DNC Panel Recommends Huge Cuts in Super Delegates & Changes to Caucuses

[Vector1]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

She had more votes, more pledged delegates, more super delegates and was leading in every poll.

.

I don't mind people having different points of view, as that is part of the reason we come to places like this forum to discuss/exchange viewpoints. However when they are intentionally talking past you, it gets frustrating.
I am not sure that is what you are doing, and I am certainly not, so let see if you understand my points, even if you disagree.

Many news outlets, whether they be print, radio, TV or internet where adding Hillary's super delegates to her totals when reporting to pad the lead, and give the air of inevitability of her win. This was combined with calls for Bernie to step aside for the good of the party. Bernie refused, but the calls continued, and even greater efforts were made to give potential voters the impression that supporting Bernie was a futile cause, and not good for the party as a whole.

Now two questions.

Do you acknowledge the aforementioned (even if you think it had no effect on the outcome)?

Do you acknowledge that in the big scheme of things this was minor compare with the leadership of the DNC essentially being in the bag for Hillary from the beginning?

That last question is important because many Democrats have already tried to "move on" beyond all the corruption that was exposed via the email scandal, DWS & Brazille, and the latest revelations of deceit/corruption Hillary & Co were involved with.

`

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Vector1

I don't mind people having different points of view, as that is part of the reason we come to places like this forum to discuss/exchange viewpoints. However when they are intentionally talking past you, it gets frustrating.
I am not sure that is what you are doing, and I am certainly not, so let see if you understand my points, even if you disagree.
Now two questions.

Do you acknowledge the aforementioned (even if you think it had no effect on the outcome)?

I know you are trying to throw me a bone so we can have a real conversation and I indeed want to have a real discussion about this issue, but when I was watching MSNBC and CNN, they both defined the difference between pledged delegates and super delegates and showed totals for both.

My problem with your characterization is exactly what the person in the video said. Like it or not, SDs do count, and hiding them/not reporting on them or pretending they dont exist until the convention is a lie. and does far more to "Pad" numbers in Sanders direction instead of Clinton than it does in the opposite direction.

If we are going to use Cenk's argument, then in reality, all that should be reported, is the popular vote(which clinton still won by a mile) as most delegates dont get finalized until their state conventions which may not happen until late June or early July, months after their primaries.

This is actually how Bernie gained delegates, People who won delegate seats didnt show up( delegates have to provide their own travel and many have jobs outside of politics and cant always make it).

Do you acknowledge that in the big scheme of things this was minor compare with the leadership of the DNC essentially being in the bag for Hillary from the beginning?

That last question is important because many Democrats have already tried to "move on" beyond all the corruption that was exposed via the email scandal, DWS & Brazille, and the latest revelations of deceit/corruption Hillary & Co were involved with.

`

We are getting back into an area where I have a serious problem with people who dont know the rules of the Democratic Party.

DNC members can support people in the primary, there is no rule saying they cant and have done so for the last 50 years. If they couldnt there would be about 300 less Super delegates. The premise of your argument is based on something that is 100% false.

Now, if you are actually talking about your personal ethical view on whether or not Leadership should be involved in a primary, that is just an opinion and we will have to live with disagreeing.

Many news outlets, whether they be print, radio, TV or internet where adding Hillary's super delegates to her totals when reporting to pad the lead, and give the air of inevitability of her win. This was combined with calls for Bernie to step aside for the good of the party. Bernie refused, but the calls continued, and even greater efforts were made to give potential voters the impression that supporting Bernie was a futile cause, and not good for the party as a whole.

Calling for on candidate to drop out to unify the party happens in every single contested primary. If you think it is wrong. That is fine. but you guys talk about it like it isnt normal.

So i think its time for us to simplify this.

My argument is based on the rules of the game. Yours seems to be based on your personal opinion of how things should go.

Those 2 things have nothing to do with each other.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by pknopp

Not so. It's inherently an unfair system. In an election you do not stack the deck.

Hillary Clinton won by 3 million votes. There are states where Sanders still won the popular vote despite the super delegates supporting clinton (which clearly shows that being a super delegate didnt sway anyones opinion).

