Support NeoGAF

[Machina]

Yeah all those racial minorities, women, and LBGT should get fucked over cuz the DNC deserves it!

Yep, because Trump's existence gives the DNC an automatic pass on pretty much everything. What a pathetic circumstance the U.S finds itself in politically.

 

[Toxi]

Yeah all those racial minorities, women, and LBGT should get fucked over cuz the DNC deserves it!

That's not what the poster is saying. They're saying failing to beat fucking Donald Trump with this much preparation for a Clinton campaign would be a massive failure of the Democratic Party leadership.

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

Yeah all those racial minorities, women, and LBGT should get fucked over cuz the DNC deserves it!

No, they shouldn't get fucked over.

 

[jack_package_200]

That's not what the poster is saying. They're saying failing to beat fucking Donald Trump with this much preparation for a Clinton campaign would be a massive failure of the Democratic Party leadership.

I misread.

My bad. Sorry for the hostility.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

That's not what the poster is saying. They're saying failing to beat fucking Donald Trump with this much preparation for a Clinton campaign would be a massive failure of the Democratic Party leadership.

In all likelihood, they won fairly and bent over backwards to placate Sanders to get his endorsement. The man himself is saying he supports Clinton when he has no obligation to do so, what more can be done?

 

[Volimar]

Hell I would let Clinton step down right now but then her supporters will be HillaryOrBust and threaten to break up the party which also leads to Trump. Please, tell me what the fuck we're supposed to do here because Trump legitimately sounds either crazy or just plain bigoted every time he speaks in public.

Why should Hillary step down because of fuckery in the DNC?

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

I misread.

My bad. Sorry for the hostility.

I really don't want a trump president. I can appreciate if Hillary wins, but I'll mostly just be happy for the country is able to maintain our social progressiveness, and expand it via adding another liberal judge, if Hillary wins.

In the end, even in the DNC was completely neutral, I doubt Sanders would have won the south. That's is what doomed him. Unless there is some huge bombshells coming that we don't know about, I just don't think Sanders was well enough known. Maybe if the states were later on? Who knows. Hillary has had an infrastructure for years in the south, and also got the Obama nod.

 

[dolabla]

You know what? Maybe it's just my journalism education speaking to me, but the only thing more disturbing than the implications in some of these emails is the fact that so many of you don't seem to care in the slightest.

You've got:

- Solid evidence that members of the DNC (all the way up to Schultz) acted to influence media coverage of Sanders and Clinton, when the organization's charter clearly states that it must remain impartial (nevermind the fact that it's common sense that such an organization has to be impartial to do its job on behalf of the American people)

- Solid evidence that the DNC and the media (including CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc) colluded to paint Clinton in a favorable light while making Sanders and his campaign look unorganized and confused (email from Schultz to MSNBC's Chuck Todd regarding the network's negative coverage of the DNC, tilted "This must stop," purported journalists emailing copies of planned stories to DNC members for their approval before their editors even see them, etc.)

- DNC paid fake protesters to show up at Trump rallies (one of those things that we admittedly all know happens, but is still shitty to see in written correspondence)

- And this is supposedly just the beginning? What are there, four more days of leaks planned?

And you're all so goddamn blasé about it. Responses here are ranging from basically "None of this is surprising, why is this a big deal?" to "Oh yeah? Well if this looks like this, just IMAGINE what the REPUBLICAN emails must say!"

1. If you're not furious about this, you're not thinking hard enough. Is Bernie Sanders un-electable? Maybe (but that's what everybody said about Trump, and well...). But that's for the American people to decide, NOT the DNC. I won't pretend to have any idea of what their motivation was (or point out Schultz and Clinton's long history with each other...), but this is not the capacity in which they are supposed to operate.

And the press! The fucking press! Chuck Todd getting shamed by Schultz like a dog that just pissed on the carpet is a downright disgrace. Politico reporters sending early copies of their stories to the DNC for approval before they go live (before they even go to the editor!)--are you fucking kidding me? This isn't a puff piece you're writing about a local hero who saved a cat from a burning building that you send him a copy of to make sure you spelled his name right or some shit--this is news about the people running for the President of the United States of America. Journalists aren't supposed to toe a party line. And now that this is all blowing up, none of them are reporting on it because they're all implicated! The only places you can find any info on this are the fringey sites and on Twitter, and Twitter is sure trying their damndest to keep the hashtag buried because Twitter's just as bad (though to be fair to the pieces of shit running Twitter, they don't have the same obligation to impartiality as the press is supposed to).

2. Maybe the Republicans have said and done similarly fucked up shit. Probably! When those emails come up, then we can talk about the Republicans. Y'all are acting like they email each other planning infanticide parties or some shit so you can ignore what the democrats and the DNC have done here, and it's not okay.

And now you have Hillary's campaign managers simultaneously citing a supposed nefarious Russian plot to influence the election, and throwing Chairperson Schultz under the bus as hard and as fast as they can...gimme a break.

This isn't how elections are supposed to work. This isn't how journalism is supposed to work. You can get away with acting indifferent about stuff like this when it's only suspected, but if you're not furious now that there's proof right in your stupid faces that this is how things go, then I feel sorry for you.

http://www.businessinsider.com/leaked-dnc-emails-wikileaks-2016-7
http://www.dangerandplay.com/2016/07/22/5-biggest-scoops-from-the-dncleaks-wikileak/
http://www.mediaite.com/online/leak...-told-chuck-todd-negative-coverage-must-stop/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...c&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork

Spoiler

I get banned pretty much every other week so I don't really care if I get banned for this post. The quality of discourse here is sophomoric at best, and Gaming side isn't a whole lot better. Neiteio is about the only actual good person here anyway. See y'all in hell.

Great breakdown!

And now Debbie Wasserman Schultz won't speak at the DNC: http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/22/politics/dnc-wikileaks-emails/

 

[jack_package_200]

Democratic chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz no longer has major speaking role at convention, source says, in wake of email leak at DNC.

Jeff Zeleny of CNN https://twitter.com/jeffzeleny/status/757045249336369152

 

[thiscoldblack]

Your wish is my command.

You banned him because of that? Wow, talk about misuse of power.

I thought that was a great lengthy post discussing actual findings rather than the usual pandering by other users. He probably mentions the ban since more than 90% of this thread is full of Hillary fanatics, including some of the mods.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Why should Hillary step down because of fuckery in the DNC?

I'm saying that Clinton doesn't mean anything to me though she is capable of handling the job, it's more about defeating the rise of nationalist fascism. I don't care who has to do what, as long as it unites people against Trump.

 

[Machina]

Democratic chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz no longer has major speaking role at convention, source says, in wake of email leak at DNC.

Jeff Zeleny of CNN https://twitter.com/jeffzeleny/status/757045249336369152

Panic stations. Wikileaks may have just lost the election for Hillary, or at the very least severely damaged her.

Uh ohhhh.

 

[excelsiorlef]

You banned him because of that? Wow, talk about misuse of power.

I thought that was a great lengthy post discussing actual findings rather than the usual pandering by other users. He probably mentions the ban since more than 90% of this thread is full of Hillary fanatics, including some of the mods.

Most of these threads have more people complaining about supposed fanatics than actual people acting like these supposed fanatics.

 

[Volimar]

You banned him because of that? Wow, talk about misuse of power.

I thought that was a great lengthy post discussing actual findings rather than the usual pandering by other users. He probably mentions the ban since more than 90% of this thread is full of Hillary fanatics, including some of the mods.

I don't want to get in a meta debate, but there's something to be said for ending your edgy post with "I don't care if I get banned". I mean, other than the condescending "journalism education" (I'm an expert), I can see what he's saying but come on, you're not fighting the man with that go ahead and ban me shit.

Panic stations. Wikileaks may have just lost the election for Hillary, or at the very least severely damaged her.

Uh ohhhh.

Supposedly more email leaks are coming...

 

[jack_package_200]

Panic stations. Wikileaks may have just lost the election for Hillary, or at the very least severely damaged her.

Uh ohhhh.

I didn't realize HA Goodman had a GAF account.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Panic stations. Wikileaks may have just lost the election for Hillary, or at the very least severely damaged her.

Uh ohhhh.

What the hell are you talking about? Schultz doesn't mean anything to anybody other than partisan hacks within the DNC. She will be gone soon too.

 

[Christine]

You banned him because of that? Wow, talk about misuse of power.

I thought that was a great lengthy post discussing actual findings rather than the usual pandering by other users. He probably mentions the ban since more than 90% of this thread is full of Hillary fanatics, including some of the mods.

This isn't a matter for discussion in thread. Take it to PM.

 

[TheLaughingStock]

Democratic chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz no longer has major speaking role at convention, source says, in wake of email leak at DNC.

Jeff Zeleny of CNN https://twitter.com/jeffzeleny/status/757045249336369152

Good for the Dems. She was a total hack.

 

[Mango Positive]

Your wish is my command.

Terrible post. You should be ashamed of yourself. And your country.

 

[Corronchilejano]

It's like everyone is doing their best to take Trump and sit him in the White House.

 

[Christine]

Terrible post. You should be ashamed of yourself. And your country.

Nah.

 

[brainchild]

Democratic chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz no longer has major speaking role at convention, source says, in wake of email leak at DNC.

Jeff Zeleny of CNN https://twitter.com/jeffzeleny/status/757045249336369152

Best news to come out of this whole debacle.

 

[Machina]

It's like everyone is doing their best to take Trump and sit him in the White House.

When did chaos and hate become vogue?

 

[Ekai]

You know what? Maybe it's just my journalism education speaking to me, but the only thing more disturbing than the implications in some of these emails is the fact that so many of you don't seem to care in the slightest.

You've got:

- Solid evidence that members of the DNC (all the way up to Schultz) acted to influence media coverage of Sanders and Clinton, when the organization's charter clearly states that it must remain impartial (nevermind the fact that it's common sense that such an organization has to be impartial to do its job on behalf of the American people)

- Solid evidence that the DNC and the media (including CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc) colluded to paint Clinton in a favorable light while making Sanders and his campaign look unorganized and confused (email from Schultz to MSNBC's Chuck Todd regarding the network's negative coverage of the DNC, tilted "This must stop," purported journalists emailing copies of planned stories to DNC members for their approval before their editors even see them, etc.)

- DNC paid fake protesters to show up at Drumpf rallies (one of those things that we admittedly all know happens, but is still shitty to see in written correspondence)

- And this is supposedly just the beginning? What are there, four more days of leaks planned?

And you're all so goddamn blasé about it. Responses here are ranging from basically "None of this is surprising, why is this a big deal?" to "Oh yeah? Well if this looks like this, just IMAGINE what the REPUBLICAN emails must say!"

1. If you're not furious about this, you're not thinking hard enough. Is Bernie Sanders un-electable? Maybe (but that's what everybody said about Drumpf, and well...). But that's for the American people to decide, NOT the DNC. I won't pretend to have any idea of what their motivation was (or point out Schultz and Clinton's long history with each other...), but this is not the capacity in which they are supposed to operate.

And the press! The fucking press! Chuck Todd getting shamed by Schultz like a dog that just pissed on the carpet is a downright disgrace. Politico reporters sending early copies of their stories to the DNC for approval before they go live (before they even go to the editor!)--are you fucking kidding me? This isn't a puff piece you're writing about a local hero who saved a cat from a burning building that you send him a copy of to make sure you spelled his name right or some shit--this is news about the people running for the President of the United States of America. Journalists aren't supposed to toe a party line. And now that this is all blowing up, none of them are reporting on it because they're all implicated! The only places you can find any info on this are the fringey sites and on Twitter, and Twitter is sure trying their damndest to keep the hashtag buried because Twitter's just as bad (though to be fair to the pieces of shit running Twitter, they don't have the same obligation to impartiality as the press is supposed to).

2. Maybe the Republicans have said and done similarly fucked up shit. Probably! When those emails come up, then we can talk about the Republicans. Y'all are acting like they email each other planning infanticide parties or some shit so you can ignore what the democrats and the DNC have done here, and it's not okay.

And now you have Hillary's campaign managers simultaneously citing a supposed nefarious Russian plot to influence the election, and throwing Chairperson Schultz under the bus as hard and as fast as they can...gimme a break.

This isn't how elections are supposed to work. This isn't how journalism is supposed to work. You can get away with acting indifferent about stuff like this when it's only suspected, but if you're not furious now that there's proof right in your stupid faces that this is how things go, then I feel sorry for you.

http://www.businessinsider.com/leaked-dnc-emails-wikileaks-2016-7
http://www.dangerandplay.com/2016/07/22/5-biggest-scoops-from-the-dncleaks-wikileak/
http://www.mediaite.com/online/leak...-told-chuck-todd-negative-coverage-must-stop/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...c&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork

Spoiler

I get banned pretty much every other week so I don't really care if I get banned for this post. The quality of discourse here is sophomoric at best, and Gaming side isn't a whole lot better. Neiteio is about the only actual good person here anyway. See y'all in hell.

Good post outside of your spoiler bit at the end there. It doesn't really help or add anything to the discussion. It's pointlessly edgy.

 

[Corronchilejano]

When did chaos and hate become vogue?

There's a worldwide push from the conservative right to bring the world back to its knees, holding their hatred on their shoulders.

 

[Polari]

You know what? Maybe it's just my journalism education speaking to me, but the only thing more disturbing than the implications in some of these emails is the fact that so many of you don't seem to care in the slightest.

You've got:

- Solid evidence that members of the DNC (all the way up to Schultz) acted to influence media coverage of Sanders and Clinton, when the organization's charter clearly states that it must remain impartial (nevermind the fact that it's common sense that such an organization has to be impartial to do its job on behalf of the American people)

- Solid evidence that the DNC and the media (including CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc) colluded to paint Clinton in a favorable light while making Sanders and his campaign look unorganized and confused (email from Schultz to MSNBC's Chuck Todd regarding the network's negative coverage of the DNC, tilted "This must stop," purported journalists emailing copies of planned stories to DNC members for their approval before their editors even see them, etc.)

- DNC paid fake protesters to show up at Trump rallies (one of those things that we admittedly all know happens, but is still shitty to see in written correspondence)

- And this is supposedly just the beginning? What are there, four more days of leaks planned?

And you're all so goddamn blasé about it. Responses here are ranging from basically "None of this is surprising, why is this a big deal?" to "Oh yeah? Well if this looks like this, just IMAGINE what the REPUBLICAN emails must say!"

1. If you're not furious about this, you're not thinking hard enough. Is Bernie Sanders un-electable? Maybe (but that's what everybody said about Trump, and well...). But that's for the American people to decide, NOT the DNC. I won't pretend to have any idea of what their motivation was (or point out Schultz and Clinton's long history with each other...), but this is not the capacity in which they are supposed to operate.

And the press! The fucking press! Chuck Todd getting shamed by Schultz like a dog that just pissed on the carpet is a downright disgrace. Politico reporters sending early copies of their stories to the DNC for approval before they go live (before they even go to the editor!)--are you fucking kidding me? This isn't a puff piece you're writing about a local hero who saved a cat from a burning building that you send him a copy of to make sure you spelled his name right or some shit--this is news about the people running for the President of the United States of America. Journalists aren't supposed to toe a party line. And now that this is all blowing up, none of them are reporting on it because they're all implicated! The only places you can find any info on this are the fringey sites and on Twitter, and Twitter is sure trying their damndest to keep the hashtag buried because Twitter's just as bad (though to be fair to the pieces of shit running Twitter, they don't have the same obligation to impartiality as the press is supposed to).

2. Maybe the Republicans have said and done similarly fucked up shit. Probably! When those emails come up, then we can talk about the Republicans. Y'all are acting like they email each other planning infanticide parties or some shit so you can ignore what the democrats and the DNC have done here, and it's not okay.

And now you have Hillary's campaign managers simultaneously citing a supposed nefarious Russian plot to influence the election, and throwing Chairperson Schultz under the bus as hard and as fast as they can...gimme a break.

This isn't how elections are supposed to work. This isn't how journalism is supposed to work. You can get away with acting indifferent about stuff like this when it's only suspected, but if you're not furious now that there's proof right in your stupid faces that this is how things go, then I feel sorry for you.

http://www.businessinsider.com/leaked-dnc-emails-wikileaks-2016-7
http://www.dangerandplay.com/2016/07/22/5-biggest-scoops-from-the-dncleaks-wikileak/
http://www.mediaite.com/online/leak...-told-chuck-todd-negative-coverage-must-stop/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...c&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork

Spoiler

I get banned pretty much every other week so I don't really care if I get banned for this post. The quality of discourse here is sophomoric at best, and Gaming side isn't a whole lot better. Neiteio is about the only actual good person here anyway. See y'all in hell.

Pretty depressing that posters now expect to get banned for a post like this. I think it's a good summary of the issues both within the emails and this thread.

 

[jaxpunk]

Pretty depressing that posters now expect to get banned for a post like this. I think it's a good summary of the issues both within the emails and this thread.

The mod who banned them was even flippant about it. Insane.

 

[ShironRedshift]

Good post outside of your spoiler bit at the end there.

Pretty depressing that posters now expect to get banned for a post like this. I think it's a good summary of the issues both within the emails and this thread.

Where's the evidence of collusion in these e-mails?

 

[Christine]

Pretty depressing that posters now expect to get banned for a post like this. I think it's a good summary of the issues both within the emails and this thread.

It's a fine post outside of the fuck everybody, see you in hell, I don't care if I catch a ban for this sign-off. I will continue to oblige even the best posts that end that way with a "see you after the election". This is a pretty bright-line rule, I think.

Now, back to the discussion of leaked DNC emails.

 

[royalan]

All this stuff just confirmed what I already thought and knew.

They have a great system and infrastructure to control messages, etc. There was never supposed to be any other person for the Dem nom than Hillary. The whole DNC was set up the past 8 years to prepare for her run at the whitehouse after Obama's terms.

If they can some how be beaten by freaking Trump, they deserve it.

What did the DNC do?

Where are your receipts?

How was Bernie treated unfairly by the primary process? SHOW ME EVIDENCE.

Why even bother. This is like the 100th time this has been asked.

 

[disastermouse]

I misread.

My bad. Sorry for the hostility.

You saw what you were sure was there, even when it wasn't. I'm shocked you didn't invoke the word 'bro'.

On a separate note, I wonder if Hillary supporters really think they can bully Hillary refusers into changing their minds.

I remember last cycle when my friend had decided to refuse to vote for Obama again. I debated with him. I tried to lay out my argument as clearly as I could. I never insulted his intelligence, accused him of being blind to his privilege, assaulted his morals or personal ethics, or in any way implied that he was less-than. This cycle, I've had every single one of those things done to me for being a refuser and every time it happens, it hardens my resolve.

 

[Ekai]

Where's the evidence of collusion in these e-mails?

So you're saying you aren't reading the e-mails? There's plenty of evidence for discussion of collusion having taken place. Which is damning to me regardless of the end point execution of said collusion. Discussion of it still happened. You can't exactly wave that away. It's there.

I'm still voting Democrat regardless, always was, but the DNC aren't doing themselves any favors with BS like discussing using Bernie's religion against him in battleground states. Stuff like that pisses me off regardless of political party or who did it. We need to stop giving Democrats free passes when they say or do things that is hopelessly out of tune with any sensibility. As someone who is very liberal leaning, I don't see the issue with criticizing the Democrats when they behave in gross manners. I want them to move more to the left afterall. And employing or even thinking of employing those kinds of tactics doesn't sit well with me.

 

[royalan]

You saw what you were sure was there, even when it wasn't. I'm shocked you didn't invoke the word 'bro'.

On a separate note, I wonder if Hillary supporters really think they can bully Hillary refusers into changing their minds.

I remember last cycle when my friend had decided to refuse to vote for Obama again. I debated with him. I tried to lay out my argument as clearly as I could. I never insulted his intelligence, accused him of being blind to his privilege, assaulted his morals or personal ethics, or in any way implied that he was less-than. This cycle, I've had every single one of those things done to me for being a refuser and every time it happens, it hardens my resolve.

I don't think the Hillary supporters care at this point. ______ or Busters are of a negligible number, and the proof is in who Hillary chose as her VP. Vote or not.

But if you're going to peddle in conspiracy theories with facts about as solid as my dog's shed hair, don't be surprised when you're talked down.

 

[pigeon]

On a separate note, I wonder if Hillary supporters really think they can bully Hillary refusers into changing their minds.

I've made this point before, but it's not about bullying, it's about setting a clear social expectation that supporting white supremacy is not appropriate in civilized society.

Obviously to the person who requires shunning it's not particularly persuasive, but it's mostly meant to benefit the people watching.

 

[msdstc]

Pretty depressing that posters now expect to get banned for a post like this. I think it's a good summary of the issues both within the emails and this thread.

Whats sad is anybody who sees wrong in these emails is immediately chased out of here.

 

[GoldenEye 007]

The DNC fucked Bernie? Well what do ya know.

No, the voters voted to fuck Bernie.

 

[jack_package_200]

Deleted

 

[pigeon]

Whats sad is anybody who sees wrong in these emails is immediately chased out of here.

This is dumb, come on. There are a huge number of people in this thread posting angry stuff about the emails and they are mostly not banned.

That guy got banned for saying "ban me, fuck you." Not sure what you expected would happen after that.

 

[Piecake]

Whats sad is anybody who sees wrong in these emails is immediately chased out of here.

This whole persecution complex that I have seen among some of Bernie supporters has really been one of the most annoying things that I have experienced this primary season.

I mean, who the fuck is being chased out in this thread? The guy that got banned for basically asking for it?

 

[Gutek]

Shhh those 3 million +voters are a lie put out by the big banks to screw over the white man.

The fucking nerve. Pure condescension, with a pinch of "Bernie voters a racist whities".

 

[Ekai]

Shhh those 3 million +voters are a lie put out by the big banks to screw over the white man.

I thought this forum was supposed to move beyond "Bernie V. Hillary shit". Yet we're still seeing narratives like "only white men liked Bernie" and other such arguments taking place.

 

[disastermouse]

I don't think the Hillary supporters care at this point. ______ or Busters are of a negligible number, and the proof is in who Hillary chose as her VP. Vote or not.

But if you're going to peddle in conspiracy theories with facts about as solid as my dog's shed hair, don't be surprised when you're talked down.

Which conspiracy theory? It's in the emails. It's not a theory.

You know what we don't have any conclusive proof about? The 'this is motivated by Russia trying to throw the election' stuff. And even if they are, that still doesn't clear the DNC here. By way of analogy, If my girlfriend's friend was motivated to tell me that my girlfriend was cheating on me because she wanted to break up the relationship, and she had proof, the fact that the person's motivation may have been selfish wouldn't be enough for me to ignore the truth.

I flat out cannot vote for Democrats after this.

 

[jack_package_200]

The fucking nerve. Pure condescension, with a pinch of "Bernie voters a racist whities".

It was an absurd to the extreme statement that wasn't intended to be taken seriously.

I'll delete it. I'm sorry. It was a stupid thing to say.

 

[ShironRedshift]

Which conspiracy theory? It's in the emails. It's not a theory..

That there's evidence of collusion. No one's been able to provide any so far. Evidence of people having opinions and biases yes, but not collusion. That word has a meaning, and no one's provided any evidence of it actually occurring here.

 

[GutsOfThor]

You know what? Maybe it's just my journalism education speaking to me, but the only thing more disturbing than the implications in some of these emails is the fact that so many of you don't seem to care in the slightest.

You've got:

- Solid evidence that members of the DNC (all the way up to Schultz) acted to influence media coverage of Sanders and Clinton, when the organization's charter clearly states that it must remain impartial (nevermind the fact that it's common sense that such an organization has to be impartial to do its job on behalf of the American people)

- Solid evidence that the DNC and the media (including CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc) colluded to paint Clinton in a favorable light while making Sanders and his campaign look unorganized and confused (email from Schultz to MSNBC's Chuck Todd regarding the network's negative coverage of the DNC, tilted "This must stop," purported journalists emailing copies of planned stories to DNC members for their approval before their editors even see them, etc.)

- DNC paid fake protesters to show up at Trump rallies (one of those things that we admittedly all know happens, but is still shitty to see in written correspondence)

- And this is supposedly just the beginning? What are there, four more days of leaks planned?

And you're all so goddamn blasé about it. Responses here are ranging from basically "None of this is surprising, why is this a big deal?" to "Oh yeah? Well if this looks like this, just IMAGINE what the REPUBLICAN emails must say!"

1. If you're not furious about this, you're not thinking hard enough. Is Bernie Sanders un-electable? Maybe (but that's what everybody said about Trump, and well...). But that's for the American people to decide, NOT the DNC. I won't pretend to have any idea of what their motivation was (or point out Schultz and Clinton's long history with each other...), but this is not the capacity in which they are supposed to operate.

And the press! The fucking press! Chuck Todd getting shamed by Schultz like a dog that just pissed on the carpet is a downright disgrace. Politico reporters sending early copies of their stories to the DNC for approval before they go live (before they even go to the editor!)--are you fucking kidding me? This isn't a puff piece you're writing about a local hero who saved a cat from a burning building that you send him a copy of to make sure you spelled his name right or some shit--this is news about the people running for the President of the United States of America. Journalists aren't supposed to toe a party line. And now that this is all blowing up, none of them are reporting on it because they're all implicated! The only places you can find any info on this are the fringey sites and on Twitter, and Twitter is sure trying their damndest to keep the hashtag buried because Twitter's just as bad (though to be fair to the pieces of shit running Twitter, they don't have the same obligation to impartiality as the press is supposed to).

2. Maybe the Republicans have said and done similarly fucked up shit. Probably! When those emails come up, then we can talk about the Republicans. Y'all are acting like they email each other planning infanticide parties or some shit so you can ignore what the democrats and the DNC have done here, and it's not okay.

And now you have Hillary's campaign managers simultaneously citing a supposed nefarious Russian plot to influence the election, and throwing Chairperson Schultz under the bus as hard and as fast as they can...gimme a break.

This isn't how elections are supposed to work. This isn't how journalism is supposed to work. You can get away with acting indifferent about stuff like this when it's only suspected, but if you're not furious now that there's proof right in your stupid faces that this is how things go, then I feel sorry for you.

http://www.businessinsider.com/leaked-dnc-emails-wikileaks-2016-7
http://www.dangerandplay.com/2016/07/22/5-biggest-scoops-from-the-dncleaks-wikileak/
http://www.mediaite.com/online/leak...-told-chuck-todd-negative-coverage-must-stop/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...c&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork

Spoiler

I get banned pretty much every other week so I don't really care if I get banned for this post. The quality of discourse here is sophomoric at best, and Gaming side isn't a whole lot better. Neiteio is about the only actual good person here anyway. See y'all in hell.

Aye Aye Aye! Not a good look at all.

All this stuff just confirmed what I already thought and knew.

They have a great system and infrastructure to control messages, etc. There was never supposed to be any other person for the Dem nom than Hillary. The whole DNC was set up the past 8 years to prepare for her run at the whitehouse after Obama's terms.

If they can some how be beaten by freaking Trump, they deserve it.

I feel the same way. She's had 8 years to prepare for this shit. If she doesn't take it in November, there is no one to blame but her and the campaign.

 

[Azzanadra]

I thought this forum was supposed to move beyond "Bernie V. Hillary shit". Yet we're still seeing narratives like "only white men liked Bernie" and other such arguments taking place.

Well the narrative has probably evolved to white atheist college aged men at this point. Its sad to see only god fearing Christians are apparently eligible for the Presidency.

 

[Hylian7]

I flat out cannot vote for Democrats after this.

I get what you are saying, but at the same time...you can somehow see yourself voting for Trump instead?

Even with all this shit, I feel like Hillary is still the best option of what's left, despite being lesser of evils.

 

[Blader]

I thought this forum was supposed to move beyond "Bernie V. Hillary shit". Yet we're still seeing narratives like "only white men liked Bernie" and other such arguments taking place.

White liberals were the majority of Bernie's base. How is that a narrative?

 

[pigeon]

I flat out cannot vote for Democrats after this.

You were never going to anyway, since they're unlikely to assuage your concern that white men are the most disadvantaged people in American society.

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

I really really hope no Sanders voter would vote for Trump just because they are mad at Hillary or the DNC.

I mean, Trumps first act to building his potential presidency was selected someone that is extremely socially conservative. Thats clue enough to show that Trump isn't with the whole "alt right" stuff, and is just clue less about things.