HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Help me understand why ch...

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 01:53 AM

 

Help me understand why choosing the nominee who lost the delegate and popular vote is "democracy"

What's the point of sending yuuuge crowd to Philly?

What are they rallying for? Not for victory for sure.

81 replies, 2795 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 81 replies Author Time Post
Reply Help me understand why choosing the nominee who lost the delegate and popular vote is "democracy" (Original post)
hill2016 Jun 2016 OP
Joe the Revelator Jun 2016 #1
LoverOfLiberty Jun 2016 #3
Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #34
Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #57
Joe the Revelator Jun 2016 #81
BlueStateLib Jun 2016 #79
aikoaiko Jun 2016 #2
LuvLoogie Jun 2016 #10
aikoaiko Jun 2016 #17
LiberalFighter Jun 2016 #61
Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #77
Cal33 Jun 2016 #56
LiberalFighter Jun 2016 #63
Cal33 Jun 2016 #80
Garrett78 Jun 2016 #11
aikoaiko Jun 2016 #18
Garrett78 Jun 2016 #33
aikoaiko Jun 2016 #36
Garrett78 Jun 2016 #40
aikoaiko Jun 2016 #42
Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #38
LiberalFighter Jun 2016 #60
-none Jun 2016 #74
Scootaloo Jun 2016 #4
Lord Magus Jun 2016 #7
Scootaloo Jun 2016 #9
Garrett78 Jun 2016 #37
Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #41
Meteor Man Jun 2016 #5
grasswire Jun 2016 #6
anotherproletariat Jun 2016 #12
GreatGazoo Jun 2016 #19
grasswire Jun 2016 #20
kerry-is-my-prez Jun 2016 #69
Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #43
azurnoir Jun 2016 #8
Meteor Man Jun 2016 #13
azurnoir Jun 2016 #14
Lord Magus Jun 2016 #15
grasswire Jun 2016 #21
Lord Magus Jun 2016 #23
grasswire Jun 2016 #24
Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #47
Meteor Man Jun 2016 #25
Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #48
pinebox Jun 2016 #67
brush Jun 2016 #59
Sheepshank Jun 2016 #65
Eric J in MN Jun 2016 #16
grasswire Jun 2016 #22
oberliner Jun 2016 #49
joshcryer Jun 2016 #27
Eric J in MN Jun 2016 #28
joshcryer Jun 2016 #30
Eric J in MN Jun 2016 #31
joshcryer Jun 2016 #32
CrowCityDem Jun 2016 #55
Eric J in MN Jun 2016 #71
CrowCityDem Jun 2016 #72
Jack Bone Jun 2016 #26
bravenak Jun 2016 #29
seabeyond Jun 2016 #35
sufrommich Jun 2016 #39
JoePhilly Jun 2016 #44
hobbit709 Jun 2016 #45
Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #50
Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #52
pinebox Jun 2016 #68
PufPuf23 Jun 2016 #46
Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #51
PufPuf23 Jun 2016 #78
JoePhilly Jun 2016 #54
PufPuf23 Jun 2016 #75
PowerToThePeople Jun 2016 #53
bkkyosemite Jun 2016 #58
beachbum bob Jun 2016 #62
MineralMan Jun 2016 #64
Bread and Circus Jun 2016 #66
Garrett78 Jun 2016 #70
davidlynch Jun 2016 #73
Live and Learn Jun 2016 #76

Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 01:58 AM

1. To save the party from its own suicide. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joe the Revelator (Reply #1)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:02 AM

3. That is your definition of Democracy?

Really?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joe the Revelator (Reply #1)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:00 AM

34. so you and the bern would substitute your opinion

for the will of the voters? Sounds fake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joe the Revelator (Reply #1)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:19 AM

57. so you know best...people who vote are too stupid to be allowed to choose a nominee?

