HRC would have been nominated without the superdelegates...that proves we don't NEED them.

[Ken Burch]

191. What is your issue with how 2008 turned out?

Last edited Tue Nov 7, 2017, 05:42 PM - Edit history (1)

That was nine years ago. It's over. And it's absurd to be refighting the primaries when those primaries resulted in the election of a Democratic president with majority popular support. Let it go already.

Nothing would have been different in the last eight years had HRC been president instead of Obama. The results we had in those eight years were the exact same results we'd have had, no matter which of them had been president. Let that one go already.

If Texas has removed the two-step, why did you bring it up? If it's a moot point(I don't LIVE in Texas and can't be expected to know everything about how specifically Texas politics is run).

As to Sheila Jackson Lee...I just showed how my proposals would empower her and the rest of the CBC. They got nothing from HRC by throwing their support to her before most people voted-they'd have won much more by staying neutral and playing queen-or-kingmakers. I wish the congressmember well, agree with her more than you do(if you backed HRC in 2008, you were taking a position on the contest opposed by over 90% of the CNC, and unlike you, were I a member of Congress, I would vote for the CBC's Alternative Federal Budget).

On the technical matter of delegates being unbound...it's an irrelevant point. We haven't had a convention in the modern history of the Democratic Party(prior to 1932, it was for all practical purposes an entirely different party) in which any significant number of delegates have broken with the candidate they were essentially pledged to. And there was no convention in that time when there was any evidence that any significant number of delegates pledged to the eventual nominee came anywhere close to considering breaking with that nominee(including Chicago in 1968, when every single delegate pledged to Hubert Humphrey KNEW that in voting to nominate him, and also in voting to back Johnson's position on the war, they were voting to make it impossible for this party to hang onto the White House). I grant that, in theory, any delegate can vote for anyone they wished to vote for, but that is only in theory. The option to break with a pledge to a candidate doesn't exist "in the real world".

Again, you're insulting me by accusing me of not living in the real world.

Here's how real world I've been.

In addition to attending several Alaska Democratic conventions...some in years when you had to fly to three separate rounds of caucuses and sleep on somebody's floor while doing so.

I've given speeches for presidential candidates at two rounds of precinct caucuses and wrote the speech given by someone else for a third.

I've campaigned door-to-door for Democratic congressional and legislative and U.S. Senate candidates there...in late October and early November...when it gets dark at 4 in the afternoon and when doorbelling and canvassing involving walking large neighborhoods in a slashing rainstorm when its 35 degrees and there's a 40 MPH wind in my face. That is as real world as it gets.

And if anybody doubts it, I'm willing to get important Democratic figures, including at least one pro-HRC former Democratic National Committeewoman and current member of the Alaska State House, to vouch for me on it.

Your continued implication that I'm not involved in real world politics is a personal insult and a despicable lie.. There's no reason to make it about me at all-since I've never made anything about you. We both have equal authority to speak on things here and you have no reason to try and use personal derision to shut me up.

These tactics make you sound like an insecure bully-one in particular.

Why would you WANT to sound like that?