I am sincerely asking what would be said to Super Delegates

[rbrnmw]

to get them to switch to SBS? How many of you really think this is a good idea and why?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

1. Just reverse the 15th Amendment, the 19th Amendment , the Voting rights Act, and be done with the...

Just reverse the 15th Amendment, the 19th Amendment , the Voting rights Act, and be done with the pretense. If those people affected by those amendments and Act couldn't vote their candidate would have won.

[barrow-wight]

8. That pretty much says it.

[w4rma]

2. Nominating Hillary, and her infinite scandals, elects Trump. Sanders defeats Trump in every poll

by double digits, in nearly every case. I've never seen Hillary go up in a poll. Hillary is now losing to Trump in 2 national polls and 2 polls of swing states.

If your priority is to defeat Trump, vote for Sanders. But, if your priority is to try to defeat progressives, at the cost of the presidency, vote Hillary.

[jehop61]

36. Would you please

Provide links to any proven "infinite scandals" attributed to Hillary Clinton?

[SheenaR]

98. While we wait for that answer

Can you provide a list of the scandals that have surrounded her that you consider to be fake?

[Demsrule86]

107. Sanders would lose in a landslide

He would be swiftboated and destroyed by the GOP which is why they wanted him. Polls this far out are meaningless in any case. I have no doubt the double teaming of Hillary by Sanders and Trump has an effect on the polls...temporary I hope. Now Bernie lost the primrary...the only way he gets the nomination is if millions of primary voters are disenfranchised...thus no matter how you look at it ...Bernie loses.

[CrowCityDem]

3. Begging the party 'elite' to overturn the will of the people makes Sanders look pathetic.

It goes against everything he spent the last six months talking about, and it makes it easy to believe that he never had any principles, if he's so willing to throw them aside for the sake of winning.

[w4rma]

5. This is, precisely, the type of situation that Superdelegates were officially made for.

And since closed primaries disenfranchised Sanders's voters, and voter suppression, like in Arizona, New York and Rhode Island worked against Sanders, he would win a straight up election of Democratic-leaning voters.

Now, if the Superdelegates aren't willing to do the thing that they were officially made to do, then the Superdelegate system should be abolished.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. Nothing is more anti-democratic than the caucus process but he seems to have no problem with them.

It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact caucuses are his bailiwick, would it?

[w4rma]

9. No. Superdelegates and closed elections, especially when voters have their registrations changed,

are undemocratic. The fact that you have a problem with caucuses OVER the completely undemocratic Superdelegate system, says *everything* about your elitist mindset.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. Funny you bring that up. I called for the suspension of Super Delegates just today

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512020773


As for caucuses they are anti-democratic because

- there is no secret ballot
- the lack of a secret ballot leads to intimidation and the rule of the mob
- the limited time frame makes it harder for working people to vote, especially working people with families. It also discourage participation by the physically challenged and the infirm.


I would be all for open primaries as long as they were open and Democrats and Republicans were on the ballot. that would avoid situations where 40% of Sanders WV voters would vote for Trump even if Sanders was on the ballot. It would discourage voters from gaming the system.

[w4rma]

21. So far, it's Hillary's delegates who have voted against ridding ourselves of the superdelegate

system. So, you are an aberration among Clintonites.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

26. The only role I can see for them is if you had an exceedingly close race

The only role I can see for them is if you had an exceedingly close race where the popular vote and the pledged vote count diverged. I wouldn't want to have to make such a Solomon like decision though.

I would hate to be put in the position of overturning the popular vote but would ultimately give the victory to the person with the most pledged delegate as that was the system for choosing a nominee democratically chosen. But it would be difficult.

[w4rma]

30. In other words, the only role you would have for them is to overturn the decisions of caucus states.

You, obviously, know that caucuses have a far lower turnout since their voters have to remain for hours, or even all day, to be able to vote. But that the caucuses represent millions of voters that you would override.

But, you are divorced from reality, since disenfranchising caucus voters isn't what the Superdelegate system was officially built to do.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. Remember we started our tête-à-tête with me emphatically stating caucuses are inherently....

Remember we started our tête-à-tête with me emphatically stating caucuses are inherently undemocratic.


But even given that yuge caveat we can make an educated guess how many people actually voted in caucuses and who they voted for.

[brush]

78. Did Sanders not know of the super delegates when he asked to join the party?

They were not put in place to thwart Sanders.

They've been there for a few decades now.

Did the Sanders camp not familiarize themselves with the rules of the party before joining?

[w4rma]

91. You mean, did half of the Democratic general election voters "know" about the authoritarian rules?

Yes. But, I was unaware of how deeply Clinton's corruption has seeped into the leadership of the Democratic Party. I, and other voters, are aware of Clinton corruption, now.

[brush]

96. Nice try, but the super delegate system pre-dates the Clintons by quite a few years

[w4rma]

97. I'm sure you'll support the Bernie delegates in working to remove the anti-democratic system, then?

What do you think? How authoritarian is your wing of the Democratic Party?

[brush]

101. If you're talking about after the primaries, the conventions and election, sure. Sit down and . . .

figure something out.

But you don't change the rules in the middle of the game because a new member who agreed to the rules in joining, finds himself losing then wants to get rid of the super delegates — but then flip flops and wants to convince the super delegates in the end to grant him the nomination over someone with more votes and delegates.

No one with any sense should even thing someone else with sense would agree to something like that.

[CrowCityDem]

15. The point was that you just said everything is undemocratic, except what benefits Bernie.

[w4rma]

22. Election fraud, voter suppression, rules meant to disenfranchise "certain people" and superdelegates

are all anti-democratic.

[CrowCityDem]

59. So are caucuses, and leading off with overly white, distorting, states.

[w4rma]

84. Alaska is the least white state in the nation. Washington has a very large Hispanic population.

Don't lie, CrowCityDem.

[CrowCityDem]

85. Two separate issues. Caucuses suck. IA and NH are distortions of whiteness.

[w4rma]

89. New Hampshire is a primary. The Iowa caucus was a virtual tie. (nt)

[KingFlorez]

19. That's a system. If you don't like it, start your own party

Sanders knew all about closed primaries when he signed up to run, so he cannot legitimately complain about that. Also, the Sanders campaign has not filed one lawsuit about all these changed registrations, which says everything about how nutty those theories are. If you are really cheated, you filed a lawsuit.

[w4rma]

24. Nah. How about the limousine liberals go back to their own Republican Party, instead? (nt)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

48. I am sure the approximately 80% of African Americans and 67% of Latinos who voted for Hillary

Nah. How about the limousine liberals go back to their own Republican Party, instead? (nt)

I am sure the approximately 80% of African Americans and 67% of Latinos who voted for Hillary will be happy to learn they can afford to be chauffeured around in limousines:

[w4rma]

52. Clinton-style centrist economics rests on a surprisingly shaky foundation

Not only is Clinton relying on older voters to beat Sanders, she's relying specifically on African-American votes and the institutional support of labor unions. Both groups have their reasons for backing Clinton in 2016, but neither is a reliable supporter of centrist economics.
http://www.vox.com/2016/3/21/11273978/clinton-shaky-foundation

[KingFlorez]

13. Clinton supporters would not vote for Sanders

Good luck winning without most of the Democratic base.

Trump would be out there 24/7 calling Sanders out as a fraud and people would believe him, because it would be true. Sanders would be labeled a cheat and a fraud, which is pretty much a deal breaker even against someone like Trump.

[w4rma]

17. Actually, polls suggest that you're probably lying, KingFlorez.

You've tried, and failed, to smear Sanders this entire election. But, your limousine liberal views are not shared by many outside of your gated community.

[KingFlorez]

23. You are a real undemocratic trip

Sanders would be crushed by Trump if the DNC just handed him the nomination. Clinton supporters are not going to vote for someone who in effect stole the nomination from their candidate through procedural tricks. You all are supposed to be so moral, yet you are ready to cheat in order to achieve your goals.

[w4rma]

25. In your reality bubble things happen that aren't based on reality, KingFlorez.

Every poll has said that Sanders would slaughter Trump in a general election and would have long coattails for Democrats down ticket.

But, every poll says that Clinton would barely win or lose to Trump and would have zero coattails for Democrats down ticket.