I consider this immoral, and this meme is popular with some of the worst dictators in the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #57)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 06:57 PM

81. When it comes to the democratic party, there is a fight for the soul of the party

 

To we want to be a left party or a center right party? That's a schism. The center right is certainly winning. I agree with a lot of you that it may be better for the left to go ahead and move to greener pastures, while you guys and the republicans play political footsie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joe the Revelator (Reply #1)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:14 PM

79. increasing the government size by 50% and the government controlling 40% of GDP is suicide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:02 AM

2. Mostly because the party created a very non-democratic mechanism with super delegates .

The super delegates were created for this purpose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #2)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:21 AM

10. Hillary's superdelegate support is not why Bernie is losing/will lose/has lost.

Hillary has more votes and more pledged delegates

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LuvLoogie (Reply #10)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:32 AM

17. I understand but we will never know how much influence 400+ SDs declaring for HRC


Had on the voting public. It certainly painted a picture of inevitability.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #17)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:34 AM

61. Most of the public don't even know that unpledged delegates declared for anyone.

Most of the public don't consider whether someone supports a candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalFighter (Reply #61)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:08 PM

77. Lol. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LuvLoogie (Reply #10)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:19 AM

56. Hillary "won" with the help and dirty tricks from the Dem. Establishment, DNC's DWS, as

 

well as the cooperation of MSM's hardly ever mentioning Bernie's name at all for nearly
a year. They were determined to keep the American public from knowing anything about
Bernie at all. That, plus the peculiarities of the Dem. Primary voting system, where there
are more states with closed than open voting systems. Too many citizens were not allowed
to vote.

But in the GE polls, Bernie almost always outpointed either Hillary or Donald by between
10 and 20%. The American people want Bernie for president -- not Hillary or Donald!!
The majority of Americans don't trust either of them. And that's the truth.

Why do you keep on posting only a part of the truth, instead of the whole truth, over and
over again? To convince yourself?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cal33 (Reply #56)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:42 AM

63. How did the Democratic Party prevent Sanders' name from being in the public?

It is the campaign's job to get their candidate's name out in the public. Not the MSM.

The Party does not control how primaries are conducted. State laws control that.

The nomination process is not intended for outsiders to decide the nominee for the Democratic Party. Otherwise, why have a Democratic Party? If people persist in this then it will revert back to the old days where there were no primaries or caucuses. And you won't get a say in the matter. State parties don't have to participate in primaries if they don't want to. They could use their state conventions to decide that.

GE polls are misleading as they are not based on how the election is decided for President. Electoral votes determine the outcome. And it is based on the results of individual states.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalFighter (Reply #63)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:15 PM

80. An example: Have you already forgotten how Debbie Wasserman Schultz rigged the

 

Democratic Primary Presidential debates in favor of Hillary? There were only 6 debates,
and most of them were scheduled for weekends and before National Holidays, so that
as few people as possible would be watching them. Hillary was already a well-known
national figure since the early 1990s -- all the other candidates were not as well known.

Dragging Debbie kept on ignoring the complaints of the other Democratic candidates,
who wanted more debates, and having them on more favorable dates.

Have you really forgotten Dragging Debbie and her crooked antics? As chairperson
of the DNC, her duty was to remain impartial and show no favoritism to anyone. But
she wasn't built that way. There is now a growing movement to have her removed
from the DNC chairmanship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #2)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:23 AM

11. Take away the superdelegates and Clinton still wins, though.

Allocate the superdelegates proportionally and Clinton still wins.

There's no formula (outside of simply taking delegates away from Clinton) that gets Sanders a win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Garrett78 (Reply #11)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:34 AM

18. I agree , but in theory any and all the SDs who declared for HRC could vote differently


I know it won't happen, but there is nothing in the rules to prevent that from happening IIUC.

I hope we get rid of super delegates someday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #18)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 10:59 AM

33. Pledged delegates aren't bound either, but nobody argues that they'll switch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Garrett78 (Reply #33)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:01 AM

36. Because they are pledged and that expectation matters I think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #36)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:02 AM

40. They can switch, though, which I'm not sure everyone realizes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Garrett78 (Reply #40)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:04 AM

42. Yes. It's true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #2)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:01 AM

38. NO they were not

They were created to make sure that the losing candidate with the least pledged delegates did not manage to obtain the nomination as McGovern did ....and of course he lost badly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #2)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:31 AM

60. How is it undemocratic?

Each and every one of them were elected. Even the DNC members were elected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalFighter (Reply #60)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 01:35 PM

74. The Super delegates were lined up by the Hillary campaign before the campaign started.

Before any one else was running.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:08 AM

4. The point of gathering a yuuge crowd (thanks!) is to remind everyone there that we're still here.

 

I'm sure that you want silence. It's not going to happen though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #4)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:16 AM

7. What we want is democracy.

That means the candidate with the most votes is the nominee no matter what.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lord Magus (Reply #7)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:21 AM

9. Didn't work out that way in 2008, remember?

 

But I was merely addressing the point abotu hte crowd

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #9)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:01 AM

37. Well, only because of disputed primaries (in MI and FL).

Obama won the most pledged delegates, though. And that's why superdelegates switched.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #9)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:03 AM

41. Obama had the most delegates and Clinton was much closer to him than Bernie is to her.

He won, and she lost...so it did work that way in 08.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:10 AM

5. This Is Simple

A. The primaries are not over.

B. The convention is not a coronation.

C. American's are allowed to protest.

D. The Democratic party has pissed off a whole lot of progressive Democrats on a whole lot of issues.

E. DWS sucks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meteor Man (Reply #5)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:15 AM

6. yeah, we're mad

From fixing the debate schedule to all the bits of fraud....it has been a dirty bit of stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #6)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:25 AM

12. Your candidate was not that great in the debates. Remember the anger, red face and pointing?

 

It was probably good for Sanders that the debates were not seen by more people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to anotherproletariat (Reply #12)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:42 AM

19. Remember the "anger, red face and pointing?" Yes I do

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to anotherproletariat (Reply #12)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:44 AM

20. and Hillary was barking and sneering..

..which is why her favorable ratings are so very poor, and Bernie's are so very high.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to anotherproletariat (Reply #12)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:58 AM

69. If you didn't know better, you'd think "another angry white man"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meteor Man (Reply #5)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:06 AM

43. right protesting those who are with you 90% of the time while giving a free pass to a candidate who

would destroy our country...Trump (one court pick at a time)...sounds really foolish...what are you protesting for? Do you have a sad because Bernie lost? Big deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:17 AM

8. at this point in time I am not either The Party has made itself very clear

either support Hillary or pound sand but remember if you do not support Hillary then you support Trump, it's them or us -either or -a binary choice

The question is what will people choose

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #8)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:26 AM

13. The choice is not binary

That is what Hillary supporters keep saying, but you are wrong. There is a People's Summit coming up. Jill Stein is on the ballot in 20 states. Writing in Bernie is a choice. Not voting is a choice.

If Hillary loses to Trump it will be because Hillary, the DNC and DWS abandoned long standing Democratic principles to kow tow to Wall Street and Big Oil and Big Pharma and . . . well you get the point.

You can't abandon your voters and not expect them to abandon you! That's how it works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meteor Man (Reply #13)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:28 AM

14. I was merely echoing The Party not giving an opinion other than my title line

it has been made clear that there is no place in the tent for us unless we fall in line

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meteor Man (Reply #13)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:29 AM

15. All of those "choices" you listed are a de facto vote for Trump.

And it strikes me that the DNC would truly be abandoning its voters if it handed the nomination to the 2nd place finisher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lord Magus (Reply #15)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:45 AM

21. the DNC would be following its own rules.

The super delegates are in place to prevent such a thing as Hillary has wrought.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #21)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:50 AM

23. No they are not.

The superdelegates are not there to hand the nomination to the loser because he feels he's entitled to it or because he's waving around polls saying he could do better in the general election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lord Magus (Reply #23)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 03:02 AM

24. but Hillary said...


..
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- For the second time in three days, Sen. Hillary Clinton told reporters that the pledged delegates awarded based on vote totals in their state are not bound to abide by election results.

Sen. Hillary Clinton lags behind Sen. Barack Obama in the popular vote and in pledged delegates.

It's an idea that has been floated by her or a campaign surrogate nearly half a dozen times this month.

Sen. Barack Obama leads Clinton among all Democratic delegates, 1,622 to 1,485, in the latest CNN count. Among pledged delegates, Obama leads Clinton 1,413 to 1,242.

"Every delegate with very few exceptions is free to make up his or her mind however they choose," Clinton told Time's Mark Halperin in an interview published Wednesday.
"We talk a lot about so-called pledged delegates, but every delegate is expected to exercise independent judgment," she said.

Clinton's remarks echoed her Monday comments to the editorial board of the Philadelphia Daily News.

"And also remember that pledged delegates in most states are not pledged," she said Monday. "You know there is no requirement that anybody vote for anybody. They're just like superdelegates."

Clinton also made similar comments in a Newsweek interview published two weeks ago

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #24)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:08 AM

47. and she lost...as she should have...consider the supers like her and she lost

Bernie has spent a year bashing them...not much chance for him. He is not well liked by those who deal with him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lord Magus (Reply #15)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 03:37 AM

25. No

They are not a vote for Trump. The only option that is a vote for Trump is a vote for Trump.

There is nothing "de facto" about howva person votes.

The DNC does not "hand the nomination" to any candidate. Follow closely now. At the Democratic Convention there will be people known as delegates. The delegates will cast their votes. The votes will be counted. The results of the votes made by delegates will be announced.

Whoever wins the most votes will be the nominee of the Democratic Party.

See how that works? Now you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meteor Man (Reply #25)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:09 AM

48. I f you don't vote or vote for the green traitors

It is a vote for Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #48)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:54 AM

67. No, it's a net zero

 

The same logic can be applied for saying that is a vote for Hillary too. In fact, it's identical however a net zero is a net zero. If someone doesn't vote for Trump or Hillary, it doesn't enable either candidate to be elected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meteor Man (Reply #13)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:29 AM

59. Why is it always Sanders supporters threatening going to the Green party or to write-in?

Clinton supporters always say they will vote blue no matter who ó the "who" meaning Sanders of course. We will vote for him if he wins.

But his supporters can't reciprocate. Why is that?

Why the absolute lunacy to do anything that might let lead to Trump and the repugs winning?

I will never understand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #59)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:47 AM

65. The most vocal are Indies...they have no party loyalty anyway

 

They are portraying themselves as Dems who will vote elsewhere. Closed vs.open Primaries generally prove that point. Look at the polls in CA when they produce number of likely voters, vs. registered Dem voters....huge difference in the lead, Hillary takes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:31 AM

16. Two wrongs don't make a right.

If HRC has more Pledged Delegates on June 15, then it will be wrong for Sanders to ask Super Delegates to vote for him.

If HRC has a majority of total delegates counting Super Delegates while polls are still open in CA on June 7, then it will be wrong for MSNBC to call the primaries over without waiting for the polls to close.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eric J in MN (Reply #16)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:46 AM

22. But Hillary said...

..
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- For the second time in three days, Sen. Hillary Clinton told reporters that the pledged delegates awarded based on vote totals in their state are not bound to abide by election results.

Sen. Hillary Clinton lags behind Sen. Barack Obama in the popular vote and in pledged delegates.

It's an idea that has been floated by her or a campaign surrogate nearly half a dozen times this month.

Sen. Barack Obama leads Clinton among all Democratic delegates, 1,622 to 1,485, in the latest CNN count. Among pledged delegates, Obama leads Clinton 1,413 to 1,242.

"Every delegate with very few exceptions is free to make up his or her mind however they choose," Clinton told Time's Mark Halperin in an interview published Wednesday.
"We talk a lot about so-called pledged delegates, but every delegate is expected to exercise independent judgment," she said.

Clinton's remarks echoed her Monday comments to the editorial board of the Philadelphia Daily News.

"And also remember that pledged delegates in most states are not pledged," she said Monday. "You know there is no requirement that anybody vote for anybody. They're just like superdelegates."

Clinton also made similar comments in a Newsweek interview published two weeks ago

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #22)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:11 AM

49. So you think Hillary is right about that?

 

If Bernie won the most pledged delegates, you would be similarly understanding if the supers decided to give it to Hillary if they felt that she was more electable?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eric J in MN (Reply #16)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 03:46 AM

27. Obama didn't have the majority of pledged delegates in 2008 and they called it for him.

Because technically the convention counts pledged and superdelegates on the first ballot. When the first ballot comes up each state will send their delegate numbers, and each state has super delegates and pledged delegates. Even if all superdelegates went with their states, Clinton still wins the majority of the delegates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #27)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 04:13 AM

28. The media shouldn't call it for any candidate before

...that candidate has the majority of pledged delegates.

The SDs have always sided with the candidate with the majority of PDs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eric J in MN (Reply #28)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 04:15 AM

30. You know how dumb it would be if they didn't call it for Clinton...

...like they called it for Obama?

It's really immaterial because Clinton will get the majority of pledged delegates (2026 without the superdelegates) once CA's polls close.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #30)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 04:17 AM

31. Chris Matthews said he expects MSNBC

...to call the nomination for Clinton 3 hours before CA polls close.

That will suppress the vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eric J in MN (Reply #31)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 04:21 AM

32. That will cause bandwagoning more likely.

People hearing that Clinton won and then people go to vote for Clinton to be able to say they voted for the first woman nominee.

But you can't underestimate that it could also bring out more Sanders supporters to temper her win in CA or maybe even make her lose CA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eric J in MN (Reply #31)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:17 AM

55. So if she got to the number in NY, you don't call the nomination until June, to not suppress CA?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrowCityDem (Reply #55)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 12:32 PM

71. The media should call it when someone has the majority of Pledged Delegates

...no matter how late or early that occurs.

HRC won't have that at least until CA results are counted.

Chris Matthews expects MSNBC to call the election at 5PM California time by including the Super Delegates and New Jersey.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eric J in MN (Reply #71)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 12:33 PM

72. They're doing it the way they always do.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 03:43 AM

26. Well. The popular vote is Jive...it doesn't matter

and as for the delegates, news flash...people are still voting! Delegates still to be awarded.

What's the rush? Let the process play itself out...peace

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 04:13 AM

29. It's not and everybody knows it

 

It will not happen no matter how many people show up to protest the person with the most votes winning. I do not think they will be welcome if they are disruptive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:01 AM

35. I think, the ego that truly cannot handle a loss to women, has to face his loss, needs mass of

 

outrage to assuage the hurt feeling and feel not so much the failure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:02 AM

39. It won't happen. Regardless of whatever a desperate Sanders campaign

is promising it's shrinking donor base.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:06 AM

44. They see themselves as special.

The rest of us are just too stupid to be trusted with such decisions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:07 AM

45. Tell me how stacking the deck is "democracy"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #45)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:11 AM

50. Tell me

how awarding the nomination to the losing candidate is democracy? Bernie wants to be selected because he can't be elected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #45)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:13 AM

52. Obama has worse odd than Bernie

and Obama won. Bernie is not a good candidate and would lose the GE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #52)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:55 AM

68. Can you show us evidence that Bernie would lose a GE?

 

Thank you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:07 AM

46. When the presumptive candidate has a record of failing to

support democracy domestic and internationally as SOS and Senator when the interests of wealth are in conflict.

When the presumptive candidate has an easy to see if one looks record of saying one thing regards policy and doing something else to favor power and wealth over people.

