2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumJust a Reminder, it's not long until the nominee is chosen.
73That's the number of delegates that Hillary Clinton requires to clinch the nomination.
73
No more. No less, at least for now.
That will drop to around 30 after the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico vote.
Then on June 7, she will clinch. She will be the presumptive nominee and every heavy hitter in the Democratic Party will endorse her to include Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Elizabeth Warren. Any Super Delegates who have endorsed Sanders will flip. Everybody will get in line regardless of any bullshit that may be spouted by the losing candidate.
73
That's the magic number right now for the person who will be the nominee.
HubertHeaver
(2,522 posts)Supers don't count until the convention.
LP2K12
(885 posts)Tarc
(10,476 posts)Once Hillary crests that 73, the narrative will be that the primary is truly over...even though it's really been over since New York.
Sorry, but, that's the reality of how elections go. On the eve of the last day of the primaries in 2008, 60 superdelegates endorsed Obama to put him over the top. He, and much of the media, cemented him as the presumptive nominee.
rock
(13,218 posts)They will not be recorded til the Convention but they count now.
anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)they will call the race on June 7. Technically, no delegate (pledged or super) can vote until the convention, but that doesn't mean that nominations are not called before the convention. I'm too young to remember the last time the nominee wasn't known going into a major party convention.
MFM008
(19,818 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Then it will be either Get the Fuck In Line or Get the Fuck Out.
No more middle ground come June 14!
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Repeat antisemites get to come back again and again and again.
People who threaten other DU'ers, not a problem.
Maybe you'll want ot tend your own plot before the rules come back into effect, Moh. Just saying.
ebayfool
(3,411 posts)Some are more equal than others, methinks.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)QC
(26,371 posts)Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)Because the juries were rigged for the most part. I even got a hide...something that has never happened...and it was an innocuous post too. I would give amnesty to all unless they are the Trump trolls people say are here...
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)And no, the Juries are not "rigged." The Juries work the same as they've been working for years now. The problem is that there really is just a higher incidence of abusive behavior and trolling among Hillary supporters. Combine that with a sense of entitlement and perpetual victimhood, and you've got what's happened. Even Skinner is aware that he got juked on that shit.
It is actually rather difficult to get a post hidden on DU. Most jurors extend the benefit of the doubt to the subject being juried, and actually take the role rather seriously. Yes, now and then you will get a bad hide. But you are not going to get a straight run of five bad hides. You are very certainly not going to get a straight run of ten, fifteen, twenty bad hides.
No, if your transparency page has more posts on it than the Greatest page, the fault is your own. You are not a victim, you are not a martyr. You're most likely an abusive asshole and your pleas for pity are just manipulative bullshit typical of abusive assholes.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)I have seen many innocent posts alerted and it has been discussed how some are rigging juries ...they bragged about it.Steps were taken from what I saw and more will be done when GDP primary is over...I have seen posters say that Trump is better than Hillary and the posts stands...clearly a violation.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)The overwhelming majority of said stupid alerts are simply tossed out by the seven people on jury. Getting alerted on is very different from actually being hidden.
You do not get a straight run of five bad hides. You cannot point to a list of ten, or twenty-three hides and say "I WAS FRAMED! I'M A VICTIM!" because the odds are so overwhelmingly against it, and even the possibility requires some extremely deep conspiracy thinking.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)10 or 20 "bad hides" in a row defies logic and familiarity with DU,
though I can understand that those blinded by partisanship would play the victim.
Most of the members with that number of hides have a problem admitting they are wrong.
barrow-wight
(744 posts)QC
(26,371 posts)barrow-wight
(744 posts)But then how would you know how many hides I've had if I don't have that little yellow button?
ms liberty
(8,596 posts)joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Your saltiness over a lie is noted.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Note whatever you like Josh.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)There is so much utter dreck allowed here it's not even funny. Look at WillyT's following, when only a handful of longtime DUers would denounce that shit. Celebrated in the Sanders group.
Your concern is noted. Let me know when an anti-Semite here posts a thread trashing Jewish people and it gets hundreds of recs.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)joshcryer
(62,276 posts)And only after doubling and tripling down.
And he still has a following on that other hate site, along with posters like Manny and NYC_SKP. Not sure if you are over there but many DUers are.
And it's about to get more popular in two or so weeks.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)And that's the only hate site I know of where DU'ers seem to frequent. You know, insane rants about Bernie being "in the bank for Israel to destroy the Democratic Party? Multi-page debates on whether nonwhties who support Bernie "count"? Lots of snarling about "self-hating" blacks and Jews and Latinos who support Sanders? William796 really out-did himself with that little place. But no, WillyT doesn't post there.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Whose sole reason for existence is Clinton hate.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Yeah, he posts at JPR. But we're talking about DU, aren't we?
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)And you complain about DU that is self moderated.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)joshcryer
(62,276 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)joshcryer
(62,276 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)joshcryer
(62,276 posts)The kind who supports Clinton. Only Sanders supporting bigots are allowed there. WillyT's race baiting got him banned here. He's got farewell threads here in the hundreds of recs. People were actually upset when he got banned here. After months of race baiting the AA community.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)Post is a callout of William769 and alleges that William, an openly gay DUer who mentions repeatedly that he is HIV positive, allows bigotry on his separate web site. This is a personal attack and a really nasty, unnecessary slam on a DUer who still posts here regularly
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun May 29, 2016, 10:08 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: As a rule I vote to hide profile-snooping replies on the ground that as a form of bullying they violate DU community standards.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Disgusting, false charges against a long-time DUer; a shameful personal attack.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I'm gay and work in HIV prevention: William769's a nut
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Not the admin who had revolutionary idea about using self moderating with the community. That guys like wilt and Willy got to keep posting shit only shows we allow it.
It was a damn fine experiment.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....on where you get these attacks, nor can you substantiate them.
Why is that?
Rex
(65,616 posts)The new system, from what I've read, will have them flagged so I guess they need to get in whatever they can right now.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Back in the real world her troubles are far from over. So is skinner going to stop the meanies in tne press to stop covering the slow rolling scandal? If you guys chose to be ignorant, sure go for it. I have said it in the past. DU and Free Republic are two sides of the same coin.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)hate sites.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)But the press you like is doing the same to you, as well Breitbart did to Bushbots during the Bush presidency. Echo chambers, this is one, are fun to watch it is a social studies thing...ah psychology.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)It's all daffodils and dasies.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)That we see with Freepers. I hate to see that, alas that is what is happening. Good news, I am a fan of democracy, and an independent voter. But at no time I expected to see the same behavior. I guess that since both parties are going down in size, they are both left with hyper partisans.
You might not get it, and quite frankly don't care, but this is not healthy for your party. It is not healthy for the Rs either, but that is where we are. Earn my vote. And trust me, I need you to actually prove your party cares for the polucies I care...
To be more than just brutally honest, I don't expect it
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Sanders will unite.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Default position. I am not. Try again. I see two broken to the core parties. I see two parties who'se core partisans have a bunker mentality.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Never have been never will be.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)The dreaded independent, I am not married to either party. You need my vote in November.
And who your party chooses is your issue. But you are about to make a Weimar Republic level mistake and indirectly help to elect a fascist.
It is not the 1990s
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)But I don't consider myself special.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)But I am starting to despise this hyper partisanship...and both sides are alienating voters.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)We've had 8 years of a super bipartisan Admin.
No, we need to unite behind the party, elect blue dogs if necessary, oust the Republicans, and get shit done.
And yes, it's fucking controversial, but stop pandering to a certain fucking weak ass group of people who don't come out for the midterms. Fuck them.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Who I pretend to vote for depends on who counts the votes
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)I take partisanship as a compliment. As Barney Frank says, "I'm sorry to offend your sensibilities." That's how I think we should be. Offensive to peoples sensibilities.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)That is a nice thing. I developed a level of contempt for Republicans during the Iraq debacle that almost became hate. I am starting to develop the same level of contempt for neoliberal democrats. It is not a nice place. There is a shitstorm coming...you will have to make a choice...the country...or your party.
And this is self inflicted.
I expect most of you to chose wrong
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Minorities, women, AA, Latinos, LGBT, generally anyone who isn't part of the 60% or so whites that voted for Romney.
That means I stand with the country, because that's the majority. Demographics are one way. Trump does not and cannot get their vote. People may even die protesting the man. It's going to be very ugly.
Fuck the Romney voters, we don't need them, and fuck the privleged assholes who voted for Stein in 2012.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)By the way, I am female, I am Jewish and I am Latina.
And this has nada to do with Sanders. So spare me sanders. I have read some of the emails in question before they were classified and redacted, but after they were released. That is when I went from this is the usual, to this is a real scandal
You will need to make that choice. The hour is getting late...some of this is now beyond the elite and beltway press...
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)The purist type who refuses to vote for the lesser evil on principle. Justifies it because they are not in a swing state.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Why I am developing the same kind of contempt for neoliberals like yourself
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Just offense to your sensibilities. You know what I said is absolutely true. You also know your accusation against me is false. And that's why you don't offend me. Made up shit can't offend me. It's tiresome, at most.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It is either, Sanders or purity tests. This is not that different from republicans in 2003 going for the ...purity test, or you are unamerican in 2003.
