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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TDale313

(7,820 posts)
9. It changed a lot.
Tue Jun 7, 2016, 09:04 PM
Jun 2016

I'm in California. The AP calling the race last night will by any reasonable measure suppress the vote. It was engineered to do so- there is no way a bunch of new Hillary Supers told the AP in time for them to call it at that point without letting the campaign know and getting an ok. They'd been contacting the Supers for months. It's not a new thing. The new thing was how that bunch decided to answer this time.

I'm pissed. This was an attempt to suppress the vote in my fucking state. I hope people come out anyway, but history is very clear on what something like this tends to do to turnout. The Clintons have made it very clear that they wanted to win California desperately. To "send a message". To bring Bernie and his supporters to heel. Bill running around saying Bernie supporters will be toast after California. You're not paying attention if you think they were already looking past today and didn't care what happened because they were already expecting to get the nomination. Yes, she has it won- but they intended California to make a statement to Bernie and his supporters and that's why I think they pulled that last minute trick. Which is perfectly legal and requires nothing more than telling a few of her Supers "tell the AP when they call you on this date" Not hard. Not illegal. Unethical af.

It just means we don't have to "play pretend" anymore. Lil Missy Jun 2016 #1
The call wasn't about her being the nominee. It was about supressing the vote in CA JimDandy Jun 2016 #8
That's all balony. Hillary had no part in the decision. Lil Missy Jun 2016 #29
5 million early votes were already in the bank. People who have already voted aren't swayed virtualobserver Jun 2016 #2
Succinct. JimDandy Jun 2016 #4
So people who weren't very interested or invested Station to Station Jun 2016 #6
In a close race? You bet it could. TDale313 Jun 2016 #14
It's a well known psychological tactic that's effective in suppressing the vote. JimDandy Jun 2016 #16
In a standard election, yes Station to Station Jun 2016 #18
No, not different. And see post #8 for the reason Clinton did this. JimDandy Jun 2016 #20
There is nothing that should suppress votes Station to Station Jun 2016 #5
Stop wasting your energy typing this nonsense virtualobserver Jun 2016 #7
So why did it disproportionately suppress Sanders' turnout? Station to Station Jun 2016 #10
It suppresses all turnout....which always benefits the establisment candidate.... virtualobserver Jun 2016 #19
Woah, I'm not a Clinton supporter Station to Station Jun 2016 #21
You condone the suppression of votes. Maedhros Jun 2016 #28
Bullshit. TDale313 Jun 2016 #12
But the fact that Clinton would go over the top Station to Station Jun 2016 #17
Get those excuses in before they expire itsrobert Jun 2016 #11
I make no excuses for the establishment forces who close ranks for their favored candidate. virtualobserver Jun 2016 #13
You mean the 3 million more voters itsrobert Jun 2016 #15
The voters did not call the race prematurely.... virtualobserver Jun 2016 #22
You want supers to go with the loser itsrobert Jun 2016 #24
I want supers to stay out of it virtualobserver Jun 2016 #25
If so, the people have spoken itsrobert Jun 2016 #26
the choice of the vote suppressors virtualobserver Jun 2016 #27
His post had the cause. Yours has the effect. JimDandy Jun 2016 #23
May want to read the many posts already made on this subject as they will JimDandy Jun 2016 #3
It changed a lot. TDale313 Jun 2016 #9
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»The AP calling it didn't ...»Reply #9