• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NV Democrats file complaint against Sanders campaign to DNC

Status
Not open for further replies.

Condom

Member
Sanders walking away from a reporter trying to ask about the Nevada convention just shows how much of a pompous annoying self-serving narcissist he really is.

Unlike Hilary

Yeah yeah I know whataboutism etc but of all self-serving narcissists I'd rather have one that serves my class interests
 
And somehow people think Berniebros will just magically flock to Hillary after he is forced to exit the race. Smh.

The infighting among the republicans during the debates was entertaining and spawned many a good meme. The infighting amongst democrats is just shameful.

Sanders should have kept it professional so he could have gone for that VP spot. Sanders supporters are a real risk for aligning with Trump after all this infighting finishes doing its damage
 

Zornack

Member
And somehow people think Berniebros will just magically flock to Hillary after he is forced to exit the race. Smh.

The infighting among the republicans during the debates was entertaining and spawned many a good meme. The infighting amongst democrats is just shameful.

Sanders should have kept it professional so he could have gone for that VP spot. Sanders supporters are a real risk for aligning with Trump after all this infighting finishes doing its damage

I just don't see it happening. Hillary is already ahead of Trump and the tension between her and Sanders is going to decrease from now until November, not increase.
 

boiled goose

good with gravy
I've become very convinced that he does not actually care about progressive values as much as his own ego.

Early debates reflected the fact that he really didnt think of himself as a real candidate for president. As his support rose and he started to keep it closer than anticipated in the delegate count it became much more about him and the 'revolution' than about policy.

And as he started to view himself as a real candidate the revolution became the magic wand to explain how he would inact any of his policies if elected. See the NY Daily News interview about breaking up banks by magic.

The NY Daily News article was a clear hit piece. See this NY Times article for a more fair view of the exchange
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/07/u...s-something-about-breaking-up-banks.html?_r=0

Hillary supporters online have been trumpeting this interview as a big blow to Sanders without understanding a thing about what was actually said themselves. They just run with the headlines...

Another article
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-daily-news_us_5704779ce4b0a506064d8df5
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
The NY Daily News article was a clear hit piece. See this NY Times article for a more fair view of the exchange
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/07/u...s-something-about-breaking-up-banks.html?_r=0

Hillary supporters online have been trumpeting this interview as a big blow to Sanders without understanding a thing about what was actually said themselves. They just run with the headlines...

How was it a hit piece? The posted the entire transcript and even the video!
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
And somehow people think Berniebros will just magically flock to Hillary after he is forced to exit the race. Smh.

The infighting among the republicans during the debates was entertaining and spawned many a good meme. The infighting amongst democrats is just shameful.

Sanders should have kept it professional so he could have gone for that VP spot. Sanders supporters are a real risk for aligning with Trump after all this infighting finishes doing its damage

They really aren't. A handful of them will stay out of it, but they were probably going to vote for a fringe candidate in any case and just glommed onto Sanders because he was a fringe candidate with a primary.

He was also never ever in a million years going to be the VP no matter what he did. Hillary was always going to pick a moderate Dem that gives her a bit of credential in a swing state or with a voting bloc. Not a socialist who wants to break up wall street and raise taxes on the middle class.

Turnout in primaries is far lower than turnout in November and much like the noise of Hillary voters not voting for Obama in 08 the vast majority will turn out for Hillary against Donald Trump. Those that don't aren't progressives who care about a Democratic agenda anyway and were never going to vote for Hillary in the first place.

This is going to come down to PA/IA/NH/VA/CO/OH/FL/WI just like it always was going to.
 

studyguy

Member
And somehow people think Berniebros will just magically flock to Hillary after he is forced to exit the race. Smh.

The infighting among the republicans during the debates was entertaining and spawned many a good meme. The infighting amongst democrats is just shameful.

Sanders should have kept it professional so he could have gone for that VP spot. Sanders supporters are a real risk for aligning with Trump after all this infighting finishes doing its damage

The fringe supporters, probably not.
The majority are still going to fall in line despite what social media paints it as. The majority of the Democrat electorate is nowhere near as divided as it's made out to be online. There's not really a need to stress it, this election hasn't been anywhere near as contentious as what I recall 2008 being, hell this is boxing gloves for the vast majority of it.
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
The NY Daily News article was a clear hit piece. See this NY Times article for a more fair view of the exchange
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/07/u...s-something-about-breaking-up-banks.html?_r=0

Hillary supporters online have been trumpeting this interview as a big blow to Sanders without understanding a thing about what was actually said themselves. They just run with the headlines...

