2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumClinton and the DNC Are Not Just Colluding — They’re Changing the Rules for Superdelegates
The award for most deliberate and egregious burying of a lead has just been handed out.
It goes to NBC News, for a story entitled, Bernie Sanders Makes Things Awkward for Hillary Clintons DNC Takeover.
Put aside for a moment that the storys central premise is the uncritical repetition of a nonsense: the idea that a major-party convention cant as in literally cannot be planned without a nominee being declared at least a month and a half in advance. We know thats untrue because, up until a week ago, thats exactly what the GOP was (with minimal public grousing by RNC Chair Reince Priebus) planning to do.
More importantly, in the context of Democratic National Committee rules which, as DNC officials Luis Miranda and Debbie Wasserman Schultz have both explained to the media repeatedly, dictate that super-delegates cannot be tallied until July there can be no doubt about which sentence in the above-cited NBC News story is the most important. Its this one, about what the Clinton campaign and the DNC have been up to since April (more than three months prior to the Partys late-July convention):
Back-channel conversations have already begun between Clintons campaign and the DNC about what role the party will play in the general election. These discussions are happening out of sight for now to avoid the appearance of collusion before the party has formally selected a nominee.
Where does this information appear in the article? In the very last sentence, of course.
cont'd
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/05/10/clinton-and-dnc-are-not-just-colluding-theyre-changing-rules-superdelegates
dubyadiprecession
(5,739 posts)BS isn't winning the nomination.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)But "nominee" is not accurate, unless you are undemocratic enough to tell WV, CA, OR, NJ voters to go to hell.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Cope.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)When she loses the general, will you take responsibility for it?
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)in the GE. That's what you want, right?
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)That's just how the scheduling worked. States with primaries that fall further down the line in the schedule become mathematically less relevant. This is especially true when the outcome of the primary becomes very clear early on in the process. As it turns out ... at this late date ... their votes become absolutely irrelevant with regard to the actual outcome.
Sorry, but it's true. Nothing will change. Hillary will be our party's nominee.
If it brings you comfort, you're more than welcome to attribute that mathematical FACT to a "go to hell" sentiment. But it's clear to me that you're angry with the calculator, not me.
The calculator doesn't care what you think of it... it's just counting numbers. (And come to think of it, it doesn't much matter what you think of me either. I don't care. It's not about what I "want" ... it's just math.)
Cope.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)Do you care about the GE, or only the primaries?
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... significance of their General Election vote with how much impact (or lack thereof) their primary vote had in the nomination process.
Most rational people are able to comprehend the difference, and are accepting of the fact that when the nominee has been established prior to their state's primary, and when any other contender has been mathematically eliminated, then their late-scheduled primary vote won't change the outcome.
The attitude that some are adopting ("my late-primary vote didn't matter, so I'm just not gonna vote in the general" is an immature response to the reality of math, the reality of scheduling, the denial that we don't have a National Primary Day ... and it's little more than self-pity and pure distilled vanity.
If those people lack the ability to cope with disappointment and to accept reality... and if they want to sit out the General Election as a way to "punish" others, and as a way to soothe their own hurt feelings, or to make themselves feel better about having the "misfortune" of living in a late-primary state ... well... that's their choice, isn't it?
I won't indulge their egos. If they've made up their minds to not vote, then it's a waste of anyone's time to convince them otherwise. OR... if it's just an empty threat, and they plan to vote anyway, then that's ALSO a waste to spend time trying to "convince" them to do something that they're actually going to do anyway. (It's all so silly.)
They can do what they want and believe as they will. I don't care.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)Imperious attitude loses voters. Simple as that.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... so it's a waste of time for me to even bother with those hypersensitive individuals.
As I said, if they've absolutely made up their minds, then it does no good for anyone to try and convince them otherwise.
Or, if they're just making empty threats but are actually planning to vote anyway, then it's ALSO a waste for anyone to spend time coddling them, stroking their egos, and responding to their insincerity.
Why reward bad behavior?
Gothmog
(145,839 posts)CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)William769
(55,150 posts)tonyt53
(5,737 posts)William769
(55,150 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Sanders was the leader in the popular vote.
Sanders was the early leader in the all-important pledged-delegate count.
And heres where the super-delegate count stood on February 19th:
Hillary Clinton: 451
Bernie Sanders: 19
Now its May, and were being told that the sole purpose of the Democratic super-delegate has all along been to acknowledge the popular-vote and pledged-delegate leader.
Except thats nonsense.
Response to Lodestar (Original post)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
Demsrule86
(68,788 posts)This is like a promise and is not against any rule. Hillary realizing she could not move them conceded and endorsed before the convention. The supers don't t have to wait until the convention to reveal their choice. The last thing we need is chaos at the convention when were are trying to beat Trump in the general.
Tarc
(10,478 posts)It's not that hard to understand. Early pledges don't mean a thing, as we saw them rightly switch to Obama in 2008.
brooklynite
(94,950 posts)Please specify the rules which have been changed regarding Superdelegates.