Donna puts the blame on HRC and DWS for the DNC debacle

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Donna B. is an opportunist. She is now hitching her wagon on Bernie because this revelation almost certainly ensures Bernie's nomination in the next election. Bernie is the future of the Democratic party at this point in time and Donna sees that clearly.

Bernie is only a Democrat when it suits him, what do they call that...an opportunist.

Yep. Hillary Clinton has been a Democrat since 1968, Elizabeth Warren became a Democrat in 1996, Bernie Sanders became a Democrat in 2015.

The fact that Bernie isn’t a real Dem only adds to his appeal. The Dem party is a lying, cheating, losing machine.

Yet he had no problem running as a Dem, taking their money, etc. Seems kind of hypocritical to me.

You are alluding Sanders did something wrong? Seriously? He has been so gracious in the face of this indignant treatment of his followers. His followers would have taken scalps on Twitter and there is no one worthy of their loyalty to lead them as far as I can tell. Progressives blew it.

Dems are calling themselves “Progressives” yet are sticking “to the old ways” that worked in 2008. Clintonistas their loss on the winners “collusion” with a geopolitical foe after Democrats won the 2012 election partially on the lack of foresight dealing with the very real threat of that very same geopolitical foe. GMAFB.

I am a Dem (though not a "Clintonista" whatever that is) and I blame our loss, ultimately, on one thing and one thing alone. Too many apathetic Democrats didn't show up to vote that day. We had the numbers - we still do - but too many people stayed home that day and THAT is why we lost. Is it because Hillary was a lackluster nominee? Probably, but at end the end of the day she WAS the nominee and the fact that Dems stayed home rather than vote handed the oval office to Trump. He didn't win, we gave it away.

Blaming the voters who have suffered due to turpitude of elite Dems with massive financial backing and a shameless willingness to value those backers over voters? Wow, do you want to lose? The Democrats need to offer better, this stuff about voter turnout is simply 'blaming the victim'.

"Better"? Like Trump? If you think that is better, then I guess these "victims" who couldn't bother to vote got "better."

NP. What you're not getting is that it was the Hilary machine that caused the election of someone as unqualified and crazy as Trump. The options were bad and bad.

Blaming people for not voting for one bad over the other bad is exactly the tactic that HRC uses. Either way, we as a nation were going down. The Trump presidency absolutely sucks, but a HRC presidency would have been just as bad or even worse from a longview standpoint. It would have continued to bolster the corruption within the Democratic party laying the stones for a future continued demise.

At this point, as we suffer through these 4 years, the Democratic party has the option of reflection, reorganization and doing right by its people or take the road that you and HRC take in the blame game.

This is the point where I vehemently disagree. I would have voted for The Rock before I voted for Donald Trump.

[Anonymous]

There was nothing illegal about what the Clinton campaign did! Hooking up with Russia to won the election. Is treason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I am a Dem (though not a "Clintonista" whatever that is) and I blame our loss, ultimately, on one thing and one thing alone. Too many apathetic Democrats didn't show up to vote that day. We had the numbers - we still do - but too many people stayed home that day and THAT is why we lost. Is it because Hillary was a lackluster nominee? Probably, but at end the end of the day she WAS the nominee and the fact that Dems stayed home rather than vote handed the oval office to Trump. He didn't win, we gave it away.

You may be partly right but I think that a lot of Democrats refused to vote for Hillary because she personified everything that was wrong with the political system and she stood for nothing! She would change her position at the drop of a hat if she thought it was politically advantageous to do so eg TPP.

These Democratic voters did not vote for Trump - that would have been going too far.

If the Democratic party has learned one thing out of this fiasco I hope it is that nominating someone who is just repugnant to some Democratic voters is not a wise move: it assumes that voters who don't like her will hold their noses and vote for her and the reality is that some will just not do so.

Well I supposed that is their right, but they shouldn't delude themselves that they are not responsible for the situation we now find ourselves in. Staying home that day was a vote for Trump.

As one of those who "stayed at home" rather than vote for either candidate - although I had voted Democratic for decades - I viewed my "non-vote" as a total rejection of Hillary. I have never regretted that decision and if I had the choice to make again knowing full well that we'd end up with Trump, I'd do the same thing yet again.

This liberal will not hold my nose and vote for a candidate who is absolutely unpalatable - it will not happen. What the Donna Brazile revelations have done for me is to affirm that I made the right decision. I wholeheartedly supported Bill Clinton but Hillary represents everything that is wrong with today's Democratic party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Donna B. is an opportunist. She is now hitching her wagon on Bernie because this revelation almost certainly ensures Bernie's nomination in the next election. Bernie is the future of the Democratic party at this point in time and Donna sees that clearly.

Bernie is only a Democrat when it suits him, what do they call that...an opportunist.

Yep. Hillary Clinton has been a Democrat since 1968, Elizabeth Warren became a Democrat in 1996, Bernie Sanders became a Democrat in 2015.

The fact that Bernie isn’t a real Dem only adds to his appeal. The Dem party is a lying, cheating, losing machine.

Yet he had no problem running as a Dem, taking their money, etc. Seems kind of hypocritical to me.

You are alluding Sanders did something wrong? Seriously? He has been so gracious in the face of this indignant treatment of his followers. His followers would have taken scalps on Twitter and there is no one worthy of their loyalty to lead them as far as I can tell. Progressives blew it.

Dems are calling themselves “Progressives” yet are sticking “to the old ways” that worked in 2008. Clintonistas their loss on the winners “collusion” with a geopolitical foe after Democrats won the 2012 election partially on the lack of foresight dealing with the very real threat of that very same geopolitical foe. GMAFB.

I am a Dem (though not a "Clintonista" whatever that is) and I blame our loss, ultimately, on one thing and one thing alone. Too many apathetic Democrats didn't show up to vote that day. We had the numbers - we still do - but too many people stayed home that day and THAT is why we lost. Is it because Hillary was a lackluster nominee? Probably, but at end the end of the day she WAS the nominee and the fact that Dems stayed home rather than vote handed the oval office to Trump. He didn't win, we gave it away.

Blaming the voters who have suffered due to turpitude of elite Dems with massive financial backing and a shameless willingness to value those backers over voters? Wow, do you want to lose? The Democrats need to offer better, this stuff about voter turnout is simply 'blaming the victim'.

"Better"? Like Trump? If you think that is better, then I guess these "victims" who couldn't bother to vote got "better."

NP. What you're not getting is that it was the Hilary machine that caused the election of someone as unqualified and crazy as Trump. The options were bad and bad.

Blaming people for not voting for one bad over the other bad is exactly the tactic that HRC uses. Either way, we as a nation were going down. The Trump presidency absolutely sucks, but a HRC presidency would have been just as bad or even worse from a longview standpoint. It would have continued to bolster the corruption within the Democratic party laying the stones for a future continued demise.

At this point, as we suffer through these 4 years, the Democratic party has the option of reflection, reorganization and doing right by its people or take the road that you and HRC take in the blame game.

Well said. What’s terribly unfortunate is that the DNC and the Dem establishment are determined not to change. (For example, Perez recently kicked Bernie supporters out of the DNC.)

No matter how much they lose, they will continue to offer us more of the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous[b wrote:]There was nothing illegal about what the Clinton campaign did! [/b] Hooking up with Russia to won the election. Is treason.

Oh, Honey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I am a Dem (though not a "Clintonista" whatever that is) and I blame our loss, ultimately, on one thing and one thing alone. Too many apathetic Democrats didn't show up to vote that day. We had the numbers - we still do - but too many people stayed home that day and THAT is why we lost. Is it because Hillary was a lackluster nominee? Probably, but at end the end of the day she WAS the nominee and the fact that Dems stayed home rather than vote handed the oval office to Trump. He didn't win, we gave it away.

You may be partly right but I think that a lot of Democrats refused to vote for Hillary because she personified everything that was wrong with the political system and she stood for nothing! She would change her position at the drop of a hat if she thought it was politically advantageous to do so eg TPP.

These Democratic voters did not vote for Trump - that would have been going too far.

If the Democratic party has learned one thing out of this fiasco I hope it is that nominating someone who is just repugnant to some Democratic voters is not a wise move: it assumes that voters who don't like her will hold their noses and vote for her and the reality is that some will just not do so.

Well I supposed that is their right, but they shouldn't delude themselves that they are not responsible for the situation we now find ourselves in. Staying home that day was a vote for Trump.

As one of those who "stayed at home" rather than vote for either candidate - although I had voted Democratic for decades - I viewed my "non-vote" as a total rejection of Hillary. I have never regretted that decision and if I had the choice to make again knowing full well that we'd end up with Trump, I'd do the same thing yet again.

This liberal will not hold my nose and vote for a candidate who is absolutely unpalatable - it will not happen. What the Donna Brazile revelations have done for me is to affirm that I made the right decision. I wholeheartedly supported Bill Clinton but Hillary represents everything that is wrong with today's Democratic party.

Just as long as you are clear on this.

[Anonymous]

The biggest nothingburger in the history of nothingburgers. Trump is a moron to keep tweeting about this. He clearly has NO clue about political parties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The biggest nothingburger in the history of nothingburgers. Trump is a moron to keep tweeting about this. He clearly has NO clue about political parties.

Or the law, or the Constitution

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The biggest nothingburger in the history of nothingburgers. Trump is a moron to keep tweeting about this. He clearly has NO clue about political parties.

Or the law, or the Constitution

Or spelling. Or grammar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The biggest nothingburger in the history of nothingburgers. Trump is a moron to keep tweeting about this. He clearly has NO clue about political parties.

Omg. We understand that you are comfortable with lies and corruption, but could you please at least pick a new favorite word? I don’t understand why so many of you are so infatuated with this dumb term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The biggest nothingburger in the history of nothingburgers. Trump is a moron to keep tweeting about this. He clearly has NO clue about political parties.

Omg. We understand that you are comfortable with lies and corruption, but could you please at least pick a new favorite word? I don’t understand why so many of you are so infatuated with this dumb term.

Ditto for "OMG." Are you 12?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous[b wrote:]There was nothing illegal about what the Clinton campaign did! [/b] Hooking up with Russia to won the election. Is treason.

Oh, Honey.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Donna B. is an opportunist. She is now hitching her wagon on Bernie because this revelation almost certainly ensures Bernie's nomination in the next election. Bernie is the future of the Democratic party at this point in time and Donna sees that clearly.

Bernie is only a Democrat when it suits him, what do they call that...an opportunist.

Yep. Hillary Clinton has been a Democrat since 1968, Elizabeth Warren became a Democrat in 1996, Bernie Sanders became a Democrat in 2015.

The fact that Bernie isn’t a real Dem only adds to his appeal. The Dem party is a lying, cheating, losing machine.

Yet he had no problem running as a Dem, taking their money, etc. Seems kind of hypocritical to me.

You are alluding Sanders did something wrong? Seriously? He has been so gracious in the face of this indignant treatment of his followers. His followers would have taken scalps on Twitter and there is no one worthy of their loyalty to lead them as far as I can tell. Progressives blew it.

Dems are calling themselves “Progressives” yet are sticking “to the old ways” that worked in 2008. Clintonistas their loss on the winners “collusion” with a geopolitical foe after Democrats won the 2012 election partially on the lack of foresight dealing with the very real threat of that very same geopolitical foe. GMAFB.

I am a Dem (though not a "Clintonista" whatever that is) and I blame our loss, ultimately, on one thing and one thing alone. Too many apathetic Democrats didn't show up to vote that day. We had the numbers - we still do - but too many people stayed home that day and THAT is why we lost. Is it because Hillary was a lackluster nominee? Probably, but at end the end of the day she WAS the nominee and the fact that Dems stayed home rather than vote handed the oval office to Trump. He didn't win, we gave it away.

Interesting. Your philosophy is one I hear the most often. I’ll be interested to see what that translates into. Do you think ads such as Dr. Northam’s “American Nightmare’” will increase voter turn out in Virginia for Democrats?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The biggest nothingburger in the history of nothingburgers. Trump is a moron to keep tweeting about this. He clearly has NO clue about political parties.

Or the law, or the Constitution

Or spelling. Or grammar.

Or politics. Or will of the people. Or how to troll the world.

Nope. He’s sooo JV Team. Bring Varsity on the field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I were Bernie I would be soooooo pissed. He really was screwed over by HRC and the DNC.

Look, I don't love Hillary or what her campaign did. But as a Democrat, I have a hard time getting upset that someone who wasn't a Democrat didn't get the Democratic Party nomination for president. He could have run as an independent, but he didn't. I'm not surprised that the system was rigged for someone who actually belongs to the party to get the party nomination. What party wants to nominate someone who does not even belong to that party? Seriously.