Chaos At Nevada Democratic Convention; DNC Leaders Flee Building...

[RJ Liberty]

By Tim Hains
Posted on May 15, 2016

Adryenn Ashley posted several live videos from inside the Paris Hotel in Las Vegas, where arcane secondary rounds of the delegate selection process of Nevada's Democratic caucus erupted into chaos Saturday night. Bernie Sanders supporters demanded 64 rejected pro-Sanders delegates listed in a "minority report" prepared by their campaign be allowed to participate in selecting delegates for the national convention.

DNC leaders refused to reconsider their decision not to allow this, adjourned, and fled the building amid a chorus of boos; leaving hotel security and local police officers to handle the angry Sanders supporters.

Full article here.

[Michael Landon]

By Tim Hains
Posted on May 15, 2016

Adryenn Ashley posted several live videos from inside the Paris Hotel in Las Vegas, where arcane secondary rounds of the delegate selection process of Nevada's Democratic caucus erupted into chaos Saturday night. Bernie Sanders supporters demanded 64 rejected pro-Sanders delegates listed in a "minority report" prepared by their campaign be allowed to participate in selecting delegates for the national convention.

DNC leaders refused to reconsider their decision not to allow this, adjourned, and fled the building amid a chorus of boos; leaving hotel security and local police officers to handle the angry Sanders supporters.

Full article here.

This reminds me of 2012 with the GOP and Ron Paul.

- ML

[acptulsa]

They are really working at shoving anti-war Democrats into our arms.

Of course, they're also working at convincing anti-war Democrats that we're a bunch of celebrity-worshipping fools cucking for Trump, too...



An obvious divide-and-conquer tactic that we had better fight right now.

[oyarde]

LOL, I wish DNC leadership would flee the country.

[Petar]

They are really working at shoving anti-war Democrats into our arms.

Of course, they're also working at convincing anti-war Democrats that we're a bunch of celebrity-worshipping fools cucking for Trump, too...



An obvious divide-and-conquer tactic that we had better fight right now.

The only ones "cucking" are the #NEVERTRUMP crowd that just want to preserve the status-quo.

[acptulsa]

The only ones "cucking" are the #NEVERTRUMP crowd that just want to preserve the status-quo.

Oh, it's easy to tell who wants to preserve the status quo. They run around yelling 'Losertrians never win!!' everywhere Sheldon Adelson's name isn't mentioned.

Where Sheldon Adelson's name is mentioned, they run away, because those threads Must Not Be Bumped.

[Petar]

Oh, it's easy to tell who wants to preserve the status quo. They run around yelling 'Losertrians never win!!' everywhere Sheldon Adelson's name isn't mentioned.

Where Sheldon Adelson's name is mentioned, they run away, because those threads Must Not Be Bumped.

What choice does Adelson have at this point?

1) He could be honest about his hostility towards Trump, and further expose how much of a threat that Trump actually is to the status-quo.

2) He could attempt to reluctantly make nice with the guy as some form of damage control.

He apparently went with number 2.

[acptulsa]

What choice does Adelson have at this point?

Giving money to the Clintons is amazingly easy. No trouble at all.

Are you being serious? Because you're starting to look like an Onion satire of yourself.

[Petar]

Giving money to the Clintons is amazingly easy. No trouble at all.

Are you being serious? Because you're starting to look like an Onion satire of yourself.

Don't be an imbecile.

Adelson giving money to the Clintons would do nothing but further expose just how much the GOP establishment does not appreciate Trump invading their party.

[ProBlue33]

In the 2016 election cycle Sanders is the DNC version of Ron Paul in the GOP 2012 cycle, acceptance by the grassroots, rejection by the establishment, the democracy isn't happening it's an illusion, it's a coronation.

[acptulsa]

Don't be an imbecile.

Adelson giving money to the Clintons would do nothing but further expose just how much the GOP establishment does not appreciate Trump invading their party.

Whereas keeping it in his pocket would expose nothing, because it wouldn't enter the news cycle at all, and no one would ever have noticed.

[Badger Paul]

Gee where have I seen this all before? And in Nevada no less

[Carlybee]

This reminds me of 2012 with the GOP and Ron Paul.

- ML

I was thinking the same thing

[acptulsa]

Gee where have I seen this all before? And in Nevada no less

Democrats are being driven right into our arms.

I hope we have enough sense to do something more than scare them away. And nothing will scare them away faster than a forum full of Trumpsucking cucks.

[Brian4Liberty]

Gee where have I seen this all before? And in Nevada no less

What the hell is wrong with Nevada? More establishment corruption than usual, or more vocal opposition than usual? Or both?

[FindLiberty]

And perhaps we'll see if they can trump that same move at the GOP convention.

[RJ Liberty]

This reminds me of 2012 with the GOP and Ron Paul.

- ML

Absolutely.

We'll never forget what happened in 2012. But now we know, without the shadow of a doubt, that the DNC is just as corrupt and evil as the RNC. They are two sides of the same coin. Either side will break whatever rules they want, lie, cheat, and then flee and have the lights turned off, in order to coronate whatever candidate the establishment deems worthy.

[RJ Liberty]

In the 2016 election cycle Sanders is the DNC version of Ron Paul in the GOP 2012 cycle, acceptance by the grassroots, rejection by the establishment, the democracy isn't happening it's an illusion, it's a coronation.

Yep. Here's the thing, though. The MSM keeps repeating the fact that Sanders couldn't possibly win the Democratic nomination. But at this Nevada event, the Democratic establishment made complete asses of themselves over literally one delegate: instead of Hillary getting 6 and Sanders getting 6, the officials awarded Hillary 7 and Sanders 5. If Sanders really couldn't win the Democratic ticket, why cause an uproar over literally one delegate?

[RJ Liberty]

Gee where have I seen this all before? And in Nevada no less

Seems history is repeating itself.

[acptulsa]

What the hell is wrong with Nevada? More establishment corruption than usual, or more vocal opposition than usual? Or both?

The state's one large city was built by the mob and peopled with showgirls and blackjack dealers.

Does the mafia have a reputation for allowing dissent?

[Petar]

Democrats are being driven right into our arms.

I hope we have enough sense to do something more than scare them away. And nothing will scare them away faster than a forum full of Trumpsucking cucks.

Except that those fleeing Democrats actually want to hurt Hillary (unlike you) and that is why they will be voting for Trump

[acptulsa]

Except that those fleeing Democrats actually want to hurt Hillary (unlike you) and that is why they will be voting for Trump

Still you try to perpetuate the myth that they don't want to hurt them both equally. Despite the fact that I'm talking about the anti-war crowd, and no matter how many times he flip flops and how hard his shills try to spin stuff, Trump is firmly on record as wanting to conquer the whole of the Middle East and send in the supertankers.

You can try to tie us up until doomsday with the 'is he or isn't he' game. But if we are talking about allying with the anti-war crowd, it doesn't matter if Trump is Establishment or Globalist or whatever. He is an imperialist. He wants to haul the oil here faster than we can refine it or build tank farms to store it in. He has said it, and it cannot be unseen or un-heard.

These people are going to find an alternative to both of those non-choices. We can ally with them or we can spurn them. Or we can let shills pretending to be us chase them off. But there is no way in hell we can convince them that the 'Bomb them into oblivion and take their oil' guy is anti-war. That is the one thing guaranteed not to work.

[Petar]

Still you try to perpetuate the myth that they don't want to hurt them both equally. Despite the fact that I'm talking about the anti-war crowd, and no matter how many times he flip flops and how hard his shills try to spin stuff, Trump is firmly on record as wanting to conquer the whole of the Middle East and send in the supertankers.

Disaffected Sanders supporters understand that there are really only two options in this race, and that is why they are most likely going to vote for the only option that will actually hurt Hillary Clinton and the globalist neocons that she represents (Donald Trump).

[acptulsa]

Disaffected Sanders supporters understand that there are really only two options in this race, and that is why they are most likely going to vote for the only option that will actually hurt Hillary Clinton and the globalist neocons that she represents (Donald Trump).

Some of the disaffected Sanders supporters are socialists, and they consider 'she's a globalist' a selling point.

The rest are anti-war, and those two warmongers look exactly the same to them.

So, which ones are switching to Trump again? All of those Democrats who don't want there to be a female president? All of those Democrats who want to curb immigration? All of those Democrats who love casino owners preying on gambling addicts...?

Pray, do tell us what in all the world could cause a Democrat to hate Clinton more than Trump. What is this magical thing?

[Petar]

Some of the disaffected Sanders supporters are socialists, and they consider 'she's a globalist' a selling point.

The rest are anti-war, and those two warmongers look exactly the same to them.

So, which ones are switching to Trump again? All of those Democrats who don't want there to be a female president? All of those Democrats who want to curb immigration? All of those Democrats who love casino owners preying on gambling addicts...?

Pray, do tell us what in all the world could cause a Democrat to hate Clinton more than Trump. What is this magical thing?

Mostly revenge, I guess.

Some of them may also have a clue that putting America first is necessarily going to result in less war-mongering than what globalists do.

[acptulsa]

Mostly revenge, I guess.

Some of them may also have a clue that putting America first is necessarily going to result in less war-mongering than what globalists do.

You're guessing that revenge will cause them to support someone who makes a point of saying he will conquer the middle east and pump out the oil.

And I'm telling you that these people--who are actual people, and we need not guess what they'll do, we can actually ask them--do not consider candidates who 'put America first' any less likely to start imperialistic wars than globalists are. In fact, if you were ever to talk with one, you might just find they spent years thinking that supporting globalists was the path to peace, because they did not yet realize that globalists are just as imperialist as nationalists.

And some of them still haven't figured it out.

Keep guessing.

[CPUd]

How not to get anti-war Democrats to vote for you:

[Petar]

You're guessing that revenge will cause them to support someone who makes a point of saying he will conquer the middle east and pump out the oil.

And I'm telling you that these people--who are actual people, and we need not guess what they'll do, we can actually ask them--do not consider candidates who 'put America first' any less likely to start imperialistic wars than globalists are. In fact, if you were ever to talk with one, you might just find they spent years thinking that supporting globalists was the path to peace, because they did not yet realize that globalists are just as imperialist as nationalists.

And some of them still haven't figured it out.

Keep guessing.

Globalists are necessarily more imperialist than nationalists are.

Maybe some stupid Democrats are finally starting to understand this.

I personally know hipsters who prefer Trump to Hillary just because it seems "ironic" and "contrarian".

And again, simple revenge against the DNC is an impulse that cannot be underestimated.

How many Paul supporters wanted Obama to win just to punish the GOP for how he was mistreated?

Probably most.

How not to get anti-war Democrats to vote for you:

Failed attempt at this:



Interesting in how flat it falls.

[acptulsa]

Globalists are necessarily more imperialist than nationalists are.

Maybe some stupid Democrats are finally starting to understand this.

I personally know hipsters who prefer Trump to Hillary just because it seems "ironic" and "contrarian".

And again, simple revenge against the DNC is an impulse that cannot be underestimated.

How many Paul supporters wanted Obama to win just to punish the GOP for how he was mistreated?

Probably most.

Any nationalist can be an imperialist. Any contrarian and fan of irony can be converted to a third party voter. Few people who crave revenge against the DNC crave anything less against the RNC. Most Ron Paul people probably did expect Obama to win, and none shed any tears for Republicans when he did, but I can guarantee the only ones who actually voted for him were the ones who figured he would start fewer wars than his opponents.

And as for calling Democrats stupid, that is more than a little like shooting oneself in one's own foot, and I'm not going to do it.

And therein lies the problem with the liberty "movement".

I came on this forum years ago as a leftist to learn what I could about this guy, Ron Paul, who was talking about the Federal Reserve and wanted to end the wars. The more I learned the more zealous I became. Ron was the total package. I tainted myself by getting involved with the GOP to get Republicans to support Ron. I threw a frickin tea party to spread the word about Ron and educate people about the Federal Reserve, co-operative banking, the 10th Amendment... I personally converted more people than I can count. ON ISSUES. WITH PEOPLE. WHO VOTED.

I don't even care if you vote. More will change based on SCOTUS than with whoever is elected. However, I do believe that by turning their noses away from "socialists" and "leftists" the "liberty movement" is wasting an opportunity to share the non-aggression principle with the voters most likely to embrace it.

[Petar]

Any nationalist can be an imperialist. Any contrarian and fan of irony can be converted to a third party voter. Few people who crave revenge against the DNC crave anything less against the RNC. Most Ron Paul people probably did expect Obama to win, and none shed any tears for Republicans when he did, but I can guarantee the only ones who actually voted for him were the ones who figured he would start fewer wars than his opponents.

And as for calling Democrats stupid, that is more than a little like shooting oneself in one's own foot, and I'm not going to do it.

A nationalist certainly can be an imperialist, but it takes a globalist to conspire to destroy ones own nation.

Who do you honestly believe is more keen to start endless wars?

Donald Trump, who wants to find an efficient, low-cost way to take the oil, or Hillary Clinton, who wants to continue endless wars for the purpose of sinking the USA into as much debt as possible so that the nation can be swallowed up by its international debtors?

Sanders supporters absolutely are stupid (insomuch as the truly believe in socialism) but that does not mean that even they might not be able to tell that Donald Trump is simply a lot less evil than Clinton.

And not a single voter anywhere who is going after Clinton with a vengeance is going to sabotage themselves by voting for any third party that can only really hurt Donald Trump.