June 7 Primaries - "Clinton has applied Bern cream" edition - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Prez;50475262]I really dislike the tone that politicians like Hillary speak in, sounds so robotic[/QUOTE] Yep. Now compare that to Trump who can hold highly energetic speeches for hours without teleprompters. They should make it a rule that if you're running for president you can't use teleprompters.

[QUOTE=smurfy;50475233]Clinton just congratulated Sanders for an "extraordinary campaign" and said it has been good for the Democratic Party and America[/QUOTE] Allright here comes the next few months of her desperately trying to romance the voters she insulted, suppressed and marginalised so she doesn't get annihilated by trump. She'll lose. Too many people fucking hate her.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;50475237]Source? You're incredibly useful Wikipedia link that you substituted for citations or legitimate sources or anything even approaching an argument doesn't have anything other than a story about Clinton visiting a polling place where he did nothing other than shake hands and take pictures. Someone in the article implies that his "very presence" may be soliciting votes but that's absurd and falls well short of what could be considered in a civil case against him for breaking the 150ft rule. Nobody even brought the case up, the story died on social media.[/QUOTE] Am I out of line when I question why the husband of a candidate is showing up at polling places the day of the election? I think it's incredibly naive to think Bill was being completely innocent showing up to polling places while people were trying to vote and getting chummy with voters and the pollsters. There's also a video of a huge crowd gathered at a street/parking area that no doubt disrupted people's ability to find parking and get through and vote. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xwa2vSqKPHY[/media]

[QUOTE=rilez;50475239]Did you see what happened in [B]Arizona[/B], or[B] Puerto Rico[/B]? Or [B]New York[/B], to a lesser extent? How about the electioneering in Massachusetts? Note that I'm not claiming this as the reason he lost. Voter suppression definitely happened, though.[/QUOTE] Arizona: Republicans suppression of Genereal Dems (Lawsuit Awaiting) New York: State tomfuckery that got the Mayor mad. Puerto Rico: No voter Supression, it's nearly bankrupt.

[QUOTE=orgornot;50475261]Bernie owes it to his people to not let the movement die even if it means playing dirty at the convention. He should play his last cards to get a good bargaining position. At the very least make Hillary agree to sign some of his policies.[/QUOTE] I personally like Bernie because he doesn't play dirty. It's a breath of fresh air from all the mud-slinging cluster-fuck elections I've witnessed before, at any rate.

[img]http://i.imgur.com/2TkzMgU.png[/img] wait wait wait what

[quote]A smaller clusterfuck but one that occurred in a state that Clinton was invariably going to win anyway, meaning any voter suppression hurt her as much (I'd argue more) than it did Sanders.[/quote] just want to point out that this really stuck out to me. i don't care WHO voter suppression affects. it seems like you're downplaying it just because she won anyway, like voter suppression isn't much of a problem.

[QUOTE=PILLS HERE!;50475286][img]http://i.imgur.com/2TkzMgU.png[/img] wait wait wait what[/QUOTE] What is "official?"

[QUOTE=PILLS HERE!;50475286][img]http://i.imgur.com/2TkzMgU.png[/img] wait wait wait what[/QUOTE] What's troubling you

[QUOTE=PILLS HERE!;50475286][img]http://i.imgur.com/2TkzMgU.png[/img] wait wait wait what[/QUOTE] Queen of the Hill announced herself winner even though there's no possible way for her to clinch the nominee, nothing to worry about.

" Hillary will be the first woman presidential nominee from a major political party. Watch live as she takes the stage in Brooklyn" i thought nothing was official yet

[QUOTE=PILLS HERE!;50475297]" Hillary will be the first woman presidential nominee from a major political party. Watch live as she takes the stage in Brooklyn" i thought nothing was official yet[/QUOTE] She's officially the presumptive nominee

[QUOTE=Paramud;50475295]Queen of the Hill announced herself winner even though there's no possible way for her to clinch the nominee, nothing to worry about.[/QUOTE] If that's what you say to make yourself feel better...

Remember in 2008 Clinton won all 4 of the biggies (CA, NY, FL, TX) and Obama got the Bern states + black vote (deep south). The difference this time around is that Clinton has the black vote, which is why shes winning. Would be really strange if Bernie ends up winning California.

[QUOTE=smurfy;50475162]Holy fucking shit that singing at the Clinton event Oh god Edit: they brought someone out to sing that "land of the free and all the rest of it etc" song and she could not sing it was pretty horrible Edit2: yeah the national anthem, that's the one![/QUOTE] Nobody sings that song right, there's probably not even a right way to sing it. It's a tradition to butcher this song and make it an absolute chore to listen to at sporting events

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;50475283]I personally like Bernie because he doesn't play dirty. It's a breath of fresh air from all the mud-slinging cluster-fuck elections I've witnessed before, at any rate.[/QUOTE] Which is why I prefer Trump over Bernie. He fights the good fight, getting into the mud, to help ordinary people. Sort of like Batman.

[QUOTE=Paramud;50475295]Queen of the Hill announced herself winner even though there's no possible way for her to clinch the nominee, nothing to worry about.[/QUOTE] agreed, she'll never be the nominee, she's just going to have the most votes/delegates at the end of the final primary you're delusional lol

[QUOTE=Radio Yes;50475316]agreed, she'll never get the nominee, she's just going to have the most votes/delegates at the end of the final primary you're delusional lol[/QUOTE] There's a difference between clinching the nominee and winning the nominee. She'll probably win it, sure. But she can't clinch it. There aren't enough delegates left. It's going to the convention, and it'll be decided then.

Fortunately these primaries weren't a must-win for Sanders and it looks like he's going to use the momentum from tonight to win the all-important DC primary [media]https://twitter.com/NYTnickc/status/740374616615616512[/media]

[QUOTE=Paramud;50475329]There's a difference between clinching the nominee and winning the nominee. She'll probably win it, sure. But she can't clinch it. There aren't enough delegates left. It's going to the convention, and it'll be decided then.[/QUOTE] Wow, she has the most pledged and superdelegates. I wonder who they're going to select at the convention?

[QUOTE=Paramud;50475329]There's a difference between clinching the nominee and winning the nominee. She'll probably win it, sure. But she can't clinch it. There aren't enough delegates left. It's going to the convention, and it'll be decided then.[/QUOTE] She's never going to get enough pledged delegates thanks to Bernie taking like 40% of them, but at the convention she'll likely win the nomination anyway because she still has the highest popular vote + most contests

I don't know why anyone expects Bernie to pull a Ted Cruz and pull out of the race when he has pledged multiple times that he's staying in until the convention. Especially since it is technically going to be contested.(Most likely)

[QUOTE=orgornot;50475315]Which is why I prefer Trump over Bernie. He fights the good fight, getting into the mud, to help ordinary people. Sort of like Batman.[/QUOTE] You're deluded if you think that.

[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;50475340]Wow, she has the most pledged and superdelegates. I wonder who they're going to select at the convention?[/QUOTE] The one not being investigated by 12 FBI agents? The one polling better against Trump?

California polls closing in 5 minutes

[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;50475340]Wow, she has the most pledged and superdelegates. I wonder who they're going to select at the convention?[/QUOTE] Won't know till July 25th huh?

Eh, not surprised by the outcome. Now to decide if I want a turd or a douche or a big ol' johnson.

New Mexico has been called for Clinton

[QUOTE=Paramud;50475329]There's a difference between clinching the nominee and winning the nominee. She'll probably win it, sure. But she can't clinch it. There aren't enough delegates left. It's going to the convention, and it'll be decided then.[/QUOTE] i thought she already did clinch it tho? upon further research i realized that people were counting her superdelegate support as pledged delegates there's no doubting that she WILL be the nominee tho, sadly

[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;50475280]Am I out of line when I question why the husband of a candidate is showing up at polling places the day of the election? I think it's incredibly naive to think Bill was being completely innocent showing up to polling places while people were trying to vote and getting chummy with voters and the pollsters. There's also a video of a huge crowd gathered at a street/parking area that no doubt disrupted people's ability to find parking and get through and vote.[/QUOTE] I'm not naive enough to assume he showed up not wanting to see Hillary win, the problem is what exactly constitutes electioneering and I don't quite think "appearance locking" ([I]literally [/I]the first time I've ever heard of this occuring during an election) quite reaches that level. Even if it did, what's the solution? Bill Clinton isn't allowed to show up to vote anymore? Does he have to mail-it in? Or is he allowed to show up but just not speak to anyone? I think what we are seeing here is a scenario that pretty much never happens because the odds of a husband becoming president then 20 years later his wife campaigning just doesn't happen that often. Of course it has an effect, and I suppose it may be voter suppression if we count "not being able to vote quickly" is voter suppression, but illegal? Not quite. [QUOTE=Radio Yes;50475287]just want to point out that this really stuck out to me. i don't care WHO voter suppression affects. it seems like you're downplaying it just because she won anyway, like voter suppression isn't much of a problem.[/QUOTE] Not at all what I was trying to imply. What possible motivatoin would I have to support voter suppression :what: