2016 Postmortem

www.ciafront.com

(13 posts)

79. Actually, Clinton is winning SO BADLY.

Sun Jun 5, 2016, 03:25 PM

Jun 2016

The fact is, she has parlayed a shoo in candidacy into a big fat question mark. The more the people know who Sanders is, the more votes he has gotten, both within and without the Democratic Party. Currently, he has garnered 46% of the party, after fighting against Clinton's mega advantage (name recognition, establishment support, media bias, having actually campaigned since she lost her last run, etc.).

Honestly, Clinton started with a sure win, and Sanders has eroded that completely. He has especially done well in the National Polls, and in his perception in the greater world.

So, when I see things like Clinton supporters claiming that "Sanders is losing badly" I have to wonder what they are actually trying to hide. Because from where I sit, Sanders continues to rise, while Clinton continues to fall. She is just lucking out that the primary process may end before Sanders can overtake her.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

164 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This message was self-deleted by its author [View all] nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 OP

Did you also give advice to Bernie's campaign? Is that why he lost so badly? YouDig Jun 2016 #1

It is you who is so off putting nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #3

Classy-NOT! hobbit709 Jun 2016 #5

The OP is making a very valid point, one that has been made by the admins of this site as well. Bluenorthwest Jun 2016 #11

The same person who is constantly pushing right-wing email conspiracies. YouDig Jun 2016 #18

I know my dear the FBI is RW, and so is the State Department nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #24

Not them, but the conspiracy theories you and other anti-Hillary people push are. YouDig Jun 2016 #31

Ok my cospiracy theory is actually based on exaclty what the OIG reported on nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #33

No, it's based on your fantasy lawyer friends that you claim tell you the inside scoop. YouDig Jun 2016 #38

You mean experts who read that nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #43

Fantasy experts that you claim advise you, but nobody believes exist. YouDig Jun 2016 #46

Look you and your pals do not belive I am PoC nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #51

for those of us not in CA, what is the subject of Prop 1? onenote Jun 2016 #58

Here you go nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #63

Thanks onenote Jun 2016 #74

Not believing what random people post on message boards is not "bully" behavior. YouDig Jun 2016 #60

Please continue nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #65

Your stuff doesn't come from the FBI, the FBI hasn't said anything yet. YouDig Jun 2016 #70

Nope you are correct (but the FBI is still hard at work) nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #76

Breitbart the website, not the person. But you knew that. I hope. YouDig Jun 2016 #81

No I mean the actual person nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #84

Of all the people to accuse of "pretending that you are just quoting the FBI, ...etc..." you picked Cal33 Jun 2016 #126

Yeah, I don't know who's who, I call it like I see it. YouDig Jun 2016 #129

You left out the main point: You accused her of pretending to quote the FBI. Does that Cal33 Jun 2016 #134

There is no FBI quote. The FBI hasn't said anything yet. YouDig Jun 2016 #135

You mean the same exact FBI investigation Stephenapolous asked her about this morning? nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #142

Yet you were the one who used the words "pretending that you are just quoting the FBI..." to Nadin. Cal33 Jun 2016 #159

I never quoted the FBI, because there is only one quote from the FBI nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #151

I agree with you. Cal33 Jun 2016 #162

All the new arrivals have been doing that for moths nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #132

This reminds me of a forum that I was a regular member of for 7 years, and which I still Cal33 Jun 2016 #139

Well we know Brock paid one cool millon for this nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #140

Yes, both are under the financial influence of the Corporate people, and this is Cal33 Jun 2016 #146

Who are you? What country 840high Jun 2016 #56

Prime example - what turns 840high Jun 2016 #55

+1 CountAllVotes Jun 2016 #73

Actually, Clinton is winning SO BADLY. www.ciafront.com Jun 2016 #79

So classy, that is just what the OP is about Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #82

Kinda funny/ironic RazBerryBeret Jun 2016 #92

When you sit it out, it is all on you. annavictorious Jun 2016 #2

Second textbook exzample of a sore winner nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #4

