33 state Democratic parties launder $26M from millionaires for Hillary

[anon68952647]

@fluffitfluffit

When did this place turn into bat-shit-crazy conspiracy town?

when someone followed the money.

[anon68952647]

@GideonTJones

Bernie’s the one who needs the superdelegates to ignore the popular vote

About half of em are already doing that. You want them to switch, noted.

[GideonTJones]

[quote=“AcerPlatanoides, post:42, topic:76017”]
About half of em are already doing that. You want them to switch, noted.
[/quote]I have no idea what you’re trying to say.

[anon68952647]

@Boundegar

+/- 20% is not even close enough for government work

all Hillary’s strongest states have voted. Lets see what the people say, overall.

[anon73430903]

@Mr_Smooth

If you won’t support the Democratic nominee in November, I take it you enjoyed the glorious 8-year Nader administration and the peace and prosperity it brought to America and all of Earth.

You aren’t persuading me that Hillary is a good choice, you’re helping me to slide back towards

Impossibilism

[anon26940528]

@Boundegar

Kind of like people who fail to vote?

I’m voting, just not for Hillary. My state has write-in candidates and there are other races. We have like, three whole branches of government, dude.

[Jonathan_West]

Look at the superdelegates in AK, WA, NH. . .pretty much every state Sanders won.

[fluffitfluffit]

This is a way to get around that by obscuration and diffusion of funds through a third party.

No, it isn’t. It’s a perfectly legal way of raising money for downticket races and state- and local-level party organizations.

Calling it “money laundering” is just hyperbolic nonsense.

[anon68952647]

@GideonTJones

Bernie’s the one who needs the superdelegates to ignore the popular vote, and his campaign is now arguing that they should do just that.

It is being argued that the Superdelegates might represent the popular vote, at least somewhat proportionally, and after it comes in. The point the is that Superdelegates are currently not behaving with democratic principles, but with party power structure principles. It’s a Democratic status quo, but not a democratic one.

She has had a several hundred Superdelegate “lead” since before anyone even voted.

Just as Adams and Jefferson imagined it, surely.

[anon26940528]

@anon73430903

You aren’t persuading me that Hillary is a good choice, you’re helping me to slide back towards

It takes me back towards the whole argument with @skeptic on an earlier thread in a different context. Man, never has is been so obvious to me that condescension and derision is not the way to go towards convincing people.

@fluffitfluffit

It’s a perfectly legal way

It’s legal, therefore okay. Fine. We know where you stand. Just understand we don’t occupy the same moral universe.

[Jonathan_West]

@Boundegar

@Jonathan_West No, it’s not quasi-legal, it’s completely legal, and it’s not money-laundering. And, as @GideonTJones noted above, Sanders is using the same method to raise funds, and for that matter all the Republicans are, too. If you don’t like it, you could complain on the internet, or you could run for office.

Yes, except we have this annoying legal principle called ‘intent of the law’

I haven’t seen a reference that shows where Sanders is doing this.

[Boundegar]

Good point.

[anon41912231]

@Jonathan_West

I haven’t seen a reference that shows where Sanders is doing this.

http://realtime.influenceexplorer.com/committee/2016/bernie-victory-fund/C00592568/

[Jonathan_West]

What that tells me is Bernie, like I thought, is not part of this racket.

[art_carnage]

None of this is illegal. But it makes a mockery of Ms. Clinton’s pledge to further the cause of campaign finance reform.

To repeat: NONE OF THIS IS ILLEGAL.

Doctorow doesn’t seem to be able to grasp the idea that you can be against something, while at the same time using it to your advantage, in order to gain the authority to actually do something about it.

[Mr_Smooth]

To all you Hillary-hating dead enders - President Trump, Attorney General Arpaio, and Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore thank you for your support.

[anon61221983]

I’m just posting this cause…

[anon73430903]

The scare tactics aren’t working, it’s just pissing people off and driving them away.

Besides that, Bernie is still fighting for the nomination!

[anon55609254]

Like. I am a Bernie supporter and will vote for him in the primary. However, if Hillary is the Democratic nominee, then I’m voting for her to help prevent a President Trump or President Cruz, especially if the polls are close. It’s just practicality.

I think Bernie (and Trump, for that matter) have shown that there are gobs of people out there who want change. It seems to me that Democratic candidates are far more likely to recognize and maybe actually implement those changes, regardless of who they are.

[fluffitfluffit]

It’s legal, therefore okay

It’s legal and it’s OK.

What is wrong with a party supporting state and local races? It’s just like a national charity collecting money and distributing it to local branches. Or a church. Money comes in thanks to the efforts of the high-profile people at the top of the org, and then it goes out to the people in the field.

You wrote this:

Just understand we don’t occupy the same moral universe.

And you wrote this:

condescension and derision is not the way to go towards convincing people.

Physician, heal thyself.