no, you have no grasp on anything. Muting you, have a nice life

You're misusing the word "literally." Yes, they wanted the electable candidate to win, and they discussed some unsavory strategies, but there was no rigging.

The bridge we aren't going to uncross is the racist demagogue who's going to at LEAST get very close to being the most powerful man on earth because we're too busy squabbling.

It's not even corruption! The DNC and the RNC are private entities. They get to establish any kind of crazy rules they want when it comes to picking their candidates for president. Hence all the superdelegates and whatnot. The fact that they happen to prefer the more electable candidate shouldn't be a shock.

It seems to me you've bought into 100% of the anti-Clinton conspiracy theories. Let's elect her, but hold her feet to the fire on that whole Vince Foster thing?

Oh, please. The DNC preferred the establishment candidate? You don't say. Next you'll be telling me the RNC would have preferred someone other than Trump! :0

If I didn't already think you didn't have a clue about politics, the fact that you think Hillary came at Sanders hard tells me all I need to know

I disagree — I maintain that Clinton is the more electable candidate than Sanders. (I'll leave Warren out of it since she didn't want the job enough to try out.)

"The only guaranteed benefit of a good ground game is solid identification of your support and turnout of your party loyalists." — you say that like it's a small thing. They say it's worth something in the 1-3 point range, which is a big deal in battleground states. (Not that anyone has ever tested that theory by not…

You don't see how that kind of nuance could be lost on the electorate?

de-elevator, please.

I'll say this: if Trump wins, it's going to completely upend how presidential campaigns are run. Even if he gets close, people are going to start asking questions like "why are we spending all this money on TV ad-buys." It's like Moneyball, if the Oakland A's were racist demagogues.

Even after 15 primaries, a lot of people, me included, were in denial about Trump's chances. Even straight up to the convention, I didn't believe the Republican establishment would allow what is basically an existential threat for a nominee.

Women dating women: great
Women dating women who are old enough to be their grandmother: I guess
Women dating anyone from the cast of Two and a Half Men: gross

It sounds like it's supposed to be a double-entendre, but all I can figure out is that they started direct-messaging each other on Twitter.

guh

Well, it is and it isn't. Certainly Clinton isn't currently crushing Trump in the landslide we all think the situation merits, but it's worth noting that all the aggregators give her at least a 60% shot currently. She's still the favorite. And, something not a lot of people are thinking about: those polls don't take…

No, the fact that Sanders still has skeletons in his closet was in fact a huge liability. In hindsight, now that we know Trump is the GOP nominee, it's possible Sanders would have had the edge, but against any of the serious GOP candidates I think he would have been crushed. Folks in swing states don't love to elect…

What, you don't think the average American voter would appreciate his work for the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party?

There have been a couple times here and there, like Avengers Disassembled or whatever. It's always been a terrible mistake, and it never lasts, so there's that at least.