply

To anyone concerned about caucuses not counting in the popular vote totals being communicated, please read this article.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/06/is-hillary-clinton-really-ahead-of-bernie-sanders-by-2-5-million-votes/

1 Reply

@maporsche,

Good luck getting a clear answer to that.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

Quote:

The Pinocchio Test

Despite the suspicions of the Sanders supporter, the fact that caucus results are not included in the popular vote tally does not appear to make much of a difference in the final result. Despite overwhelming victories in caucus states such as Washington and Maine, Sanders gains only about 130,000 votes. That means Clinton is ahead by 2.4 million votes, rather than 2.5 million votes. Given rounding — and the fact that caucus numbers are only estimates — the difference is slight enough that Clinton’s claim, made before the Wisconsin vote, earns a rare Geppetto Checkmark.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Exactly.

And, no doubt that having a caucus is a form of voter suppression (I think that even Sanders supporters can see how much more undemocratic they are).

If all the caucuses were switched to popular voting (like the general election) then Sanders would be even further behind than he is now.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

Exactly.

And, no doubt that having a caucus is a form of voter suppression (I think that even Sanders supporters can see how much more undemocratic they are).

If all the caucuses were switched to popular voting (like the general election) then Sanders would be even further behind than he is now.

Yup, and if they were all closed primaries, further still.

0 Replies

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

What is the lie? Does Sanders secretly have more votes than Clinton?

There are many kinds of lies. You're spreading a lie of deception. I urge you to do some research on the subject. Very fascinating.

1 Reply

@Debra Law,

I urge you to.....oh never mind. You're ignoring all the posts that are asking you to think.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

1 very good reason I'm not voting for Bernie. He is an independent.

0 Replies

@engineer,

Debra dosent understand the difference between letting everyone vote and letting the under 40 voters control the caucuses.

1 Reply

Quote maporsche:

Quote:

What is the lie? Does Sanders secretly have more votes than Clinton?

Quote Debra Law:

Quote:

There are many kinds of lies. You're spreading a lie of deception. I urge you to do some research on the subject. Very fascinating.

Once upon there was a very informative poster here named Debra Law whose posts were always enjoyable to read. Apparently, she's been kidnaped and this replacement poster has appeared in her stead. What law enforcement agency do I contact to get the wonderful, original Debra Law back?

0 Replies

@maporsche,

You said

Quote:

It's the way the system was designed and it's been working very well for over 200 years.

But it's not the way the system was designed. Washington spoke out strongly against parties in his farewell address. He predicted exactly what has come to pass.

Quote:

However combinations or Associations of the above description may now & then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the People, & to usurp for themselves the reins of Government; destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.

1 Reply

I'll Never Vote for Hillary Clinton

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know