Acceptable registrations in the queue through June 3 at 5:00p ET have now been activated. Enjoy! -M.W.
Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619
Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619
Sanders Smokes Clinton In Alaska And Washington
Sanders Smokes Clinton In Alaska And Washington
A lot of people just don't like HilLIEry.
Washington:
Sanders - 72.7%
Clinton - 27.1%
Hawaii:
Sanders - 81.6%
Clinton - 18.4
Pretty jaw dropping numbers.
Washington:
Sanders - 72.7%
Clinton - 27.1%
Hawaii:
Sanders - 81.6%
Clinton - 18.4
Pretty jaw dropping numbers.
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
- audiophile
- Posts: 8644
- Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:21 pm
- Location: Between 88 and 108 MHz.
Re: Sanders Smokes Clinton In Alaska And Washington
Those are caucuses, so here is the overall results:
Bernie +55 delegate
Clinton +20 delegates
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... count.html
Bernie +55 delegate
Clinton +20 delegates
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... count.html
Ask not what your country can do FOR you; ask what they are about to do TO YOU!!
Re: Sanders Smokes Clinton In Alaska And Washington
When you consider a relatively unknown Senator, who accomplished nothing in his life except getting elected to office, beat a "Clinton" by those margins, it says something about how even many Democrats perceive her. Either that or people are attracted to the promise of "free stuff".
If the latter is the case, the Democrat party has sure changed a lot since:
"ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
If the latter is the case, the Democrat party has sure changed a lot since:
"ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
- audiophile
- Posts: 8644
- Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:21 pm
- Location: Between 88 and 108 MHz.
Re: Sanders Smokes Clinton In Alaska And Washington
Many Democrats pander to LCD (Lowest Common Denominator), but now they have went over the top, now it's LSD...Bryce wrote:When you consider a relatively unknown Senator, who accomplished nothing in his life except getting elected to office, beat a "Clinton" by those margins, it says something about how even many Democrats perceive her. Either that or people are attracted to the promise of "free stuff".
If the latter is the case, the Democrat party has sure changed a lot since:
"ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
Ask not what your country can do FOR you; ask what they are about to do TO YOU!!
Re: Sanders Smokes Clinton In Alaska And Washington
Yes it sure has... About 5 years after that a major party realignment occurred and words like that eventually became Republican talking points... Democrats began talking like those old leftist Republicans...Bryce wrote:When you consider a relatively unknown Senator, who accomplished nothing in his life except getting elected to office, beat a "Clinton" by those margins, it says something about how even many Democrats perceive her. Either that or people are attracted to the promise of "free stuff".
If the latter is the case, the Democrat party has sure changed a lot since:
"ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
Caucuses work for Sanders because he can get enough motivated supporters to the caucus sites, she blows him out in primaries....
Re: Sanders Smokes Clinton In Alaska And Washington
We see the same thing happening on the Republican side.audiophile wrote:
Many Democrats pander to LCD (Lowest Common Denominator), but now they have went over the top, now it's LSD...
Think about this for a bit. The framers were a pretty smart group. At the time of the founding, they included language that insured that the people voting would be people that were well informed. Today, when more people are aware of who Kim Kardashian is than can tell you what the three branches of government are, much less the difference between command, market and traditional economic systems, maybe there should be some kind of bar to ensure a well informed voter.
I know, I know, all you leftist progressives are going to scream racism and sexism over the "white, male landowner over 21" thing. Easy to do on its face, but if you look to the original intent and apply it to the time, (something the left NEVER does when it comes to the COTUS) it had nothing whatsoever to do with keeping women or minorities down and everything to do with ensuring a well informed voting population.
Instead of taking the easy way out of this argument, like a Sharpton or Jackson, and play a race or sex card, take a more difficult road. Explain why we, our country, wouldn't be better off with a well informed voter? Just look at the video Audio posted a few days ago when Sanders voters we asked basic questions. Do you really think our country is in good hands with these folks voting? The same can be said about many of the T Rump supporters.
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
Re: Sanders Smokes Clinton In Alaska And Washington
And whoever pulls the strings can define well informed voter? You go start a country with those rules, I'll stay here.Bryce wrote:We see the same thing happening on the Republican side.audiophile wrote:
Many Democrats pander to LCD (Lowest Common Denominator), but now they have went over the top, now it's LSD...
Think about this for a bit. The framers were a pretty smart group. At the time of the founding, they included language that insured that the people voting would be people that were well informed. Today, when more people are aware of who Kim Kardashian is than can tell you what the three branches of government are, much less the difference between command, market and traditional economic systems, maybe there should be some kind of bar to ensure a well informed voter.
I know, I know, all you leftist progressives are going to scream racism and sexism over the "white, male landowner over 21" thing. Easy to do on its face, but if you look to the original intent and apply it to the time, (something the left NEVER does when it comes to the COTUS) it had nothing whatsoever to do with keeping women or minorities down and everything to do with ensuring a well informed voting population.
Instead of taking the easy way out of this argument, like a Sharpton or Jackson, and play a race or sex card, take a more difficult road. Explain why we, our country, wouldn't be better off with a well informed voter? Just look at the video Audio posted a few days ago when Sanders voters we asked basic questions. Do you really think our country is in good hands with these folks voting? The same can be said about many of the T Rump supporters.
Re: Sanders Smokes Clinton In Alaska And Washington
A country was already started with those rules. It's called the United States of America.NS8401 wrote: You go start a country with those rules, I'll stay here.
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
Re: Sanders Smokes Clinton In Alaska And Washington
White males over 21 were essentially the only people with any real power in society in general... Not just voting. So the rule is a norm for the time and not so much a well informed voter issue. If it was then you are surely implying they were seen as the only people capable of being responsible with a vote? That's not pulling any kind of card it just strikes me as exactly what you were implying...Bryce wrote:A country was already started with those rules. It's called the United States of America.NS8401 wrote: You go start a country with those rules, I'll stay here.
Re: Sanders Smokes Clinton In Alaska And Washington
Sure, that's an easy knee jerk reaction. One that I expected. If one takes the time to study societal norms of the time, it certainly tells a different story.NS8401 wrote: White males over 21 were essentially the only people with any real power in society in general... Not just voting. So the rule is a norm for the time and not so much a well informed voter issue. If it was then you are surely implying they were seen as the only people capable of being responsible with a vote? That's not pulling any kind of card it just strikes me as exactly what you were implying...
First, take a look at the education level of various groups in 1776. American Indians and Blacks had few if any educational opportunities at that time and the illiteracy rates among those groups were extremely high. Second, at this time in our history, women were viewed as subservient to men and not regarded to be well informed. You don't hear to much said about "The Founding Mothers". The literacy rates among white males in the colonies at the time was somewhere between 70 and 90 percent. White male landowners scored close to 100 percent.
Another thing our founders realised is that the U.S. was made up of more than people, but also land mass. Giving weight to land mass was one of the reasons the electoral college was formed for presidential elections. Limiting voting to landowners made perfect sense because landowners were viewed as having a greater long term investment in the future of the new country and were pretty much guaranteed to be literate and well informed.
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
Re: Sanders Smokes Clinton In Alaska And Washington
Right but we've moved on... You know when? The good old days...Bryce wrote:Sure, that's an easy knee jerk reaction. One that I expected. If one takes the time to study societal norms of the time, it certainly tells a different story.NS8401 wrote: White males over 21 were essentially the only people with any real power in society in general... Not just voting. So the rule is a norm for the time and not so much a well informed voter issue. If it was then you are surely implying they were seen as the only people capable of being responsible with a vote? That's not pulling any kind of card it just strikes me as exactly what you were implying...
First, take a look at the education level of various groups in 1776. American Indians and Blacks had few if any educational opportunities at that time and the illiteracy rates among those groups were extremely high. Second, at this time in our history, women were viewed as subservient to men and not regarded to be well informed. You don't hear to much said about "The Founding Mothers". The literacy rates among white males in the colonies at the time was somewhere between 70 and 90 percent. White male landowners scored close to 100 percent.
Another thing our founders realised is that the U.S. was made up of more than people, but also land mass. Giving weight to land mass was one of the reasons the electoral college was formed for presidential elections. Limiting voting to landowners made perfect sense because landowners were viewed as having a greater long term investment in the future of the new country and were pretty much guaranteed to be literate and well informed.