She said she won't sit out. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2016 #13

Threatened? CountAllVotes Jun 2016 #23

She did not say she was sitting out Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #89

The "Love it or Leave It" wing of the party demands total loyalty. K&R Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2016 #6

They act like partisans nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #8

Or like sports fans demwing Jun 2016 #42

Ok you are right, GGGGGOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!! nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #44

Nah! When it gets down to it, politics is about who wins. brush Jun 2016 #136

Love it or leave it is EXACTLY what they are, Thanks Tierra_y_Libertad... nt haikugal Jun 2016 #45

All I can say is this Peacetrain Jun 2016 #7

real democrats nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #9

You are most welcome Peacetrain Jun 2016 #14

You realize that in a country with a growing independent wing nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #19

Here Nad Peacetrain Jun 2016 #22

Here another perfect example of what I just described int he OP nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #26

Anything I can do for you..just give me a call Peacetrain Jun 2016 #28

Nah I have precious little in common with you nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #30

You bet.. Peacetrain Jun 2016 #34

In order to be a REAL Democrat you have to know the secret handshake and sign the loyalty oath. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2016 #17

The secret handshake goes like this Peacetrain Jun 2016 #25

Real Democrats CountAllVotes Jun 2016 #32

It reveals someting else nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #39

Remember that kid on the playground who always bullied the others? wyldwolf Jun 2016 #10

Thanks for yet another ezample nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #12

I remember your candidate opposing my right to marry for decades while claiming God agreed with Bluenorthwest Jun 2016 #20

It is no one's business who you vote for CountAllVotes Jun 2016 #15

I hear ya. If these Hillary supporters on here are at all representative of One Black Sheep Jun 2016 #16

This primary is about the success of propaganda noiretextatique Jun 2016 #21

Nope, but on the 16 the investigation will stop nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #27

What happens on the 16th? Nt Depaysement Jun 2016 #109

you and I might be the same person lapfog_1 Jun 2016 #29

Well we both grock science and policy I suspect nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #36

Do you need a safe space after posting that rant???? beaglelover Jun 2016 #35

Nope, it is you guys you need one and *will get one* nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #37

It's your vote. grossproffit Jun 2016 #40

Ahh, privilege. joshcryer Jun 2016 #41

She was talking about the primary Fumesucker Jun 2016 #49

The whole post comes off that way though: joshcryer Jun 2016 #52

This message was self-deleted by its author nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #59

Only the privileged say DC doesn't matter to them. joshcryer Jun 2016 #98

This message was self-deleted by its author nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #122

"you are making sure I never, like ever join the democratic party again." zappaman Jun 2016 #124

For reasons of my own I'm not the biggest nadine fan around but she gets treated badly here Fumesucker Jun 2016 #68

I agree. joshcryer Jun 2016 #77

She's kind of in a defensive crouch now I think Fumesucker Jun 2016 #113

This message was self-deleted by its author nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #123

Yup, another example nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #57

exasperation noiretextatique Jun 2016 #104

I just deleted my posts nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #127

There has been nasty behavior on the part of supporters of both candidates oberliner Jun 2016 #47

good for you - we get so wrapped up in WHO we sometimes dismiss the WHY dana_b Jun 2016 #48

It will increase the pay of my lowest paid workers by 50 cents on Wednesday if it passes. nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #54

excellent! I hope it does and with flying colors dana_b Jun 2016 #62

Wait a second. You're an employer now? randome Jun 2016 #67

She uses language a little differently Fumesucker Jun 2016 #71

Okay. I'll allow that she may not fully understand usage of the word 'my'. randome Jun 2016 #72

Seems legit. PeaceNikki Jun 2016 #85

My gets used with people you don't own, my friends, my coworkers, my boss Fumesucker Jun 2016 #99

With an after-the-fact explanation, perhaps. randome Jun 2016 #114

The fact that I am not an employer nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #152

There's one thing you DO care about, and that's telling us repeatedly how much you don't care. randome Jun 2016 #50

