2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSanders, Eyeing Convention, Willing to Harm Hillary Clinton in the Homestretch
Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche@BernieSanders, eyeing convention, willing to harm Clinton in homestretch by @patrickhealynyt @jwpetersNYT and me
Defiant and determined to transform the Democratic Party, Senator Bernie Sanders is opening a two-month phase of his presidential campaign aimed at inflicting a heavy blow on Hillary Clinton in California and amassing enough leverage to advance his agenda at the convention in July or even wrest the nomination from her.
Mr. Sanders, his advisers said, has been buoyed by a stream of polls showing him beating Mr. Trump by larger margins than Mrs. Clinton in some battleground states, and by his belief that an upset victory in California could have a psychological impact on convention delegates who already have doubts about Mrs. Clinton.
While Mr. Sanders says he does not want Mr. Trump to win in November, his advisers and allies say he is willing to do some harm to Mrs. Clinton in the shorter term if it means he can capture a majority of the 475 pledged delegates at stake in California and arrive at the Philadelphia convention with maximum political power.
Tad Devine, a senior adviser to Mr. Sanders, said the campaign did not think its attacks would help Mr. Trump in the long run, but added that the senators team was not thinking about the possibility that they could help derail Mrs. Clinton from becoming the first woman elected president.
The only thing that matters is what happens between now and June 14, Mr. Devine said, referring to the final Democratic primary, in the District of Columbia. We have to put the blinders on and focus on the best case to make in the upcoming states. If we do that, we can be in a strong position to make the best closing argument before the convention. If not, everyone will know in mid-June, and well have to take a hard look at where things stand...
read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/19/us/politics/bernie-sanderss-campaign-accuses-head-of-dnc-of-favoritism.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0
Brian Fallon ?@brianefallon (Press secretary for @HillaryClinton for America)
How nice.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)MissDeeds
(7,499 posts)Hillary has harmed herself far more than Bernie ever could.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)Baobab
(4,667 posts)VVVVVV below VVVVVVVVV
VVVV down lower in sig follow links VVVVVV
apcalc
(4,463 posts)Nucking futs.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)The idea that a woman should bow out even when she's winning so that a man can take over, is nothing but male entitlement. One Bernie supporter here yesterday even suggested that Hillary should be happy to have her legacy to be that of being the first woman to bow out and make room for "the best president ever." Yeah, like women have never been the power behind the male throne in history. No thanks. These calls for the winner to bow out are more than just ridiculous. They're part of the old patriarchal playbook.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)Silver_Witch
(1,820 posts)Baobab
(4,667 posts)because policy in the pipeline likely will eliminate a number of policies which currently prefer women and minorities in favor of giving preferential employment to firms from less developed countries whose workforce may even be exclusively male (there I have no idea and its awarded by low bid only so whomever is the lowest bid, including Americans if we can be the lowest bids we will win those jobs, but its unlikely because of the wages here)
Silver_Witch
(1,820 posts)I think they will be in for much disappointment.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)I don't remember anything like that. I was an Obama supporter in 2008, and don't remember Hillary supporters saying Obama should be glad to have his legacy being that of the first black man to let a white woman win the presidency. If anyone had said something like that I would certainly denounce it as racist.
I do, however, remember hearing a Bernie supporter say yesterday that Hillary should be glad to have her legacy be that of the woman who bowed out (graciously, I presume, the way a lady should) to let Bernie become president. I'm sorry that you can't see how deeply offensive and misogynist that is.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)JRLeft
(7,010 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.
It's not the exact thing some DU person said but then again it was said by Ferraro, a former VP candidate and Hillary campaign official surrogate. It's some sort of verbiage. Way up from the top.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/us/politics/12campaign.html
So this routine of citing 'something someone said to me on the internet' is really sort of bogus. Obviously Hillary was not even culpable for Ferraro, Ferraro was culpable for her own actions, right? So how then does some poster on DU serve to define Bernie or anyone other than that poster? Are the standards different for Bernie? If so, please state exactly why that is.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)As an Obama supporter at the time, I was often annoyed by racial dog whistles coming from Clinton surrogates and even sometimes from herself. But I got respect for Hillary when, after it became clear that she was not going to overtake Obama in what was a far close delegate race, wholeheartedly threw her support to him. I do not see Bernie doing that - instead, he is sharpening his attacks, knowing full well he can no longer win. And although he does not use the same language that the mentioned poster used, his argument that the superdelegates should nominate him instead of Hillary smacks of male entitlement. Hillary is the first woman to ever win the majority of pledged delegates in the primary race of a major political party (and yes, she has won it, even though there are some states left, since there is no way Bernie can overtake her now), but Bernie's argument is that they should nominate the guy anyway. THAT is male entitlement.
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)You just nailed it!
uponit7771
(90,329 posts)TimPlo
(443 posts)is nothing but Christian entitlement. One Clinton supporter here yesterday even suggested that Sander should be happy to have his legacy to be that of being the first Jewish person to bow out and make room for "the best president ever."
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)No one said that and Bernie is not ahead in the delegate count. If he had been and then Clinton supporters had told him to stand aside for a Christian, then it would have been antisemitism.
frylock
(34,825 posts)I'm sorry that you're blind to it.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)So "it" cannot be antisemitism.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Tsk tsk.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)on her emails, etc.
Team Hillary will have to face the fact that it is NOT Sanders who is hurting her chances against Trump or whomever the eventual GOP candidate is. How will they handle Trump if they can't handle THIS ad:
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)as a punching bag. He gets no respect. Once it is over, it will be out of his hands. He will have taken it as far as he can, covering for her still-under-investigation self. At least will have tried. After that, it is up to her to continue to not be indicted.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)Last edited Thu May 19, 2016, 06:36 PM - Edit history (1)
It's mathematically over, and was so for some time now.
Sanders can stay until the last vote has been counted, but this kind of rhetoric makes him into what he's really always been, an agitator.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)a candidate, who is getting a message out there. Damn, you'd think he would be due some level of respect.
Autumn
(45,026 posts)Loudestlib
(980 posts)bigtree
(85,984 posts)...the weakness is all Sanders, exemplified by this desperate flailing before the ultimate end of his failed revolution against the party in June.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)If she's winning, and one of her strengths is dealing with criticism, then why post your bullshit OP?
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...it's nothing more than an anti-Hillary effort at this point with zero chance that Sanders can win the nomination.
What's bullshit is coming onto this thread like there's still a viable campaign to defend. I'm sure this posture suits the anti-Hillary crowd here, but I think it's a despicable effort which benefits no one outside of the political circus that this primary has become.
Advocating against Hillary at this point is indistinguishable from any other opposition to the nomination of our Democratic party candidate. You've lost this election and your campaign doesn't deserve a platform for this type of destructive, counterproductive politics.
Cognitive dissonance
In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time, performs an action that is contradictory to one or more beliefs, ideas or values, or is confronted by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs, ideas, or values.
To shut out from view or get in the way so as to hide from sight. In internet terminology, particularly in the context of post on DU, it means putting you on ignore.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)Response to bigtree (Reply #23)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Now, how about you answer my question.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Response to bigtree (Reply #7)
Name removed Message auto-removed
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...you're talking to yourself on my threads from this point forward.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)[youtube]
[/youtube]Response to grossproffit (Reply #37)
Name removed Message auto-removed
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)boston bean
(36,220 posts)Response to bigtree (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...and she's outpolling Trump.
Sucks to be a supporter of either of those two.
Sanders can do what he pleases, but people should be aware of how self-serving it is, and how much of a lie it makes of any claim that he's intent on defeating Trump. His campaign knows well he has no chance in this election and are doing nothing but stirring up his followers so he can suck more money out of them, I guess to pay off Devine and the other campaign wizard.
It's pathetic.
Response to bigtree (Reply #14)
Name removed Message auto-removed
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...this is what you've come to this site to convey?
It should be a short stay.
Response to bigtree (Reply #24)
Name removed Message auto-removed
apcalc
(4,463 posts)Toward the next victory that will get him the nomination since March.
It hasn't happened yet, and won't.
Let's see how he plays this thing out. At this point I am not sure I trust him to help Democrats win in the fall.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)to give it his best try at winning, and IF he's been burned by the Nevada backblow into backing off on slandering Clinton and the party to inflame his more gullible and irresponsible supporters (very big if), I could accept it, although I am too disgusted with his dirty tactics to be happy about it. However, I am still worried that he may intend or be willing to harm the party when we need to be strongest.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)G_j
(40,366 posts)HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)'Defiant and determined to transform the Democratic Party' due to lackluster candidacy and conviction to progressive ideals shown by Clinton campaign
There I corrected your point....
Clinton and her supporters looks to angle the blame for their failure to close out the primaries in strong fashion against a nominee that 'can't win'... CLASSIC
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)are the Bernie supporters who are perpetual victims. Allegations of voter fraud and cheating and cries of "no fair" (which sounds like a first grader's language) abound, even when they are the ones who did wrong (datagate, NV, etc.).
The reality is that Bernie refuses to act responsibly, and this irresponsibility is also to be seen in his more ardent followers.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)Cry babies you call Bernie supporters?
Hmmmm what a fascinating term that is.
Tell us, do you think it's wrong that an entire generation for the first time in history will make less than their parents? Do you think it's wrong that people like Hillary voted for Bush's bankruptcy bill which helped enable the student loan debt crisis because from there on out, students could no longer discharge their loans in bankruptcy? Tell us, do you think it's wrong that so many kids came home in coffins and body bags because Hillary voted for the Iraq war?
Yeah, cry babies you call us. That's rich & only goes to speak of the denial you exhibit or outright ignorance that millions will never be able to afford homes in this country because of people like Hillary and you enable it by supporting her.
The reality is people are fed up and down right pissed off on BOTH sides of the aisle with politicians who trade the misery of the American people for diamonds and gold.
I find it funny that you also brush off allegations of voter fraud and cheating too, something which is a very serious issue. I believe that should be looked into immediately, no matter if the claims come from Bernie supporters, Hillary supporters or Trump supporters. Voting must be protected. It would seem though you believe that isn't the case.
You say Bernie refuses to act responsibility which in all honesty is ironic considering Hillary is under an FBI criminal investigation and had classified information on her personal email server, all along saying she never did.
You've been made a mark and you drank the Kool-Aid, you just don't want to see it.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)The crybabies are obviously a reference to your picture.
I make less than my parents. In fact, my life's been pretty tough. I don't blame Hillary for that. I know that the forces of globalization are taking their toll all over the world. I don't blame Hillary for that either. I do blame her for her stupid Iraq war vote, but to say that "kids came home in coffins and body bags because Hillary voted for the Iraq war," as you do, is factually incorrect. They came home in coffins because Bush waged a war he shouldn't have. Hillary voted for strongarming Saddam with the threat of war, since she was convinced that he was hiding WMD's. She was wrong to opt for forceful diplomacy there, and she was wrong to trust the Bush Administration to follow through with inspections first before actually going to war. But that does not mean that we can place the entire responsibility for those dead kids on her shoulders. Some, yes, but the ultimate responsibility lies with the Bush Administration who hoodwinked Congress to vote for military action and then went to war before even completing inspections because they wanted to go to war anyway.
I don't dismiss all allegations of voter fraud. But there's a pattern here. Every time Bernie loses, people come up with conspiracy theories about how Hillary and the DNC rigged the election in her favor. This is plain bullshit.
Hillary should not have used a private server, yes. But you are making assumptions about what the FBI will find. And this pales in comparison to the irresponsibility shown by Bernie in willing to risk a Trump presidency by continuing his smear campaign against Hillary and by continuing to rile up his supporters against the Democratic Party.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)are the Bernie supporters who are perpetual victims.
Own it.
You don't blame Hillary for globalization when she is out selling trade deals and things like fracking to the whole world? Sorry but she is partially directly responsible for gloabalization.
No, kids came home in coffins because of people like Hillary and Bush. That and only that. Both Obama and Sanders said "no" and they were correct in saying no. Hillary and the rest who voted voted "yes" are directly responsible for the deaths of millions. That alone should concern you because it is perfect illustration of Hillary's bad judgement.
Obama said it best when he lambasted Hillary over Iraq. She gets no free pass with this and remember, who called Iraq a "business opportunity".
I have seen no conspiracy theories of voter fraud but what I have seen is videos which display it rather accordingly and what happened in NV was complete unadulterated crap with how the chair put forth her motion and passed her own motion while Bernie delegates were standing in line. Sorry but that isn't democracy, in fact it's borderline fascism.
You say an FBi investigation pales in comparison to what Bernie is doing to Hillary. See, there you go again. Hillary has more baggage than anybody else in this election. She is permanently damaged and her favorability shows and reflects that. The FBI isn't the Keystone Cops, they are the FBI and Hillary outright LIED about having classified information on the server. Why do you dismiss that in someone who is running for POTUS? The FBI *only* conducts criminal investigations and the fact that a candidate is under one is a huge issue. What if you or I walked into a job interview and had to tell our prospective employer we were under an FBI investigation? How do you think that would play out? It wouldn't because we wouldn't be hired.
The one who is risking a Trump presidency is the one who is now showing in some polls to lose to him; Hillary. She is the weaker candidate and it's irresponsible to support that knowing that she is. You can't win the White House on only Dem support and please, don't call out to Bernie supporters who would have never voted for Hillary in the first place because they don't see much difference between her and Bob Dole.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)She is the weaker candidate, but she is wiping the floor with your candidate? The fact that you are still praying for the indictment fairy to come to your candidate's rescue says I should probably offer you a 50% discount today.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Let's be clear: His supporters were never justified in believing any of these lies before checking them out. By now they should all know that many phony charges have been made by the Sanders Campaign but were always proven false.
All these lies should also have automatically been considered in the context that Hillary has been winning the popular vote, the pledged delegate count, and the unpledged delegate count by very comfortable margins from the beginning and has no reason to cheat and every reason not to.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)"Cry babies you call Bernie supporters?
Hmmmm what a fascinating term that is."
I love that after the picture you posted. So pure you don't even like your own arguments.
The Sanders implosion is monumentally impressive. I knew they were going to eat their own. I didn't think individuals would actually start arguing against their own thoughts. This is a winner.
Nedsdag
(2,437 posts)I don't condone the violence, but according to you, his supporters should sit down and shut up regarding what they see as something they see as wrong?
frylock
(34,825 posts)firebrand80
(2,760 posts)If there are people on Bernie's side that want her to lose in November. Think about it, if Bernie won't bet he nominee, they certainly want the next nominee to be similar to him. If Hillary wins, they don't get to run that person for another 8 years, if she loses, they get to run them in 4. Trump will have screwed things up to the point that Dems are a shoo in for the Presidency, and have probably just cleaned up in the midterms.
I'm not accusing anyone of anything, just a thought.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)There appears to be a sizeable chunk of Bernie's "supporters" who are really just anti-Clinton, and they just latched on to Bernie because he appeared to be the anti-Clinton. There are also some who seem quite anti-social and quite wiling to let everything go up in flames, no matter the consequences to (other) people.
firebrand80
(2,760 posts)they aren't voting for Hillary regardless. I'm wondering about high-level people in Bernie's camp.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)Weaver comes to mind. I don't think Devine so much. Probably some others, who decided to work for Bernie out of anti-Clinton animosity.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)Whether it's just bad information, or they're actually lying to him, I don't know. But either way, the only person who benefits if Sanders continues his campaign is Trump.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)But now I realize I had that wrong.
Actually, I didn't realize it. People who know told me.
Over the last several weeks I've had a series of conversations with multiple highly knowledgable, highly placed people. Perhaps it's coming from Weaver too. The two guys have been together for decades. But the 'burn it down' attitude, the upping the ante, everything we saw in that statement released today by the campaign seems to be coming from Sanders himself. Right from the top.
This should have been obvious to me. The tone and tenor of a campaign always come from the top. It wasn't obvious to me until now.
This might be because he's temperamentally like that. There's some evidence for that. It may also be that, like many other presidential contenders, once you get close it is simply impossible to let go. I don't know which it is. That would only be my speculation. But this is coming from Bernie Sanders. It's not Weaver. It's not driven by people around him. It's right from him. And what I understand from knowledgable sources is that in the last few weeks anyone who was trying to rein it in has basically stopped trying and just decided to let Bernie be Bernie.
Sanders speech tonight was right in line with his statement out this afternoon. He identified the Democratic party as an essentially corrupt, moribund institution which is now on notice that it must let 'the people' in. What about the coalitions Barack Obama built in 2008 and 2012, the biggest and most diverse presidential coalitions ever constructed?
Sanders narrative today has essentially been that he is political legitimacy. The Democratic party needs to realize that. This, as I said earlier, is the problem with lying to your supporters. Sanders is telling his supporters that he can still win, which he can't. He's suggesting that the win is being stolen by a corrupt establishment, an impression which will be validated when his phony prediction turns out not to be true. Lying like this sets you up for stuff like happened over the weekend in Nevada.
As I said, it all comes from the very top.
frylock
(34,825 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I'm questioning that more and more every day.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)The author is the editor and publisher of Talking Points, and the people leaking to him are in CYA mode.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)He will harm the democratic nominee as much as he possibly can before the GE.
WTG Mr. Democrat!
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)Democratic Party (IMO) was when it allowed Sanders to run as a Democrat. I don't know what the hell they were thinking. Enormous error in judgement.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)I hope it doesn't cost us the white house.
God help this country if that fascist bastard Trump gets in and packs SCOTUS with hardcore right wingers.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)mainstream liberals, by no means just the conservative malcontents and others he pulled in from outside. Something the party itself didn't know was as big as it was because political researchers had not been asking the right questions.
In any case, the party supposedly legally has the ability to bar a candidate (not sure how strong it is), but it's not normally used because so far it has not been appropriate to refuse candidates with Democrat followings. Both ethically and out of practicality--members can leave too, not just candidates.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...to lock in the further left of the Democratic party. Where it went wrong is that he presented a true contrast to the more centrist, corporate candidate.
frylock
(34,825 posts)and keep out the riff raff.
LexVegas
(6,043 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Sanders is going to keep running 'til California. Evidently this translates into a 1500-word editorial by three writers about what a sexist shitbag Sanders is. A quite from Ted Devine saying the campaign is focusing on the states ahead? OMFGWTFBBQ SANDERS IS GOING TO HURT CLINTON! HE'S A WOMAN-BEATER!!!!
And of course, Clinton's supporters eat that shit with a spoon.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)Are you guys now just making shit up, she has been thoroughly vetted you told us so. Or is it possible you are making excuses because your behaviors drove us away, and we don't want to be part of the seldom right wing of the democratic party? I think the latter is the case, you guys know you screwed up talking to us, so now you want to play the blame game because you wouldn't listen to us about her god awful negatives. Own it seldom right wingers. She's all yours. what a freaking joke you Hillary supporters are.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)timmymoff
(1,947 posts)then we are told she is being damaged. Which is it, like you candidate you definitely want both sides of every issue.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)She is running against two candidates. Trump is attacking her from the right and Sanders is attacking her from the left, though Trump mostly attacks her and leaves Sanders alone.
It is what it is.
It would be as if a boxer was in the ring with two opponents.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)I bet Obama felt the same way when Hillary wouldn't leave in 08. you know the 3 am phone call. isn't it really she is just a perpetual victim. in the 90's she was a victim of a "vast right wing conspiracy" in 2000 she was a victim of George w bush lying to her about Iraq, now shes a victim of more right wing smears regarding her server. Can't you just say " we ran a perpetual victim who has no accountability for her actions"? You may not be able too, but it is the truth.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Hillary stripped herself bare, humbled herself, and gave Barack Obama a full throated endorsement at the end of the primary season.
Let's see if Senator Sanders will be such a gracious loser.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)you mentioned nothing about her lack of accountability and the perpetual victim status she has held since the 90s I noticed.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)But at some point the nominee shall be that person who garnered the most votes and pledged delegates. That's how we roll in a democracy.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)timmymoff
(1,947 posts)And when announced the nominee.. I will stop posting about her. But I am not going to vote for her either. I am going for a walk in the woods now. but can tell you why , starting all the way back to her days at wal- mart. SHE ISN'T FOR US. sHE IS FOR THOSE WEALTHIER THAN ALL OF US.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)timmymoff
(1,947 posts)you are voting for trump then etc. going for a walk
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)I disagree with lots of people. That doesn't mean I think they are bad guys. Trump demonizes whole groups of people for political gain. That is beyond fucked up to me.
But that doesn't mean I am going to browbeat people to defeat him. Everybody has to follow their own moral compass.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Surely you're not this naïve?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)200 or more days of membership: +20
20 or more posts in the last 90 days: +20
Star member: +40
7 posts hidden in 90 days: -140
TOTAL: 0
Detailed explanation | Close
http://www.democraticunderground.com/~frylock
Demsrule86
(68,539 posts)I would toss his butt out of the Senate committees ...everything...let him name post offices.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)just like your candidate won't fight for shit. I wish you well in November with the seldom right winger as our nominee.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)... from the same benign quote?
Devine is right. This is a primary campaign that they're trying to win. The only things that matter are between now and the convention in July.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)"I think you'll be able to imagine many things Senator McCain will be able to say. He's never been the president, but he will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put forth a speech he made in 2002."
So that's Primary politics. Of course the OP is one of the posters who believe the rules are different for Bernie or for people like Bernie or something.
pmorlan1
(2,096 posts)is the backlash that will come from trying to force Bernie out of the campaign when he's already committed to staying to the end. The more Hillary and her tone deaf supporters try to short circuit the democratic process the greater the damage. Add to this, the lies that have been pushed about Nevada in the shock and awe Clinton media campaign the more blowback you can expect.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...speaking of lies.
pmorlan1
(2,096 posts)Hillary has not made such a statement (she's too smart for that) but her supporters and surrogates have.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...is something you made up.
We do know that Sanders and his campaign surrogates have made a very public promise to seek help from establishment party insiders (superdelegates) to try and reverse the will of the people and nominate Sanders, no matter that he's certain to trail in earned delegates and the popular vote.
If that's not 'short-circuiting the process to you, I'd advise you to look up the meaning of the term.
pmorlan1
(2,096 posts)You have a nice day.
Vinca
(50,250 posts)Of course, Hillary is no Obama and that could pose a problem.
frylock
(34,825 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)Nowhere is its meaning clarified or quantified.
barrow-wight
(744 posts)Some people just want to watch the world bern.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)TO harm herself.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Bernie is dangerously close to becoming as hated as Nader by progressives in this country.