The people rally to make themselves heard on the record when they have no representation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PufPuf23 (Reply #46)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:12 AM

51. She won. People don't agree with you this is why we have primaries

and the substitution your will for that of the voters is a form of totalitarianism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #51)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:10 PM

78. I would go as far as to use the term totalitarianism

but the Sanders phenomena is very much about how many folks, including good long term Democratic party members such as myself, have no representation in this POTUS election.

There was the recent Princeton study that concluded the USA no longer has a functioning democracy.

We readily support allies of nations that are right wing and totalitarian in nature.

Left wing nations, particularly in Latin America, are subject to covert ops and regime change for more right wing leadership and less democracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PufPuf23 (Reply #46)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:15 AM

54. They had representation. The primary, remember it?

Every argument you made is an argument for why you think more people should have voted for Bernie.

The people voted. And he lost.

If you want to overturn that outcome, then it is you who are advocating for ensuring the people have no representation.

You want your vote to count more than mine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #54)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:05 PM

75. I backed into Sanders as the only even remore possible alternative to Hillary Clinton

We were not given a broad choice in the primary.

Hillary Clinton was treated by the DNC as an incumbent and presumptive nominee before any one else declared as a candidate.

Many of us had no choice of anyone they wanted to support as a candidate.

Sanders was a surprise as a candidate and did amazingly well; Sanders was refreshing in that he suggested a move away from neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism.

The Sanders phenomena this year is because so many people do not have representation.

Your vote does count more than mine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:14 AM

53. "Democracy" is not necessarily a free Democracy.

 

https://chomsky.info/199201__/

The logic is clear ó propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state and thatís wise and good because again the common interests elude the bewildered herd, they cant figure them out. The public relations industry not only took this ideology on very explicitly but also acted on it, thatís a huge industry, spending hundreds of..by now probably on the order of a billion dollars a year on it or something and its committment all along was to controlling the public mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:26 AM

58. Because Democracy is at stake

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:34 AM

62. Bernie is loser...and can't accept defeat like a man

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:47 AM

64. Because some people "know better" than the general population.

That's what I'm taking from it. Never mind that one candidate will have a majority of both pledged delegates and popular votes, as recorded. Never mind the words of those politically-savvy super delegates when they say they will vote for one of the candidates.

Never mind any of that. There are people who just know that they "know better" than other people and are willing to obstruct and disrupt the process so they can demand that their opinion rule.

I'm hopeful that, after the primary elections are over and the delegates allocated and after most of the super delegates tell us their intentions, this insistence that some "know better" than the voters will end and the process will be allowed to continue without disruption. That's what I hope.

Bernie Sanders should lead the way on this, if it's clear that he will not be the nominee. He should speak out clearly and plainly that his supporters should not try to force their will over the will of the voters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 11:54 AM

66. I agree, it's not. So let's get rid of superdelegates altogether. Agreed?

The nomination should not be decided by superdelegates, even if it is for my candidate.

The superdelegate system is not democratic.

Let's get rid of those fucking assholes.

That being said, I expect an apology from you and your Hillbuddies for lording the superdelegates over us for the past year.

But I doubt you will apologize because you and your buddies don't roll that way.

You like the superdelegates when they serve your purpose to create and air of inevitability for Hillary but magically now don't like them given that the could turn on Hillary.

Fancy that....

Not surprised.

Hypocrite.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bread and Circus (Reply #66)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 12:28 PM

70. Nominations aren't decided by superdelegates.

Have superdelegates ever been responsible for nominating someone who didn't finish with the most pledged delegates?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 12:33 PM

73. The Democratic primary process isn't democratic in any real sense...

It never has been. It isn't designed to be fair, it is designed to allow party insiders to choose who they want to run in the general election. Because of this there is huge institutional bias and pressure. Of course the system doesn't want Bernie, he's their worst nightmare!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Jun 4, 2016, 02:07 PM

76. This is a bit premature, Hillary hasn't lost yet. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread