Support NeoGAF

[2 Slice Toaster]

And Cornell West? How is that 'Republican in black face president'?

I suppose the fact that they allowed him to be named further substantiates the idea that the DNC is pretty poorly run and/or doesn't affect a thing in the long run.

 

[Suikoguy]

I suppose the fact that they allowed him to be named further substantiates the idea that the DNC is pretty poorly run and/or doesn't affect a thing in the long run.

Wait what?
Sanders appointed him.

Which itself was a concession, since the DNC does not have to, by their own rules, allow Sanders to appoint ANYONE to the rules committee.

 

[Mr. RPG]

Bernie isn't a long-time Democrat, and only became one at all to run for this election.

I don't have a problem with that. I'm not the biggest fan of political parties.

Second, McCain was no Trump. Trump is wildly unpredictable and shouldn't be underestimated; even if he seems demographically unelectable it's not worth the chance of not taking him seriously considering the harm he would cause to this country and its most vulnerable people in the off chance he gets elected. On top of that there are several future Supreme Court appointments on the line here; there's just way too much to lose if Trump wins. Unfortunately it seems the Sanders campaign does not care about that.

Were you this worried about the 2008 and 2012 elections?

First of all, yes, obviously, because she will be the nominee.

Second of all it would be nice to see something, anything, from Bernie's campaign indicating that they want to help unite the party. I have given up all faith that we ever will, so why bother continuing to placate him/them? Bernie has already wrung unprecedented concessions out of the DNC without any show of good faith.

Bernie has stated multiple times that he will do everything in his power to prevent Trump from becoming president.

June is almost here.

 

[Suikoguy]

Bernie has stated multiple times that he will do everything in his power to prevent Trump from becoming president.

June is almost here.

Yeah, if only his actions matched his words and other words..

 

[excelsiorlef]

I don't have a problem with that. I'm not the biggest fan of political parties.



Were you this worried about the 2008 and 2012 elections?



Bernie has stated multiple times that he will do everything in his power to prevent Trump from becoming president.

June is almost here.

He has talked and talked but his walk and walk is just attacks on the Democratic Party and bullshit self-aggrandizing bullshit with Trump.

Clinton for all the ugliness of some of her campaign in 08 never went after the fucking party, and what the hell does 2012 have to do with anything? There was no primary opponent for Obama, much to the chagrin of Sanders mind you.

 

[LudicrousSpeed]

Really, that's fascinating. Do you have a link anything where they talk about making their decision on this basis, I'd be interested in it.

The decision to seat Michigan and Florida was made at a DNC meeting on May 31, 2008. At the time of the meeting, the pledged delegate count minus Michigan and Florida was 1636.5 - 1504.5 in favor of Obama. (In case you're wondering, the half delegate came from the Democrats Abroad primary, where each actual delegate gets a half-vote and so get counted as half a delegate)

There were 3 primaries left after that meeting, Puerto Rico on June 1 and South Dakota and Montana on June 3. Those 3 primaries were to award 86 delegates in total. So, assuming literally no one voted for Obama in those 3 contests, Hillary needed a net swing of 46 delegates to change it over to her favor.

Florida was +38 in her favor (Obama's name could not be removed from the ballot and so he was on the ballot despite doing no campaigning in the state).

Michigan was an absolute mess because Obama had removed his name from the ballot, and so the state party had directed supporters of any candidate who had removed their name to just vote "Uncommitted". Hillary's campaign asked for those results to be honored directly, giving her 73 delegates, sending 55 uncommitted delegates to the convention, and giving Obama nothing from the state. They looked at multiple options, including just halving the delegates and giving half to Hillary and half to Obama, but the option they finally settled on was to give Hillary 10 more delegates than Obama.

The rules actually mandated the half-vote penalty as the minimum penalty for the infractions that Michigan and Florida committed, and the total exclusion of their delegates was the committee trying to be serious about preventing any states from joining the group of Iowa/New Hampshire/Nevada/South Carolina that were allowed to hold contests before Super Tuesday.

Obama wanted the delegations seated in some form, because he was going to be the nominee and didn't want to piss off Democrats in Michigan and Florida, but he also wasn't willing to jeopardize his win in order to play to those constituencies. Thus, the compromise to accept Florida delegates at half-strength and the other to create an equitable split of Michigan delegates and similarly seat them at half-strength.

There is no document that you could read, because these were the deliberations of the DNC's Rules and Bylaws subcommittee, but the May 31st meeting where this was decided was livestreamed and presumably exists out there if you want to go see the whole thing. It was entertaining viewing at the time because you had PUMAs at the actual meeting losing their goddamned minds because the DNC wasn't just going to let MI and FL break the rules with impunity (which would have benefitted Clinton's campaign).

 

[jchap]

Just announce your third party run already

 

[2 Slice Toaster]

Wait what?
Sanders appointed him.

Which itself was a concession, since the DNC does not have to, by their own rules, allow Sanders to appoint ANYONE to the rules committee.

So they had no possible idea who he might name, and didn't ask for any insight from him before granting him this concession? They couldn't be that dumb.

 

[Slayven]

And Cornell West? How is that 'Republican in black face president'?

Cornell West is the biggest fuck you to the black base of the democratics

 

[Cipherr]

In any case thats its. The DNC offered him concessions that were done out of their own desire to extend an olive branch. Normally if you nada, but they offered him something anyway. He in return spit in their face and demanded the removal of 2 people that fairly were elected to their seats and was denied.

They made their pivot to 'unite the party'. His turn now. Sick of his final few supporters going "ITS NOT ALL ON BERNIE TO UNITE THE PARTY!" Yeah well the DNC has made an official and documented attempt now. And he did not respond in kind.

Onus is on him now.

Cornell West is the biggest fuck you to the black base of the democratics

No way its not intentional. After the way he spoke about southern voters; Then the one guy he picks is the one that calls Obama a Niggerized President. And did shit like said Obama was part of letting Ferguson happen etc.

I want to believe that its just coincidence but I don't. I really don't.

 

[excelsiorlef]

In any case thats its. The DNC offered him concessions that were done out of their own desire to extend an olive branch. Normally if you nada, but they offered him something anyway. He in return spit in their face and demanded the removal of 2 people that fairly were elected to their seats and was denied.

They made their pivot to 'unite the party'. His turn now. Sick of his final few supporters going "ITS NOT ALL ON BERNIE TO UNITE THE PARTY!" Yeah well the DNC has made an official and documented attempt now. And he did not respond in kind.

Onus is on him now.

Spit on them twice in fact because that's what naming Cornel West was.

 

[norm9]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-sanders-democratic-primary-not-rigged-just-dumb/

Nice of Sanders to say that the Democratic Primary is not "rigged" as Trump claims. He merely considers it dumb.

"What has upset me, and what I think is -- I wouldn't use the word 'rigged' because we knew what the rules were -- but what is really dumb, is that you have closed primaries, like in New York State, where three million people who were Democrats or Republicans could not participate," Sanders added. "You have a situation where over 400 super delegates came on board Clinton's campaign before anybody else was in the race, eight months before the first vote was cast. That's not rigged, I think it's just a dumb process which has certainly disadvantaged our campaign."

 

[echoshifting]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-sanders-democratic-primary-not-rigged-just-dumb/

Nice of Sanders to say that the Democratic Primary is not "rigged" as Trump claims. He merely considers it dumb.

I get what he's saying, the fact that not every state does caucuses certainly put him at a disadvantage

 

[Ether_Snake]

Bernie has stated multiple times that he will do everything in his power to prevent Trump from becoming president.

Yes, he will run as independent to defeat Trump, by saying he believes he can beat him even if Hillary is running, and that if he didn't run as independent then Hillary would lose to Trump.

 

[Mr. RPG]

I get what he's saying, the fact that not every state does caucuses certainly put him at a disadvantage

Obama was also the king of caucuses and no one had a problem with that.

 

[Slayven]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-sanders-democratic-primary-not-rigged-just-dumb/

Nice of Sanders to say that the Democratic Primary is not "rigged" as Trump claims. He merely considers it dumb.

Sanders:"It's dumb I actually have to go to the south and get people to vote for me":

 

[excelsiorlef]

Obama was also the king of caucuses and no one had a problem with that.

Obama never claimed he was being screwed by primaries.

 

[Mr. RPG]

Obama never claimed he was being screwed by primaries.

Bernie is opposed to closed contests, not primaries.

 

[echoshifting]

Obama was also the king of caucuses and no one had a problem with that.

Because Obama also carried the popular vote. It was close, but he did. Bernie is behind by millions and if it were not for his advantage in caucus systems we wouldn't even be having the conversation we are having today.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Bernie is opposed to closed contests, not primaries.

Well I'm glad he's in favour of a system that would have likely resulted in him being even more behind.

He claims he wins when voter turnout is high, the inverse is the reality.

 

[Eusis]

Yeah, destruction of the one legitimate path to progressive legislation when the opponent is an overt fascist calling for white supremacy and isolationism is just so damn fascinating, right?

