Welcome to Dem Land

**Richard** · August-30-19, 09:49 PM

Originally Posted by Jimaz

I also understood that you conveniently neglected to disclose it as satire, leaving unwitting readers to possibly accept it as truth.

But that wouldn't have been a sly attempt to deceive DetroitYES patrons, would it?

Why are you even here?

How is it any different then some of the links you or others post that are commentaries or opinion pieces and try and push them off as facts,not to even mention an entire thread devoted to somebody pushing thier opinion off as facts trying to convince the unwitting to believe him.

you really have a low impression of your fellow DetroitYES posters if you honestly believe that any would have been unwittingly enough to accept that post as truth.

Why are you even here your self,thinking about contributing in a positive way or is it another somebody in this world sucks post then I am out of here?

Or maybe you have not noticed that I am not a Dem in Dem land?

**Jimaz** · August-30-19, 10:33 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

How is it any different then some of the links you or others post that are commentaries or opinion pieces and try and push them off as facts,not to even mention an entire thread devoted to somebody pushing thier opinion off as facts trying to convince the unwitting to believe him.

you really have a low impression of your fellow DetroitYES posters if you honestly believe that any would have been unwittingly enough to accept that post as truth.

Why are you even here your self,thinking about contributing in a positive way or is it another somebody in this world sucks post then I am out of here?

Or maybe you have not noticed that I am not a Dem in Dem land?

I'm confident enough to allow the audience to decide.

But I'm not a closet "satirist" truther. Can you claim the same?

And once again, you didn't answer my question.

Really. Why are you even here?

**Richard** · August-30-19, 11:17 PM

Originally Posted by Jimaz

I'm confident enough to allow the audience to decide.

But I'm not a closet "satirist" truther. Can you claim the same?

And once again, you didn't answer my question.

Really. Why are you even here?

For about the fifth time that you never choose to answer my question as to who thom Hartman is to you?

Why do you even feel that it is your place to question why anybody is here?

Really

**Zacha341** · August-31-19, 05:15 AM

^^^Hah! Really indeed.

I've sometimes thought someone should HOST a counter talk-host [[no, not the Limbaugh, Hannity 'my party, right or wrong' piñata types - enough of that already) to the Hartman 'program' monopoly on Detroityes!

But in doing so you'd become 'branded' and delimited to that solicitation and politic [[desirable for some), and I personally don't defend any one talk media [[em, news source) personality that infinitely...

...

**Pam** · August-31-19, 07:49 PM

DNC Screws Tulsi Out Of Next Dem Debate

https://youtu.be/r7L_33lkrwU

**Richard** · August-31-19, 08:16 PM

Originally Posted by Pam

https://youtu.be/r7L_33lkrwU

DNC to Pam,you just sit back and relax,we will let you know who to vote for when the time is right,trust us we got this.

Personally I think they got mad when she ripped Kamala Harris,who they were not done useing yet.

**Zacha341** · September-01-19, 10:40 AM

Let the games begin: The joyful details

Gabbard Victimized by DNC's Dubious Debate Criteria

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...ia_141055.html

**Shelby_** · September-01-19, 10:56 PM

I've been waiting for Richard to point out this article is clearly labeled commentary

Seriously though, this article has zero substance. All foam and no beer, as Amy Klobuchar would say.

The DNC had to determine some set of criteria to narrow down the debate field. They did so and announced the criteria for qualifying for the third debate back in May. If Gabbard thought there was a problem with the process she should have said something sooner. All the campaigns had plenty of time to meet the threshold. Gabbard, unfortunately for her, did not. Now she hints at there being a conspiracy against her and she wants the DNC to change the rules.

She needed at least 2 percent in 4 of the 21 qualifying polls. She couldn't meet that threshold. There's a reason for this and it's not because the system is rigged.

**Zacha341** · September-02-19, 08:19 AM

^^^ Thanks for the added info. Commentary can be useful, especially if it's commentary you agree with I have found.

**Pam** · September-02-19, 12:29 PM

Gabbard has polled at 2% or more in two polls sponsored by the two largest newspapers in two early primary states, but the DNC -- through its mysteriously incoherent selection process -- has determined that these surveys do not count toward her debate eligibility. Without these exclusions, Gabbard would have already qualified. She has polled at 2% or more in two polls officially deemed “qualifying,” and surpassed the 130,000 donor threshold on Aug. 2.

Tulsi met the donor threshold. She met the polling threshold, just not all in polls that were "approved". The criteria for how polls are judged to be approved is unclear. Sorry, that seems like BS to me. As the article points out, she has donors from every state. She was the most Googled candidate post debate twice. Not exactly a candidate that nobody wants to hear from.

**Richard** · September-02-19, 12:43 PM

^ you do not have to apologize for anything.

Most reasonable people,weather they agree with a candidate or not,can recognize underhanded BS.

Do they honestly believe that when the supporters of the candidates that they are throwing under the bus,are going to continue supporting the party come election time?

**Shelby_** · September-02-19, 06:32 PM

Gabbard had two rounds to get noticed. She tried, she failed. She only started whining about "transparency and fairness" when it became evident she wouldn't reach the really low bar set by the DNC.

Real Clear Politics has Gabbard polling at 1.4% Not exactly a candidate generating a lot of interest.

**Zacha341** · September-02-19, 06:48 PM

^^^ In the mean time we've got Mr. Biden and his wife's 'endorsement' that really compels......

I've noticed he's staying away from the fundraising, etc upcoming events in CA. Hiding out as long as possible. He know's full well they'll eat him alive [[he's too centrist for his own folk!).

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/19/polit...ump/index.html

**Shelby_** · September-02-19, 07:04 PM

Originally Posted by Richard

^ you do not have to apologize for anything
Do they honestly believe that when the supporters of the candidates that they are throwing under the bus,are going to continue supporting the party come election time?

Nobody is being thrown under the bus. The number of candidates needs to be thinned down. Gabbard had two debates to make her mark. It didn't happen.

As for your rhetorical question, yes I think they [[we) will. Blue no matter who. I'm a platform voter. I vote democratic because their platform represents my values better than the republicans.

**Honky Tonk** · September-03-19, 10:12 AM

Originally Posted by Shelby_

Gabbard had two debates to make her mark. It didn't happen.

Tulsi Gabbard hit the bullseye, dead center, twice. The problem is she's not shooting @ the DNC agenda target.

Originally Posted by Shelby_

As for your rhetorical question, yes I think they [[we) will. Blue no matter who. I'm a platform voter. I vote democratic because their platform represents my values better than the republicans.

Sad...

**Shelby_** · September-03-19, 12:25 PM

It's "sad" to vote for the party who best represents my values?

Could you explain the rational behind that assertion? I should vote against my own interests? Or was your comment simply meant to display disrespect for values different from your own?

**jcole** · September-03-19, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by Shelby_

It's "sad" to vote for the party who best represents my values?

Could you explain the rational behind that assertion? I should vote against my own interests? Or was your comment simply meant to display disrespect for values different from your own?

I'm certainly with you, Shelby. I may have values more, or less, in line with a certain candidate and support that candidate throughout the primary season, but when push comes to shove, even if MY candidate doesn't make it to the general election, I'm certainly not going to vote against the party because my candidate didn't make it unless of course the nominee for the Democratic party is someone I consider downright dangerous or a total loose cannon.
I'm fairly certain that's what most of the proclaimed Republicans did in 2016 or we wouldn't have Trump as president today.

**Richard** · September-03-19, 01:13 PM

It was clear in 2016 that party lines is not a deciding factor for everybody.

If the reports of 46% stayed home are true then the ,lead,follow or get out of the way would apply.

https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/54581...p-survey-finds

Fully 12 percent of people who voted for Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries voted for President Trump in the general election.

**Pam** · September-04-19, 09:17 AM

Joe Biden needs to drop out. When people are laughing at you this much, it's time.

https://youtu.be/BV8_-zK6vzs

**rb336** · September-04-19, 11:26 AM

Originally Posted by Pam

Tulsi met the donor threshold. She met the polling threshold, just not all in polls that were "approved". The criteria for how polls are judged to be approved is unclear. Sorry, that seems like BS to me. As the article points out, she has donors from every state. She was the most Googled candidate post debate twice. Not exactly a candidate that nobody wants to hear from.

She is the most erudite, charming, and clear-speaking candidate talking about the things the Democratic leadership doesn't want to talk about. Plus, she's a veteran. The Democratic leadership feels she is a threat to Goldman-Sachs, so...

**Richard** · September-04-19, 11:43 AM

^ that pretty much sums it up.

So where is the DNC at today and what is thier mission?

They have Biden,the last remnants of anything remotely related to conservative and the rest that seems to lean towards the socialist aspect,so is that thier objective,far left?

**Shelby_** · September-04-19, 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by Pam

Joe Biden needs to drop out. When people are laughing at you this much, it's time.

https://youtu.be/BV8_-zK6vzs

LOL. I don't necessarily disagree, but we're living in Trumplandia now. Everyday is a new day in which the bar for what is acceptable reaches a new low.

For example: Today The President of the United States altered a National Hurricane Center map with a sharpie to falsely extend the official forecast toward Alabama so the poor fragile baby didn't have to admit he tweeted information that was incorrect.

Hilariously, this is actually a violation of federal law.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2074

Whoever knowingly issues or publishes any counterfeit weather forecast or warning of weather conditions falsely representing such forecast or warning to have been issued or published by the Weather Bureau, United States Signal Service, or other branch of the Government service, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ninety days, or both.

**oladub** · September-04-19, 10:38 PM

Originally Posted by rb336

She is the most erudite, charming, and clear-speaking candidate talking about the things the Democratic leadership doesn't want to talk about. Plus, she's a veteran. The Democratic leadership feels she is a threat to Goldman-Sachs, so...

When Tulsi Gabbard cut down Sen. Harris, it occurred to me that here was someone who could get into the same room as Xi or Putin who wasn't going to get steamrolled or do something embarrassing. When she served in the national guard for two weeks recently instead of campaigning she signaled that she had integrity and a sense of priorities. As a Representative, she incurred the wrath of the establishment by having a conversation with Assad in an attempt to promote peace. If there is anyone who has their head on straight in this campaign it is probably Tulsi Gabbard.

**Richard** · September-04-19, 11:21 PM

Originally Posted by Shelby_

Nobody is being thrown under the bus. The number of candidates needs to be thinned down. Gabbard had two debates to make her mark. It didn't happen.

As for your rhetorical question, yes I think they [[we) will. Blue no matter who. I'm a platform voter. I vote democratic because their platform represents my values better than the republicans.

It is a presidential election,your values or my values do not apply,it is the values set forth for the country as a whole.

Your values kick in on the local and state elections,case in point Californians as a whole in the state of California value protecting and supporting illegal immigrants over their own citizens.

Outside of a few vocal ones the United States as a country does not and views them as illegals subject to deportation.

**Shelby_** · September-05-19, 01:09 AM

Originally Posted by Richard

It is a presidential election,your values or my values do not apply,it is the values set forth for the country as a whole.

Your values kick in on the local and state elections,case in point Californians as a whole in the state of California value protecting and supporting illegal immigrants over their own citizens.

Outside of a few vocal ones the United States as a country does not and views them as illegals subject to deportation.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1660/immigration.aspx