I read the entire Trasnscript and I worked in Wall Street regulation for the better part of 14 years with the last 4 of them with large financial institutions and/or the regulator. As in I was the global head of regulatory relations for a big bad bank until about 4 months ago when I quit to make board games full time. I was the US head of Regulatory Relations for another big bad bank prior to that and I was a Senior Regulatory Examiner with FINRA prior to that and was in charge of the annual examinations of multiple large financial institutions. I've interfaced with the SEC/NYFRB/FINRA/CME/NFA/all of the stock/options exchanges/MSRB/ECB/Bundesbank and myriad smaller local regulators like State DAs offices and have prepped multiple CEOs to testify in front of Congressional comittees.

I understood the entire Trasnscript. It is my wheelhouse.

He comes off like a fucking idiot in that interview with no understanding of his pet cause. It was a Trumpesque "things will happen when I'm president because" sort of hand waving with no understanding at all of the regulatory environment in Wall St.
 
And somehow people think Berniebros will just magically flock to Hillary after he is forced to exit the race. Smh.

The infighting among the republicans during the debates was entertaining and spawned many a good meme. The infighting amongst democrats is just shameful.

Sanders should have kept it professional so he could have gone for that VP spot. Sanders supporters are a real risk for aligning with Trump after all this infighting finishes doing its damage

Sanders was never going to have a spot for VP.

BernieBros aren't even democrats, they are Ron Paul people who latched onto an actual viable candidate and got a slight taste of possible victory and freaked out when reality hit them.

Hillary didn't really lose BernieBros vote, she never had them.
 
The NY Daily News article was a clear hit piece. See this NY Times article for a more fair view of the exchange
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/07/u...s-something-about-breaking-up-banks.html?_r=0

Hillary supporters online have been trumpeting this interview as a big blow to Sanders without understanding a thing about what was actually said themselves. They just run with the headlines...

I really wish Sanders supporters could make one, just one argument/rebuttal that doesn't resort to "CONSPIRACY!" and "THE ESTABLISHMENT!"

Its a "hit piece", give me a break
 
None of this is acceptable, either. =.= Politics was a mistake, it's all trash.

If you're going to try to argue from the moral high ground, at least hold the moral high ground.
 

Arkeband

Banned
Something is wrong with Sanders.

Something is wrong with his supporters.

They have mental issues and do not know how to deal with reality when things don't go their way.

Scraping the bottom of the barrel of shitposting like you're trying to find a secret compartment.
 

legacyzero

Banned
I think I'm comfortable assuming that if you can't be bothered to summarize the video it's not worth my time to watch it.

Fuck that.

One of my pet peeves is when people post videos without any context or explanation of whar makes the vieo relevant.

So you have the time to post the video and reply to my comment, but not to write up one or two lines summarizing the video?

Are you serious with this shit?
I mean you dont have to LOL. It has video of the tomfoolery happening. Watch it or don't. If you dont care about video evidence,.

Yes im serious
 
Hmmm something's fishy here


(Warning, TYT)
https://youtu.be/435x0dQ5Lzg

Cenk's whole point is that it's suspicious that way more Sanders delegates were blocked than Clinton's delegates.

That is the entirety of his point on this. He even floats the possibility that Clinton supporters might be more diligent at getting all their registrations in order, etc.

He says 'someone should look into these 58 delegates to see if they should have been blocked' and acknowledges that no one has.

So I'm supposed to presume the NV DNC committed fraud to ensure Clinton got 2 more delegates in the primary race. Because it 'seems' suspicious.
 
The NY Daily News article was a clear hit piece. See this NY Times article for a more fair view of the exchange
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/07/u...s-something-about-breaking-up-banks.html?_r=0

Hillary supporters online have been trumpeting this interview as a big blow to Sanders without understanding a thing about what was actually said themselves. They just run with the headlines...

Another article
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-daily-news_us_5704779ce4b0a506064d8df5

Not a Hilary supporter and I found that interview pretty damning and I voted for him in the primaries.

