Big Bernie Win: DNC to Reduce "Super Delegates" by 60%

[Fawlty]

We haven't learned out lesson about populism eh? Okay. We'll learn it the hard way.

 

[Rational Poster]

Yes, they did. And this is how we ended up where we are.

Why do you think Clinton just conceded like that?

What was she given, that kept her from a convention floor fight.

I know what Bernie was given to avoid the convention floor fight, the Democratic platform he wanted.

What was Clinton given?

Was she given the promise of being able to rig the DNC for 2016, and the nomination?

How exactly did Clinton's former campaign manager become head of the DNC?

lol but you're wrong.

DNC has made use of superdelegates since 1984 where 14% of delegates were super. It was already at 20% in 2004.

 

[HomerThompson]

We haven't learned out lesson about populism eh? Okay. We'll learn it the hard way.

 

[Law Talkin’ Guy]

That old turd is going to run again?

 

[HomerThompson]

That old turd is going to run again?

 

[VivaRevolution]

So, 54% of democratic voters thought it was fair.

But, im not asking of the fairness -- i want to see numbers of people who didnt vote for Sanders because of SD's, "favorable polling" for Clinton, etc.

C'mon, Viva -- you're telling me you dont want to see the actual hard data to your claim?

No, I answered your question.

You just didn't like the answer.

 

[Fawlty]

We're not actually more intelligent than Republicans. Y'all need to knock that shit out your head- it's pure arrogance. We have a better party, with a better platform, and are working toward better outcomes for people. But we're not less gullible or less prone to populist influence.

 

[HomerThompson]

We're not actually more intelligent than Republicans. Y'all need to knock that shit out your head- it's pure arrogance. We have a better party, with a better platform, and are working toward better outcomes for people. But we're not less gullible or less prone to populist influence.

You think far too little of us.

 

[Liquid Smoke]

That old turd is going to run again?

They're talking about Bernie not Hilary.

 

[VivaRevolution]

We haven't learned out lesson about populism eh? Okay. We'll learn it the hard way.

Donald trump is a lesson in populism?

It amazes me, that people don't see that Donald trump is evidence, along with congresses 7% approval rating, that people will vote for an orange clown over a Bush or clinton.

That the political establishment is so despised in this country, that people actually voted for Donald fucking trump.

Really, this idea that the problem is the people, and not the politicians themselves, is absurd.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Keep pretending that the media counting those superdelegates for clinton, and saying over and over, that Bernie couldn't win, wasn't meant to depress voter turnout for Bernie.

Maybe the uninformed rubes will buy it

You’ve got to trust your electorate AND your party’s ability and willingness to communicate a meaningful message to them.

Republicans ended up with Trump because 1) right wing media has been radicalizing and debasing the Republican base for 20 years 2) the institutional GOP is the party of kleptocracy.

The Democrats need to learn from these mistakes and win based on MERIT, not crowd control.

Also, superdelegates would still be 8%. If the party’s chosen candidate can’t run at least that close... the party should have chosen a different candidate.

I'm not saying that this is the end of the republic or anything. Just a small step in a bad direction. Also, it's not necessarily more democratic. There could be a situation where a really bad candidate who is opposed by most voters but has the support of a plurality can win. Superdelegates would provide a democratic check there. Granted, they could also go the other way (supporting an inferior candidate). It's an institutional control that I think is likely to be used well.

I think that reducing superdelegates is replicating one of the mistakes the GOP has made, in the sense of removing guardrails.

Yes, God forbid we let the people decide who their representatives will be.

The people do decide and have for a while.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

No, I answered your question.

You just didn't like the answer.

You really didn't though. I asked for the breakdown of people who did not vote due to dnc "suppression."

When the anti voter id people bring up their cause -- they use actual data points to show their case.

You gave me a break down of people thoughts on the fairness -- not their voting behavior -- but even in your stats, Hilary would've won -- as the majority of the democratic voters thought she won fairly.

Are you really saying you dont want to see the actual facts to your claim?

 

[waiguoren]

You’ve got to trust your electorate AND your party’s ability and willingness to communicate a meaningful message to them.

Republicans ended up with Trump because 1) right wing media has been radicalizing and debasing the Republican base for 20 years 2) the institutional GOP is the party of kleptocracy.

The Democrats need to learn from these mistakes and win based on MERIT, not crowd control.

Also, superdelegates would still be 8%. If the party’s chosen candidate can’t run at least that close... the party should have chosen a different candidate.

These new changes could easily lead to more brokered conventions, which means LESS meritocracy and MORE back-room deals.

 

[VivaRevolution]

You really didn't though. I asked for the breakdown of people who did not vote due to dnc "suppression."

When the anti voter id people bring up their cause -- they use actual data points to show their case.

You gave me a break down of people thoughts on the fairness -- not their voting behavior -- but even in your stats, Hilary would've won -- as the majority of the democratic voters thought she won fairly.

Are you really saying you dont want to see the actual facts to your claim?

So we are back to square one I see.

So explain to me in detail exactly how that polling and voter exit polls, can show what you are asking for.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

You think far too little of us.

an action movie star won 20% of the democratic vote in one of the most left leaning states in the country -- you really think democrats are immune from populism?

 

[Fawlty]

Donald trump is a lesson in populism?

It amazes me, that people don't see that Donald trump is evidence, along with congresses 7% approval rating, that people will vote for an orange clown over a Bush or clinton.

That the political establishment is so despised in this country, that people actually voted for Donald fucking trump.

Really, this idea that the problem is the people, and not the politicians themselves, is absurd.

Trump is definitely a lesson there. He showed that a person who builds a public persona can take the office purely on lies and a few assurances toward popular bias (I hate Mexicans, I love the Bible, I hate abortion, I hate the media). It wouldn't take as much as you and Homer seem to think to put in our own Trump. Grab some rich idiot with a public face, and he can tell us how much he hates racism, corporations, etc, and he can throw out some halfway-to-Bernie prefab platform, and voila. We've got ourselves President Kanye.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

So we are back to square one I see.

So explain to me in detail exactly how that polling and voter exit polls, can show what you are asking for.

Exit polling wouldnt work -- because you're asking people who voted...thus how could they be suppressed?

Set up a questionnaire and ask people if they did not vote (presumably for sanders) because of the reasons you outlined.

 

[VivaRevolution]

We're not actually more intelligent than Republicans. Y'all need to knock that shit out your head- it's pure arrogance. We have a better party, with a better platform, and are working toward better outcomes for people. But we're not less gullible or less prone to populist influence.

It's so funny to see what some dems have become.

The Populism of the FDR Era
By David GreenbergWednesday, June 24, 2009

Thomas D. Mcavoy / Time & Life Pictures / Getty

Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt making a Fireside Chat speech on radio during WWII.



Populist impulses — emotional demands for systemic change, waged in the name of the common man, demonizing Washington or Wall Street elites — are always rattling our politics. It's a tendency with roots in Andrew Jackson's swaggering mass-democratic appeals and attacks on the Bank of the United States; it crested with the currency-obsessed, debt-strapped farmers of the late 19th Century People's Party. Its standard-bearers today occupy no clear ideological home — self-styled leaders of recent vintage range from Jim Webb to Arnold Schwarzenegger to Pat Buchanan.

For decades, liberals and conservatives have championed dueling populisms: the left beating the drum for economic fairness, the right targeting the power of the federal bureaucracy and the cultural elite. The surge of populism induced by last fall's economic collapse, though, looks closer to that of the 1930s, when anti-government, anti-finance, anti-elite sentiment burst the boundaries of party and region.

During the Depression, citizens of all stripes joined in an inchoate but potent critique of society — raising fears that capitalism and democracy might be moribund. Even Franklin Delano Roosevelt was worried. Elected overwhelmingly in 1932 on the strength of the public discontent, FDR found himself jarred into action by recurring waves of dissent. Like Roosevelt after his triumphant hundred days, Barack Obama seems for now to have tamed the populist outbursts of his early presidential days. But like FDR, he also must remain vigilant, lest he find himself on the receiving end of the demand for change.

Roosevelt's challenge wasn't the number of populists unreconciled to his leadership but their intensity and variety. He had to act boldly and effectively enough to satisfy the outrage. Yet he also had to establish himself as the cooler alternative to demagogues who often generated among the populace as much fear as hope.

The most troublesome nemesis was the ruthless Huey Long of Louisiana, since immortalized as Willie Stark by Robert Penn Warren in All the King's Men. With his wild curly hair, fleshy face, garish dress, and constant sense of motion, Long looked very much the rabble-rouser — though he also had a record of hard achievement that gave him credibility with the dispossessed. Having helped Roosevelt secure the Democratic presidential nomination in 1932, Long soon raised the opposition banner. In 1934 he took to the airwaves to tout his "Share Our Wealth" plan-a naive, untheoretical plan to radically redistribute wealth and income, presented in terms as accessible as they were unworkable. "Share Our Wealth" Clubs sprang up around the country, demanding sweeping change.

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1906802_1906838_1908686,00.html

 

[Lavalamp]

What was the ratio of superdelegates for Clinton and against Bernie?

And if America needs to be protected against democracy, then why not just have superdelegates decide everything?

 

[Rational Poster]

What was the ratio of superdelegates for Clinton and against Bernie?

And if America needs to be protected against democracy, then why not just have superdelegates decide everything?

Bernie got 48, Hillary got all the rest.