Americans have never liked limousine liberals. But, FDR is still the most popular president in history. And it's Bernie Sanders that is pushing FDR's New Deal policies, not Hillary Clinton.

[KingFlorez]

29. Those hypothetical polls would be out the window when Clinton supporters sat out the election

Believe me, the optics of Sanders getting the nomination while trailing by double digits in popular vote and by nearly 300 delegates would be beyond negative in the press.

But, that won't happen, because the super delegates aren't stupid enough to defy the will of the voters in the primary.

[w4rma]

33. You only speak for yourself, KingFlorez. Don't try to speak for anybody else. (nt)

[KingFlorez]

35. I'm pretty sure millions of other voters are opposed to backroom deals to overturn their votes

Win at any cost is pretty sad.

[w4rma]

38. You would be fine with a Trump presidency, as long as you stop the progressive from winning. (nt)

[KingFlorez]

40. Being a progressive doesn't give you the right to be a cheat and a fraud

Self-achievement should come in way ahead of stealing.

[w4rma]

51. I just watched Hillary steal Nevada, so I already know that she is an election thief. (nt)

[KingFlorez]

55. She won the caucus in February

It was Sanders people who tried to steal more delegates through procedural motions at the convention. Each candidate left the convention with the same amount of delegates that they received after the caucus.

[w4rma]

63. Irregardless of the coin flips in February, you feel that stealing Nevada is justified. I see. (nt)

[KingFlorez]

67. Nothing was stolen

But, I understand that it's emotionally traumatic to see your candidate lose, so I'll leave it at that. lol.

[w4rma]

73. Do I believe your lying words, or my own eyes that watched the videos of it being stolen.

I think I'll believe the video evidence, over your baseless assertions.

[DCBob]

32. Your put a lot faith in polls which all experts agree are essentially meaningless this far out.

[w4rma]

39. Using the word "all" in that sentence makes your sentence a lie. (nt)

[DCBob]

42. Please provide a link to any legitimate polling expert that disputes my claim..

[w4rma]

46. Election Poll Accuracy Over Time

http://spotlight.ipsos-na.com/index.php/news/election-poll-accuracy-over-time/

[DCBob]

47. Nope.. dont see anything there.

Try again.

[w4rma]

50. These polling experts say that 6 months out, elections can be predicted with a 7.48% accuracy.

That means that if Bernie Sanders is leading Trump by double digits, right now (and he is), then he is very very likely to win the presidency 6 months from now. But if Hillary Clinton is losing in some polls and barely winning in other polls, then she is a little bit favored, but mostly a toss up, to win the general election in November.

Here are your experts: An entire major polling agency.

[DCBob]

58. Huh?? 7.48% accuracy?

Is that good??

[w4rma]

62. 'Margin of error' is the correct term. (nt)

[DCBob]

66. That still doesn't make sense.

[w4rma]

71. The likelihood of a sample result being close to the number from a whole population query.

The margin of error is a statistic expressing the amount of random sampling error in a survey's results. It asserts a likelihood (not a certainty) that the result from a sample is close to the number one would get if the whole population had been queried. The likelihood of a result being "within the margin of error" is itself a probability, commonly 95%, though other values are sometimes used.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_of_error

[DCBob]

86. This analysis doesn't take into account the conflicting effect of nominees at different stages.

Meaning Trump is the presumed nominee and Clinton and Sanders are not. Its apples and oranges at this point in time.

[CrowCityDem]

20. Fact: closed primaries do not disenfranchise when anyone is freely allowed to join the party.

You might not like that they can't do it on a whim whenever they darn well feel like it, but nothing stops them from joining the party and casting a vote, other than not wanting to be a part of the process, and not knowing the rules.

[w4rma]

28. In New York, you had to join the Democratic Party before the election, last year, to vote in this

primary. There are also thousands of instances, including in Nevada to Bernie delegates, of Democratically registered voters having their registrations "lost" or changed.

[CrowCityDem]

60. So how did they know the Bernie voters to purge?

That sounds awfully suspicious to think that anyone in power cult tell just by the registration who they needed to get rid of. Maybe it was a combination of it happening to people on both sides, and the new Bernie voters who were just registering for the first time, that twisted the discussion.

