Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: OK I'll just say it: the dem establishment wants to lose this election [View all]restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)260. rachel just nailed it
just said that maybe many people are watching gop debates is because it is "the only game in town" and said it is still a month to the first debate.
also just mentioned correct the record hit piece and the 1.2 million raised by bernie campaign
bernie on rachel next
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
376 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
OK I'll just say it: the dem establishment wants to lose this election [View all]
restorefreedom
Sep 2015
OP
With money and power comes arrogance and complacency. It's not that they don't want to win.
liberal_at_heart
Sep 2015
#1
They want a corporate candidate to win. PERIOD. Their owners have spoken, Damn the voters
Vincardog
Sep 2015
#26
Its all about the Plutocracy! They are terrified of Bernie and what he represents, that the
Dustlawyer
Sep 2015
#77
This election IS the most important election since Lincoln was President! It STARTS with
Vincardog
Sep 2015
#165
You do realize that the relevant will of the people hasn't actually been determined yet right?
mythology
Sep 2015
#298
No. Obviously not. The Dems want to win and the Reps want to win. No politicians or parties want
DanTex
Sep 2015
#8
You are correct. Their scam requires that both parties play along. And Bernie will fuck up the game
GoneFishin
Sep 2015
#99
Yes. And Hillary also. And I still don't believe in your conspiracy theories. At all.
DanTex
Sep 2015
#150
Well, most establishment Dems believe that. You are free to disagree, but your disagreement doesn't
DanTex
Sep 2015
#159
What is the evidence for the statement that everyone 'outside the DC bubble" understands
JDPriestly
Sep 2015
#338
It still AMAZES me that anyone around here thinks there is ANY remote sense of
randys1
Sep 2015
#138
No difference, is that what you are saying? I cant respond to a statement that ludicrous
randys1
Sep 2015
#335
So Black lives, Women's rights, Gay rights, not important? Just pocketbook? How about
randys1
Sep 2015
#349
Yes, you said the lives of Black people and Gay and Women are not on the top of your
randys1
Sep 2015
#353
DWS... DWS? You mean the same DWS that campaigned for 3 Republicans in the last election?
A Simple Game
Sep 2015
#319
Just like the Establishment didn't want Elizabeth Warren elected to the Senate?
brooklynite
Sep 2015
#65
Are there any "Centrist" Republicans running whom can even win their party's primary?
Proud Liberal Dem
Sep 2015
#337
Is it not a conspiracy theory? I mean, suggesting that the DNC is trying to sabotage the election
DanTex
Sep 2015
#20
What does that have to do with the theory that they want the GOP to win? Nothing.
DanTex
Sep 2015
#29
Yes. You are correct. It squelches the voices of all dem candidates while allowing the Repuglican
GoneFishin
Sep 2015
#105
<< The more they sit there on the stage railing about religion, war, etc. the stranger they seem. >>
Cal33
Sep 2015
#250
I agree. In recent decades, Republicans have been winning elections just as frequently as
Cal33
Sep 2015
#364
Aha, you're saying they lost on purpose. Obviously there is evidence of that. You know, some
DanTex
Sep 2015
#30
"Evidence based person" yet it is overwhelmingly assumption after assumption.
NCTraveler
Sep 2015
#31
Please present other evidence or other conclusions to the evidence that has been offered.
highprincipleswork
Sep 2015
#52
Also some debates are scheduled during major sports games according to several here.
appalachiablue
Sep 2015
#285
Too bad you can't come up with anything that makes sense so you have to start yelling Conspiracy
rhett o rick
Sep 2015
#303
It would be similar, but not quite exactly the same. A Corporate Democrat would, for instance,
Cal33
Sep 2015
#40
Yes. Having a corporate Democrat as President effectively muzzles most Democratic dissent
RufusTFirefly
Sep 2015
#94
Pres. Obama certainly was trying very hard for bipartisanship. He appointed 2 Supreme
Cal33
Sep 2015
#371
Absolutely. There may be a few differences, but the "bottom line" will be the same. n/t
RufusTFirefly
Sep 2015
#87
Debbie Wasserman Shultz is turning into the Ralph Nadar of this election.
Baitball Blogger
Sep 2015
#18
in other words there is no need for the Democrats to do any work. All they have to do is
liberal_at_heart
Sep 2015
#34
My guess is that the scientific community has a much different definition of evidence nt
Godhumor
Sep 2015
#22
I actually think there is some wisdom in not deflecting from the Republicans verbal food fight
The empressof all
Sep 2015
#32
When you don't show an alternative, shining in their idiotic glory doesn't work.
jeff47
Sep 2015
#226
I'd be more happy with a bowl of good old fashioned oatmeal and Vermont maple sugar. nt
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Sep 2015
#254
Respectfully disagree. I think the corporate establishment wants to win this election
RufusTFirefly
Sep 2015
#45
Eventually the population will wake up and the corporations will have to relinquish power.
Enthusiast
Sep 2015
#63
The real elites don't care one way or the other. They'll get their tax breaks, wars, privileges,
leveymg
Sep 2015
#60
the "meme" would stop if Ds stopped being Wall Street's little dancing poodles at every
MisterP
Sep 2015
#225
If that's true, it was a pretty incompetent move on Hillary's part to come out and say
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Sep 2015
#258
True. They would rather have a Republican corporatist in the White House than a liberal Democrat.
GoneFishin
Sep 2015
#109
The only way we lose the election is destroying the candidate with the best chance to win with
Hoyt
Sep 2015
#152
The party leadership should act in best interest of the party, not your annointed one.
Hoyt
Sep 2015
#230
Well, I don't think Sanders is a membrr of the party, yet it is very accomodating of him.
Hoyt
Sep 2015
#244
When I see them talking about finding a 'white knight' to 'save' the party from having to nominate
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Sep 2015
#261
The problem for corporate Dems is that as things continue to unravel, less "escape" is possible
villager
Sep 2015
#176
One of the problems with that tactic is that if you spend a lot of time looking
winter is coming
Sep 2015
#238
This is someone who teamed up w/ Sheldon Adelson to ensure FL would keep arresting sick pot smokers
Warren DeMontague
Sep 2015
#214
I believe (also) that Debbie is going to kill us. A lot of Elections are won by a fairly small...
BlueJazz
Sep 2015
#209
they've thrown Senate races, and would throw all three branches as long as it meant
MisterP
Sep 2015
#216
Please don't pretend to be evidence based. You ignore facts that don't agree with your outlook.
Persondem
Sep 2015
#249
Sure, I'll gladly admit HRC has baggage, but it's not like the 16 tons of lead
Persondem
Sep 2015
#363
If Bernie Sanders is nominated, I (and my "fat cat" friends) will work like hell to get him elected.
brooklynite
Sep 2015
#268
Great post Nance. We can elect a nominee in the DNC who hopefully win the GE or we can
Thinkingabout
Sep 2015
#358
The lesser would be a Republican getting elected and we would receive lesser.
Thinkingabout
Sep 2015
#361
Dems who support Sanders would mostly support Clinton. The ones who will never support Clinton are-
eridani
Sep 2015
#366
Umm... you do know that Hillary is way ahead in national polls right?
taught_me_patience
Sep 2015
#290
Hillary thought being liberal on social issues was all she needed to do to win the primary.
jalan48
Sep 2015
#296
John Kennedy was so ahead of his time he had a Republican head the Department Of Defense...
DemocratSinceBirth
Sep 2015
#328
No flaming here. I said something similar myself, that sometimes it almost looks
sabrina 1
Sep 2015
#301
Don't agree that Clinton can't beat a Republican--they are all really, really shitty
eridani
Sep 2015
#306
Likely that the conservative interests in the Democratic party would rather
NorthCarolina
Sep 2015
#318
Exactly! They can't assert ignorance following the task force report findings
Cosmic Kitten
Sep 2015
#336
Very same thought crossed my mind earlier today. We are no longer dems vs repubs
corkhead
Sep 2015
#329
Don't know if Dem Establishment is trying to lose, but sure not trying to WIN
Dems to Win
Sep 2015
#346
Nah, they just insist on not losing it and getting a democratic socialist president
HereSince1628
Sep 2015
#372