2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe Democratic Party establishment does not want a "democratic socialist" as President.
That is the bottom line.
And that is why the chosen "super delegates" will not vote for Bernie.
However, if there is an indictment of Hillary between now and the Democratic convention, it could change that reality?
And as we know, if there is a politically-motivated Republican judge in the picture, anything is possible.
elleng
(130,865 posts)wants an establishment candidate, and that's why they concocted 'super delegates.' We're stuck with them and the establishment now.
dubyadiprecession
(5,706 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)He's an emotional guy...which makes him so likeable. But his deceased son asked him Not To Run. How do you get past that?
Also, I'm going to guess that's not how he wants to be remembered in the Democratic Party ... helping HRC fend off her scandals. Because President or no President, those, especially the Foundation, do not go away.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)If Hillary gets taken down by her actions while SoS, there's likely to be blowblack on the Obama Administration, making Biden a dubious proposition.
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)again we might have him anyway.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)Joe Biden would not run
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)pmorlan1
(2,096 posts)if you can't get your candidate you want to make sure Sanders supporters can't get theirs. Got it.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)pmorlan1
(2,096 posts)The discussion was about if she were to be indicted who would become the nominee.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Seeinghope
(786 posts)that you knowing took. The candidate that actually ran for the office and received votes would get the nomination might not be able to proceed thru the election and /or serve as President of the United States. If the Hillary Clinton voters didn't back Hillary Clinton and instead demanded another candidate, then maybe they might be satisfied by a different candidate that wasn't under the threat of being unable to continue as the President of the United States candidate.
You took a gamble knowing that Hillary Clinton has a long history of lying and you lost. You cannot then just decide to install someone else.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)In 1968 the Democratic Party was divided. Senators Eugene McCarthy and Robert F. Kennedy had entered the campaign in March, challenging Johnson for the Democratic nomination. Johnson, facing dissent within his party, had dropped out of the race on March 31.[6] Vice President Hubert Humphrey then entered into the race, but did not compete in any primaries, compiling his delegates in caucus states that were controlled by party leaders. After Kennedy's assassination on June 5, the Democratic Party's divisions grew.[5] At the moment of Kennedy's death the delegate count stood at Humphrey 561.5, Kennedy 393.5, McCarthy 258.[7] Kennedy's murder left his delegates uncommitted.
Support within the party was divided between Senator McCarthy, who ran a decidedly anti-war campaign and was seen as the peace candidate,[8] and Vice President Humphrey, who was seen as the candidate representing the Johnson point of view.[9]
In the end, the Democratic Party nominated Humphrey. Even though 80 percent of the primary voters had been for anti-war candidates, the delegates had defeated the peace plank by 1,567¾ to 1,041¼.[10] The loss was perceived to be the result of President Johnson and Chicago Mayor Richard Daley influencing behind the scenes.[10] Humphrey, who had not entered any of 13 state primary elections, won the Democratic nomination, and went on to lose the election to the Republican Richard Nixon.[11]
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)While is 2016, most people voted for Hillary.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Most people voted for "Peace with Honor" and flag waving.as spouted my Nixon. Most people shunned "More of the same" as Humphrey promised.
Trump is even more of a demagogue than Nixon and offers the same sort of crap. Hillary offers "more of the same" larded with "not as bad".
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)You said 2016 was like the '68 convention, which it is decidedly not, then you move the goal posts to the GE, which hasn't happened yet.
This is NOTHING like '68. In '68, the people didn't chose the candidate. The only way it would be like '68 is if the supers turned around and gave it to Bernie.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Including Democrats, Republicans, Independents? Otherwise, the nomination becomes meaningless and she becomes a mighta been footnote.
As Humphrey and many others discovered after they were nominated.
Madam Mossfern
(2,340 posts)n/t
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)diligent, yet forced to be responsive to the newer elements of the situation. The leaks have been Stopped. Cold. This isn't just the email situation. Not at all.
