2020 Democratic Nomination Process Mega-thread

[Pwns]

So now apparently donks are so woke that what Biden did under Obama's administration is now fair game.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

I didn't even mention De B by name because he's so unlikable.

You know what this debate needs?

Marianne Williamson.

She should be allowed to be in ALL the debates

Agreed, she is by far my favorite

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

[JohnStOnge]

So now apparently donks are so woke that what Biden did under Obama's administration is now fair game.

These "debates" support my belief that the major political parties should not choose their candidates through primaries. We'd end up with better people in the job if the hard core party officials just chose the candidates to run.

[Ivytalk]

So now apparently donks are so woke that what Biden did under Obama's administration is now fair game.

These "debates" support my belief that the major political parties should not choose their candidates through primaries. We'd end up with better people in the job if the hard core party officials just chose the candidates to run.

Back to the “smoke-filled room” then, eh? After yesterday’s court ruling against the Bernie supporters, that may be where we’re headed. Good luck with that, Mr. Champion of Liberty.

[BDKJMU]

How do you “go to Joe 3-0-3-3-0”?
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/cl ... ite-debate

[HI54UNI]

So now apparently donks are so woke that what Biden did under Obama's administration is now fair game.

These "debates" support my belief that the major political parties should not choose their candidates through primaries. We'd end up with better people in the job if the hard core party officials just chose the candidates to run.

Yes! Because the elites are sooooo much smarter than the rest of us.

[AZGrizFan]

These "debates" support my belief that the major political parties should not choose their candidates through primaries. We'd end up with better people in the job if the hard core party officials just chose the candidates to run.

Back to the “smoke-filled room” then, eh? After yesterday’s court ruling against the Bernie supporters, that may be where we’re headed. Good luck with that, Mr. Champion of Liberty.

No shit. He's done a complete 180 from just 26 months ago.

[AZGrizFan]

The straight up fucking MURDER of Harris by Tulsi last night was certainly pleasurable to watch.

[CID1990]

The straight up **** MURDER of Harris by Tulsi last night was certainly pleasurable to watch.

Yeah Gabbard broke it off in her ass.

And it was a little confounding Harris wasn’t ready for it since Gabbard had been telegraphing it for a week or so now.

What I really liked about Gabbard’s attack was that it was spot on - Harris does what is politically expedient - so when she was an elected prosecutor, she was tough on crime. Now she’s a Dem national politician so she’s not. And the marijuana angle was great... that was Tulsa’s libertarian side that I like

[AZGrizFan]

The straight up **** MURDER of Harris by Tulsi last night was certainly pleasurable to watch.

Yeah Gabbard broke it off in her ass.

And it was a little confounding Harris wasn’t ready for it since Gabbard had been telegraphing it for a week or so now.

What I really liked about Gabbard’s attack was that it was spot on - Harris does what is politically expedient - so when she was an elected prosecutor, she was tough on crime. Now she’s a Dem national politician so she’s not. And the marijuana angle was great... that was Tulsa’s libertarian side that I like

I like her backside, personally.

[Pwns]

Live by woke purity standards, die by woke purity standards.

Especially people who were prosecutors, which are somewhere between oil company workers and Blackwater Security contractors in terms of problematic-ness..

[CID1990]

Yeah Gabbard broke it off in her ass.

And it was a little confounding Harris wasn’t ready for it since Gabbard had been telegraphing it for a week or so now.

What I really liked about Gabbard’s attack was that it was spot on - Harris does what is politically expedient - so when she was an elected prosecutor, she was tough on crime. Now she’s a Dem national politician so she’s not. And the marijuana angle was great... that was Tulsa’s libertarian side that I like

I like her backside, personally.

She also got jacked up over her position on Assad, and deservedly so -

You don’t have to defend murderous tyrants to be a non-interventionist. Assad is her Achille’s Heel and the reason she was never going to be a realistic candidate


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

I like her backside, personally.

She also got jacked up over her position on Assad, and deservedly so -

You don’t have to defend murderous tyrants to be a non-interventionist. Assad is her Achille’s Heel and the reason she was never going to be a realistic candidate


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She might be drafting for the progressive candidates a little at this point.

[AZGrizFan]

I like her backside, personally.

She also got jacked up over her position on Assad, and deservedly so -

You don’t have to defend murderous tyrants to be a non-interventionist. Assad is her Achille’s Heel and the reason she was never going to be a realistic candidate

Well she's still convinced she's the cat's meow, despite her evisceration the other night.

[JohnStOnge]

Back to the “smoke-filled room” then, eh? After yesterday’s court ruling against the Bernie supporters, that may be where we’re headed. Good luck with that, Mr. Champion of Liberty.

No ****. He's done a complete 180 from just 26 months ago.

No I haven't. I'm not talking about the final election. I'm talking about the manner in which political parties choose the candidates we vote for in the final election.

If you are a political party and you want to nominate someone from the job of President it would be better, I think, to have a process to try to nominate someone who would be best in that position. I do not think the current process accomplishes that.

[JohnStOnge]

These "debates" support my belief that the major political parties should not choose their candidates through primaries. We'd end up with better people in the job if the hard core party officials just chose the candidates to run.

Yes! Because the elites are sooooo much smarter than the rest of us.

The "elites" I presume you're talking about are not smarter than ALL of the rest of us. But they are a lot smarter than the average person who votes in primaries. Actually much smarter than the average person.

It's pretty much self evident at this point that people can make REALLY stupid decisions through this primary process.

[JohnStOnge]

BTW, if you've known me over the years you know that I favor testing people to make sure they have some clue before allowing them to vote. Who that would hurt and who that would help depends on how tough the test is. If you fix it so that it just excludes maybe the bottom 10 or 20 percent it would probably favor Republicans. If you fix it so that it only INCLUDES the TOP 10 or 20 percent it would probably favor Democrats.

At this point I'm thinking the society would be better off if only to top 15% or so in terms of intelligence and knowledge could vote. That way there would be no WAY we'd end up with something like Trump being President.

[SDHornet]

The straight up fucking MURDER of Harris by Tulsi last night was certainly pleasurable to watch.

Gils gal with the kill shot...

[SDHornet]

Live by woke purity standards, die by woke purity standards.

Especially people who were prosecutors, which are somewhere between oil company workers and Blackwater Security contractors in terms of problematic-ness..

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[CID1990]

Lock em all up!

https://reason.com/2019/08/01/debate-de ... heir-foes/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Lock em all up!

https://reason.com/2019/08/01/debate-de ... heir-foes/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The last line about threatening political opponents is spot on.

[CID1990]

Lock em all up!

https://reason.com/2019/08/01/debate-de ... heir-foes/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The last line about threatening political opponents is spot on.

Most of them are just bluster

But when a dyed in the wool hammer and sickle socialist like Bernie says it, it is usually a good idea to assume he means it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

The last line about threatening political opponents is spot on.

Most of them are just bluster

But when a dyed in the wool hammer and sickle socialist like Bernie says it, it is usually a good idea to assume he means it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh good lord....

[CID1990]

Most of them are just bluster

But when a dyed in the wool hammer and sickle socialist like Bernie says it, it is usually a good idea to assume he means it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh good lord....

He’s a playbook socialist in everything else, why wouldn’t he follow the most important chapter in the playbook?

Chapter 1: Dealing With Reactionaries, Counterrevolutionaries, and Dissenters


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[css75]

BTW, if you've known me over the years you know that I favor testing people to make sure they have some clue before allowing them to vote. Who that would hurt and who that would help depends on how tough the test is. If you fix it so that it just excludes maybe the bottom 10 or 20 percent it would probably favor Republicans. If you fix it so that it only INCLUDES the TOP 10 or 20 percent it would probably favor Democrats.

At this point I'm thinking the society would be better off if only to top 15% or so in terms of intelligence and knowledge could vote. That way there would be no WAY we'd end up with something like OBAMA being President.

FIFY.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk