Hillary Clinton
Related: About this forumThey are already starting with the voter fraud in GDP
I have seen two thread on it already.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)For the underwhelming revolution.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)There's an interestingly paranoid streak out there too. Some posts would have you questioning the writers' sanity if you didn't know it was just some of Bernie's ardent followers expressing their...intense displeasure in their usual way.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I view their mindset as a cult.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)curiously because their behavior is interesting and intriguing, and then I'll find myself wading in and engaging as if it could possibly make any difference. Who's nuts?
tymorial
(3,433 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)He's got the leftist side of the Alex Jones crowd locked down.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Jones' conspiracies related to evil corporate plots might rope some people in, but the behavior I've noticed is usually just related to temporary emotional upset over some political reverse or other.
Bernie puts in an uninspiring performance during a debate, so the network and DNC must have rigged the questions to sabotage him. Bernie loses a state, and someone leaps to election tampering as the explanation of choice. That sort of thing. Though extremely common, it tends to die off as people calm down - instead of being developed into elaborate and sinister plots. Very different from Jones' stuff.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)Skinner weeds the truly whackadoodle sort out pretty quickly, with a few glaring exceptions in sure we can all name.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)There are a lot of true whackadoodles, but, now that you point it out, not here.
Still, between true whackadoodles and bizarre but temporary outrage because Bill Clinton visited some polling places to sabotage Bernie's chances is room for the most typical conspiracist type -- those who know to keep it mostly hidden -- at least before the second drink.
MSMITH33156
(879 posts)the polls show them losing, decisively in most states. He loses, decisively in most states. And then it must be fraud, just because they've deluded themselves into thinking they're a majority instead of a vocal minority.
wysi
(1,512 posts)... can be very deceptive.
jsmirman
(4,507 posts)nm
stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)sufrommich
(22,871 posts)threads like nobody's business.
msongs
(67,199 posts)charlyvi
(6,537 posts)My blood pressure was getting too high.
George II
(67,782 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)UtahLib
(3,179 posts)Stuckinthebush
(10,816 posts)Stick here with the adults
MADem
(135,425 posts)did nothing wrong.
People sometimes forget that this is no different than Jane Sanders wandering around, smiling and shaking hands, accompanied by the mayor.
It's just not illegal. If they need to get riled up in that fashion, well, there you go.
But here's the bottom line--MA politicians (especially savvy ones, like those mayors are) know exactly what a candidate can do--and what they can't do. They aren't new to this. That's why they were there with Clinton, to give him entree and to make sure he didn't overstep.
People can get mad at Clinton for taking the rules to the limit. But they could have done the exact same thing--it would have required, not a lot of money, but a lot of EFFORT. They chose to not try to boost their voter turnout in that fashion--that was their choice.
jsmirman
(4,507 posts)which we are all complicit in.
It's allowed internet alternatives with absolutely no standards to grow like weeds.
The sad thing is that these internet "journalists" don't know how to do journalism.
I spent a couple years in traditional media, and it makes all the difference in the world. You learn how fact checking works and why it is important. You learn to take pride in accuracy and in responsibly reporting a story.
These internet zines could be good if they had any desire and dedicated any resources to restricting their output to stories they can stand behind and stories they can justify.
(not that this is the genesis of tonight's hogwash, but it has created an overall atmosphere where facts are optional and no one "knows" the truth)
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)for whom facts always have been "optional" and the truth has always been whatever they want it to be. A big difference between past and now was largely that local society acted as something of a control on behavior, but now the internet allows various types to find each other in large numbers and reinforce each others' behavior.
Someone from the Boston Globe, I think one of the editors at the time of the church scandal investigation, was saying just yesterday something to the effect that with information age resources journalism can be better than ever, but that people just won't pay for it. Of all the problems, the biggest is that we who need it so badly and once mailed out checks every month for newspapers won't ante up a monthly auto payment.
liberal N proud
(60,302 posts)24/7 media coverage and the monopolies that have take place allow the media to control the propaganda.
I have said for a long time that Russia and China can only dream of such a propaganda machine.
book_worm
(15,951 posts)VT (Bernie's home state), CO, OK and probably MN--we have to see what happens in MA.
Yet, HRC won by landslide margins in GA, AL, Arkansas, TN, TX, VA & American Samoa--and will get many more delegates. They are delusional. One said now there best states are coming up. Well, they are behind in key states like MI, FL, NC, IL, PA, NJ, NY, OH and apparently pinning all their hopes on small states like ME and NE.
Fla Dem
(23,352 posts)Wambulance
A fictional ambulance or rescue squad for someone who cries or whines, most often without provication. A way to insult someone whom often cries for no apparent reason; a cry baby, a brat, or someone suffering from hypochondria.
" Waaa, waaa, I want a cookie waaaa, waaaa, waaaa!"
"Did someone call the wambulance, WAAA! WAAA! WAAA!"