Brazille considered replacing Clinton with Biden last September

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get this. What do you mean by she considered replacing Hillary with Biden? She doesn't have that power.

Is this based upon an understanding of the party's rules and bylaws?

Yes, the DNC chair does not have such powers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really am trying to figure out what exactly Donna's endgame is. What does she get out of this?

A Fox News gig. Just watch.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really am trying to figure out what exactly Donna's endgame is. What does she get out of this?

A Fox News gig. Just watch.

Like Hillary's scuzzy old buddy Dick Morris? I'm pretty sure Brazile is actually aiming to get the Dems to be less convenient fodder for the Fox News crowd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get this. What do you mean by she considered replacing Hillary with Biden? She doesn't have that power.

Is this based upon an understanding of the party's rules and bylaws?

Yes, the DNC chair does not have such powers.

Thanks. Does anyone? Would it rely on the candidate's cooperation?

[Anonymous]

The attacks against an African American woman by liberals is pathetic.

All she did was to surface the nefariousness of Hillary and DWS and for this she is be castigated with comments about her physique and the size of her posterior - quite apart from questioning her motives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clinton was more qualified than Biden. Would Biden have won? Maybe. Would a man with Clinton’s qualifications have won? Absolutely. I don’t think we understood how sexist this country is. The 2020 dem nominee needs to be a white male if the Dems want to win.

Get this through your bird brain: many Americans, including those on the left, view Hillary is corrupt. Cry about gender all day long; Hillary was profoundly flawed candidate gender aside.

You’re right. That’s why they voted for trump who is not corrupt or flawed at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clinton was more qualified than Biden. Would Biden have won? Maybe. Would a man with Clinton’s qualifications have won? Absolutely. I don’t think we understood how sexist this country is. The 2020 dem nominee needs to be a white male if the Dems want to win.

Get this through your bird brain: many Americans, including those on the left, view Hillary is corrupt. Cry about gender all day long; Hillary was profoundly flawed candidate gender aside.

They have to have an excuse. Gender is their fallback.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get this. What do you mean by she considered replacing Hillary with Biden? She doesn't have that power.

Is this based upon an understanding of the party's rules and bylaws?

Yes, the DNC chair does not have such powers.

Thanks. Does anyone? Would it rely on the candidate's cooperation?

Yes, the first step is for the candidate to agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The attacks against an African American woman by liberals is pathetic.

All she did was to surface the nefariousness of Hillary and DWS and for this she is be castigated with comments about her physique and the size of her posterior - quite apart from questioning her motives.

+1 You can see that all these liberal types aren't really much different from the world at large. They just think they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The attacks against an African American woman by liberals is pathetic.

All she did was to surface the nefariousness of Hillary and DWS and for this she is be castigated with comments about her physique and the size of her posterior - quite apart from questioning her motives.

Calling someone a liar and opportunist is not racist. Try again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hillary's tribute to the Twin Towers following the 9/11 Memorial didn't go over so well with anyone but the most ardent kool-aider.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/brazile-i-considered-replacing-clinton-with-biden-as-2016-democratic-nominee/2017/11/04/f0b75418-bf4c-11e7-97d9-bdab5a0ab381_story.html?utm_term=.28559e513cbf

According to the article's summary of the book, Biden/Booker was who she would have gone with.

They would have won.

Their odds would not have been better than Clinton's. Believe me. I'm from Michigan. Trump voters actively wanted to vote for him...and Biden-Booker would not have been more appealing.

It will likely be shown that some Michigan votes were manipulated.

Not sure what you mean by this. But Michael Moore, who is from Michigan, said long before the election Trump was going to win. This was based on his conversations and observations of the political climate in the state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The attacks against an African American woman by liberals is pathetic.

All she did was to surface the nefariousness of Hillary and DWS and for this she is be castigated with comments about her physique and the size of her posterior - quite apart from questioning her motives.

Calling someone a liar and opportunist is not racist. Try again.

Not explicitly, but I am impressed that some many folks are questioning her motives. That, I'm afraid, seems to be telling of something rotten in Denmark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The attacks against an African American woman by liberals is pathetic.

All she did was to surface the nefariousness of Hillary and DWS and for this she is be castigated with comments about her physique and the size of her posterior - quite apart from questioning her motives.

Calling someone a liar and opportunist is not racist. Try again.

Not explicitly, but I am impressed that some many folks are questioning her motives. That, I'm afraid, seems to be telling of something rotten in Denmark.

Questioning motives is also not racist. HTH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The attacks against an African American woman by liberals is pathetic.

All she did was to surface the nefariousness of Hillary and DWS and for this she is be castigated with comments about her physique and the size of her posterior - quite apart from questioning her motives.

Calling someone a liar and opportunist is not racist. Try again.

What did she lie about? She told the truth about the role of the DNC in supporting Hillary though they were supposed to be neutral. She said that DWS was a stooge of Hillary.

And you are ignoring the comments about her physique. Such hypocrisy!