Bernie Lives! A thread for those who never tire of Sanders.

[Acetone]

Can we move this thread out of news/politics.

Its neither new nor real politics. It's just wishful thinking and extreme data manipulation.

Pretty sure this could fit right in the conspiracy theory section?

[Willie71]

The denial of the superiority of Sanders over Clinton is the conspiracy theory.

[Willie71]

I've posted this before. I suggest that anyone maintaining that Sanders was not nearly guaranteed to win over Trump should watch this video. A false populist right is gaining massive traction wherever there isn't a populist left. Several of us were yelling this from the rooftops during the primaries. We were labelled conspiracy theorists. The real issue is that third way democratic policies are a failure for 90% of the population. That's a lot of dissatisfied people. So many in fact that Brexit and Trump won, in spite of the clowns leading those campaigns.

[Acetone]

The denial of the superiority of Sanders over Clinton is the conspiracy theory.

Well, she won the primary. So actually it's not, by definition.

Also, who the fuck cares?

[Willie71]

The denial of the superiority of Sanders over Clinton is the conspiracy theory.

Well, she won the primary. So actually it's not, by definition.

Also, who the fuck cares?

Still not understanding the difference between who participates in primaries compared to the general? Fuck it's tiring to explain the basics over and over. If you don't like this topic, stop fucking reading and posting in it. You also seem to ignore the Dems admitting they rigged it.

Who the fuck cares? The people who would like the Dems to not repeat the same mistakes with another third way candidate next election. That seems to be the intention at this time based on how the party is trying to engage McCarthyism to explain away their failures. The same pattern is repeating throughout the industrialized world. When are people going to get their head out of their asses and take this seriously?

[Rumraket]

Can we move this thread out of news/politics.

You don't have to participate. Also, you're clearly just mad because views you disagree with are expressed. Here's a solution: Don't participate in the thread.

[Rumraket]

The denial of the superiority of Sanders over Clinton is the conspiracy theory.

Well, she won the primary. So actually it's not, by definition.

Also, who the fuck cares?

You, apparently. You're here, positively insulted by the existence of this very thread, and trying to make arguments, both about Sanders level of political appeal, and about where this thread belongs. You care so intensely your posts are steaming with it.

[Acetone]

Can we move this thread out of news/politics.

You don't have to participate. Also, you're clearly just mad because views you disagree with are expressed. Here's a solution: Don't participate in the thread.

No, it's because these topics have infested every thread already and it's just annoying to always see. I don't see the point of continuing this topic in it's own thread in this forum because it's not really based in 'news, politics and current affairs'.

Nothing about it is News. It's not really politics when you're saying 'oh take out this massive number of people from the election and blah blah' and it's certainly not current affairs.

Nothing talked about in this thread thus far constitutes what I'd say belongs in 'News, Politics and Current Affairs.'

[Acetone]

The denial of the superiority of Sanders over Clinton is the conspiracy theory.

Well, she won the primary. So actually it's not, by definition.

Also, who the fuck cares?

You, apparently. You're here, positively insulted by the existence of this very thread, and trying to make arguments, both about Sanders level of political appeal, and about where this thread belongs. You care so intensely your posts are steaming with it.

You can be annoyed by constantly seeing something without caring about what it's about.

[Acetone]

The denial of the superiority of Sanders over Clinton is the conspiracy theory.

Well, she won the primary. So actually it's not, by definition.

Also, who the fuck cares?

Still not understanding the difference between who participates in primaries compared to the general? Fuck it's tiring to explain the basics over and over. If you don't like this topic, stop fucking reading and posting in it. You also seem to ignore the Dems admitting they rigged it.

Who the fuck cares? The people who would like the Dems to not repeat the same mistakes with another third way candidate next election. That seems to be the intention at this time based on how the party is trying to engage McCarthyism to explain away their failures. The same pattern is repeating throughout the industrialized world. When are people going to get their head out of their asses and take this seriously?

No, I understand perfectly well.

Bernie Sanders never participated in the general election. Any discussion about how he could have done is not based in reality. That makes discussion of it and speculation of why he lost the primary entirely within the realm of conspiracy.

[Willie71]

Can we move this thread out of news/politics.

You don't have to participate. Also, you're clearly just mad because views you disagree with are expressed. Here's a solution: Don't participate in the thread.

No, it's because these topics have infested every thread already and it's just annoying to always see. I don't see the point of continuing this topic in it's own thread in this forum because it's not really based in 'news, politics and current affairs'.

Nothing about it is News. It's not really politics when you're saying 'oh take out this massive number of people from the election and blah blah' and it's certainly not current affairs.

