Salon: What the hell just happened in Nevada? Sanders supporters are Fed Up — and Rightfully So

[GreatGazoo]

An even-handed article despite the title:

What happened in Nevada is likely to happen elsewhere. The perception that the DNC has thrown its institutional support behind Clinton has only deepened the internal divide within the party. The Sanders wing is pissed off, and rightfully so.
...
Then there’s the Hillary Victory Fund, which has become a massive fundraising vehicle for the Clinton campaign. The HVF was created by the DNC and Clinton’s super PAC Hillary for America as a means of raising funds both for the Clinton campaign and down-ballot races across the country. Individuals can give over $350,000 to the joint committee if they donate the maximum amount to Clinton, the DNC and the state parties. Federal elections laws, however, do not allow individual donations to specific candidates to exceed $2,700.
...
But the Democratic establishment can maintain neutrality in this process without compromising their preferred candidate. The fact is, Clinton has received at least 2.5 million more primary votes than Sanders. She was – and is – likely to win the nomination. There’s no need to rig the process or skew the rules in her favor – doing so only adds to the suspicion that the process itself is undemocratic, which is ruinous to the party’s long-term viability.

It’s still unclear what the hell happened in Nevada. The optics are terrible – that’s for sure. Ultimately, the state’s few remaining delegates are meaningless and won’t alter the dynamics of the race. But the reports are sufficiently murky that both Sanders and Clinton supporters will grow more entrenched as a result of what happened there. That won’t hurt the Sanders campaign, but it will undermine the efforts of the DNC and the Clinton campaign to unify the party against the GOP and Donald Trump.

http://www.salon.com/2016/05/16/what_the_hell_just_happened_in_nevada_sanders_supporters_are_fed_up_and_rightfully_so/

(bolding mine)

[Trust Buster]

1. Salon has long since lost any credibility amongst Democrats.

[GreatGazoo]

3. it is analysis of facts reported elsewhere

Your logical fallacy is: Ad Hom

[riversedge]

5. haha.

[GreatGazoo]

7. Do you think of yourself as a would-be bully?

You add nothing to this discussion or many others, have nothing to say that speaks to the OP but feel the need to make your feelings, but not your thoughts, known.

??

[Red Oak]

20. That's not true and you know it.

Salon is well thought of among Democrats. You just don't like the article.

[bobbobbins01]

2. "doing so only adds to the suspicion that the process itself is undemocratic"

I think we're way past suspicion at this point.

[GreatGazoo]

4. Yes, but I love understatement as a tool in furthering discussion

there is so much bombastic and jingoistic stuff being thrown around now it is nice to see someone tone it down a bit

[Ferd Berfel]

6. K&R

[drokhole]

8. Rule by decree. You know, the Democratic (Third) Way! nt

[YouDig]

9. What happened is Bernie supporters tried to change the rules and steal some delegates.

When it didn't work, they got mad and started throwing chairs.

[GreatGazoo]

10. you didn't read the piece?

it is only 5 paragraphs

Hillary supporters DQ'd 64 Sanders delegates, changed the rules and then denied a recount and claimed a win by 30 odd delegates but the main point of the piece is that there is no need to strong arm this thing and such actions may well "win" the battle of Nevada but hurt us in the larger war.

[YouDig]

11. I did, it's propaganda that omits many crucial facts. This guy is a pundit not a reporter.

The Sanders delegates that didn't get to participate had unregistered as Democrats. Allowing them to participate would have been a violation of the convention rules. And then there's the chair throwing and the threats.

Hillary won fair and square. I guess she could have let Bernie's people steal one or two delegates in order to placate them, but I don't think that cheaters who throw chairs should be placated. I believe in democracy.

[GreatGazoo]

12. have you ever proved the "chair throwing" thing?

Plenty of video from that caucus but no chairs. Perhaps you mis-read "the chair" meaning the person conducting the caucus ?

Asking for a recount is not trying to steal anything. And it makes no sense that anyof the lifelong Democrats who were attending this series of caucuses would switch their own registrations to "Republican" during the process. Defies reasonable belief.

[YouDig]

13. Multiple independent credible reports, by actual reporters not pundits.

The reason Bernie supporters are switching their registrations is to spite the DNC. They brag about it on the internet. They also brag about voting for Trump or voting third party to help Trump win.

We're not talking about reasonable people here. These are the same ones who resorted to chair-throwing, personal threats, calling Barbara Boxer a "bitch", etc. Not all Bernie supporters are like that, but there is certainly a contingent.

[GreatGazoo]

14. and yet you can't link to any video or reports ?

odd

[YouDig]

15. Of course I can.

https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/731908755990798336
http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/89ae8247abe8493fae24405546e9a1aa/Article_2016-05-15-US--DEM%202016-Nevada/id-c3b7ab9ad09a47ecae4ac614538a4915

[GreatGazoo]

18. thanks

the first one is a partisan guy snarking and he doesn't say that he saw a chair being thrown. He only repeats "chair being thrown" as part of the set up of his punchline.

But the second one is of interest. Hadn't heard this part of the timeline before:

The convention was scheduled to end by 7 p.m. and when it hadn't wrapped up by 10 p.m., authorities at the Paris Las Vegas casino informed party organizers they could no longer provide the security necessary to handle the crowd.

In my experience, all crimes, however petty, are overcharged. "Throwing a chair" could be something as petty as forcefully or angrily moving a chair out of your way. Or it could be throwing a chair at the stage trying to hit someone (!) but without any video and with no victim and no one named, detained, photographed or arrested it seems to indicate that thankfully, this was something mild and no one was injured by the chair. This is a casino -- they don't have to rely on people having their cellphones going -- you injure someone in a Las Vegas casino and they WILL identify you. They have state of the art facial recognition technology and literally thousands of cameras feeding massive storage capacity.

but the pulling the security wrinkle was news to me, thanks

[YouDig]

19. Jon Ralston is not a partisan.

I agree that most crimes are overcharged. A big exception being financial crimes, which are undercharged.

I don't think anyone threw a chair specifically at another person in an attempt to injure them. There was one reported injury on one of those videos, where they called for an EMT, but no indication of how the person was injured, could easily have been dehydration or something like that.

[frylock]

16. ..

[laruemtt]

17. Right off the bat, the SIX coin tosses in her favor in Iowa

should have alerted us to what we were going to be facing.

[workinclasszero]

21. Salon? LOL

Salon is right up there with HA Goodman and the insane progressive.

Try again.

[pdsimdars]

22. But what else does she have other than lying, cheating and stealing?

No way she could touch Bernie's integrity and judgement.

[Yurovsky]

24. She' s got 2,379 pantsuits....

each costing over $3,500... Her pantsuits are worth more than Bernie's net worth. That's how she rolls. Chartered jets, limos, servants for her servants, multiple layers of security to prevent her from having to answer questions or involuntarily interact with "the great unwashed".

[JEB]

23. Don't forget about the paid trolls.