Yes, The Real The New Awesome Primary Thread

Great move, let's hope this thread is not hijacked like the previous one so no one else feels compelled to repeat such an action.Edited by anglagard, : forgot title, how negligent of me

Except, of course, quelling any rioting at the Republican Convention will be the job of the Cleveland Police.Nevertheless, should Trump be denied the nomination, it will obviously compare with Humphrey's back in 1968 and is likely to result in a similar outcome.I had a history teacher who, with some friends, witnessed the Chicago riots firsthand from a rooftop above the fray. He stated, "we thought it was the end of the world."Upvote for prescient comparison.Apparently The Houston Chronicle deserves an upvote as well. Edited by anglagard, : apparently others agree

From the wiki:

quote:

---

In 1968 the Democratic Party was divided. Senators Eugene McCarthy and Robert F. Kennedy had entered the campaign in March, challenging Johnson for the Democratic nomination. Johnson, facing dissent within his party, had dropped out of the race on March 31.[6] Vice President Hubert Humphrey then entered into the race, but did not compete in any primaries, compiling his delegates in caucus states that were controlled by party leaders. After Kennedy's assassination on June 5, the Democratic Party's divisions grew.[5] At the moment of Kennedy's death the delegate count stood at Humphrey 561.5, Kennedy 393.5, McCarthy 258.[7] Kennedy's murder left his delegates uncommitted.

​

When it came to choosing a candidate, on one side stood supporters of Senator McCarthy, who ran a decidedly anti-war campaign and who was seen as the peace candidate.[8] On the other side was Vice President Humphrey, who was seen as the candidate who represented the Johnson point of view.[9] In the end, the Democratic Party nominated Humphrey. Even though 80 percent of the primary voters had been for anti-war candidates, the delegates had defeated the peace plank by 1,567 to 1,041. [10] The perceived cause of this loss was the result of Mayor of Chicago Richard Daley, and President Johnson pulling strings behind the scenes.[10] Humphrey, even though he had not entered a single primary, had won the Democratic nomination, and went on to lose the election to the Republican Richard Nixon.[11]

---

Please note, "Even though 80 percent of the primary voters had been for anti-war candidates, the delegates had defeated the peace plank by 1,567 to 1,041."If Trump supporters feel the will of the majority, or at least a plurality, has been thwarted by the mecanations of the minority, as happened in 1968, would they react in a similar fashion?I think that is a definite possibility and I am not alone in this analysis.Do you understand now why we find a similarity?
Edited by anglagard, : title and we in last sentence

Different scenario, similar cause (denial of popular will), somewhat similar outcome (police riot 68, potential supporter riot 16, but riot all the same). Please see my response to Percy. However thanks for the history lesson for those not old enough to see it all unfold on TV, who unlike ourselves did not witness it a bit firsthand as we did. Speaking as one who is only slightly younger than you are, I think from experience we agree on hoping for the best yet preparing for the worst.

Yeah, and I made the mistake of assuming everyone knew that, because I knew that.

Washington: 81% reporting -Sanders 72%
Clinton 28%Alaska: 100% reporting -Sanders 81%
Clinton 19% source OK - CA, NY follow their lead, do your duty, and send that DINO warmonger back to the fossil bed along with all neoliberals.

All of them believe in taking earned money from the poor and middle class and giving it to their trust fund parasite supporters via "entitlement" reform. All of them believe all problems are caused by increasing melanin count and the solution is more bombing. All believe Black Loves don't matter and neither does their vote.The only perceivable difference is how much they admit to having no solutions other than an appeal to fear and hate.Trump is just saying what they all believe.Cruz is just believing his delusional daddy when he thinks he is the next John the Baptist.They all suck at being human, period.Edited by anglagard, : add last two sentences.

Millennials disagree with your assessment. May you live long enough to witness, after Hillary meets and possibly exceeds the two war, one recession minimum set by the Bushes, Elizabeth Warren as President in 2020.Sheesh what pessimists, go back to reading Schopenhauer and stop picking on millennials before they wish you and your extremely limited idea of the possible - dead.

I am calling you out for this post because it is either the result of woeful ignorance or deliberate lies. It is so transparently false rebutting is a simple matter of common sense. Last I looked Jeb Bush ran for the nomination. Are you actually suggesting they would support Cruz over their own? Right now, I figure they are scheming on a way to deny either Trump or Cruz the nomination as befits their sense of entitlement. Perhaps the only part of your post grounded in an element of truth. After all, she affects a Southern accent in the traitor states just as little Bush pretended to be a bumpkin before his bumpkin audience, I assure you they speak differently to their rich donors and masters. How uninformed can one be? You must get all your information from Fox News.Sanders supports single-payer health care, Clinton, wallowing in all those donations from big pharma and other parasites involved in the process, does not.Sanders supports a $15 minimum wage, Clinton reluctantly supports $12, a promise likely unkept after the Walton family reminds her of who is the master and who is the slave.Sanders supports free college tuition, Clinton does not.Sanders generally does not support wars of choice, Clinton wants ground troops in Lybia (to cover her mistakes), Syria (to make more), Afghanistan, and God knows where else until she suddenly discovers she ran out of soldiers. Which of course will result in a recession, and another opportunity to screw over the 99% in favor of the 1%.After all she lobbied on support of overthrowing the elected government of Honduras in favor of turning that nation into 'the murder capital of the world.'And that just scratches the surface. Unbelievable - how is it even possible to come to that conclusion??I would advise you to contact a reputable academic librarian immediately to cure you of either abject ignorance or willful dishonesty. Study the difference between shit and shineola under their tutelage and get back to us after a year or so when you have learned, lest you embarrass yourself any further in this forum.