Should the Democratic Superdelegates refuse to nominate Clinton? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 25, 2024, 06:22:15 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Should the Democratic Superdelegates refuse to nominate Clinton? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Given Comey's statement, who should get the Democratic nomination?
#1
Clinton (D)
 
#2
Clinton (R/I)
 
#3
Not Clinton (D)
 
#4
Not Clinton (R/I)
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 77

Author Topic: Should the Democratic Superdelegates refuse to nominate Clinton?  (Read 8921 times)
Devout Centrist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,135
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
« on: July 06, 2016, 08:23:13 AM »

Yes, they should follow the popular will of the voters.

Remind me, who said that again?
Logged
Devout Centrist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,135
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
« Reply #1 on: July 06, 2016, 08:39:05 AM »

Yes, they should follow the popular will of the voters.

Remind me, who said that again?

The voters cast their votes without the knowledge that FBI director would submit findings that that the candidate in question acted extremely carelessly in handling classified and sensitive state communication.  While the bar is not high enough for criminal proceedings, it is high enough to question the integrity of the candidate, and raise the question of whether the party should put forth a severely compromised nominee.
Oh, so now democracy doesn't matter.

Guess Sanders should just plow a tank into the DNC and crown himself.
Logged
Devout Centrist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,135
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
« Reply #2 on: July 06, 2016, 04:49:06 PM »

Still trying to spin lint into gold. What part of no charges do you people not understand? Get over it and move.

Let's say a VP of operations at a public Fortune 500 company is found to have maintained close friendships with sales executives of several vendors.  On business trips they went to concerts, high-profile sporting events, cruises, and so forth.  He then signed lucrative, no-bid contracts with his friends' firms.  Some shareholders raised a stink and called the FBI in to investigate.  While the FBI said there was excessive impropriety, there was no evidence of criminal bribery, and no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges. Is this someone you would want to nominate as your CEO?

Your novel is pretty crappy. No charges equals end of story. You might consider yourself a prosecutor on the internet, but you have no authority in real life.

I'm a member of the court of public opinion.  And right now the integrity of Clinton and the Democratic Party is on trial.   Not being indicted criminally doesn't exonerate her of gross recklessness and dishonesty, and it doesn't exonerate the Democratic Party of culpability in endorsing these qualities as befitting the office of President of the United States.
Sure, nominate someone else. I'll just vote for Johnson as I originally intended to do if Sanders won.

I'm no Democrat, so please don't cry "loyalty" at me.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 12 queries.