So, you agree with me, HRC will be the Democratic nominee?
Does Bernie still have a chance?
- Thread starter cawacko
- Start date
So, you agree with me, HRC will be the Democratic nominee?
cawacko
Well-known member
I'm not betting on anything. Remember you liked to start Republican convention threads every other day. I started this thread based on the radio conversation I heard yesterday and Facebook posts from Bernie supporting friends. Like I said they have passion for Bernie that others don't. You can say that hate Hillary and I'm sure some do.
I think he does. I could tolerate either Trump or Bernie, but not Hillary.
If Sanders is elected, many will hail him as a hero. Free things and all the programs you can imagine paid for by the government will be raging. Then, a year or two later, when many business have either failed or left the country, and the tax base has dwindled to the size of a lake in california, we will make venezuela look like a walk in the park.
so you are basically saying that the party base (Hillary's long time connections) are to be rewarded in the process -which is what is happening
by the superdelegates (restating your position)..damn the will of the people?
to which Bernie would correctly answer "it's a rigged game"..
When you are right, you're right. All candidates know the procedure.
Sanders picks up more superdelegates
By Daniel Strauss
| 06/02/16 11:33 AM EDT
Sen. Bernie Sanders picked up another superdelegate on Thursday: New Hampshire Democratic Party vice chairwoman Martha Fuller Clark, who also serves as a state senator.
Clark's backing on Thursday, confirmed by the Sanders campaign, is the latest in a string of superdelegate endorsements Sanders has gained in the past week.
On Thursday afternoon Maureen Monahan, vice chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party, announced that she would back Sanders and encouraged other unpledged superdelegates to support him.
"In the primaries and caucuses held so far, Senator Sanders has won about 45% of the pledged delegates, yet has pledges from only about 6% of the “super delegates.” No wonder Sanders voters are so frustrated with the party," Monahan said in a statement. "Party leaders need to acknowledge and embrace Senator Sanders and his supporters. That is why today I am pledging my super delegate vote to Senator Sanders. I am encouraging all still unpledged super delegates to support Senator Sanders as well. We need new energetic people in the Democratic Party to spread our effective message."
On Tuesday, Hawaii's Democratic Party elected Tim Vandeveer as its party chairman, meaning he also becomes a superdelegate. Vandeveer said he would vote for Sanders at the state party convention. A week earlier, West Virginia Democratic National Committeewoman Elaine Harris said she would support Sanders in her role as a superdelegate.
By Daniel Strauss
| 06/02/16 11:33 AM EDT
Sen. Bernie Sanders picked up another superdelegate on Thursday: New Hampshire Democratic Party vice chairwoman Martha Fuller Clark, who also serves as a state senator.
Clark's backing on Thursday, confirmed by the Sanders campaign, is the latest in a string of superdelegate endorsements Sanders has gained in the past week.
On Thursday afternoon Maureen Monahan, vice chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party, announced that she would back Sanders and encouraged other unpledged superdelegates to support him.
"In the primaries and caucuses held so far, Senator Sanders has won about 45% of the pledged delegates, yet has pledges from only about 6% of the “super delegates.” No wonder Sanders voters are so frustrated with the party," Monahan said in a statement. "Party leaders need to acknowledge and embrace Senator Sanders and his supporters. That is why today I am pledging my super delegate vote to Senator Sanders. I am encouraging all still unpledged super delegates to support Senator Sanders as well. We need new energetic people in the Democratic Party to spread our effective message."
On Tuesday, Hawaii's Democratic Party elected Tim Vandeveer as its party chairman, meaning he also becomes a superdelegate. Vandeveer said he would vote for Sanders at the state party convention. A week earlier, West Virginia Democratic National Committeewoman Elaine Harris said she would support Sanders in her role as a superdelegate.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
just in case you thought it was all about voting....here's the 49 page explanation of how California's delegates will be selected.....
https://www.scribd.com/doc/299194556/CaliforniaDemocratic-2016DelegateSelectionPlan-Final-01-08-2016
https://www.scribd.com/doc/299194556/CaliforniaDemocratic-2016DelegateSelectionPlan-Final-01-08-2016
extra obstacle for sanders voters in California
said that Sanders had "dim chances" in the Golden State. In April the data journalism site FiveThirtyEight said Hillary Clinton had a 91 percent chance of taking Tuesday's Democratic primary. Then Sanders toured the state and organized his rock-star "A Future to Believe In" rallies.
He took credit for unprecedented voter registrations in California, particularly among the young and Latinos. Now yet another poll is showing Sanders and the former Secretary of State in a dead heat as we head to election day.
The USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll this week has Sanders leading Clinton among registered voters 44 to 43 percent.
With a margin of error 3.7 percent, this is a statistical tie.
In a statement, USC notes that "Sanders had trailed Clinton by eight percentage points in the poll’s March results."
What a difference a season makes.
"Bernie Sanders has tapped into a wellspring of support in the Democratic primary over the last several weeks and he’s closing with a rush," said Dan Schnur, director of USC’s Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics. "If Clinton manages to hold him off and win the primary, it would be as a result of a low turnout that tilts the electorate in her direction."
Clinton was leading among registered Democratic voters 46 to 42 percent, down from 49 to 35 percent in her favor in March, USC said.
"No party preference" voters eligible to vote in the Democratic primary were favoring Sanders 50 percent to 34 percent, "up 16 percentage points from his 44 percent to 35 percent lead in March," USC stated
Clinton still has a 10-point lead among likely voters, the university says. It attributes her strength there to her appeal with older Golden State residents (Hi, mom!).
Those “no party preference” voters will have to request a second ballot to vote in the Democratic presidential primary, presenting a hurdle for Sanders, USC said. Many of those voters missed a May 31 deadline to vote by mail, meaning they'll have to get their butts to the polls Tuesday, the school said.
"Sanders has been the most successful in states where independent voters are able to participate in the Democratic primary, but the added obstacle in California could sideline large numbers of his supporters,” Schnur said.
Sanders would still have an almost impossible journey toward becoming the Democratic presidential nominee. California's Democratic primary is not winner-take-all, and Clinton is well on her way to securing a winning number of delegates nationwide.
Still, if Sanders wins in California, it would be a "very long and unpleasant summer for Clinton," Schnur said.
said that Sanders had "dim chances" in the Golden State. In April the data journalism site FiveThirtyEight said Hillary Clinton had a 91 percent chance of taking Tuesday's Democratic primary. Then Sanders toured the state and organized his rock-star "A Future to Believe In" rallies.
He took credit for unprecedented voter registrations in California, particularly among the young and Latinos. Now yet another poll is showing Sanders and the former Secretary of State in a dead heat as we head to election day.
The USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll this week has Sanders leading Clinton among registered voters 44 to 43 percent.
With a margin of error 3.7 percent, this is a statistical tie.
In a statement, USC notes that "Sanders had trailed Clinton by eight percentage points in the poll’s March results."
What a difference a season makes.
"Bernie Sanders has tapped into a wellspring of support in the Democratic primary over the last several weeks and he’s closing with a rush," said Dan Schnur, director of USC’s Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics. "If Clinton manages to hold him off and win the primary, it would be as a result of a low turnout that tilts the electorate in her direction."
Clinton was leading among registered Democratic voters 46 to 42 percent, down from 49 to 35 percent in her favor in March, USC said.
"No party preference" voters eligible to vote in the Democratic primary were favoring Sanders 50 percent to 34 percent, "up 16 percentage points from his 44 percent to 35 percent lead in March," USC stated
Clinton still has a 10-point lead among likely voters, the university says. It attributes her strength there to her appeal with older Golden State residents (Hi, mom!).
Those “no party preference” voters will have to request a second ballot to vote in the Democratic presidential primary, presenting a hurdle for Sanders, USC said. Many of those voters missed a May 31 deadline to vote by mail, meaning they'll have to get their butts to the polls Tuesday, the school said.
