The job of the democratic party is to put up nominees with a good chance to win. Job done. Sanders wouldn't have won. It would be non stop super PAC ads showing socialism in Venezuela and yes they would have pushed the atheist insinuation as it's probably true anyway and Americans don't elect atheists for president or even usually dog catchers either. Grow up whiners and stop being ridiculous.

The job of the democratic party is to put up nominees with a good chance to win. Job done. Sanders wouldn't have won. It would be non stop super PAC ads showing socialism in Venezuela and yes they would have pushed the atheist insinuation as it's probably true anyway and Americans don't elect atheists for president or even usually dog catchers either. Grow up whiners and stop being ridiculous.

You're dealing in hypotheticals and not recalling facts correctly. Sanders consistently outpolled Clinton against all presumed Republican candidates for president, except maybe Kasich, who never stood a chance of becoming the nominee..

Edited July 27, 20169 yr by lannarebirth

The job of the democratic party is to put up nominees with a good chance to win. Job done. Sanders wouldn't have won. It would be non stop super PAC ads showing socialism in Venezuela and yes they would have pushed the atheist insinuation as it's probably true anyway and Americans don't elect atheists for president or even usually dog catchers either. Grow up whiners and stop being ridiculous.

You're dealing in hypotheticals and not recalling facts correctly. Sanders consistently outpolled Clinton against all presumed Republican candidates for president, except maybe Kasich, who never stood a chance of becoming the nominee..

Wrong.

Polls were meaningless. I've mentioned this many, many times over these months. I never believed the polls showing Sander's potential strength in a general election just as the majority of democrats didn't either.

We understood quite well that nobody ever expected Sanders to be nominated, and neither did he, so polling his name was a pure fantasy game.

The issue has always been socialism. The U.S. can't even get close to nationalized health care. Electing an openly socialist president at this point in time -- impossible. A fascist, yeah, sure it could happen very soon.

The job of the democratic party is to put up nominees with a good chance to win. Job done. Sanders wouldn't have won. It would be non stop super PAC ads showing socialism in Venezuela and yes they would have pushed the atheist insinuation as it's probably true anyway and Americans don't elect atheists for president or even usually dog catchers either. Grow up whiners and stop being ridiculous.

You're dealing in hypotheticals and not recalling facts correctly. Sanders consistently outpolled Clinton against all presumed Republican candidates for president, except maybe Kasich, who never stood a chance of becoming the nominee..

Show any action that the DNC did that would cause over 3 million democratic voters to vote for Hillary instead of Sanders. 55% of democratic primary voters chose Hillary, that is the fact, not a poll, not a projection, not a fantasy. A fact.

TH

The job of the democratic party is to put up nominees with a good chance to win. Job done. Sanders wouldn't have won. It would be non stop super PAC ads showing socialism in Venezuela and yes they would have pushed the atheist insinuation as it's probably true anyway and Americans don't elect atheists for president or even usually dog catchers either. Grow up whiners and stop being ridiculous.

Obviously another person that does not believe in real democracy. It is ok to rig elections if the right person wins.

When you have a public organization makes a call for tender to suppliers to delivery products, but you change the requirements to favour a single supplier (i.e. the requirements are altered in such a way that the only one that can provide that type of hardware is one company -- without the need to specify that company).... the bidding is considered rigged.

When you have an organization in charge of elections (primaries) that make the rules favour a single candidate as opposed to being unbiased... the election is rigged. No difference.

The punishment for her... good job, join our team.

When you have a public organization makes a call for tender to suppliers to delivery products, but you change the requirements to favour a single supplier (i.e. the requirements are altered in such a way that the only one that can provide that type of hardware is one company -- without the need to specify that company).... the bidding is considered rigged.

When you have an organization in charge of elections (primaries) that make the rules favour a single candidate as opposed to being unbiased... the election is rigged. No difference.

The punishment for her... good job, join our team.

Not to mention that state governments fund the party primaries. Fraud was committed with the use of taxpayer money.

Off topic posts and replies have been removed, once again, this topic is not about Trump. There is now a new topic running regarding Trump asking the Russians to find the missing Clinton emails.