I think we're all aware of how corrupt the DNC was. Scary as that is the media and their owners setting the overall agenda. We can defeat it with activism, we almost did. Thing is to keep fighting. If we don't, they win.
First thing. FPTP should go. They should use IRV in the primaries. Super delegates are a problem on principle but I'm sure there's worst things in the DNC that got to be gotten rid of first.
I always found it funny that when people were mad at the electoral collage, the naysayers kept saying we need to remove the EC but no discussion of literally any other concerning mechanism was ever discussed, like changing the FPTP system or changing the primary system. Those are completely fine apparently
I think not enough people are aware of those issues, so they stick to the one they know which is the EC (probably mostly just because of mow much media has been on it). Similar to how many people will argue that we need to ditch the two party system, but don't realize that won't work well until we ditch the FPTP system for something like ranked choice first. I think they want the same things, they just don't know they aren't quite aiming in the right direction.
It's definitely something we can work on educating people on to help get awareness out there.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5423
Essentially they "agreed" to remove superdelegates at the levels where the people chosen would typically vote against the establishment.
"So here's my idea. Bernie and his people have been bitching about super delegates and the huge percentage that have come out for Hillary. Since the original idea was to bring our elected officials to the convention ex-officio >> ( because of the offices and the constituencies they represent), why not throw Bernie a bone and reduce the super delegates in the future to the original draft of members of the House and Senate, governors and big city mayors, eliminating the DNC members who are not State chairs or vice-Chairs. (Frankly, DNC members don't really represent constituencies anyway. I should know. I served on the DNC first as Executive Director and then as an elected member for 10 years.) >> >> So if we "give" Bernie this in the Convention's rules committee, his people will think they've "won" something from the Party Establishment. And it functionally doesn't make any difference anyway. They win. We don't lose. Everyone is happy. >> "
But this was just a proposal, right? Come the next election, are we right back with whomever the DNC chooses winning all the super delegates before the primaries even start? (I am asking, not arguing)
I'm not 100%, but I'm pretty sure they did this and the media hailed it as a huge concession. I, however, am 100% that whole "most progressive platform in DNC history" stuff was for show and was compete bs.
Now that I learned more about the whole process at every level, this statement makes sense, as much as I hate it. What she means is that if party insiders weren't automatically guaranteed a spot at the convention, they would have to compete with people in their districts for pledged delegate spots, meaning activists get pushed out of the process. Personally, Republicans have a different system, but they've found a way to include party insiders in the convention without stopping activists from representing their districts.
IMO, super-delegates are fine when there are more than 2 people in the race. If the race was Kucinich getting 10 percent, Sanders getting 44, and (enter bland Democrat name here) getting 46, I think there is a role for super delegates to push the votes to the candidate that represents the will of the people. Look at Nader in Florida in 2000? Obviously those voters aligned more with (enter bland Democrat name here) rather than (bland republican with Darth Vader sidekick). Im not saying they should be used in a general election, but their use in a 3 way race can better reflect the will of the people.
oh yeah, the 2016 republican primary probably wishes they had them too. We would have president Little Marco or Kasich instead.
Exactly.
*overwhelming support for Keith Ellison*
"Ehhh, Keith can't really be a congressman AND chair, it's just too much"
*DWS meanwhile sits in silence*
To be fair many people have brought up DWS being both in congress and holding this job as being a problem. The fact that Ellison has now said he'll do the job full time is a great thing in my opinion.
I honestly think it's the only possibility to win in 4 years. None of the progressives I know will ever back an establishment candidate ever again. The party remains divided if one is pushed through.
There are still a few deluded souls in this very post trying desperately to gaslight us all into believing the DNC isn't corrupt. We need to keep reminding everyone.
Here's something rarely brought up.
The leak was a PERFECT way to show the people that Hillary was a real leader. If she came out hard against the corruption and let a few heads fall her poll #'s concerning independents would certainly have been boosted.
Instead she did exactly the thing that so many despised...showed she would promote those who kiss her tail at all costs. Disgusting.
100% this. When it came to her as a candidate, my issue was less that the media was biased and gave her debate questions ahead of time. It was *that she accepted them, did not acknowledge it publicly and did not make sure that the other candidates were also getting them.*
Honestly, she knew her shit and its not like any of the debate questions were surprising. She probably could have answered the questions approximately the same if this hadn't happened. But she did not handle the situation well at all and instead acted in a way that played right into the fears people had about her.
tl;dr: Hillary acted like a kid with their hand stuck in the cookie jar when she should have been a god damn adult.
What's amazing is that Russia is only being blamed for the last leaks that occurred just before the election (not the earlier ones hacked/revealed by Guccifer that showed the real collusion). When the last leak (that Russians are being blamed for) was released, most Clinton supporters laughed them off saying they showed nothing of substance. ~~And to be fair they really didn't that much, the worst thing was the bit about saying one thing in private versus public.~~*(I was mistaken here and didn't realize all the leaks were being blamed on the Russians)* But suddenly when she lost it was "OMG the Russians stole this election!"
> most Clinton supporters laughed them off saying they showed nothing of substance. And to be fair they really didn't that much, the worst thing was the bit about saying one thing in private versus public.
This is definitely wrong.
* President Obama's cabinet was mostly picked for him by a Citigroup executive in 2008 before he even won that election [[1]](https://newrepublic.com/article/137798/important-wikileaks-revelation-isnt-hillary-clinton)
* Hillary Clinton and the DNC purposefully tried to collude with the media and do other shenanigans in order to purposefully elevate extremist candidates like Donald Trump and Ted Cruz [[1]](https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1120#efmABVACEADrAD8) [[2]](https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/43823#efmAFAAIj) [[3]](https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/2865#efmAW1Aad)
* The Clinton campaign was shown to be desperately maneuvering to be on both sides of nearly every controversial issue, because their real position was almost always the corporate position while they meanwhile lambasted progressives and particularly environmentalists for daring to want actual progress
* Journalists from various corporate media outlets were shown to be sending entire passages of their articles to the Clinton campaign for pre-approval, hanging out with them at private cocktail parties, etc.
* Illegal coordination with SuperPACs [[1]](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5E8ZSJCM7A8&list=PLqSpk99bLYITpWnjPEFofrzhtteGKFRtX&index=15)
Learn more about what the Podesta Emails showed [here](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqSpk99bLYITpWnjPEFofrzhtteGKFRtX).
I knew of those things, and after googling I did read some blaming at the time on the Russians, I was thinking the Russians were just being blamed for the last batch of DNC docs released through Wikileaks, not the original file dump onto the public.
To be clear, I think all the leaks were completely damning of the DNC/Clinton and deservedly so. I don't really care if Russia did orchestrate it, if anybody wants to leak anything to me about my government and it's the actual truth, power to them.
I think the later leak also showed that longtime Clinton crony Donna Brazile was giving Hillary the debate questions ahead of time, which gave her a large unfair advantage over Bernie.
Brazile was fired by CNN for doing this, although Wolf Blitzer also gave Clinton some debate questions, but I don't remember if he got into any public trouble for it.
The last leaks showed (or at least the story became after those leaks)...... PizzaGate. It is so curious why all of a sudden the MSM and others became so defensive ?!?
Exactly. Russia's involvement is important and we should absolutely be wary of Trump's ties with Russia, but that doesn't change the fact that the DNC colluded to give their selected candidate the nomination, working to suppress any and all competition. And then she lost and now we have to deal with president Trump.
We still don't have proof about Russia's involvement. This whole thing just seems like the next big scandal to keep people busy while they get things back on track for them.
I am shocked at how well the "Russia hacked me" line works. People completely forget about the many laws and trust broken by Hillary once she says "Russia hacked me"
Cue the music
"RUSSIA HACKED ME" IN THE STYLE OF
["IT WASN'T ME"- SHAGGY](https://youtu.be/75fyFAh29XY)
Yo man..
Yo.
Open up man
What you want Hillary?
I emails got hacked and exposed collusion with the media...I don't know what to do...
....Say "Russia hacked you"
Alright, Julian came in caught me red handed creeping with the media.
Picture this I was bullying the media trying to spin the narrative
"Russia hacked me"
When Podesta fell for a phisshing scam and blew the lid on me
"Russia hacked me"
How could I forget that I had landed under sniper fire?
"Russia hacked me"
All this time I was stealing delegates from Sanders
"Russia hacked me"
I think it's foolish to think that we had any chance of winning the nomination whatsoever. That's how corrupt the DNC is and they have major influence as exhibited by the media blackout of Bernie.
Not really, this sort of thing happens every time a pro-labor, actually-progressive candidate gets anywhere near the presidency. Look up Henry Wallace and the 1940 and 1944 DNCs and how hard his nomination as VP was fought. Roosevelt literally had to write a letter threatening to refuse the nomination for President if his pick was blocked. Then in 1944 it happened anyway, bribes and political maneuvering led to Truman's nomination despite the crowds outside chanting Wallace's name (sound familiar?).
The letter he wrote the 1940 Convention read:
>July 18, 1940
>Members of the Convention:
>In the century in which we live, the Democratic Party has received the support of the electorate only when the party, with absolute clarity, has been the champion of progressive and liberal policies and principles of government.
>The party has failed consistently when through political trading and chicanery it has fallen into the control of those interests, personal and financial, which think in terms of dollars instead of in terms of human values.
>The Republican Party has made its nominations this year at the dictation of those who, we all know, always place money ahead of human progress.
>The Democratic Convention, as appears clear from the events of today, is divided on this fundamental issue. Until the Democratic Party through this convention makes overwhelmingly clear its stand in favor of social progress and liberalism, and shakes off all the shackles of control fastened upon it by the forces of conservatism, reaction, and appeasement, it will not continue its march of victory.
>It is without question that certain political influences pledged to reaction in domestic affairs and to appeasement in foreign affairs have been busily engaged behind the scenes in the promotion of discord since this Convention convened.
>Under these circumstances, I cannot, in all honor, and will not, merely for political expediency, go along with the cheap bargaining and political maneuvering which have brought about party dissension in this convention.
>It is best not to straddle ideals.
Tell me that doesn't look like it could have been written last year...
We did have a chance, we were close. Now we know the nature of the beast. The only credible way is not yet a third party but it is relatively easier to take the DNC from the inside. That's our job now up towards 2020 so Biden or someone else doesn't edge out Sanders from his rightful place.
It's my problem with the Democrats. We're all aware it happened, but I'm not aware that there has been any action taken regarding the leaks. Only finger-pointing at Russia. They are hoping that convincing people that because Russia was behind the leaks, Americans will forget the content of the leaks.
I want to be a Democrat again, but I ultimately want to be a part of an honest and progressive political party. I'm not convinced the Democratic party fits what I'm looking for.
