Giant robot FDR needs a plaque.
Giant Robot FDR (GRFDR)'s hyperphasmic fusion pack was partially powered by hundreds of Chicksaw, Choctaw, and Cherokee souls illegally stolen from ancient Native American burial grounds along the Trail of Tears. GRFDR WAS A MONSTER
Wikileaks right again: Dem primaries were rigged.
Are you suggesting you’ve caught Clinton in a contradiction?
Because it’s pretty clear from the story what happened: she paid for oppo research but didn’t see those particular results until after the election.
She’s certainly not trying to distance herself from the dossier. In fact, she said that had she seen it earlier, she would have made it public immediately. So what’s your point, other than pointing out a missed opportunity?
As for the Democratic primary: I’m glad to see you have a keen interest in making sure the will of the electorate is impartially represented. And your principled stand must mean that you are looking forward to a SCOTUS decision that ends political gerrymandering. Right, Malathor?
You know it never occurred to me that anyone could find plausible that Hillary would be completely ignorant of this dossier that Hillary’s campaign paid for, that was shopped around to numerous media outlets, and was passed on to the FBI, but I suppose liberal credulity knows no bounds. I bet you think she was ignorant of the DNC rigging the primaries in her favor too.
Well, it’s certainly more plausible than Hillary having a dossier on Trump that she decided not to use.
What? It was used. It was all over Washington. Mother Jones published a piece on it before the election. Others did not publish because they were unable to verify the information in it. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-alleging-russian-operation-cultivate-donald-trump/
Funny how gerrymandering has been around for 200 years and now Dems are finally making a push to end it when Rs have a record majority in statehouses. “Principles”.
Do you think that perhaps the majority is in fact related to the gerrymandering?
I mean, we both acknowledge that it’s taking place to an absurd degree in some cases, right? With districts being drawn with the intent of disenfranchising certain view? It seems like we need to establish whether you accept that is happening.
So you are implying that Hillary had access to the dossier before it was published by Buzzfeed, but she didn’t publish it, but instead fed it to Mother Jones or other organizations. Which means she is a liar, because she said she hadn’t seen it.
Except she didn’t say that. That’s just what sources close to her reported to the media. Thus the sources are liars, or maybe just poor sources. So what’s your point? Besides don’t trust anonymous sources?
68% of state governors are Republican. All elected on statewide vote. There has always been gerrymandering, just more of it occurring on R’s side now because the Ds have been butchered on the state level.
I mean Republicans are also evil so they really shouldn’t be trusted with toys like that.
To be clear, while the retort of “gerrymandering has always occurred” may sound good, is pretty objectively clear that it’s become dramatically worse in many places. You can see this by simply looking at district maps from past years. The current district maps are dramatically more geographically disjoint. To some degree, this has been enabled by technology.
But you don’t seem to be disputing that it exists, so then the question becomes, “do you agree this is bad?”
To me, the idea of intentionally disenfranchising voters is inherently bad, even if it were being done for “my team”. Don’t you agree with this?
Good point. You are right that all the articles only refer to sources, not direct quotes. I would think that if she wanted to claim otherwise she would be denying it. Perhaps she doesn’t want to give a direct quote on the issue.
It is bad, certainly. I live in a comically gerrymandered blue state (Maryland, just look at the map), but principles don’t enter into it. The D’s are only pushing this because it potentially helps them, if the shoe were on the other foot they would be fighting it tooth and nail. Why should we expect any different from the Rs?
But one side is right, and one side is wrong.
It doesn’t matter which party is on which side.
Since gerrymandering is bad for our right to vote, we should fight against it, regardless of who is doing it.
The whataboutism is strong in this one.
“Sure it’s wrong, but the other guys would do it if they could, so that somehow makes it fine.”
Or, you know, you could fucking fix it so neither side could use it. But no, it benefits your team right now, we need to ignore it and not worry about it.
“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules”
No. Those days are over.
What the hell does this even mean?
Seriously, in the context of this conversation, you explain it. The only rational thing i can come up with is that you see democracy as the enemy of The Party. That’s the only way that fucking makes sense.
“Fuck democracy and fuck voting, as long as the Republicans win.”
Edit: inb4 not explaining anything and calling people names