I wonder what rules the Bernie people wanted to change so badly.

[YouDig]

They sure seemed to care a lot about it, not enough to actually show up to the convention on time, but enough to yell and scream.

Did they want all speeches to be given through the "people's microphone" because electricity is a tool of the capitalist overlords?
Did they want the delegate totals to be added up using #berniemath?
Did they want to bring in new chairs which were easier to throw?

Parliamentary procedure is pretty boring stuff, and in the end there were more Hillary delegates there than Bernie delegates, so the Hillary people were going to win the majority votes no matter what the rules were. The only likely explanation is that they were there to disrupt.

[highprincipleswork]

1. They wanted their voice vote to count. Is that a lot to ask?

[YouDig]

3. It did count, they were just outnumbered by Hillary supporters.

But what were they voting about? What actual rule did they want to change?

Were they just voting "no" to be pains in the ass or was there something specific they didn't like?

[BeyondGeography]

6. But they yelled louder

and they weren't rewarded for it.

[YouDig]

7. Exactly. And they recorded those yells from a microphone in the middle of their yelling section!

Maybe the rule should be whoever can make a louder iPhone recording gets to win. Democracy!

[highprincipleswork]

9. Maybe they should go to a different way of counting when there is this much disagreement.

Or are you only interested in "winning"?

[YouDig]

13. The minority was complaining because they were in the minority.

There's no way of counting that can make a smaller number into a bigger number.

[aspirant]

37. "Reinstate the 58" count'em

[YouDig]

42. The 58 weren't registered Democrats, as determined by a panel with 50% Bernie and 50%

Hillary people on it. Allowing them to participate despite not having credentials would have been fraud, but that didn't happen.

[aspirant]

55. Present the 58 registration documents and their personal interviews

[bettyellen]

76. a panel composed of 50% SBS supporters made that decision. But foolish CTs abound.

[aspirant]

78. Show us the 3 stages of the 58 documented registrations.

Did they mysteriously change at the 3rd stage so Bernie people judged fake documents?

Could that actually happen?

[bettyellen]

95. Show us the SBS supporters who made those decisions complaining about how it happened. They are not

This whole thing is bullshit.

[aspirant]

99. "Reinstate the 58" and provide registrations for all 3 stages

[bettyellen]

103. oh wow, more bullshit memes. way to go, team!

[aspirant]

105. Why the cover-up, simply produce all the documents

[bettyellen]

106. No one officially involved is making accusations- when it is just CT loving internet posters doing

it, there is nothing to address. Go chase some chemtrails, LOL.

[aspirant]

107. Why do you promote secrecy?

[bettyellen]

108. Why are you repeating lies? There are NO ACTUAL ACCUSATIONS from Sanders

people who are involved. Why are you pretending as if there are? Why are you trying to deceive people this way?

[aspirant]

109. Hiding the truth is the grand deception

Release the documents for all to see.

[bettyellen]

115. You think there was a "grand deception" and SBS campaign workers are in on it? Because they

would HAVE to be half the people hiding "the documents" and they are eerily silent. Woo. Woo woo.

[aspirant]

118. Documents were fine in stage1 and 2,

how did they change in stage 3?

[bettyellen]

119. Ask the SBS people who decertified their own delegates why THEY did that. LOL.

[seabeyond]

73. Lol. Nt

[scscholar]

104. But at the wrong time!

Bernie's supporters yelled during both the aye and the nay parts. It was dumb. They sabotaged themselves.

[highprincipleswork]

8. They then asked for a person by person count. This was at the very outset of the convention. And it

continued throughout, by the way, their being discounted or ignored.

Maybe you think we're a pain in the ass, but we think discarding the rules and not bending over backwards to make sure people are heard is a pain in the ass as well.

if you were really interested in finding the best and most popular candidate, and the winning ticket for November, you'd be less concerned about winning and more about the way the game is played. Didn't any of you play team sports once in your life?

[YouDig]

10. What were they voting about? Do you even know? Does anyone?

The chair determined that the ayes had it and it wasn't close enough for a floor vote. The chair is the person who decides that.

And since there were more Clinton than Bernie delegates there, it is obvious that the ayes actually did have it, since the nos were the Bernie people.

You don't even know what they were voting about, and still you're complaining that they didn't get a floor vote on a vote that they lost because they were outnumbered.

