The DNC has voted down a resolution that would have demanded Sanders and King run as Democrats

[Donkees]

Link to tweet

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

1. I don't understand this... that would be a reasonable thing to require if...

Sanders and/or King decide to run in the next DEMOCRATIC Party primary. Why is that resolution so controversial?

[Donkees]

2. Vermont has open primaries and declaring party affiliation isn't a requirement to vote.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

3. Sorry Donk, I'm not following you... what does not having to declare party affiliation,

as a requirement to VOTE in Vermont's open primary, have to do with the requirement proposed, and defeated, by the DNC that a candidate for office declare him or herself a Democrat to get the benefits that the DNC bestows upon its candidates? That doesn't seem all that unreasonable to me - not that I mind maintaining the status quo either - or, do I have that wrong?

[Autumn]

4. I don't get the sudden problem with him being an Independent. Bernie has always been an

Indy but has always worked and caucused with the Dems. I'm wondering what the issue was.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/10/20/democrats-reject-proposal-to-force-bernie-sanders-to-join-the-party/

The resolution, introduced by three DNC members from California, attracted attention this week as one more skirmish between supporters of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 Democratic Primary and supporters of Sanders. Bob Mulholland, the DNC member who pitched the resolution to the committee, argued that Democrats were losing potential votes by letting progressive voters work outside the party.

I don't see how the Democrats are losing potential votes by Bernie being an Independent so I think there must have been more behind this.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

5. Oh okay, I see what you're saying... not sure what the answer is and the motivation behind it.

btw, you catch the news about Tom Perez cleaning house at the DNC? Holy crap!!

[Donkees]

7. Maybe you are thinking mainly in terms of Presidential Primaries, but this resolution would also

apply to state elections next year. It may have something to do with the Vermont Progressive Party having a big influence, the other coalitions in the state, etc.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

9. I get that, after doing some more reading about the DNC requirement that was under consideration.

I'm just trying to understand the reasoning BEHIND the DNC's proposal of that requirement. You think that by forcing Bernie to run under the "Democratic" banner, as opposed to running as an "Independant," the thinking was that, somehow, this would ease acceptance among the majority of DNC members of his running for, and successfully capturing, the Democratic nomination for President in 2020?

[Donkees]

10. Probably has more to do with millenials caring less about party loyalty or identity than previous

generations.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

11. That is SO true... but they DO love them some Bernie ... as my two kids like to say...

he talks "straight dope" while "keepin it real."

[Jim Lane]

6. The DNC doesn't have the power to impose requirements on Vermont's ballot access

In past elections, Bernie has chosen to run in the Democratic primary, has won it, has declined the nomination, and has won in November as an independent. Some people on the DNC don't like that but that's their tough luck.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

8. Yes, that should be Bernie's choice. He obviously knows what's best for him and his VT constituents.

[SHRED]

12. The more this goes on

The more Bernie bashing the more I'm convinced , in hindsight, he should have ran as an Independent in 2016.

Why not?
He's catching hell anyway.

[Plucketeer]

13. Because of this convoluted

and ridiculously expensive system, the required infrastructure to support an independent assault is insurmountable. Had the DNC played FAIR with Bernie, we'd be living in a totally different dimension than we're now suffering.