2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWas the AP announcement pre-planned and coordinated with the Clinton campaign?
You make the call.
Chasstev365
(5,191 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)w4rma
(31,700 posts)Christina Bellantoni ✔ @cbellantoni
The images in this Clinton email are labeled "secret win."
Supporters of Bernie Sanders expressed outrage and suspicion in the hours following the Associated Presss declaration of Hillary Clinton securing the Democratic nomination when it was reported that she had sent an email to supporters hailing the win with an image labeled secret win.
The APs delegate count included superdelegates which Sanders supporters say is unfair since they can switch their support at any time in the weeks leading up to the convention.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/282512-sanders-supporters-outraged-over-clintons-secret-win
dchill
(38,484 posts)Gotcha!
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)That's all. Except that BOTH Hillary and Bernie wished the AP had not. It wasn't good for either of them, very bad timing, but it was news and it was our business so they reported.
I know only Bernie has integrity in some minds, but...what if that weren't quite true? What if somewhere in AP-land there was one other such being?
senz
(11,945 posts)To win the 2016 Democratic primary, a candidate must have 2,383 delegates.
As of June 6th, yesterday, Hillary had 1,812 pledged delegates and Bernie has 1,526 pledged delegates. That's a difference of 286 delegates.
To reach 2,383 before the convention, Hillary would need 571 more pledged delegates and Bernie would need 857 more pledged delegates.
The states that vote today and the number of pledged delegates available from each:
CA -- 475
MT -- 21
NJ -- 126
NM -- 34
ND -- 18
SD -- 20
D.C. has 20 delegates and votes on June 14.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/delegate-targets/
It is virtually impossible for either candidate to reach 2,383 pledged delegates from the remaining states. Since the pledged delegates alone don't confer 2,383, the superdelegate votes at the convention will make up the difference and decide the nomination.
The AP announced last night that Hillary had "won," even though she hadn't. They made this announcement before the seven remaining primaries had been held. It will depress voter turnout and is an an act of sabotage.
wendylaroux
(2,925 posts)can I get an amen!!!????
snooper2
(30,151 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... going public with their story. It seems more likely that Hillary's campaign would have asked them to delay, but the AP declined and instead gave Hillary's campaign a courtesy-call.
(You guys crack me up, ya know that?)
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... love her so much! If she can do THIS as a mere candidate, just imagine all the phenomenal power she'll have as PRESIDENT! It'll be GREAT!!
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)establishment media. Must be an overwhelmingly difficult task to pull off.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)highprincipleswork
(3,111 posts)Bernie.
We'll see how it goes today, but as someone who lives in California I certainly do not appreciate anything that discourages our turnout. After all, besides this ongoing mess we also have other important things to vote on!!!!
The Clinton folks will of course say, nothing's stopping you from voting! True, and you'd have to physically restrain me to get me from going. But, many people do get stopped by antics like this.
Reminds me how politics is a dirty game. Or at least usually played that way. I personally believe we have had in Bernie one of the few honest, authentic, genuine politicians we will see in our lifetime. Too bad, in my opinion, we did not seize that opportunity and instead are currently going for the tribe that has done so much to damage the Democratic Party and quality of life in the US.
For me, this is not over. I'm fighting for Progressive values forever. And I'm criticizing Democrats who cheat us on those forever also. If not here, then elsewhere.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)It's certainly not the polls.
Demsrule86
(68,556 posts)The AP wanted to the first...they have been waiting to call it, as soon as they had the info...they went for it. I think Obama may have given the supers a push...it was time to put this puppy to rest.
Lodestar
(2,388 posts)Just for beginners, Warren Buffett's person is at the helm of the AP Board of Directors.
Lee Enterprises is a failing news organization that was
recently bailed out by Buffett. Why?
The second in command is from Hearst. Etc.
http://www.ap.org/company/board-of-directors
AP's National Politics Team
http://www.ap.org/products-services/elections/team
How AP calls elections:
http://www.ap.org/products-services/elections/calling-races
Skinner
(63,645 posts)the Clinton Campaign knew they could clinch it at any moment, and had created the announcement email (or emails) ahead of time so they would be ready to go at a moment's notice. All they had to do was drop in a screen cap of the tweet from whichever news organization called it first.
The URL of the graphic shows it as "V2". I'm guessing there is a "V1" (also secret) which they would have used if they clinched the nomination tonight based on the voting in the various primaries.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Never fly in GD-P. Far too rational an explanation.
FSogol
(45,481 posts)tell Jeff Weaver about planning!
Rex
(65,616 posts)Diabolical! Who could have seen these events unfolding like this? This is where I part with people that will believe any old CT.
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)To not know there was coordination between AP and her campaign.
Skinner
(63,645 posts)Because when the graphic was created she hasn't clinched the nomination and it wasn't for public consumption.
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)Skinner
(63,645 posts)berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)I'll take the more skeptical approach based on my experience of observation of her campaign tactics.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)I've worked in press release heavy industries (PETA, PBS & NPR) and when we knew something was about to break we'd prepare for it ahead of time, so when the news broke we could get things online moments after they happened.
The only nefarious plotting involved was making sure we got all the head honchos to sign off on graphics in a timely manner.
It's called being organized.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)... and that they made a really good guess about the language AP would use in their tweet.
Because if they knew it was going to be AP to break it and the language they were going to use, it negates your point.
Sounds like a lot of secret graphics and brilliant guesswork to create on spec.
emulatorloo
(44,120 posts)In other words, I can have a static picture with an easily changeable line of text on top.
So they could have the graphic all ready, and insert the tweet quote at the last sec.