The article you retorted with is the very definition of mental gymnastics.
 

semisonic

Banned
The NY Daily News article was a clear hit piece. See this NY Times article for a more fair view of the exchange
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/07/u...s-something-about-breaking-up-banks.html?_r=0

Hillary supporters online have been trumpeting this interview as a big blow to Sanders without understanding a thing about what was actually said themselves. They just run with the headlines...

goos pls
big blows only matter if the one getting hit was still capable of fighting
 

Blader

Member
This is an actual opinion held by my barber, no joke.

The twist is that it's perfectchaos007 who has been cutting your hair the whole time!

These threads are always a hoot.

Sanders supporters are worse than Trump supporters, worse than Gamergaters, now just plain mentally ill.

The 'otherization' on here is truly something to behold.

Well it's not exactly helped when the candidate himself reportedly won't comment on the issue, and the extent of his campaign's statement on the matter is "yes, violence and harassment are bad, buuuut...."

Bernie could easily stamp this out by saying people who say this kind of shit and engage in the kind of behavior where a state party chair is bombarded with texts calling her a cunt who deserves to be hanged is unacceptable and abhorrent, full stop, the end. No "but they have a voice that needs to be heard," "but they raise some concerns about the rules" tiptoeing around it. The longer he doesn't, the worse light it casts across his campaign, his broader not insane base of supporters, and himself.
 
Unlike Hilary

Yeah yeah I know whataboutism etc but of all self-serving narcissists I'd rather have one that serves my class interests

To put a fine point on it: Thus far, Sanders has taken a more prominent stand against Planned Parenthood than he has against his supporters increasingly erratic behaviour. He is basically the one person on the planet that could calm things down and he is choosing to remain silent on the subject.

Not sure how that serves your class interests, but it doesn't do much for mine.
 
To put a fine point on it: Thus far, Sanders has taken a more prominent stand against Planned Parenthood than he has against his supporters increasingly erratic behaviour. He is basically the one person on the planet that could calm things down and he is choosing to remain silent on the subject.

Not sure how that serves your class interests, but it doesn't do much for mine.

https://twitter.com/mmurraypolitics/status/732588761423486976

Per @DannyEFreeman, Sanders held press avail while in Puerto Rico. When asked about NV tension/chaos, Sanders walked away during middle of Q

Literally running away from reality that his campaign is out of control (and out of money)
 
Thanks, this is very helpful.

So really quick:



I think that this is a misreading of the rules. Take a look at VII. c. and d. The first adoption of permanent rules is a majority vote. Only after that is a supermajority required. So if the permanent rules contain changes relative to the temporary rules when they're first offered only a majority vote is necessary to adopt those changes.

The timeline is basically like this:

* Convention is called to order under the temporary rules.
* Chair hears a motion to adopt permanent rules (with some changes) under VII.c. That motion succeeds by a majority vote and the permanent rules are adopted.
* Convention is now proceeding under the permanent rules, including changes. Amending the permanent rules requires a supermajority under VII.d.

No rules violation required. Note that the rules also don't guarantee that the convention will wait for every delegate to be seated before holding votes. That's, again, pretty standard for a parliamentary system. You're supposed to be in the chamber in order to cast votes!

I'm kind of getting the impression that the majority of the complaints in that post stem from a misunderstanding of the rules. For example, note that Robert's Rules of Order don't require the chair to recognize any motions. Just because you stand up and say "I move xx thing" does not actually entitle your motion to a debate and vote. So all the complaints about how people's motions weren't recognized and voted on are, like, fundamentally Hollywood understandings of parliamentary procedure. If the chair doesn't want to hear your motion they just won't, that is pretty much why being the chair is so important.

If you want to debate on whether that was CORRECT that's a separate topic (although I think already a much-belabored one), but I am not sure yet I see any evidence that the rules were VIOLATED.


Considering that the motion to adopt the temporary rules as permanent rules was left up to a voice vote, I don't see how you could assert with any degree of certainty that there was any kind of majority in favor of the change. All video evidence suggests otherwise.

Also, according to Robert's Rules of Order, some motions must be recognized, like a point of order if there is an appeal of the ruling of the chair (which there most definitely was). Of course, this was completely ignored, and the chair just did whatever the fuck she felt like.

You're saying the stage wasn't stormed. That people didn't push against the dias... and your evidence *can't* prove this, unless it covers the stage for the entirety of the convention. Which it doesn't.

The letter says that this happened for the majority of the time when Sanders delegates disagreed with procedure. That allegation is completely false.
 

JABEE

Member
Then the Democrats whine about independents stealing votes they think should be rightfully their's (like Nader). It's a no win situation. It will be Democrats whining either way.

Exactly. The Democratic and Republican party have controlled and perverted the democratic process for so long, people just accept it as the way things should always be.

Why not make it more undemocratic by barring non-registered party members from having any impact at all on who the cartel's specific candidate will be.

You might as well make it even harder for a non-establishment candidate to run and win on ideas that conflict with the party, because we all know the only ideas that matter and can improve this country come from the corrupt, yes I said corrupt, and stodgy process we have now.
 

blackw0lf

Member
Jesus Christ

https://www.ralstonreports.com/blog/business-state-democratic-chairwoman-oversees-targeted-berners

Irate Berne Sanders supporters did not just leave threatening voicemails and texts for state Democratic Party Chairwoman Roberta Lange but also launched an assault on the businesses she oversees, the owner says.

Tom Gallagher, the former Caesars CEO and congressional candidate, said that his son's tavern, the Porchlight Grille, began receiving threats shortly after the convention ended in chaos Saturday. Lange is the day operations manager there.

"Beginning about 3am on Sunday morning our bartenders at Porchlight Grille began getting non-stop phone threats from Bernie partisans," Gallagher told me via email. "The level of threats including death threats and vitriol was astonishing. One of our bartenders was actually a Bernie supporter and was stunned at the threats he was hearing on the phone. He began to respond telling people that he was just trying to do his job and pay off his student loans and their tactics were harming his livelihood. It made no difference to the callers. Their goal was to harass and as became clear....to shut down the business and Roberta’s job with it."

Gallagher said the calls continued during the day Sunday until the eatery disconnected the phone.

"At one point on Sunday before we unplugged the phones, I took a turn at answering and experienced such a nasty call that a Metro officer who happened to be in the tavern as a customer picked up the call and attempted to encourage the woman to stop, explaining that what she was doing was unlawful harassment," Gallagher told me. "It made no difference. She actually responded that it was her right of free speech."

And then the social media assault commenced.

From Gallagher: "The Porchlight website and Facebook page were similarly attacked with threats, including by someone who set up a fake 'Roberta Lange' ID on Facebook and then posted on the Porchlight Facebook page incredibly slanderous attacks against both Roberta and her husband Ken, including a post by the so-called 'Roberta Lange' that accused her husband Ken of crimes against children!"

Gallagher then said people began posting negative reviews of the business on Yelp "claiming all kind of bad experiences. On the Google site for the tavern someone posted that it was “permanently closed”! We have so far been unable to get Google to correct this. Needless to say our business has been affected negatively. In 50 years in politics I have never seen stuff like this."
 

JABEE

Member
Except that the young people will turn into old people and mellow out and become normal humans that don't see the world so dogmatically.

They will mellow out and pick a side where they will view the world through the non-dogmatic prism of their given party.
 
https://twitter.com/mmurraypolitics/status/732588761423486976



Literally running away from reality that his campaign is out of control (and out of money)
Are there more sources for this? Because if true that is very telling.

I know that the losing team is expected to act out in weird ways before admitting defeat, but I never thought the Bernie campaign would go this far off the deep end. Their attitude and actions are hard to understand, and by now downright irresponsible.

Contrasting with how the Bernie campaign and its supporters are showing themselves lately, it makes me appreciate the somewhat calculated, never off-message, more policy and politics driven approach of Hillary.
 

semisonic

Banned

1315.gif
 
Considering that the motion to adopt the temporary rules as permanent rules was left up to a voice vote, I don't see how you could assert with any degree of certainty that there was any kind of majority in favor of the change. All video evidence suggests otherwise.

Also, according to Robert's Rules of Order, some motions must be recognized, like a point of order if there is an appeal of the ruling of the chair (which there most definitely was). Of course, this was completely ignored, and the chair just did whatever the fuck she felt like.



The letter says that this happened for the majority of the time when Sanders delegates disagreed with procedure. That allegation is completely false.

Let me help you out here, because we can easily argue majority, since you only watched 6 hours of more than 12 hours of events.

However, the letter said every time. Which yeah, you can dispute if you want to pull out the dictionary. I will happily concede that it didn't happen every time.

But that doesn't feel like conceding much at all.
 
This is what happens when a small group of loud, angry people shouts into an echo chamber and mistakes the dissonance for some kind of revolutionary majority.

It's telling that they're so upset about losing the voice vote - they know the only way they can win is by screaming more loudly and pretending theirs is the voice of the people.
 
Yes, but you see, the real issue here is voter disenfranchisement and I have a video that proves it. Don't ask me to comment on it though.

The fact Bernie has been ambiguously quiet about it adds fuel to the fire. He's not just this outsider candidate overwhelmed by some uranium-powered enthusiasts who leave radioactive trails, he's very much quietly supporting them in his ambivalence and as such is part of the problem.

I do feel sorry for his more level headed supporters, but at this point I assume they'll be relieved when this shitshow ends.
 

JABEE

Member
It's also designed to prevent insurgent candidates and non Democrats from taking over the Dem party. Which is what it did.

Again, if you want to vote for the Democratic nominee for president, it probably helps to be a Democrat.

Easy to say when the private two-party system basically controls every election in this country. They have managed to consolidate the entire power structure of the country into an oligopolistic set-up.

If you are in the minority, your only choices are to change the system from within or get steamrolled in November by the current electoral cabal.

The people that control reform are part of this cabal. The people who appoint justices to overturn this private cabal were appointed by politicians nurtured and empowered by this current system.

Telling someone to run as any other party, or if you wish to prevent insurgent candidates is basically a form of saying, "if you want to change the system go screw yourself."

I think there should be less consolidated power. I don't even feel comfortable with the democrats being taken over completely by Sanders rhetoric and ideology. It will just be Sanders taking over the same powerful systems that exist now.

There needs to be diversification of political power.
 
This is what happens when a small group of loud, angry people shouts into an echo chamber and mistakes the dissonance for some kind of revolutionary majority.

It's telling that they're so upset about losing the voice vote - they know the only way they can win is by screaming more loudly and pretending theirs is the voice of the people.

They're the exact opposite of the silent majority. Rally sizes and enthusiasm is now considered worth more than actual votes.
 

studyguy

Member
Why are people surprised? This isn't the first time the Sanders supporters have stooped to online/phone harassment on a wide scale. It's a shitty method of 'getting your voice heard.'

http://www.npr.org/2016/04/09/47339...erdelegate-hit-list-superdelegates-not-amused

When Thayer, the creator of the superdelegate list, was told people were feeling harassed and unpersuaded, here's what he said:

"It's likely that most callers are actually polite. If a few people contacting superdelegates are being obscene they'll of course drown out reasonable voices and harden opinions. However, it's useful to look at what's causing some of the anger and outrage we're seeing.

"Voters know they are being disenfranchised by superdelegate influence and these privileged voters are a reasonable target for frustration. And, let's be honest, if superdelegates aren't prepared to deal with the public, they shouldn't be party officials."

This in response to
"They said, you know, you should go to hell," said Ensley, describing another message. "How dare you vote against your own interests as an African-American woman. I expected you would be smarter than that."
 

Kangi

Member
Are there more sources for this? Because if true that is very telling.

I know that the losing team is expected to act out in weird ways before admitting defeat, but I never thought the Bernie campaign would go this far off the deep end. Their attitude and actions are hard to understand, and by now downright irresponsible.

Contrasting with how the Bernie campaign and its supporters are showing themselves lately, it makes me appreciate the somewhat calculated, never off-message, more policy and politics driven approach of Hillary.
Yeah, now more than ever I'm more than happy with Hillary and glad we dodged the Bernie bullet.
 

kess

Member

lol at one of the Yelp reviews

If you're a fan of democracy and believe your vote should count, you should not patronize this restaurant. It's owned by a corrupt DNC leader who is part of the oligarchy establishment. If you believe in your right to vote, and the very fundamental founding principles of The USA... you should boycott this restaurant.

On a related note, a Trump delegate in my state owns a construction business and sits on the township planning commission, but no one seems to give a fuck about that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom