2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumA few emails that no one knew existed until yesterday...
Didn't sway 4 million more voters to Hillary. Hillary swayed 4 million more voters to support her. The DNC bent over backwards for Bernie Sanders, allowing a non Democrat to run in their primaries, and giving him access to decades of tools, resources, and voter rolls.
Hillary won fair and square. With the primaries behind us now, and DWS out, it is time to unite behind Hillary. If your not voting for Hillary because she's "not progressive enough" when the alternative is ACTUAL fascism, then your progressivism is really just narcissism. Lets extend an olive branch, unite to defeat the neo-fascist, and then hold Hillary's feet to the fire for our causes. Anything less would be uncivilized.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)woolldog
(8,791 posts)He used and trashed the party and may have caused lasting division.There needs to be a rule that in order to run for President as a Dem you need to have been a member of the party for years.
NYC Liberal
(20,136 posts)I propose 6 years. You need to have been a registered Democrat for 6 continuous years prior to declaring your candidacy.
Expecting Rain
(811 posts)and has kept his word on supporting the eventual Democratic party nominee.
Can you imagine the havoc that a 3rd party run would have made in this pivotal election?
annavictorious
(934 posts)If not, Howard Dean would make a great candidate for the Vermont senate seat.
WIProgressive88
(314 posts)SticksnStones
(2,108 posts)All the interviews he gave today seem the opposite of keeping his word which was to do everything in his power to defeat Donald Trump and see to it that Hillary Clinton is the next president. That's what I heard him pledge. Many times.
That's not at all in keeping with today's action.
He was a willing participant in a republican political play. I'm sure they've been making popcorn all day.
So DWS resigns, the excitement of the Kaine selection gets diluted. The democratic convention begins with a negative story and Senator Sanders gets to badmouth the DNC while proclaiming "see, I was right"
How was any of that keeping his word?
There's a time and a place for cleaning house.
Jemmons
(711 posts)Sanders gets to proclaim "see, I was right" only because evidently he was right.
Something that makes DWS resignation a self inflicted wound and not something that you can blame Sanders for.
Shit happens. If you act recklessly more shit happens than strictly necessary.
If voters choose to sit out the election between the two most disliked candidates ever, im sure someone will blame Sanders for that. But it would seem to be more closely related to the attractiveness of the candidates program than to anything that Sanders has ever said or done.
DWS' resignation from her position of power is a good step towards making such a loss of voters less likely. Im sure they can find other ways to do so if and when they feel a need for it. Beating up on Sanders seems real shortsighted when so much is at stake and when the Clinton camp actually holds all the cards.
SticksnStones
(2,108 posts)He kept saying he was right.
But to be sure, he has not kept his word. It would be a big deal if Clinton didn't keep her word. Barely a blink when Sanders goes back on his. Why is that, do you suppose?
He found it more vital to publically bash the DNC the night before our convention begins. He added his voice to the republican glee. How does that action help elect a democrat to the White House? It doesn't. It does the opposite of that. He didn't keep his word.
And then there's this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512286221
But this is it. I'm done adding my voice to this fresh outrage. That's just feeding in to what the republicans want to see: a whole lot of in-fighting as the opening number to our convention.
I'm not going to be part of that show for them.
She resigned. Personally, I'm done with the topic.
glennward
(989 posts)So you would rather Bernie ran as 3rd party in order to split up the Democrat vote and thus hand Trump the election? Not to mention that Bernie wasn't the only primary candidate complaining about the shady behavior of the DNC. Martin O'Malley had quite a few comments of his own. Bernie did the Democrat party a huge favor by running as a Democrat, and it would go a long way in getting the unity that most of us want by acknowledging the positives of both Hillary and Bernie as well as this email situation being a perfect opportunity of ridding the DNC of corruption.
DWS wasn't good for the DNC. First, she had too much conflict of interest concerning Hillary with them being such good friends. Second, she was more helpful to Republicans than Democrats. Then there were the issues of Media suppression of non-Hillary candidates during the primaries as well as suppression of Democrat debate opportunities.
If people are going to stand behind the Democrat party and be PROUD to do so, then the corruption needs to GO rather than people resenting that it was uncovered.
I agree with not letting it ruin the convention and I am looking forward to seeing what I hope will be a very POSITIVE experience, but let's not hang on to the bad out of fear for the good.
Dream Girl
(5,111 posts)bekkilyn
(454 posts)The whole 'ic' ending never really crossed my mind until recently when someone on a different site pointed out that I was doing it and why it was bad. I probably switched everything around without even thinking about it. I'm attempting to do better now that I know better!
longship
(40,416 posts)When ones state does not allow party registration, like Vermont and a vast number of other states, including my state, MI?
It is like the idiots who want only closed primaries. How does one close a primary in Michigan (and many other states) where party registration never happens?
Of course, the only rational response is for open primaries everywhere. Let everybody vote.
TryLogic
(1,723 posts)in dem primaries, registered repubs vote in repub primaries, and let independents vote in which ever one they choose. Everyone votes at that very important level, and there should be minimal games by repubs messing with dem candidates and vice versa.
longship
(40,416 posts)They will have open primaries, by necessity. This puts closed primary states at a disadvantage.
All states should have open primaries. That is the only equitable way to have it.
fishwax
(29,149 posts)I think he brought energy and people into the discussion, and that many of them will stay in the discussion even now that his campaign is over. And I think that's a good thing for the party (and for our nominee).
We're going to win in the fall and Hillary Clinton is going to be the next president of the United States. And that won't happen in spite of Bernie Sanders; rather, on balance, his efforts in the past year and in the coming months contribute to it.
PatrickforO
(14,573 posts)I disagree with your rule change because Bernie said a bunch of things that needed to be said and elevated the discussion to stuff that will genuinely improve American lives. As my little sticker says, Bernie has my heart, but Hillary has my vote.
Don't screw that up by looking down on someone who was and is a New Deal Democrat at heart, as I am.
Bernie ran an honorable campaign, lost and then did what he said he'd do.
Now, let's pull together and win, and not alienate each other by proposing unneeded rule changes.
Clinton is gonna do fine, because we are all behind her. But don't be dogging Bernie.
WIProgressive88
(314 posts)with Hillary now. Most of the Bernie or Busters are not Democrats and wouldn't have voted for Hillary no matter who she defeated. Sen. Sanders did a lot of good for the party in terms of moving it in a more progressive direction and hopefully some of the new voters he brought into the process will stick around.
And if you're concerned about division in the party, well, posts like yours certainly aren't any help...
lesroseymour
(3 posts)We need unity, not division, this is the most important election of our time.
Silver_Witch
(1,820 posts)very nice
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Her Sister
(6,444 posts)Bradical79
(4,490 posts)It's not a meme
eastwestdem
(1,220 posts)Android3.14
(5,402 posts)S+
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)"A few emails that no one knew existed until yesterday...
Didn't sway 4 million more voters to Hillary."
Yes Hillary won and I accepted that after Cali but there is nothing fair in politics. That's why this story doesn't really bother me.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Its what they do.
glennward
(989 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)But to those that believe the ned justifies the means it's OK.
creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)the outcome of the election, let alone rig it. Its just discussions between DNC officers among themselves and plans to defend the DNC from Bernie's smears.
StrictlyRockers
(3,855 posts)Ford_Prefect
(7,895 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Ford_Prefect
(7,895 posts)DWS didn't act alone and David Brock is still in town.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Response to JaneyVee (Reply #26)
Post removed
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)If punishment is due, there is time for that later.
Nancyswidower
(182 posts)Larger question is...if it's our party structure....why doesn't everyone know so that this crap doesn't sneak up and bang us in the ass?
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)who voted for Hillary because they thought she was the safe pick, even though they agreed with Sanders more on policies. If fear is driving quite a few votes for a candidate, then it's not surprising when it's hard to inspire the base. The problem isn't progressives not voting, the problem is with moderates and independents not caring to vote or not being willing to cast it for Hillary.
As for the DNC "bending over backwards", I just have to laugh. We have a shitty, completely undemocraric two party system that ensures people have as little of a choice as possible, and the DNC, as the committee of one of only two parties that are practically viable, is just one of the two benefactors of this corrupt system, and has largely used their position as a tool to preserve power and privilege IMHO, and this primary just reinforced that.
Can you imagine the DNC ever being for abolishing first past the post voting? For implementing proportional representation? Fuck no. And this "only two choice" system is driving extremism and apathy.
Rex
(65,616 posts)The media is our biggest enemy right now. Alt media is doing great, but the mainstream will keep this a horse race by letting Trump do whatever he wants to.
HRC will win despite that, she has the numbers and nobody can take that away from her.
George II
(67,782 posts)...was from the first week of MAY, after about 45 states had already voted. And the subject matter had never even happened, it was idle speculation.
I can just imagine the reaction to some of the emails I wrote in the course of my job before retiring.
Blue Idaho
(5,049 posts)Then you would know that even the very best of people can sent the stupidest shit to you in an email - especially in the heat of the moment. It happens all the time.
To date I have seen no proof that the DNC acted on the ideas outlined in any emails. I have seen no proof that Sen. Sanders rights were violated, and I have seen no proof that the wrong person won the Primaries.
TryLogic
(1,723 posts)Sounds like the best strategy.
angrychair
(8,699 posts)It does matter.
Our candidate is Clinton/Kaine. That is not being debated. We will all be voting for Clinton/Kaine, period.
The point is that, during the primary, DNC leadership discussed ways to subvert a Democrat running for president. It is extremely unlikely the emails were an isolated manifestation of those efforts.
The issue has been resolved. No longer beating anybody else up over this.