Bernie Sanders is the reason Iowa went so wrong and now his supporters are handing Trump ammunition.

[Scurrilous]

"...Americans may have seen the last of the Iowa caucuses."

"....the result of accommodations for Sanders supporters who wanted to maintain Iowa's and Nevada's first-in-the-nation caucuses, rather than end the practice of holding caucuses altogether, because caucuses were thought to favor Sanders."



<snip>

"But Sanders' obviously passionate surrogates' claims that something untoward is happening in Iowa at the behest of the dreaded "establishment" ignore the fact that the changes to this year's Iowa caucus were made at the recommendation of the post-2016 "unity commission" established to pacify Bernieworlders. It was them who were convinced that the Democratic National Committee rigged the 2016 primary against Sanders (there is no evidence of this).

The uproar coming from the Sanders backers who'd read stolen DNC emails released by Wikileaks, who were now alleging that a corrupt bargain had been made between the Clinton campaign and the DNC, meant some action had to be taken to mollify Sanders' people, said Khary Penebaker, a DNC member who endorsed Cory Booker last year.

"We recognize that we no longer had control of the narrative despite what we might have thought that actually happened in [2016]. This is where people were at this point, and we needed to make adjustments to accommodate that," he told me, though he stressed that he was speaking for himself and not the DNC.

According to a person with direct knowledge with the process which led to the rule changes, Iowa's "Frankenstein caucus" was the result of accommodations for Sanders supporters who wanted to maintain Iowa's and Nevada's first-in-the-nation caucuses, rather than end the practice of holding caucuses altogether, because caucuses were thought to favor Sanders. The use of the app was necessitated by rules put in place to make the caucuses more like primaries by releasing more data, including first-round preference totals.

"That's going away," the person predicted, adding that Americans may have seen the last of the Iowa caucuses."

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/bernie-sanders-iowa-caucus-winner-trump-democrats-a9317761.html

[ZZenith]

1. Bernie designed the shitty, untested app?

That guy is incredible.

[George II]

3. In 2016 he was the one who pushed to make all the changes that were implemented this year.

[still_one]

28. +++

[Ghost Dog]

97. ... Including the paper trail, no? Nt

[Jirel]

139. Keep trying, but false.

Yes, there were people with ties to Shadow, Inc. Who were they?

Hillary Clinton.
https://apnews.com/5232ce5601996c1de440806ad30fa4fb
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/02/iowa-caucus-app-tech/606094/

Buttigieg.
https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/feb/04/what-we-know-about-shadow-acronym-and-iowa-caucuse/
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/02/iowa-caucus-app-tech/606094/

Dem tech firm and sister company to its PAC, ACRONYM/PACRONYM.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/investors-rush-to-downplay-ties-to-shadow-the-firm-behind-iowa-caucus-clusterfuck

Biden and Gillibrand (both minor).
https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/feb/04/what-we-know-about-shadow-acronym-and-iowa-caucuse/

[ehrnst]

7. The realignment rules.

This year, Dockendorff has fielded a lot of questions. The parties have run the caucus the same way for decades: Voters show up to an assigned precinct—a church or an elementary school in their neighborhood, say—and stand under a sign or in a corner associated with their favorite candidate. For half an hour, people hustle between groups, trying to coax fans of other candidates to join their team. Then organizers count each candidate’s supporters, and there is a realignment period, during which people can switch allegiances. Members of any candidate group that doesn’t get at least 15 percent of caucus-goers must move to a new candidate. Once this part is done, delegates are assigned to the remaining contenders using a mathematical formula, and reported to the state party.

For the 2020 contest, though, there are a few major changes. Caucus-goers who choose a viable candidate in the first round can’t switch. For the first time ever, voters will write down their choices on preference cards, in case there’s a recount. If a precinct has only a small number of delegates to give out, even supporters of viable candidates may have to realign; which group realigns could depend on a coin toss. (The state party instructs caucus chairs to bring their own quarter or some “other method to conduct a game of chance.”) “Some precincts have three delegates, and it’s not inconceivable that five candidates are viable,” Dockendorff said.

But the most crucial development this year is that each of Iowa’s 1,700 precincts is required to report two data points in addition to its final delegate count: the totals each candidate received in the first count and the totals they received after the first realignment.

Releasing these numbers is meant to add transparency to the process. But the new rules make it more likely that several Democratic candidates will claim victory on Monday. The traditional winner—the Democrat who receives the most delegates—will be able to boast the best organizing strategy in Iowa. But it’s about more than just delegates, Dockendorff said. “There’s going to be somebody who’s going to be able to say, ‘Look, we had 1,000 more people show up to the caucuses for us. Obviously we’re the strongest,’” she explained. And the candidate who ends up with the most total supporters after the realignment—when voters from unviable groups find a new group—can brag that he or she has built the broadest coalition of support, or has the most persuasive organizers.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/02/new-rules-might-complicate-iowa-caucus/605950/

[LisaM]

38. So someone with more supporters could end up with fewer delegates?

Ugh.

[David__77]

14. No. The party is accountable for the caucus.

...

[George II]

17. The party made the changes based on Sanders' demands.

[David__77]

62. If so, I don't think that that somehow mitigates party accountability for the caucus.

...

[DiverDave]

113. Oh, bs

You are saying Sanders is SO POWERFUL, that he changed the rules??
Sure, he did.

[LanternWaste]

120. And Bernie's responsible for his loss

[David__77]

123. Of course.

...

[krissey]

2. Sanders needs to win this in a landslide. Young, white, open, rural, caucus.

He needs a landslide or it is a loss. Sanders is the reason for a lot of things in this primary, that the Democratic party has never experienced, before Sanders.

[redstatebluegirl]

4. We keep letting him become a Democrat for a year so he can run

with our party infrastructure. If we don't stop shooting ourselves in the foot we will never win again.

[krissey]

6. He never becomes a Democrat, though. Even when running in our primary, he does it as an Independent.

[redstatebluegirl]

8. But he CALLS himself a democrat, there is a D by his name on the ballot.

[krissey]

9. That is my point. No. He does not call himself a Democrat. Ever. We put the D there.

[redstatebluegirl]

10. And we should NEVER let anyone else like him do it again.

[krissey]

19. I do not think we should, either. Nor should we allow the Republicans to participate in our

nomination of our primary candidate. What was Iowa? An open caucus that allow anyone to go in there and yell out a name. I would like to tighten that process up myself. Many lifetime Democrats could not vote for their primary candidate because with it being a caucus they could not participate for so many reasons.

Wasn't this the time when the gentry men would sit around drinking, smoking cigars and discuss while the slaves and commoners worked and stayed out of the decision making? I mean, what is this caucus thing about? They could spend all day trying to talk each other into their point of view. While the women had babies and others did the work.

[ehrnst]

124. He puts a D by his name ONLY on a primary ballot, nowhere else.

That says it all.

[PatrynXX]

21. Like Bloomberg

however only 2 candidates for Democrats are running (Tom is not on the poltiicial compass don't know why and Bloomberg came in to late but apparently as an Oligarch paid admission to the caucuses in iowa..) Tulsi and Bernie the only left wing Democrats in the running. Warren is running as a Centrist the rest are well into right wing territory With Yang being the most right but least authoritarian. (political compass as the source) Right Wing vs Right Wing = not a good year again. I'd rather have a choice. Right and Right is no choice. Left and Right is. (and centrist) so pretty much goes Bernie, Tulsi, Tom then Warren and thats about it. Maybe Yang since he's the furthest from Trump Pete is closer though. Bennett is not longer running but was the farthest to the right

[krissey]

25. No. Not like Bloomberg. That just is not factually correct. But, whatever.

[jcmaine72]

88. You're absolutely correct. Bloomberg is unique among the Democratic hopefuls in that....

....he is the only one of them to have won an election as a Republican. And not just any Republican either, but as a law and order, tough on crime, Guiliani type Republican at that. Stop and frisk, anyone?

[krissey]

89. I know his history. Still not the point. You know it.

[jcmaine72]

91. Well, if the idea was to question Bernie's credibility as a Democratic candidate....

....as seems to be the sole vocation of many here, then, yes, that is the point.

[krissey]

94. The "idea" is the statement Sanders isn't a Democrat, does not claim to be a Democrat, not even

while running in the Democratic primary.

Where am I wrong? I am not. It is fact. I see no reason for you to argue the points. I stated fact. You threw out other people. Ok, so?

[Gore1FL]

114. The other option is running as a third party candidate in the general election. It's OK he's here.

His participation brings people the Democratic voting pool. Suggesting he and his supporters are unwelcome invites 3rd party candidate diversions.
A unified and inclusive left is a good thing.

[krissey]

115. Everyone needs to go to the first statement. I was accurate. This whole subthread is about other.

He never becomes a Democrat, though. Even when running in our primary, he does it as an Independent.

[Gore1FL]

116. Fair. I assume you are talking about post 2.

I really have no idea what is in store. I don't know if his support is as thin as you might imagine.

I am trying to determine what "Democratic party has never experienced before Sanders." Do you have examples so that I can better understand what you mean?

Thanks!

[ehrnst]

126. Sanders: I don't consider myself a Democrat

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/329418-sanders-i-do-not-consider-myself-a-democrat

He only identifies as a Democrat on a ballot for a primary. No where else.

He serves as Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) not Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT)

Democrats do not require one to have served in public office as, voted as, or run even a single time as a Democrat to get on the ticket, luckily for Sanders.

He wouldn't have a chance otherwise, and he knows it. He stated that he runs on the Democratic ticket for the money and the media coverage earned by a major political party, not because he identifies in any way with one.

https://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/bernie-sanders-independent-media-coverage-220747

He stated that if there was any party that he would identify with now, it would be the Working Families Party, and they endorsed Warren this year.

[jcmaine72]

127. Neither did Elizabeth Warren or Mike Bloomberg when they were registered Republicans

To me, that's the biggest stain on anyone's potential credibility as Democrat there can be. At least we can give Bernie that much credit, right?

[ehrnst]

128. Nice goalpost move... Bernie has never once identified as a Dem other than on a primary ballot.

Warren has run and served as a Democrat, in office, and voted as a Democrat - can you "give Bernie credit" for that?

That makes Warren more Democratic than Bernie has ever been, even while running on a Democratic ticket. But some people seem to have 'a vocation' as you put it, to convince people of Bernie's "credibility as a Democrat" he has never claimed for himself. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Here's a question for you:

Have either Warren or Bloomberg stated that they "do not consider themselves Democrats" since running on a Democratic ticket?

Have you heard anyone else in this field say the following about the Democratic Party:

"You don’t change the system from within the Democratic Party.”

“My own feeling is that the Democratic Party is ideologically bankrupt.”

“We have to ask ourselves, ‘Why should we work within the Democratic Party if we don’t agree with anything the Democratic Party says?’”

How does that fit in to among, as you put it "the biggest stains on one's potential credentials as a Democrat" in your view?



And trying to compare Bloomberg and Sanders with Warren is silly. Neither one of them can hold a candle to her accomplishments. As an Actual Democrat, no less.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has done more for the 98% than either Bloomberg and Sanders combined - and Sanders has had decades longer to do something the comes even close to that consequential. We can at least give Warren credit for this, right?

Liz lapped him on this even before getting elected to the Senate.

Anything else you care to bring up?

[jcmaine72]

130. Nope. The goalposts were right where you left them.

How is being a Republican (former or otherwise) not a stain on one's credibility? The party of white supremacy, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia and misogyny, not to mention predatory capitalism. I certainly wouldn't want that on my resume, even if it's preceded by the words "former member of".

You can knock Bernie all you want on his positions if you disagree with them. That's fair. But if the idea is to question his right to run as a Democrat because he once was not then I again refer you to Warren and especially to Mike "Stop and Frisk" Bloomberg. At least be consistent.

[ehrnst]

131. "My own feeling is that the Democratic Party is ideologically bankrupt."

"You don’t change the system from within the Democratic Party.”

“We have to ask ourselves, ‘Why should we work within the Democratic Party if we don’t agree with anything the Democratic Party says?’”

At least you can give everyone else on the ticket, including Warren and Bloomberg credit for not talking about the Democratic party in those terms, right? I mean, as long as you're damning someone for party affiliation in the past, talking that way about Democrats in the past is at least as much of "a stain on one's credibility as a Democrat" as you put it, right? At least be consistent.

But if the idea is to question his right to run as a Democrat because he once was not then I again refer you to Warren and especially to Mike "Stop and Frisk" Bloomberg. At least be consistent.

Now you're trying to flog a poor straw man with that moving goalpost... I never questioned his right to run as a Democrat, that's your invention. Perhaps your confusing me with someone else you're arguing with? In any case, that's where your goalpost hit the mud. The DNC is generous enough to let candidates who have not even served as Democrats on the ticket, and that's enough for me. Bernie should be grateful, because as he said, he wouldn't have the money or the media exposure otherwise. But he is, in his own words, "not a Democrat." He puts a D next to his name on a primary ballot only. Have any other candidates registered to run for future elections as something other than a Democrat? Get back with us on that, will you?

You can knock Warren or even Bloomberg on their positions if you disagree with them. That's fair. But if your idea is to bestow somehow more cred on Bernie as a "less stained" Democrat than Warren or Bloomberg because his previous party affiliations were "independent" - you know like that paragon of virtue, Joe Leiberman... and Socialist Workers Party, but were not (clutches pearls) private citizens voting as Republicans, I again refer you to the statements above, for which he has never expressed regret for, nor apologized for despite contradicting himself on "working within the Democratic party" and the like of which have never been uttered by any other candidate on the ticket.

When others in the field say things like the above about Democrats, even if they are not on their "resume" or refuse to run as a Democrat in a General after running in their Senate primary on the Democratic ticket, then your equivalency will cease to be false.

Anything else you want to bring up?

[jcmaine72]

132. With fly-by-night billionaires like Bloomberg able to buy their way into our primaries

...maybe the point he was making is worth considering.

We should all have higher expectations for our party and nation. Bernie has, many of his detractors don't.

[ehrnst]

133. So you got nothing.

I rest my case.



Let me know if you would like to be set straight concerning other ridiculous false equivalences or false dilemmas.

I'll be happy to enlighten you.

[jcmaine72]

134. More than you, obviously.

I don't vote for Republicans, past or present. Good luck with.

[ehrnst]

135. The "I know you are but what am I?" reposte of last resort...

I guess that means you're ruling out voting for Warren if she gets the nomination?

But I hear ya on that whole GOP thing, at least in part.

I make it a habit to avoid voting, at least in a primary, for those who past or present have been promoted by BOTH the Republican Party (The party of white supremacy, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia and misogyny, not to mention predatory capitalism) and Russia. We should expect better from our party and our country, yes?

Good luck with that.

How could that not be "a stain on one's credibility" as you said yourself? At least be consistent.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/14/us/politics/trump-sanders-bloomberg-2020.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/17/indictment-russians-also-tried-help-bernie-sanders-jill-stein-presidential-campaigns/348051002/

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/07/bernie-sanders-republican-senate-1307296

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/4/20/18508880/karl-rove-bernie-sanders-could-beat-donald-trump-in-2020

Anything else you care to bring up? Again, I'm always ready to correct any misinformation or logical fallacies.

[jcmaine72]

138. Putting words in my mouth doesn't constitute a "correction" of anything.

I'd vote for Warren. Happy?

[ehrnst]

140. I quoted you...

You said that you wouldn't vote for a former republican.... your very words, no qualifiers. because "We should all have higher expectations for our party and nation."

Conversely, you've also made it clear that you think that the self-identified Independent (the party affiliation of Joe Leiberman) Senator on the Dem ticket has WAY more Democratic cred than Senator Warren (D-MA)... the one candidate on the Democratic ticket who has been promoted by the GOP (The party of white supremacy, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia and misogyny, not to mention predatory capitalism) and Russia.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/14/us/politics/trump-sanders-bloomberg-2020.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/17/indictment-russians-also-tried-help-bernie-sanders-jill-stein-presidential-campaigns/348051002/

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/07/bernie-sanders-republican-senate-1307296

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/4/20/18508880/karl-rove-bernie-sanders-could-beat-donald-trump-in-2020

So there's that.

Anything else you want to bring up?

Also - you'd better get over to this thread and start telling everyone about how they are completely misguided...and you expect better of them and our party than to offer anything but accusations of white supremacy, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia and misogyny, not to mention predatory capitalism!!!! You go set them straight that no member of the GOP past or present should be considered anything but scum by Democrats!!

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212954592

Let me know how that goes.

[George II]

136. Both Warren and Bloomberg have been Democrats longer than he has.

[ehrnst]

137. Also neither has been promoted by Russia or the GOP as their favored Dem nominee.

As was said about the GOP in this very thread...

The party of white supremacy, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia and misogyny, not to mention predatory capitalism.

As was also said....

We should all have higher expectations for our party and nation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/14/us/politics/trump-sanders-bloomberg-2020.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/17/indictment-russians-also-tried-help-bernie-sanders-jill-stein-presidential-campaigns/348051002/

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/07/bernie-sanders-republican-senate-1307296

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/4/20/18508880/karl-rove-bernie-sanders-could-beat-donald-trump-in-2020

[Scurrilous]

16. Iowa 3.5% black Nevada 8.7% black New Hampshire 1.1% black

White people pick first and their picks are more important. Because spin. Sounds right.

[krissey]

23. New Hampshire 1.1% black. Yes. And rural.

[Scurrilous]

31. Vermont 1.4% black. LOL That answers some questions...

[krissey]

34. I am a numbers gal. They tell the story. Pretty basic. Almost like, 1 + 1 2.

[Scurrilous]

37. Some people in here don't like math.

They think 1 + 1 = Surge.

[krissey]

41. Oh my god, that made me laugh, once I processed. I am old. It is taking a bit longer to go from

eyes, to brain. That is cute. Yes. That.

[Scurrilous]

52. It's going to be a crazy election.

Good luck.

[krissey]

64. For sure.

[ehrnst]

75. Math!!!! DoublePlusThoughtCrime!!!!!

[Scurrilous]

82. A patrilineal trait. Math bad. When asked for numbers, respond with words.

'You don’t know, nobody knows, this is impossible..' - CBS 'You’re asking me to come up with an exact detailed plan of how every American, how much you’re going to pay more in taxes, how much I’m going to pay. I don’t think I have to do that right now..' - NBC

Crunch 'em Bernie.

[keithbvadu2]

108. patrilineal - had to look it up. Good word but just not common.

patrilineal - had to look it up.

Good word but just not common.

[Scurrilous]

119. LOL

I just got done going through some thing a distant relative compiled about our family and that popped up a lot. I learned my great great grandfather Peter was really named Pierre.

[ehrnst]

117. He has gotten into trouble before when he quotes statistics or numbers...

And he's gotten called out on it, to his displeasure. For instance, according to Politifact....

"42 percent of (Walmart’s) associates are black."

"Forty percent of the guns in this country are sold without any background checks."

"When Trump won, we had the lowest voter turnout in 20 years."

"We spend almost twice as much per capita on health care as do the people of any other country."

"We now work the longest hours of any people around the world."

"Last year, ExxonMobil made $19 billion in profit. Guess what. They paid zero in taxes. They got a $156 million refund from the IRS."

"Was it 150 million people on private insurance? 50 million of those people lose their private insurance every year when they quit their jobs, or they go unemployed, or their employer changes their insurance policy."

With Medicare for All, "study after study has shown that ... the average middle-class families will save $3,000 each and every year on their health care bills."

Says middle class taxpayers "subsidize Walmart’s horrendously low wages to the tune of at least $6.2 billion every year."

Says President Donald "Trump’s budget gives a $100 billion tax break to three of the wealthiest families."

"Increasing the min. wage to $15 an hour would reduce spending on food stamps, public housing and other programs by over $7.6 billion a year."

"Washington politicians are paid over $200,000 an hour for speeches."

"NAFTA, supported by the Secretary (Clinton), cost us 800,000 jobs nationwide."

"We work longer hours than any people in the industrialized world, including the Japanese."


"Very little of (the defense) budget — less than 10 percent — actually goes into fighting ISIS and international terrorism."

The largest low-wage employer "is not McDonalds or Walmart but the U.S. government."

"We have the highest rate of childhood poverty of any major country on Earth."

"Poverty levels (are) at an all-time high."


False statements involving Bernie Sanders
https://www.politifact.com/personalities/bernie-sanders/statements/byruling/false/

Mostly False statements involving Bernie Sanders
https://www.politifact.com/personalities/bernie-sanders/statements/byruling/barely-true/

[Scurrilous]

122. Wow. I haven't seen that before. Nice link.

I know some people who are compiling his 'I don't knows.' He and his friends. Especially concerning his 'story' covering post graduate to pre-political. He makes Sgt. Schultz look like a piker. No one knows nothing. Google his resume. It's hilarious. I'll post it. 16 years described in 8 words. I've seen more detailed post its. Him President. Unpossible.

[ehrnst]

141. Yes, facts are inconvenient things for certain people.

[ehrnst]

5. From the Atlantic on Monday: The Iowa Caucus Could Go Very Wrong

This year, Dockendorff has fielded a lot of questions. The parties have run the caucus the same way for decades: Voters show up to an assigned precinct—a church or an elementary school in their neighborhood, say—and stand under a sign or in a corner associated with their favorite candidate. For half an hour, people hustle between groups, trying to coax fans of other candidates to join their team. Then organizers count each candidate’s supporters, and there is a realignment period, during which people can switch allegiances. Members of any candidate group that doesn’t get at least 15 percent of caucus-goers must move to a new candidate. Once this part is done, delegates are assigned to the remaining contenders using a mathematical formula, and reported to the state party.

For the 2020 contest, though, there are a few major changes. Caucus-goers who choose a viable candidate in the first round can’t switch. For the first time ever, voters will write down their choices on preference cards, in case there’s a recount. If a precinct has only a small number of delegates to give out, even supporters of viable candidates may have to realign; which group realigns could depend on a coin toss. (The state party instructs caucus chairs to bring their own quarter or some “other method to conduct a game of chance.”) “Some precincts have three delegates, and it’s not inconceivable that five candidates are viable,” Dockendorff said.

But the most crucial development this year is that each of Iowa’s 1,700 precincts is required to report two data points in addition to its final delegate count: the totals each candidate received in the first count and the totals they received after the first realignment.

Releasing these numbers is meant to add transparency to the process. But the new rules make it more likely that several Democratic candidates will claim victory on Monday. The traditional winner—the Democrat who receives the most delegates—will be able to boast the best organizing strategy in Iowa. But it’s about more than just delegates, Dockendorff said. “There’s going to be somebody who’s going to be able to say, ‘Look, we had 1,000 more people show up to the caucuses for us. Obviously we’re the strongest,’” she explained. And the candidate who ends up with the most total supporters after the realignment—when voters from unviable groups find a new group—can brag that he or she has built the broadest coalition of support, or has the most persuasive organizers.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/02/new-rules-might-complicate-iowa-caucus/605950/

[Scurrilous]

48. Mind boggling.

They changed the system to add statistics for spin? Spin for the media and the campaigns to amplify. Because not that many delegates are being decided. 'But it’s about more than just delegates, Dockendorff said.' LOL The fuck it isn't.

[jalan48]

11. Bernie's responsible for the Iowa fiasco!! Oh yeah, that's it for sure.

[LisaM]

13. Some candidates thrive on chaos.

I don't think I need to name names!

[Blue_true]

71. It's that revolution thing. To get a true revolution, you need chaos, as Susan Sarandon

proudly points out ( ).

[Autumn]

15. Bernie bought that worthless app that the IDP was warned had problems way back in mid January

with his ill gotten gains and he forced the IDP to use it with the power of what? His mind? He bribed the IDP to use an app and roll it out to the workers 2 days before the caucuses? Do enlighten us.

Well fuck. Bernie's got this. I'm buying champaign to drink now since he can just use his Jedi moves to become president.

[ehrnst]

18. Nah, he just insisted on the realignment rules.

You're welcome!

And you know, I said nearly the same thing to Trump supporters about HRC. If she was guilty of half the shit people said she was, and had the Democratic Party on puppet strings, AND was able to hide any and all evidence of this alleged corruption from being discovered, why did she even bother to run for office? If she had that kind of power over time and space, she could run the world from an underground bunker...

[Autumn]

20. .

[ehrnst]

26. I'm glad you cared enough to reply to tell me that you don't care.

[Autumn]

32. Yeah and I'm glad you always look for my posts to respond to. nt

[ehrnst]

40. Keep on flattering yourself.

[Autumn]

47. I'm not flattering myself, stating a fact.I don't look for your posts and when I see your OPs

I scroll on by, you responded to my posts here, I responded to be polite. You found a bale of straw yourself.

[ehrnst]

51. "Polite?"

[Autumn]

69. Yes. Polite

polite[ puh-lahyt ]
SEE SYNONYMS FOR polite ON THESAURUS.COM
adjective, po·lit·er, po·lit·est.
showing good manners toward others, as in behavior, speech, etc.; courteous; civil:
a polite reply.
refined or cultured:
polite society.
of a refined or elegant kind:
polite learning.

[ehrnst]

70. .....

[Autumn]

74. I rest my case. I've been very polite but I must say adieu because I have better things to do.

Have yourself a pleasant little day.

[ehrnst]

77. Fish ain't biting Hon.

You gave it the old college try, tho. I'll give ya that...

[Cha]

79. touche'

[George II]

98. IOW, you agree.

[Tweedy]

109. You are both right

This was a mistake. We all make them. Luckily for most of us, ours don't happen on live television.

The rule change makes little sense to me; nonetheless, it did not cause the application to malfunction.

And Senator Clinton is not and was not some all powerful being controlling the DNC. Folks who spout that nonsense seem to entirely forget 2008.

Reason is our friend. We all need to use our reason vigorously today, tomorrow and all the way to victory in November.

E pluribus unum

[PatrynXX]

24. how did he do that with Hillary campaigners ???

That makes no sense. I thought they didn't like each other.... Hillary wanted to get rid of the Caucus system and looks like she's having her way. . I'm leaving this silly upside down world called DU yet again because there is so much hate here and so many who wish to provoke and threaten people I see nothing has changed after almost 4 yrs nothings changed. Sorry for those with Mental Illnesses this is not a site I should be anywhere near. You'll just give in to the man. It's really irritating. Stop fighting with each other!!

[Autumn]

30. Well . Bernie done shot my dog and he done killt my Pa so the feuding gots to go on

[ehrnst]

43. You found a sale on straw men...

This OP really hit a nerve...

I guess some people don't think that the Sanders campaign can withstand an OP in the Independent being shared on DU.

What can one conclude from that?

[ehrnst]

33. People with disabilities, small children and hourly wage jobs have wanted to get rid of caucuses

for a long time now.

Is it because they "don't like Bernie," too?

[ehrnst]

72. "Mental Illnesses?"

Speak for yourself.

[zackymilly]

49. If Bernie becomes president, I hope this won't get him impeached. n/t

[ehrnst]

53. Of course that won't happen! Because everyone will be so happy

that he eliminated mosquitoes and cured cancer that they will demand that term limits on POTUS be eliminated forever!

The End.

[DanTex]

22. LOL. Bernie didn't pick "Shadow Inc" to rush a poorly tested app into production

while ignoring warnings that something like this could happen.

[ehrnst]

29. Talking about those new rules he insisted on seem to be a sore point for some...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=474738

You're welcome!

[Devil Child]

45. Sen. Sanders staffed Shadow Inc with a bunch of Clinton 2016 campaign staff!!

How dare he!

[lunasun]

83. Sanders is absolutely devious . It's no wonder "nobody liked him" in IA

[jmg257]

27. LoL - nice story

[Scurrilous]

57. A Retort. Retoot? Retweet?

Dueling Blazing Saddles.

[jmg257]

60. LOL!! Ah a great moment in cinema.

[Scurrilous]

61. Yep.

[awesomerwb1]

35. Bernie designed the app himself

His money pooping unicorn* had his people test it. TrUe StOrY!!

*Measured in billions.

[Devil Child]

36. I stubbed my toe while rushing to answer the phone. Fucking Sanders's fault!

[ehrnst]

39. Is there a sale on straw man somewhere?

[Devil Child]

42. Yes, but they're all sold out. Fucking Sanders!

[ehrnst]

44. Oh - they were on Amazon, then?

Of course.

[Devil Child]

54. I know! Bernie's Amazon presence is disqualifying!

Nefarious evidence of Amazon presence.

Even more evidence of Amazon double-talk!

When in doubt, always blame Sen. Sanders...

[ehrnst]

55. Sore spot, eh?

https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-calls-out-amazon-netflix-starbucks-other-companies-that-paid-0-federal-income-1477551

https://www.vox.com/2018/8/30/17797786/amazon-warehouse-conditions-bernie-sanders

https://theweek.com/speedreads/834228/bernie-sanders-says-millionaire-like-write-bestselling-book

Bernie's Amazon presence is disqualifying!

Your words, Hon, not mine.

[Devil Child]

59. Not really I ordered some meds off Amazon for it!

I’m fine with Sen. Warren and Sen. Sanders having amazon book sales and I’m fine with both of them winning. I’m also fine with both of them regulating Amazon heavily if either wins.

Banter aside, I believe ultimately we are (hopefully) on the same side wanting Trump removed.

[ehrnst]

63. As I pointed out - you said "disqualifying," not me.

And if someone who rails against Amazon and discredits any WAPO articles that don't flatter him because Bezos, while sharing some of the millions that they make with him from those book sales on his megacorp web portal can actually win the Democratic nomination this time around, then I'll be pulling the lever for them.

[oasis]

46. The "Iowa Caucus Chaos" story is expanding. Former Unity Commision

members will likely be asked to verify Penebaker's account. Stay tuned folks.

[Scurrilous]

50. Iowa Caucus Chaos Surging!

I say we ignore Iowa..it seems a silly place.

[ehrnst]

58. SURGE SURGE SURGE SURGE TEH SURGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SURGE SURGE SURGE SURGE SURGE SURGE SURGE SURGE SURGE SURGE SURGE SURGE

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(repeat)

[Scurrilous]

65. Herman and the Hermits rule: 2nd verse same as the first.

[Kurt V.]

56. the logic here or lack of is astounding. :(

the app was intentionally faulty to make sanders and his demand look bad. fixed it.

[ehrnst]

66. ....

[Scurrilous]

84. I think it goes deeper than that.

BRB Going to check Twitter for answers.

[Kurt V.]

90. this explains your original op. :)

[Scurrilous]

93. That place is a motherlode.

A never ending stream of...stuff. A news junkie's nirvana.

[GumboYaYa]

67. Look over there at Bernie; don't pay attention to how few people support Biden...

is not a strategy that wins elections.

[Scurrilous]

73. Still leading in Average National Polls: Biden +4.5%

State polls in here too. Don't bother with any states in the south. Bernie will never catch up there.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-primary-d/national/

[Hassin Bin Sober]

68. Biden is FOURTH!

4th!

[Voltaire2]

86. 4th is the new number 1.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

87. And a post caucus reporting issue caused by a vendor failure means it doesn't count!

[samnsara]

76. wow.....

[Tiggeroshii]

78. Nonsensical divisiveness

[ehrnst]

81. Because you say so? (nt)

[Tiggeroshii]

96. Because labeling an entire group and baselessly blaming them for something

No evidence suggests is the case, is the epitome of a divisive group attack. For instance: "Bernie and his people are responsible for -enter hyperbolic accusation here (Trump/botched voting/ poverty/ apocalypse)"

[Gravitycollapse]

100. But that's been the narrative all along. It's all the opposition has.

They can't win on principle or policy. They realize Sanders is a threat and have to turn him into a boogieman to scare away support. Clearly, it hasn't worked.

[Tiggeroshii]

105. What is sickening is how some people are willing divide us up and lose instead of

Support Bernie.

[Gothmog]

80. I agree

[Voltaire2]

85. wait I thought it was Putin who was responsible for all election chaos.

I'm so confused. I can never keep the villains straight. This is why I don't watch super hero movies.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

92. No, the guy who pushed for verifiable paper ballots to be counted is the bad guy!

Pay no attention to the Consultant/Insider owned company that was there to cash in on the contract and deliver a shit product to the Iowa Democratic Party who, by the way, signed of on said product.

[yaesu]

95. So, Iowa is now all Bernies fault?

[url=https://imgbb.com/][img][/img][/url]

[Gravitycollapse]

99. Translation: Our incompetence is now Bernie's fault

[Locrian]

101. tranlation #2....Biden did poorly so it must be someone else's fault - n/t

[Gravitycollapse]

102. Definitely part of it.

[Locrian]

106. then there's this...

App made by Clinton campaign veterans’ firm is behind Iowa caucuses debacle

https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/story/2020-02-04/clinton-campaign-vets-behind-2020-iowa-caucus-app-snafu?fbclid=IwAR3Rx9-jVw4iaP8ITPHIB9kVQ_-ldhg-C73ALVpQ4rMLoLebv2C27kbqZF8

[katmondoo]

103. I am beginning to have some serious doubts about Bernie

[ibegurpard]

104. Ridiculous

I will vote for Bernie or Biden. Personally I wish neither had entered the race this time but it is what it is.

[Yurovsky]

107. Seriously?

Biden has no one to blame but the man in the mirror. Perhaps he figured (like I did) that HRC was going to win a couple of terms, at which point he’d be too old to physically endure a campaign for POTUS. Maybe that impacted some decisions he made or how much effort he put into developing a money network for another run, as his “Jersey was being retired” so to speak.

But DJT won (sort of) and Biden finds himself more or less the heir to the last Democratic administration. But he’d made some errors in judgement, strategy, and tactics that have led to his campaign’s implosion. Not the first time. I was a Jesse Jackson supporter in 1988 and recall Biden’s campaign going down in flames. Was that the Rev. Jackson’s fault? Gov. Dukakis’? Bernie’s?

For crying out loud quit blaming Bernie.

Own your mistakes.

[keithbvadu2]

110. What is the best way to select/elect a candidate?

What is the best way to select/elect a candidate?

Whatever method is more favorable to your candidate.

[samnsara]

111. figures

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

112. Okay, now I've heard it all!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[LanternWaste]

121. After your faith-based prophecies of last week, I'm not surprised to see your deflection.

(evolution is science. revolution is violence)

[robbedvoter]

118. It has been predicted last year that the changes he demanded

would mess up the reporting of results

Link to tweet

?s=21

[Politicub]

125. I don't think the Sanders changes caused the Iowa mess.

His supporters basically added two more data points for precinct captains to track. Frankly, I would have thought they would have been tracking those statistics anyway.

It shouldn't have been something as stupid as an app that caused the problems, but it was the culprit. Even worse, the organizers did not have a backup plan in place should the app fail. And fail it did -- spectacularly.

Caucuses are an anachronism that should go away. If anything good comes from Iowa, it will be the nail in the coffin of caucuses.

[Scurrilous]

129. Amen.

According to the article Sanders lobbied to keep the format. It benefited him. So he used the 'unity' thing to skew things in his favor. Caucuses for 1 and 3. With 2 a primary in next door NH. So all 3 looking good for him. Murderer's Row. Total self server. Buttigieg and chaos threw a wrench in that. Serves him right.

[Gothmog]

142. The problems came from changes demanded by sanders