[w4rma]

64. The shared Democratic voter database was open to hacking back in December.

a "dropped firewall" in proprietary campaign software managed by the outside firm NGP VAN. The paper's reporting indicated that the data contractor was "making a tweak to its system" that inadvertently created a situation in which "the campaigns could see each others' information"
http://www.snopes.com/bernie-sanders-campaign-data-breach-controversy/
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/12/18/sanders-campaign-disciplined-for-breaching-clinton-data/

[CrowCityDem]

69. You're implying the state parties illegally hacked information.

[w4rma]

70. There were previous time periods where the system was completely unprotected, also. (nt)

[CrowCityDem]

81. It's a wild conspiracy with no proof.

[w4rma]

83. There is plenty of proof that the system was completely unprotected.

It was reported by the Sanders campaign, on a couple of occasions, before DWS decided that she would "kill the messenger".

[CrowCityDem]

87. There's no proof anyone who could change registrations hacked it.

It's dangerous to throw out those kinds of accusations, especially when the only people confirmed to have done anything like that were Bernie's. Talk like this is what gives him a a bad name. You owe it to everyone to talk in terms of reality.

[apcalc]

37. Disenfranchise my arse. If you mean Independents,

Every Independent can register as a Democrat ahead of time.
I was an Independent and switched my registration LAST SUMMER.
It was easy and anyone/everyone could do it.

DUH! Did they not know a presidential election was upcoming???? DUH DUH DUH

As far as I am concerned , they SELF-disenfranchised by either being uninformed or lazy.

Whine disenfranchisement somewhere else.

[w4rma]

43. In New York, you must be affiliated as a Democrat by October 9, 2015. (nt)

[apcalc]

61. Fine, then do it. My primary was 4/26. I

Re-registered July 2015.

It should have been done regardless of state or timeline.

[onenote]

53. The superdelegates are expected to use their independent judgment

The fact that your belief that Sanders would be the better candidate doesn't square with what they believe doesn't mean they aren't doing what they are supposed to do.

The super delegates, experienced folks with a knowledge of history know better than to give that much credence to polls conducted six months out from an election.

[StevieM]

56. Actually, in Arizona the areas that had voting problems (Maricopa County) went heavily for Clinton.

Latino voters have gone heavily for Clinton.

And in New York Hillary won Brooklyn decisively.

Bernie has not lost due to voter suppression, and the claim that he did will not be treated with validity in the history books.

[w4rma]

74. ONLY in the mail in vote. The election day vote was heavily for Sanders.

And it was the election day vote that was suppressed. You're lying by omission.

[StevieM]

76. There was no voter suppression. Sanders just lost fair and square.

Arizona was always going to be a Clinton state, especially Maricopa County. The Democrats voting there are heavily Latino, which benefits Clinton.

It is unfortunate that you feel the need to call a fellow poster a liar.

[w4rma]

90. Arizona’s Primary Voting Was Such A Mess That DOJ Is Opening An Investigation

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched an investigation to find out why voters were forced to wait up to five hours to vote in Maricopa County, Arizona’s presidential primary last month, an issue that only existed because the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in 2013.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/04/05/3766508/doj-investigation-maricopa/

[StevieM]

94. That has nothing to do with whether there was voter suppression to benefit Hillary Clinton.

There wasn't. The best evidence is that the challenges faced by voters in Arizona were more harmful to Hillary than to Bernie.

Not that any of this matters because Clinton won Arizona in a landslide, as she was expected to given the demographics of the state.

[w4rma]

95. The only reason Clinton "won" Arizona is because she won the pre-election day votes.

Sanders won the election day votes, but his voters weren't able to vote on election day because of voter suppression in the form of drastically reduced polling places, the same tactic that they tried in Rhode Island against Sanders.

[StevieM]

99. If you are determined to believe that then there is nothing I can do about it.

Arizona was a landslide for Clinton. And with its large Latino population it was always going to be.

The claim that Clinton cheated is ridiculous.

[w4rma]

100. Why is the Department of Justice investigating Arizona for voter suppression, then? (nt)

[StevieM]

102. Because Arizona is a mess. But that has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton.

The best evidence is that Hillary was hurt the most by the voting problems in Arizona and Maricopa County.

[Demsrule86]

109. You mean early voting ?

Early voting is legitimate...I have no idea what you are talking about...not everyone can vote on the day...and let me tell you with the games Kasich has paid in Ohio...with polling places...we will get as many as possible to vote early...it is a smart strategy.

[Demsrule86]

110. so you think we should choose or nominee by poll

and disenfranchise millions of voters...it will never happen. That Bernie suggested it makes me question his integrity.

[Demsrule86]

111. I would like to add that the opposite is true

McGovern did not have more than 26% of the vote...but managed to finagle his way into the nomination at the convention anyway and as we all know lost badly. The supers were supposed to make certain the candidate with the most delegates wins the nomination. And in my opinion, that is a good thing.

[MrMickeysMom]

18. "Begging the party elite"?

Why would the party "elite" need to have their rings kissed over this one? The objective is for the party to survive, but BEFORE THAT, to put a Democrat in the White House, which is a twofer.

Looking at the math, since it seems always to be about that, there is no confidence in running HRC against a Drumpf. There is HIGH confidence in running Bernie Sanders.

[uponit7771]

103. +1

[KingFlorez]

4. Basically it would be an argument about early polling numbers

But the problem with that argument is that Sanders would be an automatic loser for the general election if he is handed the nomination contrary to the pledged delegate result. For one thing, Clinton supporters would sit out and second, Trump would be out there ranting about how the socialist won by losing. Sanders really has no compelling reason to get the super delegates to switch.

[Nye Bevan]

6. Tell them that the "Deep South" doesn't count, for some reason.

Also, caucuses should count double. And don't forget the big rallies. Oh, and Bill Clinton kept blocking polling places with a bullhorn. That should do it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. Tell them homogeneous and sparsely populated states count more than heterogeneous...

Tell them homogeneous and sparsely populated states count more than heterogeneous and heavily populated states do.

[SFnomad]

12. Don't forget the birdie multiplier ... n/t

[Skwmom]

10. Since Camp Clinton has pushed them since day 1 to discourage Bernie voters you are damn right

they should be asked to switch to Bernie. Otherwise, start practicing the words President Trump.

Some of the reasons I think she will be a disaster as the nominee.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512010409

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512021982


And if they are judging 2016 by 2008 they shouldn't. 2016 is nothing like 2008. The mood of the electorate is very different.

In 2008, her supporters initially didn't support Obama because of what occurred in the primary campaign so it was not difficult to bring them on board. Plus, as Clinton said, Obama was no different then her.

Many Bernie supporters didn't just decide this primary season not to support Clinton. Their feelings towards her are based upon things that happened prior to the beginning of this primary season and what she represents - a government bought and paid for by the 1% (though her conduct, and that of her paid hacks this primary season have hardly helped matters).

[rbrnmw]

68. I do understand that feeling I held some resentments against her myself

I really started out torn between O'Malley and Bernie, I decided to just hear Hillary out and I was impressed. She has weathered many storms and I think she will make a better President than Trump by lightyears.

[uponit7771]

104. No one 'discouraged" Sanders voters they couldn't beat the "southern states" votes cause Weaver and

... Diving ADMITTEDLY said they didn't compete there on calls to the press.

That was his fault, he's running the ship and didn't run it too well

[barrow-wight]

16. How about we start with what not to say to Superdelegates?

* commentary that scorches the earth of the party.

* Threats, intimidation, and abuse against superdelegates both online and off.

* threats to remove body parts (such as tongues) from superdelegates.

It might also help to stop threatening the children and families of prominent democrats like Roberta Lange and not call their places of work.

I think that al might be a start.

[Iliyah]

27. Screaming fuck you and fuck her while you are walking out of a rally

supporting HRC with your children; one child's poster sign being taken from the child and ripped . . . .

[ucrdem]

31. Sanders charm offensive:

[Fairgo]

82. Indiscriminate killing of children in foreign countries, supporting sweatshops...

that destroy the lives of children over seas, while undermining a living wage and impoverishing children in the United States. Yes, by all means, let's think of the children.

