2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumDid Hillary punk California and the Democrats by not doing a debate that she agreed to do?
still_one
(98,883 posts)this afternoon.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)still_one
(98,883 posts)believe that is a major issue, then show it by your vote on June 7th
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)scscholar
(2,902 posts)The debate can't change the outcome of the primary. It is meaningless.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)There's no dancing around this one. She's breaking a promise and not even trying to hide the fact.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...it was pretty cut and dried. There were no caveats about where their respective delegate numbers were.
But hey, sometimes a promise is not a promise? Like when it's inconvenient, I guess.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)She lied. Nothing new to see.
She just blows with the wind, as we have known for decades. I wouldn't trust her to take out the garbage.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)still_one
(98,883 posts)still_one
(98,883 posts)reflected on June 7th in the results
Response to still_one (Reply #9)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
still_one
(98,883 posts)Response to still_one (Reply #45)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
still_one
(98,883 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)still_one
(98,883 posts)about this or not
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Trump got nominated, after all.
still_one
(98,883 posts)the Davis recall. However, California did learn pretty quick, and we have Jerry Brown
arcane1
(38,613 posts)If that made any sense
still_one
(98,883 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)still_one
(98,883 posts)eastwestdem
(1,220 posts)accomplish this goal.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Sadly, it's not surprising.
The better question is, 'why is she afraid to get her message out?'.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)casperthegm
(643 posts)Yes, the math heavily favors HRC and she will most likely be the nominee. Second, did either of them say something to the effect of "if one of us is near the nomination then we are no longer obligated?" If so, could you please show me the evidence that backs that up?
Because if not, Hillary lied. Hard to imagine, right?
No more ridiculously boring debates as we agreed to here during the last snoozefest.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Dem2
(8,178 posts)Please, no more debates! Nothing new ever happens and both sides say their candidate won, when it's become irrelevant.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Do you just want her to hide up until the election?
C'mon, your motives are so obvious, can we dispense with the strawman responses?
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Do you know what that word means?
Dem2
(8,178 posts)Do you know what a strawman is?
You misrepresented my argument (in a ridiculing way to boot), that's a strawman. Learn it.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)
You misrepresented someone's argument to make it easier to attack.
By exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just completely fabricating someone's argument, it's much easier to present your own position as being reasonable, but this kind of dishonesty serves to undermine honest rational debate.
I guess you fail. Are you going to be childish and post more gibberish?
EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)casperthegm
(643 posts)It's not exactly something new for her. What bothers me is that her supporters just shrug it off, just like all of the other transgressions that they've shrugged off. This is just another example of the huge split within our party. One that demands politicians be held accountable and one that has seemingly just given up and says "eh, that's the way politics work."
LexVegas
(6,959 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Her approval numbers are tanking and the party is splitting. She could use it as an opportunity to attack Trump and bring the Bernie supporters to her side. Why not do it?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/clinton_favorableunfavorable-1131.html
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)at the bit for more debates this late in the cycle. Bernie is telling you something,,..,LOL
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)She has the opportunity to attack Trump, get free air time, bring Bernie voters to her side, and show that she does not go back on her word.
Why not do it for those reasons?
Tarc
(10,601 posts)There is no point in debating further when the primary is already done with.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Did she lie when she said she would do this debate? Looks that way.
Tarc
(10,601 posts)As it has always been, the math just doesn't add up for him.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)msongs
(73,754 posts)she is wise not to fall for this scam
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)And, she agreed to do another debate before the California voting. Why did she lie?
Blaming any of this on Bernie is just pathetic.
Prism
(5,815 posts)Which I thought was interesting.
Will it matter? Eh, we'll see.
I expect Sanders to take the very liberal areas handily, but there are a lot of illiberal areas in Cali. The state's Democratic lock is carried by urban areas. I expect the Bay Area will be heavily for Sanders, but LA and Orange County will go heavily for Clinton.
Right now, and I know this can change, I expect a Clinton/Sanders result of 53-47.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)She's the one that felt it necessary back when she agreed to do it.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)get them to the polls.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)debate. The game is over.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)thelordofhell
(4,569 posts)Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)Starry Messenger
(32,381 posts)B Calm
(28,762 posts)Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)2banon
(7,321 posts)She's punkin' the would be "Moderators"...
The timing is all wrong for her... the questions would have been devastating.. She have to plead the 5th to every question posed to her on a certain subject by the moderators.
Timing is everything...