2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumJane Sanders for Bernie Sanders on Chris Hayes Live Full MSNBC 4/11/2016
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Pretty much answered all HIS questions, I'd say, and as usual, with grace and professionalism.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)When asked how Bernie can justify trying to win the primary at the convention while having fewer pledged delegates, she said that the rules are what they are, so if you can win with fewer votes then go for it. So the host asked her if that wasn't the same thing a Hillary supporter would say - that she doesn't like the campaign finance system but she's going to take whatever money anyone wants to give to her campaign, and use it to win, isn't that the same thing Bernie is saying? No, she says, Bernie is too pure to take money from corporations. But he's willing to upend democracy and steal an election?
No, that doesn't fly with me.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)supporting democracy. Upending democracy is allowing delegates to vote against the will of the people they represent.
You have it backwards. Welcome to DU.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)They are saying they'd ask the SDs to give him the nomination even if she has more pledged delegates, and more popular votes. That is the definition of upending democracy.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)In states where it is close, they have more discretion.
Seems eminently fair minded to me.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)I can't see that clip above, does it have the part where she discussed the SDs?
Armstead
(47,803 posts)I'll give it another look when I can get it to play. Hopefully I heard it wrong the first time.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)He keeps trying to get her to answer whether Bernie would try to win even with fewer delegates and she keeps dodging - "we don't know that either candidate will get the required number of delegates, and then it's an open convention"
It freaks me out that Bernie's campaign won't just answer that question outright. It's weaselly. I don't want any person winning who has fewer votes from the people.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)I explicitly heard him press her and she said that in states that were close it was a decision the delegates would be expected to make on their own..
realmirage
(2,117 posts)quote the line for me? I didn't hear that at all. She talked about the percentage of SDs in a state (1 per 1000), but nothing about states and the popular vote that has anything to do with the convention
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Just have to chalk it up to a difference in interpretation.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)No she either said it or didn't. But I'm out of patience with the debate myself. I watched it twice and heard what she said.
snowy owl
(2,145 posts)Freaks you out? You must be really freaked out by now! Clinton has flip-flopped so much even SNL did a parody of her changing physically into Bernie.
As for votes from the people? It's not over. You Clintonites are out of control in your thinking. Loyalty over intellect. That's scary.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)What I said is simple and not really debatable by a sane person. Whoever gets the most votes should win.
Zira
(1,054 posts)It was dishonest of you to accuse that where it doesn't exist.
It sounded like a hysterical person insulting my intellect in an illogical way. Take your Bernie blinders off
snowy owl
(2,145 posts)And we've elected presidents before who won the popular vote but lost the election. Are you new to politics?
And I didn't post ad hominems, did I?
realmirage
(2,117 posts)Is that stealing the election away from the will of the people is cool because thems the rules? Some movement you are pushing! And I guess you're not sharp enough to know that assuming I'm new to politics is an attack.
Never knew stealing elections was one of Bernie's core values! Glad you filled me in!
snowy owl
(2,145 posts)Zira
(1,054 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)You are not properly comprehending what I said. Please re-read it.
snowy owl
(2,145 posts)That's what she said. Pledged isn't chained. Many pledged before they even heard campaigns. Blind pledges. Is that what you want? That's not democracy. And it isn't up-ending democracy just because the popular vote didn't match the eventual winner. Change the rules if you don't like it. Bernie is change. But you want status quo which frankly does not result in popular vote = winner. Parsing gets you into trouble. And you are the one who sounds hysterical with your "up-ending democracy" statement. Besides, we don't have a democracy. it would be more accurate to say "up-ending oligarchy.'"
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)And vice versa.
jillan
(39,451 posts)the case it will go to the convention because neither one won.
How is that stealing?
realmirage
(2,117 posts)If she has more pledged delegates and more popular votes, but he gets the SDs to give it to him, that is going against the will of the people, and democracy (majority rule). That's stealing.
snowy owl
(2,145 posts)When all is said and done, perhaps the SDs will go with the will of the people although in Wyoming, Bernie received more popular votes but hasn't acquired the SD. How do you explain that?
While Sanders won the popular vote at the Wyoming caucus 56% to Clinton's 44%, they each received seven delegates.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/2016/04/09/sanders-looks-wyoming-win-ahead-critical-new-york-primary/82833914/
So should the four SDs in Wyoming transfer their pledges to Bernie? If we follow your line of thinking, yes they should. Now, how are you going to parse that?
BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)I watched 30 seconds of the clip and cut it off.
Zira
(1,054 posts)BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)But I can't stomach watching Hayes, Tweety or Maddow. All they do it probe and try to create a gaffe. I've seen enough of Jane to know she's very intelligent and will keep her composure.
Response to BernieforPres2016 (Reply #25)
snowy owl This message was self-deleted by its author.
Amaril
(1,267 posts)Did you happen to note the name of the poster you responded to?
snowy owl
(2,145 posts)snowy owl
(2,145 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)How horrible for you.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)problem making the candidate with the most pledged delegates markedly less viable: health crisis, collapse of voter support, major scandal, etc.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)the fact that they are saying it weirds me out. It's immoral and is the sort of thing dictators do.
BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)The superdelegates should fall in line with the pledged delegates selected by the voters? Is that your position, the candidate with the most regular delegates wins?
realmirage
(2,117 posts)Whoever has the most pledged delegates should win. If Bernie can overtake her in the pledged delegates, which really represent the voting, then the SDs should absolutely switch to Bernie. That's fair and that's democracy.
2banon
(7,321 posts)absolutely nothing "fair" or democratic about super delegates.
sad when united states citizens don't even understand the meaning of term democracy.
sad indeed.
But since they do exist, logically they should go with the will of the majority. That's what I'm saying.
2banon
(7,321 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)All good
snowy owl
(2,145 posts)But people are not informed nor education. Name recognition and loyalty carry the day.
jillan
(39,451 posts)Zira
(1,054 posts)CorporatistNation
(2,546 posts)!
KoKo
(84,711 posts)2banon
(7,321 posts)I don't have cable and so it's nice folks like you are posting these so that some of us can enjoy an occasional or rare moment of refreshing honesty.
Doremus
(7,261 posts)I'm favorably impressed. Very articulate, soft spoken and enthusiastic.
A wonderful helpmate and potential First Lady.
snowy owl
(2,145 posts)Best was her response that Vermonters and citizens of surrounding states TRUST Bernie and they showed it in the numbers that voted for him. At this point in our oligarchy, we need to trust a leader who will give us back our democracy.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Land of Enchantment
(1,217 posts)words in her mouth and she is having NONE of it. What a little creep he is and Jane Sanders is pure grace and a total Class Act.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)He's really changed since he got on MSNBC. He wrote that book, Twilight of the Elites. It was really good.
He would never talk to Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton or Chelsea Clinton the way he did to Jane Sanders. Totally biased. I understand why people sell out because they need the money, but once they get to be rich and have so much money I don't see how they can look themselves in the mirror doing this kind of hack journalism.
ViseGrip
(3,133 posts)slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)fast forward to 18:55
'Apr 11 -- Mark Halprin and Campbell Brown are joined by Jane Sanders, wife of Senator Bernie Sanders on "With All Due Respect" on Bloomberg Television. (Source: Bloomberg)"
Land of Enchantment
(1,217 posts)was eloquent, graceful and articulate. The Bloomberg guy (Mark Halprin) not so much. Yesterday he was trying to defend the results of the Wyoming caucus delegate distribution. His gotcha questions failed. Jane Sanders is a breath of fresh air and asset to the surrogates on teevee.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)Zira
(1,054 posts)I think she does really well. I'm looking forward to her being my First Lady.
I liked that they through in the birds.
BigBearJohn
(11,410 posts)CentralMass
(15,265 posts)Last edited Tue Apr 12, 2016, 12:59 AM - Edit history (1)