2016 Postmortem

Politicub

(12,327 posts)

53. Par for the sorry Sanders course

Reply to Pryderi (Original post)

Thu Feb 4, 2016, 07:50 AM

Feb 2016

If the Bernie bros don't like it, they'll attack and throw insults until they run everyone out of the house.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

128 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Something smells in the Democratic Party [View all] Pryderi Feb 2016 OP

K&R nt Live and Learn Feb 2016 #1

Legal action, "Remember the Alamo" or DNC. aspirant Feb 2016 #2

Once again we ask... why not be transparent? What could be wrong with verifying the results? tecelote Feb 2016 #3

It reeks of corruption and arrogance ErisDiscordia Feb 2016 #5

Or maybe it's something else... like trying to protect reputations HereSince1628 Feb 2016 #57

If the purpose is reputation protection, it isn't working ErisDiscordia Feb 2016 #80

Yes, all true, but that's also following basic forces of human nature. HereSince1628 Feb 2016 #92

Wow. Sure took chervilant Feb 2016 #100

Agree!! jham123 Feb 2016 #103

Agree NowSam Feb 2016 #104

Fundamentally, there is no way to verify anything since there were no paper ballots. pnwmom Feb 2016 #6

An inability to recount people is no reason to not be transparent about the work documents winter is coming Feb 2016 #65

Those work documents would prove NOTHING about the underlying pnwmom Feb 2016 #81

No, if you saw an apparent discrepancy, you'd go with the counts on your work documents, winter is coming Feb 2016 #84

The Bernie campaign has already said they're not pursuing this. pnwmom Feb 2016 #114

as Americans we have the right to oversee every phase of our elections questionseverything Feb 2016 #115

Actually not. That's another problem with caucuses. pnwmom Feb 2016 #117

i went to bed on caucus night with the party reporting 21-21 questionseverything Feb 2016 #118

21 - 21 was never an official final count. The AP explained why the final count was 23 to 21, pnwmom Feb 2016 #119

great...when the dem party of iowa shows us the numbers questionseverything Feb 2016 #120

You've heard all you're going to hear from the party. n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #122

then they deserve to lose their first in the nation place questionseverything Feb 2016 #123

Totally agree. nt pnwmom Feb 2016 #124

Are you correct about there being no 'one person, one vote' in the Iowa caucauses? I think KingCharlemagne Feb 2016 #97

Every tally was public with every standing in the room. brooklynite Feb 2016 #16

Then the Des Moines Register article has no merit? tecelote Feb 2016 #33

I don't dispute that the Sanders campaign is complaining... brooklynite Feb 2016 #35

Right? It isn't clear at all. RiverLover Feb 2016 #39

Show me the timepoint where the Sanders Precinct Captain complains... brooklynite Feb 2016 #47

Fox Resorts To Bogus "Voter Fraud" Claims To Downplay Clinton Caucus Victory workinclasszero Feb 2016 #61

So funny how anything said against Hillary is painted as a Right Wing Attack dorkzilla Feb 2016 #64

It is a RIGHT WING attack! workinclasszero Feb 2016 #69

I didn’t say you made it up, I said other outlets have shown that video dorkzilla Feb 2016 #73

Media Matters workinclasszero Feb 2016 #82

Ah, that's right, I question a source and I'm a Fox fangirl dorkzilla Feb 2016 #113

Any criticism of Clinton must come from the right? Betty Karlson Feb 2016 #71

What would be the big deal to have everyone compare notes? dorkzilla Feb 2016 #41

Bernie would be the first one to say ... tecelote Feb 2016 #60

It's not an article. Dr Hobbitstein Feb 2016 #111

Exactly! What's wrong with verification of results. Any one think SammyWinstonJack Feb 2016 #54

All of this was supposed to be hashed out while the three campaigns were in the room pnwmom Feb 2016 #4

What's the harm? Fearless Feb 2016 #11

No harm. Just not possible. They voted with their feet, not with paper. pnwmom Feb 2016 #18

Still not seeing harm in seeing the data trail. Fearless Feb 2016 #125

You're assuming there's a data trail that exists. nt pnwmom Feb 2016 #127

There is actually. Fearless Feb 2016 #128

reason number 6,243 why caucuses suck. nt restorefreedom Feb 2016 #32

Absolutely. I don't know why anyone thought this one would be the exception. n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #37

now going to see how many other states are caucus restorefreedom Feb 2016 #40

Right. How many wheelchairs did we see at that caucus? pnwmom Feb 2016 #43

seven more states plus dc. and no i saw no wheelchairs, restorefreedom Feb 2016 #46

I am dreading going to ours and my husband hates the idea even more pnwmom Feb 2016 #48

it seems that with primaries and the nom process, the repubs restorefreedom Feb 2016 #85

I'm surprised Uponthegears Feb 2016 #59

Why? Caucuses are party events, not government events. n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #79

Sanders camp tried and the DNC rep brushed them off and told them to bring it up later. kristopher Feb 2016 #77

Of course wyldwolf Feb 2016 #7

no... smiley Feb 2016 #12

Kick peacebird Feb 2016 #8

There are no ballots to count, nothing to support. pnwmom Feb 2016 #38

...and counts for very little in the long run. eom Blanks Feb 2016 #51

Agreed. Dems let two elections get stolen. jonestonesusa Feb 2016 #93

Every time this was brought up at DU we are told that is the way the caucus cookie crumbles. Ford_Prefect Feb 2016 #9

And what about this? pnwmom Feb 2016 #19

How does this refute my observations? The party refused to examine the record which you insist Ford_Prefect Feb 2016 #30

This: chervilant Feb 2016 #56

I agree MissDeeds Feb 2016 #83

Whatever will we do here with my county's iVotronics machines? MrMickeysMom Feb 2016 #10

I was more worried about the primary voting states because Ed Suspicious Feb 2016 #13

And THIS is just the start of the primaries. It's going to get uglier. nt PonyUp Feb 2016 #24

I fully expected this bullshit. Anywhere the polls are close enough there will be subterfuge. Enthusiast Feb 2016 #14

Dug in her heals and said NO makes me want to scream YES madokie Feb 2016 #15

This. I was actually naive enough to accept the results with a few minor quibbles. Stuff happens, I Ed Suspicious Feb 2016 #21

Yup me too madokie Feb 2016 #31

YES! SammyWinstonJack Feb 2016 #62

Video cameras are in everyone's hands now, everything gets digitally recorded Fumesucker Feb 2016 #17

Agreed 100%!!!!! newfie11 Feb 2016 #29

The Clinton entourage skedaddling off tight lipped to New Hampshire now makes a bit more sense Fumesucker Feb 2016 #20

It stinks to high heaven when they refuse transparency. CharlotteVale Feb 2016 #22

. stonecutter357 Feb 2016 #23

Hillarious. Ed Suspicious Feb 2016 #28

What's so damn funny? SammyWinstonJack Feb 2016 #74

Omg! newfie11 Feb 2016 #25

And what is happening with the investigation about Helen Borg Feb 2016 #26

Seems more likely to me that ... Helen Borg Feb 2016 #27

has the hillary campaign considered restorefreedom Feb 2016 #34

FYI. Warren Stupidity Feb 2016 #49

oh brother. thx for posting. nt restorefreedom Feb 2016 #87

Lordy Them Violating Insinuations Iggy Knorr Feb 2016 #96

i will grab the smelling salts lol! nt restorefreedom Feb 2016 #98

You can't verify head-counting movable heads. n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #50

i read somewhere that the party head at each location restorefreedom Feb 2016 #89

+1. It's what happened the first time Al Franken was elected to the Senate. winter is coming Feb 2016 #55

anything could happen, and since hillary was clearly restorefreedom Feb 2016 #88

If there are inconsistencies & the Iowa DNC won't look into the problem, you have to wonder RiverLover Feb 2016 #36

Maybe Ma & Pa Kettle can help with the counting ... :-P NurseJackie Feb 2016 #42

That's strange since the Sanders campaign announced they weren't going to dispute pnwmom Feb 2016 #44

Iowa must be one Effed Up state. Remember Romney won, then Santorum? Perhaps IA Dems no better! TheBlackAdder Feb 2016 #45

Don't mock them, they at least use paper ballots. Unlike the Dems, pnwmom Feb 2016 #52

Par for the sorry Sanders course Politicub Feb 2016 #53

Concede Florida Al Fumesucker Feb 2016 #63

It's no different Politicub Feb 2016 #109

+1 stonecutter357 Feb 2016 #86

"HRC 2016" is McGuire's license plate Sienna86 Feb 2016 #58

You bet your sweet bippy it does.. Ford_Prefect Feb 2016 #70

I think it does. SammyWinstonJack Feb 2016 #78

Oww, Debbie just can't help herself can she? She can only help Hillary. eom Betty Karlson Feb 2016 #66

Is is very dishonest of Bernie and his campaign to imply the results can be verified. Nitram Feb 2016 #67

It's very dishonest to claim that's what they're looking for, when they clearly state that winter is coming Feb 2016 #75

They need to be transparent unless they want an exodus from the party. Vinca Feb 2016 #68

Maybe that's what Debbie wants? eom Betty Karlson Feb 2016 #72

I think the Sanders campaign should move on mountain grammy Feb 2016 #76

Maybe Sanders shouldn't have used his own software. randome Feb 2016 #90

Maybe he does have buggy software. Or maybe the state does. Or both do. winter is coming Feb 2016 #91

I understand why recounts are approached with caution, though. randome Feb 2016 #94

Given the razor-thin margin, I think a recount should be done, because winter is coming Feb 2016 #102

AGAIN, file a lawsuit. in_cog_ni_to Feb 2016 #95

I agree. /nt RiverLover Feb 2016 #108

Come on UglyGreed Feb 2016 #99

"NO" = "Afraid of examination overturning a too close to count caucus" NowSam Feb 2016 #101

Ridiculous, if this was a stolen election it would have been by a much wider margin. Pisces Feb 2016 #105

The Des Moines Register endorsed Hillary, so if they're calling for a recount, that should carry Uncle Joe Feb 2016 #106

Good points.... KoKo Feb 2016 #107

I'm smelling a damn good chance... NCTraveler Feb 2016 #110

Opinion pieces touted as fact. Dr Hobbitstein Feb 2016 #112

There was a time Democrats supported open and FAIR elections. AtomicKitten Feb 2016 #116

H looks like she knows she lost RobertEarl Feb 2016 #121

I think Clinton cheated and I think Dr. McGuire helped her do it. PatrickforO Feb 2016 #126