[rbrnmw]

34. I can see a role for Superdelegates

Say we had someone as dangerous as Trump or worse, they could save the Country from certain peril.

[workinclasszero]

41. This....

[rbrnmw]

45. My son thinks this video is funny and he supports Bernie

[Aerows]

49. If you want a real answer

ask what you think it will take to get Sanders supporters to vote for Hillary.

You all have acted like it is in the bag for so long, I think you are starting to believe yourselves.

For a bunch of folks that pretend that they are the grownups and realists in the Democratic party, the head that needs to be pulled out of the sand might just be your own.

[rbrnmw]

54. I was being sincere no reason to be hostile

If you sincerely believe Bernie should be nominated I want to understand the rationale. Maybe explain it like you would to a Superdelegate.

[Aerows]

57. Didn't mean to snap at you

I'm a tad annoyed today.

[rbrnmw]

65. it's all good sorry you are having a rough one

[pdsimdars]

72. All I have heard him say about it is VERY reasonable and common sense

He says that in places like Washington where he won by Yuuuuge margins, I think it was 3 to 1 in Washington and 4 to 1 in Alaska, that the Super Delegates should represent the people's wish.

Could anything be more reasonable? I mean if you win by 40% of the vote (72% to 26%) should the person with 26% get all the SDs? That makes no sense.

[rbrnmw]

75. I think that argument is reasonable and it should be considered.

[Mike Nelson]

77. Perhaps...

...Bernie is sending super-delegates a "message" by endorsing DWS' opponent? His argument about the polls showing him defeating Trump isn't working - people realize the Republicans' negative campaign will drive those negatives into the cellar.

[hellofromreddit]

79. "New democrats."

[Mike Nelson]

80. Also...

...don't the Democrats get to pick the Democratic Nominee?

[morningfog]

88. The pitch isn't for all supers, but only those representing people who supported

Bernie by large margins. It's simple. You say, "look Joe Shmoe Dem, Bernie won you cinstituency by 20 points. If you stick with Hillary, you risk alienating your people and losing your reelection bid. Go with Bernie and they'll be behind you even if he doesn't get the nod."

[pdsimdars]

92. Very common sense and rational

[Turin_C3PO]

93. It's not a good idea

and it's not going to happen. The only way I would ever support the SD's overruling the popular vote and/or pledged delegate majority is if a major scandal popped up all of sudden (I'm talking criminal here).

Otherwise in this case, it would be disenfranchising a major and loyal part of our base, namely women and black Americans who overwhelmingly supported Hillary Clinton. And that would be a terrible thing for a progressive party to do.

[tom-servo]

105. "anti-democracy" baiting aside...

... It would be nice to drop the pretense that there is much "democracy" in nominating a party candidate. The democratic leadership worked hard to make sure Hillary Clinton won the nomination while trying to maintain the appearance of "democracy" under pressure from an unexpectedly large groundswell of support for Bernie Sanders. Now they are in a bind. They have a divided party and no real good way out. The deciding factor for me would be that Hillary Clinton supporters are less likely to sit it out.. but that's still pretty risky.

[MineralMan]

108. Well, so far it has all been insults and threats.

Oddly enough, that doesn't seem to be working.

[rbrnmw]

112. Now that's really strange

I wonder why it's not working?

[Recursion]

113. The basic argument is "Sanders polls much better than Clinton against Trump"

And, frankly, that's a fair case to make and the super delegates have every right to vote for Sanders based on that, if they decide to.

[apnu]

114. Simply put: Sander's issues are Democratic issues.

Bernie made a grave tactical error in the beginning and he's been making it ever since. He has not gone to Democrats and convinced them that his issues are really Democratic issues and that the things they want/need are what he's offering.

He's done a great job bringing what there is of the independent Left in America to the Democratic party tent, but he's failed to sell himself to the people who were already in the tent.

He'd be crushing Hillary now had he done that, which is exactly what Obama did in 2008. But Bernie came out of the gate as indy guy bringing in indy people to the party. And he's been masterful turning the subjects in the primary to the things he's most concerned with. Hillary has spun like a top as he's dictated the topics. But that's not enough, clearly. Democrats in the party remain skeptical about Bernie. Its too late now to make it up.