Did Sanders Help Trump Win the Presidency?

[Nous]

You forget that votes don't count in primaries, delegates do.

No, I didn't forget any fact; you merely missed the point that Clinton was the most popular Democratic candidate in the primaries, and the most popular candidate in the general election. Get over it.

 

[Nous]

He definitely played his part. I regret voting for him in the primaries.

Why the GOP and the Bernie Left Don’t Care About “the Russia Story”

The first paragraph uses the phrase, "the dehumanization of Hillary Clinton." That's precisely what it was.

 

[esmith]

No, I didn't forget any fact; you merely missed the point that Clinton was the most popular Democratic candidate in the primaries, and the most popular candidate in the general election. Get over it.

As far as the primaries you are correct, that is why she won; However, in the general election popularity does not win out over strategy and the6 P's.

 

[Nous]

However, in the general election popularity does not win out over strategy and the6 P's.

What's the "6 P's"? Anyway, obviously I didn't claim Clinton won the election.

 

[esmith]

What's the "6 P's"? Anyway, obviously I didn't claim Clinton won the election.

Proper Planning Prevents **** Poor Performance

 

[tytlyf]

He definitely played his part. I regret voting for him in the primaries.

Why the GOP and the Bernie Left Don’t Care About “the Russia Story”

Clinton had a better chance of winning the national election. She was the responsible vote and would have been Obama's 3rd term.

But I'm not sure about the claim that "The Bernie Left don't care about RussiaGate." The only people I see that don't care about it are Trump supporters. Mostly because of their media. I've been watching Fox today and they don't even mention Russia once.

 

[Falvlun]

He definitely played his part. I regret voting for him in the primaries.”

I don't. I think Bernie was a breath of fresh air. I think that if he had become president, he would have been more competent than Trump and he would have faced less entrenched opposition than Clinton.

I thought some healthy competition in the primaries was a good thing.

I then voted for Clinton in the general as the sane choice. I honestly don't understand the democratic apathy. Clinton may not have been inspiring but she was experienced and competent, in stark contrast to her opponent. That was more than enough to get me to the polls.

 

[metis]

Until it is prove that the US was harmed or will be harmed by anything that the present administration has done will do I will hold my judgment.

So, you actually don't think a hostile power interfering in our democratic process is not "harm"?

So first you would have to establish that there is a threat to the Constitution and until then back off. I do not appreciate your accusations

See above.

Secondly, if you don't like "accusations", then why did you vote for the Accuser-In-Chief? "Corrupt Hillary". "Lock her up". on and on and on... including numerous other people he "accused" of various things that were uncalled for.

My "accusation" towards you was conditional on your ignoring of what the Trump camp has been doing that we know of, regardless as to whether the Donald was actively involved or was a nonparticipant who allowed others to do his bidding. We know some of what's been done in his name, and we also know that Trump has tried to stop the investigations on numerous occasions, especially with his firing of Comey whereas he admitted it twice.

I would suggest that's more than enough evidence of "harm", and if you can't see that, then I think I can safely say that you have no interest in actually looking and/or are just ignoring what should be obvious.

 

[esmith]

So, you actually don't think a hostile power interfering in our democratic process is not "harm"?

See above.

Secondly, if you don't like "accusations", then why did you vote for the Accuser-In-Chief? "Corrupt Hillary". "Lock her up". on and on and on... including numerous other people he "accused" of various things that were uncalled for.

My "accusation" towards you was conditional on your ignoring of what the Trump camp has been doing that we know of, regardless as to whether the Donald was actively involved or was a nonparticipant who allowed others to do his bidding. We know some of what's been done in his name, and we also know that Trump has tried to stop the investigations on numerous occasions, especially with his firing of Comey whereas he admitted it twice.

I would suggest that's more than enough evidence of "harm", and if you can't see that, then I think I can safely say that you have no interest in actually looking and/or are just ignoring what should be obvious.

You have no proof that the President had anything to do with the Russians involving themselves in the hacking of emails . Until you do I suggest you put a lid on it. Yes I do believe, unlike the Obama administration, that Russia is a threat to our national security.

In your accusations that I am ignoring what the "Trump camp" has been doing, I unlike you and others, will wait until legal proof of wrongdoing is presented. Yes, it appears that when it comes to "politics" the "Trump camp" are neophytes. I would rather have political neophytes in charge other than the "good-old boys and girls" as long as they put the interest of the country first vice the typical politicians that put themselves and their cronies first.

Why did I vote for Trump for President vice the person that the Democrats put forward? Because unlike you and other I think that the Hillary was criminally accountable for her actions dealing with her private server and emails, that she was a loose cannon that would base her decisions on what was best for the Hillary and not the country, that she was indirectly responsible for the events that took place in Benghazi Libya, that she is a lying two-faced politician that only cares about Hillary and her cohorts; I could go on and on about my opinions of the Hillary but I think you get the idea.

You basically accused me of not living up to an obligation that I took when I put on the uniform of this country. I no longer wear the uniform, but I still take serious the oaths that I once took, that is why I vote. You will note in the oath that I pledged to defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. Since I am no longer under arms I can not directly defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, except by voting and that is what I did. If you have a problem with that so be it.

 

[metis]

You have no proof that the President had anything to do with the Russians involving themselves in the hacking of emails .

Why are you being so utterly and repeatedly dishonest on this when I explained that I have not accused Trump on the Russians hacking into our electioneering system? Can't you read???

Until you do I suggest you put a lid on it.

When your utter hypocrisy stops, I will. You accuse me of making "accusations", which is said was "conditional", but you do that all the time against many of the left, including Hillary. Are you so blind that you can't even put two and two together and realize that you hold yourself to a different standard than others here?

Because unlike you and other I think that the Hillary was criminally accountable for her actions dealing with her private server and emails,

Assuming guilt violates the Constitution, esmith. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

You basically accused me of not living up to an obligation that I took when I put on the uniform of this country.

Look up the word "conditional", and while you're at it you might check out the Constitution where it talks about the issue of how trials and guilt are to be handled-- your lynch-mob mentality is showing.

'Nuff.

 

[esmith]

Why are you being so utterly and repeatedly dishonest on this when I explained that I have not accused Trump on the Russians hacking into our electioneering system? Can't you read???

Yeah I can read, however it seems that you can not write. You said "So, you actually don't think a hostile power interfering in our democratic process is not "harm"?" Just what democratic process are you referring to if it wasn't the 2016 election?

When your utter hypocrisy stops, I will. You accuse me of making "accusations", which is said was "conditional", but you do that all the time against many of the left, including Hillary. Are you so blind that you can't even put two and two together and realize that you hold yourself to a different standard than others here?

Yeah, I can put two and two together and come up with 4 unlike many that come up with five.

Assuming guilt violates the Constitution, esmith. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

No if you "read" what I said " Because unlike you and other I think that the Hillary was criminally accountable for her actions dealing with her private server and emails" is an opinion that is based on factors that do not seem relevant to many. Maybe I should have use the words "in my opinion, vice I think

Look up the word "conditional", and while you're at it you might check out the Constitution where it talks about the issue of how trials and guilt are to be handled-- your lynch-mob mentality is showing.

In my opinion Hillary was given a pass due to the situation. Again it is an opinion, and the last time I looked there is no issue with doing so.

We are at loggerhead and it would be a waste of both our time and energy to debate "opinions" in this matter.

 

[tytlyf]

In my opinion Hillary was given a pass due to the situation. Again it is an opinion, and the last time I looked there is no issue with doing so.
.

There's only 1 problem, you're just repeating what conservative entertainment told you. Feel free to post a link.

 

[esmith]

There's only 1 problem, you're just repeating what conservative entertainment told you. Feel free to post a link.

A link for what, my opinion?
Oh that's right only certain people that agree with you can have opinions.