Don't Insult My Intelligence By Suggesting I Was Hoodwinked by Clinton:

[VermontKevin]

Part of a larger thread that puts paid to the notion that HRC voters were somehow duped by the DNC into voting for HRC.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

I never would have voted for Bernie in the primary. And not because of Clinton.

[Madam45for2923]

1. Yeah I voted for HRC b/c of DNC! The freaking gall!

[melman]

2. This all nonsense

Nothing in those tweets was suggested or implied anywhere by anyone.

[VermontKevin]

4. That does not seem to be an opinion shared by those who liked and retweeted said

tweets.

You may have a differing opinion, and that's okay.

[melman]

6. Wow

So you're saying the followers of a twitter account are inclined to share the views expressed on it. That's incredible.

[VermontKevin]

7. I did not reference her "followers." Please read my posts carefully to save yourself further

confusion.

[melman]

8. I've read them

and I'm not confused at all. Your purpose here is clear as day.

[VermontKevin]

12. You seem rather accusatory.

[Control-Z]

14. Ooh. Tell me, tell me.

What is VermontKevin's purpose here? It's not clear to me. Not at all. Please tell me.

[VermontKevin]

15. You won't get an answer.

[Control-Z]

16. I didn't expect one, really.

But I had to give it a try.

[pnwmom]

11. Yes. They've been suggested and/or implied by anyone who claimed

that the DNC "rigged" the election; that the DNC connection with Hillary via the signed fundraising agreement, whatever it said, influenced ordinary primary voters to choose her instead of Bernie.

[justiceischeap]

13. Suggesting that the DNC rigged the primary

and then not explaining why HRC won more votes than Sanders and tying that into the rigging does exactly that.

How did the “rigged” primary garner more votes for Clinton?

It didn’t keep people from voting for Sanders, or donating to him, so it must imply that those of us that supported Clinton were in some way duped by the DNC or primary process, cause it was “rigged.”

What other explanation can there be? I mean, there’s no way that Clinton could beat Sanders without somehow “rigging” things, right? That’s what claiming that Clinton garnered more votes comes down to.

[mcar]

3. K&R

[comradebillyboy]

5. Bravo!

[ismnotwasm]

9. This was an epic tweet

I enjoyed it thoroughly

[Sunsky]

10. +1000

She spoke to me and mine, the other choice not so much.