Actually, the Democratic Party is terrified it's losing a portion of its base and the new ones that Bernie brought into the picture. When you count in a 3rd Party taking 15% of the vote, it's a crap shoot and they may not have as many choices as they think.
Bernie is here to stay...President or not. I'm fine with that. But the rest of his is FUBAR.
TeacherB87
(249 posts)Doesn't mean they don't support democratic socialism. They just don't support Bernie. And the superdelegates will NEVER support Bernie because he will NEVER earn a majority of pledged delegates. Bernie should have planned better if he wanted to defeat the Democratic Party Establishment. It takes an Obama-esque effort to pull that off.
demwing
(16,916 posts)not when hundreds of them lined up behind Hillary before the first vote was cast, or when a state overwhelmingly supported Bernie, but the SDs there still supported Hillary.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)Well of course it has. This election we have a chance to win back our party that labor built, vote for Bernie!
kentuck
(111,079 posts)Bernie represents the best attributes of the Democratic Party, in my opinion.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)eastwestdem
(1,220 posts)backbone? When questioned he has repeatedly shown that he is unable to articulate any reasonable plans to implement any of his grand ideas. Sure, I'd love to give each and every American a free pony, but that ain't going to happen either.
Then, once it is clear that he has no path to win, he continues (for months) to ask these same supporters for money? Supporters who are mostly at the lower end of the socio-economic spectrum. How is this honest and trustworthy?
B Calm
(28,762 posts)eastwestdem
(1,220 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)FDR ushered in some socialist ideas but our system has always been a hybrid
B Calm
(28,762 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)The funny thing is that many modern progressive countries are still governed using the principles and policies of FDR. We are not one of them.
Raastan
(266 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)than the entire Republican party over a full generation.
pampango
(24,692 posts)his principles ever since.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)that ends the meaningful debate on the subject.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)The Democratic Party establishment doesn't want this Democratic Socialist. A number of elected Democrats are very close to Sanders form of Democratic Socialism. Some would be far more palatable to the masses than Sanders.
He has done well. But time after time he has shown he truly doesn't even have fully formulated thoughts on his number one subject. He has found his activists roots and is doing very well.
He is a protest candidate and it's very well known he wast the first choice of the left either.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)It took a couple weeks or so for that group to let go of Warren and jump on board. I remember. Initially, I thought Sanders a fun run, an interesting candidate. So I immediately start conversing and researching. It too a while for the fat left to step in.
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)but they can't make us vote for their choice. If they substitute in someone else besides Sanders, I don't think they would even get enough votes to be within stealing range. Even more than if Hilly were the nominee would probably stay home and not vote at all, and down ticket Dems would collapse.
Let's hope some in the Dem establishment are smarter than that.
Chezboo
(230 posts)and made us (me, anyway) vote for him. I still believed certain things about my party back then.
peggysue2
(10,828 posts)It's the voting public that has decided. In addition, to Hillary's pledged and super delegate lead, she has won the popular vote. Check the numbers. Unless, you're saying the voting public has become part of the 'establishment' or been somehow brainwashed into denying Senator Sanders' bid for the presidency. Sounds as nutty as it reads.
Look, I vividly recall how hard and heartbreaking the 2008 primary was, how I felt (pissed) at the outcome. Bernie Sanders has come up short in the same way Hillary did in that race. In fact, I would argue it was worse because she did win the popular vote in 2008. But the ultimate result was the same: she lost the nomination.
She proved her mettle when she endorsed and campaigned her heart out for Barack Obama. Bernie Sanders has the same opportunity--endorse and campaign to ensure that Donald Trump never sets foot in the WH. Sanders' supporters also have a choice: join the fight or not.
But if you're holding your breath for some legal mumbo-jumbo to turn this around for Sanders, you'll end up blue in the face. Hillary has withstood decades of right-wing smears and faux accusations. Even the Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi attacks, a tragedy turned into a political witch hunt by the GOP and resulting in an 11-hour interrogation. Which she passed btw with flying colors while making her interrogators look small & incompetent.
