- Joined
- Dec 5, 2015
- Messages
- 3,325
- Reaction score
- 2,348
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Left
Here's the CNN interview with her Majesty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
Well, there you go, right out of the horse's mouth:
Translation, "I will reinforce to them that, yes, I am trying to rig this." As far as I'm concerned, the Democratic Establishment is earning and working towards a serious collapse in their authority and power. #TimCanova2016 #FeeltheBern
PS: I cleaned up her language, because she was so obfuscatory during the interview discussion, I think so people would stop listening to the unconscionable, anti-democratic horse**** that was spewing out of her mouth.
Well, there you go, right out of the horse's mouth:
CNN Anchor:
"Clinton lost to Sanders by 22% points, the largest percentage point victory in a contested Democratic primary since John F. Kennedy, but it looks as though Clinton and Sanders are leaving [New Hampshire] with the same number of delegates in their pockets because Clinton has the support of New Hampshire's 'superdelegates,' these Party insiders. What do you tell voters, who're new to the primary process who says [that] this makes them feel like it's all rigged?"
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz:
"Well, let me just make sure that I can clarify exactly what was available [to Sanders and Clinton in the New Hampshire primary]. The unpledged delegates are a separate category; the only thing available on the ballot in a primary or caucus is the pledged delegates --those that are tied to [the voters' choices]. Unpledged [super]delegates exist, really, to make sure that Party leaders and elected officials don't have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists. [Cue irrelevant buzzwords.]"
"Clinton lost to Sanders by 22% points, the largest percentage point victory in a contested Democratic primary since John F. Kennedy, but it looks as though Clinton and Sanders are leaving [New Hampshire] with the same number of delegates in their pockets because Clinton has the support of New Hampshire's 'superdelegates,' these Party insiders. What do you tell voters, who're new to the primary process who says [that] this makes them feel like it's all rigged?"
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz:
"Well, let me just make sure that I can clarify exactly what was available [to Sanders and Clinton in the New Hampshire primary]. The unpledged delegates are a separate category; the only thing available on the ballot in a primary or caucus is the pledged delegates --those that are tied to [the voters' choices]. Unpledged [super]delegates exist, really, to make sure that Party leaders and elected officials don't have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists. [Cue irrelevant buzzwords.]"
Translation, "I will reinforce to them that, yes, I am trying to rig this." As far as I'm concerned, the Democratic Establishment is earning and working towards a serious collapse in their authority and power. #TimCanova2016 #FeeltheBern
PS: I cleaned up her language, because she was so obfuscatory during the interview discussion, I think so people would stop listening to the unconscionable, anti-democratic horse**** that was spewing out of her mouth.