Latest Breaking News

Art_from_Ark

(27,247 posts)

42. There have been a few unabashed supporters of TPP here

Reply to trillion (Reply #35)

Wed Feb 3, 2016, 01:30 AM

Feb 2016

Take this OP, for example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026649703

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

158 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Iowa's nightmare revisited: Was correct winner called? [View all] retrowire Feb 2016 OP

Boooooo! grasswire Feb 2016 #1

Why boo hiss? It's a chance to get the Wall Streets super pac candidate to give up over 300 trillion Feb 2016 #11

grass wire is pro Bernie! retrowire Feb 2016 #23

Hillary has announced her opposition to the final version of the TPP. pnwmom Feb 2016 #52

Are her announcements the "gold standard" for believable? Android3.14 Feb 2016 #75

Only the naive swallow the 25 year smear campaign the Rethugs have waged against her. nt pnwmom Feb 2016 #79

what a ridiculous comment noiretextatique Feb 2016 #122

ex Clinton supporters PatrynXX Feb 2016 #144

She supports TPP is a 25 year old RW smear? TheFarseer Feb 2016 #143

It's a recent DU smear. She does not support what turned out to be pnwmom Feb 2016 #145

Hillary's opposition to the TPP catnhatnh Feb 2016 #85

Hillary helped to design the TPP while at State. No way is she against this! ViseGrip Feb 2016 #131

Her "final opposition" has weasel words in it. Weasel words. JDPriestly Feb 2016 #120

I think the fact that she helped write the first draft has went by you. trillion Feb 2016 #135

The head of the US Chamber of Commerce said she will support the TPP after she gets Dustlawyer Feb 2016 #136

Her opposition is to the way it is presently worded if I recall correctly. A Simple Game Feb 2016 #141

Clinton Fatigue Already billhicks76 Feb 2016 #125

I should have been more clear. grasswire Feb 2016 #151

STOP TRYING TO THWART THE CHOSEN ONE'S CORONATION Gene Debs Feb 2016 #2

It's time to say no to banksters and the rest of the blood sucking corporations, including Goldman trillion Feb 2016 #12

The crown has slipped quite a bit. 840high Feb 2016 #36

This is a description of typical caucuses. The paranoia level is high around here. pnwmom Feb 2016 #53

But.........but..............the Coronation must proceed! CaliforniaPeggy Feb 2016 #3

"expected to win in a virtual coronation" NRaleighLiberal Feb 2016 #4

You know, Jeb(!) thought the same thing. forest444 Feb 2016 #5

Nothing to worry abou then. Virtual means "not exactly". Elmer S. E. Dump Feb 2016 #91

The establishment said it was fair and unbiased d_legendary1 Feb 2016 #6

Start with getting people to understand what the TPP is. The reason we have hillary voters on a trillion Feb 2016 #14

Some DUers know what TPP is all about Art_from_Ark Feb 2016 #32

I would hope no duer would support it. i would think that would be reason to be banned from this trillion Feb 2016 #35

There have been a few unabashed supporters of TPP here Art_from_Ark Feb 2016 #42

Wow. That is really really bad. You should have posted links from Democracynow.org to them giving trillion Feb 2016 #89

I actually made an OP about an anti-TPP rally I attended in Tokyo last May Art_from_Ark Feb 2016 #130

Awesome! I gave you a rec, not that you don't have plenty. trillion Feb 2016 #137

9,000 views and 7 recommendations. Not a very popular position. Enthusiast Feb 2016 #132

What does that have to do with Iowa? Both Hillary and Bernie are against the final draft.n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #73

Here's the deal (an Iowa perspective) slumcamper Feb 2016 #7

If Bernie had a captain in every precinct, roody Feb 2016 #15

Totally slumcamper Feb 2016 #33

But overall the turnout was only about 170K -- much lower than Obama's, pnwmom Feb 2016 #64

In 2008 the caucus was held in January when students we're home. progressoid Feb 2016 #138

No, you can't clean-up the house if you ignore the dirt aspirant Feb 2016 #16

Bitter a little? Your tone suggests so. slumcamper Feb 2016 #30

If advocating change results in a bitter feeling to you, it's yours to diffuse. aspirant Feb 2016 #44

I have nothing against releasing tallies. slumcamper Feb 2016 #128

There are no ballots to count in that stupid system. So nothing to compare pnwmom Feb 2016 #65

We have caucuses here and I worked on the referendum to switch to primaries. pnwmom Feb 2016 #63

Yes. George II Feb 2016 #8

Sounds like Florida in 2000, or Ohio in 2004. Ford_Prefect Feb 2016 #9

No, it's just caucuses everywhere, in every year, at least in crowded areas. n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #66

The Chair of the Iowa Democratic Party denies any recount and refuses conflicting evidence. Ford_Prefect Feb 2016 #68

They have no recount procedure in their rules. They use no paper ballots. pnwmom Feb 2016 #69

Get an injunction to keep the voting records intact. Then sue for disclosure. Hoppy Feb 2016 #10

Yes, remember the benefits of the DNC suit aspirant Feb 2016 #19

yep 840high Feb 2016 #37

There are no paper ballots. They count votes by having people move around the room, pnwmom Feb 2016 #70

There is still a apart trail of those counts. morningfog Feb 2016 #84

The counts themselves are meaningless without paper ballots to check them against. pnwmom Feb 2016 #95

I can push for primaries while asking for a review of any paper trail at the same time. morningfog Feb 2016 #106

Bernie himself isn't asking for a recount. He knows it would be meaningless. nt pnwmom Feb 2016 #107

I'm not asking for a recount, just a release of the raw vote data. What are you afraid of? morningfog Feb 2016 #112

I'm not. I'm saying it would be meaningless. ALL the numbers in caucuses pnwmom Feb 2016 #115

How else are people going to understand how dumb this forest is unless we see the roots? morningfog Feb 2016 #121

By understanding that 1 delegate can equal 10 people or 50 people. pnwmom Feb 2016 #123

Oh, for fuck's sake. Nyan Feb 2016 #13

This message was self-deleted by its author slumcamper Feb 2016 #17

It's pretty clear that NO ONE won. elleng Feb 2016 #18

...and now is the time for the party to respsct their candidates requests aspirant Feb 2016 #20

sorry about O'Malley retrowire Feb 2016 #21

Thanks, retro. elleng Feb 2016 #27

ditto from me Skittles Feb 2016 #60

Democracy at work. SoapBox Feb 2016 #22

"no." as she hops in her car with the hillary2016 plates retrowire Feb 2016 #24

This is no way to run a railroad much less a caucus. Uncle Joe Feb 2016 #25

No problem, Uncle Joe. nt retrowire Feb 2016 #26

But it is a way to railroad a caucus run. nt tblue37 Feb 2016 #39

There you go, tblue, thanks for completing the thought. Uncle Joe Feb 2016 #40

So WHY do they keep the raw vote numbers secret? John Poet Feb 2016 #28

and the republican voter turnout was higher than ours retrowire Feb 2016 #29

if true. nashville_brook Feb 2016 #140

The raw numbers can't ever be checked for accuracy, so what would be the point? pnwmom Feb 2016 #74

Then the delegate numbers derived from those raw numbers can't be checked, either. (nt) jeff47 Feb 2016 #88

Duh. I've been saying all along that these caucuses stink, and this is PART of why. pnwmom Feb 2016 #94

A generous interpretation would be that McGuire doesn't want people to find out winter is coming Feb 2016 #146

Alerting! It's not late breaking news that Clintons are cheaters! mhatrw Feb 2016 #31

Ha! SammyWinstonJack Feb 2016 #93

Dr. Andy McGuire, Mrs. Hillary2016 license plate simply said, "No." Corruption always has that same GoneFishin Feb 2016 #34

Having a sense of humor apparently is a disqualification for you. n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #62

K & R AzDar Feb 2016 #38

Andy McGuire's car frylock Feb 2016 #41

Are you freaking kidding me! lastone Feb 2016 #43

HRC Has Learned Well From Karl Rove - Expect More Shenanigans Moving Forward cantbeserious Feb 2016 #45

Well, Hillary is the one responsible for bringing toe-sucker Dick Morris into the White House. Fuddnik Feb 2016 #50

Based On The 08 Campaign - And Based On Allegiance To Wall Street - My Expectations Are Very Low cantbeserious Feb 2016 #51

Hillary had nothing to do with this. This is a standard, messy caucus. pnwmom Feb 2016 #71

Still Believe In Unicorns cantbeserious Feb 2016 #81

No, that's your specialty. pnwmom Feb 2016 #97

Your Opinion Only - Others See The World Differently cantbeserious Feb 2016 #111

The any woman for pres crowd can't be helped. Bernin Feb 2016 #46

What Am I Not Surprised To Read This???? n/t ChiciB1 Feb 2016 #47

I warned everyone. If they didn't hate caucuses before the Iowa one, they would after. pnwmom Feb 2016 #48

You're a Hillary supporter. Bernin Feb 2016 #49

No. There is no way for anything to be recounted because people don't vote with pnwmom Feb 2016 #55

if there is no transparency then the process is undemocratic questionseverything Feb 2016 #90

The 'raw numbers" are meaningless because there is no way to check their accuracy. pnwmom Feb 2016 #92

raw data= how many were there questionseverything Feb 2016 #99

If they see a discrepancy, without paper ballots they still don't know which number is true. pnwmom Feb 2016 #100

there is tons of video all over iowa about precinct results questionseverything Feb 2016 #103

They could do recounts while they were there -- I saw a video where those present pnwmom Feb 2016 #105

i saw that video too questionseverything Feb 2016 #109

The Des Moines Register reporter observed it and said it was "normal mayhem," pnwmom Feb 2016 #110

there was an 8 vote difference questionseverything Feb 2016 #114

No, it was 3. And our disagreement can never be resolved without paper ballots. n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #116

no final count was hc 232,bernie 224...8 votes questionseverything Feb 2016 #118

NO caucus with head counting of several hundred voters present can ever be as accurate as pnwmom Feb 2016 #119

It sounds like they want to verify the math, not verify the counts. n/t ieoeja Feb 2016 #126

What is the point of verifying the math done to shaky counts? The whole pnwmom Feb 2016 #127

It's good to see people come around on caucuses... joshcryer Feb 2016 #54

Yes. And it means my college student son can't vote for Bernie pnwmom Feb 2016 #56

They're arguably the core of establishment party politics. joshcryer Feb 2016 #57

My experience hasn't been anything nefarious -- just a lot of confusion pnwmom Feb 2016 #58

Well, Bernin Feb 2016 #59

No, definitely NOT fraud. Just the typical chaos involving a lot of inexperienced volunteers, pnwmom Feb 2016 #61

Hillary won the 2016 Iowa caucus GreydeeThos Feb 2016 #67

+1. n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #72

Then why the reluctance for a type of recount? (or in this case, checking the math)? hedgehog Feb 2016 #76

What does she have to lose with a recount, hmmmmm? nt LiberalElite Feb 2016 #77

Also not very "progressive" of her to walk away from possibility of voter disenfranchisement. Nt JudyM Feb 2016 #86

There is nothing to check the math against -- no paper ballots. pnwmom Feb 2016 #113

That's bullshit. There *is* something to check the math against. winter is coming Feb 2016 #147

Bottom line: the only math that MATTERS is how the ACTUAL VOTERS VOTED. If they find pnwmom Feb 2016 #148

That's not accurate. Calcuations can be checked. Whether the results of those calcuations winter is coming Feb 2016 #149

So you would be basing all that work on a GIGANTIC assumption that can't be checked. pnwmom Feb 2016 #150

"All that work" has already been done once, based on that "gigantic" assumption. winter is coming Feb 2016 #152

Then you should ask Bernie why he had his spokesman Tad Davine announce pnwmom Feb 2016 #153

That was a statement made on Tuesday. Presumably, they've discovered some winter is coming Feb 2016 #154

Where have you seen Bernie's campaign flip-flopping on this issue? pnwmom Feb 2016 #155

Flip flopping? winter is coming Feb 2016 #156

You guys said it was flip-flopping pnwmom Feb 2016 #157

kicking nt LiberalElite Feb 2016 #78

But wait... Since Hillary's narrow victory doesn't matter.... Adrahil Feb 2016 #80

No! No! Sanders won! Didn't you hear? And now his supporters are trying to take that away from him! randome Feb 2016 #108

I knew they shouldn't have let Steve Harvey announce the results. Dr. Strange Feb 2016 #82

This is the dumbest form of democracy I've ever seen and if someone wants the confusion Vinca Feb 2016 #83

Yes, it is dumb. And, no, it cannot be cleared up. Ever. Not to anyone's satisfaction. pnwmom Feb 2016 #96

They really should go to paper ballots. Vinca Feb 2016 #98

I agree. Automatic recount. I don't know why so many people here are determined pnwmom Feb 2016 #101

I caucused in Iowa for Bernie. roody Feb 2016 #87

The delegates are 23 to 21. Not a tie. It worked out that way because of the way the pnwmom Feb 2016 #104

Her saying no cast more doubt on who really won. There is no reason for her bkkyosemite Feb 2016 #102

Kick warrprayer Feb 2016 #117

As an Iowan who participated and shared his own messy experience with bullwinkle428 Feb 2016 #124

I caucused too. On balance I love it. slumcamper Feb 2016 #129

Bernie probably won, but came away with almost half the delegates. I don't think they could LiberalArkie Feb 2016 #133

Is Iowa the new Florida? KamaAina Feb 2016 #134

The Democratic Party should be ashamed at rejecting a recheck of the numbers Marrah_G Feb 2016 #139

The party decides caucus rules. There's little doubt that, by design, the rules ALWAYS favor NorthCarolina Feb 2016 #142

Who knows? Incomplete results were reported as final: k8conant Feb 2016 #158