Nothing talked about in this thread thus far constitutes what I'd say belongs in 'News, Politics and Current Affairs.'

The fact that the Dems seem hell bent on propping up candidates like Clinton putting the next election at risk isn't relevant?

Who made you supreme ruler and master of the universe?

[Thommo]

You also seem to ignore the Dems admitting they rigged it.

Exactly what was admitted by whom?

[Rumraket]

The denial of the superiority of Sanders over Clinton is the conspiracy theory.

Well, she won the primary. So actually it's not, by definition.

Also, who the fuck cares?

Still not understanding the difference between who participates in primaries compared to the general? Fuck it's tiring to explain the basics over and over. If you don't like this topic, stop fucking reading and posting in it. You also seem to ignore the Dems admitting they rigged it.

Who the fuck cares? The people who would like the Dems to not repeat the same mistakes with another third way candidate next election. That seems to be the intention at this time based on how the party is trying to engage McCarthyism to explain away their failures. The same pattern is repeating throughout the industrialized world. When are people going to get their head out of their asses and take this seriously?

No, I understand perfectly well.

Bernie Sanders never participated in the general election. Any discussion about how he could have done is not based in reality. That makes discussion of it and speculation of why he lost the primary entirely within the realm of conspiracy.

Gibberish. Much political discussion centers around what-ifs. The thread is here, now go do something better with your time that annoys you less. Or take it up with the mods. Either way, get lost. The thread title is "for those who never tire of Sanders".

I'm such a person, you're not. Take the fucking hint?

[Acetone]

Can we move this thread out of news/politics.

You don't have to participate. Also, you're clearly just mad because views you disagree with are expressed. Here's a solution: Don't participate in the thread.

No, it's because these topics have infested every thread already and it's just annoying to always see. I don't see the point of continuing this topic in it's own thread in this forum because it's not really based in 'news, politics and current affairs'.

Nothing about it is News. It's not really politics when you're saying 'oh take out this massive number of people from the election and blah blah' and it's certainly not current affairs.

Nothing talked about in this thread thus far constitutes what I'd say belongs in 'News, Politics and Current Affairs.'

The fact that the Dems seem hell bent on propping up candidates like Clinton putting the next election at risk isn't relevant?

Who made you supreme ruler and master of the universe?

That's not what this thread is about though is it. It's not about the Dems propping up candidates 'like Clinton' for the next election or even that they might do it for the next election.

No one made me supreme ruler or master of the universe. I don't even see how you get that idea. Because I requested this thread get moved to somewhere I think would be more appropriate for it?

[Acetone]

Well, she won the primary. So actually it's not, by definition.

Also, who the fuck cares?

Still not understanding the difference between who participates in primaries compared to the general? Fuck it's tiring to explain the basics over and over. If you don't like this topic, stop fucking reading and posting in it. You also seem to ignore the Dems admitting they rigged it.

Who the fuck cares? The people who would like the Dems to not repeat the same mistakes with another third way candidate next election. That seems to be the intention at this time based on how the party is trying to engage McCarthyism to explain away their failures. The same pattern is repeating throughout the industrialized world. When are people going to get their head out of their asses and take this seriously?

No, I understand perfectly well.

Bernie Sanders never participated in the general election. Any discussion about how he could have done is not based in reality. That makes discussion of it and speculation of why he lost the primary entirely within the realm of conspiracy.

Gibberish. Much political discussion centers around what-ifs. The thread is here, now go do something better with your time that annoys you less. Or take it up with the mods. Either way, get lost. The thread title is "for those who never tire of Sanders".

I'm such a person, you're not. Take the fucking hint?

So I have to get lost when you become so steamingly annoyed by what I post but I'm not allowed to request the same?

True.

[Willie71]

The denial of the superiority of Sanders over Clinton is the conspiracy theory.

Well, she won the primary. So actually it's not, by definition.

Also, who the fuck cares?

Still not understanding the difference between who participates in primaries compared to the general? Fuck it's tiring to explain the basics over and over. If you don't like this topic, stop fucking reading and posting in it. You also seem to ignore the Dems admitting they rigged it.

Who the fuck cares? The people who would like the Dems to not repeat the same mistakes with another third way candidate next election. That seems to be the intention at this time based on how the party is trying to engage McCarthyism to explain away their failures. The same pattern is repeating throughout the industrialized world. When are people going to get their head out of their asses and take this seriously?

No, I understand perfectly well.

Bernie Sanders never participated in the general election. Any discussion about how he could have done is not based in reality. That makes discussion of it and speculation of why he lost the primary entirely within the realm of conspiracy.

No the Dems admitted to rigging the primary. Whether that was enough to change the result could be investigated, but won't be.

