@ovals49

or competition at all. We're a private club."

Which organization used this legal defense? The NFL or the DNC?

Oh, wait. It was both.

The 359 DNC members will decide, as usual.
Regardless of whether Bernie has the most support among Democratic voters or the general population come convention time, the official nominee will be whoever they prefer. They will have complete control of a brokered convention.

Regardless of whether Bernie has the most support among Democratic voters or the general population come convention time, the official nominee will be whoever they prefer. They will have complete control of a brokered convention.

These DNC party members are not bound to follow the wishes of the party rank and file, as demonstrated by the stunning lack of discussion on the Climate Crisis we face:

From readsludge.com:
Just last month, DNC members voted 222-137 against allowing a presidential debate focused on the issue of the climate crisis. The roll call for that vote still has not been released, and many DNC members are known to be lobbyists for the fossil fuel industry.
After the contested 2016 Democratic Primary, where it was revealed that the DNC was funneling money for the Hillary Clinton campaign, a series of DNC meetings sought to add greater transparency to the rules and nomination process. But many of these accountability reforms are currently in flux, and there's a possibility the 2020 convention will be "brokered"—that is, if no candidate wins a majority of delegates on the first ballot, superdelegates (including scores of lobbyists) may determine the winner on the second ballot.

@burnt out
Like AA people rejecting the guy who marched with MLK for the "co-President" who rolled back the advances hard-won in the 60's.

Others have explained it here, but I still think it was "anybody but the Jew".

Does anyone else think that it's pretty weird that the people that now support Biden would choose someone at the opposite end of the spectrum as their second choice? What goes on in the minds of these people?

@crbngville I’m picturing a marionette “Weekend at Biden’s” situation if things get that bad.

If being the most important part. I don't see the DNC allowing Biden to fail. Short of a medical incident that leaves him incapacitated, Biden will be rammed down our throats. We'll be told to hold our nose and vote for him. Just like in 2016.

@tle
on exactly how Biden "drops out". He has money and establishment support, so I don't see him withdrawing from the campaign until after Super Tuesday. I'm expecting his support to decline, and for him to go through the first few primaries winning few if any delegates. After Super Tuesday it would be obvious that he isn't going to make it, even with super delegate support.
One scenario is for Warren (currently enjoying a surge) to overtake Biden in polling. That brings his electability into question and some of his support would bleed out -- to Sanders if the second choice polling is to be believed. That transitions from a three-way race to a two-way race, with Biden perhaps falling below the 15 percent threshold to get delegates.
By the time Biden formally withdraws, his endorsement may not be worth much.

How many clueless voters would fall in line?

@gjohnsit That takes talent.

useless

The Washington Post (owned by the world’s richest person, Jeff Bezos), for example, claimed that Sanders’s assertion that millions of US residents were working multiple jobs was “misleading” because it was only eight million people, which represented a minority of the workforce, and that many of those extra jobs were part-time. It also gave his statement that six people (one of whom is Bezos) have as much wealth as the bottom half of the world’s population ‘three Pinocchios’ – the designation just below the most egregious lie. This was because, they argued, billionaires’ wealth is tied up in stocks, not money itself, and that most people own essentially nothing. For them, this apparently disproved the Vermont senator’s well-sourced claim.

The Post also attacked the idea that Sanders is supported by ordinary people in an article titled Bernie Sanders Keeps Saying His Average Donation is $27, but His Own Numbers Contradict That. What was the contradiction it found? That the average donation was actually $27.89, not $27.

@gjohnsit
have less money in their pockets than the so-called "poor". They create jobs by hiring people to carry their money for them. Billionaires are the real victims here!

useless

The Washington Post (owned by the world’s richest person, Jeff Bezos), for example, claimed that Sanders’s assertion that millions of US residents were working multiple jobs was “misleading” because it was only eight million people, which represented a minority of the workforce, and that many of those extra jobs were part-time. It also gave his statement that six people (one of whom is Bezos) have as much wealth as the bottom half of the world’s population ‘three Pinocchios’ – the designation just below the most egregious lie. This was because, they argued, billionaires’ wealth is tied up in stocks, not money itself, and that most people own essentially nothing. For them, this apparently disproved the Vermont senator’s well-sourced claim.

The Post also attacked the idea that Sanders is supported by ordinary people in an article titled Bernie Sanders Keeps Saying His Average Donation is $27, but His Own Numbers Contradict That. What was the contradiction it found? That the average donation was actually $27.89, not $27.