Warren supporters need to know that their vote for Warren could wind up being a vote for Bernie.

[Gothmog]

The Warren supporters I know hate sanders. My son has come around to supporting Biden in part because he does not want sanders to get any help.

Link to tweet

I predict that Warren will continue to lose support if former Clinton supporters think that a vote for Warren could help sanders. There are a ton of Clinton supporters who will drop Warren if they think that their vote for Warren could help sanders

sanders supporters need to keep on pushing on the concept that a vote for Warren is a vote for sanders. The Biden campaign will be happy for this support

[Demsrule86]

1. That is exactly the plan...all this Sanders and Warren team shit...it is a deal breaker for me...

I would never vote for Warren now in a primary...general yes.

[Gothmog]

2. I doubt that this plan will work

Again my son is a maxed out donor to Warren but he is getting nervous. My son will not do anything that would help sanders. My son is actually considering coming with me to a fundraiser next week for Biden

[Hortensis]

32. Yes. Warren is no more Sanders than Biden is.

Her supporters are supposedly overall more educated than most, so I hope they look beyond issues slogans to the people and are as informed as your son.

I also hope that VP Biden still really wants Senator Warren for his VP, as he did strongly in 2015. Reportedly, she was the only name on his list then, and they even met to discuss it. And now she's developed even more national stature and campaign experience.

[DemocracyMouse]

126. Get back to the issues people.

(I hate, hate, hate this horse race pettiness)

Where do the candidates stand on the issues.
The more I hear this kind of high school cattiness, the more I want someone like Warren or Sanders to win. Why? Because they boldly state they are fighting for Americans and not the rich, not the monopolists. I want to hear from some Biden supporters what he stands for, not the dumb, mind numbing statement "He's the most electable." Why is he so electable? The progressive wing of the Democratic party collectively is more electable. They are FIGHTING for our democracy.

[Hortensis]

128. You totally misunderstand. CHARACTER is huge.

Good character and trustworthiness are critical and indispensable. Haven't the Republicans taught us that?

When a candidate lies repeatedly and significantly in campaigns, that's a really bad sign. The Republicans are now totally corrupt, yes, and they lie all the time to deceive their voters. But not Democrats, especially the high-level Democrats the Republicans fear.

When a candidate demonstrates bad character and untrustworthiness in other ways, that's also a really bad sign. If he'll use ruthlessly dishonorable means to get power, what would he do while using it and manipulating to keep it? And no, "everyone" doesn't do it. Republicans do, a couple of our dozens of candidates do, but our admirable Democrats don't.

But to issues, go ahead and pick one important to you: If it's liberal and progressive, it's in the Democratic Party platform and also on the agenda of Democratic candidates of good character. Many have the character and competence to come through.

Btw, Congress, the legislative branch who battled for two years to create the ACA, some of whom put their careers on the line for it, would of course not trash it and start over. There are many important reasons why they wouldn't, but one existential one is the danger that the Republicans would use this legislative fumble (that'd have to take place over at least 7 years!), to destroy both. A Democratic congress would instead, while they had the power, serve the people's wishes by adding the public option and other improvements already waiting to the ACA. That's good news. The Republicans and others have not been able to destroy it, and barring destruction by a corrupt, politicized SCOTUS, we will have it.

[empedocles]

136. Yep

[brutus smith]

138. So we all totally misunderstand?

Oh, ok.

[Hortensis]

141. I was glad DemocracyMouse realizes we're in a giant

in a giant battle to save our democracy. That's so encouraging. For so long most conversation has cluelessly been about the choices we want instead of whether we'll lose the vote itself.

So I meant to specifically mention the critical problem of candidates who run very divisive and demoralizing candidacies, the kind that cause people not to vote at all or vote against Democrats (!). That's anyone our RW authoritarian enemies, foreign and domestic, regard as useful weapons to defeat us.

[betsuni]

129. Democrats are not "fighting for ... the rich" and "the monopolists."

[LiberalLovinLug]

179. Very well said DemocracyMouse

All I hear from Biden supporters is complaining about other candidates and finding ways to scare Democrats. Now they are trying to poke Warren supporters to switch to Biden to stop the only other candidate that shares much of their platform. Totally whack.

[Demsrule86]

80. I don't think it will work either...one son and one daughter supported Warren but have switched to

Biden as they don't want their votes going to Sanders...my other daughter was a Biden supporter all along...she has met him at Obama campaign events.

[Gothmog]

83. My kids are hard core democrats

They do NOT want their votes to be used to elect a delegate who may vote for sanders

[Demsrule86]

84. Mine too...in fact my daughters boyfriend who didn't vote often now does as does my son's wife and

youngest daughter's girlfriend. They were apolitical but not anymore.

[Hortensis]

218. I haven't thought that far ahead regarding who

Warren's support might go to, but we also have a couple of Warren supporters in our close family, my husband maybe too. Not time to worry about anything yet, of course, but definitely they'll have to watch for that possible danger.

Our one Sanders supporter is 9 with a very positive child's view, and her mother especially, but her dad also, treats that as a very valid choice. Then she texts us for reassurance that she's being a good mom.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

3. I predict that if we keep making this about 2016, we will all lose

Instead of rallying around one candidate to save our nation from Trump, we'll alienate a portion of our potential voting base over a past we can't change.

To everyone: You supported Bernie? You supported Hillary? Shorten your memory and focus on the business at hand, which is getting your candidate nominated and in a position to solve our nation's problems. Why am I supporting Steyer (who I know won't win)? because he put his money where his mouth was and bought media time to support impeachment. More to the point, no one ( Joe, Bernie, Elizabeth, Andrew, Pete) has quite sold me on what they'll do for our nation after they defeat Trump.

[redqueen]

6. +1

[Demsrule86]

82. Sorry, I will never get over 16 and I don't think Sanders helped Clinton in the General enough.

I just don't. I would never vote for him in a primary ...I don't want my primary vote going to him either. Sanders has my vote in a general of course. But I don't think he will win the nomination.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

107. At this point, whats done is done as far as 2016

I was a stalwart HRC supporter in 2016, and was openly hostile to Sanders supporters. At the end of the day, all that bickering did nothing o help us defeat Donald Trump then. I get that there are honest policy differences - that's what we should be discussing. "S/he can beat Trump" isn't enough - not for me, anyway. My primary vote is going to go to who I feel conveys the clearest vision for the future.

[Demsrule86]

142. It is not done. It will live on and on with bad policy , a right wing Scotus

and war. This is the problem.

[Gothmog]

123. There are a significant number of real democrats with good memories

These real democrats will not forgive or forget.

I will support the nominee of the party. I just doubt sanders has any chance of being the nominee

[Algernon Moncrieff]

125. Stop with the "Real Democrat" nonsense

Connor Lamb and AOC are both real Democrats. That's just how we are rolling these days. Of course, the party of Hubert Humphry was also the party of George Wallace. Go figure?

We've already gone down this road enough: HRC was a Goldwater girl; Warren was an HW Bush Republican; Sanders is/was I-VT; Yang & Steyer are Billionaires; Bloomberg is a Billionaire who ran for NYC mayor as a Republican. Mayor Pete's qualification is Mayor of a small Midwestern town. Amy Klobuchar has a reputation as the world's worst boss. Biden is far from perfect: he's a gaffe machine who is generally too touchy-feely and got nailed three decades ago for plagiarism. Yet all of these candidates, and their respective supporters here at DU, agree that we need a more just and equitable society with a focus on affordable healthcare and taxing the wealthy. Bernie Sanders isn't the enemy; Elizabeth Warren isn't the enemy; Andrew Yang and Tom Steyer aren't the enemies, and Joe Biden isn't the enemy. Our enemies are Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, Devin Nunes, Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Jim Jordan, and a host of others dedicated to the proposition that corporate wealth, gun rights, and theocracy are what America is about.

Fighting battles leftover from 2016 is just stupid

[Demsrule86]

144. Democrats vote for the nominee. Already you hear from justice Democrats

that they won't vote for just any nominee...we have AOC primarying sitting Democrats. How is that avgood idea?

[Algernon Moncrieff]

231. I would/will/do expect that everyone here will vote for the nominee in the GE

You and I agree completely on that point. I have no use for anyone who is planning to vote third party and no use for anyone planning to support Trump for a second term.

That said, I support vigorous primarying. Primarying serves to vet the candidates; allows the best ideas that appeal to voters to emerge; and gives the eventual winner some practice swings at the negative talking points s/he will get in the GE. Primarying breeds inherent conflict. I get that, and I expect DUers to debate passionately. But constantly dragging 2016 into it isn't doing anyone any good. It sucks, but it's done. We all need to move forward based on today's reality, and pray that these elections are essentially fair.

If someone (either a Biden or Bernie or whoever supporter) says something along the lines of "I'll vote for the Dem nominee I don't like in the GE, but I won't work for them/give money, etc. - OK. I don't love that, but I can live with it. Especially the folks who've indicated they'll work/send money House/Senate/State House (more important than I think anyone realizes this time out), and Gubernatorial elections. It all matters. Dems winning anywhere is all good.

