Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NY Times will no longer include super delegates in their count. (Original Post) SoapBox Mar 2016 OP
We should thank them. Fawke Em Mar 2016 #1
I did. Kittycat Mar 2016 #19
Kudos to the NYT! bernbabe Mar 2016 #2
I tried to tell a Hillary supporter that she doesn't have any more Supers to gain... Kalidurga Mar 2016 #3
Yes! Hydra Mar 2016 #4
Awesome! Even though it took pissed off readers to make 'em come clean! n/t ebayfool Mar 2016 #5
This is a sign... CdnExtraNational Mar 2016 #6
They never should have to begin with. nt silvershadow Mar 2016 #7
maybe they learned from Clinton/Obama when delegates fled her campaign tomm2thumbs Mar 2016 #8
It's great that they finally did this Lordquinton Mar 2016 #9
I wondered what all the screaming was about. Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2016 #10
So now those delegates are no longer super. Major Hogwash Mar 2016 #11
Sort of "Delegates-in-Waiting". nt Hatchling Mar 2016 #23
Good lovemydog Mar 2016 #12
Hmm. Wonder why? dchill Mar 2016 #13
They accessed HRC's internal polling/saw handwriting on the wall? Divernan Mar 2016 #14
But that would get them in trouble with DU HRC Headquarters! dchill Mar 2016 #15
That's the way to do it! (nt) pat_k Mar 2016 #16
This is good, but the damage may have already been done. I hope it hasn't. stillwaiting Mar 2016 #17
Yes - although they still mention them TBF Mar 2016 #18
Mentioning them is fine bernbabe Mar 2016 #20
Yes, it's an improvement over where we were. TBF Mar 2016 #21
That is great news! ljm2002 Mar 2016 #22
Another Miracle! rgbecker Mar 2016 #24

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
1. We should thank them.
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 01:29 AM
Mar 2016

I realize they're probably only doing this because including them was so obviously biased and Berners kept pointing it out every minute of the day on social media, but, hey, at least they're responding to us and the truth.

Kalidurga

(14,177 posts)
3. I tried to tell a Hillary supporter that she doesn't have any more Supers to gain...
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 01:34 AM
Mar 2016

and she can lose them so it's not right counting votes that aren't cast. All I got was la la la la la I am not listening in response.

Hydra

(14,459 posts)
4. Yes!
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 01:34 AM
Mar 2016

No more misleading numbers. Hillary can have her honest lead and wait til we're all done voting to try and declare victory.

 

CdnExtraNational

(105 posts)
6. This is a sign...
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 02:10 AM
Mar 2016

The establishment candidate is not so inevitable anymore.

Progressives need to start drawing lines in the sand.

Let the ones standing on the wrong side of history have second thoughts.

tomm2thumbs

(13,297 posts)
8. maybe they learned from Clinton/Obama when delegates fled her campaign
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 03:11 AM
Mar 2016

they have no significance until all the votes are counted by actual voters

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
9. It's great that they finally did this
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 03:37 AM
Mar 2016

but the damage has been done. The number of people who looked at the false numbers and decided that it was too far gone and stayed home could have had a grave impact on the results.

Divernan

(15,480 posts)
14. They accessed HRC's internal polling/saw handwriting on the wall?
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 04:27 AM
Mar 2016

She continues to go down. (Something which shocks the hell out of Bill!)

stillwaiting

(3,795 posts)
17. This is good, but the damage may have already been done. I hope it hasn't.
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 11:10 AM
Mar 2016

We must demand an end to superdelegates. It must be organized, and it must be demanded.

If the Democratic Party ends the superdelegates as a concession to Sanders supporters, it might help Sanders supporters support Clinton a bit more (should Clinton be the nominee). Some concession is going to need to be made after this hideous Primary.

TBF

(32,056 posts)
18. Yes - although they still mention them
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 11:42 AM
Mar 2016

I am a web and phone subscriber. I just sent them an email to thank them for changing the way they are presenting their info. It is a start.

And I told them what I am telling everyone else who will listen:

I am supporting Bernie Sanders. I am continuing to donate to him. And I EXPECT a fair contest. No weighted coin tosses, no more Bill Clinton w/the Bullhorn. No money for the DNC. If shenanigans continue I will be changing my registration to indy and voting Green (not that it matters since I'm in Texas and my county is 3/4 republican, but still).

This after voting for every democratic nominee for president since 1992.

I have had it.

bernbabe

(370 posts)
20. Mentioning them is fine
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 12:22 PM
Mar 2016

they also say that the supers can switch their vote at any time before the convention and may do that if Bernie ends up with more elected delegates.

ljm2002

(10,751 posts)
22. That is great news!
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 02:31 PM
Mar 2016

Thanks to the NYT, and thanks to you for letting us know!

It certainly does look different than what most of the media is reporting, doesn't it? Doesn't look all that insurmountable all of a sudden.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Bernie Sanders»NY Times will no longer i...