This video from the USA says about itself:
Bernie WOULD BE PRESIDENT If Dems [Democratic Party establishment] Didn’t Have HEAD UP ASS
10 November 2016
TYT Politics Reporter Jordan Chariton reported on why Bernie Sanders would’ve defeated Donald Trump in the presidential election.
DNC Staffer Screams At Donna Brazile For Helping Elect Donald Trump. Democrats’ nerves are raw in Washington after Tuesday’s stunning loss. 11/10/2016 04:16 pm ET: here.
Dear Kitty. Some blog 
Reblogged this on The Most Revolutionary Act and commented:
*
*
If not for Democratic National Committee vote rigging in the primaries (in Bernie Sanders won more votes and elected delegates), Trump would not be president.
LikeLike
Thanks for your reblog!
LikeLike
I don’t think Bernie would ever be president. It is shame our choices were so pathetic. A socialist, Bernie appealed to the millenniums very much. Free education, universal healthcare, but these were not things he could actually make happen in America. I think Comey should be accountable for violating the Hatch Act, inserting himself into an election 11 days prior to the vote with early voting already started. A lot of disturbing breaches occurred, the insertion of the Kremlin into our voting process. It stinks to high heaven.
LikeLike
If free education and universal health care could happen in post-world war II Britain, destroyed by the war, and in not so rich Scandinavian countries, then why can’t they happen in the rich USA?
According to the FBI, there is no proof of the Russian government influencing the US elections. The point of the publication of the Podesta e-mails is not really who hacked them (Russian hackers? other people? The FBI says they don’t know). The point in the Podesta emails is their contents: Hillary Clinton saying to a secret meeting of bankers that.she now publicly opposes treaties like TTIP, but that she privately supports them; etc.
Like the point on the revelations about Trump’s sexism also is not who leaked them, but their contents.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What news are you reading? The FBI definitely said the Russians hacked our data. Come on!
LikeLike
I read, eg, CNN:
Washington (CNN) The FBI has been conducting multiple investigations of alleged connections between Russia and Donald Trump, his presidential campaign or its backers. But none so far have yielded proof of criminal connections between the parties. … But the government has stopped short of accusing Russia of trying to swing the election in a particular direction, and has also not formally accused Moscow of involvement in a hack of Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta or of attempts to hack voter registration databases that have been detected.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/01/politics/donald-trump-russia-fbi-investigations/
The Murdoch media like the Wall Street Journal claimed differently; but that is Rupert Murdoch for you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/russians-hacked-two-u-s-voter-databases-say-officials-n639551
LikeLike
That source quotes anonymous ‘officials’, providing no proof.
LikeLiked by 1 person
excuse me for commenting at your blog, your unwillingness to accept face facts makes the point unworthy of discussion. Have a good day.
LikeLike
Have a good day as well 🙂
Anonymous ‘officials’ claiming things without providing proof are not ‘facts’.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on TheFlippinTruth.
LikeLike
Thank you, and other rebloggers!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on AGR Daily News Service.
LikeLike
Pingback: Donald Trump helps military-industrial complex | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Trump elected, British reactions | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Anti-Trump movement continues | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Bernie Sanders speech against DAPL pipeline | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Trump elected, a British view | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: From Abraham Lincoln to Donald Trump, a British view | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: United States Senator Bernie Sanders’ new book | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Let’s get right to it. According to a poll that I did, two days before the Presidential Election, here are the Presidential Election results if the matchup had been different:
Barack Obama 51%, Trump 49%
Bill Clinton 52%, Trump 48%
Joe Biden 54%, Trump 46%
Bernie Sanders 56%, Trump 44%
(Presidents Obama and Clinton both would have beaten Donald Trump. But the 22nd Amendment, establishing a Presidential term limit, forbade that.)
Ted Cruz 52%, Hillary Clinton 48%
GW Bush 54%, Hillary Clinton 46%
Marco Rubio 55%, Hillary Clinton 45%
Mitt Romney 56%, Hillary Clinton 44%
Paul Ryan 57%, Hillary Clinton 43%
So Trump would have lost to all four alternative Democratic opponents, and Hillary Clinton would have lost to all five alternative Democratic opponents. As Trevor Noah said on the Daily Show, before the election, “both Trump and Clinton are very lucky to be running against one another, because they are both running against the only person they could possibly beat.”
Three final matchups:
Sanders 56%, Trump 44%
Sanders 55%, Cruz 45%
Sanders 52%, Rubio 48%
Now here is where it gets very interesting. I asked the voters how they felt about this year’s Presidential primaries. More than half said that they were disappointed by them. The least dissatisfied were the Democrats; “only” 38% of the Democrats were dissatisfied. But 53% of the Republicans, and a whopping 69% of independent voters, were dissatisfied.
And here is the $64 billion question. I asked the voters whether they would reject all of the candidates, and start over again, if they could. Forty percent said yes, they would vote for “none of the above,” and declare a mulligan.
Of the remainder, 30% said that they would not want to reject all the candidates; they wanted Clinton. Trump scored 27%, Johnson 2% and Stein 1%.
So if “none of the above” had been on the ballot, it would have won.
Which made me wonder, why isn’t it?
Accordingly, last week I introduced the “None of the Above Act,” which would require that in every federal election, the last line on the ballot would be “none of the above.” And if “none of the above” wins, then there is a mercifully short (six week) do-over, likely with different candidates less offensive to the voters.
Think about it. If “none of the above” were on the ballot, then no entrenched, coddled incumbent would be safe.
If “none of the above” were on the ballot, then negative advertising would simply drive up the vote for none-of-the-above. The candidates would be forced to run positive campaigns, or lose out to “none of the above.”
If “none of the above” were on the ballot, then there would be no excuse for not voting. In fact, “they all stink” would be the perfect reason to go and vote – for “none of the above.”
Think of it as voting with your middle finger.
Become a citizen cosponsor of our “None of the Above Act” >>
Courage,
Rep. Alan Grayson
LikeLike
Pingback: Thanksgiving in the USA, from Lincoln to Trump | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Donald Trump’s establishment support | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: ‘Voting rights violations, not Russian hacking, real US election scandal’ | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Free Puerto Rican Oscar López Rivera | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: British demonstrators interviewed on Trump and May | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Donald Trump, a Scottish poem | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Donald Trump, Australia and New Zealand | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: French austerity and militarism politician Macron | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Donald Trump criticized, rightly and wrongly | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: London demonstration against French Marine Le Pen | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Against nuclear weapons, on our way to Trump in Brussels | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Brussels against Trump, NATO militarism, report | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: US Bernie Sanders supports British Corbyn | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: US Clinton aide ran British Conservative May’s campaign | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Naomi Klein on Corbyn, Sanders and young people | Dear Kitty. Some blog
LikeLike
Pingback: Learn from British Corbyn, US Sanders says | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Japanese right-wing government loses local election | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: ‘Clinton’s warmongering caused Trump’s presidency’ | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Trump’s Islamophobia in the USA | Dear Kitty. Some blog
LikeLike
Pingback: How Hillary Clinton made Trump president | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Charlottesville, USA murderous nazism, Donald Trump, many protests | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Amazon.com censors criticism of Hillary Clinton’s book | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Clinton, presidential candidate by fraud, Democrats say | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Donna Brazile, Clinton, Sanders in the USA | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Russia-bashing, pretext for attacking civil liberties | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Anti-Trump candidates in 2020, poll omits Sanders | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: United States anti-racist black woman smeared as ‘Russian tool’ | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Angela Davis on how Clinton made Trump president | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: United States corporate Democrats ban Bernie Sanders | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: ‘Bernie Sanders would beat Trump’ | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: ‘Russiagate’ conspiracy theory in the USA | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Hillary Clinton smears Bernie Sanders, video | Dear Kitty. Some blog