SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the another-election-season-trainwreck dept.
Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has announced she will resign as chair of the Democratic National Committee. The resignation is to become effective after the party's convention. The organisation's e-mail system was hacked; leaked e-mails appear to confirm accusations that Wasserman-Schultz had taken action favouring Hillary Clinton in her contest against Bernie Sanders to become the Democratic Party's presidential nominee. Sanders had previously called for Wasserman-Schultz to resign, a request he reiterated in light of the leak.
Wasserman-Schultz said in a statement:
I know that electing Hillary Clinton as our next president is critical for America's future. I look forward to serving as a surrogate for her campaign in Florida and across the country to ensure her victory.
coverage:
(Score: 1, Troll) by jmorris on Monday July 25 2016, @07:14PM
He won't throw fuel on the fire, he will bring his extinguisher instead.
What would really piss em off would be if the emails between Bernie and Hillary camps showing that Bernie was in on it from the start came out. Because of course he had to be. He never intended to be anything but a stalking horse, to keep some interest going in what would otherwise be a boring coronation, to gin up some excitement in the base. In return he got more media exposure in a week than the rest of his miserable existence. More important, he would have never been allowed to run and get any media attention had there not been a firm understanding between his campaign and the DNC's media operations (That would be pretty much all mainstream outlets) that it was all just a voter activation scam.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday July 25 2016, @08:01PM
He never intended to be anything but a stalking horse, to keep some interest going in what would otherwise be a boring coronation, to gin up some excitement in the base
No, that's what the democrats hired Trump for. I doubt the emails would reveal that many democrats registered as republicans to vote for him though.
Bernie's job was to simply prevent any money from flowing out of the party coffers by working the liberal faction.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by ncc74656 on Tuesday July 26 2016, @03:23AM
In open-primary states, they wouldn't have needed to do that: ask for whichever ballot you want on the way in and vote on it, no questions asked. Open primaries are horrible primarily for this reason, as they're not an accurate gauge of who the members of a party want representing them.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday July 26 2016, @03:34AM
Oy! I was hoping I was joking... This probably explains why these two won it. We apparently have a system where everybody is just trying to vote against each other. What is the solution for this?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday July 25 2016, @08:29PM
The Russians or somebody gave Wikileaks a lot of docs. We initially thought that it would be a crap dump, but the shenanigans surrounding Debbie Wasserman-Schultz have stirred up some nice chaos in the party. The timing was perfect, since her removal from her position (note: effective only at the end of the convention, for maximum butthurt!) had to be done the day before the convention.
Assange has said that he has enough to "indict" Hillary. That's hard to believe, but he is on the right track.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday July 25 2016, @09:00PM
Don't let the media distract with speculation about who did the dump. Doesn't really matter, does it? Did the same suspects get all concerned about any of the other WikiLeaks dumps and where they came from? Of course not. Are the documents authentic? The DNC doesn't dispute the issue of autenticity so we can assume they are legit. Concentrate on the reality that was revealed that the entire Democratic Primary was a scripted TV show with a preordained ending.
Just for fun, lets assume Putin did it. Why? Obama in in his pocket, remember "Tell Vladimir I'll have more flexibility after the election." and Hillary was also well and truly bought, remember the Uranium deal? So if Putin really did it we would be forced to look for a motive and I can only think of one. He considers Hillary so incompetent that even if bought he can't trust her not to do something stupid enough to get a World War going, something Putin can't afford. That he figures that even with all the uncertainty around what Trump might do, that Putin can do a deal with him. Remember, Putin's hand is actually much weaker than he wants the world to believe, he has been succeeding in his antics only because he has been bold and we have been weak, feckless and uncertain. But an America that weak and feckless is, in the long term, far more dangerous to Putin's interests because it will destabilize the world order in ways he isn't currently strong enough to control.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday July 25 2016, @09:24PM
You really seized on the first sentence of my post.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday July 25 2016, @10:08PM
Because there was a reason you put it first. Whether you thought of it yourself or just blindly bought into the Narrative that is saturating the media today doesn't matter. The point is the importance, for the Dims, of deflecting sufficient attention from the contents of the emails to the meta conversation about who leaked and why, that the icky details won't sink it for a day or two and by then of course it will be 'old news' and won't be mentioned again on the boob tube.
The end effect is going to be limited to having DWS move from the DNC to HRC's campaign, exactly as was planned from the start in the first place. Bernie will forced to clean up the mess tonight by utterly abasing himself to the Dark Queen and that will be the end of it. A percent or two of his diehards might end up butthurt and sit out the general but they are the sort of youth vote that generally doesn't vote anyway.
Which was why I called ya on parroting the narrative, then went totally offscript to drop a evil thought about why this time the deflection might be used to raise questions even more uncomfortable than the leaks. Revealing the DNC is corrupt is in the end just a dog bites man story. Putin throwing Hillary under the bus actually has the potential to be hyped into a man bites dog story and actually being news.
But Trump would probably have to push it to get past the media shields and he probably isn't going to do that. I'm thinking he has his own numbers that confirm Scott Adams' projection that at this point he just has to act like a plausible President for three months and he automatically wins. That it is a change election so all he need do is pass the plausible candidate threshold, which is a pretty low bar.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday July 25 2016, @10:30PM
The reason I put it first is because in the series of events, Wikileaks has to get the docs first before they can leak them. The Russians leaking emails to Wikileaks scenario is plausible, not that it detracts from the releases in any way in my view. The Trump coordinating with the Russians narrative is a far bigger stretch that will flop. I'm not parroting any narrative. I've discussed Wikileaks and where they get their docs long before the Dems/DNC ever cared.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]