The only reason Hillary is winning the Dem. Primaries is because the Dem. Establishment

into voting for her

Poor rubes, being tricked into voting for someone. If only these rubes were smarter.

a role in keeping Bernie and other Dem. candidates down, and pushing Hillary up?

I hear DWS is also rigging the Dem. Convention in July.

Front loading primaries the establishment candidate was sure to win had the obvious benefit of creating momentum...creating the impression of an insurmountable lead. If you don't think that influences voter behavior in subsequent races, you're naive.

the same day or within a week apart.

candidates running for the presidency at the start. Most of them complained to DWS
at the way she scheduled the debate in favor of Hillary. DWS made no changes
in spite of their complaints.

This is general knowledge.

Apparently you have nothing else constructive to do with your time.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1935320

they are obligated (in one way or another) to support Clinton regardless.

everyone, how they operate.

3 million more votes, in fact.

Reality is a hard mistress.

Shame they are too blind to see.

But I don't see why that means they get to vote in Democratic primaries? Independents voting in party primaries are people who want to have their cake (not be part of the "System" and eat it too (but still get a say in the nominee).

many members of the Democratic Establishment have come under the influence of
the Corporate Power people. They have lost their ideals, become pawns of Wall
Street, and have become Democrats in name only. Bernie is trying to reverse
this trend.

I understand that in recent years many Republicans have left their Party, too. And
if you count these people together with all the small political groups as Independents,
they outnumber either one of the major political parties.

I see change coming. Whether we like it or not, change is coming. It's only a question of time.

they can do that, I suppose.

I'm not sure that's an argument for letting them vote in our party primary. If they left the party, they left the party, though of course, I would welcome them back. I'm not opposed to multiple points of view in the party. A debate of ideas is good.

people who are neither Democrats nor Republicans.

Besides even if it was, it's not exactly an arduous task to change one's registration other than perhaps New York where the deadline is months ahead.

Should self-delete.

We're all "the establishment", I'm sure.

Some are terrified to fight for our freedoms and liberties apparently more comfort in their bubble of denial. They need to wake up and smell the class war. Every day more and more of the wealth and resources of the 99% are being transferred via taxing laws/regulations to the 1%.

There are two candidates, Sen Sanders clearly favors the 99% while Clinton whose own wealth puts her and Bill comfortably in the 0.1% of wealthiest and they got it from the 1% class. They represent the 1% as the Koch Bros have recently admitted.

It's one thing to be terrified to go against the Wealthy but it's another to turn backs on those struggling among us just so Goldman-Sachs and the Clinton Family can amass more and more wealth.

Ok, Ms. Palin.

Because Hillary is ahead by millions of votes. Forget any discussion of superdelegates at this moment. Popular votes. Are you saying that those of us who voted for her in the primaries are just to stupid to know what we're doing?

How do you reconcile that the majority of voters to this point have voted for her? Could it be that those voters simply disagree with your assessment?

I know, I know , independents aren't real Americans

So, are you suggesting that no independents are a part of those millions of votes that Hillary has accumulated?

and they all think she is so entitled to the nomination they don't care if they set us up to lose.

They think Hillary will win over Republicans?

Have they listened to talk radio in the last 15 years?

And if she actually 'wins'...

Can everyone just imagine what we will go through with these nitwit Republicans?

They are already preparing to impeach her.

We need to fix some serious problems in this country, not just give the Republicans some ammo to bash Democrats for the next decade.

to be expected from anyone on the political horizon, no matter the party, when help comes, it is destroyed before our reality can be changed.

We have allowed the party of the people to devolve into a co-conspirator that would have us all as slave labor feeding the wealthy, a country where those that have nothing to contribute to the wealth of the few are left to perish as useless eaters. A country where bloody empire for the profit of of an out of control military industry and a thriving new mercenary industry are gorged on the blood of those that are no threat to us in any military sense. A modern form of feudalism that is developing before our eyes.

Without a party to protect us from the unwavering desire of some to recreate this nation as a neo-feudal fascism it's rebirth will continue unabated on it's course toward the neo-feudal goal, they have recently showed us that not only is their goal clear, it has also shown us the intend to make futile any attempts from within to change such a destructive and unwavering course.

The 99% are beginning to see that they are on their own now against the purchased post-partisanship that will lead us to that goal faster or slower, but on the same course, ever rightward ever more cruel and ever more a threat to their well being and happiness.

We are almost there and there appears to be nothing to stop it, even when a good man tried, the entire party moved heaven and earth to insure he could not be an agent for the change all of us need.

I blame us that are on the front of liberal thought for allowing our party to so easily be taken over by the republican castaways that dare claim to be more than what they are, purchased lackeys of the wealthy elite.

I blame myself for allowing myself to be used as shamelessly as any poverty stricken GOP member that would support and vote for what is demonstrably against their best interests and the interests of over 99% of the citizens of this country.

I blame the party faithful for so easily adopting and even cheering well known and deeply damaging right wing policy simply because they follow the party line (policies that they are well educated about and once fought against).

I blame the party itself for being so easily bought and co-opted by the policies of the Heritage Foundation and The Chamber of Commerce simply for a pittance in campaign contributions just as I blame them for lying cheating and stealing their maintenance of complete control


Without a party to oppose the neo-feudalists, what is left to stop them?
What can we do?
What can YOU do?

WHAT THE HELL CAN I DO!

The last sentence describes not only my feelings, but also the feelings of a growing number of citizens that can not help but see what is happening because it grows more blatant every day.

there were no responsible and capable leaders among those running for the
presidency. So he decided to take the step. He is trying to stop the
Democratic Party from going further right, which is the trend of corruption
and is responsible for the degenerate state our country is now in.

Bernie is trying to bring us back to the state of being the great nation we
once were -- and he is doing this against the formidable forces that are
opposing him.

he was the nominee? I'm sure they would uncover and capitalize on things in his past that his supporters are not even aware of.

Bernie has not yet been vetted by the right wing slime machine. They've been saving that in case he did make it to the GE.

Hrc was the "chosen" candidate by establishment democrats, the dnc has been ignoring the Sanders campaign from the beginning and now as donnie boy pivots to the general he's trying to co op Sanders message. To those who think that hrc is a "shoe in" wake up and smell the fake tan cause she's in serious trouble where as Sanders still polls better vs donnie boy.

The excuse to turn backs on those suffering.

Mammon: The greedy pursuit of wealth.

others, who are in positions of power, and can do so.

If you mean closed primaries, DWS does not set those rules, and independents had every chance to register Dem if they wanted to vote in the Dem primary.

Her whole campaign is centered around fighting sexism, and racism got tacked on because it's similar. That wouldn't be enough, but Trump got in there and provided Hillary with a straw-man turned into a real boy, which boosted her campaign by an immesurable amount. Without Trump, she'd be nothing.

It's like voting totals don't matter

did you deliberately chose to avoid them - and for your own home-consumption?

for that matter.

think Bernie believes our country has a desperate need for someone who really
would try to bring up the standard of living and hope to the vast majority of our fellow
citizens. Hillary seems to be only interested in making herself wealthy.

Is the reason why she is winning?

Not to mention the fact Clinton rates more honest and Sanders has tons of Pinocchios.

Sanders can "believe" what ever he likes, it does not make it reality.

Or were you not paying attention to the primary season?

You convinced me I would feel cheap and dirty to ever support Bernie, if that's the way his hardcore supporters think. No thanks, I want no part of that.

I was referring to those candidates still running for the presidency. There are only 3 left.
Please read the OP again.

unfairly favor the establishment pick, with the overwhelming support of lobbyists and other super delegates, Hillary has still managed to LOSE

New Hampshire
Colorado
Minnesota
Oklahoma
Vermon
Kansas
Nebraska
Maine
Michigan
Idaho
Utah
Alaska
Hawaii
Washington
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Rhode Island
Indiana
and Democrats Abroad

Hillary is likely to lose AGAIN today.

In the general election, Hillary won't be running against a candidate who raised his campaign funds from the grassroots, she won't be running with DWS twisting the rules to favor her, and the Republican establishment will work to neutralize her NeoLiberal/NewCon establishment support within the (neo?)Democrat party.

she does. Yes, her competition would become much stiffer!

(obvious from the start) obstacles against him to benefit the already chosen candidate.

It would have been a blow-out, imo.

It's the exact opposite with Hillary.

DWS and company knew what they were doing.
Plus, they had a supine corporate media to help carry their water.

I like him less as a candidate as time goes on.

/ignore.

is the reason.

[link:|

I think they thought they'd blow him out of the water months ago. I just warms the cockles of my heart to think he is a thorn in dem leadership's paw.

You can't even admit that Sanders has made a remarkable accomplishment in a corporate controlled process? Whatthefuckever.

I still remember the "He won't even win Vermont" talk when he started this campaign.

to undermine Sanders and boost Clinton.

I prefer the Party leadership to provide a level playing field for the people to decide on a nominee. That they would so openly and sleazily subvert the democratic process is a deal-killer. The Party has shown that it doesn't care what the rank-and-file think, and that it insists on a top-down policy strategy: "We'll tell you what to think, and for whom to vote."

Fuck that.

are all in on the oligarchy. They're propping up the billionaire class and perpetuating economic misery for untold millions. They're very much like Bush supporters. There's nothing you can say or do to get them to see the error of their ways.

even become filled with anxiety. They feel much more comfortable when they have orders from
above telling them what to do.

Some professions have more such people than in the general population -- the military, for
instance. From the political point of view, more of such people would be inclined to join the
Republicans than the Democrats.

There are pluses and minuses on both sides.

thank you!!

Cal33,

Right now the pledged delegates count gives Hillary Clinton 54 percent to Bernie Sanders having 45 percent of the vote. (Effective 05.10.2016 @ 03:00 p.m. ET.)

I see three factors helping to explain:

• Media: Deliverate lack of coverage for Bernie Sanders. Intentional bias from broadcast and cable networks which have reported a folding in of superdelegate numbers—which do not account before all primaries’ voters have their say before us voters (no matter any arrangements)—and reporting them without indicating the difference. (Or, in some cases, doing so in fine print.) The purpose has been to get less informed people to think the primaries are essentially done.

• Closed Primaries: Having a mix of states which are open and closed primaries. Some would say they should all be uniform. Well, given that tax payers fund these elections, they should all be open. (I say this no matter how many political parties.)

• 45–64 and 65+ voters have turned out a 3-to-2 advantage over 17–29 and 30–44 voters in these 2016 Democratic presidential primaries. In general elections, and as pairs, they are 50/50. (The in-between groups, in general elections, are the ones which are usually closer to that 3-to-2 advantage.) So, when doing some numbers crunching, this explains why Hillary Clinton eked out small victories in states like Illinois and Missouri. (Add Nevada and especially Iowa to that. I’d have to do even more numbers crunching to figure out which additional states might have otherwise tipped.)

as not a "decent human being."

Such sanctimony.

Primaries' Popular Vote as of May 8, 2016
Hillary Clinton: 12,561,272
Donald Trump: 10,717,357
Bernie Sanders: 9,446,660

Hillary Clinton has been a Democrat for more than 40 years. Bernie Sanders joined the party months ago. Of course the establishment is favoring her over him. Anybody who finds that strange isn't very bright.

with them. Bernie joined neither major party because both of them have become
corrupted by the Corporatists. He remained true to the ideals of FDR's Democratic
Party. He remained a lefty. Had he decided to run as an Independent, he would
have split the Dem. Party. And this would have surely helped the Republicans to
win. And this he did not want to do. That's why he joined the Dem. Party. (I
realize that you chose not to know this).

voted for her in large numbers; AA's, women, Hispanics, LQBT. I agree she had an advantage from the beginning due toestablishment support but the bottom line is that he didn't talk about civil rights very much and it cost him big. Plus many of his supporters savaged minorities and women on social media saying terrible bigoted things.

I'll file this with the 10,000 other theories on "excuses as to why my favorite candidate didn't win"

to Bernie's crooked vagueness and RW attacks. Yes, she has experienced a lot of unpleasant negativity, just not usually from people pretend to be progressives and liberals while mouthing Right Wing trash.

The decent human being here is the one who did not go negative, and that's not Bernie or Jane. Even with his dirty tricks and RW nastiness, he's lost.