Sanders bumped off D.C. ballot

[Bubzer]

Source: Politico

As a result of a registration error committed by the District of Columbia Democratic Party, Sen. Bernie Sanders won't appear on the Washington D.C. ballot.

The Vermont senator's name won't appear on the ballot because the party submitted the requisite paperwork one day too late, according to NBC's Washington affiliate, News4.

Both the Sanders' campaign and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton's campaign paid the $2,500 fee to appear on the June 14 Democratic primary ballot on time but the district's Democratic Party failed to inform the Washington D.C. Board of Elections until March 17, one day after the deadline.

There are still avenues for Sanders to make the ballot -- Anita Bonds, the chairwoman of the Democratic Party in D.C., told News4 that the problem could be resolved via an emergency vote of the D.C. City Council.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/bernie-sanders-district-columbia-ballot-221398

---

I smell a rat

[2pooped2pop]

1. there have been lots of rats

we are not a democracy.

[kristopher]

54. Rats that all run in the same direction...

[chknltl]

77. Arithmetic

My grade school teacher taught us to spell it: A Rat In The House May Eat The Ice Cream. It seams soooo fitting given all the ice cream that's up for grabs and all those rats salivating over it.

[AgerolanAmerican]

89. nom nom nom

I'll have the spam without so much rat in it

[cactusfractal]

152. BING!

One slice of strawberry tart without so much rat in it later...

Appalling!

[elleng]

2. A dumb bureaucratic snafu,

fairly typical in DC, likely to be remedied easily.

Chewed over here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511611471

[jeff47]

5. And it's purely coincidental that such bureaucratic snafus never affect the Clinton campaign.

[elleng]

9. I think I read, somewhere among the 'stuff,'

that Sanders campaign submitted some docs 30 or so minutes late.

[jeff47]

12. Nope. Both campaigns submitted their documents before the party's deadline.

The party was then supposed to submit the candidates to the DC board of elections.

Some stories say Clinton's was submitted on time, Sanders was submitted late.

Now there's a story claiming both candidates were submitted late, but only Sanders was challenged.

[JonLeibowitz]

26. There is some confusion because

while both candidates (apparently) submitted their docs on time to the party, the party didn't deliver the docs on time. But only Sanders is challenged. There is some confusion in the news stories out there now due to the two deadlines. Sanders' campaign didn't screw anything up though, from what I can read.

[1StrongBlackMan]

85. Do you have a link to ...

the "stories"?

[billhicks76]

91. Wrong!!! Think You Read?

Nice one

[elleng]

112. There really is no need for nastiness, hicks.

A lot was posted and 'announced.'

[billhicks76]

114. Well The People's Anger Is Rising

It's amazing that it's becoming equally directed at democrats...BY DEMOCRATS. Internecine warfare happens when corruption and sell-outs become too much for average people to bear. Hillary is 100% the "Let Them Eat Cake" candidate.

[elleng]

118. I agree, and I understand.

I found what I'd seen and referred to:

'Confusion appeared to reign late Wednesday over just what happened and whether it could be fixed.

D.C. Democratic Party Chairwoman Anita Bonds told The Washington Times that the party’s primary plan, which included the paperwork for all candidates, was submitted by 7 p.m. on the 16th. The D.C. Board of Elections offices closes at 4:45 p.m.'

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/30/bernie-sanders-left-dc-primary-ballot-after-democr/


As a former DC resident for 20+ years, I'm all too familiar with bureaucratic 'snafus' like this; they occur in many facets of life and business in DC, so I'm not surprised, but I am dismayed. I expect this will be corrected.

[DebbieCDC]

131. Former 20 yr DC resident here too

I saw it time and time and time again. The DC bureaucracy is eff'ed to the max.

[elleng]

132. Hi, neighbor!

(In southern MD now.)

Yes, eff'ed to the max.

[tabasco]

145. I think I read somewhere that my farts smell like eau de cologne. n/t

[elleng]

149. That IS a lie.

THIS is what I read:

'Confusion appeared to reign late Wednesday over just what happened and whether it could be fixed.

D.C. Democratic Party Chairwoman Anita Bonds told The Washington Times that the party’s primary plan, which included the paperwork for all candidates, was submitted by 7 p.m. on the 16th. The D.C. Board of Elections offices closes at 4:45 p.m.'

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/30/bernie-sanders-left-dc-primary-ballot-after-democr/

[Pharaoh]

37. exactly!

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

62. BBBBBRRRRRRAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[anigbrowl]

153. That could simply mean the Clinton campaign is a bit better organized

I hate bureaucracy myself, so when I have to deal with it I tend to over-prepare so as not to have to put up with snafus. In this case that might as simple as a follow-up call every day to make sure the paperwork has been submitted on time. If you see bogeymen behind every problem then maybe the problem actually lies with you.

[DamnYankeeInHouston]

171. Both Bernie and Hillary submitted docs and dollars on time.

The Democratic Party turned the paperwork in late for both candidates. Only Bernie's paperwork was challenged. There has been no reason given. It shows the Democratic Party to be both inept and working for one candidate.

