It is REALLY SHITTY of the AP to do this on the Eve of the Primaries

[LaydeeBug]

It is bullshit...they aren't giving specifics, and it just steals her thunder. She wants it to be tomorrow.

Fuckers.

[bravenak]

1. Kinda rude, innit?

[LaydeeBug]

5. just *underhanded*

it's also not fair to Bernie Sanders, and the voters in the primary states tomorrow.

[bravenak]

12. Nothing is ever fair to Bern Sanders these days

Damn that Female!!! Stealing his California Thunder! Did she not know he was going to win the BIG ENCHALADA? For shame!!!

[LaydeeBug]

21. While I don't compeletely agree with that,

I am trying to say that this is *also* shitty to him, because of it being the Eve of the primaries

[pablo_marmol]

33. Thank You.

You have integrity.

[mahina]

109. +1

[Bluenorthwest]

99. Integrity looks fantastic on Hillary supporters! I'm so glad to see it being worn around town!

Thanks LaydeeBug. I think AP served AP at the expense of principle and that really does not help Hillary. In her position my goal would be a full, undeniable victory lacking in any asterisks or doubts. She's virtually locked it either way, so all this does is make another issue to overcome in making the Party unity that nominee has to make. AP was unfair to Bernie but what they did is not helpful to Hillary. It was helpful to themselves.
I think many of her supporters on DU have also indulged lavishly in tactics that served only themselves and now will become annoyingly self created pitfalls and roadblocks to General Election politics. Much of that work did not help Hillary but in fact harmed her. Because of that it is really nice to see a post like yours, which has the public interest in mind and not some personal need to fill by lighting fires and throwing stones.

[laserhaas]

47. Bull CHIT ...if Bernie did this to her

You'd be trying to lynch him

[avaistheone1]

81. It is not fair to California voters and it is not fair to our democracy.

Little wonder the public thinks the system is rigged because it is.

Somehow I don't think will win Hillary a lot of votes tomorrow in California.

[morningfog]

2. Lol. You're complaining that they are counting super delegates? Lol.

[LaydeeBug]

10. I am complaining because HRC asked some supers who indicated their support

to hold off until Tuesday because of the *voters*. The AP, not specifying the supers, or which supers, issue this on the Eve of the primary, and it is shitty.

[morningfog]

29. If you are a Hillary supporter there is nothing shitty about this

unless you are looking for something pout about.

[LaydeeBug]

31. I am a supporter of voters, AND a HRC supporter, and yes there is

something to complain about. It marginalizes all of tomorrow's primaries

[morningfog]

34. This is incredibly disingenuous of you! Wow! The double thought.

Unless you complained about the hundreds of super delegates who announced support before any other candidate had ended the race?

Come on. This is how the game had been played all year. Don't piss about it now.

[LaydeeBug]

54. it is NOT disengenuous at all. We knew she'd get there

tomorrow around 5pm without the other supers.

Donald Trump was in a world of shit this morning. that's not what we're talking about now.

[morningfog]

65. Hilarious. Pouting because she was declared the winner too soon.

Listen to yourself. Hillary folks have been declaring it over for months, dismissing Bernie and calling for him to drop out as long. Chanting "math,math,math,math." You got your math. You got your win.

Quit complaining.

[JSup]

68. It's not the same...

...it's like all year saying "I'm gonna win that prize and you're not!"

And then someone run up, grabs the prize and hands it to you.

[morningfog]

70. The fucking nerve!

[JSup]

74. I know, right?

And I never opened my presents early, either, because I like things to be done the correct way.

Winning's bad enough because it always means someone else loses; I'd at least like a victory to wait until it's legitimate before it is called.

[KittyWampus]

87. Please. This just feeds the bogus "rigged" story Sanders likes to peddle.

And it could potentially depress Clinton's vote.

[morningfog]

88. Sanders has never said the race is "rigged."

Hillary camp wanted this to happen. You should be happy about it.

[Lord Magus]

85. Hillary didn't ask them, the AP asked them.

They called up all 715 supers and asked if they had any new endorsements to announce.

[JackRiddler]

106. Media whores create stunt story timed for attention.

A poll of anonymous superdelegates is not the same as the count of elected, pledged delegates, and they timed this to steal the attention from the actual elections, to play as if they scooped something. Fuck the voters, right AP?

[stonecutter357]

3. .

[HumanityExperiment]

4. HRC and MSM...

must be REALLY scared about tomorrow's primary to do this on eve on TUES primary votes

[KingFlorez]

8. She was going to cross the threshold tomorrow night

There was nothing to be afraid of.