[aspirant]

39. "Reinstate the 58" then count

[emsimon33]

50. Seriously, how much is the Brock pac paying and for what.

I could craft more convincing posts and have been a DU member for a very long time.

[J_J_]

63. I have come to the conclusion that Hillary has outsourced her comments

They aren't looking for quality, just quantity.

They think if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.

[Demsrule86]

116. Yeah

There were more Hillary voters than Sanders voters...so yeah they were out of line.

[Matt_in_STL]

2. I guess it's Brock o'Clock somewhere...

[DrDan]

4. Any that allows a bernie loss is unsatisfactory

[brooklynite]

5. ...and Credentials Committees get pretty dull when they're equally composed from both sides...

[St Aug girl]

11. I read a comment last night that the rules were in effect since 2008

and Sander's supporters should have known for the rules. This OP makes it sound Sander's supporters wanted to change these rules. In fact the Chairwoman changed all the rules the week before the convention to give herself complete control. The change also allowed the party to completely rewrite the 3 step back process. Sander's supports were just trying to change the rules back to what they were before the Chairperson's change which reportedly happened at a meeting without a quorum.

[YouDig]

14. You read in a comment last night?

The chair didn't have "complete control", there were still votes, and nothing would have changed the outcome of the voted because the Bernie people were in the minority. The only thing that would have changed any outcome would have been if more Bernie people showed up, but that has nothing to do with the rules.

[aspirant]

44. "Reinstate the 58" they showed up

[YouDig]

46. Actually they didn't. After the credentials committee realized that they weren't eligible because

they weren't Democrats, they simply left, and didn't show up the next day. They didn't challenge the bipartisan committee because they were not, in fact, Democrats.

[randome]

56. No complaints from the 58 and none from Sanders. Case closed, imo.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[aspirant]

59. Prove it, present the registration documents

[YouDig]

60. They didn't have the registration documents, that's the point. They weren't registered Dems,

so they weren't allowed into the convention. They didn't complain, they just left after that. Only after the fact did Sanders people try to complain that the committee, which was 50/50 Bernie/Hillary, didn't bend the rules to allow random people off the street to participate as Bernie delegates.

[aspirant]

62. "They didn't have the registration documents"

then how did they become delegates before the state convention?

[YouDig]

65. They didn't become delegates, because they didn't have the credentials.

[aspirant]

66. This is the third step and they passed the first 2 with outstanding credentials

[YouDig]

67. Apparently not outstanding since they weren't registered Dems.

[aspirant]

69. Prove it

Provide all the 58 registrations thru all 3 steps

[YouDig]

70. The bipartisan credentials committee checked. You think they lied?

[aspirant]

72. We don't know,

since you're unable to provide the documentation, do we?

[YouDig]

74. Because it might be a big conspiracy! Yuuuuuuge conspiracy!

[aspirant]

79. Or it might be evil trickery as part of an evil plan,

so resolve it with proof and any CT will disappear.

[YouDig]

80. There is proof, there credentials committe. But proof never stops a determined

conspiracy theorist.

[aspirant]

81. Good, then provide the proof at all 3 stages

[YouDig]

82. See what I mean, there's always a way to keep the conspiracy theory going.

And the other big rule is that the conspiracy theorist never has to offer proof of anything. Only come up with more conspiracies.

[aspirant]

83. Proof overpowers any conspiracy, waiting

[YouDig]

84. Yes, but you don't have proof. That's why you resort to conspiracy.

[aspirant]

85. You don't have proof, so

"that's why you resort to conspiracy" too

[YouDig]

86. I do, the credentials committee. Do you have a credentials committee?

[aspirant]

87. Good bring forth the documents, otherwise it's just words

and conspiracies.

[YouDig]

88. So that's a "no". Score: one credentials committee for me, zero for you.

[aspirant]

89. Bring forth the documents or you have no score

[YouDig]

92. But I do! I have a credentials committee. You have zero. And also no documents. Nothing!

[aspirant]

94. You have no documets, therefore you have "nothing"

Glad you agree

[YouDig]

96. A credentials committee is not "nothing". Nothing is what you have.

I have a credentials committee, and you're just trying to pretend it doesn't count because you don't have one. You lose!

