IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New unwarranted? after the meeting was supposed to start ast 10 am and they voted at 9:30?
always look out for number one and don't step in number two
New Meh.
You weren't there. I wasn't there. There are lots and lots of posts from people who claim to have been there with differing opinions.

LetsTalkNevada

All this tantrum nonsense over around 2 net delegates is ridiculous - especially when Hillary won the actual vote at the caucus in February.

Cheers,
Scott.
New You'd think Clinton would recognize that she didn't need to cheat. But its a lifestyle for her.
New Re: You'd think Clinton would recognize that she didn't need to cheat. But its a lifestyle for her.
Politifact:

There’s little disagreement that the convention was chaotic. PolitiFact Nevada was at the convention and saw it firsthand. But does the Sanders campaign’s complaints have merit?

[...]

Our ruling

Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver said Nevada Democratic Party leaders "hijacked the process on the floor" of the state convention "ignoring the regular procedure and ramming through what they wanted to do."

Caucuses and delegate math can be incredibly confusing, and the arcane party structures don’t reflect how most people assume presidential selection works.

But the howls of unfairness and corruption by the Sanders campaign during Nevada’s state Democratic Convention can’t change the simple fact that Clinton’s supporters simply turned out in larger numbers and helped her solidify her delegate lead in Nevada.

There’s no clear evidence the state party "hijacked" the process or ignored "regular procedure."

We rate this claim False.


FWIW.

Cheers,
Scott.
     the violence of the dems against those who would disagree - (boxley) - (32)
         There are enough bad people who claim to like Bernie that could cause problems... :-( -NT - (Another Scott) - (22)
             they were the ones shooting into Bernie's campaign headquarters? hardly, clintons have thugs too -NT - (boxley) - (21)
                 Meh. - (Another Scott) - (20)
                     Is it not worth asking, "What caused the overly reported 'violence' in the first place?" -NT - (mmoffitt) - (16)
                         Ralston was there. Ask him. -NT - (Another Scott) - (15)
                             Re: Ralston was there. Isnt he one of ben rhodes boys? -NT - (boxley) - (14)
                                 He writes for Politico, apparently. - (Another Scott) - (13)
                                     WAY off the mark this time. - (mmoffitt) - (12)
                                         Re: WAY off the mark this time. - (Another Scott) - (11)
                                             Lift != Throw. HTH. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (10)
                                                 Apparently from some angles, it looked like the chair was thrown. - (Another Scott) - (9)
                                                     unwarranted? after the meeting was supposed to start ast 10 am and they voted at 9:30? -NT - (boxley) - (3)
                                                         Meh. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                                                             You'd think Clinton would recognize that she didn't need to cheat. But its a lifestyle for her. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                                                                 Re: You'd think Clinton would recognize that she didn't need to cheat. But its a lifestyle for her. - (Another Scott)
                                                     Unwarranted? - (mmoffitt) - (4)
                                                         You're wrong, Mike. Stop seeing conspiracies in this. -NT - (Another Scott)
                                                         You're beginning to sound (insert gentler synonym for "deranged") - (rcareaga) - (2)
                                                             Is he working for Correct the Record? Or do you *trust* David Brock? - (mmoffitt)
                                                             Re: Boxer. When I'm wrong, I'm wrong. - (mmoffitt)
                     Or maybe the protests in 1968 were a bad thing? -NT - (mmoffitt)
                     twitter? meh -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                         It's where the hep cats hang out these days, they say. - (Another Scott)
         Does it matter that one campaign disavows violence while another offers to pay their legal fees? -NT - (drook) - (7)
             or Soros paying anarchists to disrupt? wrong on all sides -NT - (boxley) - (6)
                 Guess we better vote for Jill Stein then, huh. (roll-eyes) -NT - (Another Scott) - (3)
                     nope bill the cat gets my vote -NT - (boxley) - (2)
                         Ack! - (Another Scott) - (1)
                             yup, puurfect candidate -NT - (boxley)
                 Soros isn't part of a campaign. How about my question? -NT - (drook) - (1)
                     he isn't, someone better let the dems know that -NT - (boxley)
         It's the framing of the problem - (hnick)

And they're even healthy for you, because I made them with my milk.
103 ms