The absurdity of the "Bernie wrote the rules" talking point.

[DanTex]

I guess this is the media's new go-to anti-Bernie lie. The latest in a long line of them.

What actually happened: there was a Unity Reform Commission tasked with updating the nomination process. There were some Bernie supporters on the commission, but they were a minority. The Bernie supporters, since they believed in democracy, wanted to get rid of superdelegates, because obviously. But they were a minority, so they weren't able to. Instead, there was a compromise reached, where superdelegates could only vote on the second ballot.

And now, in an act of supreme hypocrisy, the media is claiming that Bernie "wrote the rules" that allow superdelegates to override the will of the electorate. Even though Bernie wasn't even on the commission, and his supporters wanted to get rid of the very superdelegates that are now being blamed on Bernie.

As an analogy, supposed Bernie wanted a $15 minimum wage, others wanted a $9 minimum wage and they reached a compromise at $12. Then, it turns out that at $12 a lot of people still can't pay their bills. And now suppose the very people who wanted the $9 minimum wage suddenly turn around and blame Bernie for the $12 minimum wage not being high enough. Yeah. It's nuts.

[Skya Rhen]

1. The delegates will decide.

[ripcord]

59. And if it splits the party no problem right?

[rzemanfl]

2. NTSA. n/t

[Squinch]

3. Dan, it's just silly now.

[DanTex]

4. The media's Bernie-bashing is indeed silly. And it's ramped up a lot since he took the lead in polls

I agree entirely. But it won't stop me from pointing out the truth.

[Squinch]

6. Sigh. SMH.

[DanTex]

8. Indeed SMH.

[LanternWaste]

36. Must be weird to reach so far down as to pretend others agree with you.

I get grade school kids doing that, it was standard lunchtime fare when I was in 3rd grade. But c'mon-- you reflect on your candidate so poorly in doing so.

Seriously... adults don't do that unless they have absolutely nothing else to offer.

[ehrnst]

46. The "I know you are but what am I?" reposte.

Is that where you've landed now?

[33taw]

51. That seems to happenwhenwver a candidate takes

the lead. They get a Target on their back.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

52. It's BEYOND silly... hopefully, it'll end once President Sanders is inaugurated!!

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

[treestar]

57. You do know that the media will give "President Sanders" all the same

criticizing that every President gets, right?

[R B Garr]

11. TOTALLY silly!

[xmas74]

30. He's exhausting.

He knows his candidate is ready to sink a bit and will not reach the needed numbers to prevent a brokered convention. Now it's nonstop panic and a takeover of the boards. I'm thinking of putting him on ignore for the rest of the primary.

Btw-my nephew in Korea had his leave cancelled.

[Squinch]

31. Oh, no. I am so sorry. And I am guessing there is no knowing when his next one could be.

The poor kid.

[xmas74]

32. Technically he could take it

But spend over 2 weeks in quarantine in California with people who actually have it. It just isn't worth the risk.

[Squinch]

33. Good gawd, no. And why bother?

[xmas74]

34. So he can get sick too?

His odds of staying healthy are better back in Korea.

One good thing: people are mad at Trump about the Corona virus.

[Squinch]

35. But as I have said before, he has the freakish good luck of the truly evil. He may very

well be right that it will all go away in April. Then he'll gin up another conspiracy theory about how it was a Democratic plot.

[W_HAMILTON]

5. You have the nerve to post this after you were called out for lying?

AS YOU WERE ALREADY TOLD SEVERAL TIMES:

Once again, that's the point of a commission-type format: it requires a consensus being reached among all parties involved, not just one, and not just a majority.

These are the rules Sanders agreed to, PERIOD. His people negotiated for them. He personally ENDORSED them. If he disagreed with them, he could have refused to support them, in which case they would not have been forwarded for a full vote of the party. As has already been pointed out to you, his personal support of them is what ultimately pushed them across the finish line.

ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY.

It was a COMMISSION. THERE WERE NO UP-AND-DOWN VOTES. The only proposals that moved forward for a full party vote were the ones that were agreed to by all parties involved in the Unity Reform Commission, of which Sanders was most certainly a part of (and the only candidate currently running that can claim that).

No matter how many times you repeat a lie, it's still a lie.

Stop with the lies.

[DanTex]

7. I'm telling the truth. Some anonymous person calls me a liar? LOL. Yeah, that happens.

[W_HAMILTON]

28. Then post the up-and-down votes that you refer to that Sanders and his minority lost.

As I called on you to do yesterday, before you backed down and relented because you know that they do not exist.