On the opposite end of that, Sanders was fine with taking super delegate votes in thats that he lost. destroying the "super delegates should vote with the popular vote of their state" argument.

even if you disagree with the system, your guy was fine with it when it was working to his advantage.

[PCALMike]

Originally Posted by evilcart

oh what rot.

Hillary won vastly more delegates than Bernie, Bernie was just had very vocal support. Furthermore Hillary would have won even more if supporter suspected Bernie or bust folk were going to be such asses about losing.

In my state WA, bernie won the caucus but was crushed in the required mail in vote. ie the vote that the average working mom and dad can do without having to take off work or drive 30 miles or argue like a child in public.

Caucusing is hugely outdated in this age of always online . a virtual town hall with online or mail in voting make a thousand times more sense.

So why are you so against Goldman Sachs then? Goldman Sachs and the rest of Wall Street control the mainstream media. Who do you think benefit from having media and name recognition? The Wall Street darlings. Hillary was swimming in cash from Goldman.

Goldman's Hillary was supported by the media whether we like it or not. Trump or Hillary; Goldman calls the shots.

[pknopp]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

Hillary Clinton won by 3 million votes. There are states where Sanders still won the popular vote despite the super delegates supporting clinton (which clearly shows that being a super delegate didnt sway anyones opinion).

On the opposite end of that, Sanders was fine with taking super delegate votes in thats that he lost. destroying the "super delegates should vote with the popular vote of their state" argument.

even if you disagree with the system, your guy was fine with it when it was working to his advantage.

He had no choice.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by pknopp

He had no choice.

That argument doesnt work while you specifically rail against others doing it.

It is one thing to be against the system and still work with in it. its another to be a full blown hypocrite, and that is what Sanders' team was.

[pknopp]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

That argument doesnt work while you specifically rail against others doing it.

Of course it does.

It is one thing to be against the system and still work with in it. its another to be a full blown hypocrite, and that is what Sanders' team was.

Sanders is leading the argument to change it. It will get changed or there will be more defections.

[Kracer]

Originally Posted by WaldoKitty

DNC panel recommends significant changes to Super Delegate system. Super delegates voted for Obama in 2008 even though Hillary won the popular vote. In 2016, it made it impossible for anyone to win except for Hillary.

It also wants significant changes to the secretive DNC Caucus rules to make them more transparent. Hillary won most of these due to rules which often favored her candidacy.

DNC Panel Recommends Huge Cut in Superdelegates

All the dems have to do is demonstrate ethical behavior. No changes needed.


The delegates interfere with their rigging an election when they have a loser for a candidate.


Transparency is a primal refrain for the dems having vowed to show healthcare negotiations on CSPAN to remove the veil of secrecy and back room deals like the cornhusker kickback and the Louisiana purchase, two deals critical to pass obamacare.


We have had 8 years of self proclaimed transparency.


Obama even received a transparency award from the CBCwatch....and it was done behind closed doors excluding the press. another version of a hijacked democrat party version of transparency.


The only thing transparent about the last 8 years was the clearly apparent corruption of the justice system and former free press.


Dems calling for transparency is like hearing Red Foxx call out 'Elizabeth, I'm coming', whenever he found himself in an overwhelming situation. A meaningless refrain.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by pknopp

Of course it does.



Sanders is leading the argument to change it. It will get changed or there will be more defections.

If he had said

" The system is flawed", we need to change it" I would still disagreed with him, but he wouldnt be a hypocrite.


but no, what he said was " Hillary clinton shouldnt accept super delegates from states she lost" and then he took delegates from states he lost.

If he can tell his supporters that he isnt going to take super pac dollars, then why is it so hard to not take SD votes from states he lost ?

The sad part is, their endorsement wouldnt have to be rescinded, all he had to do was simply make a statement and he couldnt do that because he is a hypocrite.

He cant wiggle away from the hypocrisy here.

[pknopp]

As I note in another thread. I am patient. I'm sure i will join in with the protest threads.