We have AOC primarying sitting Democrats. How is that a good idea?

AOC won her seat when she primaried an (IIRC) 8-term incumbent Joe Crowley. AOC was a fresh face with ideas that were to the left of the more centrist Crowley. Crowley didn't take the notion that she could win seriously, and didn't get off his ass and campaign. AOC won. That demonstrates a big part of why primaries are important - do you still represent the current thinking of party members in your state or district. AOC is being primaried, I'd point out. I she wins, she will come out a better and stronger politician.

I'm not a Bernie supporter, but I thought primarying some Dems with young, fresh faces by "Our Revolution" was a good thing. The worst thing a poltician can be is comfortable and/or complacent. Americans of both sides of the political spectrum are tired of politicians parking themselves in DC; cozying up to lobbyists that ultimately fund their reelection campaigns; and becoming fixtures. Most in Congress are smart enough to help some constituents in a way that makes the news, or be seen as co-sponsoring the Veterans Hospital or National Cemetery in their district to be perceived as doing a good job. So they keep getting reelected. What AOC did - even if it wasn't terribly successful - is make incumbents defend their records and remind the voters of what is/isn't good about them - and hopefully make them more responsive to the issues of concern to voters in 2020, as opposed to the concerns of the voters when they first came to Congress.

[BlueWI]

223. THIS.

Real Democrats sounds like a bot-generated line, crafted for fear mongering and division, and couldn't be more poorly timed.

About 20% of online political posting is by bots, according to one article I read. A cheap way to sow divisions and keep Democrats from winning.

Working locally and posting about policy are essentially to a Democratic wave in 2020.

[JudyM]

232. Wishing this post could be pinned to the top of this forum.

Some offset to the rabid attackers fomenting hate here.

[Demsrule86]

143. I agree.

[brutus smith]

139. "I will never get over 16"

Well, there you have it.

[Demsrule86]

145. But I will vote for the nominee even if it is Sanders in the general.

But I won`t support him in a primary ever.

[Demsrule86]

162. I would also add...that I hold Warren completely blameless for the 2016 general.

She worked hard for Hillary. I admire Warren...I really do. I don't always agree with her, but she has good character and is smart. The only reason I support Biden over Warren is my belief she won't win the rust belt...and last week she came out in favor of Trump's new "NAFTA". I suppose she is courting the Iowa farmers. I understand that, but this makes her unelectable IMHO in WI, MI and PA...not many people noticed this yet, but they will, and I can only imagine the ads Trump would run.

I had planned to throw my support to her honestly if it looked like Sanders would win the nomination in the primary-my state votes pretty late, as I think she is much better than Sanders...but this team rhetoric is disturbing...I do not want my vote used to make Sanders the nominee in a brokered convention; if we have a brokered convention, we will surely lose too...I will vote for him and anyone else in the general.

[Bradshaw3]

121. +1,000,000

Some here simply cannot get over 2016 and seem to want to make the same mistakes made back then. Blame, blame, blame while ignoring the fact they could very well be sowing the seeds for a repeat in 2020.

[Demsrule86]

160. Really, so you don't think having a brokered convention and taking two candidates delegates and

giving one of them the nomination- and we all know it won't be Warren- is just fine? The individual candidate with the most delegates should win- end of story...either Sanders or Warren should get out of the race if they don't want the the progressive( and I really don't think by the way that they are anymore or less a progressive than Biden) vote diluted. In the end, I do believe that supers would be forced to put the individual candidate over the top should this happen...now that would be a mess.

Here it is...I don't forgive or forget 16 as we have Trump as the result and years of future misery...Sanders didn't support Hillary enough in the General IMHO. We almost won ...a little more effort could have paid off. So I won't vote for him in the primary but I will vote for and work my ass off for any nominee in the general...including Sanders because he is better than Trump and I have a brain.

[CTyankee]

190. I'm supporting Warren but I do like what Steyer has to say and I agree with your assessment of

him. I don't consider him presidential material the way I do Warren. Plus, we need a woman president (what the hell America?!) who is gonna do what needs to be done.

[Mike Nelson]

4. I think the one with greater potential is...

... Warren. I know they say she's in a lull, and Sanders is in a surge. I think Warren's supporters are more "in play" than Sanders' supporters. Sanders has a bigger group that are not going anywhere without Sanders (they're possibly the strongest of all). Warren supporters include a group that will come and go... but I think she can hold them as the field narrows - and that would be a larger overall number.

[getagrip_already]

64. huh?

sanders is not surging. He is basically just spinning in his wheelchair.

Sure, there ever so slight changes, but the race is largely static.

As long as warren stays in, it may hurt bernie more than biden though. Depends who they see number 2 as.

But bernie is anti-woman, so I guess the woman at least might be more pro-joe. Could go either way.

[Demsrule86]

146. I like Warren. But I dont think she can win the states we need to win in

order to beat Trump.

[BlueMTexpat]

180. I am a Warren supporter

and I am NOT going anywhere, in spite of scare-tactic OPs like this.

In fact, OPs like this piss me off.

[blm]

5. If your camp REALLY cared it wouldn't have attacked Warren for 3mths as it laid off

Last edited Fri Jan 10, 2020, 10:09 AM - Edit history (1)

Bernie because you assumed his health problems neutralized hm.

If your camp was REALLY all about the Dem party it would have acknowledged that Warren was a great compromise between the two wings of the party and was better suited to unite the party afterwards. But it didn’t like those polls then and decided to change that by relentlessly attacking Warren as a liar, a stubborn woman, and not even a real Democrat.

YOUR camp was behind Sanders surge. It had great success in attacking Warren as an enemy. It must be so proud.

Now Biden camp wants to blame Warren and her supporters for Sanders’ surge and quite possibly the nomination? That’s a lie, a manipulative lie. Blame yourselves.

[Bummfuzzle]

14. +1.

[yuiyoshida]

28. This!

[kag]

77. Thank you.

Yes. This OP tries to make itself sound like a "favor" to Warren supporters, warning them about "scary" Bernie. It's bullshit.

[ms liberty]

133. This. n/t

[Hassin Bin Sober]

7. .

[redqueen]

8. Sharing a tweet from some random instead of linking directly to the intercept?

Why not just use the Intercept piece? (rhetorical)

Edit to add: ! Yikes!

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Hassin Bin Sober]

75. She seems nice...

[Baitball Blogger]

9. Reminder: The primary belongs to us.

We’ll come together in the General.

[still_one]

10. I don't agree with that assessment, and I sure wouldn't follow the analysis of the Intercept

I believe most Warren supporters are independent thinkers, something I do not believe accurately describes many Sanders voters, which is why Sanders cannot move beyond his base

The polls are very volatile at this time, there are still a lot of undecided voters out their, and we still have too many candidates running

I believe by the time we get to Super Tuesday we will have a much clearer picture, especially if the lower tier candidates drop out, which I think they will

[sheshe2]

110. As a Warren supporter, I thank you.

My vote will never be for Sanders in the primary. GE yes, primary...never.

[Autumn]

11. I don't know how old your son is but hatred is a learned response.

This may help you with your son.

https://www.parents.com/parenting/better-parenting/advice/how-to-teach-your-kids-to-fight-hate-an-age-by-age-guide/

Think back to when you were small, when you first noticed that some people differed from you. You noticed but didn’t much care. At school or on your block, you’d hang with anyone who wanted to play, whether or not their skin, religion, physical ability, or family was like yours. You knew the streetlight’s glow meant dinnertime, the bell’s trill meant recess’s end, and that differences between people were real but benign, value-neutral.

So it rattled your little world to learn that for some, difference inspires disgust, rage, hatred. You learned this slowly, over years. From the way your uncle sneered at the boys on the corner; from an adult’s whispered joke when she thought you couldn’t hear or understand. (Adults always underestimate what kids hear and understand.) Maybe you learned about difference because you had to: “There are people who don’t like us because of who we are,” your dad said, “so we must be careful.” And eventually, you learned, from footage of cops clubbing a crouching man or from Anne Frank’s diary, that there are people who so loathe difference they will hurt or kill over it.

Now adult-you sees hate—racism, misogyny, anti-Semitism, homophobia, transphobia—enjoying a grotesque golden age. You worry that your child will soon learn the same sad truths you did, except earlier, more terrifyingly. You worry that when he’s alone in his bed or quiet in the car, he’s thinking not of Saturday’s cartoons but of yesterday’s carnage, trying to make sense of some grisly headline that tore across the screen before you could change the channel. You worry that what he sees could someday change him—that he might begin to believe hateful things too.

[Gothmog]

15. His sister was called the c-word and cursed at by sanders delegates at the national convention

Last edited Thu Jan 9, 2020, 03:12 PM - Edit history (1)

He saw and heard about sanders delegates booing John Lewis. I have autographed copies of two of Lewis' books that my son reminded me that he is supposed to get.

Again, my son is a maxed out Warren donor but he does not want to support sanders

[Autumn]

17. I'm sure you have video right? You should spread that video far and wide. nt

[Gothmog]

19. I was at the National Convention

I saw the conduct of sanders delegates up close and first hand. I was screamed at and called names but that does not matter to me. As a father, the attack on my daughter is truly sad. Her brother has every right to be upset with this conduct.

As for video, there is a ton of video of the conduct of sanders delegates that will come out if sanders is ever deemed to be a viable candidate worth vetting. Right now, the media knows that sanders will not be the nominee and so that there is no need to fully vet sanders.

[Autumn]

24. Like I said. Post the video. Sorry, but I can't take your word for it without proof.

I've seen people say things like that before and it's been often not true so I've learned to be skeptical .

[Gothmog]

25. I was there and I saw what happen

If you want video, you will see if sanders is ever deemed to be a viable candidate in the real world. For real campaigns, delegates are carefully vetted by their candidates because these delegates represent their candidates. If sanders becomes viable, then these videos will come out. The video of John Lewis, Elijah Cummings and Stacy Abrams being booed would make great ads

[George II]

29. Wow, you can't possibly be telling the truth because you didn't get a video of it....

...or have "proof"! Don't you know you have to walk around all your life with a video camera just in case you or your daughter are cursed at or swarmed. I know I won't leave the house without a video camera, just in case!!!

By the way, there IS a video of John Lewis being booed at the Convention and outside the Convention Hall.

Samantha Bee certainly noticed it, but then again she's Canadian:

[Gothmog]

45. I was yelled at and called names by sanders delegates

Yelling at a lawyer is a waste of time and I really did not care because there was no way that I was going to change my vote as a delegate and support sanders. As a parent, I am upset that sanders delegates cursed at and called my daughter the c-word because she would not try to get me to change my vote.

I am not worried about sanders getting the nomination. No one really believes that sanders will be the nominee which is why the medial is not vetting him

[ehrnst]

69. And when the media does dare vet or fact check, they are swarmed as being "corporatist tools"

if their findings don't flatter the candidate.

[Autumn]

50. Thanks for making my point George. That video is obviously fake, a half blind person can

see that's Bernie's head on a woman's body.

[George II]

58. You didn't watch the video, just the opening still. It's about 7 minutes long, showing Lewis...

...being booed outside the hall in the morning and the demonstrations outside the hall later in the day.

BTW, that scene you're talking about IS real, his supporters were wearing those masks.

So, in summary, I most certainly did not make your point.

[ehrnst]

68. DON'T GO BRINGING FACTS INTO THIS!!!

No FAIR!

[Gothmog]

81. I was very amused by this also

[George II]

93. "There are none so blind as those who will not see"

[highplainsdem]

90. There were lots of news stories about Sanders supporters behaving badly at the 2016 DNC. Here's one

from NPR:

https://www.npr.org/2016/07/25/487385184/raucous-repeated-chants-of-bernie-and-hillary-fill-convention-hall-on-day-1

The first night of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia was marked by acrimony despite constant calls for unity by party leaders.

Still reeling from the revelations of an email leak, supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders disrupted the proceedings throughout the night with boos and jeers. A night that was supposed to mark the beginning of a party coalescing behind its presidential nominee was instead punctuated by acts of division.

The opening invocation was interrupted with chants of "Bernie! Bernie!" Rep. Elijah Cummings was interrupted by chants against the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Some in the crowd shushed Sanders supporters when they began chanting during first lady Michelle Obama's speech.

-snip-

First lady Michelle Obama spoke right before Sanders. She extolled the virtues of the United States, and without naming him, she made the case against GOP nominee Donald Trump.

-snip-

Obama was not immune from boos. Sanders supporters booed and began chanting "Bernie! Bernie!" as Obama endorsed Clinton.

-snip-

The prime-time portion of the convention began with comedian Sarah Silverman, who came onstage with Sen. Al Franken of Minnesota in an attempt to unify the crowd. It backfired.

They are a Clinton supporter (Franken) and a Sanders supporter (Silverman), who were there to tell the crowd a tale of how they overcame their differences.

Silverman made it clear that she was a Sanders supporter from the beginning, but now it was time to get behind Clinton.

-snip-

Sanders' supporters were still reeling from emails published by WikiLeaks earlier this week that appear to show Democratic officials had favored Clinton over Sanders during the primaries.

So they continued to loudly boo and chant "Bernie, Bernie!" as Silverman continued her speech.

Silverman finished and stood next to a stunned Franken.

"Can I just say?" Silverman said. "To the 'Bernie or Bust' people, you're being ridiculous."

-snip-

It doesn't surprise me at all to hear that when Sanders supporters were happy to boo John Lewis and Michelle Obama, they'd also swear at Clinton delegates.

[betsuni]

100. Bernie's supporters even disrupted HIM when he said Trump must be defeated, Hillary elected!

He is solely responsible for this: "Trump is a bully and a demagogue" is met with cries from his supporters, "So is she!'

[George II]

91. Have you watched the video yet?

[betsuni]

105. That's Full Frontal with Samantha Bee.

The convention was a public event and there were cameras there.

[UniteFightBack]

99. OMG these Bernie or Bust people are just like deplorables only they use bigger words. nt

[betsuni]

101. I suddenly remembered the "fart-in" they wanted to do.

[Autumn]

33. If you want video, you will see if sanders is ever deemed to be a viable candidate in the real world

??? I don't understand that so I think I'll just end the conversation here. By the way, delegates are selected at the state level so, no, Bernie doesn't vet his delegates.

[Gothmog]

43. sanders is not considered viable in the real world and so there is no need to vet him

sanders is a weak candidate who has a comparatively small base that is not going to expand. sanders has no chance of becoming the nominee without significant support from African American voters. That is not going to happen and so the media does not need to vet sanders.

If sanders ever does start to gain support in the African American community these videos were would come out.

[Autumn]

44. FYI delegates are selected at the state level, not by the candidate. No vetting by the candidate

The party's presidential nominee is chosen primarily by pledged delegates, which are in turn selected through a series of individual state caucuses and primary elections.

[Gothmog]

55. You are totally and completely wrong

Under the rules for all state parties, the candidate has absolute approval right over pledged delegates. I helped to vet Clinton delegates and I know who vetted me. At the Texas state convention, the sanders campaign rejected a sanders delegates who elected in his senate district convention because that delegate would not tell the campaign that he hated Hillary Clinton. That young man was evidently screamed at by the sanders campaign. The Texas state party had to allow the sanders campaign to remove this young man but then the party invited this young man to go to the convention as a guest of the party.

BTW, the Clinton campaign repeatedly told us that we were representing Hillary Clinton and to do our best to ignore the horrible conduct of the sanders delegates. I was yelled at and called names by sanders delegates but yelling at a lawyer is a waste of time and effort. As a father, I do object to sanders delegates cursing my daughter and calling her the c-word. If that makes me a bad parent, I can live with that.

Again your claim is totally wrong

[ehrnst]

62. I have heard about that behavior from more than one person who was present.

But I don't have video, so I guess that means they're lying too.

I predict an outsized reaction from someone being shown they are wrong....

[Autumn]

67. Pledged delegates are selected through a series of individual state caucuses and primary elections.

You might have vetted them but I've never heard of a candidate vetting them. Done.

[Gothmog]

78. You are wrong

I was a delegate and I have read the rules. It takes a great deal of hard work to be elected as a delegate to the national convention

I saw a sanders supporter who was duly elected in his equivalent of county caucus. Ecause he would state that he hated Hillary Clinton

[ehrnst]

57. Well, in caucuses the people don't vote. A small group does all the deciding for the population.

So someone with very energetic or overbearing delegates will do much better in caucuses than primaries.

Of course caucuses are run and paid for by the party, whereas primaries are run and paid for by the state.

If a party was going to interfere in candidate selection they would have a much better chance of doing that in a caucus.

But like Gothmog said, you are wrong - the candidate has absolute approval/refusal rights over pledged delegates.

[Gothmog]

118. I know how the process works in Texas and I have read up on other states

In Texas, approximately 50% of the delegates are allocated based on the results of the vote in the 31 state senate districts. The Texas Democratic Party is in effect governed by officials (one male and one female) elected from each of the 31 state senate districts. In my district, we had 4 delegates allocated and Hillary got 76% of the vote in my state senate district and so she got 3 of the four available delegates. The other 50% of the delegates are selected statewide by the nominations committee based on the state wide vote. Clinton got 65% of the vote statewide and sanders got 35% of the vote and so Clinton got 65% of the statewide allocation.

I ran as a delegate for my senate district and I was also eligible to be a statewide delegate if I was not elected in my senate district.. In March following the primary and county convention, you could apply to be a delegate by filing an application where you swear under penalty of perjury to support the nominee of the party. In this application, you state which candidate you voted for in the primary and that is the candidate who you agree to support at the national convention. This application has to be notarized and is given to the applicable campaign.

