Bernie Sanders declares war on reality

Instead of coming to grips with the overwhelming evidence that Democratic primary voters prefer Hillary Clinton be the party’s 2016 presidential nominee, Bernie Sanders continues to create his own political reality — devising new and creative excuses to explain why he’s losing to her and why he should be the party’s standard-bearer in November.

First there was the complaint that Southern, conservative states have their primaries early, which “distorts reality,” because these states won’t support a Democrat in November. This is certainly a compelling assertion from a candidate who has won such red-state stalwarts as Utah, Alaska, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Kansas, Idaho, and Wyoming.

Next the Sanders camp argued that the primary system is unfair because places like New York have a closed primary that doesn’t allow independents to vote. By this logic, it is undemocratic not to allow voters not registered as Democrats to vote in a Democratic primary tasked with choosing the Democratic nominee for president. If independents could vote, claims Sanders, it would be a different race (even though Clinton has actually won more open primaries than Sanders).

For Sanders, it seems, the only fair and equitable manner for choosing a Democratic nominee is one that favors him.

This brings us to the Sanders campaign’s latest “the dog ate my homework” excuse. In what was a bizarre press conference Sunday at the National Press Club in Washington, Sanders took aim at a new target — superdelegates.

Sanders made three arguments, none of which are remotely consistent. First, he said that this summer’s Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia will be “contested” because Clinton will not have enough pledged delegates to win on the first ballot.

Clinton needs to get 2,383 out of 4,766 delegates to win the nomination. However, by Sanders’ argument, she should not count superdelegates toward that total (even though Sanders is still including the 715 superdelegates in that 4,766 number). I realize that math is tricky, but if you subtract 715 from 4,766 and divide it in half, Clinton would actually need 2,026 pledged delegates for a majority — a fairly achievable goal for her.

It should also be noted that under the rules of the Democratic nominating system (rules that were readily available on the Internet when Sanders announced his candidacy), a candidate can assemble a coalition of both pledged delegates and superdelegates to get the 2,383 delegates needed to win the nomination.

Second, Sanders thinks superdelegates are apportioned unfairly. He argued Sunday that they should follow the popular vote of the state they represent rather than exercising free will. It doesn’t seem fair to Sanders that, for example, even though he won 70 percent of the vote in the Washington state caucus, he doesn’t get all the superdelegates from that state.

Putting aside the fact that caucuses are not exactly a bastion of fair and democratic representation, the biggest problem with this argument is that even if they all voted the way that Sanders wants, Clinton would still have a 363-to-147 advantage in superdelegates. Overall that adds up to a more than 500-delegate lead, which makes sense, since Clinton has won the most states and the most votes.

Sanders’ third argument, however, is the real doozy, because to buy it you basically have to ignore everything else he has said about the unfairness of the primary system. According to Sanders, superdelegates shouldn’t actually be guided by the will of the people. They should be guided by who can win in November. Surprisingly enough, Sanders thinks that he would be that person.

Superdelegates should ask themselves, he said, “do they want the second strongest candidate running against Trump, or the strongest candidate?”

If your head is spinning, it’s with good reason.

The same candidate who has been railing against independent voters being disenfranchised, who has called the primary system undemocratic, and who has complained about superdelegates, in general, is now calling on those same superdelegates to vote against Clinton (that would apparently include delegates from the states Clinton has won), even though she will almost certainly have the most pledged delegates and the most votes. In head-to-head general election polls, Clinton trounces Trump, but since Sanders trounces him by a bit more, he argues that he should be the nominee.

In the realm of illogical, self-serving, hypocritical, intellectually dishonest political arguments, this is practically the gold standard. But with six weeks to go until the last primary, I have great confidence that the Sanders campaign will find some way to top it.

Sanders claim of a contested violates Democratic National Convention rule nr 13

Sanders claim of a contested convention is a lie, Sanders violates Democratic National Convention rule 13

A.Delegates shall be allocated in a fashion that fairly reflects the expressed presidential preference or uncommitted status of the primary voters or, if there is no binding primary, the convention and/or caucus participants,

Meaning; if Clinton leads in the pledged delegates count, she will be the nominee.

According to Procedural Rules of the 2016 Democratic National Convention : 13 J

J Motion to Suspend the Rules: The Chair shall entertain a motion to suspend the rules, which shall e decided without debate and which shall require a vote of two thirds (2/3) of the delegates voting, a quorum being present.

Sanders will not get the necesary 2/3 vote to change or suspend the rules.

GAME OVER FOR SANDERS.!!!!!!!!

WV poll: Sanders leading 45% to 37%, Clinton 52/41 with liberals..Sanders 36/19 with conservatives

This is a weird WH poll from ppp.

it's difficult to get a man to understand something when his cash flow depends on his not understand

But it's difficult to get a man to understand something when his cash flow depends on his not understanding it.


Paul Krugman on Sanders

https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/727423227404886016

Ok then, Let's spell it out for Sanders "Democrats"

Ok then, Let's spell it out for Sanders "Democrats"

They are having a hard time with this concept.

If Sanders can't win democratic voters he will not win the general election. Period.

He has unprecedented favorable ratings among independents, due to the lack of negative campaign adds from republicans.
And favorable ratings do not equal actual votes, as the + 3,2 million Clioton votes proves.
Clinton: 12,135,109
Sanders: 8,967,401

Even Trumph beats Sanders with 10,056,690 votes

That's the math that Sanders fans don't want to talk about.

This is why comments like DWS "We don't need the democratic voters" comment is so damn stupid.

Americans, it seems, on the whole reject socialism and have always rejected Sanders socialism.

African American voters, elderly voters, women, independents, and moderate republicans does not share Sanders values.

The only voters that share sanders world view is Millennials that have voted in the undemocratic caucuses.

And did I forget, people that identify themselves as Democrats, the establishment as Sanders call them, are Clinton voters.

Indiana goes to Hillary: 75% of the early vote is over 50 and It's finals week at public schools.

Clinton raised $2.4 million off Trump's "women's card" comment in the last three days in April

Hillary Clinton's campaign raised $2.4 million off Trump's "women's card" comment in the last three days of the April q, per @brianefallon.

https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN/status/727219851329191936

Thats Power of Women

Clinton needs 19 states (and D.C.) that every dem nominee has won from 1992 to 2012, + Florida. Done

The tough truth for Sanders: HRC would still be leading by 550 if superdelegates followed his rules

The tough truth for Sanders & co: HRC would still be leading by roughly 550 if superdelegates followed his rules.



https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN/status/726897278338764800