Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)

6. She realized that if she let Obama win in 2008...

Reply to Yavin4 (Original post)

Thu May 19, 2016, 11:16 AM

May 2016

...she'd be able to push through more of her neoliberal warhawking policies in 2016.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If Hillary is rigging the 2016 primaries, why didn't she rig the 2008 primaries? [View all] Yavin4 May 2016 OP

or for that matter, why didn't she put sanders away weeks/months ago Fresh_Start May 2016 #1

Put me down for option 2. auntpurl May 2016 #37

Probably because there were not as many unfounded conspiracy theories back in 2008. LonePirate May 2016 #2

The machines have been a problem from day one. peace13 May 2016 #3

Well, come to think of it, maybe she should have One Black Sheep May 2016 #4

well hell...pointing out the obvious!!!! Well done ;) Sheepshank May 2016 #5

She realized that if she let Obama win in 2008... joshcryer May 2016 #6

She didn't have the head of the DNC in her back pocket AgingAmerican May 2016 #7

yup, takes a lot of people's cooperation to get away with keeping a finger on the scale Amishman May 2016 #21

Really? The Clintons were at the peak of their power in 2008 Yavin4 May 2016 #25

Paul supporters had no interest in Obama or Clinton. NCTraveler May 2016 #8

That is all part of the master plan. NurseJackie May 2016 #9

And you really think she didn't? basselope May 2016 #10

My guess is that she thought her name would carry her to the top. oldandhappy May 2016 #11

Because the losers this cycle are making shit up and pulling it out of their asses? workinclasszero May 2016 #12

Because it is not true. But wait when HRC wins the GE, the GOPs and others will Iliyah May 2016 #13

DWS heading the DNC today, vs. Howard Dean then. thesquanderer May 2016 #14

She didn't have her minion DWS in charge of DNC. HooptieWagon May 2016 #15

When did they hold the first debate in 2007? frylock May 2016 #16

More Hillarian "logic"!!! TheSarcastinator May 2016 #17

+1000 Katashi_itto May 2016 #18

Ok, if Clinton is rigging the whole process, why not rig it in New Hampshire? KingFlorez May 2016 #19

Remember IA? Bernie never got the raw counts, sadoldgirl May 2016 #23

The machine wasn't up to speed. cliffordu May 2016 #20

It's also about individual state machines. Some more corrupt than others. Alex4Martinez May 2016 #32

she ran a MySpae AOL chatroom campaign in the age of Twitter and Facebook. Exilednight May 2016 #22

She didn't think she had to zipplewrath May 2016 #24

For one thing, she didn't have Debbie Wasserman Schultz pulling strings for her from inside. highprincipleswork May 2016 #26

part of the machine preferred Obama---Bernie is not part of the machine. virtualobserver May 2016 #27

Probably for the same reason she chose NOT to stop apartheid LisaM May 2016 #28

Hillary did do some of this in 2008 Jarqui May 2016 #29

Uh, it's not HER doing the rigging. B2G May 2016 #30

So why didn't the DNC rig MI? Yavin4 May 2016 #33

Maybe the state officials there B2G May 2016 #36

the DNC vastly underestimated the support for Bernie Sanders... k8conant May 2016 #31

Every allegation in response will consistently and dramatically lack objective evidence. LanternWaste May 2016 #34

Perhaps she learned from her mistake. (n/t) spin May 2016 #35

The deal with this election so many seem to not get madokie May 2016 #38

But, he's not as popular as Hillary Yavin4 May 2016 #39