All delegates including pledged delegates are free to change their vote and vote for someone other than their pledged candidate. This is why all campaigns carefully vet their pledged delegates. Each campaigns has absolute approval right over their pledged delegates. The Clinton campaign vetted all of her delegates. I helped vet delegates and I know who vetted me. After this step, the campaigning begins. I sent letters to every delegate scheduled to come to the state convention in my Senate District. I think that I sent out 190 letters. Luckily, I was a maxed out donor for Clinton had I had a great picture of me taken with Clinton that I used in my materials. I also had a resume attached describing what I have done for the party including my efforts on voter protection. I was told by a former national delegate to cut my resume down to two pages which advise I followed. We also sent e-mails out to all of the delegates. Some candidates sent out short e-mails. A couple had cute pictures.

At the convention, all of the delegates in each senate district meet as a caucus. We voted for delegates by secret ballot. The caucus also elected people to serve on the nominations and other committees (I have been on the rules committee a couple of times) and we voted on the person who would be our elector in the Electoral College. The party vets people who are selected as electors. One sanders supporter asked to be elected as a lark and he got voted down in favor of a long time county party chair who everyone trusted.

The delegates selected at the senate district caucuses were announced that night and the statewide delegates were selected by the nominations committee and approved by the entire caucus on Saturday. There was one sanders delegate who was elected in his senate district caucus but was rejected by the sanders campaign due to the fact that this delegate refussed to state that he hated Clinton. The state party invited that young man to be a guest at the National Convention and I met him while he worked at the convention.

The process is somewhat similar in other states with primaries. Most other states allocate their delegates among congressional districts. Yes, I know that Texas is different. At the National Convention, the Clinton delegates were ordered to ignore the bad behavior of the sanders delegates.

I hope that this explanation of the process helps. The approval rights of delegates by campaigns is a critical part of the process.

[Gothmog]

235. Nuts & Bolts: Attending a convention can be expensive. Here's how to afford it

I found this article to be interesting and accurate https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/1/12/1910662/-Nuts-amp-Bolts-Attending-a-convention-can-be-expensive-Here-s-how-to-afford-it

t’s another Saturday, so for those who tune in, welcome to a diary discussing the Nuts & Bolts of a Democratic Campaign. If you’ve missed out, you can catch up anytime: Just visit our group or follow Nuts & Bolts Guide. Every week I tackle issues I’ve been asked about, and, with the help of a lot of great minds, we put together a series aimed at helping small campaigns.

Last week, I said that for the first time we’d go behind the scenes of the selection process for delegates to the national convention. This process involves a commitment to run for delegate, the expectation of a delegate, and the expenses to be a delegate.

One of the biggest factors determining who will be willing to run for delegate is in the last category: it can be incredibly expensive to be a delegate to a national convention. Between travel expenses, hotels, food and swag plus time off of work, people can find attending a convention to be particularly expensive and getting people to vote for them daunting. This week, we’re going to talk about how you can plan those expenses and what they will look like in Milwaukee. I’m also going to address how you build connections to get the votes you need to become a delegate.

You’ve decided to become a delegate

Some states provide forms, like Texas. In other states you just show up. In some you campaign for the slot in a direct process. We’ll cover more of that later. But in all states, you will find that a big part of how you get to a convention, budget for it, and provide for funding your attendance will be expenditures yo

u take on. So, if you’ve decided to become a delegate, let’s talk about different ways you have expenses or can contain expenses.

[ehrnst]

74. So much for "ending the conversation right here."

[George II]

73. Really?

Pledged delegates are elected or chosen at the state or local level, with the understanding that they will support a particular candidate at the convention. Pledged delegates are, however, not actually bound to vote for that candidate, thus the candidates are allowed to periodically review the list of delegates and eliminate any of those they feel would not be supportive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delegate_(American_politics)

[ehrnst]

52. Someone is calling you a liar, I guess.

[Gothmog]

56. Calling a lawyer names is a waste of time and effort

I am amused by this

[ehrnst]

60. Another form of "shoot the messenger."

[Gothmog]

79. I was amused by this

I am also evidently a bad parent because my son objected to his sister being cursed at and called the c-word by sanders delegates

[NYMinute]

48. Not every truthful statement has a video

nor does every statement without a video false.

It is asinine to imply that someone is lying about their first hand experience because there is no video. I think you should delete that post.

btw, I ate 3 eggs for breakfast, sunny-side up. I don't have a video and I am not making it up.

[Autumn]

54. Nope, not going to delete it. All I said is if he has video of that he should post it far and wide.

I'm always skeptical about smears and events that are horrible like that that are not on video.

[NYMinute]

72. Of course you won't delete it.

When one is blindly devoted to something, it becomes a matter of faith.

Intelligent opposition is asked to provide evidence of every little thing. When the evidence is provided, it is deemed fake because it doesn't align with one's bias.

?

[Blue_true]

92. My belief is that you called the person a liar for recounting a personal experience.

The person has over three years mentioned how angry the Georgia delegation was about how Rep. Lewis was treated and how the Texas and Georgia delegations had to share shuttles to the convention and I think there was some account of a breakfast a couple year back.

The person has talked about the autrocious conduct of the Sanders delegates over the last three years. If you don't know that I can't imagine why you don't.

I have no reason not to believe the person's account. And I am offended by your conduct.

[Gothmog]

119. I am not going to refight the 2016 primary

I know what I saw and I know that there are videos of what happened that will come out if these videos are needed. I can post a ton of articles about the conduct of the sanders delegates at the national convention and I know that there are Clinton campaign staffers who would love to verify these facts. There are a ton of tweets about the poor conduct of sanders delegates but most of these tweets contain language about sanders that I am not comfortable posting on this board

There is no need for this given the fact that sanders will not be the nominee and that sanders is not likely to increase the amount of support from African American voters. Without significant support from African American voters, there is nt chance that sanders will be the nominee and there is no need for these videos to come out

As for the conduct of the above poster, trying to insult a lawyer is a waste of time and effort. I was amused by these posts

[Blue_true]

224. I am not trying to refight the 2016 prinary either.

The primary was over when the negative conduct occurred.

I believe that you are right, the 2020 primary is beginning to shape up toward a conclusion, we will see how that goes once the voting starts. I know from reading your past posts how passionate you are about policy issues like good health care for all and income equality, so maybe some of that was in your reply and I misread it, anyway, let's just let the 2020 primary unfold and vote for our first choice and once that is settled, join hands to battle Trump with everything that we have. Deal?

[ForEverGlades]

237. Poor Conduct?

Hmm....now refresh my memory. why did Debbie Wasserman Schultz resign again?

[Gothmog]

238. So booing Congressman John Lewis was good conduct?

Was booing Congressmen John Lewis and Elijah Cummings acceptable conduct. Was it okay to boo Stacy Abrams? The Russians would use this conduct to suppress the African American vote if sanders was the nominee.

[Demsrule86]

85. Anyone at the convention could tell pretty much the same thing.

[Blue_true]

86. The poster has recounted that event several times here on DU.

The last time prior to the reply to your post was to me a day ago. Once I heard the account, I remembered that the poster had mentioned the incident at the convention several times earlier over the last ~ three years.

[brooklynite]

87. I can't speak to personal insults by Sanders supporters...

...but I have photos from the Convention Hall of them not being supportive of the Democratic Party.

[Autumn]

89. I can't speak to personal insults by Sanders supporters either. When we caucused I saw

no rudeness from either side. Never been to a convention but I've seen a few rowdy ones on TV years back. That's the nature of the beast I guess.

[mountain grammy]

114. Chicago, 1968 comes to mind.

The whole world was watching

[JudyM]

16. So true.

[ehrnst]

37. Goodness me, Gothmog must have really hit a nerve...

Attempting to needle someone using their kids.

Perhaps some deep breaths will help you to calm down.

[Autumn]

40. It did enough for you to respond.

[ehrnst]

42. I'm talking about your attempt to needle Gothmog via their attacking their son

and their parenting.

That indicates some real deep, angry reaction to what Gothmog shared.

Deep breaths... Deep breaths...

[lapucelle]

130. Could you please post some images of your credentials in neurobiology?

Sorry, but "I read it in a magazine" does not count as expertise in pretty much anything, least of all the complex sciences.

[betsuni]

134. Yes. What happened to "Sorry, but I can't take your word for it without proof"?

Videos or it didn't happen.

[lapucelle]

161. "Videos or it didn't happen" is a form of entitled gaslighting. N/T

[Autumn]

167. I never said I had any credentials in neurobiology so you're out of luck on that. But kudos for

the attempt. There's been a lot of discussion on hate the last few years. Maybe you missed a few.

[lapucelle]

172. Those who know little to little to nothing about a specialized topic

should probably refrain from making broad, general pronouncements, especially any that demonstrate a misreading of something as basic, facile, and superficial as a magazine article.

[Autumn]

173. That would shut up just about everyone here wouldn't it.

[lapucelle]

182. I don't think it would, at least not for me or like-situated allies.

Others, however, are qualified to speak for themselves and are probably the best judge of personal shortcomings.

[Cary]

221. Now listening to:

[Bummfuzzle]

12. Wow. So vote Biden because he is mostly likely to beat Trump and vote Biden because might

help Sanders. That is a hell of a campaign to run on.

[progressoid]

13. The Intercept?

I thought DU declared The Intercept some irrelevant fringe publication.

[Autumn]

22. In order for a publication to be an irrelevant fringe publication it must first

post positives about Bernie.

[progressoid]

26. Oh, sure. That makes sense.

[ehrnst]

46. The OP was commenting on an Intercept article's claims, not promoting it.

It that clearer?

You're welcome.

[BeyondGeography]

102. Interesting to see Biden supporters embracing The Intercept

In case they missed some of their other coverage:

Even Hunter Biden Admits His Work in Ukraine Was a Mistake. Why Can’t His Father Say That?
https://theintercept.com/2019/12/07/joe-biden-iowa-voter-hunter-damn-liar/

Joe Biden’s Family Has Been Cashing in on His Career for Decades. Democrats Need to Acknowledge That
https://theintercept.com/2019/10/09/joe-hunter-biden-family-money/

Joe Biden’s Mysterious Claim That He Whipped Votes for the CFPB
https://prospect.org/politics/joe-biden-mysterious-claim-whipped-votes-cfpb/
(In partnership with The Intercept.)

[redqueen]

206. I think when those are posted it's called a right wing rag.

But ... well ... y'know ...

[marlakay]

18. Works for me

I supported Bernie last time.

Thanks for the Biden supporters pointing this out. Sure your trying to be helpful.

[TCJ70]

20. I'm fine with either of them being our candidate. So...oh well. n/t

[hurl]

21. Seems a little far-fetched to me

Almost a Russian accent to it

[NYMinute]

23. Warren is already on the hot seat with Clinton supporters like me

[blm]

34. Not with me. Warren was a great campaign surrogate for HRC

and I wish the campaign manager had taken her advice when she urged the campaign to speak more to working class voters to counter Trump’s outreach to them based in lies.

[NYMinute]

53. She was a great supporter after all the divisiveness had set in.

There are a lot of investors who jump on a stock after it goes public but investing in seed and early stage is far more important. Once the companies go public, they don't need money but earlier they are desperate for investors.

[blm]

61. Well, she was being urged by Biden at the time to stick with him

and run as his VP because he was prepared to step in and run if Clinton faltered.

BTW, you really want to blame Warren for 2016 after the fact and in advance of 2020 if Biden loses the nomination to Sanders?

Wow.

[NYMinute]

66. Cool story

Biden had decided not to run early - before NH.

[blm]

104. Biden wanted to run and wanted Warren with him.

He was prepared to jump in if Clinton faltered.

We all KNOW he decided not to run.

He was still PREPARED to jump in if the opening appeared.

[NYMinute]

106. He was not going to run. He has been at loggerheads with Warren

This story is false unless you show me a link. If there is a credible link, I'll eat crow.

[blm]

109. Uh, it's well known. Perhaps you missed all the reports.

You seriously are only hearing this now?

Biden wanted Warren as his VP
The Massachusetts senator was 'noncommittal,' but warned of a backlash against his pro-Wall Street votes in Senate.
By GLENN THRUSH and ANNIE KARNI 05/12/2016 05:23 AM EDT

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/joe-biden-elizabeth-warren-223104

[Demsrule86]

147. It is not true.

[betsuni]

116. Please tell us why.

[sheshe2]

115. Not with me.

I also do not trash Biden.

[Fiendish Thingy]

27. Ok by me - they are my top 2 choices nt

[Bleacher Creature]

30. My preference is Warren, then Klobuchar, then Biden.

I'd be happy with any of those three being the nominee.

I also find the idea of nominating a guy who's spent his entire career bashing our party appalling, and see almost no scenario under which I'd support Sanders in the primary.

[TidalWave46]

31. This is a highly inaccurate statement.

"We plan to win. If Warren and Sanders together have a democratic mandate come convention, one of them is going to be president. That’s not negotiable."

It's actually complete bullshit.

[blm]

36. This is just a manipulative attempt to attack Warren and blame her supporters

for Bernie’s surge when their own camp is to blame.

[TidalWave46]

41. Maybe I don't recognize what you are saying because I am also a Warren supporter.

No matter how much information people are given the don't seem to get that Warren supporters and Sanders supporters are not interchangeable. Just like Biden supporters and Klobuchar supporters are not interchangeable.

That and I think there is only one Warren supporter here who rubs me the wrong way. That means I think they rock.

[blm]

47. I see Biden camp attempting to guilt Warren supporters into dropping her

for Biden. I found the OP and this strategy to be very manipulative.

[TidalWave46]

63. Hard to blame us. I'm even working on you right here.

But the tweet being referenced is actually dishonest. That is no the way to go after Warren supporters. If this is something that will influence them they will see it with their own eyes and adjust accordingly as states keep voting.

[blm]

71. The tweet IS dishonest. And Biden camp's use of it is dishonest

and manipulative. Completely ignoring their own responsibility for Sanders surge as they attempt to make Warren and her supporters the bad guys.

[Bummfuzzle]

98. This.

[Demsrule86]

168. Here is one of more than a few posts on this subject...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287376907

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

35. Huh?

Apparently people are assuming no one will get to the convention with the nomination sewn up. Which is so unlikely to happen that this OP is essentially spewing ignorance.

As long as I've been conscious, every single Presidential election year there are dire predictions of a brokered convention. I feel safe in saying that simply won't happen. After the first two or three or at most four primaries most of the current candidates will drop out. And the way delegates are assigned almost guarantees that around the time half of the states have had their primaries, the nominee will be obvious.

[blm]

38. The manipulation strategy is pretty obvious.

[TCJ70]

49. This OP is a fear/hate-based attempt to try and move Warren supporters to Biden...

...using peoples fear/hate of Sanders as a motivator. It's transparent, ugly, and wrong.

[blm]

65. Exactly

They bludgeon Warren for months then blame her and her supporters for the results.

[W_HAMILTON]

39. This is one of the reasons why I recently switched my support from Warren to Biden.

The only vote that I regret casting in my life is my vote for Sanders in the 2016 primary.

I will NOT allow my vote in this primary to be used to help that man win the nomination.

Personally, I think this question should be asked of each candidate at the debate, what they plan to do with their delegates in the event of a brokered convention where they themselves cannot win.

[Heartstrings]

59. +1000. Nt

[janterry]

51. I'm fine with that

n/t

[Baclava]

70. Complete fucking bullshit, Warren supporters are going to vote for Liz

Alert!

[bluedye33139]

76. That intercept article reaches high heights of delusional paranoia

The concluding passage describes progressives winning majority and being overpowered by the corporatists!

Holy crap, my IQ dropped 20 points just reading that s***.

[blm]

112. And opportunists are using it to lay guilt on Warren supporters

if they lose the nomination to Sanders.

Fer chrissakes, if they truly cared about the party possibly nominating Sanders they wouldn’t have aimed all their fire at Warren for 3mths straight.

[Gothmog]

124. I am not a fan of that publication

I read the entire article to try to understand the rationale. I fear that I also May have lost some IQ points from reading this article. I have refrained from posting excepts from this article on this thread but there are some deeply disturbed claims made in that article

[lame54]

88. My vote for Warren will be for Warren...

But thank you for your condescension

[milestogo]

94. Warren is my first choice. Bernie's my second.

[NurseJackie]

95. Great post! Thank you!

[betsuni]

96. K&R

[TexasTowelie]

97. K&R for further consideration. nt

[karynnj]

103. Just because a progressive group purposes this, does not make it so

For one, they are assuming a result that has not occurred in decades. Only if we complete the primaries and no one has emerged as getting 50 percent or more of the pledged delegates would there idea even come into play.

In fact, if what they are thinking is maybe a Biden 45, Sanders 30, Warren 25. Do you know the 2020 rules as to whether they can merge their delegates? In the past, they could not.

[squirecam]

113. Then

Biden would have the most delegates and should be the nominee.

The supers have never taken away the nomination from the person with the most votes. Nor should they.

[karynnj]

120. I completely agree. Nt

[crazytown]

111. A vote for Warren is a vote for Sanders? Vile.

Poster lost what respect I had for him.

[ms liberty]

135. Also this. n/t

[Demsrule86]

157. Have you not seen it here? How Sanders and Warren are a team? You couldn't

have missed it. Of course most imply Sanders is the nominee and not Warren. She seems to be the `helper`.

[jcgoldie]

117. This is bullshit

Nice fearmongering.

[Bradshaw3]

122. Biden supporters need to know they are hurting their candidate with this kind of trashing of others

It's a daily occurence on here and it only serves to divide and demoralize. I see the same kind of thing that happened in 2016 happening again here and it only works to hurt whoever is the nominee in 2020, and that includes Biden.

[Demsrule86]

152. Did you see the lies put out in a Sanders news letter about Biden?

Every other post in this forum is an attack on Biden.

[tonedevil]

164. But what about... /nt

[dchill]

127. We haven't even had our first primary.

Can't we just see what shakes out?

[Wabbajack_]

131. 2 ideologically candidates might support each other?

Holy shit! The horror!!!!

[Demsrule86]

153. That depends. First of all Warren is not the same as Sanders.

Secondly, there are Clinton supporters in Warren`s numbers. Some won't support Sanders. By the way, Warren is not a socialist but a capitalist...huge difference.

[duforsure]

132. A vote for warren

In the primaries is still a vote for her, and spin or predictions won't sway me towards changing from her. If she or other candidates lose then onto the winning candidate, but I think her intellect and her experience is far ahead of others, and why I will support her becoming our next President. We need a woman to be President , and a lot more of them in Congress , and minorities also. She's the most competent candidate in my opinion easily ahead of everyone else.

[Demsrule86]

155. That is not true. The team plan is for all of Warrens delegates to

Last edited Fri Jan 10, 2020, 10:39 AM - Edit history (1)

vote for Sanders on the second ballot... overcoming an individual candidate with the most delegates. It has been posted here. That would be a deal breaker for me if i supported Warren,

[KayF]

137. Warren supporters hating Sanders?

wtf?

[RandiFan1290]

140. Beware of people that are here only to divide us. nt

[Demsrule86]

148. Former Clinton supporters like me who feel he did not support her in the general

sufficiently. But will of course vote for him in a general....but not a primary.

[DaDeacon]

149. This shit is gotten fucking tired ...

Sanders is not an enemy he's a candidate if he wins the nomination are you not going to vote for him? If not you no good to me or the. The party I belong to is full of progressive ideas and leadership if you think someone can do the job great but enough the "but not this one" shit. We win by unity at the end of the day. If we make the divide so great now that unity will be lost.

[Demsrule86]

150. No one said that. Although,I do worry about enthusiasm ...

I will vote for him in a general.

[DaDeacon]

154. Really?!?!

He has the largest support of 18-35 year olds the second largest African American support base and has going against trump ?!? Come on.

[Demsrule86]

156. Older voters are more reliable and vote more regularly, wouldnt want to dampen their

enthusiasm. I do not believe the 18 -35 aged voters can win a general by themselves.

[DaDeacon]

185. No one can do it alone!!!

That's really the point. Enthusiasm gets you excited rallies and a good ground game. It gets People to the polls. Safe bets dont win big. When Democratic candidates win we win on long shots. Presenting Republican lite NEVER WORKS!

[blm]

151. I hope Gothmog takes the time consider your point.

[Gothmog]

165. If sanders is the nominee, trump will win 45+ states

I will support the nominee of the party. I also want to defeat trump and I doubt that sanders can beat trump

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Demsrule86]

171. We will in all likelihood lose Virginia which would be a devastating loss...if Biden is not the

nominee.

[Gothmog]

174. Biden is the only Democrats who can pick up both Florida and Virginia

Link to tweet

[Demsrule86]

177. This is true. A win in Florida would mean Trump loses;how can we not nominate a candidate who can

do this?

[DaDeacon]

186. Inch or a mile.

Loss is a loss.
I would rather lose for principle and ideas that I honestly believe instead compromise that doesn't pull anyone over.

[blm]

187. Warren can and you are attacking her candidacy and

blatantly attempting to manipulate her supporters into blaming themselves for Biden camp’s misguided strategy of spending 3months attacking her while laying off Sanders. Sanders surge is thanks to Biden and Buttegieg strategies of focusing your attacks on Elizabeth Warren.

Hard to believe good old Gothmog would do that here, yet you did.

[Gothmog]

192. Warren will also lose to trump also but probably by less than sanders

The Morning Consult polling shows that 33% of Warren voters may like sanders as their second choice but the same polling also shows that 67% of Warren supporters prefer different candidates. https://morningconsult.com/2020-democratic-primary/ These voters should be allowed to take into account that a large number of sanders supporters are pushing the concept of a joint ticket or a scheme where Warren would ask her delegates to vote for sanders. Robert Reich and other sanders fans are pushing this concept. There was a 160+ thread on Reich's concept a while back https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287376907

I will be blunt. Either Warren or sanders at the top of the ticket would kill down ballot candidates in Texas. I and other real democrats have been working very hard to turn Texas blue. We have gone from 101 republicans in the state house of representatives compared to 49 Democrats after the 2010 election to only needing 9 seats to flip control of the Texas house. Texas is projected to pick up three new congressional seats after the 2020 census and so control of the Texas house is critical. Texas picked up two congressional seats in 2018 (Lizzie Fletcher and Colin Allred) and the DCCC is targeting six additional seats.

It is clear that MFA and taking away private insurance from 160 million voters will kill down ballot candidates in Texas. There is great polling that shows that if Joe Biden is the nominee, Texas will be a battleground state. If Texas is a battleground state, we have a good chance of picking up control of the Texas house (and control of the redistricting) and a couple more congressional seats. I will be block walking this weekend with Beto for one of the Texas state house seats (Eliz Markowitz).

67% of Warren supporters should know that their vote may result in a Warren delegate voting for sanders. For the 33% of Warren voters who want sanders as their second choice, they should have no problem with this plan.

[blm]

193. Baloney. Warren is the BEST candidate to take on Trump.

Her anti-corruption platform will be easily digested by the voters when she is making the case against Trump and the economic corruption that affects working families and their daily lives.

Your camp wants to take that excellence and toss it away to preserve the fragile egos of your strategists who effed up by smearing Warren for 3months straight as you laid off Sanders and everyone else.

[Gothmog]

195. Not according to the polling in the real world

I note that Warren's wine cave attack failed and that she has dropped this line of attack.

Look, I actually donated to Warren early on. My kids like her and my son is a maxed out donor. That does not mean that Warren's supporters should not be able to consider the consequences of their vote for Warren. 67% of Warren supporters prefer a candidate other than sanders as their second choice

[blm]

199. Warren is best general election counter to Trump's corruption.

Wow - you notice that Warren in her FIRST primary campaign does not do well hitting back at Dem opponents after 3months of them attacking her. You should worry about Dems who ARE good at attacking other Dems. Warren is great at attacking Republicans and their policies and the corruption.

Jamie Dimon and his pals know how good she is at pointing out the corruption that harmfully affects the daily lives of working families and that is why they want her stopped from making that case to the general public as the Dem nominee.

Those trying to stop her with deceptive and manipulative messages against her and now her supporters are being useful idiots and tools.

Biden even knows she is the best when he is being honest with himself. It’s why he wanted to run in 2016 WITH her.

[Gothmog]

208. Again, Warren's wine cave attacked backfired and failed

Link to tweet

Some voters are glad to see Warren go back to her “I’m not here to criticize other Democrats” creed.

“The whole wine cave thing was blown out of proportion,” said Jim Martin, a 48-year-old from Hopkinton who is undecided and brought a baseball for Warren to sign after a Thursday event in Concord. “Campaigns cost money.”

Dick Hesse, a retired 86-year-old from Hopkinton who is also undecided, echoed that sentiment. “It didn’t make sense and it was meaningless,” he said of the wine cave attacks.

Even some volunteers for the Warren campaign such as Mary Shelby — an 81-year-old retiree from Pittsfield — said they found the attacks “disappointing.”

This was not a good issue for her

Link to tweet

I also saw that Warren has committed to attending these events if she is the nominee so that the party would not be at a disavantage.

I note that the polling does not support the concept that Warren is the most electable.

In any event 67% to 70% of Warren's supporters deserve to know that a vote for Warren could be a vote for sanders

[blm]

211. Who polled Warren's anti-corruption platform against Trump and

the economic corruption that harms and limits working families every day of their lives?

You and your poll worshipper pals did not. You don’t want to know how an anti-corruption candidacy would poll in a general election matchup with Trump.

Jamie Dimon knows she can make the case against the corruption in the economic system. He doesn’t want that case made in the general election. He knows how strong and competent she will be making that case to the American people.

Start showing some decency towards fellow DUers. This line of attack on us for supporting Warren is wrongheaded.

Try going after every other primary opponent and making the same manipulative demands of them.

What a disappointment you are on this thread.

[Gothmog]

216. Again, I note that Warren herself has realized that her wine celler attacked backfired

I like living in the real world. Your opinion of me amuses me but is not relevant to these discussions. I live in the real world and I am actually working on real campaigns. We are already gearing up for voter protection efforts for the upcoming primary and general election

Warren used private fundraisers when she ran for senate and she has committed to using these same fundraisers if she is the nominee. Warren gave up on her amusing wine cellar attack. That is all that matters to me.

[blm]

217. Stick to the poll poll poll rut you find comfortable. Real world is that there

Is no polling on Warren and her anti-corruption platform up against Trump and the corruption of our economic system.

Most Americans have never heard her speak to them on it. That’s what general elections do for platforms.


She can make that case to the American people best and even Biden knows it. Jamie Dimon sure does.

[Gothmog]

219. The real world is a nice place where facts matter

I like facts and discount emotional claims that are not based on facts.

You are free to support Warren and other voters are entitled to have all facts disclosed to them including the fact that a vote for Warren may be a vote for sanders.

[blm]

220. Fact: A vote for Warren is a vote for Warren.

You latched onto a fantasy in hopes of sabotaging Warren’s candidacy and blatantly attempted to guilt Warren supporters into not voting for their preferred candidate. All because some fvcking moron strategists in the Biden AND Buttegieg campaigns assumed Sanders couldn’t maintain a campaign after his health scare so they spent 3 months focusing attacks solely on Warren.

And the candyass strategists are STILL attacking Warren and her supporters, trying to blame them for Sanders current standing instead of admitting they screwed up.

Fix your own campaign’s dumbass mistake honestly and you might get better results.

[Gothmog]

163. It is sanders who is attacking establishment Democrats and who wants to remake the party

I will vote for the nominee of the party. I am also working hard to flip control of the Texas house of representatives and to flip 6 congressional seats from red to blue. I doubt that sanders will be the nominee of the party and if sanders is the nominee of the party, I fear that down ballot candidates will be destroyed.

I have never taken sanders seriously. sanders has zero legislative accomplishments and none of his programs could ever be adopted even if was POTUS. None of sanders proposals have the support of sufficient current members of Congress to pass and sanders is not campaigning for down ballot candidate

I am not in favor of sanders plan to remake the Democratic Party and his attacks on "establishment democrats"

Link to tweet

A number of threads on twitter are sanders supporters attacking all establishment democrats and demanding that the party remake itself into sanders' image

I will support the nominee of the party. I am a proud member of the Democratic Party and I do not believe that we need to remake the party and get rid of establishment Democrats.

[blm]

191. So your answer is to attack Warren's candidacy for 3months and

If she’s still standing then guilt her supporters into taking the blame for Sanders current surge.

Geez.....take some responsibility for your camp’s strategy of smearing Warren for 3months while you gave Sanders a pass after his health scare.

Lay that guilt where it belongs if Sanders prevails.....your strategists and their relentless targeting of Elizabeth Warren.

[Gothmog]

194. I have not attack Warren

I have read her proposal to pay for her health care plan and I found that this plan was very flawed as has many other people. I note that Warren is avoiding talking about her health care plan after the critics took her plan apart. If Warren puts out a plan, it is fair for others to look at that plan. It is not my fault that the plan does not stand up to even mild scrutiny.

I actually donated to Warren early on and I will clearly support her if she is the nominee. I worry about her effect on down ballot candidates but Warren is a far more acceptable candidate to me compared to sanders.

According to the Morning Consult polling 67% of Warren supporters prefer a candidate different than sanders. These voters should be allow to consider that there are proposals that would cause their vote for Warren to result in sanders being the nominee.

[blm]

197. Oh, the old GOP 'flawed' card when they haven't an actual case.

https://www.telegram.com/news/20191207/umass-ceo-eric-dickson-backs-medicare-for-all-calls-plan-bold-courageous?

UMass CEO Eric Dickson backs Medicare for All, calls plan ‘bold, courageous’
———

But for UMass Memorial Health Care CEO Dr. Eric W. Dickson, Medicare for All — specifically, Sen. Elizabeth’s Warren’s plan for Medicare for All — is not only worth considering, it’s worth praising.

“It’s a bold and courageous plan, and the best plan that any candidate has come out with to date,” Dickson said Tuesday. “It’s an option to consider ... very few health care CEOs would say that at this point.”

Early last month, Warren released a plan to enact Medicare for All that she said would not raise taxes on the middle class. The plan, constructed with help from economists and health policy experts, estimates a $20.5 trillion cost over a decade and moves the country to universal health care over three years by first building on existing laws, including the Affordable Care Act. The plan is largely paid for by requiring employers to pay what they would normally pay in health insurance premiums to the government in the form of an Employer Medicare Contribution.
——-
In an interview Tuesday, Dickson broke down two major challenges in health care that he said Warren’s plan would address: people without insurance, and care that costs too much and is getting more expensive.

The first challenge would be solved by definition by Medicare for All, Dickson said.

The high cost of health care is a more difficult nut to crack.

But Dickson said Warren’s plan has crucial elements that make it work.

A “linchpin” to the proposal for Dickson is administrative simplification — particularly simplifying the preauthorization and denial processes through streamlined forms rather than a form unique to each state and/or each medical insurer.

Not only would this go a long way to reducing costs by freeing up physicians’ and workers’ time, it would also lessen physicians’ frustrations with — and burnout from — constant paperwork, Dickson said.
......

Much more....

[Gothmog]

198. Her plan does not add up in the real world

I note that Warren is no longer talking about this plan after it was shown to be unrealistic and now is proposing a three year phase in.

There is great polling that shows that MFA will kill down ballot candidates in the real world. i want to turn Texas blue and I really think that both Warren and Sanders would kill down ballot candidates

[blm]

207. You didn't read the REAL WORLD acknowledgment that

Last edited Fri Jan 10, 2020, 05:15 PM - Edit history (1)

her plan will work and end up SAVING money.

You won’t admit the truth because your interest is only focused on killing Warren’s candidacy in order to favor your own preferred and ‘flawed’ candidate. And you don’t mind insulting her supporters along the way.

Shame on you, Gothmog. After all these years of trust and camaderie you are acting manipulatively towards fellow DUers and their primary decisions.....shame on you.





“We spend $140 million a year on our employees’ health insurance,” Dickson said. “If the government were to tax me $140 million a year and give all of our employees insurance, I’m neutral ... With no new costs, we could pay that to the government and then we could move to a single-payer system

[Bummfuzzle]

210. +1.

[Gothmog]

214. I read your material but I have also read real analysis that come to a different conclusion

Trying to shame a lawyer is amusing but a waste of time. I have read and understood a number of good analysis on the issue on whether Warren's health care plan works and can be paid for and these issues were discussed on other threads. I do not believe that Warren's plan to pay for her health care plan stands up to analysis and I note that even Warren has stopped talking about his plan. This thread is not about the viability of Warren's health care plan. Posting weak attempts at analysis of Warren's plan will not change my mind.

As for the topic of this thread, I believe in the concept that voters should have all necessary information so that they can make an informed decision. If there is a real chance that a vote for Warren will result in that vote really being for sanders, then Warren supporters are entitled to that information. Warren can clean things up by stating that she rejects Robert Reich's proposal and that she will not agree to a joint ticket with sanders if she wants to deal with this issue. I do note that 30% to 33% of Warren's supporters have sanders as their second choice and these voters will be happy with this plan. 67% to 70% of Warren supporters may not want their vote for Warren to really be a vote for sanders and these Warren supporters deserve all available information

I plan on working hard to turn Texas blue and helping down ballot candidates get elected. I strongly believe that Joe Biden is the strongest candidate and is the most electable and the polling backs me up on this. Trying to shame me is a waste of time but did make me smile

[blm]

222. You are peddling a FANTASY and then claim to adhere

Last edited Sat Jan 11, 2020, 10:39 PM - Edit history (1)

to the real world.

And I’m very sure that Dickson knows the reality of healthcare costs and the REAL effect on his business than you do. And pretty sure that if the Koch Bros with all their billions couldn’t find a way to make Med4All come out more expensive than this current system, then you can’t, either.

[Gothmog]

234. For this thread

Link to tweet

[Magoo48]

158. Sounds good to me. They are the two best, and only progressive, candidates.

[Demsrule86]

169. Biden is a progressive and he can actually beat Trump...the others not so much.

[Eliot Rosewater]

225. SIGH

I dont even know where to start...

I just wish people would read about who did what, when. but they wont

[yellowwoodII]

159. Sounds okay to me

I would be happy with Warren or Sanders. Would not be happy with "establishment" Biden in the primary.

[whathehell]

166. Lol..Is that supposed to scare us?

"The Warren supporters I know hate Sanders"

Huh?..That seems counterintuitive, given that their positions are closer
to get each other's than to any of the other candidates.

Most Warren supporters I know not only don't "hate" Sanders, they FAVOR him as their 2nd choice and/or as VP running mate to Warren.

[Demsrule86]

170. No,please emphasize that a vote for Warren is a vote for Sanders...please do this as often as

possible...run ads-take it to the limit...if you think it is true (not saying I do) and will work... have at it. When all is said and done, I will vote for our nominee...vote blue no matter who.

[whathehell]

175. Many see them as almost interchangeable on the issues..

So yeah, that's good. I will vote "blue no matter who" as well.

[Demsrule86]

176. Good luck.

[whathehell]

178. Back at ya..

[LiberalLovinLug]

181. "The Warren supporters I know hate sanders" WTF?

Firstly, maybe you could have put the effort in to capitalize Bernie Sanders last name at the very least.

Secondly, how in hell does a vote for Warren HELP Sanders? Other than it helps further the push towards a more progressive, positive, people-centric candidate winning. Someone who shares Sanders goals and someone he can work with.

Thirdly, I would love to have an explanation from a Warren supporter that they "hate" Sanders. And why. Considering that Sanders has the closest platform to hers. Are you admitting that simply gender is making your decision? That you are happily ignorant of candidates platforms and are only voting to break the glass ceiling? What other explanation is there? You do realize that IF Warren had the same money raised, the same grass root support, and was seen as the same kind of threat that Sanders seems to be to the status quo, or if they do manage to smear Sanders until he is compelled to drop out, all that ire will focus on Warren. BECAUSE THEY BOTH THREATEN THE SAME ESTABLISHMENT!

I think there may be a few Warren supporters that have those kinds of self-defeating blinders on, but I am confident that most Warren supporters are smart enough to support her because of her tough talk and determination to reign in the power of the corporate classes, and to begin the start of MFA......much like Bernie..

And those that support Sanders, or Warren, are the majority. Deal with it. Democrats want real change. The third way is over.

[totodeinhere]

184. I don't buy it for even one minute that Warren supporters hate Bernie.

Yes there is a healthy competition between Bernie and their candidate right now, but what logical reason could a Warren supporter have for hating another candidate who agrees with their candidate on most issues? I for one support Bernie but I love Elizabeth and without question I will support her enthusiastically if she gets the nomination.

[Bummfuzzle]

188. Warren is a solid Democrat, Sanders is not. Warren supported HRC in 2016, Sanders did everything he

could to help HRC lose. Warren gets things done, Sanders is a do nothing and has accomplished very little. Warren has made the Democratic party stronger, Sanders despises the Democratic party, per his own words.

Better believe there are a lot of Warren supports that are not enthused by Biden, likes Warren progressive plans, likes that she stands up to Trump and Republicans but have absolutely no desire to ever support Sanders. They are not even close to the same. One is of quality, one is a pied piper.

[LiberalLovinLug]

201. lol

"Warren is a solid Democrat, Sanders is not"

Warren was once a Republican. Sanders has never ever even been close to that.
Jeff Van Drew. Was he also a "solid" Democrat, just before he switched parties?
How about Jared Golden and Collin Peterson, who voted with Van Drew "no" on impeachment.
How about Manchin, Edwards, Bishop who regularily vote alongside Republicans?

"By their works ye shall know them"

Oh...but you also say "Sanders is a do nothing and has accomplished very little."

is that why he was nicknamed "the Amendment King" when Democrats had to first deal with a hostile Republican legislative branch during Clinton's and Obama's terms? In fact Politifact confirms that

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/24/bernie-sanders/bernie-sanders-was-roll-call-amendment-king-1995-2/

Some highlights were
passing the overhaul of the Veterans Administration together with John McCain,

Sanders worked with Republican Congressman Ron Paul in the House to pass a measure as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform bill to audit the Federal Reserve, revealing how the independent agency gave $16 trillion in near zero-interest loans to big banks and businesses after the 2008 economic collapse.

Introduced his Medicare for All bill in 2017.

I'm not going to google for you, but I'm sure you can find the long list of "accomplishments" he has stood for.


So.....you say there are a lot of Warren supporters....that like Warren's progressive plans.....which are closest in substance to Sanders plans....but have "no desire to ever support Sanders"



Forgive me, but that makes no sense, unless those "progressive plans" she proposes mean nothing to you. Warren is clearly my second choice because of that. And I could have gone either way as my first choice TBH. I chose Sanders because he has more experience, the longest unwavering track record, and has the largest fund raising effort.

[Bummfuzzle]

204. Warren has been a Democrat and strengthen the party for over two decades.

The "Amendment King" is a bunch of silliness, riding on the back of others work.

[LiberalLovinLug]

205. lol

[totodeinhere]

183. Hate is a very destructive emotion. We see enough of that from the Republicans and from that clown

in the White House. We don't need Democrats hating one of our major candidates.

[booley]

189. the second choice for 30% of Warren supporters is Bernie Sanders

So if Warren doesn't' make it, the second choice of a third of Warren supporters is Bernard Sanders.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voters-second-choice-candidates-show-a-race-that-is-still-fluid/

PArt of Warens' appeal was how much she was perceived to be a more establishment-friendly version f Sanders. Her policies are often compared to how similar they are to his and she seems to suffer when those policies stray from that. Liek how much she dropped in the polls after she rolled out her health care proposal compared to before when she was sen as a much stronger Medicare For All Proponent. (Just being perceived as less than committed to Medicare for All hurt her)

Oh and while Waren and Sanders are friends, she has a very different attitude towards Biden, who she feels was a road block to much of what she tried to do with the Senate.

So I don't' think this is the argument against Sanders you think it is.

[Gothmog]

196. Which means that either 67% or 70% of Warren supporters prefer a different candidate

[booley]

200. before you get excited...

Only about 19% of Warrens supporters choose Biden as their second choice

Yes, 30% for Sanders still leaves 70% for elsewhere. But with so many candidates that doesn't mean as much as you think

KInda weird to imply Sanders is "losing" when everybody else is lagging behind him.

[Gothmog]

203. I have been volunteering on voter protection issues for a very long time

One of the key things that I was taught way back in 2004 and which I teach now is that the goal is for everyone to cast their vote for the candidate of their choice. I do not care who a voter is voting for so long as they get to vote.

Here, 67% (according to Morning Consult) or 70% (according to Nate) want to their vote to go someone other than sanders if Warren will not be the nominee. Voters should be allowed that choice.

[booley]

212. I think you make too many assumptions

One of which is that those voters cant' be swayed to Sanders over time

Why assume the Warren voters who have Buttigieg as a second choice would never switch to Sanders if/when Buttigieg dropped out?

Look at that chart again. Notice something? When it comes to the second choice, Sanders gets a healthy percentage from all the other candidates. The only one who is higher are Bloom berg voters who would switch to Biden and Bloomberg is at what? 6%?

Frankly, your mistake is acting as if this is Sanders versus EVERYBODY ELSE, as if everybody who isn't' Sanders is part of some monolithic block, and the votes for Everybody else will stay the same.

Th reason why that doesn't work is Sanders supporters are sticky. That means they are less likely to switch than other candidates without Sanders leaving the race first.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/11/bernie-sanders-2020-presidential-campaign-polls-democratic-primaries

Though I admit what really bothers me is the double standard. Why is it bad that Sanders only has 31% of Warren voters as a second choice but not even worse for Biden that he only has 19%. Or Buttigieg gets at most 15%. The fact is Sanders is doing better at potentially grabbing Warren voters than any other candidate. But somehow it doesn't' matter because it's Bernie Sanders.

IF 70% of Warren voters don't' want Sanders, then 81% don't' want Biden and 85% don't' care for Buttigieg if I am following the logic you laid out.

Voters should be allowed that choice.

No one among the Sanders camp is arguing otherwise. Given what happened in places like Michigan and other examples I can give, I can say Sanders voters are very much in favor of allowing the Voters to choose with the DNC staying neutral as possible.

Though again I don't' know-how what this has to do with Sanders picking up Warren supporters if she drops out.

[Doremus]

202. I'd be okay with that.

Funny how the Biden/Klobuchar/Butagieg (sp) supporters expect full Dem loyalty in the event their candidate wins but don't offer the same in return.

They're also the ones who seem to scream the loudest about not dividing the party. Go figure.

[Tink41]

209. I'd love Bernie to win!

But I'm equally enthralled with Warren. I'm in my early 50's NOT a boomer but a Gen X. I was born into a world colliding if you will. Early on about 6th Grade I explained to my father how I thought things should be, he proclaimed me a communist. Fine by me. Not knowing what that actually meant, to this day I'm considered LEFT/Ghandi leaning. I feel I've only gotten more left as time has gone on based on life experience. I fully support both candidates.

[LiberalLovinLug]

213. I love the smell of desparation in the morning

lol

[ms liberty]

215. Well Gothmog, you've been here almost as long as I have

And while I have disagreed with you before, I always felt a measure of respect for you, too. That's now gone the way of the duck billed platypus.
This article is inflammatory and appears to be expressly designed to create division and hard feelings between former Sanders supporters, current Sanders supporters,
current Warren supporters, former supporters of Hillary in the 16 primary and Biden supporters. Exactly what we need! NOT.
In other words, it's Russian ratfucking at its most disgusting, but you're okay with that. So okay with it that you will bring it here to create ugliness and divisiveness and feel good about it, which you must since you haven't taken it down.

[JudyM]

233. THIS.

[Kurt V.]

226. LOL I'm okay with that. Centrist crack me up.

[marble falls]

229. I thought you put your money on Bernie?!?!?

[caraher]

228. Fine with me

Sanders is my second choice anyway.

Meanwhile, a vote for Warren is a vote for Warren, a vote for Sanders is a vote for Sanders, a vote for Biden is a vote for Biden. I don't need any "help" telling me which candidate my vote is "really" for.

[TSIAS]

230. This thread brings a tear to my eye

Watching Donut Twitter turn on each other while Sanders surges is absolutely glorious.

I've spent the last few months listening to Warren supporters begging Bernie to drop out if he couldn't win.

Let's be honest, I'd have preferred the primary come down to Sanders vs Warren. She was my 3rd favorite candidate. Now that Williamson dropped out she is Number 2.

Now, unless Warren does well in Iowa, the race is between Biden and Sanders. Bernie might be an underdog, but those betting markets the neoliberals adore have Bernie slightly ahead.

[Gothmog]

236. Michael Moore says Warren & Sanders need to reconcile and agree to combine their delegates

Michael Moore is now pushing this concept

Link to tweet