"Rigged!" "Corrupt!" "Conspiracy!"... All a steaming load of horse crap!

[RBInMaine]

Why all this delusion? Nothing has been rigged. Nothing is corrupt. The rules are the rules, and they are the same rules for everyone. You don't see Hillary and her supporters shouting all this delusional foolishness when Bernie wins a primary. So enough!

Forget super delegates. Forget them. Hillary has won NY, PA, OH, FL, and TX. She has won in the South, and she has won in the North in places like Massachusetts and Connecticut. She has won in the midwest including MO and IL. She has won in the west in NV. She has about three million more popular votes and about three hundred more PLEDGED delegates.

Senator Sanders ALWAYS knew his candidacy would be DIFFICULT. Go back and look at what he said early in the campaign. He should be credited with all he has accomplished, but for anyone to say that he will lose the nomination due to come crazy conspiracy or a "rigged system" has a mind that simply refuses to acknowledge truth and reality.

Enough of the conspiracy theories. Enough of the nonsense. Hillary will be the nominee. Bernie can take satisfaction in knowing he accomplished much more than expected. And then progressives have ONE choice to make in a VERY high stakes election. Do you want the billionaire right wing racist lunatic Trump, or Hillary who is MUCH closer to you on EVERY major issue? In 2008 Hillary won by a bit in the popular vote, but Obama had more pledged delegates. She graciously conceded and threw all her support behind Obama. THAT is grace and that is what you do. She didn't shout about a "rigged system."

[uponit7771]

1. +1, the black guy won in 08 with the same system Sanders is losing with right now, he's whining..

... like a 2nd grader and it's getting old.

[ThePhilosopher04]

5. More race baiting. It never stops.

[uponit7771]

6. Stating facts about race in America is race baiting to racist

[hellofromreddit]

24. The Stormfront guys use a similar defense

1. They'll post some stats about crime in an obviously racist context.
2. Other people will challenge them.
3. They'll claim, "I'm just posting facts! If you're against that YOU must be racist against ME!"

[anigbrowl]

97. If you can't tell the difference between that and the above then you have bigger problems

Observing that Obama had to deal with racial bias as part of his candidacy which a white candidate would not is not race-baiting by any stretch of the imagination.

[hellofromreddit]

99. None of that noise you wrote turns bad logic into good logic.

But, hey, thanks for the insult.

[anigbrowl]

102. Dunning-Kruger effect strikes again. Oh well. nt

[BumRushDaShow]

7. The term "race baiting" is a RW meme. nt

[ThePhilosopher04]

11. Race baiting is race baiting. It knows know political boundaries.

[BumRushDaShow]

12. Pointing out racist responses is not "race-baiting". nt

[BootinUp]

35. The point is that he was the underdog, don't be obtuse. nt

[uponit7771]

51. +1, they are claiming up and down now that Obama was establishment in 08. They're going into the

... make shit up stage of grief

[1StrongBlackMan]

61. Outrage seems to be in the DNA of some ...

and it seems to blind them to the obvious.

[MH1]

72. C'mon, that's like asking my cat not to shed.

I can ask, but it ain't happening.

[FarPoint]

32. I like that...

It is simple and obviously a clear explanation. Thank you.

[apnu]

40. That's not true. Largely Hillary has been winning with the Obama coalition.

The demographics of Sanders supporters is quite different from Obama supporters.

The truth is, America's center has moved to the right which makes the work to bring it back that much harder for people further on the left. That also plays to the advantage of moderate and centrist candidates such as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Bernie's yelling at people that his way is the right way and its resonating with listeners who already fairly left of center. Combine that with the absolutist language used by Sanders and his supporters, such as the notion that all independents are Sanders people, we can see a campaign that has become very insular.

Bernie may have intended to be inclusive, but his campaign and his supporters have become very exclusive.

I've been saying all along, Bernie made a grievous tactical error in 2015 and continues to this day, he does not speak to Democrats about their issues and he does not try to convince them that his issues are really their issues and his solutions are the best solutions to the issues of Democrats. Instead he decided to pull everybody on the left that's outside the Democratic tent in and is trying to Occupy the party.

