2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumCalling The Superdelegates
So, I'm trying to imagine what it would be like to be a fly on the wall during one of these infamous phone calls from NBC and one of the superdelegates...
NBC..."you know Mr. Smith your support of Hillary Clinton would put her over the top.". "How about, it?. Can we count on your vote?
Mr. Smith..."really?. I could put her over the top?!. Count me in.
NBC... Great... Can we use your name?
Smith... Oh no.... That's ok.
Note that the current count had her 1 vote over the required number.
This just seems so unprofessional.
ON EDIT... It just seems strange to call until you get the one that puts her over and then make no more calls. Where is the journalistic integrity? Am I reaching here?. Can't put my finger on it. It just seems wrong.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)so. sick. of. it.
I heard the Director of Elections for NBC say that they were called. Apparently they only called just enough to put her over the top.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)responsible journalism.
whatevs.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)and no, please don't tell the country it was me, thanks.
Shit sandwich.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)Renew Deal
(81,859 posts)But it doesn't mean that
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)HarmonyRockets
(397 posts)Does it really make that much of a difference if Hillary was declared the presumptive nominee on Monday versus Tuesday? What difference will it end up making? Seems like people are grasping at straws to make everything that happens seem extremely nefarious.
TheFarS1de
(1,017 posts)Then look up "Bandwagon Effect" .
joshcryer
(62,270 posts)They would not mention the status of the running count. It could've been the last person they called that put them over.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)And that's it.
The only time they talk is when the superdelegates chooses to call them back or if they have something to say and they want to take the call. The delegate controls the access.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)They call the source up and ask questions.
And there's only a limited number of Superdelegates. Why would anyone repeatedly call 719 people when all they needed was 20?
Just because you can't fathom the simple mechanics of how things work & how people do their jobs doesn't mean there's any nefarious activity here.
joshcryer
(62,270 posts)Just to get an idea if anything has changed. Like, I don't see them repeatedly calling, say, Al Franken, who endorsed early on, but they probably bug the shit out of someone like Al Gore.
Leading up to the final primary I can see them confirming all of the SDs. Only take a couple of days for the two AP reporters responsible for the report to do it. It just so happened, and purely by coincidence, that enough SDs talked to take Clinton over.
I think this final tally before the primaries is probably quite accurate, in that vein. That's their job, to get accurate numbers.
It's just a dumb system. Can you imagine how terrible it would be if the popular vote loser and pledged delegate loser somehow got the SDs to choose them?
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)nominee. They verified SD support for the leading candidate.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)underthematrix
(5,811 posts)but I followed the 2008 campaign 24/7. AS an African American, it was historic that President Obama running and in contention for the DEM nomination. It was everything. I lived in NV at the time and campaigned for him. Worked the phone banks, went door to door, etc. I watched coverage on every cable and local news station and read everything I could find on the Internet. I remember delegate count coverage especially on CNN which provided daily coverage of the delegate count.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)All in all pretty nasty. All in all, I won't forget.
onenote
(42,702 posts)Everyone, including Bernie, knew that as soon as New Jersey polls closed the media was going to declare Clinton the "presumptive" nominee. Bernie had no strategy or way to prevent that. His strategy was to try to cut into Clintons pledged delegate margin and use the result in CA along with GE polling data to attempt to convince several hundred SDs that had publicly committed to Clinton to support him instead.
How does the announcement last night change that strategy. How does it help that strategy for Sanders supporters to tray last nights announcement as preventing Samders from going ahead with the same strategy he had before last nights announcement?
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)WiffenPoof
(2,404 posts)I'm on the road so I can't respond myself in detail. I will later today. I will say as the OP I did not mean to imply that there was some conspiracy involved here. It just seems unprofessional and without method. More later.