[anigbrowl]

172. Try reading past the headline next time. nt

[jeff47]

175. THAT is what your argument is?

You post your "call every day" bullshit and then demand the other poster read past the headline?

Both campaigns were submitted to the DC Board of Elections by the DC Democratic party on the same day. And that day was one day late.

But the Clinton campaign was organized enough to get a false submission date entered on their form!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511619539

[anigbrowl]

176. Yawn

Allegations are not facts, and I have better things to do than respond to rude, aggressive people. It is plain you are looking for a fight rather than a discussion, but you will have to look elsewhere.

[jeff47]

177. Yeah, election fraud. Who cares?

It will be lots of fun linking to this when you get angry at Republicans committing election fraud.

[anigbrowl]

178. Enjoy yourself, as I'm unlikely to see it

Frankly I rarely found your posts worth reading in the past and I'm sure you feel the same about mine, so I'm not going to bother doing so from now on.

[Bubzer]

11. Accompanied with a lot of other dumb bureaucratic snafus... awfully convienient

[elleng]

16. Happens often in DC, unfortunately.

I lived there for 20 years, and am very aware.

[Bubzer]

19. It's made to happen in DC, quite often.

[snagglepuss]

3. Talk about slime. This is disgusting.

[onehandle]

4. It's A CONSPIRACY! nt

[retrowire]

14. Looks like a fact to me. nt

[Chasstev365]

29. How times will you dismiss or rationalize Bernie being screwed?

Everytime it's just a coincidence!

[passiveporcupine]

38. If Sander's campaign turned it in on time and the DNC screwed it up for him but not Clinton

You can bet your bippy they screwed up. But then, that was to be expected, wasn't it?

And if it happened to Clinton and not Sanders, you'd be screaming holy hell!

[dchill]

110. The DNC is there for Clinton.

[Raster]

173. In. The. Bag.

[FailureToCommunicate]

126. Posting the same comment in every thread about Bernie merely shows

your lack of seriousness on this site dedicated to political discussion.

You must think it make you sound clever.

In fact it has the opposite effect.

[Betty Karlson]

144. Yes, someone very close to your candidate is conspiring.

And your candidate seems happy about it. Shame.

[CrispyQ]

146. It could be simple incompetence.

But the level of incompetence we've seen in the democratic party's process this election is staggering & it leaves one questioning the democratic process. Nothing squashes enthusiasm like thinking your vote doesn't count. I haven't decided if dem leadership thinks they can win without the left or if they are just so damned confident we will fall in line like we always have.

[rhett o rick]

150. Glad you admit you recognize it. Some live in bubbles pretending that there are no

conspiracies and when someone suggests such, they stick fingers in ears, and close eyes and say "Clinton is honest, Clinton is honest."

All of the shenanigans have been against Sanders. Some say coincidence and, like you others say bullshit, it's a conspiracy to keep a Progressive out of the WH. Those with money think they are entitled to get their way and sadly some, so-called, Democrats seem to believe them.

Politics is all about conspiracies. Think Tanks are really Conspiracy Tanks. Karl Rove makes a living conspiring and it wouldn't surprise me if he wasn't on loan from the Bush Crime Family to help friend Clinton out.

[PFunk1]

6. And they wonder why Sander's folks wont vote for Clinton if she wins the GE.

Crap like this wont help matters any.

[SFnomad]

32. If Clinton wins the GE ... she is the President, we won't care if you voted for her or not

Of course, it doesn't matter than this isn't Clinton or her campaign's fault. You need to have your outrage and it doesn't matter what the facts are.

[passiveporcupine]

56. Of course it's not Clinton's fault. Did anyone say it was?

It was the DNC's fault, and ooops...they support Clinton. Big woopsie!

And again, if this happened to Clinton, do you really think you Hill supporters wouldn't be going apeshit over this?

[Ed Suspicious]

64. They would, and if it went the same way for her I'd call dirty pool on it even though

I don't want her to win. Principles, man.

[SFnomad]

68. Re: Did anyone say it was [Clinton's fault]?

Well, let's put it this way ... the poster I replied to said:

And they wonder why Sander's folks wont vote for Clinton if she wins the GE.

Either the poster is blaming Clinton for it and taking it out on her because of it, even though she had nothing to do with it ... or ... the poster is taking it out on Clinton even though they know she doesn't have anything to do with it, like the way the Bush administration invaded a country even though they had nothing to do with the terrorism that was used as an excuse, to invade the country. Neither option is really a good one, is it?

[passiveporcupine]

72. No, they are taking it out on Hillary because the DNC is working for her

And this is the kind of shit they pull to make certain she is the favorite.

It is and isn't Hillary's fault. She knows what Debbie is doing. She is not blind to the favoritism.

[SFnomad]

74. What a load of garbage n/t

[Dont call me Shirley]

169. Debbie's words and actions have been loud in terms of her support for Hillary,

[1StrongBlackMan]

86. What does the DNC has to do with this?

[SFnomad]

108. The DNC has nothing to do with this, as far as I can tell, though there isn't much information here

It sounds like it was a royal screw-up by the DC Democratic Party. And there are perpetually outraged Sanders supporters that now have another reason to take it out on Hillary, even though she apparently didn't have anything to do with it either.

[larrysanders]

135. …not every Sanders supporter

It's a BIG screwup.

NON-constructive criticism doesn't help Dems in the long run.

[onecaliberal]

105. She CANT win without us; but you proceed please....

Especially when 67% say she's a liar

[PFunk1]

174. Bad choice of words, I ment the primary.

But with that correction my original post still stands

[stopbush]

35. Why would you assume Clinton had anything to do with this snafu?

There's no upside for her campaign to screw around with something like this.

A stupid mistake by the D Dem Party that will be fixed before the ink is dry.

[Fuddnik]

50. Occams Razor.

The simplest explanation is usually correct.

And with the history of this campaign and that candidate, it's pretty simple.

[stopbush]

116. Considering that Bernie's campaign has been flagged

for campaign donation irregularities, and that they didn't bother building a ground game in many of the statES they've lost, and the fact that they ended up losing half the states they predicted they'd win, Occam's Razor points to the gross incompetence of the Sanders campaign as being the likely reason they missed the ballot in DC.

[anigbrowl]

155. This doesn't strike me as the simplest explanation, which is why also like Hanlon's razor:

'Never ascribe to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.'

As I've gotten older I've found that speculating about people's motivations is a complete waste of time in most cases, for the same reason that people jumping to conclusions about why you or I might do something are usually incorrect. Instead I focus on the origin of the problem and whether and how it could be corrected, as well as developing a strategy to ensure it doesn't recur in the future. It is not a good use of my time, nor yours, to do work on imagining hypothetical motivations that can never be tested or proved.

[passiveporcupine]

73. I guess we will have to see how it turns out. n/t

[treestar]

99. It's to be expected.

Anything that goes wrong for Bernie must be a Clintonian Conspiracy!!!

[1StrongBlackMan]

84. What does HRC have to do with this?

[billhicks76]

92. Sounding More Like A Republican Excusing Every Election Fraud Example

Seriously do you live in a bubble? How do you expect anyone to take you seriously. A complaint was made against Sanders and not Clinton. Is this the rethuglicans fault again? You have lost every shred of credibility you hoped you ever had.

[1StrongBlackMan]

102. Bullshit, my question is not an excuse ...

Seriously do you live in a bubble?

Yes ... It's commonly called, the real world.

How do you expect anyone to take you seriously.

I really don't care if people that default to some, and any, conspiracy take me seriously, or not.

Is this the rethuglicans fault again?

I don't know; but, that wasn't my question ... was it?

You have lost every shred of credibility you hoped you ever had.

Again, I will have no problem sleeping tonight.

[billhicks76]

113. Avoided Point Again

DWS and party filed paperwork late and someone complained about Sanders and not Clinton. You don't know if it was a republican? Really? In DC? There are no republican residents for the most part and only someone with inside knowledge could do this as evident by a 1-0 vote. It only took one complaint as Clinton campaign surely knew. 20 delegates at stake. You must think the tooth fairy did this. You may not care about your credibility and that is good because you have none.

[1StrongBlackMan]

119. Uh ...

DWS and party filed paperwork late

No, she didn't. DWS had nothing to do with this.

You talk about "credibility" and don't know the basics of how local Parties work and that lead you to ignorant outrage.

[billhicks76]

158. Yeah I'm Sure DWS Doesn't Coordinate Locally

Last edited Thu Mar 31, 2016, 03:41 PM - Edit history (1)

Especially in DC during a heated election. Just like Karl Rove didn't coordinate in state house elections because he ran a national organization.

[1StrongBlackMan]

159. OkAY.

[billhicks76]

160. Karl Rove Has Slipped Up And Supported Hillary Tactics Before Too

But then again the Bush family is close intimate friends with the Clintons. The opposition is just a charade for the commoners.

[1StrongBlackMan]

161. Well, Alrighty! ...

We're getting our full tinfoil on!

Shhh ... Illuminati!!!

[billhicks76]

162. Wow. That's Extreme

I thought you were at least slightly informed. I guess it's your credibility problem getting to you. The Clintons became close with the Bush family in '81. That's a fact. And beyond DC cocktail parties. Any informed democrat knows this. IranContra was pivotal.
I watched every one of those IranContra hearings in 1987. Did you? I spoke with congressman on that committee who told me what happened when they went to executive session behind closed doors. You have no idea what you're talking about. I also was raised in an elitist republican family in NY and Maine and I assure you these are not fairy tales. Alliances with the Clintons were made in 1981 after he ran for governor again. I can find photos for you since you obviously can't do your own homework. An easy one for you is the photo at Bush's PRIVATE retreat in Maine in '83 sitting Bill, Bush Sr and the racist George Wallace. Clinton pretended to barely know Bush in 92. He was "allowed" to be the nominee after Perot decided to be a spoiler in 92. It's not a surprise that after 2000 Bush Sr referred to him and Hillary as honorary members of the Bush family. Keep spreading naivite. You are for real right?