Its obvious that's what Bernie is doing, and his supporters should not be surprised when Democrats react negatively, the results of this primary have shown that.

Bernie's failure is not in energy and youth, he's a pro with that. His failure is convincing Democrats that what he's talking about are what the Democrats are concerned with and that he's "for" them.

[uponit7771]

41. Obama EARNED all his support in 08 against a similar Clinton candidate, he was a long shot even bein

... white so I stand by the fact that he was black making him a longer shot and he still won.

Dems are not just left of center, they want common sense stuff that all humans would want

I'm being turned off of socialism or the far left, first Nader and now Sanders... don't see how either are a net positive seeing the kind of campaigns they run

[apnu]

64. Yes, Obama's race was a factor

No question of that. We are of similar mind.

Dems, generally, sit left of center because Bush moved the frigging goal posts to the right, and we haven't corrected it. We've had 16 years of being told liberal and Democratic positions, such as Social Security, are far left commie plots. That taxation is some socialist evil and that government is fundamentally broken and must be destroyed. To me Republicans don't sound like Republicans anymore, they sound like anarchists.

"Dems are not just left of center, they want common sense stuff that all humans would want"

That is truth. When I discuss things with people who don't share my political view (I exist in a world between liberalism and progressivism) I try to find common ground with that in mind.

All people want the same basic things: food, shelter, stability, and growth. Essentially a safe life. I've found that if I steer the conversation there, we agree more often than we disagree. I like to say: "it doesn't matter that we take different paths to this point, we are both here and we agree."

You are right that the socialist pitch of the Left isn't very good. Sanders tends to get riled up and shouting and can't seem to stop shouting at the listener. After a while it puts people off. Plus there is an arrogance on the Left we (the general "we&quot don't talk about much. We are so convinced that our ways are the right ways and we scoff at everybody else for not getting it. That doesn't win people to our side.

We lose patience when someone is clearly not getting what we're saying. Instead of being calm and rational, and then bringing our point down to the other person's level. We throw our hands up in the air and declare the person a lost cause, which is insulting to them and entrenches their opposition.

"You catch more flies with honey." is apt here. And we, Democrats, Liberals and Progressives suck at that. We need to take a long hard look at our tactics and make adjustments.

[1StrongBlackMan]

69. Damn, I wish I could Rec and post within a thread! Spot on.

[1StrongBlackMan]

67. I'm glad I read your entire post, before responding because ...

I've been saying all along, Bernie made a grievous tactical error in 2015 and continues to this day, he does not speak to Democrats about their issues and he does not try to convince them that his issues are really their issues and his solutions are the best solutions to the issues of Democrats. Instead he decided to pull everybody on the left that's outside the Democratic tent in and is trying to Occupy the party.

This is exactly what has occurred, and in my view, WHY America's political system has moved to the right ... those farther to the left pretend two things: 1) that they are the political center; and, 2) that we don't live in a two party system of government (I'm talking Congress and State houses).

The former can be worked through by intra-party engagement ... engagement, not sporadic foot stomping and shouting and when the foot stomping and shouting fails, dropping out of the party. Which bring the latter into play ... pretending we don't live in a two-party system (of government) means the left doesn't have to do the frustratingly slow and back-breaking work of building a viable third party (which would change our system of government to more of a parliamentary system ... a system that I don't have a problem with, for a number of reasons).

[apnu]

68. Thank you and well put.

[jfern]

2. The DNC+ 33 states money laundering for Hillary is absolutely fucking rigged

[RBInMaine]

8. Oh my goodness. What a pathetic load of conspiracy theory nonsense.

[jfern]

13. There's no conspiracy theory. It's all been documented.

[RBInMaine]

15. So Hillary's 300 more pledged delegates and 3 million more votes don't exist? CRAZY!

Enough of the CRAZY.

[jfern]

19. Total non sequitor

[Ed Suspicious]

58. Good. I was hoping they'd get a count of caucus voters. I assume you did since your reporting a

number like that as fact and for that to be a fact you would need to count the people who came out for Bernie in those states.

