Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Hillary Clinton
In reply to the discussion: So there was a campaign conference call today with reporters [View all]Rose Siding
(32,629 posts)56. He's serious. Just found a transcript and he researched the plot back to 1980
If you are the frontrunner in the nominating process, even if you have a significant delegate lead, that delegate lead with pledged delegates can become very soft if you don't continue to win. That's the point I'm trying to illustrate.
We don't have a plan at the moment to start calling all the Clinton delegates once they get selected and try to sway them individually to vote for Bernie Sanders. But we do believe that if we can succeed in this last half of the process as much as Hillary did or even more so, that there will be enormous pressure on people who are delegates at this convention to do the right and responsible thing.
We think the right and responsible thing will be to support the candidate who is the strongest candidate to go up against the Republicans, particularly if the Republicans select Donald Trump as the nominee. We really think it changes the game in a fundamental way.
The Democrats will be deeply concerned about having the possibility of a guy like Trump being the President of the United States.
So, as to the standard that I'm referring to in the Democratic Party. In 1980, we had the big fight over this. The standard was that a delegate who didn't vote for a candidate for whom they were elected could be removed physically from the floor of the convention and replaced by an alternate who was pledged to that candidate who would cast the vote in favor of that candidate.
After the '80 convention and the Hunt commission, the standard in the Democratic Party was changed to the standard we now refer to as "fair reflection." That is embodied in the rules of delegate selection, and also in the call to the convention.
And it says, "A delegate shall, in all good conscience, reflect the sentiments of the voters who participated in primaries and caucuses." That is our standard. Not a standard embodied in a law, for example, that says that you have to vote for somebody. By the way, many states do have laws like that but it's been demonstrated constitutionally that those laws cannot be enforced in light of the Democratic Party's very strong First Amendment associational interest to make its own party rules.
The Democratic Party rule will define what happens in this instance. And that rule is a standard of fair reflections. Those delegates are free to do what they want to fairly reflect those sentiments of voters who participated in primaries and caucuses, but they are not bound in any way to do so.
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/03/sanders-camp-lays-out-strategy-remaining
We don't have a plan at the moment to start calling all the Clinton delegates once they get selected and try to sway them individually to vote for Bernie Sanders. But we do believe that if we can succeed in this last half of the process as much as Hillary did or even more so, that there will be enormous pressure on people who are delegates at this convention to do the right and responsible thing.
We think the right and responsible thing will be to support the candidate who is the strongest candidate to go up against the Republicans, particularly if the Republicans select Donald Trump as the nominee. We really think it changes the game in a fundamental way.
The Democrats will be deeply concerned about having the possibility of a guy like Trump being the President of the United States.
So, as to the standard that I'm referring to in the Democratic Party. In 1980, we had the big fight over this. The standard was that a delegate who didn't vote for a candidate for whom they were elected could be removed physically from the floor of the convention and replaced by an alternate who was pledged to that candidate who would cast the vote in favor of that candidate.
After the '80 convention and the Hunt commission, the standard in the Democratic Party was changed to the standard we now refer to as "fair reflection." That is embodied in the rules of delegate selection, and also in the call to the convention.
And it says, "A delegate shall, in all good conscience, reflect the sentiments of the voters who participated in primaries and caucuses." That is our standard. Not a standard embodied in a law, for example, that says that you have to vote for somebody. By the way, many states do have laws like that but it's been demonstrated constitutionally that those laws cannot be enforced in light of the Democratic Party's very strong First Amendment associational interest to make its own party rules.
The Democratic Party rule will define what happens in this instance. And that rule is a standard of fair reflections. Those delegates are free to do what they want to fairly reflect those sentiments of voters who participated in primaries and caucuses, but they are not bound in any way to do so.
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/03/sanders-camp-lays-out-strategy-remaining
That was posted by a Sanders supporter who strongly disagrees with the tactic-
The very suggestion that those earned delegates should somehow be induced or wooed to break that pledge is just plain wrong. Before you throw shoes at me, rest assured I'd say the same thing about Hillary if her camp suggested such a thing about Bernie Sanders' earned delegates.
The purpose of primaries is for voters to express their party preference for the general election. If you're not the frontrunner, keep striving. But don't suggest some kind of attempt at delegate revolt as the way forward and expect respect for it.
The purpose of primaries is for voters to express their party preference for the general election. If you're not the frontrunner, keep striving. But don't suggest some kind of attempt at delegate revolt as the way forward and expect respect for it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
58 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Salon last month: Tad Devine is the Karl Rove to Sanders’ 2016 populist uprising
Rose Siding
Mar 2016
#11
Well, let's just ask Presidents Dukakis, Gore & Kerry about Mr. Devine's campaign acumen. Oh wait..
Tarheel_Dem
Mar 2016
#7
It makes him look like an opportunist, not the decent, honest icon his supporters
charlyvi
Mar 2016
#18
He can't say the DNC did not give him a chance, it is his campaign to run, we just did not buy into
Thinkingabout
Mar 2016
#15
I get the feeling that he & the people around him fully intend to blow the whole thing up. As a...
Tarheel_Dem
Mar 2016
#46
FWIW, BS has promised he won't mount an independent campaign. But like you, it comes down to trust.
Tarheel_Dem
Mar 2016
#58
Steve Kornacki basically said the same thing. "It upsets the Sanders supporters when we add in SD's"
Tarheel_Dem
Mar 2016
#47
"That spokesperson is talking from an opening at the other end of the digestive tract."
fleabiscuit
Mar 2016
#45
He's serious. Just found a transcript and he researched the plot back to 1980
Rose Siding
Mar 2016
#56
That sounds like trying to steal delegates. Very unbecoming and sounds desperate. n/t
Lil Missy
Mar 2016
#51