The DNC Just Screwed Over Bernie Sanders and Spit in Voters’ Faces - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Durandal;49723003]That huffpost article was written in august of 2015. Im hazy but wasnt he still basically "bernie who" back in august?[/QUOTE] 33% of respondents knew who Sanders was vs. 92% knowing who Clinton was. If you account for that, Clinton was ahead by 17%.

[QUOTE=BigWhitey;49722580]Well the U.S. already does this through the party primaries and caucuses.[/QUOTE] I'm talking about the actual elections between party nominees, not the primaries. Bring in more parties to the debates and ballots, more national coverage. Whichever party nominee has the least votes is dropped and another round of voting is performed and so on until two men are left standing.

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;49723399]I'm talking about the actual elections between party nominees, not the primaries. Bring in more parties to the debates and ballots, more national coverage. Whichever party nominee has the least votes is dropped and another round of voting is performed and so on until two men are left standing.[/QUOTE] Which parties? Furthermore, which parties that people actually care about? You can't just say 'bring in more parties' when there are no more parties to bring in. Sure, there's a Green Party, but green politics is a platform in not just the Democrat party, but even a fringe of the Republican Party. There's also a Libertarian Party, but most of the libertarians moved over to caucusing with the Republicans when they realised that they were irrelevant as their own party. People like to criticise the two-party system as if it only presents a black and white choice, but that could not be further from the truth. In the Democrat camp you have everyone from the Blue Dog conservatives to the mainstream social liberals and social democrats, and on the far side from the Blue Dogs you even have democratic socialists. In the Republican camp you have the conservative mainstream, classic liberals (called libertarians in America) and even some progressive elements. Sure, continental European democracies have more parties than the United States, but those parties are ideologically unified, whereas the Democrats and Republicans are broad camps. Also, having multiple rounds of voting is costly, inefficient, and would still lead to a Democrat or Republican winning the election each time. We have instant-runoff elections and 99% of the time it's either a Labor or Liberal/National candidate who is elected.

[QUOTE=BigWhitey;49723579]Which parties? Furthermore, which parties that people actually care about? You can't just say 'bring in more parties' when there are no more parties to bring in. Sure, there's a Green Party, but green politics is a platform in not just the Democrat party, but even a fringe of the Republican Party. There's also a Libertarian Party, but most of the libertarians moved over to caucusing with the Republicans when they realised that they were irrelevant as their own party. People like to criticise the two-party system as if it only presents a black and white choice, but that could not be further from the truth. In the Democrat camp you have everyone from the Blue Dog conservatives to the mainstream social liberals and social democrats, and on the far side from the Blue Dogs you even have democratic socialists. In the Republican camp you have the conservative mainstream, classic liberals (called libertarians in America) and even some progressive elements. Sure, continental European democracies have more parties than the United States, but those parties are ideologically unified, whereas the Democrats and Republicans are broad camps. Also, having multiple rounds of voting is costly, inefficient, and would still lead to a Democrat or Republican winning the election each time. We have instant-runoff elections and 99% of the time it's either a Labor or Liberal/National candidate who is elected.[/QUOTE] When Ross Perot established the Reform Party and ran for president, he took 19% of the popular vote. The Republicans and Democrats may hold members of varying ideologies, but how often do you see anyone who isn't to the far left or far right of these two parties nominated? As much as you like to say it isn't black and white, it's quite the contrary. The primaries itself show this. Bernie Sanders, who is as far left as you can get in this country, and Donald Trump who is the far right of the Republicans. The Democrats and Republicans are the only ones who win because no other party gets coverage by the tv media, and the average American gets their information through the tv. You want to see the other parties? [url]https://ballotpedia.org/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_States[/url] The system is broken because some states require parties to obtain a minimum percentage of the votes, or have inane restrictions stating that minor parties aren't allowed to run in the primaries. Because of this, there is no awareness for these other parties, new perspectives that challenge the two parties in control of the country. They are unable to be challenged because there is no general knowledge of these parties.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49715919]Again, that's shitty for the country as a whole, though. If the election goes like this: Candidate A - 24% of votes Candidate B - 24% of votes Candidate C - 24% of votes Candidate D - 28% of votes Candidate D will win with 72% of the US not wanting him. On top of that, I'm pretty sure one cannot even legally win the presidency with such a voter rate.[/QUOTE] Sounds familiar... [img]http://bardhihistoryclass.weebly.com/uploads/2/4/6/1/24615437/1860-presidential-election-map_2nd_image.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49715919]Again, that's shitty for the country as a whole, though. If the election goes like this: Candidate A - 24% of votes Candidate B - 24% of votes Candidate C - 24% of votes Candidate D - 28% of votes Candidate D will win with 72% of the US not wanting him. On top of that, I'm pretty sure one cannot even legally win the presidency with such a voter rate.[/QUOTE] No, that wouldn't happen. In the US, you have to win 51% of the votes. The result would be that congress has to vote on the winner among the top 3 candidates. This happened in 1824 and the election was stolen from Jackson by Adams and Henry Clay [editline]11th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=adamsz;49724066]Sounds familiar... [img]http://bardhihistoryclass.weebly.com/uploads/2/4/6/1/24615437/1860-presidential-election-map_2nd_image.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Lincoln won the electoral vote though. Even if the other 3 candidates were not in the race and it was just him v. breckenridge, he would have won since we've got the electoral college.