All this nonsense, yet she's still standing, strong and undeterred. It's the reason the Republicans hate the Clintons so much. Despite their best efforts, they have not been able to bring them down. They're not going to be successful this time either.
Because she's still standing.
kentuck
(111,079 posts)You have an interesting interpretation.
But, the bottom line, in my opinion, is how do we pull the Party together. Someone posted up-page about the election of '68 and we could see those types of forces at work in this election also, if we do not make an effort to work together.
I'm all for working together. But that means accepting the reality of the primary results. Hillary won; Bernie lost.
As I said above: Sanders has an opportunity to join the fight against Trump in the same way Hillary joined Barack Obama in 2008. Bernie's supporters have the same opportunity to support the Democratic ticket. Or not. We all get to choose in the same way we all get to vote for the primary candidate we supported.
But if you're interested in defeating Trump then pointing to '68 is counterproductive. Hillary Clinton has said she is quite willing to reach out to Senator Sanders, ensuring he does have an influential impact on the Party's platform. His people will have representation and a voice. But it's a two-way street. The loser doesn't get to set the entire agenda. Threatening to sabotage the convention won't work either nor will it alter the ultimate nomination result.
So yes, she is still standing but willing to reach out. Whether she receives an open hand or a fist is a decision Bernie Sanders will need to make. His legacy will largely be measured by that decision.
kentuck
(111,079 posts)We won. Get in line. Don't ask for anything.
No.
brooklynite
(94,502 posts)2banon
(7,321 posts)It's a sad commentary on the party establishment, but that's the truth.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)DrDan
(20,411 posts)The +3M vote difference is the elephant in the room for bs-supporters.
THAT is the bottom-line.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)and that's not insignificant if you give a shit about winning elections and care about the future of the Democratic Party
DrDan
(20,411 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)That's fairly dismissive sounding.
It might be applicable if Bernie had gotten 5 percent of the vote....
DrDan
(20,411 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)DrDan
(20,411 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)DrDan
(20,411 posts)qualified - to the tune of 3M more
pampango
(24,692 posts)until recently. I am glad he changed his mind.
David__77
(23,370 posts)If he fails to be nominated, it will be his failure.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)This is Civics 101 stuff...
Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #42)
kentuck This message was self-deleted by its author.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)It has more to do with the momentum from the Obama years, and also that it appears the no one in office has seen Bernie get heavily involved in hands on legislative work (aside from amendments.)
MrsKirkley
(180 posts)Hillary Clinton would rather have a for profit insurance mandate. Better learn to love those rising premiums, deductibles, and annual maximums. Forget about lowering the cost of health care and prescription drugs since single-payer is the only way to do that. How other developed countries must laugh watching us getting ripped off as we continue voting against our own best interests
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I don't think it is appropriate to desire Republicans to corrupt the justice system in order to disenfranchise Democratic voters.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)Whatca gonna do if Trump wins by 55 percent?
Just give up and say "Well I guess Democrats should not have any say in anything or any right to try and temper what they do. Let Trump and the GOP do whatever the hell they want because they own the place." Is that how you interpret democracy?
RKP5637
(67,104 posts)Often, when it comes to $$$$$'s, democrats and republicans are the SOS IMO.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)organization
far from being a democratic socialist and more in line with marxist.....
america will NEVER elect this guy...GOP will make mincemeat of this....Sandersd being a pacifist AFRAID to defend to america...and looking like he is a crook on top of it
EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Let us face facts, WALL STREET does not want a socialist running the country...they love hiding their money in tax shelters and a socialist might demand they pay their fair share.
Demsrule86
(68,552 posts)They won't vote for Bernie because he has less delegates than Hillary, and they never overturn the will of the voter...Hillary was closer in 08 and they would not do it then either.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)and the two judges involved in the blip, blip, (censored) case are Clinton appointees and are Dems.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)...is bribed by the same corporations that bribe the Republican Party establishment. Of course they don't want the gravy train to come to a halt.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)If we went just by majority pledged delegates ... the SDs are irrelevant.
Democrats picked Hillary, period.