Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton, Democracy's Friend—and Foe

She likes democracy, when it breaks her way.

|

Hillary Clinton is a huge fan of democracy—just so long as it doesn't get in her way.

HRC—Her Royal Clintonness—has not driven a car in two decades. Her list of speaking-engagement demands includes special pillows onstage and hummus and crudités offstage (crudités is a fancy word for veggies). She has been paid more than a half-million dollars for speaking to the swells at Goldman Sachs.

But that doesn't mean she no longer cares about the little people! She does care. Deeply. We know this because she says so—and if there is anything Clinton is known for, it's always telling the straight-up truth.

In a recent column on CNN.com, Clinton recalls those glory days after the election of Barack Obama, when "Republicans faced a choice. (They) could either change themselves—by embracing the young, diverse and tolerant America of the 21st Century—or they could try to change whose voices count in our democracy. We all know the cynical path they chose."

Thanks to the Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United and other developments, she continues, "our democracy is being hollowed out. And that should offend every American, no matter what party you belong to." Too many special interests have too much power over elections, which makes it harder for "people with good ideas and a passion for public service" to run for elected office. "You shouldn't have to be rich or well-connected to serve."

On her campaign website, Clinton has a briefing paper on her "proposal to restore integrity to American elections." It says "revitalizing democracy" is "a key pillar of her campaign. She will fight to ensure that democracy works for everyday Americans and leads to government of, by, and for the people, not just the wealthy and the well-connected."

The trouble with the current system, the position paper says, is that it "creates disincentives for voters to feel like their participation matters and for candidates to focus more of their attention on regular voters." So Clinton wants to "restore the role of average voters in elections" and "revitalize our democracy so that it values the voices of everyday Americans, not just those at the top."

But she doesn't have to wait for the election to do those things. She could have done them long ago—by demanding that the Democratic Party eliminate superdelegates.

Superdelegates are Democratic Party big shots—current or former elected officials, members of the Democratic National Committee, and so on—who automatically get to attend the nominating convention. They offset the pledged delegates, who are chosen based on primary and caucus voting results. There are 712 superdelegates, and they make up nearly one-third of the convention votes needed to secure the nomination. (It takes 2,382 delegates at the national convention to become the nominee.)

And so far, Hillary Clinton has a lock on them.

In fact, as early as this past November—before a single vote had been cast—Clinton already had received so much superdelegate support that she had 15 percent of the total delegates needed to win the nomination.

Since then she has barely edged out Sanders in Iowa and lost badly to him in New Hampshire. And while she squeaked by him in Nevada, her lead in the delegate count has actually grown. As the AP recently reported, "after the contests in Iowa and New Hampshire, Sanders has a small 36-32 lead among delegates won in primaries and caucuses. But when superdelegates are included, Clinton leads 481-55." Sanders won New Hampshire by double digits, but six of its eight superdelegates support Clinton (the other two haven't announced who they're backing). Nevada added 19 delegates to the Clinton tally and 15 to Sanders'.

Sanders supporters are understandably cheesed off about this, and they have been voicing their displeasure—sometimes to superdelegates directly. And the supers are not impressed. "I'm sick and tired of them," says one superdelegate from Indiana.

To be clear, superdelegates have not signed blood oaths. They can switch their allegiance—and some do. When Clinton ran for president in 2008 a few dozen superdelegates who had supported her initially shifted to Barack Obama. But by then, Obama had mostly closed the superdelegate gap anyway.

Regardless, the Democratic Party's heavy reliance on superdelegates creates a two-tiered system in which the party elites—"those at the top," as Clinton puts it—have veto power over the wishes of the great unwashed masses. Clinton is counting on them to thwart the "young, diverse and tolerant Americans" who support her opponent. Sanders certainly has a "passion for public service"—and he promotes what many Democrats consider "good ideas"—but unlike Clinton, he is not "well-connected." So while he is winning the votes, he is losing the race.

To top it all off, Clinton and the Democratic Party apparatus have created a joint fundraising committee whose operations have enabled CLinton to "maximize donations from wealthy supporters," as The Washington Post notes. The New York Observer says this effort also "helps Clinton buy off superdelegates. . . . The Clinton campaign controls the money and decides which states receive it." New Hampshire's Democratic Party netted $124,000. No wonder its superdelegates support her.

To paraphrase Clinton, the question of superdelegates is a question of whose voices count in our democracy. And we all know the cynical path she's chosen.

This column originally appeared at the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

Advertisement

NEXT: Connecticut's Mom & Pop Booze Stores Want You To Pay More For Liquor

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I wish companies like G-S would simply bribe her outright without insulting our collective intelligence by pretending that anyone on earth has the slightest bit of interest in hearing a Hillary Clinton speech. There would be more dignity in honest corruption.

    1. Those shows are usually for clients.

      You bring clients in for a meet and greet with Hillary Clinton, you might raise hundreds of millions for various equity investments. $500k can be a good investment for that + any good will you get from Clinton should she become President.

      Peyton Manning could probably make that at Goldman. Clients don’t care what he says. They just want to meet Peyton Manning.

      1. I can’t believe anyone actually wants to meet her, either. They just want influence.

        1. You get to have your picture taken with her.

          You can put it on the wall in your reception area.

          You look so influential.

          I know somebody who got so many pictures on her wall that way, you’d think she was more influential than Henry Kissinger.

          Come to think of it, she also has a picture of herself with Henry Kissinger.

          1. Well, she certainly influenced *you*, Ken! 😉

  2. “HRC?Her Royal Clintonness?has not driven a car in two decades. Her list of speaking-engagement demands includes special pillows onstage and hummus and crudit?s offstage (crudit?s is a fancy word for veggies). She has been paid more than a half-million dollars for speaking to the swells at Goldman Sachs.”

    Also, she eats people’s children.

    1. But only if there is a nice crudit?s side dish and she is sitting on comfy pillows.

    2. Well, the children of Syed & Saleha Abedin anyway.

      1. +1 order of mutton flaps

    3. No she just kills them by running weapons to terrorists.

    4. “Also, she eats people’s children.”

      Oh, come on. She doesn’t eat them; she sucks the blood and marrow from them.

  3. “You shouldn’t have to be rich or well-connected to serve.”

    Good thing she’s broke and disconnected.

    1. She’ll accept servants from any socio-economic status.

  4. her aides will now be forced to testify under oath. progress.

    1. It’s kind of cute watching you guys get your hopes up over that.

      1. “It’s kind of cute watching you guys get your hopes up over that.”

        There’s always some hope that justice will win out over blatant corruption, but yeah, it’s a long shot.

        1. It’s not corruption. Getting away with stuff that would send the hoi palloi to prison for the rest of their lives is what political power is for.

          1. So, then it’s …. corruption.

            1. The bear that steals your cooler is not corrupt, it’s just a bear, and there is no other kind.

              1. Yeah, it’s really hard to call someone a cheater when they’re playing the game according to the rules.

                1. Did you even read this article, or did you just come here to claim Her Royal is beyond such things as basic decency, never mind legal matters.

                  1. If you can point me to a circumstance where she has suffered any significant consequences for indecent behavior or breaking the law, I will gladly acquiesce.

                    1. There’s a first time for everything. Stop trampling on my dreams.

      2. Hope springs eternal. Then again, I’m a Redskins fan, so I have some experience in these matters.

    2. Just think about the fact that the email scandal broke a year ago, and discovery is just happening now.

        1. The government does not take the mishandling of secrets by connected people very seriously, that is why Sandy Burger got fined only $50,000 and his security clearance revoked for 3 years, (a security clearance that he would not need since the Bush admin was in power) even though he stole secret documents, stuffed them down his pants, lied about it and refused to cooperate on telling what other documents he had stolen on other visits to the archives

          If you or I was to do that we would be in Gitmo

          1. Oh, I agree. I was being sarcastic.

          2. The state is merely a criminal gang writ large.

            And its senior officers are the equivalent of “made men”. Lesser officers can be whacked for such things, but a made man can only be whacked with the consent of the capo di capi in the crime family. Obviously, nobody is higher than Clinton in the Clinton crime family.

      1. it makes me want to put whoever was responsible in charge of more stuff!

    3. It all comes down to how serious the FBI is.

      If they are just going through the motions to assist their future boss in a coverup of her criminal career, then, yeah, nothing will happen.

      If they conduct a bare-knuckle investigation, they will be able to credibly threaten lots of people with criminal charges unless they roll over. And once the Cankle Wall of Silence is breached, it will be a stampede to become state’s evidence, because the alternative is jail.

  5. “…and if there is anything Clinton is known for, it’s always telling the straight-up truth….”

    For those who missed the left-coast AM links:
    “Hillary Clinton responded to Stephen Colbert’s joke about her trustworthiness”
    http://www.sfgate.com/technolo…..594727.php

    Wherein, that lying POS lies again.

    1. “And I’m going to demonstrate that I’ve always been the same person ? I’ve always been fighting for the same values, fighting to make a difference in people’s lives.”

      Actually, I believe her.

      1. *Classic* Clintonspeak.

        1. But she’s “always tried to tell the truth.”

    2. Wow, way to play hardball there CNN.

      ” CNN’s Chris Cuomo played the former secretary of state a clip … After the clip finished, Cuomo asked Clinton to take another chance to respond to say whether she had ever lied. ….

      “I’ll just say no,” Clinton said, as the audience applauded.
      “You’ll make Mr. Colbert very happy,” Cuomo said.
      “Good, I want to make him happy,” Clinton responded.”

      CNN really put her on the grill with that one.

      1. “CNN really put her on the grill with that one.

        Channeling Larry King…

      2. And Cuomo blew it with the email questioning, too.

    3. Oh, I took the “No” to mean she didn’t want to respond.

      In any event ….

      1. What difference does it make? /HRC

      2. Now that would be a bad choice for a laugh track.

    4. SF Gate rivals CNN for “annoying pop-up autoplay video”-ratio

      “CNN’s Chris Cuomo played the former secretary of state a clip of “Late Show” host Stephen Colbert mocking Clinton’s comments that “she didn’t believe she ever lied.”

      “How can you be this bad at it? Just say no! You’re running for president of the United States! Even Richard Nixon knew to say, ‘I am not a crook,'” Colbert said.

      After the clip finished, Cuomo asked Clinton to take another chance to respond to say whether she had ever lied.
      More from Business Insider

      “I’ll just say no,” Clinton said, as the audience applauded.

      Hillary really is just a vessel for the projections of her audience. They say, “NOW REPEAT AFTER US…” and when she performs as required everyone looks at each other and goes, “See! See! I told you!!! She’s everything we thought she was!!”.

      Neat trick, that. Politics.

  6. Why do I assume the “special pillows” are like those donut-shaped hemmorhoid pillows that in her case they’re to keep her from accidentally sitting down on her nutsack?

  7. I can’t wait to see her pull some absolutely outrageous superdelegate shenanigans or whatever else she has to do to secure the nomination. Because I have the feeling that she’s not letting it escape her grasp this time, no matter what.

    1. The DNC will do everything they can to force Bernie out before that point.

      1. I think it’s unlikely, but I really hope that Bernie gets a majority of primary votes. In any case, I anticipate that we’ll all enjoy a bit of schadenfreude when Bernie supporters finally grasp the fact that the nomination process of the Democratic Party is not really democratic.

        Green and socialist party activists ought to be preparing a barrage of propaganda to be launched when the time is right. They stand to capture new party members from disaffected Bernie supporters and other Democrats who finally recognize that the Democratic Party is just as sleazy as the Jack Abramoff wing of the Republican Party and just as bloody as its neo-con wing.

    2. The more you tighten your grasp lord Hiliary the more voters slip through your fingers.

    3. Unfortunately, she won’t have to. Bernie looked like he was going to run a serious challenge for a while, but he’s pretty much out of it now. The kids are bored with it and already onto some new youtube fad.

      1. Curious why you think this?

    4. Bernie did go live on a kibbutz once, wouldn’t accepting the rules and regulations of the kibbutz amount to a renunciation of his citizenship and therefore make him ineligible to run for President? I’m not saying it would, of course, but some people might say that. Is Mr. Sanders ineligible to run for President? I don’t know, I’m just a lowly housewife from Arkansas and I honestly don’t know. I’m just saying is all, some people might say Bernie Sanders is not a US citizen. Maybe they should sue to clear this issue up? I have no opinion on that, if the voters want to pick somebody who is clearly ineligible to be President by the very words of the Constitution itself instead of me, the former wife of a US President and definitely a person of the vaginal persuasion, why, they should have the right to do that. I just think that in all fairness, non-US citizens like Bernie Sanders perhaps shouldn’t be so involved in American politics. I’m just saying.

    5. It won’t be necessary.

      Bernie’s not going to win any of the big state primaries. Mass i think he might. But lacking any of the others he’s basically doomed.

      1. Really what makes you think so?

        1. The same thing that made me certain to a metaphysical level that nobody, and I mean nobody, would ever pull the lever for Donald Trump in a real election.

          It turns out that people in large groups can be scary-dumb.

          1. No, I was relying on a combination of actual poll %s and Hillary’s delegate lock via the political-payback machine she’s got.

            its nothing remotely like Trump, which is driven by actual greenfield voter-rebellion against the Status Quo

  8. Speaking in Northern Virginia just after the Supreme Court ruled for gay marriage, Hillary Clinton seemed deeply disappointed in her Republican rivals, and the GOP generally, which she labeled the party of the past. “They all decried the Supreme Court’s ruling,” she said. “We even heard them call for a constitutional amendment” to overturn it. Wow! Those Republicans have some nerve, don’t they? What kind of reactionary extremist wants a constitutional amendment to overturn a Supreme Court decision, asks A. Barton Hinkle? Well ? Hillary Clinton, for one. She’s been seething for five years over the court’s ruling in Citizens United. “We need to fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccounted money out of it once and for all,” she said a couple of months ago, “even if that takes a constitutional amendment.”

    1. what you’re supposed to do is executive order it away. duh.

  9. “Eliminate superdelegates”?! That’s just crazy talk!

    1. Rule of the Top Men – that is what progressives are all about.

  10. Oh no, not crudit?s!

  11. Hillary’s a criminal. The only place she belongs is in prison.

    You think any of us around here could get away with installing a private email server at home to handle our work emails and then wipe out the data and have no backups off site like is dictated by federal law?

    Try it, go ahead and let me know how that works out. I don’t even know how anyone could get away with it to begin with let alone breaking federal law and then still getting away with it. And it’s the freaking state department we’re talking about!

    What the fuck is wrong with people who support this dishonest, corrupt criminal?

    1. What the fuck is wrong with people who support this dishonest, corrupt criminal?

      The other team might win. That is all.

      1. The asshole of my asshole is my asshole?

        1. “He’s an asshole too, sir. Major Asshole.”

          1. “KEEP FIRING ASSHOLES!”

            1. Winning campaign slogan right there.

            2. “I knew it. I’m surrounded by assholes!”

          2. And his cousin?

            -Gunner’s Mate, Second Class Phillip Asshole.

            How many Assholes we got on this ship?

            -*in unison*YO!

          3. Nice “you don’t have to call me father; I’m am Anabaptist actually “

      2. AS FM said, they don’t want the other team to win, period. That’s what’s important.

        One reason the investigation is likely to stall is that there are a boatload of people who also knew the email server was not legal and said nothing — anybody who had an email exchange with her should have realized what was going on, and are complicit. Mass arrests (or even mass firings) are not going to happen.

        1. If, for whatever reason, I was emailing her or her underlings, and the address was @clintonemail.com I’d probably assume it was because of some political thing where they were trying to keep her Gov’t and political work separate. Right until the content of the email shifted to classified info. At that point I am assuming they are completely unsecure and this is something that the agency in question needed to know about.

          Any bets that people who weren’t Clinton-insiders who questioned why classified info was ebing discussed on an obviously unsecured system were told by The State Department it was all okay?

          1. You mean people like the President and his staff?

        2. I saw “mass firings”, immediately thought of how the Chinese government handles stuff like this, and got really excited for a second.

    2. In the town hall she attempted to shift what goes as blame to the State Department.

      One might ask: who headed the State Department while this was going on?

      1. When discovery starts over her email server, you’re going to see people flying under the bus.

    3. Hillary for Prison 2016!

  12. http://arstechnica.com/gadgets…..dal-robot/

    One day we will look back on this period of subjugation by our lizard overlords as a golden age.

      1. They all look delicious.

      2. 10 fooled me.

    1. Serious question: how would you fight that?

      I see a future market for affordable mech-suits…

    2. ‘After taking a walk over some rough, snowy terrain, a Boston Dynamics employee pushes it backwards with a hockey stick and smacks its toy box out of its hands. After being pushed so hard and taking a header into the floor, the robot shows it is still capable of picking itself up and going back to work.’

      We are doomed, the robots first encounters are with psychopathic humans.

      1. The hockey stick and package bit was interesting for the psychology it elicited. I clearly felt empathy for the robot, who was being teased. Very interesting response to an obviously inanimate object. Just the “human” movement and outline was enough to elicit this response.

        1. Have you seen the one where they kick Little Dog over to show how it reacts and can right itself.

          You would swear, for a second there, that it was a real dog that had been kicked.

        2. And it has reached this stage not even ten years after, say, the release of Windows Vista.

  13. This is a woman who lied to the families of the Americans killed in Benghazi as they were pulling the caskets off the plane and then when later on the campaign trail was called out about lying to them said that they were the ones who were lying.

    And this was no big deal to anyone.

    There is nothing she can do at this point that will stop her from getting the nomination.

    It’s gonna be Hillary vs. Donald.

    We are going to get democracy good and hard.

    1. It is more than that Tman. I think she is responsible for the deaths in Benghazi.

      My money is that the attackers were pro-Assad fighters there to shut down her clandestine gun-running to the anti-Assad rebels in Syria. One way or other they found out about it because of her insecure server. That is my guess.

      The emails too secret to release are probably the ones that gave it away and I haven’t heard a solid explanation of who the attackers were.

      The cover up story about the video was just too hinky. Every story about the attack leaves you with less information than before you heard it.

      It stinks to high heaven. I think she is responsible for those people’s deaths and she had the gall to lie to the families not to console them but as part of the cover-up of her misdeeds.

  14. You think any of us around here could get away with installing a private email server at home to handle our work emails and then wipe out the data and have no backups off site like is dictated by federal law?

    Never mind that; if somebody like Jamie Dimon were found to have engaged in the sort of egregious conflict of interest self-aggrandisement schemes which are business as usual in Clinton Land, cabinet heads would be fistfighting in the Oval office over who got to perp-walk him for the cameras.

  15. SuperPacs- not quite as super as some people might think

    And the spending came: hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars of political spending, denominated in gifts in the millions and tens of millions and even hundreds of millions.

    But what did it all buy?

    In an interview on election night 2012, Chris Wallace challenged Karl Rove: “[American] Crossroads, which you helped found, spent?what??$325 million, and we’ve ended up with the same president, the same Democratic majority in the Senate, and the same Republican majority in the House. Was it worth it?”

    Many donors expressed similar frustrations, in public and?even more forcefully?in private.

    Who could have guessed they’d turn out to be a way for political consultants to fleece the rubes?

    1. There have been studies on this subject, and there is simply no evidence that money has undue influence on election results. It’s just fear mongering. Many politicians probably do in fact buy the notion that money is super important as they get wrapped up in campaigning, but it’s bullshit.

  16. Dream On?:

    “Dreams, that governments will make you free,
    Dreams, that they ain’t just war and slavery,
    Dreams, of your god democracy,
    You keep dreamin’, of more enforced equality,
    Yes you’re dreamin’, dreamin’ you are free
    In your dreams”

    “In your dream, Donald Trump is not a fraud,
    In your dream, Sanders is not a fraud,
    In your dream,all the rest are not frauds,
    In your dream, Obama is not a fraud,
    In your dream, Reagan was not a fraud,
    In your dream, all the rest were not frauds,

    In your dream, the constitution was not a scam,
    In your dream, the Supreme court is not a scam,
    In your dream, 9/11 was not a scam…….”

    Lyrics excerpted from:

    “Dreams [Anarchist Blues]”:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMXtoUtXrTU

    Regards, onebornfree.
    onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom

    1. YARR WTC 7 WERE A CONTRRROLLED DEMOLITION

  17. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding who to eat for dinner.

    So I’m glad we’re a Republic. And I see no problem with the Democrat Party structuring it’s own nomination process the same, to weigh public opinion and it’s representatives both.

    Further, a problem the Republicans are having this year is that they *don’t* have much control over the nomination process. There’s been plenty of hand-wringing here and elsewhere that Trump is unstoppable in the Republican nomination process. Gee, maybe they shouldn’t have handicapped their super delegates so the party actually had some influence over it’s own nomination?

    1. Well, there’s the party establishment and paid professionals. If that’s what you mean by “the party”, then yeah, the Repubs, like the Dems, should just ignore their voters and anoint whoever the apparatchiks want.

      If “the party” is registered Republican voters, you get a different answer.

      So which do you think “the party” really is, or should be?

      1. I think that for a variety of reasons the question you pose is unnecessarily vague in the US. Different people will make equally legitimate claims of representing the “real” party, the consequences of which we can see playing out this election season.

        But as for what it *should* be? I think a political party *should be* a private organization (independent from government) with it’s own constitution/party platform, that has it’s own rules governing who is/isn’t a member, how positions within the party are chosen, and how nominees for general elections are selected. The current American system, in which the two main parties are unhealthily ingrained with state law, is a major problem contributing to the duality of American politics, keeping us locked into this partisan mess.

        1. Involvement in the major pol. parties in the USA is broad & shallow, as opposed to that in minor parties here & most parties elsewhere, which is narrow & deep.

  18. Superb work-from-home opportunity for anyone…fg Work for three to eight hours daily and start earning about $4k-$8k each month… Regular weekly payments…If this interest you try here Viset My Page……..

    ——– http://www.alpha-careers.com

  19. before I saw the paycheck that said $8517 , I didn’t believe that my mother in law woz like realy bringing in money in their spare time from their computer. . there uncles cousin started doing this 4 only ten months and as of now cleard the mortgage on there villa and bourt a gorgeous Saab 99 Turbo . learn this here now…

    Click This Link inYour Browser…

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~[] http://www.Mom80.Com

  20. The USA is Not a Democracy………………………….

    The USA is a Constitutional Republic…………………..

    1. The US was a constitutional republic.

      The fundamental principles of the Constitution were eviscerated in the first half of the 20th century.

      Now the Constitution is whatever the Top Men say it is.

    2. They’re just slogans. Republic & democracy mean the same thing, & either of them can be constitutional.

  21. The greatest threat to liberty is the centralized socialist state. Only central committee knows what’s best for you.

  22. My friend’s sister in-law makes $55 /hour on the computer . gw She has been out of a job for nine months but last month her income was $13390 just working on the computer for a few hours.visit that site….

    ——— http://www.alpha-careers.com

  23. Dream On?:

    “……Dreams, of your god democracy,
    You keep dreamin’, of more enforced equality,
    Yes you’re dreamin’, dreamin’ you are free
    In your dreams”

    “……In your dream, Donald Trump is not a fraud,
    In your dream, Sanders is not a fraud,
    In your dream,all the rest are not frauds,
    In your dream, Obama is not a fraud,
    In your dream, Reagan was not a fraud,
    In your dream, all the rest were not frauds,

    In your dream, the constitution was not a scam,
    In your dream, the Supreme court is not a scam,
    In your dream, 9/11 was not a scam…….”

    Lyrics excerpted from:

    “Dreams [Anarchist Blues]”:

    http://onebornfree-mythbusters…..blues.html

    Regards, onebornfree.
    onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom

  24. RE: Hillary Clinton, Democracy’s Friend?and Foe

    Comrade Hillary is democracy’s friend when it is a convenience for her. Democracy is her enemy when she is being criticized.

  25. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.workpost30.com

  26. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.workpost30.com

  27. “New Hampshire’s Democratic Party netted $124,000. No wonder its superdelegates support her.”
    They sold out their party and their country for less than $200K? I mean really that’s not that much money. It could hire you someone at minimum wage for about 427 weeks. So less than a year paying for 10 drudges.

  28. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do..
    Clik This Link inYour Browser….

    ? ? ? ? http://www.WorkPost30.com

  29. Logan . if you think Albert `s posting is terrific, on saturday I got themselves a Chevrolet Corvette after bringing in $9913 recently and would you believe, 10-k lass month . this is certainly the most-financialy rewarding Ive ever had . I began this eight months/ago and immediately made myself over $82.. per/hr . check this site out…
    Clik this link in Your Browser..

    ————? http://www.Wage30.com

  30. The Fit Finally programs and guides are based on over 600 research studies conducted by some of the biggest Universities and research teams of the world.
    We take pride in the fact that our passion for better health and fitness is 100% backed by science and helps 100’s (if not 1000’s) of people every year since 2010. Just try it:

    http://03615gbnxbyy5y42r9r8o80…..kbank.net/

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.