• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 08:29
CEST 14:29
KST 21:29
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Team TLMC #5 - Finalists & Open Tournaments0[ASL20] Ro16 Preview Pt2: Turbulence10Classic Games #3: Rogue vs Serral at BlizzCon9[ASL20] Ro16 Preview Pt1: Ascent10Maestros of the Game: Week 1/Play-in Preview12
Community News
BSL 2025 Warsaw LAN + Legends Showmatch0Weekly Cups (Sept 8-14): herO & MaxPax split cups4WardiTV TL Team Map Contest #5 Tournaments1SC4ALL $6,000 Open LAN in Philadelphia8Weekly Cups (Sept 1-7): MaxPax rebounds & Clem saga continues29
StarCraft 2
General
#1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time Weekly Cups (Sept 8-14): herO & MaxPax split cups Team Liquid Map Contest #21 - Presented by Monster Energy SpeCial on The Tasteless Podcast Team TLMC #5 - Finalists & Open Tournaments
Tourneys
RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series Maestros of The Game—$20k event w/ live finals in Paris Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament SC4ALL $6,000 Open LAN in Philadelphia WardiTV TL Team Map Contest #5 Tournaments
Strategy
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 491 Night Drive Mutation # 490 Masters of Midnight Mutation # 489 Bannable Offense Mutation # 488 What Goes Around
Brood War
General
ASL20 General Discussion ASL TICKET LIVE help! :D Soulkey on ASL S20 BW General Discussion NaDa's Body
Tourneys
[ASL20] Ro16 Group D [ASL20] Ro16 Group C [Megathread] Daily Proleagues BSL 2025 Warsaw LAN + Legends Showmatch
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Muta micro map competition Fighting Spirit mining rates [G] Mineral Boosting
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile Borderlands 3 General RTS Discussion Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion LiquidDota to reintegrate into TL.net
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread UK Politics Mega-thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread
Fan Clubs
The Happy Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion MLB/Baseball 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Linksys AE2500 USB WIFI keeps disconnecting Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread High temperatures on bridge(s)
TL Community
BarCraft in Tokyo Japan for ASL Season5 Final The Automated Ban List
Blogs
I <=> 9
KrillinFromwales
The Personality of a Spender…
TrAiDoS
A very expensive lesson on ma…
Garnet
hello world
radishsoup
Lemme tell you a thing o…
JoinTheRain
RTS Design in Hypercoven
a11
Evil Gacha Games and the…
ffswowsucks
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 2032 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3688

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 3686 3687 3688 3689 3690 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15714 Posts
April 27 2016 02:11 GMT
#73741
On April 27 2016 11:09 kwizach wrote:
Hillary pulls ahead in Connecticut! The NY Times' live model currently has her winning by three points.


Wait, what? That would be enormous. 2/5 was expected, so going 1/4 would be brutal.
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
April 27 2016 02:11 GMT
#73742
On April 27 2016 11:04 Introvert wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 27 2016 11:02 xDaunt wrote:
On April 27 2016 11:00 Introvert wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:52 xDaunt wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:45 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:

Bernie supporters are more likely to flake out than the republicans.


How do you figure? Clinton is more of a liberal Dem than Trump is a Republican.

Bernie is rallying young voters who are notoriously flakey. I also expect Trump to make some big deals to get the Republican Party to rally around him.


I just don't know what that means. Getting the party to rally around him is one thing, but getting people's votes is another.

I wonder if Trump is really scary enough that Dems will show up just to vote against.

Edit: I think you are right about the party, maybe. Trump can't self fund the general and so far donors are reluctant.

I don't think that voting against someone is enough of a motivation to drive turnout. People need something to vote for.
ragz_gt
Profile Blog Joined April 2012
9172 Posts
April 27 2016 02:14 GMT
#73743
Trump really isn't that scary. He might be in fact more scary to Reps than Dems. Cruz OTOH scares the bejeesus out of me.
I'm not an otaku, I'm a specialist.
Introvert
Profile Joined April 2011
United States4825 Posts
April 27 2016 02:16 GMT
#73744
On April 27 2016 11:11 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 27 2016 11:04 Introvert wrote:
On April 27 2016 11:02 xDaunt wrote:
On April 27 2016 11:00 Introvert wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:52 xDaunt wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:45 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
https://twitter.com/GovGaryJohnson/status/725125736319844353

Bernie supporters are more likely to flake out than the republicans.


