[Cog]

Give it up Sixstrings. Embrace your nominee.

[Sixstrings]

The super delegates counted have already stated their position to vote for Clinton at the convention. It would be unprecedented for them to change their vote and go against the majority popular vote and pledged delegates.

Superdelegates were first put in there, after McGovern. The idea was to forever prevent Democrats from nominating "some liberal that can't win."

The entire design and intent of superdelegates was to overrule popular vote -- to ensure that a nominee that can actually win the general, is chosen.

Well here we are in 2016, and a very strange election year.

It's actually Sanders that polls so much higher than trump (sanders does much better with independents than clinton does). Whereas Clinton either ties trump or loses to him.

Therefore, given what the original intent for having superdelagates was, they really ought to side with Bernie.

In any event, Bernie has the right to campaign for their votes and make that case to them.

Or, at minimum, clinton should enter into a negotiation process with Bernie Sanders and his half of the Democratic Party, if she wants their votes.

She cannot unite the party without genuinely doing just that, *uniting the party*, and adjusting some of her positions to where Bernie could endorse her.

[Lore]

Notice, Bernie has not been attacked during the run up. You can only imagine the hammer and sickle take down by Trump and the party. He's just been used as a foil against Clinton.

However, the way Trump is going Micky Mouse may just get his first real shot to beat a Presidential candidate. The polls are becoming increasingly meaningless as the voters will coalesce around the nominated candidate.

[Sixstrings]

Supporters of Bernie Sanders expressed outrage in the hours leading up to Tuesday's primary elections ...

from the stage of the rally and among the more than 10,000 supporters who cheered on the Vermont senator, the emotions ranged from incredulity to anger.

"When the mainstream media calls the polls, calls the election, because they're already planning to do it to suppress the vote in California, we will fight on," said Nina Turner, a former Ohio state senator and one of Sanders' top surrogates.

Morgan Reed, a rafting guide from Mendicino, California, attended the rally and said it was unseemly for the media to call the race for Clinton so close to the start of voting in California, warning that it amounted to "disenfranchising the vote."

"It's ridiculous. California is the biggest state in the nation," she said.

Patrick Bryant of San Francisco, who also attended the Sanders' rally, said the decision was disappointing: "It's what bookies do. They call fights before they're over."
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/c8976c50c03f4f1d97f5e34d7057f600/sanders-supporters-angry-clinton-wins-sufficient-backing

Nina Turner says she'll fight on, to the convention:


"The mainstream media may not understand it, but there is no substitute or replacement for Senator Bernie Sanders. Sisters and brothers we're going to fight on, say fight on!"

Nina Turner for Bernie Sanders: We Will Fight On, 6/6/16, San Francisco

"I’ve got a news flash. We’re going all the way to the convention."
Danny Glover and former State Senator Nina Turner at Senator Sanders' last campaign event in San Francisco on the eve of the June 7 primary election.
https://youtu.be/YoT7ACM0zR4

[Cog]

Bernie Sanders will not be the nominee. The sooner you Democrats fully embrace your candidate, like Lore already has, the sooner you can beat the misogynist, racist, and homophobic Donald Trump. All of those accusations of Hillary Clinton being a criminal or violating national security are simply a vast right wing conspiracy.

Time to man up and support your candidate.

I am Cog and endorse this position.

[Sixstrings]

The sooner you Democrats fully embrace your candidate, like Lore already has, the sooner you can beat the misogynist, racist, and homophobic Donald Trump.

No -- Clinton ought to to do whatever she needs to, to make things right with Bernie Sanders.

If she can do right by Bernie then maybe I can do right by her, and vote for her.

(I say maybe.. I could go one way, or another way.. if Trump keeps it up about that judge he's going on about, that's the kind of thing that may get me start thinking "Madame President." Some latest news though is that he says he's gonna shut up about that stuff, so we'll see.)

I voted for Bernie. I like Trump, when he's not being over the line about something, but when it came time to vote -- I voted Bernie.

I COULD have switched parties and voted Trump, but I did not (there's things I like about him, but it just wasn't there enough for me to actually go vote for him.. it COULD have been.. he COULD have been less bigot-seeming.. he COULD have come out for raising minimum wage sooner, and been stronger about it.

I could have swtiched back to R and voted for him, if he'd been a bit different -- I just vote on issues, gimme somebody interesting and personality I like, and that's strong on some issues I can agree with and then okay I vote for them. It's not rocket science.)

And I could have voted Clinton, but I did not. And to be honest, I thought about it. I had that ballot in my hands.. it said "Clinton, Sanders, O'Malley." To be honest -- I did think for a few minutes about it.

I put my mail-in ballot away, for a day. Then when I finally decided, and checked Bernie's name I thought "hm, well it would be pretty cool to vote for a woman for president for the first time in my life."

But THEN I thought about the issues, and how consistent Bernie has been on so many things.. from wall street reform, to working and middle class issues, and how I gut level know he wants to do what's best for everyone and his policies are the kind that would help EVERYBODY, of all races and both genders.

So, I voted Bernie. If somebody is so good on the issues as Bernie is, and honest, then I HAD to vote Bernie.

So at that convention there will be a delegate there whom my vote went toward electing. A Bernie delegate means another voice at the D convention that's for his issues, and that can shape the platform / pressure Clinton to adopt a few of his stances.

Bernie, and his issues, still needs every vote he can get.

I agree with Nina Turner, "fight on, brothers and sisters."

[Cog]

Bernie is irrelevant. The voters have spoken and they want Hillary Clinton. Sanders should be discarded like the dead carcass that he is. Time to get behind Hillary and not let the Republican party win this crucial election. Sanders, and his commie everything is free ideas, will only weigh down the progressive candidate, Hillary Clinton, that the Democrat party truly needs.

[Sixstrings]

Cog, in the old days, party conventions were a more organic thing and they have rules in place and it's a process and it's OKAY for there to be floor fights and some excitement.

Conventions do not have to be just a coronation and just for show and ceremonial.

D side of things is same as R side.. movement conservatives have issues they care a lot about, and movement progressives do as well, on the D side.

Environment, climate change, $15 minimum wage, wall street reform, anti war, college cost reform, etc.

You can't just say these people should all shut up and just get behind neoliberal Clinton and what is frankly the same exact policies as Jeb Bush would have been.

A party convention is DEMOCRACY -- so let it work.

It's a negotiation process -- yes, Clinton will be the eventual nominee, but if she wants the tens of millions of Bernie voters then Bernie Sanders is right -- SHE is going to have to fairly move their direction on some things.

It's CLINTON that has to genuinely unite her party -- not just "bring them to heel."

I mean come on man, I voted Bernie Sanders. If Clinton's just gonna be same as Trump, then maybe I'll vote just vote Trump; I get a lot of entertainment value out of Trump. Heck, I pay $150 bucks a month for cable tv, but Trump is free.

If Clinton wants to get my vote, then she's got to take on some of Bernie's issues and she needs to be strong about it, and a good yardstick of that would be whether she's making Bernie happy or not.. if she honestly does the right things, then YES he would not only endorse her but campaign for her.

Bernie's about the issues. If Clinton gets right enough on the issues then OF COURSE he would get behind her.

Clinton needs to do right by Bernie Sanders, to get his voters, just my opinion.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Supporters of Bernie Sanders expressed outrage in the hours leading up to Tuesday's primary elections ...

from the stage of the rally and among the more than 10,000 supporters who cheered on the Vermont senator, the emotions ranged from incredulity to anger.

"When the mainstream media calls the polls, calls the election, because they're already planning to do it to suppress the vote in California, we will fight on," said Nina Turner, a former Ohio state senator and one of Sanders' top surrogates.

Morgan Reed, a rafting guide from Mendicino, California, attended the rally and said it was unseemly for the media to call the race for Clinton so close to the start of voting in California, warning that it amounted to "disenfranchising the vote."

More liberal nonsense about how everything imaginable is "suppressing the vote". Requiring a valid ID to vote is "voter suppression" by the GOP. As though people needed a valid ID for NOTHING else, instead of many, many things.

So now it's speech. How dare the press report on a story before an election. Because it's "voter suppression".

The more nonsense like this is trumpeted by the Bernie crowd, the less credible he gets.

[Cog]

Its over Sixstrings. Lore and others have moved on here and embraced Hillary as their candidate. Time for you to do the same.

[Newfie]

I'm just glad I don't have to pick between T-rump and Trumpet.

If you want proof democracy is a failed experiment this election is it.

The masses are asses.

[vtsnowedin]

So now it's speech. How dare the press report on a story before an election. Because it's "voter suppression".

The more nonsense like this is trumpeted by the Bernie crowd, the less credible he gets.

It is not nonsense. The AP and MSNBC calling Hillary the "Presumptive Winner" on Monday night was deliberate sabotage. There is a band wagon effect where enough voters to swing an election will jump on the band wagon of the winner if they are told who is winning. They don't realize they are being led by the nose and being manipulated.
Of course enough tombstones votes were counted in New Jersey before the polls opened to settle it but don't let that routine event sway your opinion.

[Lore]

It could work just the opposite by suppressing the get out and vote Clinton supporters since they may have figured why vote at that point while inflaming Bernie supporters to make a last stand in retaliation.

[Cog]

Except that is not what happened. Hillary wins big in California. Polling before the MSM announcement had it much closer.

[AgentR11]

If you want proof democracy is a failed experiment this election is it.
The masses are asses.

Nah, its just an indictment of our presidential election system, which is garbage. Designed in an era of no communications, no electricity, no paved roads, to work by horseback, in winter, with lots of mud, swamps, and more than a few bandit/indian threats..

Our constitution, being designed to be relatively easy to adjust by 13 or so relatively similar thinking states; is darn near impossible to adjust in any significant way by 50 very diverse states.

So we are stuck with an antiquated system, with no realistic way to fix it. That's the cards we have in hand. It *usually* works out ok; and the Senate being very democratic and very hard to artificially manipulate serves as a backstop to any stupidity that might result on the presidential side.

So overall, it kinda works.

But its not an indictment of democracy. It is an indictment against the United States' failure to practice democracy.

[Tanada]

If you want proof democracy is a failed experiment this election is it.
The masses are asses.

Nah, its just an indictment of our presidential election system, which is garbage. Designed in an era of no communications, no electricity, no paved roads, to work by horseback, in winter, with lots of mud, swamps, and more than a few bandit/indian threats..

Our constitution, being designed to be relatively easy to adjust by 13 or so relatively similar thinking states; is darn near impossible to adjust in any significant way by 50 very diverse states.

So we are stuck with an antiquated system, with no realistic way to fix it. That's the cards we have in hand. It *usually* works out ok; and the Senate being very democratic and very hard to artificially manipulate serves as a backstop to any stupidity that might result on the presidential side.

So overall, it kinda works.

But its not an indictment of democracy. It is an indictment against the United States' failure to practice democracy.

Sounds almost like your solution would be to split up the country into blocks that have the same ideals and let each find its own path into the future. Either that or authoritarian rule that forces all the outlier areas to comply with what the people in charge think is best for everyone.

[AgentR11]

Nope. My position has been the same for a long time; a rewrite to a sane, parliamentary system, weak presidential, strong PM; instant runoff.

Barring that, an improvement would be a nationwide, straight up, popular vote; 50%+1 victory, instant runoff option where no majority winner exists.

[Sixstrings]

Except that is not what happened. Hillary wins big in California. Polling before the MSM announcement had it much closer.

What's hilarious is that in the Republican Party, it was party chairman Reince Priebus that declared a presumptive nominee.

In the Democratic Party -- it's MSNBC that's in charge of that.

It's just odd to me. It's one thing if it's party leadership and then reporters report on that.. but imagine on the R side if it was JUST Fox News that declared a presumptive nominee, and then they report on their declaration of a presumptive nominee.

But anyhow.. Clinton is +10 versus Trump, in the latest polls.. Drudgereport headline, "Media Goddess:"

MEDIA GODDESS

Madame President?

[Cog]

By the way, CNN did some modifications with their camera to make Hillary appear to glow. I'm not kidding.

[Newfie]

I still think that photo looks photoshopped, poorly.