Well, yes. It's by no means GOOD, but it's curious how he's willing to eat the party alive still when Trump is scary as shit.

 

[whyamihere]

Someone should ask Bernie about caucuses sometime.

 

[jack_package_200]

Someone should ask Bernie about caucuses sometime.

He went on Maddow and claimed they weren't undemocratic not too long ago

 

[whyamihere]

He went on Maddow and claimed they weren't undemocratic not too long ago

lol

LOL

 

[Mr. RPG]

Because Obama also carried the popular vote. It was close, but he did. Bernie is behind by millions and if it were not for his advantage in caucus systems we wouldn't even be having the conversation we are having today.

Bernie was going to win those states regardless if they were caucuses or primaries.

He went on Maddow and claimed they weren't undemocratic not too long ago

Are superdelegates undemocratic to you?

 

[excelsiorlef]

He went on Maddow and claimed they weren't undemocratic not too long ago

https://twitter.com/maddow/status/728755884080386050

The twitter argument below is lovely

Oh and you're summary doesn't do it justice, he outright says he likes how they work.

It's some beautiful double speak, where he claims to want to increase turnout while arguing how awesome the one system that depresses turnout the most is.

MADDOW: It seems to me like the other sort of small D, democratic problem
in the – in the way the Republican – the way the Democrats and
Republicans pick their nominees are the caucuses.

And, I know caucuses have a strong history and they have their adherents.
But they`re pretty anti-democratic. They`re complicated. They`re for
insiders. They are – they take a lot of time. They exclude, in effect, a
lot of people.

That`s – and you`ve done very, very well at caucuses. What`s your view on
them?

SANDERS: The answer is yes and no. Everything you`ve said is true, but
there`s another side to that. I happen to believe that we have to really
reinvigorate American democracy, not only getting a much larger voter
turnouts than we have in the past.

The last general election, as you remember, midterm election, 63 percent of
the people didn`t vote. This is unacceptable.

So we need to figure out ways to bring people into the process. We also
have to figure out a way to engage people in a very deep sense in American
democracy. And what caucuses do do – you`re right, it does take time to
come to a caucus and to argue with your neighbor about which candidate is
the better candidate.

But you know what? I kind of like that. You know, I understand there are
negatives to it. But I do like the idea of the American people becoming
more engaged in the political process. Yes, you`re spending a – a few
hours on a Saturday afternoon. But this is – you are helping to determine
the future of America.

So, you know –

MADDOW: It has its up – it has its ups and it has its down side.

SANDERS: It has its ups and its downs, right. But I don`t think we should
dismiss the caucuses.

http://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/rachel-maddow-show/2016-05-06

Bernie was going to win those states regardless if they were caucuses or primaries.

Probably but with a place like say Washington not nearly by % he did, he'd have likely gotten less delegates, and Clinton more delegates from a Washington primary, and probably a significant number.

 

[SolicitorPirate]

Sanders was a mistake. He's nothing but trash

 

[Balphon]

Bernie was going to win those states regardless if they were caucuses or primaries.

Maybe, but he wouldn't have won, say, Washington by 45 points had it been a primary.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

Sanders was a mistake. He's nothing but trash

Never has this meme been more accurate.

 

[Suikoguy]

Maybe, but he wouldn't have won, say, Washington by 45 points had it been a primary.

Actually, it's probable a couple of states would have flipped in Clinton's favor.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-system-isnt-rigged-against-sanders/

Sanders fans have claimed that because caucuses have lower turnout the current national caucus and primary vote underrates how well Sanders is doing. In fact, the opposite is true. When we switch all caucuses over to primaries, Sanders actually does worse. Clinton’s lead in the popular vote would grow from 2.9 to 3.3 million votes. Moreover, her edge in elected delegates would expand significantly.7 Instead of her current lead of 272 elected delegates, Clinton would be ahead by 424.8 Some states that were won by Sanders in caucuses, including Colorado and Minnesota, would be won by Clinton in primaries, according to our calculations.

(That would mean he would have needed a bit over 77% of the remaining vote)

But what if they were all open primaries?

In fact, if all states held primaries open to independents — instead of closed primaries, or caucuses of any kind — Clinton might have a larger lead in elected delegates than she does now. The model indicates that Clinton would have a lead of 294 elected delegates, compared with the 272 she holds now. That’s not a huge difference, but it means that Clinton has been hurt at least as much by caucuses as Sanders has been hurt by closed primaries.

(A bit over 69% of the remaining vote)

 

[NullPointer]

So, reading the document in the OP, is "halting the convention" being a little overboard?

Bringing up their request as the first order of business and requesting the drafting of minority reports - does that really mean no other matters can be attended to until they get what they want? How does that work?

And again, I'm not sure what precedents there are or aren't with this story. The articles I've read talk about the letter and now the DNC response, but no wider context or history. Is this a truly new request? Has it ever been done before? Have others been removed from their committees for similar reasons?

These threads are pretty maddening when it comes to the substance - they all end up repeating the same shit flinging from both sides.

 

[Valkyri von Thanatos]

I am embarrassed to have voted for him.

The past couple of days have made me really disappointed in Sanders. He's coming off as incredibly desperate

Same. I voted for him in Oregon just as a way to push for the democratic party and Hillary to adopt some of his ideas, even though I actually support Hillary over him (I think she is more likely to get real change done and has more experience, and it was obvious at that point he wouldn't win anyways). But within weeks I regret that pity vote, he's becoming a real scumbag. |

Edit:

Sanders was a mistake. He's nothing but trash

Never has this meme been more accurate.

I agree with this as well. I can't believe I have a room mate who seriously has said that if Bernie doesn't get the nomination that the US "deserves" Trump as president. It's so stupid.

 

[AxelFoley]

You wanna know how I got these scars? My opponent was a shrieker, and a fiend...

Bernie's lived long enough to see himself become the villain.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Let's look at Washington and say, for ease sake, give Sanders the win at Oregon levels.


In The Caucus Sanders won 72.7% to Clinton's 27.1%

Sanders got: 74 delegates
Clinton got: 27


Now let's take the Oregon primary results:

It was 56% to 44%

So in Washington State there are a 101 delegates so with Oregon results you get:

Sanders : 57
Clinton: : 44

So simple math: Sanders loses 17 delegates, Clinton gains 17 delegates, for a net gain for 34 delegates in favour of Clinton.

Factor in closer loses in the caucus states and Clinton is closer if not at the delegate majority number.

Make supers proportional to the vote and Clinton is possibly officially the nominee right now

 

[jack_package_200]

Delorted

 

[excelsiorlef]

.

A small reminder

Numbers and math are part of the establishment.

 

[whyamihere]

.

A small reminder

Establishment math.

 

[eBay Huckster]

.

A small reminder

wait why does proportional-no-supers have 110 fewer total than no-supers

 

[PhoncipleBone]

Establishment math.

I have actually seen that argument.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

Numbers and math are part of the establishment.

Math is the oldest establishment. And thus, the most establishmenty.

 

[Dan]

Numbers and math are part of the establishment.

They also have foreign roots. We probably got them in an unfair trade deal.

 

[Koomaster]

Yes, he will run as independent to defeat Trump, by saying he believes he can beat him even if Hillary is running, and that if he didn't run as independent then Hillary would lose to Trump.

I have to believe that as egotistical as Bernard is; he's not so far gone as to believe this would do anything but help Trump. And if not, those around him surely would pull him back from that ledge. Feel free to remember/quote/shame me if he does end up running as an Independent. But I just can't see him going there. I think the DNC would have to purposely piss him off like spitting on his platform in a press release or something before he would go that far. He surely knows better.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

He surely knows better.

I really, really, really don't know about that.

 

[And_Gignac]

Numbers and math are part of the establishment.

You may be joking but they kind of are. Mathematics is usually used to justify injustice.

Not related to the topic, though.


I am ok with this. The DNC needs to suffer.

 

[Keby]

I have actually seen that argument.

I find this hard to believe. Please tell me you're exaggerating.

 

[jack_package_200]

I find this hard to believe. Please tell me you're exaggerating.

You may be joking but they kind of are. Mathematics is usually used to justify injustice.

.

 

[Diprosalic]

.

A small reminder

you forgot voter supression, those 3 million independents in NY would've voted for Bernie.
Bernie wins.

 

[Suikoguy]

You may be joking but they kind of are. Mathematics is usually used to justify injustice.

Not related to the topic, though.


I am ok with this. The DNC needs to suffer.

Oh Melkr_, I thought you were one of the few hardcore Sanders supporters that might wake up and realize what was going on... sadly I was disappointed.

you forgot voter supression, those 3 million independents in NY would've voted for Bernie.
Bernie wins.

The sad thing is, I don't know if you are being sarcastic or joking.

 

[Mael]

I find this hard to believe. Please tell me you're exaggerating.

You didn't have to wait long :

You may be joking but they kind of are. Mathematics is usually used to justify injustice.

Not related to the topic, though.


I am ok with this. The DNC needs to suffer.

 

[jack_package_200]

Also I meant to post that in PoliGAF

My bad ya'll