Think about that one. It is ugly and the fall for you guys will be just as ugly. I am not the enemy. But you think I am. Maybe I am. I am outside your fucking bubble. As to who I vote for, Stalin said it best, it does not matter who I vote for, but who counts the votes .
Partisans...
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)...than they got since 2000.
Mainly from "liberals" like this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002184082
These are the bipartisan people you're talking about. I don't want or need their support. It will not be our downfall.
And we'll see in 6 months. Easy. Not even sweating it.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I don't expect you to get it. Partisans
And from your linked post, you prove that bunker mentality. Partisans
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)And we saw how that turned out.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And you do not want commies. That is the way many in the neoliberal wing, a real thing, talk about progressive. But you have a problem with that bunker mentality. Incidental to this discussion is that a bunker mentality...but, but purity tests, but, but, but Sanders, indicate a more mature scandal.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Every single one. The candidate that embraced Obamacare? He won. And he was a dirty blue dog.
You damn right I'm partisan, fuck shitty candidates, fuck falling for shitty narratives that our guys are no better. Barney Frank is right.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)This has again NOTHING TO DO WITH SANDERS OR PURITY TESTS BUT AN FBI INVESTIGATION. It is fucking real. Get out of the bunker. Or better yet, don't. I am not debating Sanders with you, or fucking purity., but a real thing.
Once again, I DO NOT CARE WHO YOUR PARTY NOMINATES. FOR ALL I CARE NOMINATE THE MAN ON THE MOON, BUT YOU ARE ABOUT TO MAKE A HISTORUC MISTAKE BECAUSE OF A FUCKING REAL FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONS CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION. You keep talking about everything else.
Nominate the man on the moon, after the goat sacrifice and entrail reading for all I care. But she is a very damaged candidate and your party will learn how damaged...the rest of us will get to suffer through it.
And here is where the bunker mentality also shows up. You will have to make a choice, party or country. I hope you chose wisely, for all our sakes. The FBI investigation is not a fucking joke. She is already beyond damaged. Only partisans are having trouble understanding how damaging the OIG report already is. We have seen a media narrative switch on a dime.
But I do not expect people like you to get it. I really do not. After the fall out, re-read this. You might understand Cassandra had a point.
Your turn...I know, but Sanders...but purity. It's like talking to a parrot.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)And when you're wrong you'll act like nothing happened. That hundreds of your like minded posters spent thousands of real hours bashing the likely nominee over a very real right wing conspiracy will not even cross your radar.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Keep proving to me that bunker mentality
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)This has nada to do with purity either. Your party will need to chose...and I will enjoy it...those who ignore this for partisan reasons will not be too happy
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)I'm sorry.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Sorry if I laugh
kayakjohnny
(5,235 posts)You have always been one of my favorites here.
Cheers!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It is now beyond obvious
Loki
(3,825 posts)You like visiting Free Republic? Seem to know quite a lot about it. There isn't a scandal or a conspiracy theory that you don't like.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)But this place is going to enter the same paradigm, and be just as hilarious
Logical
(22,457 posts)Romney.
So take your "get the fuck out" and shove it.
barrow-wight
(744 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)I take that to mean after DC.
barrow-wight
(744 posts)But then I suppose he could have meant the voting by delegates at the convention. I suppose we could always ask.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)IT will be when DC has voted.
barrow-wight
(744 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Must be some of the over 500 whom I shall never see until the great Meltdown of June 7.
beachbumbob
(9,263 posts)His followers...it's over....and sanders is demonstrating he had no class
Supers are not changing their minds
Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)beachbumbob
(9,263 posts)And one that doesn't....
Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)What does he pay you? Does he pay you in excrement? Maybe it's the fishbowl.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)It will not be July, but most rational people expect July to arrive. No delegates vote till the convention, but on June 7 when Clinton reaches the total delegates count, pledged and super, needed to win the nomination, the press, the Party, the President and Skinner will call it. Then GD-P goes away.
This is the way it has worked since 1982(except the Skinner part). But I would not be surprised to read in the next few days the CT that the rules change back then was Hillary anticipating Bernie and rigging the system against him.
The ironic thing about me posting this is that I really do not like Hillary! But I have been around a while and have learned that life is often a matter of picking the best available mediocre option because perfect does not exist.
floppyboo
(2,461 posts)GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)She will win.
Are hoping Bernie is a bad loser and does not release his delegates like Clinton did in 08?
He will. Because if he doesn't he will still lose on the first vote. But he will also lose all the Senate committee assignments he has(unless he asks the repugs for some). He will be a bitter old man who shows up for votes in the Senate but has no committees that he belongs to.
And mainly he will think of his legacy. In 1999 most Democrats respected Nader. Now he is despised and laughed at by both parties. Bernie is smart enough to see that. In fact he has no use for Nader.
The question is how will Bernie supporters react when he endorses Clinton?
floppyboo
(2,461 posts)after the appropriate vote and will IMO support the Democratic Party all the way! Why on earth would you suppose that someone who has never wavered from their word in 40 years of public service would change now? I suppose if you have been disappointed in the past, you might steel yourself for such an outcome. I'm sorry your trust has been so broken that you can put forward such predictions.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Or maybe I am not that smart. If you think Bernie will insist on behind the scene concessions, as he should, and concede before the convention we are on the same page. If you think Bernie is looking for a floor flight at the convention then refer to my previous post.
I take Bernie at his word and think on June 8 when Clinton has enough PD and SD for the nomination he will concede. The press, party and President will state as much. If Bernie keeps raising objections after that he hurts his party and cause.
I am curious how his die-hard supports will react.
mac56
(17,574 posts)Yeah, just like Republicans do, amirite?
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)The vast majority will look at what's left and make the best choice available.
Some will be jaded enough to not vote at all, leave the POTUS line blank, or do a write in. Hopefully not enough numbers in Ohio/Florida/Pennsylvania to make the difference.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It is not over until either stands down or the nomination process is over. That is in July oh and those are DEMOCRATIC PARTY RULES.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)it is over.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And I suspect you all will get a bitter pill. By the way, I could give two fucks who you nominate...but it will be a historic mistake. Say hi to president trump...your party enabled that.
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)zappaman
(20,606 posts)Figures.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And remember, I am one of those pesky independents who are watching this horror show. At this point though, both parties are a mess! And it is your party making that mistake. So it will be lots of fun right until November.
It is also your party that keeps underestimating Trump
zappaman
(20,606 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)In the country and we continue to go up in population percentage. And we like it this way.
So make sure, and I mean this, that your party, alienates independents.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)You'll get there though.
Plenty to learn here on DU!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And I have yet to underestimate Trump...live with it, or not. I give two shits about it.
George II
(67,782 posts)You must be using Bernie math.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/180440/new-record-political-independents.aspx
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It is not 1990 anymore.
Enjoy. I hear we are not that easy to bribe or scare
George II
(67,782 posts)...in fact, in the House, Senate, and Governorships, a total of 588 high elected officials, there are only three independents (one Governor and two Senators, all from relatively small states voter-wise - Alaska, New Hampshire, and Maine)
By the way, I (a proud Democrat) didn't vote for President in 1990, but I did vote for Bill Clinton.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I cover this shit, as in local politics. What do you want to know if tje police review board? Perhaps line items in the city budget? And at this point I know both sides can do great harm and great good. It depends on where you stand.
As I said, I am a proud Independent Voter. Both of the parties need us to win. Enjoy that cupcake. We are not easily scared. And at this point, both parties are into bunker mentalities. It is nice to watch. But you need us. And we vote
zappaman
(20,606 posts)But the poster once taught us there are 60 cm in a meter, so...
That's not what I learned in Engineering school, and I vote.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Shemp Howard
(889 posts)Does presumptive nominee (superdelegates included) = nominee?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Which the party, DWS to be very specific, said they were not supposed to
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Around the same amount of time Clinton gave it before conceding.
jillan
(39,451 posts)She needs 2383 and has 1769 right now.
You do the math!
That is according to the AP.
Shemp Howard
(889 posts)Hillary needs 614 more pledged delegates to reach the 2383 to win the nomination. Bernie needs 884 more.
Hillary has a very, very good chance of reaching that 614 number. Bernie, no. But it is simply a mistake to count in any superdelegates until they actually vote.
If you are asked to calculate your net worth, you'd include money you have in the bank. You would not include any money that somebody promised to give you at some future time.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)Shemp Howard
(889 posts)If a company - or a person - does not pay on an account receivable, the owed party can sue in civil court. An account receivable is a binding promise. So it makes sense to count it towards your net wealth.
A superdelegate's pledge is not a binding promise. It just isn't.
strategery blunder
(4,225 posts)They can be calculated into net worth because the entity paying into the accounts receivable is legally obligated to make the payment, barring something like bankruptcy at least.
However, in the case of superdelegates, there is no such obligation for them to vote for the candidate that they have said they support. At best, superdelegates are like someone who told you, "I'll give you $400 two months from now." Without a contract to require payment (and to be clear, a contract in this context would be more like bribery because a contract would require you to give some form of consideration--and in a nominating convention that "consideration" is likely to be votes or favors in office--for that $400), that isn't legally enforceable.
As collecting that $400 cannot be legally enforced, it wouldn't count in a net worth calculation unless and until it was paid.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)can't attend the convention, a replacement is sent. If an unpledged delegate can't attend that vote does not exist, it is not replaced. No proxy. When those who are elected lose their office, that vote is no longer theirs, and it is not transferred to another unless a Democrat wins the election to replace them.
The Party rules do not call them 'Super Delegates' but rather 'unpledged delegates' because that is what they are, any pledge they make is in fact contrary to their defined role in the process, that of being unpledged.
The conflicts come from the abuse of their status long in advance of that status being actual, which is at the convention and only at the convention.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)will not work here.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)She won't have cliched anything until then. And with her legal trouble, It probably won't happen then either.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)This is party rules, not the supers. Do so...not like partisans are not doing everything in their power to both change the conversation, control tne narrative, and kick out progressives. Ah how to make a mess. But go for it. I am enjoying this. One, if not both, diminishing sized parties will have more trouble with the rest of the electorate.
It would be historic if...both parties splintered...which is precisely what is happening.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)shenmue
(38,506 posts)Bleacher Creature
(11,257 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Then the choices will be "Get The Fuck In Line" or "Get The Fuck Out".
June 14 cannot get here fast enough.
Bleacher Creature
(11,257 posts)I had someone argue to me today that Clinton would be as bad as Trump - using those exact words.
How do you even argue with someone who believes something like that?
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Then I alert on the results regardless.
Skinner and EarlG are banning posters for that shit on sight.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)They know their time is coming to and end, so they are going to double down on their goal to disrupt and try and get as many "real" Democrats as they can to NOT vote in November. There will be a few that might buy into their BS, but not that many. Most of those who claim they will NEVER vote for Hillary are either other trolls, are the old anti Obama crowd that has been pushing the same BS since Obama was elected. Many of them are libertarians, green party, and even a few Paulites who weren't going to vote for here anyway, and probably never voted for Obama.
Anyone with half a brain knows how bad Trump would be, and they will get out and vote to make damn sure that does not happen.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Really?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Every vote counts and all delegates are important.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)That's how Hillary handled things so graciously in 2008.
If Sanders fucks up and pushes a first ballot, he will become a pariah forever politically. Vermont won't get shit as long as he's a Senator. Democrats will go out of their way to shit all over him, and rightfully so. He'll have no committee assignments.
Bleacher Creature
(11,257 posts)VT will be ok, but people will go out of their way to make sure that Sanders doesn't get credit for any of it.
I really wish there was some way to run a real Democrat against him. It's too bad there's no way to run someone against him in his personal party of "me."
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Are committed in the first vote.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)A bitter old man showing up for floor votes but nothing else. Even Leahy will shun him.
Which is why he will honor his word and endorse Clinton by June 10. Actually I think better of Bernie he will honor his word because he gave it.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)I think he WANTS another '68 style set of riots,
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)I love neither candidate. And I hope Bernie is true to his word. But I am not a socialist.
And I get your fear. Hard-core socialist have a history of trying to wreak havoc. If Bernie pulls that shit, he will be killing any chance for democratic socialism in the next 40 years.
I am concerned that Bernie has never been able to work with anyone and that perhaps all these young kids had his rallies have gone to his head. But he is over 70 years old, and must know that votes mean something.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)It's gonna be fun come June 7 when I take 'em all off ignore to watch the meltdown.
Gothmog
(145,554 posts)whistler162
(11,155 posts)of 2015!
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)to put you on ignore
bvf
(6,604 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)QC
(26,371 posts)Gee, that will put some folks in a bind.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Done with a lot of the repeat bullshit we've had to put up with since DU3 opened for business. I for one salute them and cannot wait for a more peaceful site.
QC
(26,371 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Hasn't been much of that around here lately.
Logical
(22,457 posts)DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)by trying to hurry up the process and trying to declare everything dead on arrival, you only anger people and make people think that you tried to crush any opposition to the coronation in the egg.
If you are really so secure, then you do not need to scream "she is inevitable" at the top of your lungs..
or if you want an echo chamber, go to the group this is one.
eastwestdem
(1,220 posts)SunSeeker
(51,698 posts)XRubicon
(2,212 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)I can't wait!!