I'm sure you can imagine a scenario where a candidate generates a plurality of support within the party but is ultimately bad for the party. In that case, it is good for the party to have a mechanism to deny that candidate the nomination.

There are still a lot of Republicans that wish they had a super-delegate system in place so they could have stopped Trump.

Posted by bad_luck on 5/3/2017 3:07:00 PM (view original):
I'm sure you can imagine a scenario where a candidate generates a plurality of support within the party but is ultimately bad for the party. In that case, it is good for the party to have a mechanism to deny that candidate the nomination.

There are still a lot of Republicans that wish they had a super-delegate system in place so they could have stopped Trump.

Was Hillary Clinton as the nominee over Bernie Sanders good or bad for the Democratic Party last November? How'd that go for them on election night?

You're funny when you keep posting.

Posted by tecwrg on 5/3/2017 3:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/3/2017 3:07:00 PM (view original):
I'm sure you can imagine a scenario where a candidate generates a plurality of support within the party but is ultimately bad for the party. In that case, it is good for the party to have a mechanism to deny that candidate the nomination.

There are still a lot of Republicans that wish they had a super-delegate system in place so they could have stopped Trump.

Was Hillary Clinton as the nominee over Bernie Sanders good or bad for the Democratic Party last November? How'd that go for them on election night?

Your funny when you keep posting.

Are you under the impression that the primary voters didn't choose Clinton over Sanders?

Posted by bad_luck on 5/3/2017 3:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 5/3/2017 3:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/3/2017 3:07:00 PM (view original):
I'm sure you can imagine a scenario where a candidate generates a plurality of support within the party but is ultimately bad for the party. In that case, it is good for the party to have a mechanism to deny that candidate the nomination.

There are still a lot of Republicans that wish they had a super-delegate system in place so they could have stopped Trump.

Was Hillary Clinton as the nominee over Bernie Sanders good or bad for the Democratic Party last November? How'd that go for them on election night?

Your funny when you keep posting.

Are you under the impression that the primary voters didn't choose Clinton over Sanders?

I'm under the impression that there is a lawsuit against the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz in federal court for rigging the primaries to favor Clinton over Sanders.

Now if you don't think there's anything wrong with rigging an election, then I'm not sure why your panties are all bunched up over RUSSIA!!! and COMEY!!!

Posted by tecwrg on 5/3/2017 3:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/3/2017 3:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 5/3/2017 3:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/3/2017 3:07:00 PM (view original):
I'm sure you can imagine a scenario where a candidate generates a plurality of support within the party but is ultimately bad for the party. In that case, it is good for the party to have a mechanism to deny that candidate the nomination.

There are still a lot of Republicans that wish they had a super-delegate system in place so they could have stopped Trump.

Was Hillary Clinton as the nominee over Bernie Sanders good or bad for the Democratic Party last November? How'd that go for them on election night?

Your funny when you keep posting.

Are you under the impression that the primary voters didn't choose Clinton over Sanders?

I'm under the impression that there is a lawsuit against the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz are being sued in federal court for rigging the primaries to favor Clinton over Sanders.

Now if you don't think there's anything wrong with rigging an election, then I'm not sure why your panties are all bunched up over RUSSIA!!! and COMEY!!!

I don't buy the premise that the primary elections were rigged.

Maybe you can just send the judge a text message to tell him that and ask him to throw the case out.

tec believes the plaintiffs in any lawsuit ever filed.

SEND THE JUDGE A TEXT, BL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/3/2017 3:40:00 PM (view original):
SEND THE JUDGE A TEXT, BL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Stick up for your boy, mike!!!!!!

Well, we like to think our votes count. You're saying that the DNC is saying "Sure they count. When you vote for who we want." That seems un-American.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/3/2017 3:51:00 PM (view original):
Well, we like to think our votes count. You're saying that the DNC is saying "Sure they count. When you vote for who we want." That seems un-American.

Your votes? Since when did you become a Democrat?

During the first Clinton era. But why are you completely ignoring the point? Because it doesn't fit your point?

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/3/2017 4:06:00 PM (view original):
During the first Clinton era. But why are you completely ignoring the point? Because it doesn't fit your point?

What point? Clinton received 4 million more primary votes than Sanders.



****also, you're a registered democrat? I have a hard time believing that****

Sigh. Why is there a lawsuit against the DNC?

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/3/2017 4:13:00 PM (view original):
Sigh. Why is there a lawsuit against the DNC?

Do you think the existence of a lawsuit is proof, tec jr?