(06-02-2016, 08:53 PM)Qvait Wrote: Somewhere, there is a poll showing that the majority of Bernie supporters would go support Trump over Clinton, which is a problem that must be fixed.

(06-03-2016, 10:34 AM)Punchwood Wrote:

(06-02-2016, 08:53 PM)Qvait Wrote: Somewhere, there is a poll showing that the majority of Bernie supporters would go support Trump over Clinton, which is a problem that must be fixed.

I don't think it is a problem though. I mean when it was Clinton vs Obama loads of Clinton supporters say they would vote for the Republican nominee or not turn up to vote. We all know how that turned out. Also I'm glad to see that you are now starting to accept the reality that Clinton will be the nominee.

Good lyrics from an excellent song

You can join the march, protest, scream and shout
Get on Twitter, hashtag and seem like you're down
But they see through it all, people believe you now?
You said publicly, "Rest in peace, Mike Brown"
You speak about equality, but do you really mean it?
Are you marching for freedom, or when it's convenient?
Want people to like you, want to be accepted
That's probably why you are out here protesting
Don't think for a second you don't have incentive
Is this about you, well, then what's your intention?
What's the intention? What's the intention?

(06-03-2016, 04:52 PM)Qvait Wrote: That happened on April 26, when Bernie failed to win Pennsylvania and a couple other states. However, I'm sticking with the belief that if he received more recognition from the media, he would have performed better. It's also my belief that Bernie did not do so well with the African American vote due to a lack of name recognition. He has done just as much a service to African Americans as Clinton did. In fact, Bernie was on the ground protesting in the Civil Rights Movement. It's just that Clinton received much more exposure in the last two decades. She had been the First Lady, Senator, and Secretary of State. Bernie had been the Mayor of Burlington, Representative, and Senator.

(06-03-2016, 05:18 PM)Punchwood Wrote:

(06-03-2016, 04:52 PM)Qvait Wrote: That happened on April 26, when Bernie failed to win Pennsylvania and a couple other states. However, I'm sticking with the belief that if he received more recognition from the media, he would have performed better. It's also my belief that Bernie did not do so well with the African American vote due to a lack of name recognition. He has done just as much a service to African Americans as Clinton did. In fact, Bernie was on the ground protesting in the Civil Rights Movement. It's just that Clinton received much more exposure in the last two decades. She had been the First Lady, Senator, and Secretary of State. Bernie had been the Mayor of Burlington, Representative, and Senator.

I get your point but he has been in the public light for more than a year now I don't think you can blame Bernie's shortcomings with African Americans just because he hasn't been in the public light for very all. Anyway we've got June the 7th to look forward to and that will be the last Super Tuesday of the year then it will just be D.C left to vote.

(06-07-2016, 11:36 AM)Darkstrait Wrote: Say what you like, but in my opinion the DNC scheduling debates at inconvenient times says a lot to me, as does the superdelegate split, and the media bias, and oh so much else.

(06-07-2016, 04:11 PM)Qvait Wrote: I think that both parties should do away with the primaries, the delegate system, and the electoral college. The thing about the primaries is that most people who vote in them are either dedicated to voting or are political extremists. I think that an election for president should take place on one day at one time. Instead of using the blasted electoral college, I would implement an instant-runoff voting (IRV) system, which I endorse. If the 2016 presidential election was conducted with this system, Donald Trump nor Hillary Clinton would be President. Let's make it clear: neither candidate really deserves to be President. Clinton's incompetent and Trump has a bad temper.

(06-07-2016, 11:36 AM)Darkstrait Wrote: Say what you like, but in my opinion the DNC scheduling debates at inconvenient times says a lot to me, as does the superdelegate split, and the media bias, and oh so much else.

(06-07-2016, 04:49 PM)Punchwood Wrote:

(06-07-2016, 04:11 PM)Qvait Wrote: I think that both parties should do away with the primaries, the delegate system, and the electoral college. The thing about the primaries is that most people who vote in them are either dedicated to voting or are political extremists. I think that an election for president should take place on one day at one time. Instead of using the blasted electoral college, I would implement an instant-runoff voting (IRV) system, which I endorse. If the 2016 presidential election was conducted with this system, Donald Trump nor Hillary Clinton would be President. Let's make it clear: neither candidate really deserves to be President. Clinton's incompetent and Trump has a bad temper.

If you got rid of the primaries you would have an establishment candidate each time as the parties would get to chose  the candidate. I don't really see how you can say Hillary doesn't deserve to be President? She fights for equal pay, LGBT rights, she's gotten healthcare access to 8 million kids, she has spent 25 years in the public light fighting for people. Love them or loath them politicians could make millions in different jobs. Look at Tony Blair he's made £50 million since leaving public office. I don't agree with David Cameron's view however I do believe that he wants the best for this country and the people in it. So for you to say that Hillary doesn't deserve to be President I think is quite disgusting. I would never say something like that about Sanders so I don't think you should be making such comments.