The evidence for or against something can be evaluated. We can evaluate whether planet 9 exists, or what happens at the event horizon of a black hole. Are those conspiracy theories too? No one has seen those things first hand.

We know what hurt Clinton. We also know that Sanders didn't suffer from the same flaws. One can make a pretty good hypothesis about what could happen. We also have the polling data before the primaries were over. The fact that every single line of reasoning supports sanders would have done better is only conspiracy theory to those with motivated reasoning. The only line of reasoning that Clinton was the better candidate was the fact that she barely held on to a 60 point lead over a previously unknown candidate who was growing in popularity, and won an admittedly rigged primary. One of these things is not the same. Remember that from Sesame Street? That's the level of skill to see the difference in probability of either candidate winning.

[Willie71]

You also seem to ignore the Dems admitting they rigged it.

Exactly what was admitted by whom?

The DNC lawyers argued that the party should not be sued because it was obvious that the DNC would rig the process for Hillary. Secondly, the DNC admitted their favouritism of Clinton violated their policies. Reading the podesta, Wasserman Schultz, and Braille emails showed interference with the process. Finally, combine this with the statistical anomalies in how the vote came in showed a pattern of moving away from the mean rather than normalizing. This happens when votes are weighted. There's more but these factors cannot be disputed, as all are factual. Not hyperbole, not speculation. Anyone could read and look at this information.

[Willie71]

You don't have to participate. Also, you're clearly just mad because views you disagree with are expressed. Here's a solution: Don't participate in the thread.

No, it's because these topics have infested every thread already and it's just annoying to always see. I don't see the point of continuing this topic in it's own thread in this forum because it's not really based in 'news, politics and current affairs'.

Nothing about it is News. It's not really politics when you're saying 'oh take out this massive number of people from the election and blah blah' and it's certainly not current affairs.

Nothing talked about in this thread thus far constitutes what I'd say belongs in 'News, Politics and Current Affairs.'

The fact that the Dems seem hell bent on propping up candidates like Clinton putting the next election at risk isn't relevant?

Who made you supreme ruler and master of the universe?

That's not what this thread is about though is it. It's not about the Dems propping up candidates 'like Clinton' for the next election or even that they might do it for the next election.

No one made me supreme ruler or master of the universe. I don't even see how you get that idea. Because I requested this thread get moved to somewhere I think would be more appropriate for it?

The posts in the other threads about Sanders almost always come up in that context, when someone is affecting the BS propaganda about why Trump won. You don't understand that either? What fucking planet do you live on?

[Thommo]

You also seem to ignore the Dems admitting they rigged it.

Exactly what was admitted by whom?

The DNC lawyers argued that the party should not be sued because it was obvious that the DNC would rig the process for Hillary. Secondly, the DNC admitted their favouritism of Clinton violated their policies. Reading the podesta, Wasserman Schultz, and Braille emails showed interference with the process. Finally, combine this with the statistical anomalies in how the vote came in showed a pattern of moving away from the mean rather than normalizing. This happens when votes are weighted. There's more but these factors cannot be disputed, as all are factual. Not hyperbole, not speculation. Anyone could read and look at this information.

Ok, so you're not saying they admitted rigging it then? You're inferring it?

What do you mean by "showed a pattern of moving away from the mean rather than normalizing"?

[Acetone]

You also seem to ignore the Dems admitting they rigged it.

Exactly what was admitted by whom?

The DNC lawyers argued that the party should not be sued because it was obvious that the DNC would rig the process for Hillary. Secondly, the DNC admitted their favouritism of Clinton violated their policies. Reading the podesta, Wasserman Schultz, and Braille emails showed interference with the process. Finally, combine this with the statistical anomalies in how the vote came in showed a pattern of moving away from the mean rather than normalizing. This happens when votes are weighted. There's more but these factors cannot be disputed, as all are factual. Not hyperbole, not speculation. Anyone could read and look at this information.

What the DNC lawyers argued was that the people who are suing already said before that the DNC was rigging the election so how can they now sue for donating to something they already said was rigged for being rigged.

This would be like posting that you hate some church because they support abortion, donating to the church and the suing them for supporting abortion.

The lawyers AFAIK never said 'it actually was rigged' but 'you said it was rigged and donated anyway, how can you now sue us for it being rigged as if you hadn't known?'

The DNC have never 'admitted it was rigged'. It's something you infer and speculate.

EDIT: And this is why I say this doesn't belong in this forum but another. Maybe general discussion or something. If you want to discuss the next DNC candidate and if they'll be Clinton like or not that doesn't require discussing how Sanders could've done at all. Separate topics. I think that we already have a thread here for discussing who should be the next DNC candidate.