[ContinentalOp]

70. They've been counted again and again, you just choose to ignore it.

Last I checked, the best case scenario was that Sanders had a 200k vote lead in the caucuses over Clinton. Which leaves her total lead at around 2.8 million.

[FarPoint]

34. So, you must be keeping a personal journal.

That should help.

[JudyM]

56. Denial of factual evidence reflects poorly on your intellect and judgment.

[CorporatistNation]

22. NO FUCKING CONSPIRACY THERE! Just Plain Ole Fucking Ethical Behavior! Real Slick!

Cannot win straight up! Gotta finagle! Who with an ounce of personal integrity can vote for what all of THIS represents? Being "The Nominee" does not guarantee one the power that "they" seek...

[uponit7771]

25. So how did Obama win with the same rules? tia

[aikoaiko]

43. This has to be the silliest defense to this issue.

Its like saying Bill Clinton won in Florida in 1996 so our issues with the 2000 election must not be real.

[uponit7771]

45. That's the GE and the SC changed law and didn't allow for FL recount and even made it a one time

... ruling.

The facts count against your position on many levels

But again, Obama was a long shot in 08 and won with the same system Sanders is calling rigged

[aikoaiko]

49. Let's just say that the Clintons have done a lot over the last 8 years to ensure victory.

[uponit7771]

50. Which is good on them, Obama... a long shot...still won with less PD's in 08 than Sanders has now...

... and Clinton didn't whine about a rigged system when she ceded with nearly an equal amount of votes as Obama.

If you're claiming there were some rule changes the DNC implemented I'd like to hear them... no one else can state any DNC rule changes just anecdotal crap

[aikoaiko]

55. She didn't whine because there was a quid pro quo with Obama on taking care of her debt.

[Maru Kitteh]

94. After she conceded

You are talking about after then Senator Clinton conceded. And your assertion that she did not whine about a "rigged system" and sputter stupid conspiracy theories and cry "CHEATERS!" was due to a quid pro quo relating to her debt is unsupported by facts or reality.

She didn't sputter any of the that kind of nonsense before she conceded. She had no reason to expect to lose. Prepare for loss, certainly, but she was ahead in the popular vote and extremely competitive, almost even with SBO even to the end. She didn't intend to lose, and if she did, she had more class than to take the sore loser route. If you want to make that kind of tin-foil hattery your sore, lame excuse for losing you need to start quivering your lower lip about it and building that narrative early.

[jfern]

74. Obama wouldn't have won if it they had rigged it like they have this time

[uponit7771]

75. What are the rule changes from then to now outside of less PDs? No one else can name them just

... a bunch of anecdotal crap that means little

[jfern]

80. The DNC and 33 state parties money laundering for Hillary

[uponit7771]

81. That's not a DNC rule change and was done in 2008, nice try but you're one of 50 who wont

... be able to answer the simple question of what changed in the DNC from 2008 to now

[jfern]

83. That's a total lie, they didn't do this in a contested primary before

And I don't think you realize exactly how fucked up it is that they are laundering money to circumvent campaign finance laws in a primary. I'm done with this party because of shit like this.

[uponit7771]

84. They did the same in 2008, and that's not a DNC rule that money can or can't be sent to down ticket

... dems.

No really, don't sweat it.. no on else is going to answer this question cause there were relatively no rule chances

Obama, the long shot black guy, won against the establishment dem and beat her and had less PD's to pull from than Sanders.

We'll get past this

[jfern]

85. Bullshit, the DNC didn't launder funds in a primary for the chosen one before

[uponit7771]

86. Link and quote to "laundering" from a credible source... this is embarassing

[jfern]

87. Here

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/clinton-fundraising-leaves-little-for-state-parties-222670

[uponit7771]

88. That's not a link to laundering money, something that's illegal... whatever, sick of CTs on DU

[jfern]

89. The article specifically mentions laundering

[anigbrowl]

98. As usual you have a claim but no argument to back it up. And that's why you keep losing. nt

[reformist2]

3. Sorry, we will not accept the results of many, many states until they are fully investigated.

Stop telling us to get in line. Not only is it rude, you can't make us do it. You can't make us do anything.