As a graphic artist, To me it is highly likely both candidate's graphic teams prep files in advance so that the campaign social media team can react quickly. I would be very surprised if Sanders graphics are done at the last nano second.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)... even given your explanation, the jpg file *would* have to be created at the last nano second. Only after all the information is known, and placed onto the .psd file, can you create the .jpg.
emulatorloo
(44,120 posts).psd is the artist's master/work file, the .jpg is the final output for web/social media team.
Was trying to give basics without getting too techie but obviously failed lol
i expect both candidate's graphic teams work that way.
That is why I don't view the graphic as 'proof' of a conspiracy.
KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)Any graphics they were going to use would have been prepared in advance. It's really crazy to think that AP is colluding with any campaign.
dana_b
(11,546 posts)Rachel congratulates her on being the Dem nominee and it is totally scripted.
And yeah, I saw that video last night. It's disgusting. We have the media and a few Supers deciding our elections for us and many here don't give a shit. As long as their candidate wins, it's okay that the oligarchy decides for us. Because you cannot say that this was democracy. When six states and D.C. don't get to vote before the fucking AP calls the election based on a few Super votes, that is NOT democracy! It's the very definition of an oligarchy!
Evidently turnout is not good and that is on the heads of the bigwigs in the Democratic party and the media. But that's what they want so they got it. They told me and millions of Californians and people in other states that we and our votes do not matter. We are shit to them. Fine - but I will do nothing for them anymore. The hours/days that I have put in tying to get their candidates elected, the thousands in dollars I've donated, the wasted time I've spent here! Yeah, I know... "so get out!" Don't worry, you'll get your way. You always do.
But if you think I'm alone, you are dead wrong and more arrogant than your filthy candidate.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)you claimed happen.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)I guess we just get to say wtf ever we want, right?
eastwestdem
(1,220 posts)while the Hillary supporters are much more ho-hum. This was not something that Hillary did on purpose. It totally steels her thunder...she had a huge 'coming out' as the nominee planned starting tonight, highlighting the historical significance. All of which is much, much more muted now.
Rex
(65,616 posts)It is silly time at the DUs. HRC want to rule the world!
TwilightZone
(25,471 posts)It's certainly more realistic. It certainly generated the anticipated outcome.
Jarqui
(10,123 posts)Lucinda
(31,170 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)The media has carried water for Hillary since the beginning. In this case by suppressing the vote.
wisteria
(19,581 posts)Exilednight
(9,359 posts)Several occasions, and still do every so often. This happened one of two ways
1. AP contacted SDs and established their support. After making their discoveries and writing their piece, they then called the Clinton campaign to seek a statement - thus tipping off the campaign.
2. SDs contacted AP and started declaring in hope of what eventually transpired.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)LonePirate
(13,419 posts)Prep work for graphics, data, communication drafts, etc. are completed ahead of time much like lengthy newspaper obituaries written in advance of an actual death. This is no conspiracy nor is it evidence of coordination between the Clinton campaign and the media. I know it's easy for anyone on the losing side to grasp onto any and every possible idea or theory or excuse to explain the result. There's nothing nefarious here regardless of whatever dots people think they are connecting.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)newsbreaking, they have to be ready for anything. The AP and other news orgs are sitting on dozens of prepared obituaries for prominent people that just need a little tweaking to make them relevant. Top-notch PR people -- and I'm guessing there are one or two on HRC's team -- work with their social media experts to prepare shareworthy graphics and clever tweets in advance, and that are closely guarded (one might even say "kept secret" to keep from leaking prematurely. This shit is getting embarrassing and I'm hoping it settles down by September.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)It seems to me that their profit motive would lead them to portray the election as closer than it is, to keep each side spending money on advertising. Also, pundits and talk shows thrive on the back-and-forth between the campaigns. It is counter-intuitive for a media organization to put a damper on that - unless there is some quid pro quo that tilts the scale in their favor...
Jitter65
(3,089 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)AzDar
(14,023 posts)condoleeza
(814 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)played. Each plays the game from whatever position they are in - working the polls or the propaganda.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)It was posted here a week ago that the media was gonna call it before California voted. Reason is the news from California is gonna be bad for the Clintons.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)The real question: Does the Clinton campaign coordinate with their superdelegates on the timing of their endorsements?
Especially when you have more than 20 all moving at the same time.
If people can't see that I feel horrible for them.
And it's way too much of blaming the press, blaming the AP.
If the AP didn't announce it, another news agency would have. They compete. It was the coordinated release of the delegate endorsements that made this story.
moriah
(8,311 posts)... to do her bidding at her whim, even making the Associated Press wipe their ass with journalistic integrity.
She can orchestrate massive voter fraud in states -- exit polls are flawless and always take into account the exact percentages and demographics of early voters.
She so clearly, as Bernie often said, is the "most powerful political organization in the United States of America".
What I don't understand is why people who believe all that don't realize it actually kinda sounds like an endorsement, if the goal is to defeat Trump...
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)LAS14
(13,783 posts)... in this thread that say the same thing. Like the one from an AP employee. The explanation is that ANY professional organization involved in PR will have prepared e-mails and twitters for possible upcoming important events. Like newspapers have obituaries for hundreds of well known figures just waiting for them to die. This win wasn't "secret" by a long shot. Where's the secrecy? But the campaign might reasonably want to name such pre-written e-mails in some way to remind people not to let them out early.
shanti
(21,675 posts)shit in the woods?
senz
(11,945 posts)Instead they did it last night, the night BEFORE the primaries, knowing it would suppress voter turnout.
Yes, the video points out something extremely suspicious, but the changed timing of the announcement says it all.
Dirty, dirty, dirty campaign. Lowlife campaign.
Election sabotage = election theft.
Her friendship with Dubya makes more sense now.
May this candidate be remembered in history for the kind of person she actually IS.