"Sanders has been the most successful in states where independent voters are able to participate in the Democratic primary, but the added obstacle in California could sideline large numbers of his supporters,” Schnur said.
Sanders would still have an almost impossible journey toward becoming the Democratic presidential nominee. California's Democratic primary is not winner-take-all, and Clinton is well on her way to securing a winning number of delegates nationwide.
Still, if Sanders wins in California, it would be a "very long and unpleasant summer for Clinton," Schnur said.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
actually, she's been losing consistently for weeks.....
In the midst of the media's never-ending horse race coverage of the Democratic Primary, delivered by pundits who rarely leave the comfy confines of cable news green rooms to actually speak with the voters they pontificate about, a long-brewing simmer of struggle erupted.
It started with Democratic voters in 2008; so disheartened and angered by eight years of war, recklessness, and social-Darwinism-masked-as-economic-policy, they delivered Barack Obama the White House on the belief he'd usher in a new era of capital Progressivism.
Disenchanted with Obama and 30 years of trickle-down economics and corporate America's purchase of Washington, D.C., Occupy Wall Street spread in the heart of the corruption only to ultimately fizzle.
For all the punditry about the Vermont Senator's historic rise (or lack thereof), a simple truth has been missing. Quite the contrary from some radical, "pie in the sky" revolutionary, Sanders is actually an FDR Democrat.
You know, the Democrat who brought America back from the brink of economic calamity. The Democrat whose New Deal programs led to the creation of the American middle class. The same Democrat whose policies in the 1930's and 40's led to the strongest decades of economic equality and prosperity for the majority of Americans—as opposed to those at the top—in the 1950's and 60s.
And the Democratic Party and establishment, who beginning in the 1970's decided to begin a pivot away from the working class and New Deal era in favor or wealthier suburbanites and corporatists, has fought Sanders every step of the way.
Sure, party leaders and lawmakers have delivered good lip service. Hillary Clinton—whose big-money donors from Wall Street, corporate America, K Street, and other special interests have served as her political oxygen throughout her career—lauded Sanders for challenging the Party on unaccountable money.
But she, and the Democratic establishment backing her, don't mean a damn word of it. No objective person can suggest Democrats haven't looked the other way as inequality exploded.
From the Clintons to Chuck Schumer to Harry Reid and other corporate Democrats—who love uttering the words middle class before heading to fundraisers with the same folks who've decimated it—the bottom line is clear.
When party leaders, even President Obama, talk about "pragmatism" and "incremental change," they're using code words; ones that rationalize the revolving door between corporate America, Wall Street, K Street, and Washington, D.C.—the one they've been complicit in swinging wide open.
But that sales pitch has been rejected by the voters the party needs to survive into the future—millennials, young African Americans and Latinos, and the working class. And from the hundreds I've met and interviewed on the campaign trail, they are for Sanders and don't give a damn about Democratic Party unity.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/02/bern...line|story&par=yahoo&doc=103684596&yptr=yahoo
It started with Democratic voters in 2008; so disheartened and angered by eight years of war, recklessness, and social-Darwinism-masked-as-economic-policy, they delivered Barack Obama the White House on the belief he'd usher in a new era of capital Progressivism.
Disenchanted with Obama and 30 years of trickle-down economics and corporate America's purchase of Washington, D.C., Occupy Wall Street spread in the heart of the corruption only to ultimately fizzle.
For all the punditry about the Vermont Senator's historic rise (or lack thereof), a simple truth has been missing. Quite the contrary from some radical, "pie in the sky" revolutionary, Sanders is actually an FDR Democrat.
You know, the Democrat who brought America back from the brink of economic calamity. The Democrat whose New Deal programs led to the creation of the American middle class. The same Democrat whose policies in the 1930's and 40's led to the strongest decades of economic equality and prosperity for the majority of Americans—as opposed to those at the top—in the 1950's and 60s.
And the Democratic Party and establishment, who beginning in the 1970's decided to begin a pivot away from the working class and New Deal era in favor or wealthier suburbanites and corporatists, has fought Sanders every step of the way.
Sure, party leaders and lawmakers have delivered good lip service. Hillary Clinton—whose big-money donors from Wall Street, corporate America, K Street, and other special interests have served as her political oxygen throughout her career—lauded Sanders for challenging the Party on unaccountable money.
But she, and the Democratic establishment backing her, don't mean a damn word of it. No objective person can suggest Democrats haven't looked the other way as inequality exploded.
From the Clintons to Chuck Schumer to Harry Reid and other corporate Democrats—who love uttering the words middle class before heading to fundraisers with the same folks who've decimated it—the bottom line is clear.
When party leaders, even President Obama, talk about "pragmatism" and "incremental change," they're using code words; ones that rationalize the revolving door between corporate America, Wall Street, K Street, and Washington, D.C.—the one they've been complicit in swinging wide open.
But that sales pitch has been rejected by the voters the party needs to survive into the future—millennials, young African Americans and Latinos, and the working class. And from the hundreds I've met and interviewed on the campaign trail, they are for Sanders and don't give a damn about Democratic Party unity.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/02/bern...line|story&par=yahoo&doc=103684596&yptr=yahoo
The purpose of supers (party leadership) is to insure that the party proceeds as leadership wants irrespective of what the base (rank, file and other voters) vote for.
Going in, hrc was to be the nominee which is why there was an early flood of supers stating intentions. It was to create a sense of inevitability.
Then something odd happened, Sanders.
Now party leadership has a problem.
The money says hrc, the people say bs. What's worse is that hrc is a terrible candidate and with the gale force headwinds fom the BO era she not only can't beat a socialist she ain't looking good against a tv personality.
The party has a terrible decision to make. It's one of their own creation having sold their souls and rigged their game and are looking at having to use their rig.
They need a sign from god. That god is named California.
Gonna be an interesting week.
"It's a rigged game".. thank you for that. The DNC is so hellbent on Hillary nothing can stop them.
I am so glad I left the Democratic party, although as a registered Democrat in a closed primary state
I have to say voting forSanders was the first time in many years I wasn't voting "lessor of 2 evils" It was refreshing and uplifting.
To be fair, it's always been rigged. The party first responsibility is to elect it's pols. As the $ has increased, the expectations have as well. This puts the interests of the citizenry at odds with the party which demanded votes be bought. A very tricky path to walk. But seldom as hard as this go.
Ain't it grand ?
here we go AGAIN. and this time it's not even about California!
+
Hillary Clinton’s improbable path to clinching the nomination this weekend
..
Hillary Clinton is widely expected to clinch the Democratic nomination on Tuesday, when voters in six states, including New Jersey and California, go the polls.
It may be far-fetched, but two lesser-watched contests this weekend, in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, could put Clinton over the top — if she wins very lopsided victories over Bernie Sanders and picks up the remaining superdelegates from the two territories along the way.
Clinton needs 70 more delegates to reach the threshold of 2,383, after which she and much of the news media will consider her the Democratic Party’s presumptive nominee.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...top-table-main_democrats-203pm:homepage/story
^WaPo front page,, (of course)
+
Hillary Clinton’s improbable path to clinching the nomination this weekend
..
Hillary Clinton is widely expected to clinch the Democratic nomination on Tuesday, when voters in six states, including New Jersey and California, go the polls.
It may be far-fetched, but two lesser-watched contests this weekend, in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, could put Clinton over the top — if she wins very lopsided victories over Bernie Sanders and picks up the remaining superdelegates from the two territories along the way.
Clinton needs 70 more delegates to reach the threshold of 2,383, after which she and much of the news media will consider her the Democratic Party’s presumptive nominee.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...top-table-main_democrats-203pm:homepage/story
^WaPo front page,, (of course)
*blech* the MS parties are SO BAD for this country ,it would take pages to describe.
It's especially galling to be in the "Democratic " party with superdelegates -inherently undemocratic.
PS.. sander has better numbers then Hillary over trump,so even that is a disconnect
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders on Saturday vowed to continue his fight for the Democratic nomination beyond the primary season, telling reporters at a news conference in Los Angeles that he plans to go after Hillary Clinton's superdelegates.
Clinton currently has 2,313 total delegates -- 1,769 of which are pledged and 544 of which are superdelegates -- and she is expected to cross the 2,383-delgate threshold in the next few days to clinch the nomination. But Sanders, who has 1,501 pledged delegates and only 46 superdelegates, says he can still woo enough of her superdelegates between now and the Democratic convention in July to swing the nomination his way.
It's a tall order.
Pledged delegates emerge from primaries and caucuses, while superdelegates are party leaders -- elected officials and former ones who have individually committed to a candidate. It would be unprecedented for the number of superdelegates Sanders needs to switch allegiances, and, like Clinton this year, then-Sen. Barack Obama entered the 2008 convention without a majority of pledged delegates.
Sanders is making this pledge to keep his fight alive in the closing days of the California primary campaign, sending a signal to his supporters that the race isn't finished.
"
The Vermont senator accused the media of lumping together pledged delegates and superdelegates, noting that superdelegates don't formally cast their votes until the convention in late July, or, as Sanders put it, "six long weeks from today."
Sanders, however, acknowledged that it's unlikely he'll be able to turn around his fortunes.
"We understand that we have a steep climb," Sanders said. "I'm not here to tell you that tomorrow we're going to flip 300 superdelegates. You don't hear me say that. But I am saying we are going to make the case."
At a rally outside the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Saturday night, Sanders fired up the crowd by repeating his pledge to go to the convention, citing his performance in polls with him and Trump
Clinton currently has 2,313 total delegates -- 1,769 of which are pledged and 544 of which are superdelegates -- and she is expected to cross the 2,383-delgate threshold in the next few days to clinch the nomination. But Sanders, who has 1,501 pledged delegates and only 46 superdelegates, says he can still woo enough of her superdelegates between now and the Democratic convention in July to swing the nomination his way.
It's a tall order.
Pledged delegates emerge from primaries and caucuses, while superdelegates are party leaders -- elected officials and former ones who have individually committed to a candidate. It would be unprecedented for the number of superdelegates Sanders needs to switch allegiances, and, like Clinton this year, then-Sen. Barack Obama entered the 2008 convention without a majority of pledged delegates.
Sanders is making this pledge to keep his fight alive in the closing days of the California primary campaign, sending a signal to his supporters that the race isn't finished.
"
Yet that decision isn't entirely his alone. If enough superdelegates pledge their support to Clinton -- and President Barack Obama, Sen. Harry Reid and other party leaders weigh in next week -- Sanders will face new pressure to reconsider his fight.
The Vermont senator accused the media of lumping together pledged delegates and superdelegates, noting that superdelegates don't formally cast their votes until the convention in late July, or, as Sanders put it, "six long weeks from today."
Sanders, however, acknowledged that it's unlikely he'll be able to turn around his fortunes.
"We understand that we have a steep climb," Sanders said. "I'm not here to tell you that tomorrow we're going to flip 300 superdelegates. You don't hear me say that. But I am saying we are going to make the case."
At a rally outside the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Saturday night, Sanders fired up the crowd by repeating his pledge to go to the convention, citing his performance in polls with him and Trump
i still find it hard to believe sanders case is going to be " i know your people voted for clinton but i want you super delegates to vote for me instead." Seems like this is exactly what he was critizising.
Its a sad thing to realize but we just have to admit the democrats are fine with status quo.
Its a sad thing to realize but we just have to admit the democrats are fine with status quo.
Over Racist and Religious bigotry... Yes I prefer Status Quo.