[1StrongBlackMan]

164. Alex Jones considers himself, "Informed", too ...

and can spin all sorts of connections.

But I guess you are slightly better ... none of your connections (thus far) involve reptilians or chem-trails.

[billhicks76]

167. Ah Yes...Deflection and Obfuscation

So typical. Invoking the racist, sexist xenophobic Alex Jones when you can't respond to facts? That's like a child. That's what sock-puppets or people with no argument do. No we aren't talking about Alex Jones. What's next calling anyone who disagrees with you a Ron Paul supporter? What's nests comparing us all to Bill Cosby? Conspiracy? So pathetic. You do know tens of thousands of people are locked up in federal prison on conspiracy charges alone right? My guess is you don't care one bit and are quite alright with the drug war destroying families and eroding our rights. I think it's you who needs to take off the tin foil hat and get out of your moms basement.

[1StrongBlackMan]

168. Yeah ... Okay.

[stonecutter357]

156. "credibility" from you....

[Omaha Steve]

7. At the end of the article

There are still avenues for Sanders to make the ballot -- Anita Bonds, the chairwoman of the Democratic Party in D.C., told News4 that the problem could be resolved via an emergency vote of the D.C. City Council.

In a statement, the Sanders campaign said it expected to get on the ballot.

[elleng]

10. Yes. This surely will happen, Steve.

[jeff47]

15. The fact that it can be fixed does not change that it should not need to be fixed. (nt)

[Cali_Democrat]

22. Mistakes happen.

This one will be resolved and Bernie will appear on the ballot.

[jeff47]

31. When all of those mistakes by the party apparatus happen to only affect one candidate

are we not supposed to notice the pattern?

[Cali_Democrat]

36. What other mistakes by the party are you referring to? nt

[jeff47]

59. There's been several.

How bout the erroneous delegate counts in IA that all favored Clinton? Must've just been an honest mistake!!!

[Cali_Democrat]

66. ...

[jeff47]

67. What sane, logical explanation do you have for all of those counting errors going one way?

How 'bout your sane, logical explanation for only Sanders getting left off the DC ballot?

Mistakes are random. When these problems all go one way, they aren't random.

[AllyCat]

79. Sane and logical would have shown Clinton's name off the ballot too.

[billhicks76]

94. Should Be A Photo Of A Coincidence Theorist

Sorry but facts ruin your petty analysis. Just like they always did to Bush.

[larrysanders]

136. wish the site had cat smilies :laughing:

[bahrbearian]

141. Mistakes happen, like the Iraq War

[stonecutter357]

157. this one is even more disgusting .

[LiberalLovinLug]

154. Because the word "conspiracy" in the dictionary is a misprint?

And the term "theory" is also added. Can't even accept the possibility of any authoritarian entity pulling one over on you? Why is this so difficult to comprehend?

Its as if you refuse to believe the Dictionary. News Flash: Its all true! There is actually a term that defines when two or more people conspire together for power or money or some other advantage over others. Furthermore, there are examples in US historical fact when conspiracies happened!

Project MKUltra
Operation Northwoods
Operation Mockingbird
COINTELPRO

and others.

Bush Sr. and the false flag of babies dying on the floor of hospitals in Kuwait to start the first Gulf War.

NSA threatening service providers to allow them to eavesdrop unconstitutionally.

[kstewart33]

47. Jeff, I think the Bernie supporters see a pattern in everything.

Corruption wherever Bernie doesn't do particularly well in a state primary, corruption at the ballot box, corruption whenever the media does a story about Bernie that isn't worshipping enough.

And corruption in the DC situation. Ah, the humanity!

[jeff47]

55. Again, when the problems

from the party apparatus all go one way, that's a pretty obvious pattern.

Don't win an election? That's not the party apparatus. Erroneous delegate counts get entered in IA that just happen to favor Clinton? DC Party happens to file late? Those are the party apparatus.

[kstewart33]

70. Jeff, Bernie will be on the ballot.

Check the thread I just posted on the Primaries forum (WP: Bernie will be on the ballot).

[passiveporcupine]

61. Yeah, especially when they are in Hillary's favor.

I'm not going to hold my breath until Sanders is back on the ticket.

And no I don't blame Hillary for this. I blame Debbie.

[hrmjustin]

8. Hopefully they fix this.

[berni_mccoy]

13. The DNC stinks to high Hell

[merrily]

17. Two candidates in the running and left one off--and lo and behold, that one was not Hillary.

Lo and behold, it was the same candidate who's been getting screwed by state party officials in one primary and caucus after another, starting with Iowa, the same candidate that has been shafted by the DNC's debate schedule, who's been spoken about poorly by a DNC official who is supposed to be neutral, etc.

But no one is supposed to put two and two together and see a pattern, just as no one was supposed to do that with media until the Tyndall Report did it.

Anyone who countenances this corruption in the primary process, regardless of whom they support, should never again complain about stolen elections--and should be deeply ashamed of themselves.

Once again, the Des Moines Register's editorial board, which had endorsed Hillary, nailed it:

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/editorials/caucus/2016/02/03/editorial-something-smells-democratic-party/79777580/


Fsck corrupting any part of the process, no matter wich candidate it benefits or harms; and fsck anyone who doesn't condemn it, no matter whose candidate it benefits or harms. If you are among those who fail to condemn this or, worse, who deny it's been happened, please take this paragraph very personally.

[kstewart33]

49. Yep, corruption under every rock, behind every tree, and in every word that Hillary has ever stated.

Ah, the humanity!

[merrily]

52. .

Two candidates in the running and left one off--and lo and behold, that one was not Hillary. Lo and behold, it was the same candidate who's been getting screwed by state party officials in one primary and caucus after another, starting with Iowa, the same candidate that has been shafted by the DNC's debate schedule, who's been spoken about poorly by a DNC official who is supposed to be neutral, etc.

But no one is supposed to put two and two together and see a pattern, just as no one was supposed to do that with media until the Tyndall Report did it.

Anyone who countenances this corruption in the primary process, regardless of whom they support, should never again complain about stolen elections--and should be deeply ashamed of themselves.

Once again, the Des Moines Register's editorial board, which had endorsed Hillary, nailed it:

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/editorials/caucus/2016/02/03/editorial-something-smells-democratic-party/79777580/


Fsck corrupting any part of the process, no matter wich candidate it benefits or harms; and fsck anyone who doesn't condemn it, no matter whose candidate it benefits or harms. If you are among those who fail to condemn this or, worse, who deny it's been happened, please take this paragraph very personally.

[AzDar]

83. Don't know about the rock and the tree... but you are certainly right about Hillary being corrupt.

[billhicks76]

96. Pretty Much

Sorry facts get in your way. Go cry to the Bush family as they understand your pain.

[SoapBox]

18. My first thought...WTF???

Then I read OS's post...

Let's hope.

[alittlelark]

20. WATCH this vid.... Very Nessesary for any REAL Dem.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1608898

Funny thing is that The You Tube, therefore DU version has had an error message for over 2 hours. If you click the link you MAY get audio....

It is documenting Clinton operatives in top positions in the Sanders campaign.... it is deeply disturbing

[Bubzer]

24. I agree...it's a very important and revealing video. I did some research after watching it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280161791

[alittlelark]

28. Yours has an 'ERROR' message as well....

Funny that - I stream YouTube regularly and have only seen that message twice before, it is always fine the next time I click on it.

[Bubzer]

41. Huh....I can watch it just fine.

[alittlelark]

71. Doesn't work for me on either DU or YouTube

I sent it out earlier to ppl and it was fine - tried many times since and I get an error message.

[Bubzer]

107. You may have an issue going on with either flash or Java. Are they bugging you for an update?

There's also the possibility of spyware/adware or malware in general interfering with your internet...eating up your bandwidth.

[alittlelark]

121. Nope... all current. Been on them all day....

...just cannot access the Mass. link. Cute kitties are fine.

The YouTube vid is still blocked for me.

[Bubzer]

122. Huh. Thats a strange one. Who's your internet provider?

[alittlelark]

124. Windstream - but the vid suddenly stated working!!

at 8:44 MST.

[Eric J in MN]

21. It's not an 'error' to submit only one of two names on time.

This is sabotage by the DC Democratic Party.

[ananda]

23. And a really stinky rat too!

...

[Old Codger]

25. WOW

More and more blatant shit. Not too surprising really when you look at the DNC and all the rest of the party...

[bvf]

27. A big rat, too.

[stopbush]

30. As a Hillary supporter, this is entirely unacceptable.

I assume Sanders will appear on the ballot, but what a black eye for the DC Dem party.

[NowSam]

33. This is a joke right?

Won't stand.

[Baitball Blogger]

34. This stinks to high heaven.

[ripcord]

39. Something just isn't right here

[no_hypocrisy]

40. WRITE IN BALLOTS?

[Peace Patriot]

42. How did Clinton get ON the ballot?

Article says:

Both the Sanders' campaign and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton's campaign paid the $2,500 fee to appear on the June 14 Democratic primary ballot on time but the district's Democratic Party failed to inform the Washington D.C. Board of Elections until March 17, one day after the deadline. --from the OP

If both paid the fee, and both were submitted a day after the deadline, HOW did Clinton get ON the ballot?

The article wording is a little unclear. It appears to say that BOTH were late. If true, WHY is only Clinton on the ballot? Does it work, being late and being a Clinton? You just get presumed to be a candidate for whatever? They put Clinton on the ballot, forgiving her highness for her lateness, and just tossed that other piece of paper into the trash on the way to a power lunch?

It's probably that they WEREN'T late with hers, ONLY with his.

The alleged Democratic Party did NOT fail to inform them that Clinton was on the ballot, apparently. So what did they do with Sanders' papers? Dog ate them on the way to the Board of Elections, or, in too big of a hurry to that donor lunch? WHY, if they both paid on time, did ONLY ONE of them get on the ballot? WHY was only THAT one LATE?

[JimDandy]

60. Papers for both candidates were late, but someone challenged only Sanders' ballot access.

Probably a Clinton supporter. AFAIK, there is nothing to stop anyone from legally challenging the presence of Clinton's name on the ballot either.

[Sophiegirl]

138. THIS IS THE REASON^^^^^^^

I live in No VA and have been listening to this all morning on the local news. An unnamed "activist" challenged Sanders. Both candidates filed on time. Both names were forwarded late. This "activist" issued the legal challenge against Bernie? Clinton could technically be challenged as well.

IIRC, this happened on the day the Metro was shut down for over 24 hours in an unprecedented move for safety inspections. It caused a commuting nightmare. Many people telecommuted or simply took the day off. Sloppy work, no doubt, but not at all a surprise from what I know of the DC bureaucracy.

This will be fixed.

[klook]

69. Unprofessional and sloppy, at BEST. (n/t)

[Safe as Milk]

165. Nine months?

It took the DC Dems 9 months to notify the DNC, and even that was a day after the deadline. So what was the problem with the DC Dem Committee on March 17. Was there only one phone in the office and the call was made at 4:59pm so there wasn't time to mention that the Sanders campaign also paid for the registration?

This decision won't stand. It might stand if Sanders were a local fringe candidate. But he's tied nationally with Clinton. He's big time. And he's being subjected to high school shenanigans. It's embarrassing to Democratic voters in DC. Their local party is NOT serving them well.

[Fuddnik]

43. Fuck yeah there's a rat!

Went through similar bullshit with Disaster Debbies minions in Florida, when our county DEC's conveniently "forgot" to form a Federal PAC to help fund our campaign.

We explained other ways they could support us without the PAC, and no, they had to "check on it".

After we beat their hand picked candidate by 10 points in the primary. Debbie Disaster went on to endorse her Republican "friend".

There's rats alright. Lots of them.

[GoneFishin]

44. What assholes.

[pnwmom]

45. He should OF COURSE be put on the ballot. But why should the other team conspire

in an election in June that Hillary will carry in a landslide?

[billhicks76]

97. Because Clinton Campaign Losing Confidence

You may have it still...they do not.

[pnwmom]

100. This is so ridiculous. If they were going to pull a trick, they would have

filed Hillary's stuff weeks ago and only filed Bernie's at the last minute -- not file them both at the same time, only challenge Bernie, and wait for Bernie's people to kick up a storm of righteous indignation.

The head of the Dems there says their standard procedure is to process the paperwork on the last day and to file it on the next day. This time someone crawled up out of some hole and challenged Bernie but not Hillary.

It's obviously unfair and the DC Chair says it will be fixed.

[billhicks76]

111. Wrong

There were no complaints about Clinton. Bernie had one and that was enough to keep him off ballot where there are 20 delegates at stake. DWS and the party filed the paperwork knowing this discrepancy. Your faith in coincidance amazes me. Too bad you're not a judge...with 500,000 people in prison over the past decade on conspiracy charges you're attitude would've surely helped.

[pnwmom]

115. Try reading again but this time pay attention.

I never said there were any complaints about Clinton. I said:

If they were going to pull a trick, they would have

filed Hillary's stuff weeks ago and only filed Bernie's at the last minute -- not file them both at the same time, only challenge Bernie, and wait for Bernie's people to kick up a storm of righteous indignation.

The head of the Dems there says their standard procedure is to process the paperwork on the last day and to file it on the next day. This time someone crawled up out of some hole and challenged Bernie but not Hillary.

It's obviously unfair and the DC Chair says it will be fixed.

[billhicks76]

117. "Let Them Eat Cake" Is A Losing Strategy

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/hard-proof-that-hillary-clinton-has-been-losing-to-bernie-sanders-for-a-month-now_b_9567212.html

[pnwmom]

120. Changing the subject because you were wrong is a losing strategy.

Here is an article about Bernie's "miracle path" by a much more objective observer.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-really-hard-to-get-bernie-sanders-988-more-delegates/

To reach a pledged delegate majority, Sanders will have to win most of the delegates from those big states. A major loss in any of them could be fatal to his chances. He could afford to lose one or two of them narrowly, but then he’d need to make up ground elsewhere — he’d probably have to win California by double digits, for example.

Sanders will also need to gain ground on Clinton in a series of medium-sized states such as Wisconsin, Indiana, Kentucky and New Mexico. Demographics suggest that these states could be close, but close won’t be enough for Sanders. He’ll need to win several of them easily.

None of this is all that likely. Frankly, none of it is at all likely. If the remaining states vote based on the same demographic patterns established by the previous ones, Clinton will probably gain further ground on Sanders. If they vote as state-by-state polling suggests they will, Clinton could roughly double her current advantage over Sanders and wind up winning the nomination by 400 to 500 pledged delegates.

But things can change, and polls can be wrong — and so it’s worth doing the math to see what winning 988 more delegates would look like for Sanders. Call it a path-of-least-implausibility. If you think Sanders can meet or exceed these targets, then you can say with a straight face that you think he’ll win the nomination. If you think they’re too good to be true, then you can’t. Here’s the Bernie-miracle path I came up with:

SNIP

[RichVRichV]

181. If this race tightens as expected then not being on the DC ballot could be killer.

If Hillary won 70% of the vote in DC and got 14 delegates vs Bernie's 6 delegates. That's a net of 8 delegates for Hillary.

If Bernie weren't on the ballot at all, that's 20 delegates to Hillary verses 0 for Bernie. That's a net of 20 delegates for Hillary.

Bernie winning just 30% of the vote would be a 12 delegate swing versus him not being on the ballot at all. If this race tightens up (and Bernie takes a slight lead after June 7th) that could be the deciding factor in the outcome.




Whether Bernie closes the gap or Hillary expands her lead, every Democrat should have the right to have their vote counted.

[Hotler]

46. I have no hope. I see no future. n/t

[EndElectoral]

48. Here we go again.

[blackspade]

51. So if they both paid on time....

Why was Clinton the only one that the Party 'informed' the board of elections about?
What was the timeline?

This is shady as shit.

[silverweb]

53. An "error." Right.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Remember that old line that goes something like, "It's easier to apologize afterwards than ask permission ahead of time"? Some overly zealous and deceitful people live by it.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

57. I smell a RepublicRAT.

[Ed Suspicious]

58. Fuckers at the DNC.

[dubyadiprecession]

63. Hey, at least his $2,500 check cleared or did it...

bounce.

[bluestateguy]

65. Put him on the ballot and end the drama

I don't like technicalities in ballot access stuff.

That's Theresa LaPore/Kathryn Harris crap.

[zentrum]

75. Rat stench.

Really, the party should be ashamed.

[OnlinePoker]

76. DC has 20 delegates

If Sanders isn't on the ballot (especially if things tighten up before then), then those delegates should not be included in Clinton's count.

[pnwmom]

78. If the Chair of the Dem party in D.C. says he'll be on the ballot

then he'll be on the ballot.

This was a stupid screw-up but it will be easily fixed.

[Sunlei]

80. "problem could be resolved via an emergency vote of the D.C. City Council" So have the meeting.

Americas election & voting system is way more complicated then it has to be.

[BlandGrenade]

81. If Hillary and her supporters expect the backing of Bernie's voters in November

Then "SHIT HAPPENS" IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE FUCKING RESPONSE. If she wins the nominations, SHE WILL INDEED have to answer for these "anomalies", either to those of us now feeling the Bern, or in november to the entire nation in a concession speech TO DONALD TRUMP.

[Skittles]

101. you are not fooling anyone

[n2doc]

82. DC party chair: Sanders will appear on ballot

Getty
Sen. Bernie Sanders is likely to be on the D.C. presidential ballot despite a registration error by the local Democratic Party, CNN reports.

Anita Bonds, chairwoman of the Washington, D.C. Democratic Party told CNN she was confident he would appear on the primary ballot despite a challenge filed with the city’s Board of Elections.
“Bernie will be on the ballot,” she told CNN.

The D.C. Democratic Party was required to file to the D.C. Board of Elections by March 16 but submitted the registration paperwork for Sanders a day late, and a challenge was filed against him.

Bonds said the party’s deadline is a few hours after the Board of Elections closes, so the staff usually delivers the filings the next day, which has been the standard in the past, but this time, someone challenged Sanders.

more
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/274752-dc-party-chair-sanders-will-appear-on-ballot

Hmmmmm....

[TexasBushwhacker]

87. Oh for Pete's sake

First all the coin flips go in favor of Clinton in Iowa.

Long lines in NV.

Bill Clinton showing up at a polling place in MA.

Then the AZ fiasco.

Now this.

I'm probably forgetting something.

I'm not saying HRC had anything personally to do with it, but I wouldn't put it past her minions.

[Ford_Prefect]

88. It seems someone in the DC Democratic Party has a sense of perspective:

Anita Bonds (chairwoman of the Democratic Party in D.C.) said she would submit a “clarification” in the city rules that would allow a 24-hour grace period after the filing deadline, putting Sanders on the ballot, according to CNN.

I guess we'll see if that's enough to solve the problem.

As far as the degree of frequency of this and other "errors" and whether Hillary knew about it all, I find it hard to believe she does not know of it given her well documented obsession with details and control. As to whether she planned this kind of thing I believe she would have delegated most if not all of this activity to others in the campaign or the DNC so as to maintain a degree of Plausible Deniability, and to be able to keep her focus on the presentation of herself as candidate.

I also believe there is more than enough evidence which points to Debbie Wasserman Schultz and David Brock as both are well known for slimy underhanded politics. This view gives less than fair credit to the local and state level Democrats who view themselves as gate keepers against any aspirations of progressive Democrats. I have personally seen this last group in action in NH, WA, and NC.

They see progressives as a threat to the party, as dreamers who have no sense of compromise or gravitas, as the demons who undid the party in 1968. They also never saw a crooked voting machine or ballot count server, or a tainted ballot, or a party system at odds with everyday people. They remind me of those people who looked down their noses at the Peace movement as misguided and unpatriotic. Who sat safely in their suburban living rooms while the rest of us marched at Selma, and the Pentagon, and the Capitol, and The White House. They do not know what it takes to really change things and are not afraid to make sure the rest of you do not find out.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

142. I wish Anita Bonds success in her clarification.

Ms Bonds is a superdelegate currently committed to Clinton. Hopefully she can still do her duty for the Democratic Party.

[MrMickeysMom]

90. PLEASE somebody - get an emergency meeting for this vote!

For crying out loud!!!

[treestar]

93. Of course there are going to be claims it is on purpose

Even though if Hillary were really going to cheat, there'd be much better places to do it in than a place she is likely to win in a landslide.

Just sound like a bureaucratic snafu. Those happen.

[billhicks76]

98. Did You Read???

Clinton supporter complained...Bernies did not...thats why shes on and hes not when DWS filed late.

[mishi48.59]

95. If it's not on purpose

Then someone is seriously incompetent

[AgerolanAmerican]

133. It's on purpose

nothing in politics happens by accident, especially when everyone's standing around acting like it was an accident

Track down that "DC voter" who objected to Sanders' ballot status and not HRC's and you'll have the source. I'd wager 20-1 that said objector is a HRC partisan and had inside knowledge that the filing was a day late.

[WhiteTara]

103. Washington Post: Bernie will be on the ballot.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511612809

[Kittycat]

128. Great, let us know when the challenge has been thrown out.

[Beartracks]

104. "Failed to inform"? I should think the PAYMENT would have informed.

==============================

[tartan2]

106. Then someone needs to call a vote and fix this!

NOW! I'm calling Anita Bonds now.

[Zira]

123. I feel like throwing something...

[alittlelark]

125. I did... piece of firewood against a tree.

[bbgrunt]

127. K and R for visibility

[kadaholo]

129. OUR REGISTRATIONS HIJACKED IN PENNSYLVANIA

This is UNBELIEVABLE! After reading an article at Anonymous on the antics in Arizona, I noticed a comment attached to the article that stated there are widespread reports of voter registration manipulation in PA and NY.

See article: Anonymous Investigate Arizona Election Fraud, “Sanders Was Hacked”
Link: http://www.anonews.co/anonymous-sanders-hack/

Since I live in PA and am a Bernie supporter, I decided to confirm my registration immediately.

I checked the VotesPA website and, sure enough, voter registration information on both my husband and me is not available!!! We have been registered Democrats and voting at this location since 1987 and 1994 respectively.

This is the message that came up for both of us: "No Voter Registration information could be found for the data provided. Either search again using different data or contact your County Voter Registration Office."

Calling tomorrow and surprise (not), we are Bernie supporters!!! INCREDIBLE!!! Just coincidence in state after state???? I think not!!!

Seems like those two lapses in the firewall (both reported by the Sanders Campaign) are benefitting only one of our two Democratic candidates...

HIGHEST PRIORITY!!! PLEASE TELL EVERYONE WHO IS STILL WAITING TO VOTE IN PRIMARIES TO CHECK THEIR REGISTRATION...ESPECIALLY FRIENDS IN NY AND PA!!!

[Marrah_G]

130. They need to fix this right away

[CountAllVotes]

134. I smell a BIG RAT

Gee and in Washington, D.C. of all places. Who would have thunk?

!!!

& recommend!!

[larrysanders]

137. per NBC4 News a voter in D.C. filed a challenge against the Vermont senator's registration

NBC4 News reported that a voter in D.C. filed a challenge against the Vermont senator's registration, which will be heard in April.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/274738-dem-mistake-leaves-sanders-off-ballot-in-dc

[Sophiegirl]

139. Yes. See my post #138. eom

[classykaren]

140. We need to demand he is put on the ballot is there a petition?

[mariawr]

143. Stay tuned. As this race gets closer.....

...DWS, Brock and the rest of the DLC minions will totally jump the shark into uncharted waters

[MisterP]

163. revoking citizenship, having Congress undo California's 1850 statehood, or just trying to physically

keep him out of buildings because men are a threat or something

[valerief]

147. Thieves. Fuckin' thieves. nt

[saidsimplesimon]

148. k&rats

Bubzer, do you have a link to Senator Sanders official recommended action for his supporters? Since I'm not a resident of DC, I don't have any legal standing to take action, or do I?

[PatrynXX]

151. I smell DWS not doing her job

do'h..... DNC on self destruct

[Safe as Milk]

166. She IS doing her job.

She's widening the path for Hillary. That was her job in 2008, when she was Hillary's campaign manager, and lost, so she's being HRC's agent with a vengeance this time around. For DWS, the end justifies the means.

[StevieM]

180. DWS was not Hillary's campaign manager in 2008, Maggie Williams was.

Also, DWS was made DNC chair by Barack Obama. Nobody pressured him into it. He appointed her because he wanted to.

Welcome to DU!!

[Dont call me Shirley]

170. Debbie Dumper.

[StevieM]

179. Another day, another fake scandal. (eom)