Anything and everything that the Unity Reform Commission proposed and passed on to the full party for a vote was agreed to by all the members or else it would have not been forwarded. There were no up-and-down votes. There was a consensus reached through compromises. No one got everything they wanted, but everyone agreed with the reforms that were proposed or else they were not agreed to and were not voted on by the full party.

How despicable to outright lie about something like this, especially after being called out on it yesterday. Have you no shame? Is Sanders """winning""" worth it to abandon all sense of honesty and reasonableness?

[DanTex]

38. It was a compromise. Everyone knows that.

Bernie's people couldn't get supers eliminated, so they compromised. And now, ludicrously, people are trying to blame Bernie for the superdelegates that his members on the commission weren't able to eliminate completely.

Beyond absurd. But that's the way anti-Bernie smears go.

[W_HAMILTON]

40. Yes, that's how compromises work.

No one got everything they wanted. Many Democrats felt that it was insulting to reduce the number of superdelegates and have a part-time temporary Democrat that went back on his word and left the Democratic Party when it no longer benefited him dictate to them what the rules should be for governing how their party selects a nominee, but guess what? They also had to compromise. And the rules that everyone is now operating under are the rules that Sanders and his people both helped write, agreed to, and even endorsed (by Sanders himself personally). Face the facts already.

[DanTex]

41. Exactly. And now people want to blame Bernie for exactly the thing he didn't want.

Like I said, it's as if $9 and $15 people compromise on a $12 minimum wage, and then the $9 people turn around and blame the $15 people for the $12 minimum wage not being high enough.

[ehrnst]

69. Bernie helped to draft the rules that he's complaining are "unfair."

He worked to neuter Superdelegates by banishing them from the first round of voting, but keeping their participation in a brokered convention. Not surprising, as historical record shows, Superdelegates have not done what told them to do.

The decision to relegate superdelegates — now called “automatic delegates” — to the second ballot in a contested convention consumed the DNC for nearly two years after the 2016 election. Superdelegates overwhelmingly sided with Hillary Clinton, infuriating Sanders’ supporters.

The rule change was widely viewed as a major victory for the Democratic Party’s left flank. At the time, Perez called the delegate overhaul “historic,” while progressive Democrats and many moderates lauded its appeal to young voters skeptical of centralized party power.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/31/dnc-superdelegates-110083

It appears he assumed there would be little to no competition this time around, so a brokered convention wasn't a scenario that he anticipated.

He assumed incorrectly, and now he's upset that the very rules he worked to change to give him more of an advantage against Superdelegates won't give him an advantage at all, and in fact give Superdelegates (who, as history shows, have in the past not complied with his directives) in the current scenario a specific directive to determine, in a brokered convention, who the best candidate will be.

On May 29, 2016, Sanders said superdelegates had the “very grave responsibility to make sure that Trump [is not] elected president of the United States. Vote for the strongest candidate.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/20/bernie-sanders-pushed-contested-convention-2016-now-he-wants-avoid-one/

Where do you propose "blame" for Bernie's frustration lies, if not with Bernie?

Face the facts already.

[lapucelle]

76. Superdelegate BS hired superdelegate Nina Turner to run his campaign.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_2020_Democratic_Party_automatic_delegates

[brush]

70. She/he's got receipts. You're losing. Best to stop digging that hole you're in.

[R B Garr]

9. But what happened when it was clear Bernie lost?

And why are you leaving that out? Would that also be a “lie”? (Your word)

It seems maybe all the news of events weren’t available to you at that time, because you still have some gaps in the recollections. I’m sure it’s not intentional, though, as lots of us chose to quit the news for awhile.

[DanTex]

12. If Bernie doesn't get the most pledged delegates, he shouldn't and won't be the nominee.

If he does, he should, and will. Unless we want to fracture the party and get Trump to get re-elected. Which I don't want.

[sweetloukillbot]

14. You misspelled "Majority" nt

[DanTex]

15. No, I mean the most. It would be suicidal to give the nomination to someone who got even less

delegates. Trump would win in a landslide, the party would fracture.

If someone else gets more pledged delegates, more power to them, that other person should and will be the nominee.

[sweetloukillbot]

18. Boy, Bernie shouldn't have agreed to the process then.... nt

Pity Bernie Stans don't understand majority rule.

[sweetloukillbot]

19. And are willing to "Fracture the Party" if the rules aren't broken for them nt

[ehrnst]

43. "It would be suicidal to give the nomination to someone who got even less delegates."

If someone else gets more pledged delegates, more power to them, that other person should and will be the nominee.

You think?

On May 29, 2016, Sanders said superdelegates had the “very grave responsibility to make sure that Trump [is not] elected president of the United States. Vote for the strongest candidate.

And even as Clinton secured the Democratic nomination the following week, Sanders continued to push for superdelegates to vote to override Clinton’s pledged delegate majority.

Told on June 7, 2016, that his superdelegate convention push would defy history and the will of the voters, Sanders said, “Defying history is what this campaign has been about.”

Bernie Sanders pushed for a contested convention in 2016. Now he wants to avoid one. Feb 27, 2020

[JudyM]

61. Um. He was arguing that he should get the votes of superdels *for states that he won*...

Check your facts.

[ehrnst]

62. No, Superdelegates are 'unpledged" delegates - and not the delegates from the states.

Check your knowledge and bias.

And re-read my post a bit more carefully this time. I've highlighted the part that you didn't understand:

And even as Clinton secured the Democratic nomination the following week, Sanders continued to push for superdelegates to vote to override Clinton’s pledged delegate majority.

[JudyM]

63. They hail from states.

[ehrnst]

64. Nope. Not the same thing as a 'pledged delegate." And if they do serve as a pledged delegate, they

vote as a pledged delegate and not a superdelegate, which is an 'unpledged' delegate.

Democratic superdelegates are free to support any candidate for the presidential nomination. This contrasts with pledged delegates who are selected based on the party primaries and caucuses in each U.S. state, in which voters choose among candidates for the party's presidential nomination.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate

So no, they can't be both, and they are not interchangeable. As the article I shared pointed out, Sanders wanted Superdelegates to override the pledged delegates that represented the results of the state primaries/caucuses that HRC won.

You're welcome.

As the record shows, Sanders was pressing for all Superdelegates to override the pledged delegates, not just specific superdelegates from specific states. Where on earth did you hear that?

[R B Garr]

20. Now you are shifting again. So much shifting. nt

[DanTex]

22. No shift. Whoever gets the most should be the nominee. Democracy. Simple.

[R B Garr]

23. That's not what Bernie says. nt

[DanTex]

24. Yes it is.

[R B Garr]

25. But we know you have some gaps in your recollections

in the totality of what Bernie has said and fought for. It’s okay, a lot of people chose to block out the news at times.

[DanTex]

26. Um, no, there aren't. The unity commission went down exactly as I described.

[ehrnst]

65. He's been back and forth on it, that's for sure.

On May 29, 2016, Sanders said superdelegates had the “very grave responsibility to make sure that Trump [is not] elected president of the United States. Vote for the strongest candidate.

And even as Clinton secured the Democratic nomination the following week, Sanders continued to push for superdelegates to vote to override Clinton’s pledged delegate majority.

Told on June 7, 2016, that his superdelegate convention push would defy history and the will of the voters, Sanders said, “Defying history is what this campaign has been about.””

Bernie Sanders pushed for a contested convention in 2016. Now he wants to avoid one. Feb 27, 2020

[ehrnst]

42. "Whoever gets the most should be the nominee. Democracy. Simple."

On May 29, 2016, Sanders said superdelegates had the “very grave responsibility to make sure that Trump [is not] elected president of the United States. Vote for the strongest candidate.

And even as Clinton secured the Democratic nomination the following week, Sanders continued to push for superdelegates to vote to override Clinton’s pledged delegate majority.

Told on June 7, 2016, that his superdelegate convention push would defy history and the will of the voters, Sanders said, “Defying history is what this campaign has been about.””

Bernie Sanders pushed for a contested convention in 2016. Now he wants to avoid one. Feb 27, 2020.

[greatauntoftriplets]

27. I've never seen goal posts moved so much!

It's like watching a tennis game.

[ehrnst]

44. "If Bernie doesn't get the most pledged delegates, he shouldn't and won't be the nominee."

On May 29, 2016, Sanders said superdelegates had the “very grave responsibility to make sure that Trump [is not] elected president of the United States. Vote for the strongest candidate.

And even as Clinton secured the Democratic nomination the following week, Sanders continued to push for superdelegates to vote to override Clinton’s pledged delegate majority.

Told on June 7, 2016, that his superdelegate convention push would defy history and the will of the voters, Sanders said, “Defying history is what this campaign has been about.”

Bernie Sanders pushed for a contested convention in 2016. Now he wants to avoid one. Feb 27, 2020.

[Celerity]

53. so you are saying if Berne gets 36%, Biden 33%, Bloomberg 18%, etc etc

that Bernie should auto get the nomination?

