HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Moulitsas: Sanders's soci...

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:31 AM

Moulitsas: Sanders's socialist coup | The Hill - Op Ed

?itok=ocMH3h6U


By Markos Moulitsas - 05/24/16 05:33 PM EDT

Knowing it’s lost electorally, the Bernie Sanders campaign is now pushing for a superdelegate coup, one that would discard the will of the Democratic primary electorate in favor of an unearned coronation. Whether willfully or not, such a strategy is not just an affront to basic democratic principles, it would also serve to disenfranchise the growth demographics powering the modern Democratic Party.

“We can argue about the merits of having superdelegates, but we do have them,” said Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver. “And if their role is just to rubber-stamp the pledged delegate count, then they really aren’t needed, right? So they’re supposed to exercise independent judgment about who they think can lead the party forward to victory.”

That is quite the turnaround from a few months ago, when Sanders and his surrogates were railing against the superdelegate system as an undemocratic affront to the will of the voters. And they’d be right — if, that is, those superdelegates had shown any willingness to subvert the will of the voters, something they didn’t do in 2008 when the insurgent Barack Obama won the nomination and certainly won’t do this year. The nominating process is undeniably in need of reform, but that doesn’t justify Sanders’s hypocrisy in siding with superdelegates over his newly adopted party’s voters.

But aside from the merits, let’s examine what such a superdelegate coup would mean.

Full Article at the Hill

39 replies, 2429 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 39 replies Author Time Post
Reply Moulitsas: Sanders's socialist coup | The Hill - Op Ed (Original post)
BootinUp May 2016 OP
merrily May 2016 #1
TheBlackAdder May 2016 #2
BootinUp May 2016 #3
DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #4
TheBlackAdder May 2016 #9
DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #11
TheBlackAdder May 2016 #12
DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #14
TheBlackAdder May 2016 #17
DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #18
TheBlackAdder May 2016 #7
BootinUp May 2016 #10
TheBlackAdder May 2016 #13
haikugal May 2016 #30
AZ Progressive May 2016 #27
haikugal May 2016 #31
AZ Progressive May 2016 #38
haikugal May 2016 #39
boston bean May 2016 #5
haikugal May 2016 #32
leveymg May 2016 #6
DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #8
trudyco May 2016 #33
SidDithers May 2016 #15
workinclasszero May 2016 #16
trudyco May 2016 #36
workinclasszero May 2016 #37
leeroysphitz May 2016 #19
workinclasszero May 2016 #20
Orsino May 2016 #21
BootinUp May 2016 #22
Orsino May 2016 #23
vintx May 2016 #24
Cali_Democrat May 2016 #25
stupidicus May 2016 #26
Zen Democrat May 2016 #28
AZ Progressive May 2016 #29
Octafish May 2016 #34
vintx May 2016 #35

Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:33 AM

1. Thanks for the CIA-type take on Bernie. I was dying to know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:38 AM

2. I followed Kos for years, contributing to rebuild the site. He's gone completely establishment.

.


I stopped donating to his site last year, because he is turning into a stooge.


He is not the Markos who got banned from MSNBC a couple of years ago. He's learned to play the game.


.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #2)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:42 AM

3. That's your rebuttal? lol nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Reply #3)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:43 AM

4. The first responses are perfect examples of the genetic fallacy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #4)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:50 AM

9. Projection is so typical of certain posters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #9)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:54 AM

11. I can not give your rebuttal a passing grade.

Instead of discrediting the argument you discredited the source. That is the sine qua non of the genetic fallacy.

I am sure a smart lad like yourself is capable of doing so much better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #11)

Wed May 25, 2016, 09:12 AM

12. I stopped at the 'socialist' dog whistle, because that shows a skewed mentality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #12)

Wed May 25, 2016, 09:21 AM

14. He proudly calls himself a socialist, albeit a democratic one.

I am sympathetic to socialism but when a candidate runs under its banner and wants to overturn the popular vote it raises all the old boogeymen; that people will never embrace it democratically.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #14)

Wed May 25, 2016, 09:29 AM

17. We're all socialists to some extent--a big difference between the two that nefariously is cut out.

.


There is a reason why someone uses 'socialism' instead of 'democratic socialism,' and that is to illicit the impression of some precursor to a Marxist/Communist state. There is no other reason for it. And, people who are politically savvy know how this dynamic works on the general populous. It's a shame that some Democrats have to stoop so low as to burn their own bridges to bring down a candidate, when all that does is make fights for other programs that much harder to achieve later on, when socialism is brought up.

Someone who professes to be so intellectual, as yourself, you should note that.


And, as a side note, while you are polarized with a particular candidate, I remain neutral between HRC and SBS.




.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #17)

Wed May 25, 2016, 09:40 AM

18. I wish all of us would operationalize our terms when it comes to capitalism and socialism.

So we all know what everybody means when they invoke those terms.


Nobody should be denied medical care or a college degree for an inability to pay. That doesn't mean it should be free...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Reply #3)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:49 AM

7. My rebuttal is that I discount most of Kos, since he operates like any other money-driven MSM.

.


The dog whistle of the term 'socialist' should be hint enough.


The real question is why do you hold his voice as someone who is credible and unbiased? LOL


.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #7)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:53 AM

10. His site enables freedom of expression, I am sure he supports your right

to differ with his. Its a shame in my opinion that you do not respect his right to the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Reply #10)

Wed May 25, 2016, 09:19 AM

13. Your comment does not directly apply to the words I wrote, sans FOX, most allow free expression.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Reply #10)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:20 AM

30. Freedom of expression? Only if you support Clinton! Ha...what a stooge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #2)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:13 AM

27. Moulitsas was always establishment, he was clearly a sympathizer of the right wing government...

in El Salvador during the Civil War. Google Markos Moulitsas, find out the truth yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AZ Progressive (Reply #27)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:21 AM

31. He wanted to BE CIA....and they rejected him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to haikugal (Reply #31)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:11 PM

38. According to him...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AZ Progressive (Reply #38)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:12 PM

39. Yeah...pretty pathetic isn't he?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:44 AM

5. He is right. And basically is stating what Bravenak posted yesterday!

Luv ya Brave!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #5)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:22 AM

32. oh gawd...that's just sad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:45 AM

6. The 800 pound gorilla that will deny her the nomination isn't Sanders or Comey. It's really Hillary

who brought the prospect of having to give up the nomination on herself. She's shown extremely bad judgement, if not criminal intent, by setting up her unsecure, uncertified private communications channel to become a conduit for the unauthorized swapping of classified information. She did this despite warnings from NSA to stop using unsecure devices. She then encouraged others to "keep 'em coming" when told the materials were classified. She failed to report these apparent mishandling of classified information in direct violation of her security oath and Sec. 793 (f)(2) of the Espionage Act, as cited in her signed nondisclosure agreement. Then, when she finally got called on it, she rushed to destroy 30,000 files on the server. Then she misrepresented facts to two courts and withheld further emails. This is what the FBI report will confirm what we already know about her actions.

She's disqualified herself, and has no one else to blame.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #6)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:50 AM

8. Thank you for starting my day off with a chuckle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #6)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:24 AM

33. Very succinct. And oh. so. true.

Quite possibly she did this to hide what the emails say. Maybe pay for play with the Clinton Foundation and family speaking fees?

Anyway, she did it to herself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 09:24 AM

15. DU rec...

The Sanders Campaign have shown themselves to be enormous hypocrites.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 09:29 AM

16. "Bernie Sanders pushing for a superdelegate coup, one that would discard the will of the Democratic

 

primary electorate in favor of an unearned coronation"

So all the BS about respecting the will of the people and their votes were just a total lie in his quest for personal political power!

The mask is off of Sanders and his campaign!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to workinclasszero (Reply #16)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:48 AM

36. Well the point is the Superdelegates are there and they are supposed to pick the most electable

With her investigation Hillary is looking less and less electable.
The SuperDuper Delegates should then do their job. Originally they were all lined up behind her before the primaries even started. That is not their function, they were subverting their reason for being from the get-go. Hence the resentment towards them. Many were bought (I'm using that loosely) by her. More resentment. All reasonable resentment I might add.

People say she's ahead. I don't agree. It looks like she or somebody on her behalf has committed election fraud. There is evidence worth investigating. Certainly there has been disenfranchisement. Any Superdelegate who actually cares about democracy should be concerned. It's the same pattern we saw with the voting machines and "shennanigans" with Shrub.

So if I was Sanders I would be courting the superdelegates and pointing out the obvious. She's becoming less and less electable. She did it to herself, this isn't Sanders doing. Since we have Superdelegates they should do their job, which is not to rubber stamp the supposed primary vote, but to promote the most electable candidate. The point is to get a Democrat in the White House and when the Dems accepted Bernie into the Primaries they accepted him as a Dem. The argument that he isn't a real Democrat doesn't hold. He is the best bet to win the Whitehouse and mostly holds the views of Democrats. He's less DLC and more progressive/populist/and-oh noes - socialist but those values have always been in the party, they've just been overshadowed by the DLC lately. If he is able to get some of his programs in then the Democratic party will have pulled in new young voters and old progressive stalwarts who had given up and retain people like me who will most likely leave after this election if Hillary is nominated. This revitalizes the dwindling party. This helps get more Dems into Congress and lower ticket, too.

We can preserve Obamacare and maybe make it better. We can finally fix Social Security so it lasts and get rid of the spouse penalty (a great idea of Hillary's to borrow). We can start working on Global Warming and give the young hope again with affordable college. America is in crisis and the Democratic party is faltering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trudyco (Reply #36)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:57 AM

37. The supers are not supposed to go against the popular vote of the people

 

What you are advocating is an anti-democratic coup, usurping the will of the people, just like the article the OP posted stated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 09:57 AM

19. Pot meet kettle. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:50 AM

20. K&R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:54 AM

21. Superdelegates are there to save the party from some of the perils of democracy.

They keep us from nominating a Trump, but the flip side is that they'll keep us from nominating a Sanders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #21)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:56 AM

22. The D party will evolve, I have faith. Revolutions can have

unintended consquences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Reply #22)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:02 AM

23. Change is a-coming.

I hope the Democratic Party still has enough flexibility to be part of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:06 AM

24. ...

 

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512049240



It's practically a requirement that to support her you have to be a complete and utter hypocrite

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:07 AM

25. Excellent article.

 

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:12 AM

26. I'd like to know how anyone can be cocksure that he's lost

 

the "votes" that would make it truly "undemocratic" given the caucus system -- hardly a good means of establishing a win by popular vote, no?

and besides, she could be assassinated http://www.rawstory.com/2016/05/that-time-when-clinton-refused-to-drop-out-of-the-race-because-obama-could-be-assasinated/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:16 AM

28. Kos has shown his colors. He's done. Sacrificed himself on the altar of neoliberalism. R.I.P.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:20 AM

29. Moulitsas was a sympathizer of the right wing government of El Salvador during the El Salvador civil war

Moulitsas is Salvadoran but comes from a family that had ties to the right wing government there (he claims that he was fleeing the communist guerrillas but you had to be a part of the government or the wealthy there in order to be an enemy of the guerillas.)

Moulitsas also has connections with the CIA, having admitted that he was recruited long ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AZ Progressive (Reply #29)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:26 AM

34. Yep.

Someone has to kill the godless communists. Otherwise, the rich will have to share.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AZ Progressive (Reply #29)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:27 AM

35. Ha, you just reminded me of Operation Mockingbird

 

Been a while since I thought about that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread