Latest Breaking News

trillion

(1,859 posts)

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

Wed Feb 3, 2016, 01:31 PM

Feb 2016

them the facts and telling them about the 2 law suits right now that they are about to stick the US public with for deciding not to build the pipeline. Via nafta we get charged even for their losses for simply deciding not to build it and the TPP has all the wording from nafta and worse so when it goes into effect we double our liability. Even not being legally allowed to label where meat is from is included into this - it's because of Nafta and will be covered under the new TPP.

I know Obama lied and said it would be good for us - his worst lie in office, but as Dems I would think they'd due diligence and know better. I'm going to bet those are Hillary supporters as they tend to spend 0 time doing any diligence and believe what she says, and they act like Obama is all that. I voted for him twice but the guy has some serious flaws.

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