[RBInMaine]

9. Stop being DELUSIONAL.

[coyote]

82. The only one being delusional is yourself

Step out of lala land, your Clinton glasses are clouding your judgement.

[RBInMaine]

14. So interesting that Hillary supporters don't say Sanders' wins have been "rigged." Hm?

These CRAZY conspiracy theories need to end. It is ridiculous baseless paranoid delusion and nothing more.

[Maru Kitteh]

95. Tell us again the number of these "many" states BS has contested?

He knows they are not "rigged" but it sure gets the money out of your wallet.

You are left with this.

a) Sanders knows he lost this election fair and square under the same rules he signed up for at the beginning and that's why he has not contested results.

or

b) He doesn't really care enough about your "revolution" to fight for it at the ballot box, the only place where it really counts.



Since the man has been giving the same stump speech for 43 years, I'm going with a.

[ThePhilosopher04]

4. It's all rigged and corrupt. Everybody knows it. Professional wrestling used to be "real" too.

[RBInMaine]

10. And the crazy paranoid conspiracy theories just keep marching along. Good grief.

[bobbobbins01]

16. Delusion is discounting all of this overwhelming evidence to the contrary:

Last edited Fri May 20, 2016, 08:54 AM - Edit history (1)

1. Only 60 polling locations in Maricopa county, AZ, down from 200.
2. Voter registrations changing in AZ(as admitted by the secretary of state).
3. Electioneering by Bill Clinton in Massachusetts.
4. The 120000 voter purge in Brooklyn.
5. Voter registrations changing in NY.
6. This video of the first NV caucus, where Clinton supporters voted without registering:

&list=PLSufrUZiF2ndOLWLsMke2VAimGAZKH6gy
7. The entire farce of the NV convention.
8. Exit polls, of which Hillary Clinton outperforms all but two, most by wildly huge margins(10-20%), well outside the margin of error(GOP exit polls were very accurate).
9. Baltimore MD invalidating its election results.
10. The 5% audit in Chicago and the testimony from the board of elections meeting here:

11. The correlation between Clinton's big wins and hackable voting machines, as documented here: http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/16/clinton-does-best-where-voting-machines-flunk-hacking-tests-hillary-clinton-vs-bernie-sanders-election-fraud-allegations/

Thats just scratching the surface, but I'll stop now because no matter how many I post, you'll discount them all. Its climate change level denial at this point.

[Mnpaul]

20. That video explains the 20% spoiled ballots in the first tier

and it explains why they tried to arrest the credentials lady at the second tier when she pointed out that these people aren't on the list

repost from Wednesday: list from the ex kos members on reddit

BACKGROUND INFO:
Nevada Caucus - has 3 tiers, 3rd tier wins state/delegates:
1st Tier (main televised caucus Feb 20th): Hillary won
2nd Tier (April 2nd): flipped to Bernie
3rd Tier (May 14th): last night's shitshow
(1st Tier Feb 20th problem: At the county level convention 20% of the voters at the original caucus were missing valid ballots. So 20% of the delegates were up for grabs. That means Hillary did not legitimately win the first round of caucus and that is an important factor everyone is leaving out. - Thanks to /u/vamub for pointing this out.)
Shady rule-changing prior to last night:
Nevada Democratic Party knew that based on the 2nd Tier vote, the 3rd Tier would probably go to Bernie. They didn't want this. So they changed some rules around!
Changed the Nevada Democratic Party rules so that Nevada's delegates would be awarded to the winner of the Feb 20th 1st Tier (ie Hillary).
However, they also knew that educated people would try to make motions at the convention to object to this rule, and that those motions would probably pass! So....
They also changed the Nevada Democratic Party rules so that all votes on the floor of the convention would be decided ONLY by a voice vote (all in favor say "aye", etc), and that the results of that voice vote would be decided ONLY by Nevada Democratic Party Chair Roberta Lange, and that her say was FINAL.
When you heard people talk about "Temporary Rules" last night, it was referring to these rules.