Heh PeaceNikki Jun 2016 #53

I was thinking the same thing. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #75

well there are tihngs in line that matter far more than nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #80

I don't see anyone disagreeing with Prop I so more power to the voters! randome Jun 2016 #88

Here you go nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #90

We need to be gracious, while Bernie continues assaulting reality and reason. Why's that? CrowCityDem Jun 2016 #61

Becuase you will need those sore losers to vote in November nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #83

So what happens if Bernie somehow won? Would we have to suck it up and be good soldiers? CrowCityDem Jun 2016 #87

Read the op... who I vote for is my business nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #118

I'll take that under advicement. PeaceNikki Jun 2016 #64

:) Lucinda Jun 2016 #78

The SDs will count in 2016 in the same way they did in 2008 when they pushed Obama over the top. LonePirate Jun 2016 #66

The party told the media not to do that this year nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #86

And the media will ignore being told what to do by the party. LonePirate Jun 2016 #96

And as I wrote in the OP, it is a vioation of journalistic ethics nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #101

Thanks for the lecture on "journalistic ethics". zappaman Jun 2016 #107

LMAO nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #111

Just the facts, nothing snide jamese777 Jun 2016 #69

It comes down to the question -What is a REAL Democrat? azurnoir Jun 2016 #91

Policy is not what this is about nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #95

I;m sorry to offend but that is central and part of what you point out in your OP azurnoir Jun 2016 #110

I know and I am not nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #112

Credibility is earned RandySF Jun 2016 #93

I know the FBI has no credibility with you or the State Department nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #115

Your 378th post telling us you "don't care"? zappaman Jun 2016 #94

ah my shadow speaks nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #97

sorry this thread didn't go like you thought. zappaman Jun 2016 #103

Actually it did nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #106

Sorry, but it's not my role to stroke your ego. If you sit this one out, it says something... NNadir Jun 2016 #100

I am not asking you to stroke any egos nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #102

Bernie Sanders won my support many years ago. raging moderate Jun 2016 #116

Like I said, I couldn't care less. Write in the fool's name if you wish. Like Ms. Clinton... NNadir Jun 2016 #138

What a thoroughly nasty response to raging moderate's real effort to dialogue riderinthestorm Jun 2016 #153

What a nasty textbook example nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #158

Some people have cranked the assholery knob up to eleven, that's for sure. Warren DeMontague Jun 2016 #105

My image is actually more obnoxious , but yes nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #108

Support a fascist or not...make threats or not really don't care beachbumbob Jun 2016 #117

Thanks for the textbook example nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #120

I don't usually weigh in our your posts (or posts like this one) justiceischeap Jun 2016 #119

Counterpoint nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #121

The point of the matter is, I'm not being obnoxious because I disagree and point out facts justiceischeap Jun 2016 #125

I don't believe elections in the US are clean nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #130

I voted for a Clinton in 1992 Califonz Jun 2016 #128

I always enjoy your posts Bjornsdotter Jun 2016 #131

And it was that administration when that process reversed nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #133

I could return that advice to Sanders supporters. NT Adrahil Jun 2016 #137

Alas how winners act determines a lot of the future nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #147

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service jeff47 Jun 2016 #141

a 7-0 that is indeed impressive nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #145

I agree with the results and juror #3. zappaman Jun 2016 #149

What do you and the other Sanders supporters want? nt asuhornets Jun 2016 #143

I am such a big and YYYUUUGEEE Sanders supporter that we are not endorsing him nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #144

What Bernie said CountAllVotes Jun 2016 #148

The Clintonites do come off a bit nasty and condescending. JEB Jun 2016 #150

Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Jun 2016 #154

You welcome nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #156

Democratic turnout is already low. With such a flawed candidate topping the ticket I'm worried too riderinthestorm Jun 2016 #155

To me it is this nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #157

They won't listen, Nadine Scootaloo Jun 2016 #160

especially after this nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #161

K&R! Owl Jun 2016 #163

Before this is locked since truth is too much I will self delete myself nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #164