I agree with this; it’s what I was driving at in my longer post.
I live in one.
Broadly speaking, it’s viewed as important here because having a significant portion of the population that avoids talking to the police or interacting with local government is problematic for a bunch of reasons.
Let’s try and stay focused.
Turning around and claiming to be for a ban on sanctuary cities that you previously voted against is bad politics. He got hit with a bunch of ads tying him to scarrrrry immigrants and immediately caved. Granting the R’s premise that immigrants are members of violent gangs and should be arrested and deported is trying to appeal to…who, exactly?
“I’m gonna be just like the other guy, except a little less so” isn’t a great way to turn out your base, nor is it a great way to win votes from the other side who’d rather have the full monty than the pale imitation.
Not to mention money. The Feds historically fuck over local law enforcement that helps them do their jobs. You detain someone for ICE and then they make you deal with him for weeks while not picking him up. You waste money and manpower and lose the trust of the local populace making it more dangerous and harder for your people to do their actual jobs. The upside of all that? Literally nothing. You’re just taking it in the ass while doing someone else’s job for them.
Are you sure it’s bad politics? I am pretty sure the guy in the White House right now does this on a daily basis, and it sure worked out well for him.
If Gillespie wins VA, Republicans will grow confident that racism is a winning hand.
I haven’t been at protest since my early 20s but I’m planning on protesting Trump tomorrow with my sister.
My sign is going to read Putin Puppet, Go Home, Moscow is that way
Well well well, someone just sold out their fellow co-conspirators to help their book
I must confess to wondering why she would come out with this now. Establishment democrats are going to hate her now and this is probably too little/too late to earn the forgiveness of progressives.
Meh. #1 - it wasn’t secret. Everyone and their brother were talking about, and Sanders complained about it as well so it wasn’t like he was in the dark. #2 - it wasn’t illegal. She played the game in a way that provided her the most advantages and didn’t cheat. That it was a completely messed up set of rules is an entirely different story, but it wasn’t exactly scandalous like the click-bait-please-buy-my-book title seems to indicate.
Everyone strongly believed that they did it, but i don’t believe it was ever confirmed. In fact most of the time it was denied.
I look forward to the video documentation!
Basically the same thing in politics, though having confirmation is good I guess.
Hope you don’t get pepper sprayed. :/
(Kidding, but kudos for taking a stand. That’s awesome.)
I’m not convinced Donna Brazille isn’t mixing up the 2015 candidate JFA with the 2016 June party-nominee JFA.
You can read the 2015 agreement on wikileaks and it doesn’t contain the language she claims it does, like that the campaign can refuse a communications director. It’s possible that there was a different version that wasn’t in wikileaks? But Donna should produce that document if so!
link to 2015 JFA: https://t.co/rhvHgdzjpV
This is such a dumb mistake I can hardly believe it’s true but…
Isn’t Brazille the one that gave Clinton the questions for that debate and had to resign because of it?
Yep, she’s a piece of work.
That said Warren stated the primaries were rigged today herself, and unlike Brazille, Warren has credibility in my eyes.
I mean… I guess?
For once I agree with Malathor. Clinton put her thumb on the scale in both primaries. To push the GOP toward Trump, and to buy her own primary via the super delegates. The narrative during the entire democratic primary was “how cute Bernie thinks he can win” and graphs showing delegate counts of 65 to 480 (because super delegates).
Yes the ultimate blame is on the legion of villains and idiots that voted for Trump. But Clinton certainly did her best to motivate them to come out against her.
It’s in the past now, but the Democrats need to learn from the past. Benevolent populism is a winning strategy. And hell, maybe you campaign on doing Good Things for people, and when you get into office you can actually pursue those things and get like 1 of them accomplished!
I think folks are glossing over a major point of this whole thing with Clinton and the DNC, which is that Obama fucked up the DNC bad.
Or rather, he didn’t actually maintain the party at all. It was all about him as an individual, and he didn’t maintain the party as an organization, which then led to the GOP routing them pretty well across the board. It also led to Clinton being ABLE to exert her influence over the DNC, because the DNC had been mismanaged for years and had no money.
Ultimately, I think that’s the biggest thing that this shows.
In terms of Clinton exerting pressure on the DNC to get herself nominated? Yeah, not really an act of evil. Pretty much what you’d expect. In terms of the DNC supporting Clinton more than a guy who literally isn’t even in their party? Yeah, again, not really surprising.
Ultimately, no vote tampering took place. Clinton won by getting literally millions and millions of more votes.
Some amount of reform of the DNC should take place, but there was no nefarious malfeasance. The idea that this is even in the same universe of magnitude as the shit that is going on with Trump and the Russians is, on its face, patently absurd.
Of course the DNC is biased toward Democrats, as opposed to a guy who was never a member of the party.