2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe continued nonsense about nullified votes...
I feel like I am taking crazy pills here.
Let's all breathe and break it down:
- it is literally an IMPOSSIBILITY for a single person/group/ethnicity/race/gender to be nullified. Every single person who voted (and who will vote) cast their votes towards PLEDGED delegates. Allow me to share a personal experience. In my state, I voted for Bernie Sanders. The pledged delegate balance reflected his victory in my state. My vote was represented by the pledged delegates.
-Simultaneously though, the Superdelegates in my state have pledged their initial support to Sec Clinton. This being their right to do so, the total will leave my state having Secretary Clinton as the winner. Now look what just happened. My vote COUNTED. The pledged delegates reflected that. Nothing that happened in this paragraph changes that.
- Furthermore, if (in an extreme hypothetical) every single Superdelegate decided to cast their vote for Senator Sanders at the Convention, NOBODY'S vote was nullified. The Supers were put in place to make this decision independent of any other result. They are not required to do anything except vote their conscience. ALL of our votes counted. All of our votes went toward PLEDGED DELEGATES, all of whom will be casting votes also.
- Thus, if by some reason Senator Sanders left Philadelphia with the nomination (a very unlikely scenario), again NOBODY had their vote nullified. Your vote counted. We are playing by the rules the Party put in place. Or don't some people forget the incessant reminders that "Tad Devine made these rules, so you better learn to play by them".
I think some people do forget. Rules are rules. Dumb rules are rules. But this notion that millions of people, including minority populations and women, etc have not had their voice heard and their votes would be nullified is absolute nonsense.
And if it's not nonsense? And you are completely correct? Then don't be a fucking hypocrite. Call every Superdelegate in my state and tell them they "nullified" the will of the voters. Oh wait, people like me must not count for this exercise.
Enjoy the evening.
Autumn
(44,762 posts)Bernie and his supporters does it?. Seriously. How else do you get that meme that minorities are "3/5 of a white liberal vote "out there? Everyone here knows how the votes work.
SheenaR
(2,052 posts)If they actually do know. But playing the game you mentioned is a much easier approach for them.
Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)Many of them minority and women....thus the votes would be tossed aside by Bernie Sanders if he got his way...thankfully he won't.
SheenaR
(2,052 posts)And 300 million? Interesting
Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)is if you rolled up all th caucuses..they would not equal the votes in Ohio or Florida.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)the loser of the primary over the top and he became the nominee...then all those who voted for Clinton would have had their votes nullified...their votes would be overturned...it would be a horrific and undemocratic action ...and it won't happen. They will vote for the winner of the most delegates as they always do. Hillary Clinton is already the nominee in the real world.
SheenaR
(2,052 posts)The minute your state's votes were tabulated and pledged delegates were assigned, your vote counted. It goes no further. Sorry to break the rules to you.
I fully anticipate Sec Clinton to be the nominee, make no mistake. But you are confusing what you perceive as common sense with our ridiculous Superdelegate rules which shoot your common sense down.
BootinUp
(46,928 posts)The SD's have never gone against the winner of the pledged del.
The SD's have never gone against the winner of the pledged del.
The SD's have never gone against the winner of the pledged del.
The SD's have never gone against the winner of the pledged del.
The SD's have never gone against the winner of the pledged del.
The SD's have never gone against the winner of the pledged del.
The SD's have never gone against the winner of the pledged del.
The SD's have never gone against the winner of the pledged del.
The SD's have never gone against the winner of the pledged del.
The SD's have never gone against the winner of the pledged del.
SheenaR
(2,052 posts)I never said they were going to. Not once. zero times actually.
And since you are the expert, can you look up for me how many of those pledged delegate winners were under FBI investigation. Must have been a bunch, has to be pretty common.
BootinUp
(46,928 posts)Gothmog
(144,005 posts)Sanders being the nominee will be telling many key demographic groups that their votes do not count because they are not white http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/05/24/bernie-sanders-is-crushing-donald-trump-head-to-head-and-it-doesn-t-mean-a-thing.html
Bah, you say. Bernie can handle all these things. Plus, hes going to get all those white working-class votes that Clinton will never get. Its true, he will get some of those. But every yin has a yang. How is Sanders going to do with black and Latino voters? They wont vote for Trump, obviously, but surely some percentage will just stay home. This will matter in Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, maybe Michiganall states were a depressed turnout from unenthused voters of color might make the difference. The media find discussing this a lot less interesting than they do nattering on about the white working class, but its real, and Trump is smart enough to get out there and say, Remember, black people, Bernie said your votes werent legitimate.
Sanders being nominated when he has no support from key demographic groups in the Democratic base will not work
SheenaR
(2,052 posts)Sanders will have more votes than Bill, Gore, Or Kerry ever had in a Primary. It appears there are people that would vote for him in a GE.
Interesting that you support the author's notion that someone AA would support Trump over Sanders. Can't really envision that. Plus, I'm told party loyalty is a must. So the millions and millions of Clinton supporters would definitely be there to join the Sanders supporters who wouldn't care what attacks threw at him.
BootinUp
(46,928 posts)I assume you agree that Sanders has politically positioned himself to the left of Hillary?
Now lets assume there are more politically left leaning folks by percentage that vote in the Democratic Party than there are in a GE. You with me? Nearly 100% of the folks voting in the Democratic Party lean to the left. In a GE its close to 50%.
Now, Bernie has essentially lost the Primary. I propose the reason simply is because he is farther left than Democratic Primary voters want.
Assuming you can follow the logic there, how the bleep could he win the GE? The truth is, it would be the biggest loss for our party in decades.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)who are casting their votes based upon what influence and favors they have been promised and NOT based upon what's best for the country.
Influence peddling is a hell of a way to choose a nominee.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)maybe the campaign'll call Sandernistas anti-Honduran or -Libyan
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)This is not democracy's finest example of democracy.
There is the potential.... no, a certainty, that no matter who wins the nom, many votes will be nullified since the rules say they can be by supers. We are all victims of this ill democracy.
larkrake
(1,674 posts)Conventions write rules every convention, to deflect anything that can harm the party. Lets say, candidate #1 is in a car accident, and is in a coma, the convention can withdraw that candidate even if he has the most delegates, Rules are their insurance policy. If a candidate is linked to fraud, or has the nation in outrage from new facts surfacing, those delegates still represent their states, but they are free, if the rules say so.
If Hillary get enough votes without SG, she does not necessarily automatically get the nomination. Rules might be in the works now with the allegations about the Foundation and who she is linked to.
I expect she will be nominated, it was decided in 2012 and the ground work was all set before she announced. She would not risk being embarrassed again, not Hillary. She made sure she would not lose. She sounded good at first, until Bernie got attention, then she turned on him and her numbers, just like in 2012, have consistently gone downhill. She has always been a barracuda, is feared by many. She may have disgusted powerful people just enough to force them to bushwhack her at the convention. She has a history of self-destruction and that has to worry the DNC.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)nullified. End of story.
SheenaR
(2,052 posts)Which I agree with you 100%. But I was directly responding to the other OP that was on the front page on this matter.