Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
A Bernie Sanders Supporter Confronted a Superdelegate — Then Leaked Their Private Conversation
.
In addition, President Sanders would not be as bad for the Democratic Establishment as President Trump would be for the Republican Establishment. The only thing Bernie Sanders is really a threat to is Hillary Clinton's presidential aspirations, since I don't think the Democratic Party will allow Hillary to run a third time for the Democratic nomination if she loses to Sanders. After all, she would have lost to Obama badly in 2008 and just barely gotten beaten by Sanders in this scenario, so the Democratic Party Leaders might decide that the voters just don't want Hillary Clinton as President.
edited 2nd Apr '16 12:21:02 AM by GameGuruGG
Wizard Needs Food Badly![]()
Superdelegates don't represent states anyway, so I'm not sure why this is such a big deal. I mean, they're from states, but they don't represent the will of the voters or anything. The idea is that they currently support Clinton because she's winning, but if Sanders magically turns things around before the convention they'd feel pressured to ride that wave at the risk of being on the wrong side of history when the party collapses, or whatever. A single superdelegate from Alaska at a time when Clinton's nomination is all but guaranteed is hardly a counterexample, regardless of how Alaska's caucuses turned out.
I mean, I'm not saying that's necessarily what's going to happen, I just don't think that conversation is meaningful, and honestly I felt kind of sorry for her being pestered like that.
edited 2nd Apr '16 12:35:54 AM by Clarste
On the one hand, so did I. But on the other hand, I have a deep antipahty for people who end a declaration with "End of conversation." All the more so when they keep on replying afterwards. The truth is that she handled it with a lot of condescension, and would have been better off not trying to get the last word.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.On the bright side, Bernie isn't the Democrats' equivalent to Drumpf. While the Democratic establishment aren't exactly thrilled by Bernie actively attacking the party's status quo and trying to drag them and their preferred candidate towards the left, they can live with a Sanders presidency and don't consider his presence to be an existential problem for the party. The Republican establishment, on the other hand, are hyperventilating and actively considering a brokered convention to prevent Drumpf from taking the GOP to places they desperately don't want.
A rather dumb idea, since the DNC is primarily composed of apparatchiks to begin with.
A party split is unlikely. What's more likely is that Hillary will be forced through, Sanders won't run third-party, and the backlash will lead to revolts against the state Democratic conventions. What I'd like to see is a Sanders run in 2020 (if Sanders is up for it) fuelled by a mass revolt against the state Democratic Committees. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and fortunately, Hillary being purged in mid-term by her own party is unlikely to weaken us against the Republicans.
Why only a presidential election year? I know that Congress is underrated, but for a "Sanderite revolution" a midterm year may be an option worth considering. The DNC doesn't care what happens in these years so you won't have any superdelegates or manipulation attempts there.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanThe way to support Sanders in Congress, right now, is to get more Democrats into Congress, not launch primary attacks on any who are not progressive enough - we don't have any actual Blue Dogs anymore.
While primarying Schultz might be viscerally satisfying, since she is a US Representative, the objective would be to fix the system the Democratic Party uses to select its Presidential candidate - which Schultz has admitted is designed to keep the party apparat from having to run for their places as delegates.
You still do have Blue Dogs. Not all of them are tied to swing or red districts, a Blue Dog can also be elected in a safe blue district. I also did not say that primarying Blue Dogs is the only way to go about this - voter enthusiasm that the current DNC does not inspire in midterm elections is the main scope here.
I also think that people like Boss Water-brain even though they aren't Blue Dogs per se are a problem even without her attempts to rig the presidential primary - see that support of hers to defang that financial services bureau for example.
edited 2nd Apr '16 1:41:44 AM by SeptimusHeap
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanSo has anyone else noticed something odd regarding coverage of Arizona's primary problems? I mean, you'd think it'd be major fucking news when a Secretary of State confirms that election fraud happens
, but I can't find anything involving that testimony on the more "mainstream" channels (CNN, NY Times, etc.), which is just shameful. Hell, the last thing CNN reported on with Arizona's primary was the petition from voters and Phoenix's Mayor to have the DOJ investigate
, but after that? Nothing since the 25th.
Thanks for that site. There I found a link to this little gem.
Now who has an abuse problem again? Who are the dangerous harrassers again?
Many Twitter users it would appear, regardless of what political positions they claim to have.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranTo be fair, I believe that the people who have this utter dislike of the Establishment, both on the Democratic and Republican sides, will need their desires addressed. There will be more Sanderses and Trumps in future elections given how popular Sanders is with young voters and how popular Donald Trump has been with Republican voters.
edited 2nd Apr '16 7:12:16 AM by GameGuruGG
Wizard Needs Food BadlyThat assumes that neither get the nomination, Trump getting it and loosing will take the wind out of the sails of his supporters, Sander's year, but if Clinton is smart she might be able to fold them in with a good VP pick who both sides would be happy with some 2024.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran@Luminosity
Haven't had a chance to look at the page (I'm at work), but keep the GIFT in mind when taking online actions and statements into account. Trump's supporters, by contrast, pull their stuff in full view of the public.
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"![]()
Isn't the VP typically a foil to the President anyway, like Kennedy & Johnson or Obama and Biden?
![]()
![]()
Having Trump run and lose and having a Clinton VP pick that matches the ideals of Sanders would be addressing those desires. The former would be the Republican Establishment giving up on fighting Trump to have an "We told you so" moment after Clinton wins. The latter would be Clinton and by extension, the Democratic Party understanding that this thing started by Sanders isn't going away and to accept those ideals into the fold as it were.
edited 2nd Apr '16 8:17:51 AM by GameGuruGG
Wizard Needs Food Badly

The standard narrative is that the superdelegates wouldn't dare go against the popular vote, because that'd simply position themselves as the enemy of the people and democracy itself. That's not the best thing for your political career.