Not to the level the DNC did for sure. Ignoring the all the email stuff that was leaked the simple fact that the DNC setup their superdelegate system after Carter and McGovern to make sure the establishment could always put their thumb on the scale in the primary.
Maybe they would have pulled some Donna Brazile level shit if the the media had the RNC’s back the way they had the DNC’s back though. I wouldn’t put it past them if they had the option.
I am certainly not disputing the corruptness of the DNC. They have their party set up in a way that ALLOWED them to be corrupt during the primaries. But republicans calling democrats corrupt… c’mon man.
You honestly think the RNC is more corrupt than the DNC? Power corrupts, and there is no greater power than having the media on your side.
I don’t want to turn this into a meme thread, but have you seen this?
^ That is by far the most on point thing I’ve seen regarding this entire election. Trump won because he knew how much the media was backing the left so he bypassed them entirely. It’s a powerful image and will likely end up in a history book 50 years from now.
politics in general is subject to corruption. corruption is subjective as well.
the US, and Canada, are still among the more transparent democracies right now and at least we get to see some of the corruption and are free to discuss it.
honestly, while some of the things (like leaking debate questions) show some sort of corruption… it’s still pretty innocuous. it’s just the tip of the iceberg.
This whole thing has been funny everyone is an expert on hacking, hacking voting machines, attribution and Russia lately.
Edit: page left open on phone too long. Disregard.
I don’t want to go all BED, but who was it again that leaked the questions? That’s right, Donna Brazile. The same Donna Brazile who stepped in to chair the DNC after Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz got busted. The same Debbie that chaired Hillary’s 2008 campaign. How did Debbie get the job at the DNC? That’s right, Tim Kaine stepped down and Debbie got the job. Yeah, that same Tim Kaine that came out of nowhere at Clinton’s VP pick.
But yeah, the RNC is just as corrupt. :rolleyes:
this is not the meme thread 
or maybe there are enough memes to sustain two threads?
Yeah, I was hoping for actual sustained discussion.
There’s this:
Also, I never said that one was more corrupt than the other. I honestly don’t think you can put a measure on something like that. The politicians who are the best at being corrupt are the ones you don’t know are corrupt.
It’s more of a don’t throw rocks from a glass house situation. You can pick as many scandals from this election that you feel like but I’m not sure why you think it’s safe to only throw up the stories about the left just because you happen to support the right. People do this and then bash liberals for being biased.
the source piece i use to try and explain this is here: Steve Bannon Trump Tower Interview: Trump’s Strategist Plots “New Political Movement” – The Hollywood Reporter
I have a meme for this but I’ll hold back 
I think a single meme per post limit would be acceptable.
Nah I’ll keep it all to one thread. Got some more good Kanye ones I need to post.
It’s not that I mind discussion, it’s just that a thread like this won’t change anyone’s mind. If you want honest discussion the first person you need to “talk” with is yourself. Start out by changing your assumptions.
Indeed. I think you’ll find that I try to argue both sides. It just so happens that there is more Trump support on this site than anything else so I probably come off as more liberal than I actually am.
For this thread, I was trying to focus discussion on the CURRENT state of affairs that matter instead of looking back at Clinton, etc. We should all stop trying to argue for something by arguing against something else. That’s not real analysis.
he’s the piece on bill gate’s comments on trump… nothing negative… unlike Mr. Branson.
Yea before I was shocked with how many gun experts I knew. Now I am shocked with how many security and intrusion analysis experts I know.
If Obama doesn’t provide evidence of their claims, it will be another failure to end his “legacy”. They are looking like idiots and this is just getting worse and worse expecting people to blindly trust the CIA on unfounded claims.
That’s only possible if there is actual news here to talk about, and there isn’t. It’s a bunch of non-sense being blown out of proportion by one side. The only way you can talk about it is to point out how it’s nothing new and show examples of how the very people crying about it have been doing the same thing for years.
And I probably come off more “Conservative” than I am. People just care about different things. So if you try to have a discussion about something you care about, but IDGAF we’re just going to talk in circles or not talk at all.
For example, someone on the left might think it’s “literally the start of the 4th Reich” that Trump is picking generals for cabinet positions. I don’t care if he picks generals, CEOs or Pepe the frog as long as they do the job well by my metrics not by yours.
To be fair, the people you’re referring to probably don’t have metrics aside from how they feel about it. (These people exist on the right, too.) I have a hard time talking to far leftists and they end up thinking I’m a right wing nut. I didn’t vote for Trump but once the election was over I immediately just wanted to stay up to date with his progress and truly want him to do a good job with this. Same for his appointees.
But there IS notable news happening. As a recent example the announcement of Tillerson being Secretary of State. Sure, he may have relevant experience for a global position but it’s hard to ignore the massive conflict of interest when major oil contracts are on the line if sanctions with Russia are lifted.
You should be happy that the candidate you supported won but treat them with the same scrutiny you did Hillary, Bernie, Obama, etc. That simply does not happen.
