2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf the leading candidate suspends their campaign, the runner up should be the nominee, agreed?
Hypothetically, in the unlikely event that the leading candidate for the nomination suspends their campaign for some unforeseeable reason, the voice of the people -- namely, the candidate who is in a close second -- should be made the nominee, right?
Do we all agree on that?
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)-300 million in the popular vote isn't close ... neither is -268 in the pledged delegate count.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #17)
ljm2002 This message was self-deleted by its author.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Now what?
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Because 'popular vote' is irreverent in our system, Obama was the nominee.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Neither of which meet my estimation of "close".
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)If she or anyone involved is indicted OR if indictments are recommended, she is toast. If the incompetent DNC throws someone in besides Sanders, Trump will be the next president.
Some Democrats would clearly rather see Trump win than Sanders. This is because Sanders will kill the corporate goose that lays the golden eggs. If Clinton is forced out, and Sanders steps in, Bernie Sanders is our next president. Just the facts.
Deal with it.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Your political opinion is irrelevant.
Funny ... you spout fantasy and tell me to deal with it? No thank you. I'd far rather deal with reality.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)If you would rather have Trump than Sanders in, the consequences are on you.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Garbage in - Garbage out.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)He was just my 3rd choice, after O'Malley suspended, and he remains my second choice, today.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...implying he is a racist, among other things, I doubt your sincerity on this subject.
Have a wonderful rest of your day.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I have neither said nor implied that Sanders is a racist.
When you have to make shit up, i.e., interpret what I "implied" that interpretation says more about you than me.
George II
(67,782 posts)...he had more pledged delegates and more popular votes after the last primary, and Clinton conceded at that time.
Will Sanders be so gracious and unifying?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html
Popular Vote Total Obama 17,535,458 48.1% Clinton 17,493,836 48.0% Obama +41,622 +0.1%
madokie
(51,076 posts)do you care what I believe?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...my post was unnecessarily rude and uncalled for and I apologize.
rock
(13,218 posts)300 million, 30 million, 3 million. None of these is close.
larkrake
(1,674 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Wishfulness.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)Last I heard Sanders had about 46% of pledged delegates.
CorporatistNation
(2,546 posts)e.g., MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...
Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...
Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"
Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"
Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!
Txbluedog
(1,128 posts)The DNC and the RNC makes these for their respective parties---so if Hillary is forced to suspend won't make Bernie the nominee
morningfog
(18,115 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)so blatantly thwart the will of the people.
larkrake
(1,674 posts)I dont think DNC will commit suicide
hack89
(39,171 posts)regardless of the vote?
hack89
(39,171 posts)Ash_F
(5,861 posts)If I am not wrong, the pledged delegates are released if their candidate suspends and can vote for whoever.
This is the less complicated situation. What would truly be a fiasco is if she holds on to the nomination and gets charged after the convention, or even just a few weeks before the GE.
Then it would be too late. The entire D ticket would get wrecked, all the way down the line.
LoverOfLiberty
(1,438 posts)The leader's delegates do not necessarily go to #2.
I think the party would chose a Democrat to represent them in November.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Demsrule86
(68,595 posts)I want someone who can win a general which Bernie can't.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)in this circumstance, is a suicidal move for the Party.
If Clinton suspends the Party will need to get behind Bernie or it's the end of the party
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...but IF something should happen and and she were to suspend her campaign, and the party tries to choose someone other than Bernie, given his very strong showing during this primary season... there will be hell to pay.
Not that I would expect the party to do the right thing in this case.
I hope it does not come to that.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)Suppose Hillary released her delegates and asked them to vote for him. He has at least been a declared candidate, and while the MSM race turned focus to the more hostile Hillary - Bernie confrontation, he did have some supporters and stayed classy while he was in the race.
Could he re-emerge with less controversy and division than if they went to someone who was never in this race? Not sure how it could be orchestrated, but I wonder if it could be a unifying strategy.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)no real name recognition, no republican or independent crossover.
suicide
Algernon Moncrieff
(5,790 posts)He doesn't. He's made a career out of being I-VT. He has neither a majority of recorded votes nor a majority of pledged delegates. In the highly unlikely event that Hillary were to exit, the party would be well within it's right to nominate Biden, Kerry, O'Malley, Warren, or Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (OK - I'm kidding on that last one).
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)and more so than any DINO's and RW Corporate sock-puppets that call themselves Democratic today. Certainly since the 80's when the Clinton's sold the Party to the Koch Bros and the Party began pushing the right wing agenda. Bernie has always represented the Democratic Party as it was when I first started voting in 1968. I think if the party had not taken the Corporate turn in the 80's that he might well have joined the party sooner.
Algernon Moncrieff
(5,790 posts)If D-VT is good enough for other Vermonters like Leahy, Shumlin, and Howard Dean, it should have been good enough for Sanders.
Only Spartacist Youth League types believe that Hillary Clinton is pushing a "right wing" agenda. The "right wing" is terrified of a Clinton presidency, and is backing Donald trump. Get your facts straight.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)some other candidate, be it Biden or anyone, who was not even running in the primary contests. Who in the party would accept that?
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)It is a one way track, ya know.
Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)He's won a lot of states, has gotten a lots of votes, polls very well against Trump, is popular and liked.
They better decide quickly if they want to win in November or not.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)their control of power.
WheelWalker
(8,955 posts)If before the convention, you would still have to have a vote of delegates.
If after the convention, wouldn't the VP nominee have something to say about it... if not a claim to the party banner?
Renew Deal
(81,866 posts)The candidate can't be replaced on many/most ballots. So in most cases people would have to vote for Hillary's electors. If Hillary/dems got 270 electors then the electors would have to name someone. It would get crazy and probably wouldn't work.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)Require a presidential appointment with congressional approval.
Bob41213
(491 posts)You don't vote for a person, you vote for a board of electors. The electors vote for whomever they please.
Algernon Moncrieff
(5,790 posts)Each party has its own protocol for this scenario, but in neither case does the running mate automatically take over the ticket. If John McCain were to die before the election, the rules of the Republican Party authorize the Republican National Committee to fill the vacancy, either by reconvening a national convention or by having RNC state representatives vote. The new nominee must receive a majority vote to officially become the party candidate. If Barack Obama were to die before the election, the Democratic Party's charter and bylaws state that responsibility for filling that vacancy would fall to the Democratic National Committee, but the rules do not specify how exactly the DNC would go about doing that. (Congress could also pass a special statute and push back Election Day, giving the dead candidate's party time to regroup.)
What happens if the party doesn't have time to select and endorse a new candidate? In 2000, Akhil Reed Amar outlined for Slate some of the head-scratching scenarios that might occur if a candidate died just before the election, without enough time to prep new ballots or to decide how votes should be counted.
The outcome would be a little more straightforwardthough not necessarily more politically satisfyingif the candidate dies between the general election on Nov. 4 but before the Electoral College votes on Dec. 15. There's no federal law that mandates how electors must cast their votes; theoretically, if the candidate to whom they were pledged dies and their party has not made a preferred successor clear, electors can vote for their party's VP candidate, a third-party candidate, or a leading preconvention contender within their own party. Under this scenario, however, individual state laws have the potential to make things murky, given that each state has the power to determine exactly how its electoral votes are to be cast and distributed.
Bonus Explainer: What if the candidate dies after the election but before the inauguration on Jan. 20? The 20th Amendment states that if the president-elect dies before beginning his term, then the vice president-elect assumes his or her spot. However, the point at which a candidate officially becomes "president-elect" is debatable. He or she definitely assumes the title after Jan. 6, when a joint session of Congress officially counts the Electoral College votes and declares a winner. But the shift could be said to occur immediately after the Electoral College vote. (See Pages 2 and 3 of this PDF article from the Arkansas Law Review.)
Bob41213
(491 posts)I mean I know they do at the convention, but surely they don't send out a certified letter to each state that day saying here's our nominee that day. I assume there are state by state deadlines to put the official name on the ballot.
Renew Deal
(81,866 posts)But the convention has legal bearing in some states. So I'm pretty sure it goes out right away. I doubt there is much that can be done with letters and deadlines.
Bob41213
(491 posts)Maybe I'm confusing the third party type deadlines.
djean111
(14,255 posts)IMO the VP only counts after a president is elected.
And, since it seems Hillary's VP may very well be chosen with an eye to demographics, and not the issues, it would make no sense at all to have the VP as the candidate.
Ironically, I would be thrilled to vote for Liz Warren in that scenario, but would not vote for Hillary even if Warren is her VP.
WheelWalker
(8,955 posts)acclamation, perhaps, but still...
djean111
(14,255 posts)No votes for Third Wayers. Bottom line.
TimPlo
(443 posts)The 12th Amendment lays out the procedures for electing. We vote on electoral college. Then they vote on separate votes for POTUS and VP.
Snip from the Constitution
"The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate."
djean111
(14,255 posts)The OP is positing that the nominee stands down during the campaign, after the convention, before the GE.
Renew Deal
(81,866 posts)If something happens to thay person all bets are off.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)All delegates should be open to vote for the name on the ballot they chose.
All of this is a waste of time. Clinton is the nominee.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)msongs
(67,420 posts)barrow-wight
(744 posts)I would much rather they give it to Biden or Warren or any Dem but Bernie.
felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)whether we believe he comes in first or second, is Bernie Sanders clearly.
These results will determine if the DNC is willing to honor or reject the millions of supporters who registered as Democrats for Bernie Sanders. This decision will either keep us in the party of drive us out. Up to them.
valerief
(53,235 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)....because I don't want that person refreshing the campaign.
"withdraws" is a better word.
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)Shadowflash
(1,536 posts)Though, it'll never happen. Clinton is THIS close to almost being president and there is NO WAY she'd drop out now, no matter WHAT legal troubles she is having.
You'd have to pry the nomination from her cold, dead fingers. Her being president is the one and only non-negotiable core belief she has.
You'd have more luck trying to talk Cruella DeVille out of getting a Dalmatian skin coat.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)And she will become the president in January 2017.
Second, if for some reason the presumptive nominee in a given election year cannot continue their campaign that does not mean the runner-up gets the nomination.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)I am asking, if the leading candidate leaves the race, shouldn't the voice of the people be heard with the one who is still running and is in a close second?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)StevieM
(10,500 posts)and then dropped out for some reason, you would support making Hillary the nominee?
I can honestly say that I would be opposed to nominating her under those conditions. And I don't believe she would seek the nomination under those circumstances. It would just be awkward to have the defeated candidate as the nominee.
Not that any of this matters because Hillary is going to be nominated and I strongly believe that she will be elected.
larkrake
(1,674 posts)firebrand80
(2,760 posts)It would depend on how strong of a campaign the second place finisher ran. I don't think a candidate that won 2 states and was out by Super Tuesday should necessarily be the nominee.
However, in this instance, Bernie should be the nominee. Whatever is GE weaknesses might be, picking someone else would be a long-term disaster for the party.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)This is why Bernie should not drop out before the convention.
firebrand80
(2,760 posts)The delegates are his
ecstatic
(32,712 posts)larkrake
(1,674 posts)dana_b
(11,546 posts)It's the only fair thing to do. That candidate worked and campaigned for the nomination. Some of us also worked for the candidate. To throw it to someone else who did not EARN it would be a huge slap in the face to that candidate and the supporters.
anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)to chose a candidate who they feel best represents the values of the party.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)eastwestdem
(1,220 posts)WhiteTara
(29,718 posts)with the DNC. Let us know how that goes.
PATRICK
(12,228 posts)won't even be noted as they laugh that one off. The supers will go exclusively to Biden or "someone else" in the right center. "Should" applies to principles not the actual politics as it stands. Yet the votes everywhere might be split in the "everyone talking not about Bernie caucus". No Biden= bloodbath and leakage might put Sanders over. Nothing automatic or clean about it. certainly not principle and certainly not the public.
It doesn't even matter if the preferred frontrunner actually had an insufficient lead or losing delegate total. They will not be there for Sanders. A refreshing lack of scenarios for last chance hopes.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)B Calm
(28,762 posts)Gomez163
(2,039 posts)Idontthinkso
(13 posts)Vinca
(50,279 posts)I like Biden, but that would really piss me off.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)It would make it clear even to the dimmest of bulbs that the party no longer represents anything but moneyed interests.
Algernon Moncrieff
(5,790 posts)If HRC had to drop, that does not mean Bernie wins or loses. HRC could endorse Bernie and pledge her delegates to him. Or, they could abstain on the first ballott. Same with the SDs. So if we get past the 1st ballott with no nominee, anything could happen --Gore, Biden, Warren, O'Malley...or Sanders.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Bernie taking it to the convention alone would make it unprecedented.
okasha
(11,573 posts)I continue to be amazed at the persistence of "Hillary withdraws" fantasies.
Fortunately, the majority of the electorate is not thus afflicted. Hillary will be the Dem candidate, and she's polling stronger than Trump now that reality is setting in and the novelty has worn off.
Madame President.
Practice it. It's not painful.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)When have two candidates taken it to the convention, neither securing the nomination through pledged delegates and neither withdrawing?
When has a candidate ever been connected to a criminal investigation by the FBI going into the convention?
I have no fantasy of her withdrawing. I don't expect her to. But the FBI criminal investigation does not turn on the whims of the majority of the electorate, does it?
okasha
(11,573 posts)Humphrey's convention devolved not only into deals in the smoke filled rooms but a police riot.
Etc. on the R side.
Do you realize we haven't always had primaries?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Oh, right, that was before the super delegate system.
Yes. I am well aware the the nomination process is not a democratic process historically and that residual is ever present.
As I said, it has never happened that two candidates have taken it to the convention where neither has clinched the nomination threshold through PDs alone.
okasha
(11,573 posts)selected strictly by and for the local political organizations.
You have a particularly nasty transparency page, by the way.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Joob
(1,065 posts)I'd view Democrats as I do Republicans and Go look for a new party to build on.
beachbumbob
(9,263 posts)If it happens afterwards..the DNC will name...sanders will never be the nominee
George II
(67,782 posts)....if, after the primaries are completed one candidate has hundreds of delegates more than the other, should the runner-up suspend his campaign?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)one is connected to a criminal investigation by the FBI? No.
George II
(67,782 posts)By early evening a week from tonight, one candidate WILL have secured the number needed to be nominated.
Game. Set. Match. On to November.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)This time next week she will have secured a majority of the PDs, but that doesn't end it this year.
George II
(67,782 posts)...so, since the people have given her a majority of the pledged delegates the majority of the superdelegates should logically vote for Clinton.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)unless they have a reason not to. In which case, they are free to go elsewhere.
George II
(67,782 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)oasis
(49,392 posts)automatically accepted candidate of the GOP. It's should be up to the convention delegates to decide.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)oasis
(49,392 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Even if he stayed in and trump dropped out, Cruz could not have reached the number to secure the nomination.
On our side, Bernie has not been mathematically eleminated and will not be becuse we endow 15 % nominating power with super delegates. Mathematically, he could still win at the convention, whether Hillary is still on or not.
oasis
(49,392 posts)their "cup of tea". What's stopping a delegate on the floor from putting Kerry, Biden, or Warrens name into the nomination process?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)If enough of them back Sanders, then he will be the nominee. If they coalesce around somebody else, that person will be the nominee.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)prior to the first vote?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)A delegate at the convention is allowed to vote for whomever he or she wants to for the nomination (in the GOP convention many of them are actually required by the bylaws to vote for the candidate they are pledged to). If a candidate releases his or her delegates, they are still allowed to vote for whomever they wish, but the personal loyalty issue is no longer a factor.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)woolldog
(8,791 posts)And if not Biden then Warren. Maybe even Warren before Biden.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Would most likely be the lowest Democratic turnout in US history.
woolldog
(8,791 posts)popular among Dems and well respected. Biden would make a great contrast with Trump.
Zynx
(21,328 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Zynx
(21,328 posts)It would have to be a lot closer than Bernie Sanders is for me to automatically say that makes sense. Obviously, an 80-20 split would make it absurd to go with the second place finisher. I'm not sure a 56-44 split is any less absurd.
At that point I'd just favor a vote of the delegates at the convention and see who else wants to vie for the the delegates of the first place candidate.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)that's what the neo-liberal party establishment has in mind.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)then eat the masticated remains for lunch. It would not be pretty, or close.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Not based on whether Biden is a strong candidate of not.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Come November very few people out there in the real world will remember the name Sanders. And even fewer people will stay home sulking on Election Day.