After Sanders' Big Win in New Hampshire, Establishment Figures Want to Scare You with Superdelegates

[votesparks]

After Sanders' Big Win in New Hampshire, Establishment Figures Want to Scare You with Superdelegates. Here's Why It's Bullshit


Bernie Sanders’ win in the New Hampshire primary Tuesday night came with some pretty impressive footnotes:

1. His margin of victory was the highest for a non-incumbent candidate in any state since JFK.

2. He won almost every demographic group—male, female, young, old, moderate, liberal, college educated, high school-educated—with the exception of voters making more than $200,000 per year.

3. He became the first Jewish candidate to win a state primary in U.S. history.

4. He became the first non-Christian candidate to win a state primary in U.S. history.

Sanders isn’t one to emphasize his religious affiliation—his political beliefs make him enough of an outsider as it is—so you won’t read much coverage about the historic nature of his win. What you will read about is how it’s going to change his primary battle against Hillary Clinton. The path to the nomination is still difficult for Sanders, and Clinton should still be considered the favorite, but winning New Hampshire in a blowout will give his candidacy a new kind of credibility and momentum. Sanders was polling below five percent nationally when he joined the race, and to come this far in such a short time, against an overwhelming favorite, is a bit staggering—so staggering that a frustrated Clinton “might “shake up her entire campaign.

Full piece here: http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/02/after-sanders-big-win-in-new-hampshire-establishme.html

[Dragonfli]

1. According to this thread, the purchased delegates mean she will win new Hampshire

It does not appear to matter what the voters want.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110744344

[votesparks]

2. They will turn

like weathervanes. We're talking about the most disloyal, self-interested people in America here.

[Dragonfli]

3. To be honest, any other year I'd agree with you, but between DWS rigging the debates

and the Iowa official rigging the vote count (made apparent by not allowing a full audit/recount). I think there is more than just fair weathered loyalties at play, I think millions in dark money changing hands at the establishment level in ways never seen before is going on.

Not to sound like an asshole (and I would be the first to say I am sounding that way any other election year). I chose the words Purchased delegates for a reason. Money works on the self-interested well beyond any flaky loyalty they may pretend to have.

Sorry to be so blunt and so contrary to conventional political wisdom.

I think the fix is really in, I can only hope a similar fix is in regarding Trump. Because If the Dems actually go through with this fix, no way in Hell does Hill end up President of the United States, no matter what her money people think.

[A Simple Game]

5. I have been saying for quite awhile that the money Hillary's supporters brag about

her raising for the party, and that they say Bernie is not helping raise, will end up being bribes for super delegates. So yes purchased is the perfect word.

[DUbeornot2be]

12. So...

...if indeed the "fix" is in there is a simple solution...

One massive write-in campaign would likely work seeing as Bernie seems to have at least half the democratic voters already... Throw in the majority of independents and the portion of republicans who actually do care about other people and he could still pull off a landslide...

The democratic party would be left in the past...

[Cassiopeia]

13. I think TPTB (Including SD's) would rather

burn the party to the ground than risk the change Bernie is fighting for.

Bernie needs to win this with huge numbers.

[Dustlawyer]

16. You are right to be concerned! I would believe that they will pull out all of the stops to defeat

Bernie. They have already shown other politicians that Hillary's donors will fund them if they support her, just look at Chris Mathews and his wife.

[mpcamb]

19. The other thing it tells us is to be in position to guard against vote theft in the General Election

-Something easier said than done.

Any ideas about that?
I'm asking that because I don't have any.

[Dragonfli]

20. There is unfortunately no defense against election fraud where the only records

are electronic and proven to be easily hack-able. We could have solved this problem 15 years ago, but NEITHER party appeared to give a shit that the votes are insecure. and took no action.

In places where there are paper records but hackable tabulation machines, the defense is a full recount done visibly and openly of the paper punchcards.
In places where votes are made on paper and tallied by human eyes, no defense is needed.

Sorry the news is not better.

Sometimes the election fraud is done by "flipping" IOW you push the button for x and the screen and count shows y, although not a defense, recording such events are most helpful in proving certain types of unreliability and expose the likelyhood of illegal tampering when enough events are recorded.

[mpcamb]

21. The only defense against flawed or faulty machines would seems to be yelling and hollering about it

BEFORE the election.
I remember there were models that took some minimal time (was it 2 minutes, 20 minutes? whatever...) for an expert to rig.
I think we Democrat aren't vigilent enough about the inner workings of elections. We need to be because of the honor and morals of the opponents we face on the state and federal level.

[Dragonfli]

23. Yet for some reason, ever since it was proven how easy it was to fix an election

via these machines and even video proof of vote changing LIVE en masse was provided on machines doing so (known as vote flipping), neither party has as much as raised an eyebrow about it.

If I were a cynical man I would say the elections are mere theater and the results end up being what the big money supporters of both parties want. Perhaps there are times when a Dem in the White House can pass big money legislation easier than when a Republican holds the spot, and vice versa, so they alternate as necessary. I do know gutting welfare and fully deregulating banks would have been harder under a Republican because the Democrats in congress would have had to make a show of opposing such things. Same with the TPP, it was opposed as expected when pushed by Bush but is sailing right through under Obama.

As far as Bernie Sanders goes, that is a definite no can do, even under the guise of theater because he is sincere in his rhetoric and beliefs.
Just my two cents (with a nickle added for free.)

[HooptieWagon]

4. Then we will scare the establishment with this:

http://www.history.com/topics/1960s/videos/violence-batters-1968-democratic-convention

[Bohemianwriter]

6. Then make it ten times larger... nt

[jwirr]

14. I think we have a much bigger threat to force the super-

Last edited Wed Feb 10, 2016, 07:02 PM - Edit history (1)

delegates with - the anger that is going to make many of us refuse to vote for anyone who plays dirty politics as usual games this year.

If they think they hold the strongest hand they need to think again. First of all she needs to stop adding super-delegates to her total until the convention. They are undeclared until then.

Second, she and the super-delegates need to understand that if we win in the primaries and they take that win away from us with super-delegates there will be consequences. We are still free people and we can vote however we want.

As to the elected officials who are the super-delegates - we will be taking names and remembering what happened at the convention.

They may have thought that they would be able to override the people after 1972 but they were wrong.

The only super-delegate who has to stay with her is her own husband and he will to keep peace in the family. The rest of the super-delegates should be thinking about what is good for the party and the country. And overriding the people's votes in not good for either.

Google "After Sander's Big Win in New Hampshire Establishment Figures Want to Scare you with Superdelegates. Here's Why It's Bullshit" by Shana Ryan.

This explains it all. Great article.

[HooptieWagon]

17. Yes, exactly.

I'm not saying there will be actual violence in the streets (although that will be determined by police response to peacefull protests). But, if Hillary gets the nomination by anything other than honest and transparent means, Sander's supporters will walk away. She may still win some solidly blue states, but in the swing states she'll get crushed. That will extend down ticket too. For example, Obama won Florida in 08 and 12 by very slim margins. Florida has a lot of Electorial College votes. If Hillary pisses off Sanders-supporting Democrats, she loses Florida badly. Add to that other swing states. Hillary already has a marginal path to victory in the GE, I'm not alone in thinking she can't win. She will absolutely lose if she pisses off Sanders supporters by rigging the nomination.

[DirkGently]

7. Full piece is worth reading. n/t

[ViseGrip]

8. This bullshit is spead everywhere, so this is how they want to win, people be

damned.

[ViseGrip]

9. PS. Do they expect help if they game it with delegates even if they would

go against the people in their districts, who elect them?

[Petrushka]

10. Thank you for the link! I'll post it on my Facebook page.

And, in appreciation for the information, I'm giving you a second heart.

[erlewyne]

11. I feel we have a new scenario.

Religion is overrated. Oh, it is there but it is not like it used to be.
It is changing. Just like our parties. The GOP has destroyed
itself and the DLC (Debbie W S) is following suit.

They use our donations for their party (pun).

Bernie will not do that because he is a socialist and it is our party,

The internet is enlightening us peons. We don't forget and we
don't have to remember. Just google.

[rocktivity]

15. Great idea -- Especially since it worked so well for her

back in 2008:




rocktivity

[LongTomH]

18. Scare us? That should just make us fight harder for Bernie!

Oh, and JFK's words are now more true than ever!

[morningfog]

22. Pressuring a candidate to drop out is the only purpose supers serve.

Ain't gonna happen.