Sun Apr 10, 2016, 08:37 PM

Iamaartist (3,300 posts)

Light My Fire.......Burn The Feel...Cartoon LOL Another cartoon added funny

40 replies, 5366 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

40 replies	Author	Time	Post
Light My Fire.......Burn The Feel...Cartoon LOL Another cartoon added funny (Original post)	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	OP
Great cartoon	Gothmog	Apr 2016	#1
Thank-you......	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	#2
cartoon	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	#36
Are you kidding! that says it ALL right there! Super 'Toon!	Cha	Apr 2016	#3
Thank-you Cha	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	#4
The bottom one seems to have a strong pro-Bernie cluelessness	jmowreader	Apr 2016	#5
Yep	shenmue	Apr 2016	#7
yep	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	#8
Agreed. nt	SunSeeker	Apr 2016	#10
They should just thank the stars that our dels are awarded proportionally. If not...	Rose Siding	Apr 2016	#11
"Burn the Feel."	SunSeeker	Apr 2016	#6
It's berning	liberal N proud	Apr 2016	#9
K & R, good post. Enjoyed.	Thinkingabout	Apr 2016	#12
Of course, the second cartoon seems to miss the fact that	BlueMTexpat	Apr 2016	#13
But wait until the SDs take a hit of that Morementum (sic), some really good shit.	fleabiscuit	Apr 2016	#14
LOL - I will not	BlueMTexpat	Apr 2016	#15
History...	HumanityExperiment	Apr 2016	#16
No comparison between 1968 and today	Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin	Apr 2016	#17
I was pointing out historical facts... not comparison	HumanityExperiment	Apr 2016	#18
Ever work under a union?	fleabiscuit	Apr 2016	#19
What are we trying to parse here...	HumanityExperiment	Apr 2016	#20
The party is civics.	fleabiscuit	Apr 2016	#21
the party, is about party not people...	HumanityExperiment	Apr 2016	#22
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that a nomination process is the same as the GE	KitSileya	Apr 2016	#23
THANK YOU, KitSilya! It appears that Sanders supporters don't understand the diff between	BlueCaliDem	Apr 2016	#33
I'm sorry did you not see this is Hillary's Group for Hillary's Supporters? Thank you	Cha	Apr 2016	#24
Thank you Cha	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	#25
Hey, Iam... what do you mean ".. there is a lot of them in my rec also"?	Cha	Apr 2016	#26
Cha	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	#27
You mean put him on Ignore?.. because only Hosts of Hillary's Group can Block and	Cha	Apr 2016	#28
Cartoon	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	#29
Thank you for the cartoons	Gothmog	Apr 2016	#30
Your welcome	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	#31
This message was self-deleted by its author	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	#32
Love them all, but especially Hillary as Carmen Miranda with the fruity headdress...LOL!	Surya Gayatri	Apr 2016	#34
thank-you	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	#35
Message auto-removed	Name removed	Apr 2016	#37
Our Next President.....	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	#38
Love, love, love the Mt.. Rushmore. eom	UtahLib	Apr 2016	#39
Thank-you I do to......	Iamaartist	Apr 2016	#40

Response to Iamaartist (Original post)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 08:43 PM

Gothmog (136,380 posts)

1. Great cartoon

Reply to this post

Response to Gothmog (Reply #1)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 08:45 PM

Iamaartist (3,300 posts)

2. Thank-you......

Reply to this post

Response to Gothmog (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 03:50 AM

Iamaartist (3,300 posts)

36. cartoon

Reply to this post

Response to Iamaartist (Original post)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 08:52 PM

Cha (289,579 posts)

3. Are you kidding! that says it ALL right there! Super 'Toon!

Perfect, Iamaartist! LOL!

Reply to this post

Response to Cha (Reply #3)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 08:56 PM

Iamaartist (3,300 posts)

4. Thank-you Cha

I think I got some Bernie people on my Rec's oh well

Reply to this post

Response to Iamaartist (Original post)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 08:58 PM

jmowreader (49,909 posts)

5. The bottom one seems to have a strong pro-Bernie cluelessness

The candidate currently leading the superdelegate count ALSO has more popular votes than any other candidate out there, on either side of the ballot.

Reply to this post

Response to jmowreader (Reply #5)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 09:07 PM

shenmue (38,440 posts)

7. Yep

Reply to this post

Response to jmowreader (Reply #5)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 09:16 PM

Iamaartist (3,300 posts)

8. yep

Reply to this post

Response to jmowreader (Reply #5)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 09:50 PM

SunSeeker (50,366 posts)

10. Agreed. nt

Reply to this post

Response to jmowreader (Reply #5)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 10:49 PM

Rose Siding (32,623 posts)

11. They should just thank the stars that our dels are awarded proportionally. If not...

If our whole primary race was winner take all...

Clinton: 1647
Sanders: 732

Losing with Super Ds, losing without. This primary system is working as it was designed.

Reply to this post

Response to Iamaartist (Original post)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 09:00 PM

SunSeeker (50,366 posts)

6. "Burn the Feel."

