Is Van Jones trying to rewrite history in order to help Bernie now?

[pnwmom]

He just said that in 2016 she didn't have enough pledged delegates to put her over the finish line, so there would have been a brokered convention except that Bernie gave her some of his!

But she earned the last pledged delegates she needed, for a majority of pledged, when she won CA. And she had the support of hundreds of superdelegates.

Is Van Jones trying to rewrite history to help Bernie now? It sure seems that way.

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/07/primary-results-latest-news-from-california-new-jersey-and-more.html

But even before California was called, NBC made a major announcement just as results from the state first started rolling in. Based on initial reports, NBC News was able to allocate 140 pledged delegates each to Clinton and Sanders. Importantly, this gave Clinton 2,043 pledged delegates, guaranteeing that she will have an outright pledged delegate majority over Sanders no matter what else happens.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries

Six states held their primaries on June 7. Clinton won in California, New Jersey, New Mexico and South Dakota. Sanders won Montana and North Dakota, the latter being the only caucus contest held on that day.[126] Clinton finally declared victory on the evening of June 7, as the results ensured that she had won a majority of the pledged delegates and the popular vote.

[honest.abe]

1. It sickening how these Bernie surrogates have to twist the truth to help him win.

Reminds me of those surrounding Trump.

[DanTex]

16. LOL. Van Jones is not a Bernie surrogate.

[pnwmom]

30. Why would he lie for him? Bernie didn't give Hillary any delegates.

She won because she had a solid majority of pledged delegates and more than 500 supers backing her -- all eligible to vote in the first round.

[DanTex]

32. He didn't lie. People are so used to the media lying to smear Bernie that when someone like

Van Jones defends Bernie with the truth, it seems like a shock.

[pnwmom]

33. It was a falsehood. How do you know whether he was lying

or just deluded?

Hillary didn't need or get a single delegate from Bernie. She had a majority of pledged delegates plus more than 500 supers backing her, all eligible to vote in the first round.

Bernie's delegates were not needed or used.

[DanTex]

34. Van Jones told the truth. Obviously.

[pnwmom]

35. He told an undeniable falsehood. The only question is whether it was a deliberate lie.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/clinton-delegates-pledged-224044

If the Democratic primary wasn’t over Monday, it is now.

Hillary Clinton has reached a majority of pledged delegates, according to projections from three networks and FiveThirtyEight.

The Associated Press crowned Clinton the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Monday evening after additional superdelegates pledged to support her at the Philadelphia convention. The superdelegate support catapulted Clinton to the 2,383-delegate mark, enough to clinch the Democratic nomination.

[DanTex]

37. He told a plain truth, and it's bizarre to try to deny that.

[pnwmom]

38. Prove it. Show me a single reliable source that says Hillary needed delegates FROM BERNIE to win.

[brush]

41. Hahahahahahahaha. Good story.

[honest.abe]

48. I never watched his show and I never will.

[George II]

2. Van Jones seems to be a man on a mission, and it's not to help the Democratic Party.

[NurseJackie]

12. I can't stand him.

[George II]

15. He pontificates and seems so smug about it. He's no political genius.

[brush]

46. Yep. Jones is always, always, in the middle of some posterior osculation stunt.

On this one I can't figure out if it's on Sanders or trump. I'm never sure of his agenda—and I dare say, neither is he.

[W_HAMILTON]

3. I heard Van Jones say that and wanted to smack him.

I grow so tired of that man. Why CNN continues to have him on, I have no clue. He must have locked them into one helluva contract.

[lapucelle]

4. Van Jones : Donald Trump Became President of the United States Tonight

What the Hell, Van Jones?

https://www.gq.com/story/what-the-hell-van-jones

Have a donut, Van.

[Cha]

10. van jones is a tool for trump

Van Jones : Donald Trump Became President of the United States Tonight

[LiberalFighter]

5. Some people ignore the facts.

If Sanders had given Hillary delegates that would had been major news.

[pnwmom]

6. Right. What was major news was that on June 7th Hillary won the nomination

based on the majority of pledged delegates. (Since she already had hundreds of supers supporting her.)

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/clinton-delegates-pledged-224044

If the Democratic primary wasn’t over Monday, it is now.

Hillary Clinton has reached a majority of pledged delegates, according to projections from three networks and FiveThirtyEight.

The Associated Press crowned Clinton the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Monday evening after additional superdelegates pledged to support her at the Philadelphia convention. The superdelegate support catapulted Clinton to the 2,383-delegate mark, enough to clinch the Democratic nomination.

[HarlanPepper]

7. Van is one of the biggest idiots on TV.

[Cha]

11. No doubt.. and there's so many of them.

[Celerity]

8. you are misreading it, she did NOT have a majority of ALL the delegates, only the majority in terms

of pledged delegates.

re-read your OP

Clinton 2,043 pledged delegates, guaranteeing that she will have an outright pledged delegate majority over Sanders no matter what else happens.

In terms of ALL the delegates available, she had around 48% BEFORE super delegates were added in.

There were a grand total of 4,765 total delegates, so 2383 total were needed to win outright, without the aid of the super delegates. She end up with only 2271 in terms of pledged delegates.

here is the chart from you own link



and also

from your link

There are 4,051 pledged delegates and 714 superdelegates in the 2016 cycle.

[pnwmom]

9. You are misreading it. She had enough to win the majority of pledged delegates

and she ALSO had more than 500 super delegates. Despite what Van Jones said, she didn't need any delegates from Bernie to win.

[Celerity]

13. no, you are wrong, sorry

from your own link

There are 4,051 pledged delegates and 714 superdelegates in the 2016 cycle.

That is 4765

2383 was the magic number needed to win

based off just pledged delegates only, she had 2271

[pnwmom]

17. Van Jones lie is that she needed some of Bernie's delegates to put her over the top.

She did NOT.

She had a majority of pledged delegates. She merely needed some of the super delegates that had already voiced support for HER -- not Bernie.

[Celerity]

19. now you are moving the goalpost

this is exactly what you said in your OP

you said that Jones said

He just said that in 2016 she didn't have enough pledged delegates to put her over the finish line

that is true

she was 112 delegates short

as for what was said following that

show me the link to what he said, an exact quote


but

what I said is 100% correct

she did not have enough from just pledged delegates to win without some superdelegates added in

[pnwmom]

22. No, I'm not. Van Jones falsely said she needed Bernie to give her delegates.

She did NOT. She had more than 500 superdelegates who supported her, and they were all eligible to vote for her in the first round -- on top of the majority of pledged delegates.

[Cha]

14. Thank you!

[Celerity]

18. the OP is wrong, do the maths yourself

What Jones said was correct.

There were 4,051 pledged delegates and 714 superdelegates in the 2016 cycle.

That is 4765

2383 was the magic number needed to win

based off just pledged delegates only, she had 2271 (47.66% of ALL delegates)

she was 112 delegates short until the superdelegates were added in

from the OP's own link

[pnwmom]

23. He FALSELY said Hillary needed some delegates FROM BERNIE to go over the top.

No, she just needed what she already had: a majority of the pledged delegates and hundreds of super delegates who were already supporting her and were eligible to vote in the first round.

[Celerity]

28. I have not seen that, I only addressed the fact she did not have enough to win outright

just based off pledged delegates

which the OP said Jones said here

He just said that in 2016 she didn't have enough pledged delegates to put her over the finish line

that part is 100% correct

but..............

IF Jones did go on to say that Clinton needed 'some of Bernie's' delegates to win (I would need to see a transcript or at least a video, neither of which was posted) then he is just a fool, as there were a shedload more than enough superdelegates who voted for Hillary that put her FAR over the top of the magic number of 2383. She was only 112 short, which was such a tiny number. She did not need ANY of Bernies pledged to switch.

That SD vote was was RIGHTLY done, btw, I have ZERO issue with that happening, as she won 47.66% of the TOTAL delegates before the SD's were added in, and had close to 4 million more popular votes so was the clear winner.

My entire issue was with fact she was short of winning until SD's were added in. That is just a fact.

I would love to see a video or a transcript about the Bernie delegates issue. Jones is crazy if he did say that part. If he did say that, I will slam him any chance I get (I hate CNN and almost never watch it anyway, so it isn't like I am some Van Jones fangirl anyway)

Hope that clears it all up as to where I stand.

cheers

[pnwmom]

29. He did say that, and here's another poster who heard the same thing I did.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=593744

[Celerity]

31. well then he is a damn fool, but again that was not what I was disputing

Do you have a link to the video or the transcript by chance? TIA

[pnwmom]

36. He just said it tonight, so I doubt it's online yet, if it ever will be. nt

[Celerity]

39. does he have his own show? or was he a guest on another show, and if so, whose show?

I will try and track it down with that info, if you have it

[pnwmom]

40. I'm not certain but I think I saw him on Anderson Cooper's show.

And here are a couple others who heard him.

Link to tweet

Mahlers5th
@CarolynRodham
“Hillary was close in 2016 and Bernie gave her the delegates to get the nomination.” @VanJones68

Huh? Hillary had 2,220pledged delegates (Bernie had 1,831) and won the popular vote by close to 4M. Her SD’s put her over the top, not Bernie. #CNN

Link to tweet

Purity For Thee But Not For Me
@TheePurity
I heard that too. Wow, way to erase Hillary's accomplishment, Van Jones. Here's the info on pledged delegates from @FiveThirtyEight
View image on Twitter

[Celerity]

42. thanks, I will try and track it down, seems like a really shit thing to say

hugz

[pnwmom]

43. Thanks for understanding why I was so shocked, Celerity.

[Celerity]

44. all good, I was just got hung up on the other part, which was off on the maths, and blew past

the 'took or needed Bernie's delegates part' which is what (rightly so) everyone else was going off about, lolol.

cheers

[pnwmom]

45. And obviously I could have expressed myself more clearly the first time.

Have a good evening!

[Celerity]

47. damn internet! lololol

[kacekwl]

20. Van Jones is not a serious person

except in his own mind.

[DanTex]

21. This is kind of funny, really. Everyone is so used to the media constantly bashing Bernie

that when someone like Van Jones actually makes a truthful point in Bernie's defense, it seems shocking.

[pnwmom]

24. Van Jones made a false point. Hillary didn't need a single delegate from Bernie.

She had the majority of pledged delegates and she had more than 500 super delegates who were openly backing her, and were eligible to vote in the first round.

They were NOT Bernie's gift to Hillary.

[blm]

26. Prove it. Show the source that spread this lie you believe.

[Blue_true]

25. Personally? My opinion of Van Jones is lower that a snake's belly passing through a trench. nt

[Metodiko]

27. Jones is a Sanders/Tulsi fan

Who doesn't care about the Democratic party.