How do you figure? Clinton is more of a liberal Dem than Trump is a Republican.

Bernie is rallying young voters who are notoriously flakey. I also expect Trump to make some big deals to get the Republican Party to rally around him.


I just don't know what that means. Getting the party to rally around him is one thing, but getting people's votes is another.

I wonder if Trump is really scary enough that Dems will show up just to vote against.

Edit: I think you are right about the party, maybe. Trump can't self fund the general and so far donors are reluctant.

I don't think that voting against someone is enough of a motivation to drive turnout. People need something to vote for.


That's true most of the time. And by that token Trump doesn't do anything for a lot of GOP voters. I am very curious to see how this turns out. There is research for years that's going to come out of this election.
"It is therefore only at the birth of a society that one can be completely logical in the laws. When you see a people enjoying this advantage, do not hasten to conclude that it is wise; think rather that it is young." -Alexis de Tocqueville
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
April 27 2016 02:16 GMT
#73745
On April 27 2016 11:14 ragz_gt wrote:
Trump really isn't that scary. He might be in fact more scary to Reps than Dems. Cruz OTOH scares the bejeesus out of me.

Frankly, if Dems really want to troll the fuck out of the Republican Party, they should vote for Trump this fall and see that he wins the presidency. A Trump victory will destroy conservatism as we know it.
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15714 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-27 02:18:22
April 27 2016 02:18 GMT
#73746
Trump is the republican party's best shot at long term survival. Social conservatism and trickle down are toast. It has no future and the signs are everywhere. Trump gives the party a way to tilt into a somewhat socially liberal, otherwise conservative country. It's interesting actually.
Introvert
Profile Joined April 2011
United States4825 Posts
April 27 2016 02:20 GMT
#73747
I'm having a hard time thinking of a single thing Trump is conservative on. Also, losing in landslides is not good for parties. IDK, all these ideas seem like trying to make reality fit an idea, instead of just seeing it for what it is.
"It is therefore only at the birth of a society that one can be completely logical in the laws. When you see a people enjoying this advantage, do not hasten to conclude that it is wise; think rather that it is young." -Alexis de Tocqueville
kwizach
Profile Joined June 2011
3658 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-27 02:33:20
April 27 2016 02:27 GMT
#73748
On April 27 2016 11:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 27 2016 11:06 kwizach wrote:
On April 27 2016 11:02 GreenHorizons wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:59 kwizach wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:55 GreenHorizons wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:48 kwizach wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:45 GreenHorizons wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:38 kwizach wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:36 GreenHorizons wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:25 kwizach wrote:
[quote]
So which not-indicted for corruption elected officials do you feel have changed their views because of the impacts of Citizens United? And which haven't (other than who you'll obviously mention, Sanders/Warren)?


I want to know what word besides "corrupting" you would like to use to describe the influence of Citizen United so you can answer who (other than Hillary) you think is both using it, and not being affected by it's _____ influence.

That's interesting, you can't answer your own question?


Sure I can. I think all of the politicians using citizens united (particularly, directly coordinating with a superPAC, and using dark money) and those opposing candidates who are, are affected, some more than others and clearly in different ways. I agree with Bernie, Hillary, and the DNC that it is "corrupting" even if you and I disagree on the threshold on the use of the word. Bernie and I disagree with Hillary and the DNC that it should be exploited in the process of gaining the power to stop it.

Your turn.

Apparently you can't, because you asked me to name some and you didn't. Which elected officials changed their views because of Citizens United?

Like I said in the edit in my previous post: come on, I know you'd like to speak about anything else than the results currently coming in, but I made my position clear in my exchange with Nebuchad. I am disgusted by the effects of Citizens United on campaign finance. I agree that corruption can and does happen, and I agree that donations can have an impact on how some officials vote. I think "innocent until proven guilty" is an important principle, however, and the most important issue for me with Citizens United is the rise of SuperPACs and the ability of 501(c)(4)s to play a role in elections thanks to undisclosed donations. The problem is therefore far from limited to individual cases of corruption.


But you're saying someone can use use Citizens United, those superPAC's, and undisclosed donations and not think it's a problem. I'm asking who, other than Hillary, you think is doing that.

I "can't" name someone specific, because I don't think it's happening.

I asked you to name officials whose views have changed due to the effects of Citizens United, which is what you have argued has happened.

I am not saying Citizens United is not a problem, or that the people who work in the current legal framework and make use of what can be done in the current system don't think Citizens United is a problem. On the Democrats' side, the position is overwhelmingly that the effects of Citizens United on campaign finance are terrible.


That wasn't my question though.

If it's not it's "corrupting" influence, what makes it so terrible?

You're asking whose views haven't changed, I'm asking you whose views have. Anyway, you're going back in circles now, clearly looking for something to distract you from the results coming in. I'll repeat my position: I am disgusted by the effects of Citizens United on campaign finance. I agree that corruption can and does happen, and I agree that donations can have an impact on how some officials vote. I think "innocent until proven guilty" is an important principle, however, and the most important issue for me with Citizens United is the rise of SuperPACs and the ability of 501(c)(4)s to play a role in elections thanks to undisclosed donations. The problem is therefore far from limited to individual cases of corruption.


Thought so.

You can't name a single politician using Citizens United, superPAC's and undisclosed donations and not being influenced by it's ______ influence other than Hillary. Nebuchad was right. Your semantic games were just that, games.

Please, you can't answer your own question with regards to whose views actually been influenced. Sorry for exposing your loaded question for the phony line of attack that it is (you don't even seem to understand the difference between what SuperPACs and 501(c)(4)s can do, given your framing of the question about politicians using undisclosed donations, making it impossible to answer by anyone familiar with the issue). Like I've said, I am disgusted by the effects of Citizens United on campaign finance. I agree that corruption can and does happen, and I agree that donations can have an impact on how some officials vote. I think "innocent until proven guilty" is an important principle, however, and the most important issue for me with Citizens United is the rise of SuperPACs and the ability of 501(c)(4)s to play a role in elections thanks to undisclosed donations. The problem is therefore far from limited to individual cases of corruption. If it's names you want, look at the entire current roster of Senate Democrats, for example. I have yet to see evidence that they have changed their views due to campaign contributions or the actions of SuperPACs or 501(c)(4)s. I haven't looked into it much, though, so if you have evidence of the contrary, do bring it up.

Clinton widening the gap in CT!

On April 27 2016 11:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 27 2016 11:09 kwizach wrote:
Hillary pulls ahead in Connecticut! The NY Times' live model currently has her winning by three points.


Wait, what? That would be enormous. 2/5 was expected, so going 1/4 would be brutal.

I mean, it doesn't even make a difference given the fact that Sanders wouldn't have been able to close the gap in pledged delegates with Clinton even if she had been unviable in CT. But to see Sanders not even able to win it should send a clear signal to the people who thought he still had a shot.
"Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions." -- Stephen Colbert
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15714 Posts
April 27 2016 02:29 GMT
#73749
I can't believe Hilldawg might win CT. I'm not gonna hope, because Bernie the Disney Princess dream needs to be kept alive, just kinda because. But holy crap.
BallinWitStalin
Profile Joined July 2008
1177 Posts
April 27 2016 02:33 GMT
#73750
On April 27 2016 11:11 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 27 2016 11:04 Introvert wrote:
On April 27 2016 11:02 xDaunt wrote:
On April 27 2016 11:00 Introvert wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:52 xDaunt wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:45 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
https://twitter.com/GovGaryJohnson/status/725125736319844353

Bernie supporters are more likely to flake out than the republicans.


How do you figure? Clinton is more of a liberal Dem than Trump is a Republican.

Bernie is rallying young voters who are notoriously flakey. I also expect Trump to make some big deals to get the Republican Party to rally around him.


I just don't know what that means. Getting the party to rally around him is one thing, but getting people's votes is another.

I wonder if Trump is really scary enough that Dems will show up just to vote against.

Edit: I think you are right about the party, maybe. Trump can't self fund the general and so far donors are reluctant.

I don't think that voting against someone is enough of a motivation to drive turnout. People need something to vote for.


While I am inclined to agree with you in general on this principle, I don't think America has ever seen anyone like Trump run before. I genuinely think that's it's difficult to make predictions about voter turnout, based on that. It's too much of an unknown, and there's no previous experiences to really base expectations on that are (roughly) analogous.
I await the reminiscent nerd chills I will get when I hear a Korean broadcaster yell "WEEAAAAVVVVVUUUHHH" while watching Dota
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
April 27 2016 02:35 GMT
#73751
On April 27 2016 11:33 BallinWitStalin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 27 2016 11:11 xDaunt wrote:
On April 27 2016 11:04 Introvert wrote:
On April 27 2016 11:02 xDaunt wrote:
On April 27 2016 11:00 Introvert wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:52 xDaunt wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:45 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
https://twitter.com/GovGaryJohnson/status/725125736319844353

Bernie supporters are more likely to flake out than the republicans.


How do you figure? Clinton is more of a liberal Dem than Trump is a Republican.

Bernie is rallying young voters who are notoriously flakey. I also expect Trump to make some big deals to get the Republican Party to rally around him.


I just don't know what that means. Getting the party to rally around him is one thing, but getting people's votes is another.

I wonder if Trump is really scary enough that Dems will show up just to vote against.

Edit: I think you are right about the party, maybe. Trump can't self fund the general and so far donors are reluctant.

I don't think that voting against someone is enough of a motivation to drive turnout. People need something to vote for.


While I am inclined to agree with you in general on this principle, I don't think America has ever seen anyone like Trump run before. I genuinely think that's it's difficult to make predictions about voter turnout, based on that. It's too much of an unknown, and there's no previous experiences to really base expectations on that are (roughly) analogous.

People said a lot of the same shit about Reagan.
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23296 Posts
April 27 2016 02:35 GMT
#73752
On April 27 2016 11:27 kwizach wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 27 2016 11:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
On April 27 2016 11:06 kwizach wrote:
On April 27 2016 11:02 GreenHorizons wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:59 kwizach wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:55 GreenHorizons wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:48 kwizach wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:45 GreenHorizons wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:38 kwizach wrote:
On April 27 2016 10:36 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]

I want to know what word besides "corrupting" you would like to use to describe the influence of Citizen United so you can answer who (other than Hillary) you think is both using it, and not being affected by it's _____ influence.

That's interesting, you can't answer your own question?


Sure I can. I think all of the politicians using citizens united (particularly, directly coordinating with a superPAC, and using dark money) and those opposing candidates who are, are affected, some more than others and clearly in different ways. I agree with Bernie, Hillary, and the DNC that it is "corrupting" even if you and I disagree on the threshold on the use of the word. Bernie and I disagree with Hillary and the DNC that it should be exploited in the process of gaining the power to stop it.

Your turn.

Apparently you can't, because you asked me to name some and you didn't. Which elected officials changed their views because of Citizens United?

Like I said in the edit in my previous post: come on, I know you'd like to speak about anything else than the results currently coming in, but I made my position clear in my exchange with Nebuchad. I am disgusted by the effects of Citizens United on campaign finance. I agree that corruption can and does happen, and I agree that donations can have an impact on how some officials vote. I think "innocent until proven guilty" is an important principle, however, and the most important issue for me with Citizens United is the rise of SuperPACs and the ability of 501(c)(4)s to play a role in elections thanks to undisclosed donations. The problem is therefore far from limited to individual cases of corruption.


But you're saying someone can use use Citizens United, those superPAC's, and undisclosed donations and not think it's a problem. I'm asking who, other than Hillary, you think is doing that.

I "can't" name someone specific, because I don't think it's happening.

I asked you to name officials whose views have changed due to the effects of Citizens United, which is what you have argued has happened.

I am not saying Citizens United is not a problem, or that the people who work in the current legal framework and make use of what can be done in the current system don't think Citizens United is a problem. On the Democrats' side, the position is overwhelmingly that the effects of Citizens United on campaign finance are terrible.


That wasn't my question though.

If it's not it's "corrupting" influence, what makes it so terrible?

You're asking whose views haven't changed, I'm asking you whose views have. Anyway, you're going back in circles now, clearly looking for something to distract you from the results coming in. I'll repeat my position: I am disgusted by the effects of Citizens United on campaign finance. I agree that corruption can and does happen, and I agree that donations can have an impact on how some officials vote. I think "innocent until proven guilty" is an important principle, however, and the most important issue for me with Citizens United is the rise of SuperPACs and the ability of 501(c)(4)s to play a role in elections thanks to undisclosed donations. The problem is therefore far from limited to individual cases of corruption.


Thought so.

You can't name a single politician using Citizens United, superPAC's and undisclosed donations and not being influenced by it's ______ influence other than Hillary. Nebuchad was right. Your semantic games were just that, games.

Please, you can't answer your own question with regards to whose views actually been influenced. Sorry for exposing your loaded question for the phony line of attack that it is (you don't even seem to understand the difference between what SuperPACs and 501(c)(4)s can do, given your framing of the question about politicians using undisclosed donations, making it impossible to answer by anyone familiar with the issue). Like I've said, I am disgusted by the effects of Citizens United on campaign finance. I agree that corruption can and does happen, and I agree that donations can have an impact on how some officials vote. I think "innocent until proven guilty" is an important principle, however, and the most important issue for me with Citizens United is the rise of SuperPACs and the ability of 501(c)(4)s to play a role in elections thanks to undisclosed donations. The problem is therefore far from limited to individual cases of corruption. If it's names you want, look at the entire current roster of Senate Democrats, for example. I have yet to see evidence that they have changed their views due to campaign contributions or the actions of SuperPACs or 501(c)(4)s. If you have evidence of the contrary, do bring it up.

Clinton widening the gap in CT!


Play on playa, play on.

I'll be plugging along, holding out for California, or the FBI, or Trump, to derail Hillary but if not, best of luck with that. Trump v Clinton may be one of the worst matchups for the country imo but I'll be damned if it's not going to sell tickets.

Trump comes out hard at the end. "All Hillary's got is the woman card. If she was a man I don't think she would get 5% of the vote. The beautiful thing is women don't like her".
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
kwizach
Profile Joined June 2011
3658 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-27 02:37:06
April 27 2016 02:36 GMT
#73753
On April 27 2016 11:29 Mohdoo wrote:
I can't believe Hilldawg might win CT. I'm not gonna hope, because Bernie the Disney Princess dream needs to be kept alive, just kinda because. But holy crap.

The AP, ABC and NBC News have called CT for Hillary! Great night overall for her. It's more than time to rally around her against Trump, who's pivoting towards general election mode.

edit: and now CNN called it for Hillary as well!
"Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions." -- Stephen Colbert
radscorpion9
Profile Blog Joined March 2011
Canada2252 Posts
April 27 2016 02:46 GMT
#73754
Is hilldawg really her nickname? I've never heard that before that's hilarious !

HILLDAWG FOR PRESIDENT
Kipsate
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
Netherlands45349 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-27 02:57:53
April 27 2016 02:57 GMT
#73755
Trump says scary shit but i'm not even sure he believes in half the shit he says
Cruz says scary shit and I'm pretty sure he believes in that shit as well.
WriterXiao8~~
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15714 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-27 03:07:46
April 27 2016 03:06 GMT
#73756
On April 27 2016 11:46 radscorpion9 wrote:
Is hilldawg really her nickname? I've never heard that before that's hilarious !

HILLDAWG FOR PRESIDENT


No, it's mainly me being a fucking idiot. I love referring to Clinton in the most almost-hip ways possible.

GH, what do you think Bernie's road to the nomination looks like now?
ZeaL.
Profile Blog Joined April 2009
United States5955 Posts
April 27 2016 03:18 GMT
#73757
On April 27 2016 12:06 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 27 2016 11:46 radscorpion9 wrote:
Is hilldawg really her nickname? I've never heard that before that's hilarious !

HILLDAWG FOR PRESIDENT


No, it's mainly me being a fucking idiot. I love referring to Clinton in the most almost-hip ways possible.

GH, what do you think Bernie's road to the nomination looks like now?


Road to victory is to keep on in case of emails just like how Hillary kept going in '08 in case of assassination attempt.
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23296 Posts
April 27 2016 03:23 GMT
#73758
On April 27 2016 12:06 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 27 2016 11:46 radscorpion9 wrote:
Is hilldawg really her nickname? I've never heard that before that's hilarious !

HILLDAWG FOR PRESIDENT


No, it's mainly me being a fucking idiot. I love referring to Clinton in the most almost-hip ways possible.

GH, what do you think Bernie's road to the nomination looks like now?


Well he's going to win more contests and delegates, those delegates are going to the convention, and they are going to help shape the platform regardless of how the race ends up. As for a path forward:

I'll/he'll be plugging along, holding out for California, or the FBI, or Trump, to derail Hillary. Maybe his supporters try to talk him into an independent run, but as the deadlines go, he may have to make moves before the convention (not sure which states deadlines come before the convention that he would need in a general) so that may not be entirely viable.

I'd support forcing the electoral college to decide/punt on it to expose why this game was rigged from the beginning, long before this election started.

But I'm a "radical" not really a Democrat if this is what the party wants representing them. Bernie, contrary to common wisdom, is not that "radical".
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
kwizach
Profile Joined June 2011
3658 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-27 03:47:57
April 27 2016 03:46 GMT
#73759
On April 27 2016 12:06 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 27 2016 11:46 radscorpion9 wrote:
Is hilldawg really her nickname? I've never heard that before that's hilarious !

HILLDAWG FOR PRESIDENT


No, it's mainly me being a fucking idiot. I love referring to Clinton in the most almost-hip ways possible.

GH, what do you think Bernie's road to the nomination looks like now?

The Sanders campaign has essentially just conceded the race to the nomination. See here. They're basically saying they will focus solely on the issues, and on getting delegates to influence the Democratic platform at the convention -- no mention of trying to actually get the nomination itself.

I wish they had come to that conclusion sooner, because it has been a foregone conclusion for quite some time now and I'm sure his unjustified personal attacks of the last few weeks against Hillary will be (and they already are) used by Republicans in the general election. Still, it's a more than welcome development, and I look forward to seeing unity on the Democratic side. We'll have to wait until tomorrow to see how/whether he mentions Hillary in his next speeches, but I'm optimistic.
"Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions." -- Stephen Colbert
ticklishmusic
Profile Blog Joined August 2011
United States15977 Posts
April 27 2016 03:50 GMT
#73760
4/1 is just a narrative thing

Anyways looks like I won a bet? Busy for work but I'll come up with some questions in the nest couple days

I look forward to a more constructive Bernie spreading the message and pushing downballot rather than throwing whatever might stick to try and win the nomination.
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
Prev 1 3686 3687 3688 3689 3690 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Map Test Tournament
11:00
$450 3v3 Open Cup
WardiTV306
IndyStarCraft 164
LiquipediaDiscussion
RSL Revival
10:00
Season 2: Playoffs Day 5
Cure vs TriGGeRLIVE!
Tasteless1007
Crank 950
Rex124
CranKy Ducklings122
3DClanTV 77
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Tasteless 1007
Crank 950
Lowko301
IndyStarCraft 164
Rex 124
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 43026
Calm 8138
Horang2 4593
Bisu 1409
Hyuk 899
Stork 646
Snow 494
actioN 424
EffOrt 305
Pusan 243
[ Show more ]
ZerO 234
Soma 228
Mini 208
Last 198
Light 160
Soulkey 147
hero 119
Hyun 102
ggaemo 75
Rush 68
Liquid`Ret 67
Mind 58
ToSsGirL 43
JYJ35
HiyA 34
Sea.KH 32
Sharp 28
Free 25
sorry 23
sas.Sziky 19
scan(afreeca) 19
Sexy 18
SilentControl 11
Icarus 11
Terrorterran 7
Dota 2
singsing3171
qojqva1429
Dendi668
XcaliburYe192
Gorgc0
Counter-Strike
olofmeister1912
x6flipin610
zeus142
hiko108
markeloff58
edward33
Other Games
B2W.Neo902
DeMusliM401
Hui .181
Fuzer 148
Pyrionflax138
XaKoH 134
NeuroSwarm40
ArmadaUGS30
QueenE20
Trikslyr8
Organizations
StarCraft: Brood War
Kim Chul Min (afreeca) 1144
CasterMuse 20
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 13 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Nemesis2763
• Jankos1484
Other Games
• WagamamaTV198
Upcoming Events
The PondCast
31m
RSL Revival
21h 31m
Zoun vs Classic
Korean StarCraft League
1d 14h
BSL Open LAN 2025 - War…
1d 19h
RSL Revival
1d 21h
BSL Open LAN 2025 - War…
2 days
RSL Revival
2 days
Online Event
3 days
Wardi Open
3 days
Monday Night Weeklies
4 days
[ Show More ]
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
LiuLi Cup
5 days
The PondCast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-09-10
Chzzk MurlocKing SC1 vs SC2 Cup #2
HCC Europe

Ongoing

BSL 20 Team Wars
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 3
BSL 21 Points
ASL Season 20
CSL 2025 AUTUMN (S18)
LASL Season 20
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1

Upcoming

2025 Chongqing Offline CUP
BSL World Championship of Poland 2025
IPSL Winter 2025-26
BSL Season 21
SC4ALL: Brood War
BSL 21 Team A
Stellar Fest
SC4ALL: StarCraft II
EC S1
ESL Impact League Season 8
SL Budapest Major 2025
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.