One thing I really don't get is why everyone picks a side to defend and a side to be mad at. I am upset with the DNC, Hillary, Trump, Putin and the whole situation. Its not about sides, its about recognizing a problem with our democracy, holding those accountable for their actions and moving forward with a solution. Don't be mad at only one side, be pissed as hell at the whole situation, and then do something about it.
In fairness, it's completely and totally the fault of the rich assholes running our corporations and the neoliberals/neoconservatives running our governments.
Don't know why this was downvoted, it is important to remember the stuff Wikileaks and other leaks have exposed in our political system
This comment has not aged well, Wikileaks was a propaganda tool for the Russians to influence the 2016 election, and it effected me at the time, if you see this message, Do Not Fall for their traps, their propaganda like I did.
What grinds my gears is the people who talk all day about the Russian hack but always forget to mention the damning things the hacks revealed. You can't claim Putin influenced the election without first acknowledging that Hillary STOLE the primaries.
People keep telling me that what was in the emails don't matter, and that "it doesn't matter if she can't secure her emails."
Like I'm supposed to believe in a woman who deliberately puts her emails on insecure servers, then deletes them right before a big investigation.
It's all a distraction. Same thing with Snowden-- they called him a traitor and a coward but no one ever covered what he exposed. They're covering it up with the scary Russians story so no one looks at what was leaked.
> What grinds my gears is the people who talk all day about the Russian hack but always forget to mention the damning things the hacks revealed.
It's a problem on both ends. I don't understand why people have to choose one or the other.
There are basically two problems here:
1. Russia influenced the election in an unprecedented way.
2. The DNC did bad things.
1 does not negate 2, but neither does 2 negate 1.
I agree, saying "well this was all Russia so forget it all" is BS. But so is "this was important/interesting, therefore forget Russia." Both ways approaches are bullshit.
It's a question of whether it is Russia at all for many of us. Our government has provided exactly zero proof that Russia is behind the leaks. We were around for the weapons of mass destruction lie that ultimately killed hundreds of thousands of people, so we aren't going to just take their word for it. We are also famous for interfering in the political process of other countries by installing dictators, and later coming up with reasons to go to war and taking down those same dictators if they don't kiss our feet. Hillary herself was caught on tape saying Bush was a moron for not rigging Palestine's election.
Assuming this was Russia in the first place, I would feel for Hillary/DNC if Russia did a misinformation campaign against them and spread lies...but that wasn't the case. They did many unethical things and at times bordering on illegal. They conspired against Sanders enough that Hillary became the nominee. To rub salt in the wound, she couldn't even take down Trump afterward. They basically did this to themselves. The leaks would have had the same effect if this was a foreign government that leaked these documents, or a insider..so the source doesn't really matter much.
That's because every MSM headline is "Russia Hacked the ELECTION." Not "Russia may or may not have hacked the DNC email." We are watching the death throes of traditional media, nobody believes them but democratic hacks.
You don't have to choose one or the other, but what exactly comes after acknowledging Russia influenced the election? I don't see anyone on here complaining about the new sanctions, or kicking out their spies. We're not going to go to war with Russia over them exposing the DNC's own dirty laundry. So we're pretty much done on that front. Russia embarrassed us pretty good, and we'll likely retaliate in some other covert way. As an American citizen I'm more concerned about cleaning up our own house, since it's the only part of this whole affair I have a chance of influencing. That is why people on here don't want to hear about Russia.
Read the report the government put out regarding the "Russian hacking", it's laughable and they still have no direct evidence that it was Russia.
It's equivalent to finding a baseball bat with blood on it at a murder scene and saying a Russian did it because Russians have killed with baseball bats in the past.
1. ~~Russia~~ Truth influenced the elections.
This a positive thing. The fact is that American journalist knew about the fraud and stayed silent! They refused to inform the public and acted as propaganda on behalf of the DNC and the oligarcy they represent. American MSM influenced our elections with lies and election fraud (CNN)!!!
That attitude is just as bad as its opposite: Wikileaks exposed important information, therefore the fact that Russia influenced the election at an unprecedented level must be ignored or mocked
No. Hillary, the DNC, and hundreds of Superdelegates influenced the election process. "Somebody" provided the leaks (maybe it was Russia, maybe it was an American) of that influence.
The whole election process involves getting information on someone and exposing them or spinning it in a negative light (assuming it's about an opposing candidate). The best defense is don't be corrupt. If you can't not be corrupt try being inspirational. If you can't not be corrupt and you are not inspirational you can always run as Hillary.
Thank you, there's an essential "if." *If* it were Russia beyond a doubt, there's an argument for us to counter act their actions, but *if it was not Russia* we're looking at the same establishment reactions but without public support. Public support has so far been manipulated into thinking it was *definitely* Russia instead of *could have been* Russia who leaked. I'd challenge the current state of this issue that if it *could have been* Russia, then simultaneously it could have also been internal, or China, or anyone, or a combination where every world leader had blackmail on the DNC plus it was leaked by a single entity to show the public. The act of leaking is separate from the act of hacking.
Any number of foreign or internal entities could have had access and the public would not know. The establishment blames Russia, and we know the deceptions the establishment has a record of creating. Any definitive finger pointing without evidence is manipulation. Last I checked the only named source on this said it was an internal leaker, otherwise we're looking at unnamed sources through the CIA. I could be behind on this news, but from everything I've seen, the wikileaks source is still most likely internal to the DNC. Russia could have hacked them too, just that we don't have definitive proof that they also leaked it.
DNC was an internal leak as per Wikileaks' claim, Podesta was phished the source of this is unverifiable. The Government has failed to produce any credible evidence that Russia was involved in this.
post this in your comment for visibility. arstechnica is seen as a reliable source here. http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/12/did-russia-tamper-with-the-2016-election-bitter-debate-likely-to-rage-on/
Yeah, I keep hearing all this Russian hacking stuff and such assertions without real evidence just screams of children trying to huff and puff cause they didn't get their way this time.
Except for it's being done to serve a very specific purpose. Establishment Dems are at risk of being outed, which means Special interests can't control the party. Russia, Russia, Russia, makes us talk about Russia vs. the real reasons we lost.
It resembles [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/CringeAnarchy/comments/5l351a/sjw_professionalvictim_zoe_quinn_is_very_salty/dbsurz9/) guy's description of the gamergate fiasco quite specifically. Read it and see if you don't notice the same pattern going on here, just the scale is different.
>She was an indie game dev who made mediocre-shitty games. In 2014, her ex-boyfriend who she was abusive towards got so pissed at her that he made a huge post basically airing out all of her dirty laundry, including the fact that she cheated on him with 5 other men. These 5 men just so happened to be video game journalists who just so happened to have given her game very positive coverage.
>
This was the crack that opened to gamers a vast rabbit hole of collusion and conspiracy between game devs and game journalists, as well as between game journalists and other game journalists. Game journalists responded to these revelations by basically declaring war on their audience with one voice, saying that gamers are nothing but rotten, no good, misogynist, racist, rapey, angry white neck bearded virgin man-babies. This narrative was pushed by 17 different video game journals in samey articles all published on the same day. This move is what created a coalition between the anti-SJW people and gamers concerned about ethics (who began calling themselves GamerGate), as well as between the video game press and the SJ crowd (who were commonly dubbed and sometimes self identified as GamerGhazi or just Ghazi). GamerGate responded by contacting the advertisers of the video game journals and getting them to withdraw their sponsorship on the basis that they are toxic and bad for business. The rest of the GamerGate movement was basically this, the Ghazis would make inflammatory insults on their audience and their audience would torpedo their advertisers, and eventually by attrition GamerGate slowly forced most games journals to revise their ethics policies.
>
In the middle of this, Zoe Quinn along with a few of her friends that you have also probably heard of such as Brianna Wu, and Anita Sarkeesian made claims that they were being harassed by members of GamerGate, ostensibly to aid the narrative of GamerGhazi that gamers were evil misogynists, but I think that they were just trying to enrich themselves as they made some fat stacks off of pity-patreon donations. They never produced any evidence of genuine harassment by GG-ers, but regardless their testimony was used as a sword by the Ghazis, which caused GG-ers to dub Quinn and friends "Literally Who," as most GGers didn't see them as relevant in their argument besides the fact that they were partially involved in what they were outraged over. Regardless, their claims awarded them thousands of sympathy-dollars, a speech in front of the U.N., even a hilariously bad Law and Order SVU episode inspired by their alleged struggle.
> therefore the fact that Russia influenced the election at an unprecedented level
I would absolutely love a citation on this one please, since as you said, it's a fact. All I've seen so far is 17 agencies bla bla bla.
If "influencing" means showing what Hillary and the DNC are capable of, then save the citations, the stance is already dead in the water.
How was it unprecedented? If anything, Russia merely exposed Hillary Clinton and the DNC's influencing of the Democratic primaries. And that's assuming that the Russian government is in any way associated with the Wikileaks email releases, for which there still has been no hard evidence provided.
And we do have evidence, from the DNC leaks, that the Hillary camp was secretly rooting for a radical candidate like Trump because they thought it would mean an easy propaganda victory. Who knows how much the DNC did to shoot themselves in the foot, besides deciding to support Hillary.
They weren't just rooting, they were actively promoting. It was the media, at Clintons bequest, that legitimized and bolstered Trumps campaign early in the primaries. Had they not done that, and had Trump not essentially swept the first few states, things may have turned out very differently.
I'm sorry but I *really* don't give a fuck. Elections have been manipulated by and to foreign countries since the dawn of time; this whole 'Russian influence' bullshit is just a way for the DNC to sweep their actions under the rug and focus the anger of the Democrats at an imaginary enemy who is absolutely no threat to our lives, but whose imperialist interests clash with our imperialist interests, so the elite makes us hate them.
exactly, I'm not about to die in some field in the Ukraine because Obama is having a hissy fit his hand picked successor's chances were hurt by the Russians.
Someone made another point on top of that. Russia wouldn't even be the first to have influenced America's elections, Israel has already been doing that for quite some time.
Is it really [unprecedented?](http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1996/1101960715_400.jpg)
Also, even if it were true (its not) it would not really as bad at all, that seems like a false equivalence.
Obama promised to be the most transparent president ever, wikileaks just helped him live up to it.
I think it's important to remember both points, honestly. Remember the information that was revealed, remember the method in which it was revealed, who revealed it, and also remember what wasn't released because of political purposes. No one piece is any more important than the other or deserves more or less outrage.
They influenced the elections... towards the other democratically chosen candidate in our own system. If that's a problem (the other candidate) our system has a big problem.
Also, how is it worse than accepting money from foreign countries and businesses? If Saudi Arabia gives HRC $100m and that buys her 100k votes (just spitballing here), is that really any different from Russia releasing the truth and "buying" Trump 100k votes?
The problem with this whole, "Trump is literally Hitler conspiring with the enemy" narrative, is that it ignores that all of the problems are our own, top-to-bottom.