Just Biden and Bloomberg alone are at 51%

Do THAT (it will never happen, the others will unite to block Bernie if those are the numbers) and the party rips itself apart

the same as it would would rip itself apart if Berne ends up on 45% (not saying 45% is the cut off) or more and is denied

[sweetloukillbot]

13. Just wait till he needs the SDs this time...

We'll see him flip-flop once more. And the Bros will twist themselves into pretzels explaining how he isn't actually flip-flopping.

[R B Garr]

21. Exactly! Shape shifting again. nt

[ehrnst]

71. This would be complete reversal number three.

1. The very of Superdelegates is "undemocratic!"

2. Superdelegates have an duty to trigger a brokered convention, despite another candidate getting the full number of pledged delegates, in order for them pick the "best candidate" and override the popular vote!

3. Superdelegates are "undemocratic" but I will agree that they can intervene if there is a brokered convention due to there being no candidate that gets the minimum number of pledged delegates.

4. Superdelegates choosing a candidate in a brokered convention is "undemocratic" and the nomination should be based on the popular vote!

Source:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/20/bernie-sanders-pushed-contested-convention-2016-now-he-wants-avoid-one/

[LexVegas]

10. ...

[mikeysnot]

16. yeah, joe puts me to sleep also...

[George II]

17. Everyone knows the "evolution" of the rules between the last primary and today.

[awesomerwb1]

29. Wow this AGAIN?

Maybe it's time for you to take a break from DU ? Go read a book, or knock on doors for bernard.

Seriously. You're spamming the forum now.

[LanternWaste]

37. My guess is a very dramatic and emotional flame-out is forthcoming.

[SidDithers]

39. You're right. "Bernie aaproved the rules" is more accurate...nt

Sid

[ehrnst]

45. You use what "supporters said" to shore up a claim about what "Bernie did"

The absurdity of the "Bernie wrote the rules" talking point.

and his supporters wanted to get rid of the very superdelegates that are now being blamed on Bernie.

[wundermaus]

47. Just so we are clear on the "nominating process"...

Former State Representative Anton Gunn (D) South Carolina
27Feb2020 twitter post -

Link to tweet

Sure sounds a lot like Tweedism to me.
What do you think?

fyi - reference -

[AncientGeezer]

48. I'll repeat to you what I said to you in a different OP

Maybe Sen. Sanders should register as a Democrat and STAY a Democrat....if he wants to try to dictate to the commission.

Or he abides by the rules he agreed to...to run as a Democratic candidate for POTUS.

[wundermaus]

49. I think you are missing my point.

And it looks like you seem to think I am missing yours.
I guess you prefer I should address your concerns first before you consider my point.
It seems so typical for folks to talk past each other and be to focused on our own point of view.
If only we (democrats) could find common ground some where in all this discourse, imagine what we could accomplish.

Senator Sanders is running as a democratic socialist in a democratic party's primary.
Given your concerns about him not being a "democrat", what is he doing you our primary then?
And for that matter what is Bloomberg doing in the democratic primary? Wasn't he a republican just a few years ago? And doesn't he also fund republicans? Where is the cut off for being qualified to run as a democrat? Could a republican change his tie from red to blue and then run as a democrat? Sure does seem so. The lobbyists and cooperate donors don't care which side of the political spectrum the the candidate is. they fund both sides to win and retain power of control in both parties.

I think Senator Sanders is being consistent and honest in his party affiliations and political identity. I respect that nobility of character and I hope you can appreciate the difficulty he thus has with being transparent with the electorate.

Amy would be a much better candidate in my eyes if she spent less time attacking Bernie and more time presenting her solutions to the problems that face us. For the most part, I like what she has said when she is not attacking. I just agree with what Bernie says more, that's all.

Do you see the super delegates rules are not democratic, right? What if the shoe was on the other foot, how would it feel to have your winning candidate passed over because "such and such" was not looked upon favorably by the super delegates (funders).

We are the democratic party, not the Tweed party. We should act in accordance with what we call ourselves.

Instead of fixating on what separates us, we might try to find common ground.

Who ever wins the most delegates in the primary should be the nominee. Anything else is a sham. The reaction of "selecting" the candidate instead of electing the candidate by the majority of citizens will leave a bitter taste. We will all get a front row set to the circus that will ensue. I have voted in every presidential election since 1972. For me, and I suspect likewise for you, we will vote our conscience. I wish you well and I hope the best for all of us.

Your moniker in this forum is Ancient Geezer.
I like that name; you and I might have more in common than you may think.
You are a relatively recent member of this forum, 2017... I have been around almost 14 years... so maybe I'm an older geezer here!

[AncientGeezer]

50. " Who ever wins the most delegates in the primary should be the nominee"

That's not the rules he agreed to..to run as a Democratic candidate

[wundermaus]

58. Will you concede the sElection rule is not democratic?

If I concede the super delegate selection rule was imposed on (and agreed to by) the democratic party by lobbyists and corporate donors? Bernie did not impose the super delegate process on the democratic party.

The rules of selection based on Tweedism, not rules of election based on democracy.

Who are the Delegates and who are funding them?
What gives them so much power to select the nominee?

What is the point of primary elections if the nominee is selected regardless of delegates majority?
Why would you, a democrat want to enforce and sustain such a corrupt selection policy?
Rules (laws, too) can change or be removed.

I have been a democrat for almost 50 years. When are we ever, once and for all, going to break the chains of corruption in our political system?
We as a nation are not unique in this fatal flaw, but we can change the rules to make it so.

Will you agree with me the removal of super delegates selection process from our primary elections is critical to the fidelity of our founding father's intent?

[AncientGeezer]

73. I'll cncede it's the rules the Semator agreed to.

[wundermaus]

74. fair enough.

Alas, we are at an impasse.
We will know soon enough the implications of willful, blissful ignorance in the flaws of this process.
We shall witness "together" the results.
Have a good day.

[treestar]

54. I recall the Bernie supporters thought the superdelegates

were a terrible thing until near the end, when they changed their minds, thinking the superdelegates could all vote for Bernie and he'd win in spite of the voters.

Bernie supporters then spend the next four years claiming the DNC "cheated" Bernie of the nomination.

We're tired of them complaining about the process of a party Bernie only belongs to in order to run for President.

[DanTex]

55. I was a Hillary supporter in 2016, and Obama in 2008, and I've been against superdelegates

overriding the voters in every election, including this one. It's a bad idea, whether it's 2008, 2016, 2020, or any other year.

[ehrnst]

67. "been against superdelegates overriding the voters in every election"

That has not always been the position of your favored candidate. History shows he made an impassioned case for Superdelegates overriding the voters to give him the nomination at the convention, after campaigning on how undemocratic their existence was.

On May 29, 2016, Sanders said superdelegates had the “very grave responsibility to make sure that Trump [is not] elected president of the United States. Vote for the strongest candidate.

And even as Clinton secured the Democratic nomination the following week, Sanders continued to push for superdelegates to vote to override Clinton’s pledged delegate majority.

Told on June 7, 2016, that his superdelegate convention push would defy history and the will of the voters, Sanders said, “Defying history is what this campaign has been about.””

Bernie Sanders pushed for a contested convention in 2016. Now he wants to avoid one. Feb 27, 2020

[wundermaus]

60. It was a Hail Mary moment...

When you are drowning, even sea water is an option.
And we all now see the result of that.

[ehrnst]

66. By "even sea water is an option" you mean even reversing completely ones position on what is

and is not "undemocratic" is "an option" in a "Hail Mary" moment?

And by 'drowning' you mean seeing one's preferred candidate losing a primary by a wide margin of the popular vote?

[wundermaus]

72. indeed... interesting dissection of my analogies

An undemocratic selection of a democratic candidate is a hail Mary and indeed an option. It is also an oxymoron.

The 2016 Presidential selection process is an example of what I mean by "drowning" and is a similar MO in play in our democratic primary: Popular vote succumbing to back room deals. Not a pretty way for democracy to die.

[ehrnst]

75. So that's a yes to my questions?

[W_HAMILTON]

77. I don't know what you are going on about...

...but Hillary won a MAJORITY of both the popular vote and (non-superdelegate) delegates in 2016 -- you know this and accept this, correct?

[myohmy2]

56. well...

...if Bernie 'wrote' the rules, maybe Bernie should 're-write' the rules...

...power to the People...

[ehrnst]

68. ...I can imagine he's trying his best...

...I understand he 'never changes' and is as constant as the North Star...

On May 29, 2016, Sanders said superdelegates had the “very grave responsibility to make sure that Trump [is not] elected president of the United States. Vote for the strongest candidate.

And even as Clinton secured the Democratic nomination the following week, Sanders continued to push for superdelegates to vote to override Clinton’s pledged delegate majority.

Told on June 7, 2016, that his superdelegate convention push would defy history and the will of the voters, Sanders said, “Defying history is what this campaign has been about.”

Bernie Sanders pushed for a contested convention in 2016. Now he wants to avoid one. Feb 27, 2020

... ...