Reply to this post

Response to Iamaartist (Original post)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 09:36 PM

liberal N proud (60,023 posts)

9. It's berning

Reply to this post

Response to Iamaartist (Original post)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 11:26 PM

Thinkingabout (30,058 posts)

12. K & R, good post. Enjoyed.

Reply to this post

Response to Iamaartist (Original post)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 11:38 PM

BlueMTexpat (15,210 posts)

13. Of course, the second cartoon seems to miss the fact that

most SDs ARE supporting the candidate who has indeed received the most votes! Exactly what is undemocratic about that?

Aside from that

Reply to this post

Response to BlueMTexpat (Reply #13)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 12:07 AM

fleabiscuit (4,542 posts)

14. But wait until the SDs take a hit of that Morementum (sic), some really good shit.

Reply to this post

Response to fleabiscuit (Reply #14)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 12:16 AM

BlueMTexpat (15,210 posts)

15. LOL - I will not

hold my breath.

Reply to this post

Response to Iamaartist (Original post)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 01:02 AM

HumanityExperiment (1,442 posts)

16. History...

Interesting and understandable that HRC and her supporters would support this and it's connotation, but why the 'joke'? Doesn't that make you become the very thing you chastise the other candidate and his supporters about?

http://origins.osu.edu/history-news/superdelegates-obstacle-road-democratic-elections

"After the 1968 convention in Chicago highlighted the problems inherent in the Democrats’ tradition of nomination by party bosses, the Dems experimented briefly with making the process more democratic.

It was during that experiment, in 1976, that Washington outsider Jimmy Carter won the nomination against the wishes of many Democratic party leaders. High-ranking Democrats were determined to never again have to sit back and look on helplessly as a candidate outside the control of the established political machinery became their party’s duly elected candidate. So superdelegates were introduced in 1982 and implemented two years later. The Republican party, by the way, has no superdelegates."

So party boss - protests in '68' pushed to more democratic - then party bosses didn't like democratic process went to superdelegate to bring back party boss aspect

and HRC and her supporters are highlighting and supporting this 'party boss' aspect over the more democratic process? Gloating over the SD before the primaries are over will come back to bite ya if things don't go the way you expect them to based upon trends currently

Reply to this post

Response to HumanityExperiment (Reply #16)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 01:23 AM

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (102,376 posts)

17. No comparison between 1968 and today

Clinton already has the most delegates not counting the supers. Unlikely Sanders catches up.

Reply to this post

Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 01:36 AM

HumanityExperiment (1,442 posts)

18. I was pointing out historical facts... not comparison

the reason(s) for the creation of SD system is the point, the cartoons are only making the statement that SD are 'embraced' to prevent "Dems experimented briefly with making the process more democratic....experiment, in 1976, that Washington outsider Jimmy Carter won the nomination against the wishes of many Democratic party leaders....High-ranking Democrats were determined to never again have to sit back and look on helplessly as a candidate outside the control of the established political machinery became their party’s duly elected candidate. So superdelegates were introduced in 1982 and implemented two years later"

So...

Democratic or party bosses that's the tale as proven out by history, so what exactly is the SD system telling you this election cycle?

They 'pledged' before the are supposed to vote, so why would they 'pledge' before a single primary vote is cast?

Once they 'pledge' they aren't allowed to change?

Which do you support? the people or party bosses?

I find it odd that these cartoons portray embracing the SD over the people... and that HRC and her supporters are promoting that point

who matters more in this nation? people or party bosses?

Reply to this post

Response to HumanityExperiment (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 01:51 AM

fleabiscuit (4,542 posts)

19. Ever work under a union?

Ever been to a union convention? Do you know where the primary system started?

Do you really believe that a convention is a democratic process? Working within the unit is what counts.

Reply to this post

Response to fleabiscuit (Reply #19)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 02:02 AM

HumanityExperiment (1,442 posts)

20. What are we trying to parse here...

I do know how the primary system started...

but here's a good primer breaking it down...

http://www.npr.org/2016/03/23/471563611/the-mind-boggling-story-of-our-arcane-and-convoluted-primary-politics

"GROSS: Why was 1968 a turning point in the Democratic approach to primary politics?

KAMARCK: In 1968, the Democratic Party was the site of a significant anti-war movement. That movement coincided with the women's movement, with civil rights movements, with a feeling that American politics needed to be more inclusive. And the anti-war protesters found that they could not win delegates to the '68 convention. Even when their candidates - in that case, Gene McCarthy - were doing fairly well, they were cut out of the convention and cut out of delegate slots because the process for electing delegates did not depend on primaries. It wasn't a very open process. And so the significant anti-war movement was really cut out of the '68 convention and, as we saw, they were in the streets rioting during the '68 convention. After that, the party said, all right, we have to do something about this, we have to open up a little bit more than we've been. And they created something called the McGovern-Fraser Commission, and the rules from that commission fundamentally reshaped the nominating system not just for the Democrats but for the Republicans as well.

GROSS: What are a delegate's responsibilities and what is their loyalty to the voter who elected them? And what is their loyalty to, like, their own conscience and what they think they should do once they get to the convention?

KAMARCK: Ninety-nine percent of the time, the delegates simply go to the convention and they vote for whoever they were supposed to vote for according to the results of the state. There are, however, exceptions. You could have a candidate incapacitated between the end of the primaries and the convention. You could have a candidate that you find out something unusual about, something that maybe doesn't make them as strong a candidate as you the voter thought they were back in the winter when you voted for them. There's all sorts of things that could happen, but it is not a decision that the delegates would take lightly, you know? They'd have to really - to leave the presidential candidate they voted for, they'd have to have a good reason and be able to go home and say to the voters in their state, I had a good reason for changing my vote."

back to my point...

"Dems experimented briefly with making the process more democratic....experiment, in 1976, that Washington outsider Jimmy Carter won the nomination against the wishes of many Democratic party leaders....High-ranking Democrats were determined to never again have to sit back and look on helplessly as a candidate outside the control of the established political machinery became their party’s duly elected candidate. So superdelegates were introduced in 1982 and implemented two years later"

What these debates and primaries are highlighting, very vividly, is the disconnect between party and people...

What these cartoons depict are a clear statement that party over people matters more...

so, which is it? people or party?

Reply to this post

Response to HumanityExperiment (Reply #20)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 02:10 AM

fleabiscuit (4,542 posts)

21. The party is civics.

The party is the people who get out and do the work. What you put into cartoons is what you bring.

Reply to this post

Response to fleabiscuit (Reply #21)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 02:26 AM

HumanityExperiment (1,442 posts)

22. the party, is about party not people...

to your point "people who get out and do the work", for the party not the people

so why the debates? just for show?

my take, the party is afraid of the people, if the PARTY doesn't nominate a candidate of the people they will lose

you can't FORCE a candidate on the people and expect to win, this is a fact

"Political parties are voluntary organizations under the Constitution, and they're covered by the First Amendment's freedom of association. No one forces you to register as a Democrat or a Republican. You can vote in the general election as an independent. You can join the Constitution Party or the Green Party. In other words, political parties are a kind of funny entity. They are neither fish nor fowl. They're somewhat public because we have primaries, and in some states, the state government funds the primaries. On the other hand, ultimately, political parties, according to the Supreme Court, are basically semipublic or even private organizations and they can nominate their candidates as they please. And the only real intervention the Supreme Court has made in this is to say you can't violate somebody's civil rights in the process. But in terms of making up your own rules of how you do things, the courts have given political parties pretty much free range. So this is controlled by parties, not by law."

what you are sidestepping is the fact that this current primary cycle is trying to do just that... it's why SD's 'pledged' before a single primary vote was cast. to tilt the scales, to try to force optics upon the public to 'direct' their voting preferences to that 'party boss' preferred candidate

Reply to this post

Response to HumanityExperiment (Reply #22)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 03:30 AM

KitSileya (4,035 posts)

23. You seem to be under the mistaken impression that a nomination process is the same as the GE

It is not. The primaries and caucuses are where the Democratic Party chooses its nominee. The General Election is where the country elects its President. The two are not the same.

The idea that the superdelegates saying who they will vote for is tilting the scales is idiotic. They are no more tilting the scales than the 2.4 million people more who voted for Hillary. Should we mandate that all candidates for the nomination receive equal number of votes, lest having more votes tip the scales? Should we make it illegal to say who you will be voting for, lest the people around you be influenced by your decision? Plenty of us said we would vote for Hillary and Bernie well before the primaries actually started. That people would want to hear the opinion of people who actually work with the two candidates, and see who they support is smart, not tilting the scales. You would assume that people that have worked with them (both of them!) on issues would have a better idea of who would be more suited to be President, and I, for one, appreciate their input.

I'm sorry you're aggrieved that more than 80% of the people elected or working for the Democratic party at federal or state level think that Hillary will make a better President than Bernie. Most of them have had a chance to work with her as she rose through the ranks of the party, since she's been a member for nigh on 40 years. More than half the superdelegates in the House who support Bernie were elected after he joined the Senate, and haven't had the chance to work with him as a peer. Most of the others don't support him. If many of them don't want to support a guy whose peers they were or are, that is a clue, you know.

Reply to this post

Response to KitSileya (Reply #23)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 12:46 PM

BlueCaliDem (15,438 posts)

33. THANK YOU, KitSilya! It appears that Sanders supporters don't understand the diff between

the primary elections and general elections. Makes you wonder if they've ever been Democrats, doesn't it?

Reply to this post

Response to HumanityExperiment (Reply #16)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 03:52 AM

Cha (289,579 posts)

24. I'm sorry did you not see this is Hillary's Group for Hillary's Supporters? Thank you

for understanding that you have the whole rest of the board but we reserve this for her supporters.

I don't go into the BS group as a Hillary supporter.. I would be blocked in a second. As it is I was out and no other hosts were around so you got to go on and on about nothing.

Reply to this post

Response to Cha (Reply #24)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 04:01 AM

Iamaartist (3,300 posts)