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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
72. Sanders not conceding has no bearing on the vote.
Wed May 25, 2016, 02:03 PM
May 2016

Outside of DU, there's a pretty broad consensus that Clinton will win in an electoral college landslide in November. That aside, contesting the convention (which simply means Clinton isn't at 2383 via pledged delegates alone and that Sanders hasn't conceded when the vote takes place) doesn't have any bearing on the vote. Clinton will likely be somewhere around 2200 and the vote will put her well over 2383, whether Sanders has conceded or not. So, what does him contesting the convention accomplish? Who does it benefit and how?

I think he'll concede June 10th. joshcryer May 2016 #1
D.C. doesn't vote until June 14. grasswire May 2016 #3
DC is going to be an absolute shellacking. auntpurl May 2016 #50
I would agree because he is a bitter, bitter man. Gomez163 May 2016 #76
And what will contesting the convention accomplish? Garrett78 May 2016 #80
It's Bernie who wants a massive fight not his followers. nt fun n serious May 2016 #2
LOL grasswire May 2016 #4
The Candidate sets the tone. fun n serious May 2016 #14
Notice how we are Hillary supporters but we seem quiet like her? fun n serious May 2016 #15
We are the group that will actually show up to vote in November. tonyt53 May 2016 #51
LOL! You know this how? merrily May 2016 #29
It will be a brokered convention with both Sanders and Clinton arriving without hitting the magic Samantha May 2016 #5
It won't be brokered. For one thing, that would require there being more than 2 candidates. Garrett78 May 2016 #6
I think there only has to be two and she will not walk in the door with 2383 (eom) Samantha May 2016 #8
You have it backward. Garrett78 May 2016 #10
Well, read this quote and tell me these terms are not "mushy" Samantha May 2016 #19
That confirms what I wrote in my OP. Garrett78 May 2016 #21
Finality Samantha May 2016 #82
I'm not suggesting that Sanders drop out before the primaries conclude. Garrett78 May 2016 #84
Where is the harm in letting it unfold naturally? Why should he drop out? Samantha May 2016 #87
Are you reading what I'm writing? Garrett78 May 2016 #88
I am exhausted and not being evasive -- I misunderstood you were not recommending him dropping out Samantha May 2016 #89
Clinton will have the majority on the first vote Demsrule86 May 2016 #28
Assuming she continues to have all the superdelegates Bill Clinton lined up for her before the Samantha May 2016 #83
She has way more delegates and votes Demsrule86 May 2016 #31
She has 271 more pledged delegates than he Samantha May 2016 #85
She has maintained a lead greater than Obama ever had in 2008. Garrett78 May 2016 #86
Well, you have the answer to your OP question, anyway. So, there's that. merrily May 2016 #32
No, I don't. Garrett78 May 2016 #40
The question was if we can all agree. Apparently we can't merrily May 2016 #58
Only when people are confused about the difference between brokered and contested. Garrett78 May 2016 #61
At least for the past half century or so "brokered" has meant "no nominee on the first ballot" Recursion May 2016 #7
Agreed. I would hope we can all agree on that point. But... Garrett78 May 2016 #9
It would accomplish nothing, and I believe it would hurt Sanders since I believe the majority of the still_one May 2016 #11
I'm torn between "nothing" and "it would be harmful." Garrett78 May 2016 #12
What's with all the "Can we all agree..." posts? Contrary1 May 2016 #13
We have goals that require us to come togther and be strong. fun n serious May 2016 #16
Some things are ripe for a consensus. Garrett78 May 2016 #17
I don't think that the convention will be brokered or even contested... Contrary1 May 2016 #18
I was essentially asking for everyone to agree that there are only 2 candidates. Or that 2+2=4. Garrett78 May 2016 #20
A wish is not an infomred opinion Demsrule86 May 2016 #27
Thank you. merrily May 2016 #33
But there are things we can all (for the most part) agree on. Garrett78 May 2016 #41
I don't have a crystal ball. I have no clue what might happen between now and July. merrily May 2016 #54
So, with only 2 candidates, you're not sure if 1 of them will get a majority? Garrett78 May 2016 #55
I don't even know if there will be two candidates by July. merrily May 2016 #56
Well, there will either be 2 or 1. Garrett78 May 2016 #60
Who is contesting the convention? Sorry, I don't have much of an interest in merrily May 2016 #62
Well, if Sanders doesn't concede, he would - by definition - be contesting the convention. Garrett78 May 2016 #64
Perhaps we can agree on 2 + 2 = 4 MH1 May 2016 #43
Which is really no different than agreeing that the convention won't be brokered. Garrett78 May 2016 #45
2 + 2 = 10 in base 4 arithmetic. ;-) aidbo May 2016 #77
Yes but that is still 4 if you convert it back to base 10. :) MH1 May 2016 #78
More "subtle" (lol) pressure to unify behind Princess Weathervane. Lizzie Poppet May 2016 #47
No, I'm asking what contesting the convention would accomplish? Garrett78 May 2016 #57
I expect some fast PATRICK May 2016 #22
It won't happen that way Demsrule86 May 2016 #26
Chill PATRICK May 2016 #30
First ballot Demsrule86 May 2016 #35
It should not be brokered. Bernie should drop out after California and before D.C. cali May 2016 #23
Why are you folks so desperate for this to go your own way? If Hillary is such a strong candidate, highprincipleswork May 2016 #24
I'm not desperate for anything, nor am I a Clinton fan. You didn't actually address my questions. Garrett78 May 2016 #37
You know, you're right. Got carried away. Must be posting too late. But highprincipleswork May 2016 #52
Bush was a horrible candidate MH1 May 2016 #44
I don't underestimate Trump. I just know that a corporate, establishment candidate is the worst highprincipleswork May 2016 #53
WE have no control over what certain sore losers might do Demsrule86 May 2016 #25
What would it accomplish? Garrett78 May 2016 #63
Dunno. Can we all agree that there will be bvf May 2016 #34
No. Sorry, we can't "all agree." LWolf May 2016 #36
So, you think the convention will be brokered? Garrett78 May 2016 #38
I expect that it will be contested. LWolf May 2016 #90
I wouldn't bet against a contested convention. Garrett78 May 2016 #91
So, what you care about is symbolism? brooklynite May 2016 #65
LWolf didn't actually address my questions, so I'm not sure what he/she cares about. Garrett78 May 2016 #69
Possibly nominating an electable nominee? Preventing a Trump presidency? lagomorph777 May 2016 #39
I don't wish to argue electability, but how does contesting the convention accomplish those things? Garrett78 May 2016 #42
It benefits us if there is one last chance to go with an electable nominee. lagomorph777 May 2016 #71
Sanders not conceding has no bearing on the vote. Garrett78 May 2016 #72
OK, so for those who don't have a TeeVee, here's the deal: lagomorph777 May 2016 #73
You're not addressing my question. Garrett78 May 2016 #74
Alrighty then; I see you are genuinely suffering with anxiety about the contested convention lagomorph777 May 2016 #75
No anxiety. And Clinton's not my candidate. Garrett78 May 2016 #79
If he concedes, the probability of SDs flipping goes to zero. lagomorph777 May 2016 #81
There's nothing to "broker" or "contest" nt firebrand80 May 2016 #46
It's certainly possible that it will meet the definition of contested. Garrett78 May 2016 #48
It benefits the GOP, obviously firebrand80 May 2016 #49
As I wrote above, I'm torn between "it would accomplish nothing" and "it would help the GOP." Garrett78 May 2016 #66
I've heard two different things firebrand80 May 2016 #68
How does contesting accomplish either? Garrett78 May 2016 #70
I think it will be fine in the end.. Peacetrain May 2016 #59
What will be fine? Garrett78 May 2016 #67
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Can we all agree the conv...»Reply #72