WHAT HAPPENED YESTERDAY:
"Temporary Rules" debacle:
Item #1 on agenda of convention was to vote for these "Temporary Rules" to pass. This was conducted by paper ballot.
Vote was supposed to be held after convention started, but instead it was held immediately at 10 am early at 9:30 when not everyone was inside the convention and not everyone who was inside had ballots. But you know who was inside and had all their ballots ready? All the Hillary earlybirds (early-hawks) that knew this vote was going to happen early. Vote passed.
Motion to have a re-vote of the Temporary Rules was demanded by citizens. Nevada Democratic Party Chair Roberta Lange instead held a voice vote that the temporary rules would stay. Some AYES, resounding NAYS. But who cares! She votes to pass it. Video of that CHILLING MOMENT here, (PS the beginning of this video is confusing because Roberta Lange is on screen, but the voice is from a woman talking OFF-screen. The voice is of a concerned citizen demanding a re-vote.) :

Sanders delegates debacle:
64 delegates were ejected from the convention because they didn't have "the proper credentials", even though they did. They weren't allowed to prove they were credentialed. Shady.
Most, if not all, of these ejected were Sanders delegates.
Therefore, Clinton won by 30 delegates. How convenient.
Highlights from the resulting daylong/nightlong shitstorm:
Barbara Boxer mocks Sanders supporters (who were objecting to how things were going down): http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/05/15/barbara_boxer_to_nevada_democrats_if_you_boo_me_youre_booing_bernie_sanders.html
Roberta Lange commandeered all mics and surrounded herself by police so that no Sanders people could get on the mic

Eventually Dan Rolle (NV 2nd Congressional District Candidate) was able to get on the mic and he made a motion to call for the removal of Roberta Lange as Chair. As soon as he made that motion, his microphone was cut immediately. Of course. Motion was ignored. Great explanation of why this motion was ignored, here. Thanks /u/wormhog! Happens at 42:40 here: https://www.periscope.tv/FenyxFX/1yNGawjozjrxj CRAP this periscope link expired - NEW LINK: Happens at 42:40 here:

?t=43m24s
Nevada Democratic Party employs stalling tactics and psychological tactics to try to force people to leave. Making them wait hours while nothing happened, playing music SUPER LOUD, charging $5 for tiny little bottles of water. People online started ordering pizza for those inside. Some pizzas got in, but once it was realized what was going on, police started intercepting the pizzas and throwing them in the dumpster. the pizzas had to be moved outside.
Jesse Sbaih (NV 3rd Congressional District Candidate) gets on microphone and makes motion for a recount to resounding cheers. Motion is ignored (it is against the rules to ignore a motion). Happens at 16:50 here:

?t=16m50s
Roberta Lange jumps onstage and in like 15 seconds makes a bunch of motions that basically say "all the shady votes that happened here tonight stand, the pro-Hillary delegate results stand, and this meeting is adjourned". She does voice votes on all this. NAYs are ridiculously louder every time. But she passes everything regardless, ignoring the nays, then runs off stage. COMPLETE CHAOS ENSUES Videos of this: From Periscope Superhero FENYXFX great video, 21:42 here:

&feature=youtu.be&t=21m42s From Adryenn Ashley - great closeup video, start at 3:50 https://www.facebook.com/AdryennAshley/videos/10153761902337695/ From Asia Zamora, this one well captures the pain and sadness of the aftermath of democracy being stolen from us, start at 2:30 though: https://www.facebook.com/asia.zamora.3/videos/1195756427101567/

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:
Another great timeline from user /u/sublime_revenge https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4jdn3y/nevada_democratic_convention_mega_thread/d36591z
Great 10 minute long explanation of events from Dan Rolle here:

Another super great video explaining what when down (thanks /u/treein303 !):

A great firsthand account of the night - thanks to friend of /u/PeopleWhoDrawStuff!

Lots of pics and videos of the night here: http://www.berniesandersvideo.com/the-nevada-democratic-convention.html
An FAQ + discussion about the nights events from a comment in /r/NevadaForSanders: https://www.reddit.com/r/NevadaForSanders/comments/4jexj9/what_happened_in_nv_today/d36fmcf

[bobbobbins01]

23. Thanks for filling in this piece.

I didn't even get to mention other things that went down like the provisional ballots or granny farming, or the Kentucky issues, or the business in California right now.

[FarPoint]

37. You realize your reply has a taste of Spam.

You could clean it up as to not consume the thread discussion. If you care.

[casperthegm]

38. It might be long but it's factual

And it goes to the heart of the discussion, disproving the claim that there is no bias or rigging. That's what should matter.

[FarPoint]

42. I suggested some editing of the post...

Information is all good for discussion. Trimming the fat would be prudent. We have a video Forum...cross referencing would work.

[beachbumbob]

17. Angry socialist fanning the flames....can't accept rejection

[uponit7771]

27. +1, socialist is starting to be mud to me... I don't like they way they act

[baldguy]

18. If the system is rigged, it’s the worst rigging in the history of rigging.

How about answering one simple, obvious question: If the system was/is so rigged for Hillary, how come she’s having to have this close a fight right down to the wire? To be sure, the campaign has certainly been no cakewalk for her. She’s had to fight way longer, way harder and way more expensively than she ever hoped and expected. If the system is rigged, it’s the worst rigging in the history of rigging.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-ostroy/an-open-letter-to-bernie-sanders-supporters_b_10021974.html

[Il_Coniglietto]

46. And if she's this good at "rigging," why the loss in 2008?

Was that just a practice run? Was Obama better at it? What is the truth?!?!

[pengu]

21. It was rigged from the beginning

Every thumb was put on every scale for Clinton. The results of this primary are not legitimate.

[uponit7771]

53. The long shot black guy won in 08 against same system Sanders is losing in & is whining about now

[pengu]

66. That is probably the stupidest Brocking Point yet

[uponit7771]

71. Yeap, factual = stupid to idealouges

[LexVegas]

26. The system is rigged against white males!

[uponit7771]

28. +1, That's basically what they're whining about seeing Obama won with less PD's

[LexVegas]

30. And this time, a woman is winning. OMG! nt

[uponit7771]

39. +1!!! rigged... rigged !! lol, when prilieged is neutralized some cry like babies

[betsuni]

29. K&R

[cantbeserious]

31. Living In Fantasy Land Still - Not Surprised

eom

[JCMach1]

33. A candidacy largely buoyed by Independent voters (not Democrats)... that's the reality.

Some of whom have nothing but animosity towards the party... that's becoming abundantly clear.

[Lizzie Poppet]

44. Of course there's "animosity towards the party."

The party has lurched so far to the right it's almost unrecognizable as any sort of progressive alternative to the GOP...and has transparently rigged things to nominate the corporatist candidate. The party deserves animosity.

[JCMach1]

52. Bernie entered that party about 1 year ago. Was that ever going to be easy? Was it ever going to

be easy running against someone who (probably even the President) wanted to be the first female President?

It was never going to be easy. I like Bernie Sanders... always have. However, sorry but Clinton is not a corporatist. Pragmatist, yes...

And sorry, the Party does not deserve animosity. The party is what the people who find themselves inside make it. If you don't like it, push your agenda. Work for it. Change doesn't always happen overnight.

Let me just use the example of Reagan in 1976 (as foul as they are)... his people did not give up. Instead, they took over the party in 1980. If you have the will, are right on the issues and are willing to put in the effort, it can happen. That's the 'movement' Sanders has always been talking about.

Sorry, but it royally pisses me off when I see BOB nonsense everywhere. Have you even been listening to Sanders? Did you ever ask yourself why he joined the Democrats in the first place? He could have easily run as an Independent, no fuss, no muss.

No, he USED the Democratic party as a platform for his message. Sorry, but it would be absolute BS if he walked away from that. I don't think he will by the way.

Sorry Poppet, I have been neutral this cycle. However, I am not neutral about the Party.