[aspirant]

100. "Reinstate the 58"

and provide all 3 stages of registration documents or admit the cover-up

[joshcryer]

16. They used the same basic rules, nothing was changed.

What the Sanders people wanted to do was change the temporary rules before hand, despite the person in charge being fine with those rules for years. If there was to be a rule change it would have to come by 2/3rds vote.

[Hortensis]

90. Yes, and a judge found nothing wrong with the rules

that would justify intervention and dismissed Sanders' suit out of hand.

[TheBlackAdder]

12. Be honest! You don't "wonder" anything, you're just pushing a narrative.

[YouDig]

15. Be honest. You have no idea what the rules issue was, and don't care, you're just mad

because Bernie people told you to be mad.

[aspirant]

47. Which Bernie people told him to be mad, a list of names

[TheBlackAdder]

101. Since you appear as a new trollist type, you don't know I'm an Non-committed Democratic Poli-Sci guy

.


I will vote straight Democratic, regardless of who the candidate is, and remain neutral to maintain objectivity.

I will, however, call out stupidity when it reaches a certain level. This applies to both HRC & SBS folks.


I am not a myopic, "my candidate can do no wrong" type, who is blinded by some weird affinity.

.

[YouDig]

102. Since this thread is about rules, isn't there some rule here about calling people trolls?

But I guess you're above that one.

[TheBlackAdder]

117. Applying critical reading, I did not call you one. I said you seem to appear like one of that ilk.

[aikoaiko]

17. More than anything they wanted a fair vote on the issue of whether or not to change.

[YouDig]

19. And they got that. Any amendment to the rules required a 2/3rds majority, and the

Sanders supporters were less than 50%.

[aikoaiko]

22. The voice counts were dubious and they wanted a more careful count.

[YouDig]

24. OK, but the chair is the person who determines that, according to the rules which have been

in place since 2008. And since there were in fact more Hillary people there, and Hillary people didn't want to change the rules, it's simply not credible that the chair got it wrong. The only reason for a floor vote is just to waste time.

[aikoaiko]

34. We'll never know if the chair got it wrong and that was the point of a more careful count which was

ignored.

Maybe there were ethical HRC supporters in attendance who wanted a fair count.

[YouDig]

38. If we do math we can. Because if less than 50% of the delegates were for Bernie, they

couldn't have had a majority, much less the 2/3rds required to change the rules.

The rules were followed, which means the chair determines if there is to be a floor vote, as has been the case for previous Nevada conventions. There's no evidence whatsoever that anything was even slightly wrong. Certainly not cell phone videos taken from the middle of the screaming Sanders section. I guess Sanders people don't understand that sound volume dissipates with distance.

[aikoaiko]

53. You seem to be missing the point. Robert's Rules of Order is about process and deliberation

When a member of a group makes a motion or calls for a point of order and the chair ignores those properly made motions, then they are not following the rules. And that is on video tape.

[YouDig]

58. Robert's Rules of Order are not been in place for the Nevada convention, nor have they been

for years. They have a set of parliamentary rules that they have been using, which allow for amendments with a 2/3rds majority, but the Bernie people didn't have that.

There were no properly made motions that were ignored, what is on tape is voice votes taped from the middle of the screaming Bernie section, which made his votes seem louder because of proximity. From the vantage point of the chair, who could see everything from center stage, it was clear that the ayes had it, and we can verify that her judgement was correct because there were more Hillary people there than Bernie people.

[aikoaiko]

61. I'm not surprised you didn't know this, but RRO due have a place in the convention rules

It is a part of the RRO that a group can make different rules, but when there isn't a group defined rule, RRO are followed.

And yes motions were ignored and there is no convention rule for ignoring motions from the floor.


see here:
V. Parliamentary Authority
a. The 2016 Democratic State Convention shall be governed in the following order of
authority: The Charter and The Bylaws of the Democratic Party of the United States, the
Nevada Delegate Selection Plan for the 2016 Democratic National Convention, the
Charter and Bylaws of the Nevada State Democratic Party, the Rules of the 2016 Nevada
State Democratic Convention, and the most current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order.
http://nvdems.3cdn.net/ea5a7f0df495b0cf4c_z2m6bnqh5.pdf

[YouDig]

64. As a fallback, behind their specific rules. But there is no indication that the rules they

had weren't followed. If there was something that wasn't covered in their rules, they defer to RRO. But the 2/3rds amendment rule was, and Bernie didn't have 2/3rds.

There's nothing there. At all.

[aspirant]

49. "Reinstate the 58" and "less" becomes more

[IdaBriggs]

18. Fact Fail. Voting scheduled for 10:0@ am - voice vote started at 9:30 am

with a Rule CHANGE pushed by the Chair, and "voice voted".

Basically the entire premise of your argument depends on stuff that is THE OPPOSITE of what happened: the Chair of the State Party cheated the preset rules to benefit Hillary. She also publicly lied about the results of votes and did not recognize motions from the floor.

[YouDig]

20. Not close to true. The convention started at 9, not 10. 10 was when registration closed, which

has nothing to do with when the actual event starts, which you would know if you had ever attended any event of any kind.

And the chair did not "cheat", she abided by the rules, which were the same rules that were in place since 2008. Sanders people wanted to change them, but changing them required a 2/3rds majority, which they obviously didn't have since they didn't even have 50%. The chair didn't change the rules, the chair moved to adopt the rules as stated. The Sanders people wanted to change them.

[IdaBriggs]

21. That's not what I've read and watched in the reports. Since we disagree

About the facts, it is obvious why we disagree about the results.

[YouDig]

23. Here is the official call to convention.

2016 STATE CONVENTION CALL
SATURDAY, MAY 14, 2016 – 9:00 AM
PARIS LAS VEGAS
3655 SOUTH LAS VEGAS BOULEVARD
LAS VEGAS, NV 89109

I'm not sure how anyone could miss that.

http://action.nvdems.com/page/-/2016_Digital/2016%20STATE%20CONVENTION%20CALL.pdf

[IdaBriggs]

68. From Your Link -- (page 2) --

"In-person registration for the State Convention shall be open on Friday, May 13 from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., and on Saturday, May 14 from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. at the Paris Las Vegas Conference Center. Delegates and Alternates must register in person by 10:00 a.m. on Saturday. Pre-registration is available and will end at 12:00 a.m. (midnight) on Friday, May 13. All online pre-registrants must also check in during the in-person registration period to register their presidential preference and receive their credential."

The protesting began fairly early because of the "issues" with registration. Also typically (or so I am told), welcome speeches and such happen while registration snafus are resolved during that first hour (long lines, parking issues, people getting lost, etc.).

Starting with a contested "voice vote" to change pre-existing rules at 9:30 (while people are still in line outside the hall) then ignoring motions from the floor is an egregious abuse of authority. In one report I read, the chair was pretending she couldn't hear the motions from the floor, so someone used a bullhorn so she couldn't "play deaf" but instead of taking the motion as precedence and procedure dictated, security was instructed to remove the bullhorn and threaten the delegate. Another delegate used his time at the microphone to request the same motion, and was similarly ignored.

There was a video from a Clinton delegate explaining that people were being banned from consideration as National Delegates for unknown reasons -- names were being "disappeared" from both sides and the delegates were told this was coming from the top.

The idea behind a state convention is to generate excitement and fellowship for members of a party. The failure was on the part of the Chair. A wiser woman would have found a way to unify the organization and built a strong coalition for November GOTV efforts. Instead, she destroyed the credibility of the party representatives and has sullied the Democratic Party in the process. Who wants to be part of an organization where, instead of the membership being treated with respect, the police are called and supporters are characterized as "violent"? What part of "party" was not clear to the leadership?

She needs to step down and publicly apologize for her failure of leadership.

[YouDig]

71. Did you check page 1? In boldface? Right at the front?

And then again in the first paragraph?

The convention started at 9, period. The registration window and the convention start time are totally different things, and if Bernie delegates were too dumb to understand that, it's their own fault.

Every one of the allegations you've made were false. There were no improperly denied motions, and the only reason the voice votes seemed off in the videos is because the microphone was in the middle of the Sanders section, and Hillary section was across the room.

As for bullhorns, that were against the rules. So was any form of harassment of anyone (for example yelling "bitch&quot . Yelling and booing to disrupt an invited speakers speech was against the rules. According to the rules, all the Bernie people doing any of that should have been expelled. But they weren't.

If there was any failure to abide by the rules, it was being way too permissive of Bernie people repeatedly breaking them. That was the one place where the chairperson broke the rules by showing leniency to the disruptors.

But for some reason Bernie people don't care about those rules. And they also don't care about the "majorities win votes" rule, because even though there were more Hillary peolpe than Bernie people their, they still think they should have been able to somehow get the votes to go their way.

[aspirant]

75. "reinstate the 58" and "more" becomes less

[IdaBriggs]

77. Again, we are arguing facts and we disagree about them.

If it was true that the "voice votes" were going to carry for Hillary (when video evidence is clearly different), then following procedure accept the damn motion and do a body count, especially if it doesn't matter as you claim but the delegates who were present dispute.

I have already addressed the time issues and how they are reported to have been addressed. "Playing deaf" to motions was unacceptable and appears to be corruption on behalf of one candidate which was stupid on the part of the Chair (who needs to resign in disgrace).

When you show respect for the attendees, people want to participate. The Chair has permanently damaged the Nevada Democratic State Party. That isn't on the Bernie people -- that is on leadership.

It will be up to the citizens of Nevada to make sure appropriate consequences are enforced.

[YouDig]

91. Why do a pointless floor count except to waste time?

And the thing is, the chair decides whether to do a floor count. Those are the rules. It makes no difference if you think she should have, you're not the chair. She's the chair, and she made a judgement, and her judgement was correct.

Like I said, the only violation of the rules was by the Bernie supporters who disrupted. That was expressly against the rules, and it's not a matter of opinion, it's in writing. Even if you think there should be a floor count, yelling "bitch" and booing and disrupting invited speakers is against the rules. There is no exemption to the decorum rules for situations where you think the chair did something wrong.

The "playing deaf" thing is total nonsense. There are procedures to raise a motion, and if the proper procedure was followed, the motions were allowed. But a screaming angry mob is not the proper procedure. In that case, the proper procedure is to kick everyone in the angry mob out.

The Bernie supporters should be thankful that Roberta Lange was so lenient with the rules that she let them continue to be in the room even after multiple flagrant rules violations. I agree with you that Nevada has to make sure that disruptors don't get away with breaking the rules like the Bernie people did again.

[Hortensis]

93. IdaBriggs, you are arguing against all honest

evidence and the reports of all the honest and official people who have examined this. You are emphatically not arguing facts.

I recommend you try to understand the world as it is, not as you want to imagine it. Counterintuitive as it might seem, I suspect you would be far happier with reality. For one thing, there are a lot more fairly decent people around.

[aspirant]

98. "Reinstate the 58"

[TheKentuckian]

110. If you are doing votes, much less voice votes while the people that vote are still registering

then you are fucking willfully crooked as a snake and sneaky asshole. No fair minded person would consider such a thing reasonable.

To argue this is absurd and indecent.

Seriously, what the hell is your argument for voting while the delegates are still registering? Plus, then hardliners refuse to actually count the damn votes?

1000% shady.

This is exactly why we have the orchestrated screeching and lying about chair throwing and riots because you dirty bastards needed a smoke screen.

Be sure to trace back those death threats and throw the book at them, I suspect it will reduce the votes for the Turd Way for a bit.

Of course people that operate like this would TOTALLY fake death threats, can't put anything past the amoral.

I'd love to buy on this whole bullshit being mostly backward B type antics with some TeaPubliKLAN chaos mongers and a couple of loon Sanders supporters chipping in.

[YouDig]

112. The schedule is posted weeks in advance. Anyone who wanted to participate in the procedural votes

at the beginning but slept in instead is an idiot. Maybe next time they should just close registration at 9 so that the lazy Bernie supporters nursing their hangovers would just not get to participate at all, instead of being giving a chance to register late.

And there was no need to have a floor count because there were more Hillary people there. Bernie people just wanted it to make things take longer.

The only violation of the rules were the Bernie people disrupting. There were very clear rules about yelling at speakers and the like, and there were no exceptions in those rules for whining babies who can't accept the fact that they are losing this election because people don't want to vote for their savior.

All the rioters should have been thrown out, I don't know why the Nevada Democratic Party went to such extraodinary lengths to bend the rules and let them continue to participate. If the rules were followed Hillary probably would have ended up with another delegate or two.

Fortunately, Bernie's cheating won't make the slightest bit of difference. Hillary his crushing him, and soon he will be giving his concession speech, which all non-chair-throwing Democrats will enjoy immensely.

[TheKentuckian]

113. If you vote when people are still registering to be delegates then you are trying to get over.

The rest is blah, blah, blah.

There is no argument for voting while the people that are supposed to be there to vote are registering of course it is bullshit by definition.

It is dishonorable and illogical to defend this.

No, there is a big difference between being a character and having character.

Also, what is up with all the petty games to get a couple delegates if the lead is so infinite what difference does it make?
Pretty desperate and sharp elbow tactics in the position crowed about it seems to me.
Came from high levels too but the footpads bought in with gusto so I consider all about equally without honor and untrustworthy.

[YouDig]

114. That's absolutely not true, it happens all the time, the rules were the same as in years past.

Have you been to any kind of organized event in your life? If you want to participate, show up on time, if you were out drinking the night before and roll in late, they're going to start without you, be happy the registration desk is still open, and you can participate at all. They're not going to postpone starting the state convention because a few people couldn't be bothered to show up on time.

The only rule breaking was the yelling and disrupting. This isn't a basketball game, except for the Bernie people these are adults at a convention with clear decorum rules, with a clear penalty of dismissal, that were grossly violated. Funny how none of the Bernie people care at all about enforcing the rules when their own people break them.

Any talk of "corruption" is a joke. The Bernie campaign tried to hijack the convention with intimidation. It didn't work, and he deserves 100% of the pushback he's getting.

[TheKentuckian]

120. No honor. No decency. No honesty.

I no more care what you are going on about that what the juice in a dumpster thinks.

What ever you have to tell yourself to get through the night.

[mmonk]

25. I believe the party chair was the one to change the rules.

[YouDig]

32. Nope. The provisional rules were decided well in advance, and were the same as had been

used in previous conventions going back to 2008.

[ViseGrip]

26. They didn't want change, they wanted the changes entered legally, with Roberts Rules of Order.

Get it? They knew they would be out of order, and cause kaos. DWS is disgusting...no leader at all.

[YouDig]

29. There were no changes. The rules were the same as had been used since 2008.

[AgingAmerican]

27. They wanted the rules to be followed

[YouDig]

28. And they were, to the word. Hillary people just had them outnumbered.

[AgingAmerican]

31. The made up the rules on the fly

When the nay vote went against Hillary, they did an end around and declared her the winner.

IT's called election fraud.

[YouDig]

33. Nope, the provisional rules were created weeks in advance and posted on the internet for everyone.

And they were the same as in previous conventions.

Bernie people lost the votes because there were less of them there. How do you think it is possible for a group with less than 50% of the delegates to win a vote?

[AgingAmerican]

35. And the fraud they have committed will sink them in the General election

The Democrats are now more corrupt than the GOP.

[YouDig]

40. There was no fraud. You have a habit of being wrong.

[AgingAmerican]

43. Apparently openly committing fraud is their strategy

Right wingers don't do foresight.

[aspirant]

51. "Reinstate the 58" "less" becomes more

[libdem4life]

30. I wonder why people bother to reply to you. Canned talking points and all.

ETA: Almost forgot...so did I...but I'm done now.

[Gothmog]

36. The Sanders Campaign did not comply with the rules and were unhappy when they lost

[riversedge]

41. Bernie delegates did not show up so the others threw a childish fit.

[anotherproletariat]

45. Let them put whatever they want into the platform...it's not a legally binding document

just a guideline for the party. But only let them do it if they stop threatening people with whom they disagree.

[YouDig]

48. I'd say so too, write whatever you want in the platform, just no more disrupting and death threats.

It kind of feels like giving in to threats of violence, but so be it, we need to beat Trump, and after Bernie is out this won't be happening anymore.

[aspirant]

54. Where are the "death threat" arrests, it's a crime?

[Hortensis]

97. Oh, no. They'll get something, we agree on so much,

but caving would be a mistake. One thing you can count on, any item Bernie gets into the platform could be used as a future weapon against the Democratic Party if our policies ran contrary. The platform wouldn't be allowed to be forgotten if he could make use of it, and most Americans believe they have meaning. We'd better believe in it if we're going to include it in our statement of purpose.

[dchill]

52. Major thread FAIL.

Fact-free OP.

[cherokeeprogressive]

57. Know what this reminds me of?

[JSup]

111. This post is kinda 'trolly'...

...and while I realize nothing we do or say will stop some Sanders fans from hating us for voting, I don't really think this post is helpful or useful or has any purpose but to be 'trolly'.