Didn't see anywhere else to post this. Watch Hillary blinking during the debate on now, while Sanders is talking. You won't be able to stop noticing it after.

sanders got clinton defending kissinger holy shit

Yeah, I heard about this "superdelegate" thing. That's fucking rotten as week old eggs, Jesus. Fuck Hillary. Fuck politics. Bitch is being investigated by the FBI and is still leading behind the scenes.

can we not call her a bitch

She [i]is[/i] a bitch though.

If Clinton wins I might just vote for Trump.

[QUOTE=Govna;49724978]She [i]is[/i] a bitch though.[/QUOTE] So what.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49717319]I have no sympathy for those who don't vote. They have no right to complain about the results as they made no move get someone to that result or not.[/QUOTE] What a ridiculous sentiment. Everyone has a right to bitch about the shitheads in the oval office regardless of whether they went through the motions of pretending to choose which one is there.

[QUOTE=person11;49724957]can we not call her a bitch[/QUOTE] Can we call her a Megawhore64?

[QUOTE=TestECull;49725265]What a ridiculous sentiment. Everyone has a right to bitch about the shitheads in the oval office regardless of whether they went through the motions of pretending to choose which one is there.[/QUOTE] good luck enacting change via nonparticipation then dude

[QUOTE=AnonymaPizza;49725322]Can we call her a Megawhore64?[/QUOTE] no just Megawhore62

[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;49725814]no just Megawhore62[/QUOTE] I guess her corporate contributors took the other two bits.

[QUOTE=TestECull;49725265]What a ridiculous sentiment. Everyone has a right to bitch about the shitheads in the oval office regardless of whether they went through the motions of pretending to choose which one is there.[/QUOTE] I don't see it that way. It's like complaining about gambling losses when you never put any money into the game. If you don't participate, you don't have any authority to complain about the problems thereafter.

[QUOTE=Killer900;49725213]So what.[/QUOTE] You need help. Seriously this nonchalant attitude towards corruption is why Trump will get elected.

[url]http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/superdelegates-might-not-save-hillary-clinton/[/url]

[QUOTE=Daysofwinter;49726101]You need help. Seriously this nonchalant attitude towards corruption is why Trump will get elected.[/QUOTE]Ahaha ok, pot calling the kettle black bro. You think I'm nonchalant towards corruption? Lol look back on my posts I am not for Clinton and never was and I don't think she should even be allowed to run considering all the bullshit with her, but calling her a bitch just because you don't like her is not right. Attack her policies, not her person. You need to think before you speak

[QUOTE=Slacker101;49724993]If Clinton wins I might just vote for Trump.[/QUOTE] This is the stupidest sentiment I see/hear on a regular basis.

[QUOTE=plokoon9619;49721603]So Democrats win no matter what?[/QUOTE] typo, I meant republican. :)

[QUOTE=Killer900;49725213]So what.[/QUOTE] So we're calling her out for what she is. That's a valid thing to do.

[QUOTE=Govna;49731284]So we're calling her out for what she is. That's a valid thing to do.[/QUOTE]It's derogatory and doesn't help in any way, in fact it gives fuel to your opposition because they can point at the comments you make and call you misogynistic and childish and gives more support for Clinton. Instead of calling her a bitch, call her liar, call her out for that, because calling her a bitch doesn't do you any favors and is detrimental to your goal.