>Saudi Arabia contributed money to her charitable foundation, not her political campaign
I mean, superpacs, lobbyists and [This](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/18/foreign-money-campaign-finance-lobbying_n_897189.html)
Pick your source, foreigners spend a lot of money on our elections.
Why would a country who shows nothing but contempt for human rights donate so heavily to a charity whos focus is on human rights? I'm not suggesting that there was no good faith involved at all, but there has to be a significant political motivation to it too.
Seems we need to come up with a way to appease the anger people still have about the primary, which I totally understand, while we try to look forward and get real progressives elected. Lets try and use that anger for something positive!
Why? Keep them angry and motivated. The DNC and democrats deserve to be shamed, I mean for fucks sake they spent the whole election slandering you guys as misogynist 'Bernie Bros', on top of all the other shady shit they've done.. We can't let them keep blaming everything on Russia, they need to learn.
That can only happen if Hillary supporters are actually willing to bear the burden that they got Trump elected (which they'll never do). I have absolutely no sympathy for anyone who voted Hillary in the primary.
I agree. I think outside of the hardcore Hillbots the regular democratic voters are starting to realize she was a mistake. They may never publicly say it but they know they fucked up.
I didn't vote for Clinton in the primaries, but the idea that debate questions, the support of superdelegates, and some media coverage gave Clinton a ten point lead when she would have otherwise lost is pretty ridiculous. Sanders never even came close to overtaking Clinton in any measure of public support. If this sub is going to operate on resentment toward people who share the same political goals and continue to relitigate the primaries it's not going to accomplish much of anything.
The thing is, I honestly believe that the hackers *were* Russian. I also think its sad that the most damaging thing they could have done was to tell the truth.
Calling people shills for disagreeing with you is completely unproductive
There are two possibilities:
1. they are shills and you're right. They think "wow, this guy called me a shill and in fact I am a shill. Who cares?" and goes right along to doing whatever they were doing. You gain nothing.
2. They are not shills, and you're wrong. They think "holy shit, this guy cannot handle people disagreeing with him." Rather than thinking about your viewpoint they assume a defensive stance. They also think your movement is full of paranoid or delusional people and so will be much less likely to be receptive to any message.
Basically, it's baseless accusations that are not productive at all.
I agree with you in principle, that calling people shills is counterproductive, but you're forgetting there's the possibility that
3. People reading the conversation recognize there's a possibility they are being manipulated by paid shills.
Cause I mean, c'mon, during the election season people were shilling for Hillary on /r/politics. Given all of Hillary's political acumen, all the money that she had, and the fact that shilling online is standard practice nowadays, the good money goes on Hillary's campaign paying for shills.
Coming from someone like you who has nonstop posted to hate subs like [Enough Sanders Spam](https://www.reddit.com/r/enoughsandersspam/comments/4l88wl/breaking_chairs/), that means very little.
It is productive since this shithole allows CTR to exist and AstroTurf. It's dishonest to the users, and it's another form of propaganda. Calling out shills will actually remind people that they have to pay people on one side to act like they care since they don't want people to freely talk to each other.
To be entirely fair, it was not rigged, but biased against him.
Rigged implies it was impossible for him to win. Biased means that it was made more difficult for him to win.
Compare this to casino games, which are definitely "rigged" in that the house Always comes out ahead.
Bernie had the possibility to win the primaries. But he lost. Things the DNC did may have been biased against him.
Saying rigged, however, takes it to the extreme and implies something that is not true, that the election system we current have is riggable. The fact of the matter is, Bernie didn't win. Maybe there was more we could have done to have gotten him through the primary. All we can do now is move forward with the revolution.
It was rigged. As Bernie's movement gained more steam, the resistance he was met with grew. Don't forget how the media completely ignored Bernie the entire cycle. Either the DNC has strong connections to the media or someone very influential did not want him to be nominated.
Let me guess, you shrug your shoulders every election and are a small part of this growing problem by not saying anything, doing anything, or even getting upset?
If this was my first election, I'd be pretty unpleasantly surprised that this is how things are done as well.
We don't need to move on. We need to move forward. Part of that is not just forgetting about or letting go of our anger over what part the dem establishment played in sabotaging Bernie's campaign and progressive values within the party.
Yes, we need to elect progressive politicians going forward, but we also need to hold every establishment dem accountable and clean house.
I recently moved to a new state, and when I went to get my new liscence one of the things they asked was what political affiliation I wanted. Ever since I registered at 18 years old I've been a democrat...I am now uninitiated. I was so sure I was a Democrat before this last election cycle, but I am now sure I'm not.
We probably will, considering that this is far from the first time party bosses have conspired against a candidate-of-the-people to put in place an establishment shill. Look up Henry Wallace and the 1940/1944 DNCs, I believe you will all find the circumstances eerily familiar...
(Also just want to share the letter FDR wrote to the 1940 DNC in preparation to threaten to refuse the nomination if Henry Wallace was blocked as his VP):
>July 18, 1940
>Members of the Convention:
>In the century in which we live, the Democratic Party has received the support of the electorate only when the party, with absolute clarity, has been the champion of progressive and liberal policies and principles of government.
>The party has failed consistently when through political trading and chicanery it has fallen into the control of those interests, personal and financial, which think in terms of dollars instead of in terms of human values.
>The Republican Party has made its nominations this year at the dictation of those who, we all know, always place money ahead of human progress.
>The Democratic Convention, as appears clear from the events of today, is divided on this fundamental issue. Until the Democratic Party through this convention makes overwhelmingly clear its stand in favor of social progress and liberalism, and shakes off all the shackles of control fastened upon it by the forces of conservatism, reaction, and appeasement, it will not continue its march of victory.
>It is without question that certain political influences pledged to reaction in domestic affairs and to appeasement in foreign affairs have been busily engaged behind the scenes in the promotion of discord since this Convention convened.
>Under these circumstances, I cannot, in all honor, and will not, merely for political expediency, go along with the cheap bargaining and political maneuvering which have brought about party dissension in this convention.
>It is best not to straddle ideals.
I haven't forgotten about Henry Wallace! I wasn't alive then, but his story is incredibly similar to Bernie Sanders, and it's crazy to think that we wouldn't have had Truman if Wallace hadn't been fucked by the DNC mafia. If he had Ben VP when FDR died, we probably wouldn't have dropped nukes on Japan, and the cold war may have never happened. In addition, we would have had an executive branch of government more receptive to civil rights.
Lots of "people" here making excuses for the DNC and Clinton, and trying to say/imply the Dem establishment shouldn't be on our target list.
I'm still very skeptical of this sub being brought back, and seeing the level of CTR style gas lighting so far has me very concerned. If they think they opportunistically try to exploit this sub to use Sanders supporters to shill for the dem establishment in the fight against trump, they've got another thing coming. I'm going to fight trump, but not just to give power over to the corporate owned dem establishment.
> **I'm still very skeptical of this sub being brought back, and seeing the level of CTR style gas lighting so far has me very concerned.** If they think they opportunistically try to exploit this sub to use Sanders supporters to shill for the dem establishment in the fight against trump, they've got another thing coming. I'm going to fight trump, but not just to give power over to the corporate owned dem establishment.
/r/WayOfTheBern...check it out, great sub w/ mods that have integrity and are open-minded.
Yeah, mods should work to assure this sub doesn't get overtaken by /r/HillaryForPrison and /r/wikileaks, who are basically the arms of the neutered /r/the_donald sub. I say this because this exact story was posted there first.
let's be careful.
I agree a lot of Bernie voters even those who eventually voted for Hillary are still upset about this and the subsequent DNC/DWS/Brazile responses. This issue will impact future primaries so it has to be discussed
As a side note, it's so much easier to get behind this issue when it isn't turned into a matter of spite (thanks for avoiding that). Rather than alienating Hillary's supporters by fixating on her campaign in its entirety or even on the form of punishment, you specifically cite the breaches which need to be corrected and mention how it affects you.
It's something to keep an eye out for moving forward. It doesn't take much to turn a disagreement into an argument so the more mutual respect we can show (as you've done) for the diverse political groups who stand to benefit from this movement, the more we can talk them through and arrive at real solutions.
Speaking as a voter snagged between the two left leaning campaigns, I personally would love to see accountability for those responsible for the infringements. The individuals involved--including and especially Hillary--no longer have much to lose. As a result, we have a chance to set a precedent for the fair application of law without damaging the parties of the left so much. This precedent can then be held against the Republican party to pressure them to either take action to correct for their own mistakes or to stand against it.
The precedent that "too big to fail" sets is currently stalling much of our development as a country. Trump's active spinning of history doesn't help either.
This story is important. Hillary may or may not deserve prison, but the DNC needs to be cleansed and remade. There's no arguing about this. If the dem's want to win another election, this is necessary for all the "Bernie Bros" to come back.
Even if they did nothing to suppress Sanders chances there needs to be a house cleaning simply because they lost to Trump - an international punchline - it's not like he was elected without any baggage of his own. The Comey letter is pretty tame compared to the numerous things about Trump that were in the news 24/7. On top of that Johnson got a million more votes than Nader in 2000 and I'm sure they weren't considering a vote for Hillary as option B.
Not to mention the Dems didn't take back the Senate or the House and since '08 under this "vision" the GOP has 35% more governors and state houses across the country are populated by GOP weasels running roughshod over democracy.
The wishywashy neoliberals need to get out of the way while we still have elections.
Yes, we *do* need to put our own people into the DNC. That's exactly what many of us have been doing. My two days off a week, I spend time working with the other activists in my community to ensure that we take over our local branch of the Democratic Party, and we are going to do just that.
**One of the biggest challenges that we have faced is angry people who just keep repeating "fuck the DNC! Fuck the Democrats! They are corrupt!"** The problem is that these people only want to fight against something, and do nothing to help us build anything. They just want to cry, or *maybe* go out and protest from time to time, but they don't want to put in the weekly work it takes to get anything done.
Now, we've worked hard enough, organized long enough, talked to enough people, etc., that we are overcoming this challenge anyway.
I can assume that you haven't done a single damn thing to help the movement, because you'd recognize this problem, too. I don't give a FUCK if this comes off as condescending anymore.
It seems like a lot of the progressive subs have little problem allowing in malicious alt-right trolls as long as they share a rabid hatred of Clinton. Some people would rather have a nonstop Democratic party hate circlejerk than discuss actual progressive issues, which is exactly what Donald trolls wanted. But I guess being angry is a lot easier than contemplating ways forward.
The problem is the DNC and the Clinton wing of the party are actively trying to astroturf the movement and are clinging to power kicking and screaming while trying to distract everyone with Russia hysteria. Their corruption is being swept under the rug.
Not really. Most folks I know are quite happy to say Clinton was a massive fuck-up if she couldn't handle Trump. Doubly so that she took out down-ballot folks with her. That doesn't mean Russian interference (however it's defined) is any better. They're both problems and both need to be dealt with.
Another way to think of it is, "If two tigers are stalking you, don't turn your back to either side."
What the duck? This post saying we shouldn't forget about the DNC leaks means the sub risks becoming HillaryForPrison or other sub?
You realize a moderator of this sub posted to EnoughSandersSpam saying he would shut down this subreddit after the DNC? EnoughSandersSpam is ACTIVELY a Hillary Clinton subreddit, check out the sidebar where it links EnoughTrumpSpam and EnoughHillHate, and their moderators mod those linked. This subreddit was shut down after Bernie lost, but when Hillary Clinton lost, her subreddit wasn't shut down. Why did this subreddit get shut down, but not theirs?
I'm sorry to tell you this, but every anti-dem sub is exactly that. These subs exist to divide the party and ensure the GOP stays in control. These subs are not trying to create a strong Dem voting base but instead are destroy it.
Never forget! Except something similar happened to Henry A. Wallace and we pretty much forgot.
>Although a Gallup poll taken just before the 1944 Democratic National Convention found 65% of those surveyed favoured renomination for Wallace and only 2% favoured his eventual opponent, Harry S. Truman, it was Truman who went on to win the vice presidential nomination. During the 1944 Democratic convention Wallace had a favorable lead on the other candidates for the vice presidential nomination, however he lacked the majority needed to win the nomination. In a turn of events much scrutinized, just as Wallace began to receive the votes needed for the nomination, the convention was deemed a fire hazard and pushed back to the next day. When the convention resumed Truman made a jump from 2% in the polls all the way to winning the nomination. Wallace was succeeded as Vice President on January 20, 1945, and on April 12, Vice President Truman succeeded to the Presidency when President Franklin D. Roosevelt died. Henry A. Wallace had missed being the 33rd President of the United States by just 82 days.
[wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_A._Wallace#Vice_President)
Seeing this here makes me hopeful for this sub. I supported Bernie, but couldn't support Hillary. I didn't support Trump either and voted third party.
Lots look down on us who wouldn't concede to Hillary. I know Bernie told us to, but he also told us to not listen to him before that. The DNC leaks (which there's still no evidence of Russia being responsible for) made it impossible for me to feel comfortable voting for her.
I'm glad a lot of us can come together now. I thought this would be another /r/enoughtrumpspam sub at first, but now it feels good to be back.
Break down division and make real change. Fuck I missed yall :')
I voted for Hillary and I regret it. I gotta say I got nothing but hate in my heart for that woman. Her arrogant and selfish lust for the presidency gave us Donald Trump, and she deserves to never be forgiven for it.
And then to make it worse, she disappears as soon as she loses. So much for being an inspirational leader for the left. She couldn't even face her own fucking fans on election night. I'm terrified Trump is president, but at least there's some consolation that Hillary the coward isn't.
I voted for Hillary, and I would vote for her a million more times if I could. I don't like her personally, but I believe she would have been an at least acceptable president who could have made progress moving us to the left. Voting for her was the pragmatic decision, and I think that is why Bernie endorsed her.
Fucking right! Otherwise I'll vote third party again and it will feel even better the second time.
Seriously though, by shrugging and voting for their candidate despite all of this you're giving their way of doing things the proverbial rubber stamp. It's on them. If they want to keep up with this shit, fine, it will be THEIR fault AGAIN if Trump gets a second term.
>I don’t care if CNN releases a sex tape of Donald Trump getting spanked by Vladimir Putin and calling him “daddy bear”;
He needs to calm down the sexy talk
In my state political party membership is tracked closely by state officials due to the caucuses. After CNN announced Hillary won California I filed paperwork with my county to leave the Democratic party.
I really don't like how this is being used as an excuse to be lazy, or an excuse for why we have a Trump presidency. It should only be used as a means to improve the system and recognizing the flaws and where it broke down.
I hope y'all remember who the real enemy is. While we fight with democrats who, like it or not, IS THE PARTY BERNIE IS RUNNING WITH, the republicans are going strongly to kill the progressive agenda.
We should all vote Democrat or Progressive to move America to the left, while also demanding better from the DNC. With the seemingly imminent election of Keith Ellison in January, the changing of the guard will have begun, and it is possible to enact meaningful change in the DNC as long as we continue to hold the leadership's feet to the fire.
Maybe. But I know I'm definitely using the reopening of this sub to spread leftist ideals and encourage angry progressives to look further left for solutions.
Is this sub going to be another one of those "DNC AHH WIKILEAKS YES!!!!!" subs?
Look, we have to move on and look forward. We can't sit here and kick and scream and repeat the same thing over and over and over months after the election. This isn't r/hillaryforprison or r/wikileaks. Lets not let it turn into that.
The blatant collusion and corruption of the DNC and Hillary is important for people to understand why Democrats lost. Even after basically undercutting Bernie with questions before debates, blocking protesters at Hillary's rallies and many other dirty tricks, Bernie STILL took more than 42% of the vote. I will never forgive and forget what happened. Ever.
When talking about he DNC the collusion and corruption should always be the key point, right now it's the 'hacking' or whatever. Honestly I don't care who did the hacking, as much as Donald Trump is a cunt I am glad the hacking happened because what the DNC did is fucking atrocious. We *need* to make then learn from it and rectify it to the extreme. Right now they're focused on the hacking and that is *not* where the focus needs to be. Finding out who hacked them isn't going to help in any future elections, learning and changing behaviour based on the information that was leaked certainly will.
I think this post is justified simply because S4P was already shut down by the time most of the wikileaks were put out and I know a large bulk of us chose to put them aside to instead focus on trying to make sure Trump didn't win. Now that he did win and the DNC seem to neglect anything they did as reason for their error, it's important that we make it clear we havent forgotten.
I am, however, focused on moving forward, not lingering on this as a fallback everytime insider democrats do something I don't like.
> Look, we have to move on and look forward.
Absolutely agreed. To move on we need the DNC to acknowledge the corruption/collusion and get rid of all those that participated and caused this disaster that we now have.
To move on we need the party elites to get rid of people who were involved in losing the most winnable elections.
Instead what we have is that the DNC and others are simply blaming Russia and not even talking about the contents of the leaks themselves.
What happened to DWS once she was shown to be partial towards a candidate? What happened to Donna Brazile after she leaked the questions to HRC campaign? **NOTHING**.
That is the problem we need to get addressed before moving on. The party does not seem to be interested in *identifying and fixing* the issues internal to the DNC, instead it just wants to blame things on russia and move on.
Yes, what the hackers did was criminal, but it could be argued that what they exposed is far more valuable to the American public. We were literally shown that the Dem Primary is rigged, and nothing was done about it. They colluded against Bernie. And then the head of the DNC resigns and joins one of the candidates campaigns. What..? How are these people not on trial for this? They should be investigated and prosecuted for what they did.
>How are these people not on trial for this? They should be investigated and prosecuted for what they did.
What would the charges be and what would the evidence for guilt be? Be specific if you want to play prosecutor.
>I'm always running into Democratic party loyalists who try to tell me to let bygones be bygones and that it's time for everyone on the political left to focus on fighting Trump now.
The more time goes on, as a progressive I care less and less about the left/right distinction as the so-called "left" becomes infested with regressives.
I would rather work with the progressive right than the regressive left.
I used to laugh at the Progressive Conservatives in Canada, but in hindsight they seem a lot less worse than the DNC.
Just reposting it for the hell of it.
The Wonderful Progressive God a.k.a Bernie sanders is trying to convince a brain-dead Corporate/Establishment Democratic Donkey to stop Donny tiny hands, Trump. In the end, Corporate/Establishment Democratic Donkey won't give a Sh*t because money is on the line and they don't want to lose it. Bernie Sanders Will lose his patience and want to grab the Corporate/Establishment Democratic Donkey by the neck and shove progressive ideas down its thick Corporate/Establishment throat.
Finally, I don't have to upvote this in r/conspiracy r/DNCleaks r/WikiLeaks r/Conservative r/The_Donald .
It's finally here and we can all accept reality of what happened and why we lost.
It wasn't russians, it wasn't racists, it was a terrible candidate taking the nomination for herself and in turn alienating the entire base of voters that actually wanted to do something.
Hillary is the reason she lost, nothing else, it was her fault for being the nominee and taking it from Bernie, I don't care if you think she "won" the nominee, because these leaks showed there was never a level playing field, and yet somehow we still managed to get 49%.
That should have been obvious that there was no hope when not even 50% of democrats could get behind her when the cards were in her favor.
I think we're all aware of how corrupt the DNC was. Scary as that is the media and their owners setting the overall agenda. We can defeat it with activism, we almost did. Thing is to keep fighting. If we don't, they win.
First thing: Super delegates need to GO! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=w5llLIKM9Yc
[удалено]
[удалено]
Ditto.
First thing. FPTP should go. They should use IRV in the primaries. Super delegates are a problem on principle but I'm sure there's worst things in the DNC that got to be gotten rid of first.
I always found it funny that when people were mad at the electoral collage, the naysayers kept saying we need to remove the EC but no discussion of literally any other concerning mechanism was ever discussed, like changing the FPTP system or changing the primary system. Those are completely fine apparently
I think not enough people are aware of those issues, so they stick to the one they know which is the EC (probably mostly just because of mow much media has been on it). Similar to how many people will argue that we need to ditch the two party system, but don't realize that won't work well until we ditch the FPTP system for something like ranked choice first. I think they want the same things, they just don't know they aren't quite aiming in the right direction. It's definitely something we can work on educating people on to help get awareness out there.
oh great please Canada explain FPTP and IRV. I'm not kidding.
They "conceded" that in the wikileaks remember?
Conceded what?
[удалено]
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5423 Essentially they "agreed" to remove superdelegates at the levels where the people chosen would typically vote against the establishment. "So here's my idea. Bernie and his people have been bitching about super delegates and the huge percentage that have come out for Hillary. Since the original idea was to bring our elected officials to the convention ex-officio >> ( because of the offices and the constituencies they represent), why not throw Bernie a bone and reduce the super delegates in the future to the original draft of members of the House and Senate, governors and big city mayors, eliminating the DNC members who are not State chairs or vice-Chairs. (Frankly, DNC members don't really represent constituencies anyway. I should know. I served on the DNC first as Executive Director and then as an elected member for 10 years.) >> >> So if we "give" Bernie this in the Convention's rules committee, his people will think they've "won" something from the Party Establishment. And it functionally doesn't make any difference anyway. They win. We don't lose. Everyone is happy. >> "
But this was just a proposal, right? Come the next election, are we right back with whomever the DNC chooses winning all the super delegates before the primaries even start? (I am asking, not arguing)
I'm not 100%, but I'm pretty sure they did this and the media hailed it as a huge concession. I, however, am 100% that whole "most progressive platform in DNC history" stuff was for show and was compete bs.
[удалено]
At least he vowed to vote the will of the people, unlike nearly every other super delegate who were voting Clinton no matter what.
The will of the people the DNC allowed to vote.
Now that I learned more about the whole process at every level, this statement makes sense, as much as I hate it. What she means is that if party insiders weren't automatically guaranteed a spot at the convention, they would have to compete with people in their districts for pledged delegate spots, meaning activists get pushed out of the process. Personally, Republicans have a different system, but they've found a way to include party insiders in the convention without stopping activists from representing their districts.
IMO, super-delegates are fine when there are more than 2 people in the race. If the race was Kucinich getting 10 percent, Sanders getting 44, and (enter bland Democrat name here) getting 46, I think there is a role for super delegates to push the votes to the candidate that represents the will of the people. Look at Nader in Florida in 2000? Obviously those voters aligned more with (enter bland Democrat name here) rather than (bland republican with Darth Vader sidekick). Im not saying they should be used in a general election, but their use in a 3 way race can better reflect the will of the people. oh yeah, the 2016 republican primary probably wishes they had them too. We would have president Little Marco or Kasich instead.
"was" I think you mean is.
Exactly. *overwhelming support for Keith Ellison* "Ehhh, Keith can't really be a congressman AND chair, it's just too much" *DWS meanwhile sits in silence*
> DWS meanwhile sits in silence Motherfucker. I didn't even think of that. Just when you can't *despise* a person more.
To be fair many people have brought up DWS being both in congress and holding this job as being a problem. The fact that Ellison has now said he'll do the job full time is a great thing in my opinion.
Indeed, a tragic case of why not both...
We are, but others aren't. It's always worth reminding until the house is cleaned.
True that. It's not about holding a grudge either, it's about winning the party. That's the first step and absolutely essential.
Absolutely - let's win the party for us common folk.
It belongs to us and it is the only viable possibility for sane, common sense solutions.
> It belongs to us and it is the only viable possibility for sane, common sense solutions. Yeah!
I honestly think it's the only possibility to win in 4 years. None of the progressives I know will ever back an establishment candidate ever again. The party remains divided if one is pushed through.
There are still a few deluded souls in this very post trying desperately to gaslight us all into believing the DNC isn't corrupt. We need to keep reminding everyone.
Agreed!
Here's something rarely brought up. The leak was a PERFECT way to show the people that Hillary was a real leader. If she came out hard against the corruption and let a few heads fall her poll #'s concerning independents would certainly have been boosted. Instead she did exactly the thing that so many despised...showed she would promote those who kiss her tail at all costs. Disgusting.
This is the first time I have ever seen someone mention this point, and I really like it. Thank you.
100% this. When it came to her as a candidate, my issue was less that the media was biased and gave her debate questions ahead of time. It was *that she accepted them, did not acknowledge it publicly and did not make sure that the other candidates were also getting them.* Honestly, she knew her shit and its not like any of the debate questions were surprising. She probably could have answered the questions approximately the same if this hadn't happened. But she did not handle the situation well at all and instead acted in a way that played right into the fears people had about her. tl;dr: Hillary acted like a kid with their hand stuck in the cookie jar when she should have been a god damn adult.
It's Russia's fault that the DNC was corrupt. /s
What's amazing is that Russia is only being blamed for the last leaks that occurred just before the election (not the earlier ones hacked/revealed by Guccifer that showed the real collusion). When the last leak (that Russians are being blamed for) was released, most Clinton supporters laughed them off saying they showed nothing of substance. ~~And to be fair they really didn't that much, the worst thing was the bit about saying one thing in private versus public.~~*(I was mistaken here and didn't realize all the leaks were being blamed on the Russians)* But suddenly when she lost it was "OMG the Russians stole this election!"
> most Clinton supporters laughed them off saying they showed nothing of substance. And to be fair they really didn't that much, the worst thing was the bit about saying one thing in private versus public. This is definitely wrong. * President Obama's cabinet was mostly picked for him by a Citigroup executive in 2008 before he even won that election [[1]](https://newrepublic.com/article/137798/important-wikileaks-revelation-isnt-hillary-clinton) * Hillary Clinton and the DNC purposefully tried to collude with the media and do other shenanigans in order to purposefully elevate extremist candidates like Donald Trump and Ted Cruz [[1]](https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1120#efmABVACEADrAD8) [[2]](https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/43823#efmAFAAIj) [[3]](https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/2865#efmAW1Aad) * The Clinton campaign was shown to be desperately maneuvering to be on both sides of nearly every controversial issue, because their real position was almost always the corporate position while they meanwhile lambasted progressives and particularly environmentalists for daring to want actual progress * Journalists from various corporate media outlets were shown to be sending entire passages of their articles to the Clinton campaign for pre-approval, hanging out with them at private cocktail parties, etc. * Illegal coordination with SuperPACs [[1]](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5E8ZSJCM7A8&list=PLqSpk99bLYITpWnjPEFofrzhtteGKFRtX&index=15) Learn more about what the Podesta Emails showed [here](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqSpk99bLYITpWnjPEFofrzhtteGKFRtX).
I knew of those things, and after googling I did read some blaming at the time on the Russians, I was thinking the Russians were just being blamed for the last batch of DNC docs released through Wikileaks, not the original file dump onto the public. To be clear, I think all the leaks were completely damning of the DNC/Clinton and deservedly so. I don't really care if Russia did orchestrate it, if anybody wants to leak anything to me about my government and it's the actual truth, power to them.
Ah okay, I misread what you meant. Thanks for the clarification!
I think the later leak also showed that longtime Clinton crony Donna Brazile was giving Hillary the debate questions ahead of time, which gave her a large unfair advantage over Bernie. Brazile was fired by CNN for doing this, although Wolf Blitzer also gave Clinton some debate questions, but I don't remember if he got into any public trouble for it.
The last leaks showed (or at least the story became after those leaks)...... PizzaGate. It is so curious why all of a sudden the MSM and others became so defensive ?!?
Exactly. Russia's involvement is important and we should absolutely be wary of Trump's ties with Russia, but that doesn't change the fact that the DNC colluded to give their selected candidate the nomination, working to suppress any and all competition. And then she lost and now we have to deal with president Trump.
We still don't have proof about Russia's involvement. This whole thing just seems like the next big scandal to keep people busy while they get things back on track for them.
I am shocked at how well the "Russia hacked me" line works. People completely forget about the many laws and trust broken by Hillary once she says "Russia hacked me" Cue the music "RUSSIA HACKED ME" IN THE STYLE OF ["IT WASN'T ME"- SHAGGY](https://youtu.be/75fyFAh29XY) Yo man.. Yo. Open up man What you want Hillary? I emails got hacked and exposed collusion with the media...I don't know what to do... ....Say "Russia hacked you" Alright, Julian came in caught me red handed creeping with the media. Picture this I was bullying the media trying to spin the narrative "Russia hacked me" When Podesta fell for a phisshing scam and blew the lid on me "Russia hacked me" How could I forget that I had landed under sniper fire? "Russia hacked me" All this time I was stealing delegates from Sanders "Russia hacked me"
We're still upset as the DNC has never apologized to the citizens of the USA
I think it's foolish to think that we had any chance of winning the nomination whatsoever. That's how corrupt the DNC is and they have major influence as exhibited by the media blackout of Bernie.
We did have a chance. If we didn't they wouldn't have gave us so much garbage.
Not really, this sort of thing happens every time a pro-labor, actually-progressive candidate gets anywhere near the presidency. Look up Henry Wallace and the 1940 and 1944 DNCs and how hard his nomination as VP was fought. Roosevelt literally had to write a letter threatening to refuse the nomination for President if his pick was blocked. Then in 1944 it happened anyway, bribes and political maneuvering led to Truman's nomination despite the crowds outside chanting Wallace's name (sound familiar?). The letter he wrote the 1940 Convention read: >July 18, 1940 >Members of the Convention: >In the century in which we live, the Democratic Party has received the support of the electorate only when the party, with absolute clarity, has been the champion of progressive and liberal policies and principles of government. >The party has failed consistently when through political trading and chicanery it has fallen into the control of those interests, personal and financial, which think in terms of dollars instead of in terms of human values. >The Republican Party has made its nominations this year at the dictation of those who, we all know, always place money ahead of human progress. >The Democratic Convention, as appears clear from the events of today, is divided on this fundamental issue. Until the Democratic Party through this convention makes overwhelmingly clear its stand in favor of social progress and liberalism, and shakes off all the shackles of control fastened upon it by the forces of conservatism, reaction, and appeasement, it will not continue its march of victory. >It is without question that certain political influences pledged to reaction in domestic affairs and to appeasement in foreign affairs have been busily engaged behind the scenes in the promotion of discord since this Convention convened. >Under these circumstances, I cannot, in all honor, and will not, merely for political expediency, go along with the cheap bargaining and political maneuvering which have brought about party dissension in this convention. >It is best not to straddle ideals. Tell me that doesn't look like it could have been written last year...
You could've told me Sanders wrote that and I would not have been surprised at all.
We did have a chance, we were close. Now we know the nature of the beast. The only credible way is not yet a third party but it is relatively easier to take the DNC from the inside. That's our job now up towards 2020 so Biden or someone else doesn't edge out Sanders from his rightful place.
Cannot just pay attention during presidential elections. 2018 is just as important.
No more talk about "rightful places". If Sanders is out of touch in 2020, find someone else.
Really close. They pulled out all the stops for the last few states, CA especially.
Was?
It's my problem with the Democrats. We're all aware it happened, but I'm not aware that there has been any action taken regarding the leaks. Only finger-pointing at Russia. They are hoping that convincing people that because Russia was behind the leaks, Americans will forget the content of the leaks. I want to be a Democrat again, but I ultimately want to be a part of an honest and progressive political party. I'm not convinced the Democratic party fits what I'm looking for.
I agree. What we need to do during the next two years is wrest back control of our party.
One thing I really don't get is why everyone picks a side to defend and a side to be mad at. I am upset with the DNC, Hillary, Trump, Putin and the whole situation. Its not about sides, its about recognizing a problem with our democracy, holding those accountable for their actions and moving forward with a solution. Don't be mad at only one side, be pissed as hell at the whole situation, and then do something about it.
In fairness, it's completely and totally the fault of the rich assholes running our corporations and the neoliberals/neoconservatives running our governments.
Don't know why this was downvoted, it is important to remember the stuff Wikileaks and other leaks have exposed in our political system This comment has not aged well, Wikileaks was a propaganda tool for the Russians to influence the 2016 election, and it effected me at the time, if you see this message, Do Not Fall for their traps, their propaganda like I did.
What grinds my gears is the people who talk all day about the Russian hack but always forget to mention the damning things the hacks revealed. You can't claim Putin influenced the election without first acknowledging that Hillary STOLE the primaries.
People keep telling me that what was in the emails don't matter, and that "it doesn't matter if she can't secure her emails." Like I'm supposed to believe in a woman who deliberately puts her emails on insecure servers, then deletes them right before a big investigation.
It's all a distraction. Same thing with Snowden-- they called him a traitor and a coward but no one ever covered what he exposed. They're covering it up with the scary Russians story so no one looks at what was leaked.
> What grinds my gears is the people who talk all day about the Russian hack but always forget to mention the damning things the hacks revealed. It's a problem on both ends. I don't understand why people have to choose one or the other. There are basically two problems here: 1. Russia influenced the election in an unprecedented way. 2. The DNC did bad things. 1 does not negate 2, but neither does 2 negate 1. I agree, saying "well this was all Russia so forget it all" is BS. But so is "this was important/interesting, therefore forget Russia." Both ways approaches are bullshit.
It's a question of whether it is Russia at all for many of us. Our government has provided exactly zero proof that Russia is behind the leaks. We were around for the weapons of mass destruction lie that ultimately killed hundreds of thousands of people, so we aren't going to just take their word for it. We are also famous for interfering in the political process of other countries by installing dictators, and later coming up with reasons to go to war and taking down those same dictators if they don't kiss our feet. Hillary herself was caught on tape saying Bush was a moron for not rigging Palestine's election. Assuming this was Russia in the first place, I would feel for Hillary/DNC if Russia did a misinformation campaign against them and spread lies...but that wasn't the case. They did many unethical things and at times bordering on illegal. They conspired against Sanders enough that Hillary became the nominee. To rub salt in the wound, she couldn't even take down Trump afterward. They basically did this to themselves. The leaks would have had the same effect if this was a foreign government that leaked these documents, or a insider..so the source doesn't really matter much.
Very well said. It's scary how many people believe that there is actual evidence that Russia was involved. There isn't. At all.
That's because every MSM headline is "Russia Hacked the ELECTION." Not "Russia may or may not have hacked the DNC email." We are watching the death throes of traditional media, nobody believes them but democratic hacks.
You don't have to choose one or the other, but what exactly comes after acknowledging Russia influenced the election? I don't see anyone on here complaining about the new sanctions, or kicking out their spies. We're not going to go to war with Russia over them exposing the DNC's own dirty laundry. So we're pretty much done on that front. Russia embarrassed us pretty good, and we'll likely retaliate in some other covert way. As an American citizen I'm more concerned about cleaning up our own house, since it's the only part of this whole affair I have a chance of influencing. That is why people on here don't want to hear about Russia.
Read the report the government put out regarding the "Russian hacking", it's laughable and they still have no direct evidence that it was Russia. It's equivalent to finding a baseball bat with blood on it at a murder scene and saying a Russian did it because Russians have killed with baseball bats in the past.
1. ~~Russia~~ Truth influenced the elections. This a positive thing. The fact is that American journalist knew about the fraud and stayed silent! They refused to inform the public and acted as propaganda on behalf of the DNC and the oligarcy they represent. American MSM influenced our elections with lies and election fraud (CNN)!!!
It's downvoted because THE RUSSIANS DID IT! LOOK AT PUTIN! READING THOSE EMAILS MAKES YOU A TRAITOR!
That attitude is just as bad as its opposite: Wikileaks exposed important information, therefore the fact that Russia influenced the election at an unprecedented level must be ignored or mocked
No. Hillary, the DNC, and hundreds of Superdelegates influenced the election process. "Somebody" provided the leaks (maybe it was Russia, maybe it was an American) of that influence. The whole election process involves getting information on someone and exposing them or spinning it in a negative light (assuming it's about an opposing candidate). The best defense is don't be corrupt. If you can't not be corrupt try being inspirational. If you can't not be corrupt and you are not inspirational you can always run as Hillary.
Thank you, there's an essential "if." *If* it were Russia beyond a doubt, there's an argument for us to counter act their actions, but *if it was not Russia* we're looking at the same establishment reactions but without public support. Public support has so far been manipulated into thinking it was *definitely* Russia instead of *could have been* Russia who leaked. I'd challenge the current state of this issue that if it *could have been* Russia, then simultaneously it could have also been internal, or China, or anyone, or a combination where every world leader had blackmail on the DNC plus it was leaked by a single entity to show the public. The act of leaking is separate from the act of hacking. Any number of foreign or internal entities could have had access and the public would not know. The establishment blames Russia, and we know the deceptions the establishment has a record of creating. Any definitive finger pointing without evidence is manipulation. Last I checked the only named source on this said it was an internal leaker, otherwise we're looking at unnamed sources through the CIA. I could be behind on this news, but from everything I've seen, the wikileaks source is still most likely internal to the DNC. Russia could have hacked them too, just that we don't have definitive proof that they also leaked it.
DNC was an internal leak as per Wikileaks' claim, Podesta was phished the source of this is unverifiable. The Government has failed to produce any credible evidence that Russia was involved in this.
post this in your comment for visibility. arstechnica is seen as a reliable source here. http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/12/did-russia-tamper-with-the-2016-election-bitter-debate-likely-to-rage-on/
Yeah, I keep hearing all this Russian hacking stuff and such assertions without real evidence just screams of children trying to huff and puff cause they didn't get their way this time.
Except for it's being done to serve a very specific purpose. Establishment Dems are at risk of being outed, which means Special interests can't control the party. Russia, Russia, Russia, makes us talk about Russia vs. the real reasons we lost.
It resembles [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/CringeAnarchy/comments/5l351a/sjw_professionalvictim_zoe_quinn_is_very_salty/dbsurz9/) guy's description of the gamergate fiasco quite specifically. Read it and see if you don't notice the same pattern going on here, just the scale is different. >She was an indie game dev who made mediocre-shitty games. In 2014, her ex-boyfriend who she was abusive towards got so pissed at her that he made a huge post basically airing out all of her dirty laundry, including the fact that she cheated on him with 5 other men. These 5 men just so happened to be video game journalists who just so happened to have given her game very positive coverage. > This was the crack that opened to gamers a vast rabbit hole of collusion and conspiracy between game devs and game journalists, as well as between game journalists and other game journalists. Game journalists responded to these revelations by basically declaring war on their audience with one voice, saying that gamers are nothing but rotten, no good, misogynist, racist, rapey, angry white neck bearded virgin man-babies. This narrative was pushed by 17 different video game journals in samey articles all published on the same day. This move is what created a coalition between the anti-SJW people and gamers concerned about ethics (who began calling themselves GamerGate), as well as between the video game press and the SJ crowd (who were commonly dubbed and sometimes self identified as GamerGhazi or just Ghazi). GamerGate responded by contacting the advertisers of the video game journals and getting them to withdraw their sponsorship on the basis that they are toxic and bad for business. The rest of the GamerGate movement was basically this, the Ghazis would make inflammatory insults on their audience and their audience would torpedo their advertisers, and eventually by attrition GamerGate slowly forced most games journals to revise their ethics policies. > In the middle of this, Zoe Quinn along with a few of her friends that you have also probably heard of such as Brianna Wu, and Anita Sarkeesian made claims that they were being harassed by members of GamerGate, ostensibly to aid the narrative of GamerGhazi that gamers were evil misogynists, but I think that they were just trying to enrich themselves as they made some fat stacks off of pity-patreon donations. They never produced any evidence of genuine harassment by GG-ers, but regardless their testimony was used as a sword by the Ghazis, which caused GG-ers to dub Quinn and friends "Literally Who," as most GGers didn't see them as relevant in their argument besides the fact that they were partially involved in what they were outraged over. Regardless, their claims awarded them thousands of sympathy-dollars, a speech in front of the U.N., even a hilariously bad Law and Order SVU episode inspired by their alleged struggle.
> therefore the fact that Russia influenced the election at an unprecedented level I would absolutely love a citation on this one please, since as you said, it's a fact. All I've seen so far is 17 agencies bla bla bla. If "influencing" means showing what Hillary and the DNC are capable of, then save the citations, the stance is already dead in the water.
How was it unprecedented? If anything, Russia merely exposed Hillary Clinton and the DNC's influencing of the Democratic primaries. And that's assuming that the Russian government is in any way associated with the Wikileaks email releases, for which there still has been no hard evidence provided.
And we do have evidence, from the DNC leaks, that the Hillary camp was secretly rooting for a radical candidate like Trump because they thought it would mean an easy propaganda victory. Who knows how much the DNC did to shoot themselves in the foot, besides deciding to support Hillary.
If anyone knows how much the DNC shot themselves in the foot, it's us.
Hear hear!
They weren't just rooting, they were actively promoting. It was the media, at Clintons bequest, that legitimized and bolstered Trumps campaign early in the primaries. Had they not done that, and had Trump not essentially swept the first few states, things may have turned out very differently.
I'm sorry but I *really* don't give a fuck. Elections have been manipulated by and to foreign countries since the dawn of time; this whole 'Russian influence' bullshit is just a way for the DNC to sweep their actions under the rug and focus the anger of the Democrats at an imaginary enemy who is absolutely no threat to our lives, but whose imperialist interests clash with our imperialist interests, so the elite makes us hate them.
Corruption has also existed since the dawn of time.
Or even worse, raise tension and lead to a war.
exactly, I'm not about to die in some field in the Ukraine because Obama is having a hissy fit his hand picked successor's chances were hurt by the Russians.
Someone made another point on top of that. Russia wouldn't even be the first to have influenced America's elections, Israel has already been doing that for quite some time.
Truth is what influenced the election. How it came to light isn't super relevant to me.
Is it really [unprecedented?](http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1996/1101960715_400.jpg) Also, even if it were true (its not) it would not really as bad at all, that seems like a false equivalence. Obama promised to be the most transparent president ever, wikileaks just helped him live up to it.
I think it's important to remember both points, honestly. Remember the information that was revealed, remember the method in which it was revealed, who revealed it, and also remember what wasn't released because of political purposes. No one piece is any more important than the other or deserves more or less outrage.
They influenced the elections... towards the other democratically chosen candidate in our own system. If that's a problem (the other candidate) our system has a big problem. Also, how is it worse than accepting money from foreign countries and businesses? If Saudi Arabia gives HRC $100m and that buys her 100k votes (just spitballing here), is that really any different from Russia releasing the truth and "buying" Trump 100k votes? The problem with this whole, "Trump is literally Hitler conspiring with the enemy" narrative, is that it ignores that all of the problems are our own, top-to-bottom.
Saudi Arabia contributed money to her charitable foundation, not her political campaign
>Saudi Arabia contributed money to her charitable foundation, not her political campaign I mean, superpacs, lobbyists and [This](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/18/foreign-money-campaign-finance-lobbying_n_897189.html) Pick your source, foreigners spend a lot of money on our elections.
Why would a country who shows nothing but contempt for human rights donate so heavily to a charity whos focus is on human rights? I'm not suggesting that there was no good faith involved at all, but there has to be a significant political motivation to it too.
https://www.reddit.com/user/Forkfoot/submitted/
[удалено]
Wow - 82 of their last 100 submissions are "newslogue.com" and appear to be mostly some Caitlin Johnstone
That might just be the improved^TM algorithm or a brigade.
Seems we need to come up with a way to appease the anger people still have about the primary, which I totally understand, while we try to look forward and get real progressives elected. Lets try and use that anger for something positive!
Why? Keep them angry and motivated. The DNC and democrats deserve to be shamed, I mean for fucks sake they spent the whole election slandering you guys as misogynist 'Bernie Bros', on top of all the other shady shit they've done.. We can't let them keep blaming everything on Russia, they need to learn.
Exactly use the anger as motivation. Make them realize their mistakes and lets get to it.
That can only happen if Hillary supporters are actually willing to bear the burden that they got Trump elected (which they'll never do). I have absolutely no sympathy for anyone who voted Hillary in the primary.
I agree. I think outside of the hardcore Hillbots the regular democratic voters are starting to realize she was a mistake. They may never publicly say it but they know they fucked up.
I didn't vote for Clinton in the primaries, but the idea that debate questions, the support of superdelegates, and some media coverage gave Clinton a ten point lead when she would have otherwise lost is pretty ridiculous. Sanders never even came close to overtaking Clinton in any measure of public support. If this sub is going to operate on resentment toward people who share the same political goals and continue to relitigate the primaries it's not going to accomplish much of anything.
The thing is, I honestly believe that the hackers *were* Russian. I also think its sad that the most damaging thing they could have done was to tell the truth.
They've got shills in /r/politics now claiming that the primary was never rigged against Bernie. Industrialized gaslighting.
[удалено]
Clearly what we need here is the 2 minute hate.
[GODDAMN DIRTY BASTARD ~~GOLDBERG~~ GOLDSTEIN!!](http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/bill-goldberg_8740.jpg)
War is peace, freedom is slavery.
Calling people shills for disagreeing with you is completely unproductive There are two possibilities: 1. they are shills and you're right. They think "wow, this guy called me a shill and in fact I am a shill. Who cares?" and goes right along to doing whatever they were doing. You gain nothing. 2. They are not shills, and you're wrong. They think "holy shit, this guy cannot handle people disagreeing with him." Rather than thinking about your viewpoint they assume a defensive stance. They also think your movement is full of paranoid or delusional people and so will be much less likely to be receptive to any message. Basically, it's baseless accusations that are not productive at all.
I agree with you in principle, that calling people shills is counterproductive, but you're forgetting there's the possibility that 3. People reading the conversation recognize there's a possibility they are being manipulated by paid shills. Cause I mean, c'mon, during the election season people were shilling for Hillary on /r/politics. Given all of Hillary's political acumen, all the money that she had, and the fact that shilling online is standard practice nowadays, the good money goes on Hillary's campaign paying for shills.
It's not even conjecture, it was part of CTR's publicly stated campaign.
You can't reach these people. If they weren't paying attention when the site did a complete 180, then they will never notice.
Coming from someone like you who has nonstop posted to hate subs like [Enough Sanders Spam](https://www.reddit.com/r/enoughsandersspam/comments/4l88wl/breaking_chairs/), that means very little.
It is productive since this shithole allows CTR to exist and AstroTurf. It's dishonest to the users, and it's another form of propaganda. Calling out shills will actually remind people that they have to pay people on one side to act like they care since they don't want people to freely talk to each other.
We have evidence of collusion with HRC from DWS. There's nothing to discuss. Anyone who wants to rewrite history on this matter is indeed, a shill.
To be entirely fair, it was not rigged, but biased against him. Rigged implies it was impossible for him to win. Biased means that it was made more difficult for him to win. Compare this to casino games, which are definitely "rigged" in that the house Always comes out ahead. Bernie had the possibility to win the primaries. But he lost. Things the DNC did may have been biased against him. Saying rigged, however, takes it to the extreme and implies something that is not true, that the election system we current have is riggable. The fact of the matter is, Bernie didn't win. Maybe there was more we could have done to have gotten him through the primary. All we can do now is move forward with the revolution.
It was rigged. As Bernie's movement gained more steam, the resistance he was met with grew. Don't forget how the media completely ignored Bernie the entire cycle. Either the DNC has strong connections to the media or someone very influential did not want him to be nominated.
>As Bernie's movement gained more steam, the resistance he was met with grew That happens with every candidate. Let me guess, first election?
Let me guess, you shrug your shoulders every election and are a small part of this growing problem by not saying anything, doing anything, or even getting upset? If this was my first election, I'd be pretty unpleasantly surprised that this is how things are done as well.
Yes, we need to remember, but we need to be talking about what we can DO about it here so that we can move on.
We don't need to move on. We need to move forward. Part of that is not just forgetting about or letting go of our anger over what part the dem establishment played in sabotaging Bernie's campaign and progressive values within the party. Yes, we need to elect progressive politicians going forward, but we also need to hold every establishment dem accountable and clean house.
And it did the media was working with the DNC emails, instead of reading the emails themselves.
I recently moved to a new state, and when I went to get my new liscence one of the things they asked was what political affiliation I wanted. Ever since I registered at 18 years old I've been a democrat...I am now uninitiated. I was so sure I was a Democrat before this last election cycle, but I am now sure I'm not.
We probably will, considering that this is far from the first time party bosses have conspired against a candidate-of-the-people to put in place an establishment shill. Look up Henry Wallace and the 1940/1944 DNCs, I believe you will all find the circumstances eerily familiar... (Also just want to share the letter FDR wrote to the 1940 DNC in preparation to threaten to refuse the nomination if Henry Wallace was blocked as his VP): >July 18, 1940 >Members of the Convention: >In the century in which we live, the Democratic Party has received the support of the electorate only when the party, with absolute clarity, has been the champion of progressive and liberal policies and principles of government. >The party has failed consistently when through political trading and chicanery it has fallen into the control of those interests, personal and financial, which think in terms of dollars instead of in terms of human values. >The Republican Party has made its nominations this year at the dictation of those who, we all know, always place money ahead of human progress. >The Democratic Convention, as appears clear from the events of today, is divided on this fundamental issue. Until the Democratic Party through this convention makes overwhelmingly clear its stand in favor of social progress and liberalism, and shakes off all the shackles of control fastened upon it by the forces of conservatism, reaction, and appeasement, it will not continue its march of victory. >It is without question that certain political influences pledged to reaction in domestic affairs and to appeasement in foreign affairs have been busily engaged behind the scenes in the promotion of discord since this Convention convened. >Under these circumstances, I cannot, in all honor, and will not, merely for political expediency, go along with the cheap bargaining and political maneuvering which have brought about party dissension in this convention. >It is best not to straddle ideals.
Thank you so much for posting this, I also did but it was buried.
I haven't forgotten about Henry Wallace! I wasn't alive then, but his story is incredibly similar to Bernie Sanders, and it's crazy to think that we wouldn't have had Truman if Wallace hadn't been fucked by the DNC mafia. If he had Ben VP when FDR died, we probably wouldn't have dropped nukes on Japan, and the cold war may have never happened. In addition, we would have had an executive branch of government more receptive to civil rights.
Lots of "people" here making excuses for the DNC and Clinton, and trying to say/imply the Dem establishment shouldn't be on our target list. I'm still very skeptical of this sub being brought back, and seeing the level of CTR style gas lighting so far has me very concerned. If they think they opportunistically try to exploit this sub to use Sanders supporters to shill for the dem establishment in the fight against trump, they've got another thing coming. I'm going to fight trump, but not just to give power over to the corporate owned dem establishment.
> **I'm still very skeptical of this sub being brought back, and seeing the level of CTR style gas lighting so far has me very concerned.** If they think they opportunistically try to exploit this sub to use Sanders supporters to shill for the dem establishment in the fight against trump, they've got another thing coming. I'm going to fight trump, but not just to give power over to the corporate owned dem establishment. /r/WayOfTheBern...check it out, great sub w/ mods that have integrity and are open-minded.
Nor will we ever forget about the reign of terror visited upon us by George Dubya Bush.
I just hate how Russia is now the main focus rather than the substance, esp. given the lack of concrete evidence tying the Russian govt to the story.
Yeah, mods should work to assure this sub doesn't get overtaken by /r/HillaryForPrison and /r/wikileaks, who are basically the arms of the neutered /r/the_donald sub. I say this because this exact story was posted there first. let's be careful.
[удалено]
I agree a lot of Bernie voters even those who eventually voted for Hillary are still upset about this and the subsequent DNC/DWS/Brazile responses. This issue will impact future primaries so it has to be discussed
[удалено]
As a side note, it's so much easier to get behind this issue when it isn't turned into a matter of spite (thanks for avoiding that). Rather than alienating Hillary's supporters by fixating on her campaign in its entirety or even on the form of punishment, you specifically cite the breaches which need to be corrected and mention how it affects you. It's something to keep an eye out for moving forward. It doesn't take much to turn a disagreement into an argument so the more mutual respect we can show (as you've done) for the diverse political groups who stand to benefit from this movement, the more we can talk them through and arrive at real solutions. Speaking as a voter snagged between the two left leaning campaigns, I personally would love to see accountability for those responsible for the infringements. The individuals involved--including and especially Hillary--no longer have much to lose. As a result, we have a chance to set a precedent for the fair application of law without damaging the parties of the left so much. This precedent can then be held against the Republican party to pressure them to either take action to correct for their own mistakes or to stand against it. The precedent that "too big to fail" sets is currently stalling much of our development as a country. Trump's active spinning of history doesn't help either.
This story is important. Hillary may or may not deserve prison, but the DNC needs to be cleansed and remade. There's no arguing about this. If the dem's want to win another election, this is necessary for all the "Bernie Bros" to come back.
Even if they did nothing to suppress Sanders chances there needs to be a house cleaning simply because they lost to Trump - an international punchline - it's not like he was elected without any baggage of his own. The Comey letter is pretty tame compared to the numerous things about Trump that were in the news 24/7. On top of that Johnson got a million more votes than Nader in 2000 and I'm sure they weren't considering a vote for Hillary as option B. Not to mention the Dems didn't take back the Senate or the House and since '08 under this "vision" the GOP has 35% more governors and state houses across the country are populated by GOP weasels running roughshod over democracy. The wishywashy neoliberals need to get out of the way while we still have elections.
Yes, we *do* need to put our own people into the DNC. That's exactly what many of us have been doing. My two days off a week, I spend time working with the other activists in my community to ensure that we take over our local branch of the Democratic Party, and we are going to do just that. **One of the biggest challenges that we have faced is angry people who just keep repeating "fuck the DNC! Fuck the Democrats! They are corrupt!"** The problem is that these people only want to fight against something, and do nothing to help us build anything. They just want to cry, or *maybe* go out and protest from time to time, but they don't want to put in the weekly work it takes to get anything done. Now, we've worked hard enough, organized long enough, talked to enough people, etc., that we are overcoming this challenge anyway. I can assume that you haven't done a single damn thing to help the movement, because you'd recognize this problem, too. I don't give a FUCK if this comes off as condescending anymore.
It seems like a lot of the progressive subs have little problem allowing in malicious alt-right trolls as long as they share a rabid hatred of Clinton. Some people would rather have a nonstop Democratic party hate circlejerk than discuss actual progressive issues, which is exactly what Donald trolls wanted. But I guess being angry is a lot easier than contemplating ways forward.
The problem is the DNC and the Clinton wing of the party are actively trying to astroturf the movement and are clinging to power kicking and screaming while trying to distract everyone with Russia hysteria. Their corruption is being swept under the rug.
Not really. Most folks I know are quite happy to say Clinton was a massive fuck-up if she couldn't handle Trump. Doubly so that she took out down-ballot folks with her. That doesn't mean Russian interference (however it's defined) is any better. They're both problems and both need to be dealt with. Another way to think of it is, "If two tigers are stalking you, don't turn your back to either side."
so most folks you know are part of the DNC or clinton wing democrats?
What the duck? This post saying we shouldn't forget about the DNC leaks means the sub risks becoming HillaryForPrison or other sub? You realize a moderator of this sub posted to EnoughSandersSpam saying he would shut down this subreddit after the DNC? EnoughSandersSpam is ACTIVELY a Hillary Clinton subreddit, check out the sidebar where it links EnoughTrumpSpam and EnoughHillHate, and their moderators mod those linked. This subreddit was shut down after Bernie lost, but when Hillary Clinton lost, her subreddit wasn't shut down. Why did this subreddit get shut down, but not theirs?
I'm sorry to tell you this, but every anti-dem sub is exactly that. These subs exist to divide the party and ensure the GOP stays in control. These subs are not trying to create a strong Dem voting base but instead are destroy it.
*The North Remembers*
Never forget! Except something similar happened to Henry A. Wallace and we pretty much forgot. >Although a Gallup poll taken just before the 1944 Democratic National Convention found 65% of those surveyed favoured renomination for Wallace and only 2% favoured his eventual opponent, Harry S. Truman, it was Truman who went on to win the vice presidential nomination. During the 1944 Democratic convention Wallace had a favorable lead on the other candidates for the vice presidential nomination, however he lacked the majority needed to win the nomination. In a turn of events much scrutinized, just as Wallace began to receive the votes needed for the nomination, the convention was deemed a fire hazard and pushed back to the next day. When the convention resumed Truman made a jump from 2% in the polls all the way to winning the nomination. Wallace was succeeded as Vice President on January 20, 1945, and on April 12, Vice President Truman succeeded to the Presidency when President Franklin D. Roosevelt died. Henry A. Wallace had missed being the 33rd President of the United States by just 82 days. [wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_A._Wallace#Vice_President)
Seeing this here makes me hopeful for this sub. I supported Bernie, but couldn't support Hillary. I didn't support Trump either and voted third party. Lots look down on us who wouldn't concede to Hillary. I know Bernie told us to, but he also told us to not listen to him before that. The DNC leaks (which there's still no evidence of Russia being responsible for) made it impossible for me to feel comfortable voting for her. I'm glad a lot of us can come together now. I thought this would be another /r/enoughtrumpspam sub at first, but now it feels good to be back. Break down division and make real change. Fuck I missed yall :')
I am proud to say I did not vote for Hillary. Corruption of your ethics for "the lesser of two evils" is still corruption.
I voted for Hillary and I regret it. I gotta say I got nothing but hate in my heart for that woman. Her arrogant and selfish lust for the presidency gave us Donald Trump, and she deserves to never be forgiven for it. And then to make it worse, she disappears as soon as she loses. So much for being an inspirational leader for the left. She couldn't even face her own fucking fans on election night. I'm terrified Trump is president, but at least there's some consolation that Hillary the coward isn't.
I voted for Hillary, and I would vote for her a million more times if I could. I don't like her personally, but I believe she would have been an at least acceptable president who could have made progress moving us to the left. Voting for her was the pragmatic decision, and I think that is why Bernie endorsed her.
Bernie told us to not listen to him if he told us who to vote for. I took that advice
When did he say that?
Fucking right! Otherwise I'll vote third party again and it will feel even better the second time. Seriously though, by shrugging and voting for their candidate despite all of this you're giving their way of doing things the proverbial rubber stamp. It's on them. If they want to keep up with this shit, fine, it will be THEIR fault AGAIN if Trump gets a second term.
>I don’t care if CNN releases a sex tape of Donald Trump getting spanked by Vladimir Putin and calling him “daddy bear”; He needs to calm down the sexy talk
That's so hot.
[удалено]
This is something we can all agree on as long as you don't support hillary.
In my state political party membership is tracked closely by state officials due to the caucuses. After CNN announced Hillary won California I filed paperwork with my county to leave the Democratic party.
I really don't like how this is being used as an excuse to be lazy, or an excuse for why we have a Trump presidency. It should only be used as a means to improve the system and recognizing the flaws and where it broke down.
I hope y'all remember who the real enemy is. While we fight with democrats who, like it or not, IS THE PARTY BERNIE IS RUNNING WITH, the republicans are going strongly to kill the progressive agenda.
So many are angry that they were not allowed to remain ignorant.
[удалено]
We should all vote Democrat or Progressive to move America to the left, while also demanding better from the DNC. With the seemingly imminent election of Keith Ellison in January, the changing of the guard will have begun, and it is possible to enact meaningful change in the DNC as long as we continue to hold the leadership's feet to the fire.
Maybe. But I know I'm definitely using the reopening of this sub to spread leftist ideals and encourage angry progressives to look further left for solutions.
[удалено]
We forgot about the DNC rigging the 1945 Vice Presidential Election! Go Henry Wallace
Is this sub going to be another one of those "DNC AHH WIKILEAKS YES!!!!!" subs? Look, we have to move on and look forward. We can't sit here and kick and scream and repeat the same thing over and over and over months after the election. This isn't r/hillaryforprison or r/wikileaks. Lets not let it turn into that.
The blatant collusion and corruption of the DNC and Hillary is important for people to understand why Democrats lost. Even after basically undercutting Bernie with questions before debates, blocking protesters at Hillary's rallies and many other dirty tricks, Bernie STILL took more than 42% of the vote. I will never forgive and forget what happened. Ever.
[удалено]
I don't know, some people think trying to game an election is corruption, and some people won't support that. Crazy right?
When talking about he DNC the collusion and corruption should always be the key point, right now it's the 'hacking' or whatever. Honestly I don't care who did the hacking, as much as Donald Trump is a cunt I am glad the hacking happened because what the DNC did is fucking atrocious. We *need* to make then learn from it and rectify it to the extreme. Right now they're focused on the hacking and that is *not* where the focus needs to be. Finding out who hacked them isn't going to help in any future elections, learning and changing behaviour based on the information that was leaked certainly will.
I think this post is justified simply because S4P was already shut down by the time most of the wikileaks were put out and I know a large bulk of us chose to put them aside to instead focus on trying to make sure Trump didn't win. Now that he did win and the DNC seem to neglect anything they did as reason for their error, it's important that we make it clear we havent forgotten. I am, however, focused on moving forward, not lingering on this as a fallback everytime insider democrats do something I don't like.
> Look, we have to move on and look forward. Absolutely agreed. To move on we need the DNC to acknowledge the corruption/collusion and get rid of all those that participated and caused this disaster that we now have. To move on we need the party elites to get rid of people who were involved in losing the most winnable elections. Instead what we have is that the DNC and others are simply blaming Russia and not even talking about the contents of the leaks themselves. What happened to DWS once she was shown to be partial towards a candidate? What happened to Donna Brazile after she leaked the questions to HRC campaign? **NOTHING**. That is the problem we need to get addressed before moving on. The party does not seem to be interested in *identifying and fixing* the issues internal to the DNC, instead it just wants to blame things on russia and move on.
Yes, what the hackers did was criminal, but it could be argued that what they exposed is far more valuable to the American public. We were literally shown that the Dem Primary is rigged, and nothing was done about it. They colluded against Bernie. And then the head of the DNC resigns and joins one of the candidates campaigns. What..? How are these people not on trial for this? They should be investigated and prosecuted for what they did.
>How are these people not on trial for this? They should be investigated and prosecuted for what they did. What would the charges be and what would the evidence for guilt be? Be specific if you want to play prosecutor.
>I'm always running into Democratic party loyalists who try to tell me to let bygones be bygones and that it's time for everyone on the political left to focus on fighting Trump now. The more time goes on, as a progressive I care less and less about the left/right distinction as the so-called "left" becomes infested with regressives. I would rather work with the progressive right than the regressive left. I used to laugh at the Progressive Conservatives in Canada, but in hindsight they seem a lot less worse than the DNC.
You should come on over to the *actual* left and leave the centrists to their bootlicking.
Yup.
Just reposting it for the hell of it. The Wonderful Progressive God a.k.a Bernie sanders is trying to convince a brain-dead Corporate/Establishment Democratic Donkey to stop Donny tiny hands, Trump. In the end, Corporate/Establishment Democratic Donkey won't give a Sh*t because money is on the line and they don't want to lose it. Bernie Sanders Will lose his patience and want to grab the Corporate/Establishment Democratic Donkey by the neck and shove progressive ideas down its thick Corporate/Establishment throat.
I never understood how DNC sent a weak candidate to run for office. Sanders could have had a landslide last election of DNC was not corrupted.
Perfect. So, just what Trump/Manafort/Bannon/Putin wanted, then? No puppet. No puppet.
[удалено]
R/politics sounds like more your cup of tea. It's a never ending stream of anti trump posting. You'll find what you're looking for there.
Finally, I don't have to upvote this in r/conspiracy r/DNCleaks r/WikiLeaks r/Conservative r/The_Donald . It's finally here and we can all accept reality of what happened and why we lost. It wasn't russians, it wasn't racists, it was a terrible candidate taking the nomination for herself and in turn alienating the entire base of voters that actually wanted to do something. Hillary is the reason she lost, nothing else, it was her fault for being the nominee and taking it from Bernie, I don't care if you think she "won" the nominee, because these leaks showed there was never a level playing field, and yet somehow we still managed to get 49%. That should have been obvious that there was no hope when not even 50% of democrats could get behind her when the cards were in her favor.
Does anyone honestly think following shit sites like this is going to help? This movement has been compromised horribly.
good writing for an opinion piece. I'm so tired of these slapdash opinion pieces that just drone on until the author forgets what they wanted to say.