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

Hillary Clinton

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

UMTerp01

(1,048 posts)
Mon Jun 6, 2016, 11:42 PM Jun 2016

Ok so revised Nina Turner on MSNBC post [View all]

I get why some may have thought the other one was in good taste. Was more about her crying and whining than anything so I get it. Sorry if it offended anyone. But basically she was up there like an angry child who was a sore loser.



Can we all just agree that this whole argument about changing the superdelegates from Hillary to Bernie when she has a significant pledged delegate lead and millions more popular vote is INCREDIBLY hypocritical. The central tenet of Bernie Sanders argument has been about fairness and things being democratic. How does overturning a pledged delegate lead and popular vote lead seem democratic. We can argue about superdelegates being fair. I believe they aren't. But these were the rules he knew about going in. You can't change the rules in the middle of the game because you are losing. If the shoe was on the other foot, Bernie folks would be going berserk. And Hillary actually had more of a case with a closer race with then Senator Obama in 2008.

17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Hillary Clinton»Ok so revised Nina Turner...»Reply #0