[Lizzie Poppet]

62. While I found it hard to get past "Clinton is not a corporatist," I did so anyway.

Glad I did, as it was a civil, reasoned post (all too rare in this forum).

I'm not a Democrat (well, technically I am, I guess: I haven't flipped back to Independent yet, after switching a few months ago to vote for Bernie in Oregon's closed primary). So I am basically neutral about the Party. Not neutral about its current center-to-center-right positioning, but neutral in general. I've been tempted to try and work to turn the ship around...but I suppose I've become deeply cynical about the ability of even large numbers of ordinary people to overcome big money, a cynicism that looks to become even more deeply entrenched after this horrorshow of a primary.

Not to put too fine a point on it, what began with #OWS and continued with Bernie Sanders' candidacy is something I consider to be the last chance for this nation as currently constituted. I've come to suspect that the slide into complete oligarchy is irreversible from within the system, and I've become a fairly vocal Cascadian secessionist.

But I still find myself hoping against all rational analysis that it's not too late. The best possible outcome is probably the rise of a couple of legitimately-contending parties. The current (effectively) two-arty system has horribly failed working-class America.

[JCMach1]

63. I think you have to take Sanders actions seriously... he joined a party...

He didn't have to.

I should probably explain what I mean about Hillary. I believe both Clintons have always been Left Pragmatist. That Pragmatism has always been the central component of Clintonism. In a capitalist country, yes that sometimes means dealing with capitalist institutions.

Personally, as a Progressive (in my definition anyway), I hold that the balance between the people (think socialism) and capitalism has swung to far in the direction of corporations a la the Gilded Age. For me, historically, America has functioned BEST when those two polls have been somewhat in balance.

In recent decades, capitalism has morphed into a neo-colonial corporatist enterprise that actually seeks to weaken nation states and thereby weaken the power of the people as well.

That's the sickness... can Left Pragmatism cure that? Maybe? Socialism, maybe?

I am probably, if anything less optimistic than you because I think with exploding tech/automation advances any political ideology based on unit labor (capitalism, socialism, etc.) is ultimately going to fail.

Anyway, too much coffee...

And yes, I would also support Sanders equally if he got the nomination. That's the sole reason I remained neutral. I like BOTH. And yes, Trump is freaking dangerous.

[Mnpaul]

36. Clinton math

I was looking for a specific video from Feb. but found this gem.

Actual count of people there 33/21 in favor of Bernie.

Additional ballots from people who have left:
9 for Bernie for a total of 42. You can count along as she counts them.
10 for Hillary for a total of 31. Same here.

Now there is a second count of additional ballots for Hillary. There are now 17 additional ballots for Hillary for a total of 37.

from there it goes totally off the rails

Counts with extra ballets
First Count 42/31
Second count 42/37
Third Count 42/42
Fourth Count 35/37
Fifth Count 45/37
Sixth Count 44/37
Seventh Count 44/38
Seventh count used.

Lead of 66.11% reduced to 53.66%

documented in this video

[99Forever]

47. Yeah sure.

Because all lying cheating thieving politicians willingly admit their crimes, especially Clintons.

[JCanete]

48. If somebody does suspect vote manipulation, party collusion, or any other impropriety,

what is the proper way of bringing it up without somebody going straight to "sore loser" and "tin-foil hat" memes?

I'm not saying anybody is right about any of that, although I have my own suspicions that seem to be supported by establishment action time and time again, but if you actually wanted to lower people's paranoia you wouldn't try to shut down conversation about these topics by painting concerns as fringe. You'd address the concerns and do your best to refute them, hopefully after doing your best to understand them.

See, whether there's corruption or not, your response to any claim of it would be in the service of preventing a closer look. "You think people are Poisoning you for science? Your just crazy people looking for a handout. Nothing to see here but crazy ingrates!"

Do you think you sound different than any given editorial that came on the heels of W's win vs. Gore? Hell, if people were saying get over it, there must not have been any rigging there either right?

My generous read of your post is to say that you want to believe in the system we have. You want to trust the democratic establishment and the Hillary team, because it's your team. Maybe everything is working out really well for you so you aren't experiencing a lot of cognitive dissonance on a daily basis. So, its not that you are actively trying to shut down people's voices, you just actually think they are crazy or indicative of poor sportsmanship. From my perspective though, you aren't looking closely enough, and until you do and can actually refute the claims on their own merits, rather than to bundle them all up and label them as an unexamined whole, the only thing you're doing, intentionally or otherwise, is assisting in marginalization for marginalization's sake.

[My Good Babushka]

54. I am more convinced that the party schism will lead to an all-out split

if one arm of the party will not even admit that money is deforming the political process in favor of the already powerful.

[JudyM]

57. 'Zactly. This is THE main issue for many of us.

[AgingAmerican]

59. Worming and squirming in denial

[procon]

60. Bottomline: Sanders can't attract enough voters to win... ever!

None of these crazy conspiracy theories that try to concoct screwy excuses to prop up Sanders failing campaign explain why he isn't winning the voters.

[myrna minx]

65. Why don't you work to fix Maine, before you have your daily Hippie punch here?

[QC]

93. Thank you!

Given this guy's enormous knowledge of politics and his gift for strategy, why is Paul LePage still in the governor's office up there?

[mhatrw]

73. Were Sanders supporters violent at the Nevada caucus? Were chairs thrown?

If the answers are no, and they are, then the corporate media are most definitely rigged and corrupt.

[riversedge]

76. Bernie is having a hard time with his loss and grief. His dream is deferred.

[bkkyosemite]

77. Your denial is not a conspiracy

[Fast Walker 52]

78. Yes, always easy to ignore real evidence

Because the news media would be all over this right?



https://medium.com/@spencergundert/hillary-clinton-and-electoral-fraud-992ad9e080f6#.4pt8efrq8

[99Forever]

90. Ever met a fucking cheating cheater that admitted to being a cheating cheater?

Name them.

I fucking dare you.

[BainsBane]

91. The rigging is that they don't get to impose their will over the majority

that other Americans actually have a vote. The argument for Sanders to become the nominee hinges on overturning the results of elections and imposing him as the nominee in violation of the electoral will of the majority. It is a clear statement to the base of the Democratic Party--to people of color, women, the elderly, disabled, and the poorest Americans--that they are worth less, their votes don't count. It shows that the ultimate goal of this "revolution" has been to strip the majority of their vote, of equal rights.

Those who declare the elections rigged have no evidence. There has not been a single state in which polls showed Bernie winning and yet the election went to Clinton. If anything, Bernie has outperformed polls, which refutes the idea that election irregularities rose to a level sufficient to change the outcome of the election. The greatest evidence of voter suppression has been, as always, in areas populated by people of color (like in AZ), areas where Clinton rather than Bernie draws the majority of voters. Yet they don't concern themselves with evidence. Their sense of certainty is based on the conviction that they and only they are fit to determine the nation's leaders, and that the rest of us must submit to their demands. They of course will not succeed, but that a major candidate has set about seeking to strip Americans of the right to choose leaders by majority rule shows exactly what we are dealing with. We are dealing with people who see other Americans as worth less, who justify subjugating the majority to their dominion. When people insist the only legitimate election is one in which their chosen candidate comes out on top, they show that they oppose democracy itself and that they are fundamentally opposed to basic principles of equality before the law.

Ultimately, Hillary is merely a proxy for the real enemy: Democratic voters: women, people of color, the elderly, anyone who refuses to submit to their entirely unjustified sense of superiority, not based on achievement or knowledge but their own impenetrable self entitlement, one so encompassing that they think nothing of overturning elections and nullifying the voting rights of the majority, no small number of whom come from historically disenfranchised groups. As they protest the nomination process, they make their contempt for equal voting rights all too clear.

[reformist2]

96. We want to recount the votes.

[BainsBane]

100. Which votes? Where?

[Maru Kitteh]

92. K & R. Great post!

[wendylaroux]

101. sorry,wrong again hbro.