[HumanityExperiment]

13. LOL... yeah sure

perception is everything closing this out... establishment is that AFRAID of Bernie... this is hilarious

[KingFlorez]

17. No one is afraid of Bernie

He's hardly fearsome.

[HumanityExperiment]

28. Yeah sure...

Coincidence that this 'announcement' occurs on eve of CA where Bernie is predicted to win...

OPTICS... he wins that lessens HRC even more closing this out

[LaydeeBug]

53. No Chance. Math is math.

but you knew that

[gopiscrap]

62. That's what I'm saying also

[MFM008]

6. I agree

But I've said many times the media will call it as soon as they could.

[Raster]

7. You're not complaining that it minimizes millions of legal, lawful voters...

...but only that it possibly steals Hillary's "thunder"?

[LaydeeBug]

15. They are not unrelated...since the reason she wanted them to wait is FOR the voters

This is shitty to Bernie Sanders, his supporters and *anyone* in the primary states tomorrow.

Now, either way, either argument can be made.

He would have won, or she would have.

It is very shitty

[larkrake]

60. like she gives a damn about CA voters. Now we will never know who really won the most pledged d's

and it will fall to the bought SDs. If that isnt stagecraft, I dont know what is. This is Florida all over again.

[Lord Magus]

52. What minimizes those millions of votes is the primary schedule.

When the primaries are scheduled across half the year, somebody always gets stuck going last. And the later your state is in the process, the greater the chance that somebody will have already won by the time you vote. The only way to make prevent this from every happening would be to have a single nationwide primary day.

[Joe the Revelator]

9. Poor Hillary

[TwilightZone]

11. Nah, Skinner made a good point in one of the other threads. Sitting on the information wouldn't make

any sense. They're a news organization; their job is to report. If she has the numbers now, they should report it now. If she had them last week, it should have been last week.

Would it make a better story if it was tomorrow night? Sure, but it's reality now.

[KULawHawk]

30. Actually it's not.

Financial decisions don't make for anything else than deciding your rationale to reach your desired conclusion. That's working backwards.

[TwilightZone]

35. I have no idea what you're talking about

or how it's relevant to the conversation.

[KULawHawk]

39. Site revenue

[TwilightZone]

43. Considering that he's going to crack down on some of the nonsense, it would seem that

revenue isn't the only thing that matters.

[KULawHawk]

44. Crackdown is

Directly related to money coming in.

[Renew Deal]

46. They were probably sitting on these delegates

[valerief]

48. But HRC only has 1812, not 2383.

https://www.google.com/search?q=dem+primary&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#eob=m.09c7w0/D/6/short/m.09c7w0/

You'd almost think we have a corrupt media. Oh, wait. We do!

[TwilightZone]

49. No.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/4c9c850385c84b12ad5b85fda49743f9/after-weekend-wins-clinton-cusp-democratic-nomination

[valerief]

51. Wrong.

Your link has the same count as my link: 1812.

[Lord Magus]

55. Superdelegates count.

Whether you like them or not.

[valerief]

95. On July 25. Whether you like it or not.

[TwilightZone]

56. Your candidate disagrees with your interpretation of how the delegates should be counted.

Well, he did in 2008 anyway.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/08-sanders-endorsed-obama-clinton-formally-exited-race-n586556

Funny how he doesn't now.

[JackRiddler]

107. Bullshit. This isn't a news report, it's a construct.

They decided to hold an anonymous poll of supers. AP decided to count them as if they were equivalent to elected and pledged. They decided to report this as a "clinch" that doesn't exist until the convention.

They timed this for release on the Monday before the last big round of elections. Anyone can know that this fucks over the voters and probably screws around with the results. They didn't care, they wanted to steal the attention that belongs to the voters in California and five other states.

This is the construction of news, not "reporting." These are the actions of media whores without scruples or decency, people who would trip their grandma down the stairs if it would get them a career boost. Fuck them.

[TwilightZone]

108. Supers aren't anonymous.

Never have been. Lists are publicly available. Perhaps you should find one.

The rest of your post is just silly. The AP can count to 2383. They did, and they reported on it. End of story.

[JackRiddler]

110. Oh yeah?

Did AP publish the names of the extra supers they claimed to have discovered? And what if they had? Do those get to preempt a six-state election?

AP decided to count supers as equal to pledged.

AP decided to round out the number to 2383 so as to explode their stunt story in advance of the elections, showing utter contempt for millions of voters.

It is a story, all right - but one constructed by the news organization for the attention. A media whore story.

And just to do the old tit for tat, since superfluous insults like the one you added to your post merit it, your entire post is apologist, complacent bullshit evincing no capability of critical attention to anything outside the confines of your own dish. Eat up!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. If the press know something they will say something.

[TwilightZone]

22. Agreed. If the numbers were there, they're going to report them. Makes no sense to sit on the info

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. They also didn't want to get scooped...

Newsweek had the Lewinsky story but while they were sitting on it Drudge released it. If not for that there would likely be no Drudge Report.

Something to ponder.

[KULawHawk]

32. Worry of being Scooped doesn't = good journalism.

Why not just call it last October and scoop everyone else.

[TwilightZone]

36. Because the numbers weren't there until tonight.

You can deny the numbers, and you no doubt will, but that doesn't change anything. Clinton reached the required number of delegates because the delegates expressed a preference to the AP. The AP didn't just make this up.

[KULawHawk]

38. Still aren't.

Anonymous or unnamed don't cut it.

No reason to not have confirmed numbers after the primaries tomorrow.

[TwilightZone]

40. They have confirmed numbers now.

Otherwise, they wouldn't have published.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. i am upset...I was invited to a watch party... Now it's like watching a movie from the end.

[Lord Magus]

92. Sitting on a story because it'll hurt people's feelings doesn't = good journalism either. -nt-

[Bluenorthwest]

100. Since when is that the case? Are they vigilent on issues of Police corruption, judicial inequality?

Did the press tell us what they knew during the rush to the Iraq War? It's an interesting position, that the press always seeks out and then reports the full truth because that's part of their nature. Would that it were, DSB, would that it were.

[CherokeeDem]

16. Tonight... we know...

Tomorrow, we celebrate!!! It won't take anything from her....

[ecstatic]

18. I was really looking forward to tomorrow

Had my popcorn ready. This kind of throws everything up in the air. Feels like interference, in a way. Why did they feel the need to survey delegates tonight?

[NCTraveler]

19. I think they had to. The timing stinks. Nt

[Tarc]

20. i'm fine with it coming now, no sense in delaying the inevitable

[reddread]

23. lol

clouds in your whine?
hats off to this much anticipated finale and adorable cover posts.
how great to have them sprinkled with the kind of profanity that might
bear an alert in service to just causes.

[Nye Bevan]

24. News organizations don't generally take the views of prominent people into account

in deciding when to release their stories. News stories are usually released when they are ready to be, not held back and then carefully timed in order not to "steal the thunder" of prominent politicians.

[Sheepshank]

69. Just so long as we don't consider the complainers here prominent people nt

[tritsofme]

26. So they should have embargoed the story to avoid hurting the feelings of Berners?

That would be highly irresponsible.

[apcalc]

27. Agree

Jerks
Depresses her turnout, steals her thunder...

[JimDandy]

41. There is NO WAY this announcement wasn't explicitly approved by Clinton.

No news organization would jeopardize their access to the info and personnel of the candidate they support for president, by making such a statement without Hillary's approval.

This was another of their water-carrying tasks for her.

Your anger should be directed at Hillary, if you don't care for this early, election-quashing announcement.

[LaydeeBug]

42. yes there is. nt

[JimDandy]

45. That position is extremely politically naive.

Misplaced anger can never address the real problem.

[LaydeeBug]

50. Not naive at all.

And it'd be nice if you could practice what you preach.

Because Donald Trump was in a world of shit earlier today, and her big bash is for tomorrow

[Lord Magus]

61. Nonsense.

Hillary would have much preferred if the AP had held off on their surveying of the superdelegates until her big win tomorrow. But the AP didn't do that, and didn't sit on the story afterward, because if they sat on it then some other outlet could announce it first. The AP isn't the only organization capable of contacting superdelegates, after all.

[JimDandy]

64. Nonsense.

Her campaign knows the majority of her supporters are the older voters who vote by mail. They have already cast their ballots. The majority of the voters tomorrow they expect to be Sanders supporters. This announcement was absolutely meant to quash voter turnout of his supporters.

Neither the media nor the superdelegates involved took this action without Clinton's direct approval. It would be political suicide to have done otherwise.

Whether you agree or not, that is almost assuredly what happened.

[Lord Magus]

67. "The majority of the voters tomorrow they expect to be Sanders supporters." [citation needed]

The idea that the AP would even care if Hillary Clinton approved of their reporting is laughable.

[JimDandy]

71. This post is WHY you are a Hillary supporter.

[Lord Magus]

72. Because I care about facts? Yes, that's true. -nt-

[JimDandy]

84. No. That post was your analysis of the situation-and not a poitically astute one.

This post of yours just reinforced my opinion.

Sanders supporters have now been relieved of any responsibility for what happens in Nov. The Clinton load is entirely on you all now. Carry it however you can.

Que sera, sera.

[JDPriestly]

77. "her big win tomorrow"?

I don't know how this news will affect the California primary, but if the area I live in is any measure, she was going to lose huuuuugely tomorrow.

I walk down the street in a Bernie tee shirt (and it isn't my boobs, I assure you because I am too old for that) and people stop me to say they are voting for Bernie.

Hillary was going to lose big, may yet, probably will lose big tomorrow in California, and that is why they announced this. It's a cheap and dirty trick to psychologically disenfranchise California voters.

[Lord Magus]

83. Just because everybody you know is voting for Bernie dosn't mean he's going to win.

None of the polling has indicated a Bernie win in CA.

[JDPriestly]

89. When did the polling indicate that Bernie would win? In very few states, yet he has

thus far won in 20 states.

It's not over until July and the convention. We will vote tomorrow.

We will not be disenfranchised by Hillary's machine.

[Lord Magus]

91. He polled ahead in most of those 20.

And yes it is over before July and the convention.

[larkrake]

57. it works two ways, Hill voters stay home and Bernie gets his 90%

or Bernie folk stay home discouraged (not likely)

[JimDandy]

73. The majority of Hillary voters are older and elderly. They vote by mail consistently.

The majority of Sanders supporters are 18-30, working class voters who consistently vote in election day.

Clinton's campaign knows this. This announcement was to designed to depress election day turnout of Sanders voters.

[Fresh_Start]

58. I wanted my vote to matter

so it doesn't make me happy either

[Jester Messiah]

59. One last dirty trick.

Sickening but not out of character.

[Peregrine Took]

80. +1

[thucythucy]

63. Agreed.

They could have waited until tomorrow. I suppose they wanted the "scoop."

Brainless obsession with being first, no matter how accurate or inaccurate, no matter what the consequences.

[Baitball Blogger]

66. If I lived in CA I'd be pissed.

[ContinentalOp]

75. I do and I'm not

The outcome has been obvious to sane people for ages now. We still need to vote tomorrow because there's a senate primary and other stuff happening other than this.

[Baitball Blogger]

96. You know, I agree with those who say that calling out a group

insane because they don't agree with your opinion is way over the top.

[still_one]

76. I live in California. Anyone this morning who was going to vote tomorrow is still going to vote.

There are a lot of issues and other offices on the ballot than just the Presidential primary

[Peregrine Took]

78. NO accident - done to screw up the vote tomorrow. Typical Clinton trick.

Predictable, really.

[Baitball Blogger]

97. Agree. Political maneuvering to temper the vote in CA for Bernie.

Of course, it could backfire. People who would have voted for Hillary may not come out to vote because they might think she has the nomination clenched.

[bigwillq]

79. Why? Bernie had to win big in Cali, NJ to even have a chance.

Probably unlikely Bernie could have done that. Hillary has a big lead in pledged delegates and pop vote. She will be the nominee, whether they called it tonight, tomorrow or Wednesday.

[greyl]

82. It's not that bad.

It's like your 100th birthday being tomorrow, but you get a card today.

The real excitement will be tomorrow, undoubtedly, using the past couple hours as a guide.

[KittyWampus]

86. Yes, it is nasty. And plays into the 'rigged' nonsense. It only hurts Clinton.

In several ways.

[Time for change]

90. They've done everything they can to steer the nomination to Hillary since the beginning

So this is no surprise.

They're nothing but highly paid whores. The idea that we have a national news media that tries to inform the American public with news that is important to us died a long time ago.

[JCMach1]

94. It's called a scoop...

[Lucinda]

98. I don't like it either, for several reasons. We already knew she would clinch today

and all it accomplished was to try to interfere with Dem voter turnout and cause more bad feelings.

But it's done, and I'll still enjoy tonight very much!

[beachbum bob]

101. we all agree on this....hillary, bernie and all their supporters...see how we have unity already??

bush league move....

[rjsquirrel]

102. "The AP" is just journalists doing their jobs

They didn't "do" anything wrong, and they aren't obliged to consider Bernie Sanders' supporters' feelings. When they have news they can confirm they report it.

I have never ever heard the AP called partisan or biased before. Arguably it is the world's best journalistic enterprise. It's certainly way up there.

So you're just throwing mud cuz u mad.

[NorthCarolina]

103. I love the smell of faux outrage in the morning. -nt-

[Democrats_win]

104. mad mistaken media shows Drumpf-type restraint

They could have waited 24 hours. This is the same media that didn't question bush on the Iraq war. The media is just terrible.

[boomer55]

105. Corporations need their puppets

[mhatrw]

111. LOL. This was the Clinton campaign's brilliant final strategy.

If you can't win, just have the AP take the ball and go home.

Anybody who pretends otherwise is denying the obvious.