XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.elections, alt.politics.democrats   
   XPost: alt.politics.usa   
   From: noway@nowhere.com   
      
   On 8/16/2024 6:06 PM, pothead wrote:   
   > On 2024-08-16, Josh Rosenbluth  wrote:   
   >> On 8/16/2024 12:36 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:   
   >>> On 8/16/2024 12:12 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:   
   >>>> On 8/16/2024 12:08 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:   
   >>>>> On 8/16/2024 12:00 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 8/16/2024 9:46 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 8:29 AM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 8:19 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 5:34 AM, Gak, fucked up the ass by priests hundreds   
   >>>>>>>>> of times — and *admits* it — lied:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 8/15/2024 9:20 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On 8/15/2024 7:25 AM, Gak, fucked up the ass by priests   
   >>>>>>>>>>> hundreds of times — and *admits* it — lied:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/15/2024 12:42 AM, Gronk wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ubiquitous wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vice President Kamala Harris got enough delegate votes   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Friday in the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> virtual roll call process to become the official Democratic   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> nominee.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden dropped out and Harris stepped up. Your problem?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> But...but...but...democracy!!!!   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Biden dropping out is fully consistent with a democracy.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Biden's dropping out is; Harris' coronation less so. A   
   >>>>>>>>>> fundamental hallmark of 'democracy' is the will of the people to   
   >>>>>>>>>> select their candidate.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> We don't take lectures from fascists about "fundamental hallmarks   
   >>>>>>>>> of democracy," especially when they put quotes of derision around   
   >>>>>>>>> "democracy," and especially when said fascists oppose democracy   
   >>>>>>>>> in every form.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> There is nothing "anti-democratic" about the way Harris has been   
   >>>>>>>>> chosen. Primary elections and caucuses were held, and the   
   >>>>>>>>> candidate who won a majority of delegates dropped out, meaning it   
   >>>>>>>>> is an open convention. The same thing happened in 1968. In 1968,   
   >>>>>>>>> the eventual nominee, Humphrey, had a minority of the committed   
   >>>>>>>>> delegates, but he ultimately was nominated by the convention.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> 1968 was not the same as 2024. HHH chose not to run in most of the   
   >>>>>>>> primaries, with almost all of the votes being split between   
   >>>>>>>> McCarthy and RFK. Even if RFK had not been assassinated, HHH could   
   >>>>>>>> have won because most of the delegates were not chosen in the   
   >>>>>>>> primaries. That's a big difference.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> The point is Humphrey had a minority of committed delegates as of   
   >>>>>>> the night of RFK's assassination. That means he got delegates that   
   >>>>>>> he did not win in primary elections.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> HHH had a plurality of the delegates when RFK was assassinated.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> He still had 90 fewer than the combined total of RFK and McCarthy,   
   >>>>> and a candidate needed to get a majority, which he didn't have. It   
   >>>>> was, for all intents and purposes, an open convention.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Correct. That is, it wasn't like 2024 prior to RFK's assassination.   
   >>>> 1968 is not a good comparison to 2024.   
   >>>   
   >>> They are alike in the sense that the ultimate nominee did not win enough   
   >>> delegates in primaries to become the nominee. Republiscums/QAnon are   
   >>> crying that if the nominee didn't win primaries, the nomination is   
   >>> somehow "illegitimate." It is not.   
   >>   
   >> There was a good argument it was in 1968 (and hence after that, the   
   >> primaries became paramount). It is not a good argument in 2024.   
   >   
   > Hint: the argument is very much the same.   
   > An unpopular war.   
      
   We aren't at war in 2024.   
      
   > The nomination of an unpopular candidate or an unpopular party.   
      
   The Democrats weren't unpopular in 1968, nor are they in 2024.   
      
   > And Chicago 2024 is going to be epic because the authorities will not be   
   able to contain it.   
   > Watch for the MSM to totally ignore whatever happens, big or small.   
      
    From your lips to the Trump campaign's ears: keep on blaming the media.   
     loser you are.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)