Will Hillary throw in the towel on Friday as is being reported on CNN?

one_raven said:
Think about this for a second.
What would you have her do?
Take it to the court system and allow the government in power decide who gets a party's nomination?
That is a precedent I NEVER want to see set under ANY circumstances.
Click to expand...

I would have there have been a proper vote in the first place; now that there is not one, there needs to be. Democracy or expediency? I choose democracy. The nation will have four years before they can decide again. Let's make this a decision that, at the least, everyone had a say in, and not subject to arbitrary rulings. Let me ask you this: what would you do? Let a handful of party officials - touting God knows what line - set the stage for the federal election? Or leave it to the people? I trust neither court nor clique.
 
She even had the nerve to ask for more money, and not contradict her supporters who were chanting "Denver".
 
GeoffP said:
I would have there have been a proper vote in the first place; now that there is not one, there needs to be. Democracy or expediency? I choose democracy. The nation will have four years before they can decide again. Let's make this a decision that, at the least, everyone had a say in, and not subject to arbitrary rulings. Let me ask you this: what would you do? Let a handful of party officials - touting God knows what line - set the stage for the federal election? Or leave it to the people? I trust neither court nor clique.
Click to expand...

everyone did have a say
 
VRob said:
This is the thing that continues to baffle the fkc out of me.

Are you aware that Obama has more legislative experience than Hillary?

Obama also has done far more in his time as an elected official than Hillary has.

How in gods name can you people continue to use her 8 years as a First lady as Experience......? :eek:
Click to expand...
I am an Obama supporter.
I didn't say this was MY argument.
She wouldn't have a chance in hell of getting my vote as president.
I am talking about arguments that people make.
 
GeoffP said:
I would have there have been a proper vote in the first place; now that there is not one, there needs to be. Democracy or expediency? I choose democracy. The nation will have four years before they can decide again. Let's make this a decision that, at the least, everyone had a say in, and not subject to arbitrary rulings. Let me ask you this: what would you do? Let a handful of party officials - touting God knows what line - set the stage for the federal election? Or leave it to the people? I trust neither court nor clique.
Click to expand...

It's not up to the people, it never has been and it shouldn't be.
This is not about the election, this is about internal party decisions - them deciding who they want to represent their party.
If you start a political party, no one should have any say on the inernal politics but YOU - the party officials.
No one has to vote for the Democrats.
Hillary does not have to run on the Democrat ticket.
Anyone has the right to start a political party today if they want to - and they can get behind anyone they want to represent their party.
It's none of anyone's business but the people who run the party.
 
McCain would have been in for the fight of his life with Hillary. She probably would have won too. End of story.
 
one_raven said:
It's not up to the people, it never has been and it shouldn't be.
Click to expand...

Er - isn't that what the political process in the US is supposed to be?

If you start a political party, no one should have any say on the inernal politics but YOU - the party officials.
No one has to vote for the Democrats.
Hillary does not have to run on the Democrat ticket.
Click to expand...

You make a fair point about "it's my party and I can hire who I want to" - but realistically no one could possibly be elected in the US without being a member of one of the two parties. This is the way it's been all along; de facto, then, these groups are meant to be custodians of fair representation. If it's really a free field, then an independent candidate should have access to the same amount of funding and exposure as either of the two regular parties. But, it'll never be that way; ergo, the Dems and the GOP should be firmly under control to make sure that this kind of thing can't happen. This is about representation, not the peddling of some obscure product or a treehouse club.

Anyone has the right to start a political party today if they want to - and they can get behind anyone they want to represent their party.
It's none of anyone's business but the people who run the party.
Click to expand...

But it becomes the business of the people affected by the decisions that party makes. If not, then we might as well call it what it is: monopoly. Or diopoly, anyway.
 
I agree that the two-party system is shitty, but that is up to the people.
What have they done about it?

The only people who should be able to decide who will represent their party are the members of their party. Period.
 
But how are the people going to change it? No money = no power.
 
GeoffP said:
But how are the people going to change it? No money = no power.
Click to expand...

Bullshit.
The power is in numbers, not money.

That's the whole point of a country ruled by its people.
The problem isn't with the system, it is with the lazy, complacent people.
 
1212709145044.jpg

bitch
 
one_raven said:
The only people who should be able to decide who will represent their party are the members of their party. Period.
Click to expand...

Well, yes and no. Since there isn't really a 3rd choice, that's why some states allow non-party members to vote in the primaries>>>open primary...
 
John99 said:
McCain would have been in for the fight of his life with Hillary. She probably would have won too. End of story.
Click to expand...

I am sure that is why the Republican Party Folks and pundits spent so much time and money on her an voting for her as well...not!
 
one_raven said:
Bullshit.
The power is in numbers, not money.

That's the whole point of a country ruled by its people.
The problem isn't with the system, it is with the lazy, complacent people.
Click to expand...

I agree with you in part. But it is also the result of a biased media who deliberately distort the news...eg. Fox, Limbaugh, etc. Also the so called Liberal Media, tends to focus on non-issues or false issues. Look at how much attention was paid to the Swift Boat nonsense. There was not a drop of truth in the whole affair, yet the media, including the so called liberal media gave it incredible coverage and weight/credibility. The coverage disproving the allegations were substancial and given just a very small fraction of the total coverage for this affair....and the the conservative media gave it no coverage. It was just too sexy for the media, and they did the nation a great disservice. I think we need to be back to the "Fairness Doctrine".
 
one_raven said:
Bullshit.
The power is in numbers, not money.
Click to expand...

Without money, how are you going to get your message out? Who's the last blue collar guy who ran for president?

That's the whole point of a country ruled by its people.
The problem isn't with the system, it is with the lazy, complacent people.
Click to expand...

Maybe, or maybe not given the above. What's the solution?

pjdude1219 said:
everyone did have a say
Click to expand...

Not really, no.
 
geoff said:
Without money, how are you going to get your message out? Who's the last blue collar guy who ran for president?
Click to expand...
It isn't the money that keeps the blue collar guy out.

The last non-wealthy guy who ran for President just won the Democratic nomination.
 
I hope my faith in the American people will be restored...dare I say I am becoming optimistic.

I think, I hope, you can only burry the American votes in only so much bull shit before they bite back!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top