The Real Question
I didn't bother to watch or listen to the debate. The only segment of interest to me is this one segment concerning one simple question with six answers.
Only one candidate gave an acceptable answer. I would comment further but you all know how that would go. But, really, this should be a straightforward process.
-
TODD: Guys, guys, we are at the end here. We are at the end here. I've got to let that one go.
We are less than two weeks away from a national primary. And I want to ask all of you this simple question. There's a very good chance none of you are going to have enough delegates to the Democratic National Convention to clench this nomination, OK?
If that happens, I want all of your opinions on this. Should the person with the most delegates at the end of this primary season be the nominee, even if they are short of a majority? Senator Sanders, I'm going to let you go last here, because I know your view on this.
(LAUGHTER)
So instead, I will start with you, Mayor Bloomberg.
- BLOOMBERG: Whatever the rules of the Democratic Party are, they should be followed. And if they have a process, which I believe they do...
- TODD: OK, I'm trying to do this yes or no to make it fast.
- BLOOMBERG: ... everybody else -- everybody can...
- TODD: So you want the convention to work its will?
- BLOOMBERG: Yes.
- TODD: Senator Warren?
- WARREN: But a convention working its will means that people have the delegates that are pledged to them and they keep those delegates until you come to the convention.
- TODD: Should the leading person?
- WARREN: All of the people.
- TODD: OK. All righty. Vice President Biden?
- BIDEN: Play by the rules.
- TODD: Yes or no, leading person with the delegates, should they be the nominee or not?
- BIDEN: No, let the process work its way out.
- TODD: Mayor Buttigieg?
- BUTTIGIEG: Not necessarily. Not until there's a majority.
- TODD: Senator Klobuchar?
- KLOBUCHAR: Let the process work.
- TODD: Senator Sanders?
- SANDERS: Well, the process includes 500 super-delegates on the second ballot. So I think that the will of the people should prevail, yes. The person who has the most votes should become the nominee.
- TODD: Thank you, guys. Five noes and a yes.
There you have it!
RIP
Comments
This is the plan ~
the big steal it from Bernie even after the majority of Americans vote for him. If revolution doesn't result from the thievery, our society is doomed.
"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11
I have a short attention span,
particularly now after all these decades of political this and political that. I have been fully engaged (wining some, losing some) but the situation has of late sharply degraded to the point that it is really hard to take any of it seriously.
The lack of solidarity on this rather straightforward question it so very revealing. My dad's phrase would be "(fill in the blank) isn't worth the powder and lead it would take to blow him (her) to hell." These five ingrates do not have the integrity to fight for us. And, they have the gall to disparage me as some sort of ideologue.
RIP
I entirely agree with you.
They don't care about us and they stated it publicly. It has been talked about a lot today, so I hope people understand that it means THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT US.
I am concerned, of course. What will happen? Will this youth take it lying down? Will we? It makes my stomach turn.
"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11
The answer is no.
The youth that I have known will not take it lying down. The problem will then become what will we need to do to reclaim self-determination as a grounding principle of our social system. On this point, not clear, is the future …
RIP
Exactly as I wonder, myself.
What will happen? It's time for something to happen.
"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11
I have some thoughts:
Actually I have many thoughts, grounded in my experiences. Some not so pleasant. Some acceptable. And, some quite pleasant.
Change, real lasting change, requires time. Some things need to be done quickly, other things can be the result of considered actions over a greater span of time. The real trick is never losing sight of the objective, while attending to the gritty details.
And, as usual, we shall see what we shall see.
RIP
Indeed.
I think we're about the same age, PR. I was born in 1952. I find change takes time, too. I work in a university and had a Dean once who would say to me, baby steps were to be accepted. That's still a difficult one for me. But, to the point - it is true, lasting change takes time. I, too, have experienced this and learned from watching others.
Peace, bro.
"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11
Have I got the stories ...
For me birth was 1948 just before school started.
Virtually my entire life has been in the classroom. It is actually the perfect place to do theoretical work with a lab for the ancillary stuff.
For 35 years I had a series of several deans that wanted me gone, but I managed to best them all. Well actually, it was three where I was primary and for the others I played a supporting role. It was interesting getting them removed (Oops, there goes another rubber tree plant.) for one institutional failure or another. It's funny that each new dean had the previous dean's notes and records, yet each new dean made the same type of errors. And, in the end the administration granted me all the rights and access of emeritus professor, for the remainder of the time I lived in the area.
The real advantage where we were was the combination of challenges and spectrum of talent meshed to make it all work. When all gets aligned (as it did there) each new step just seems to be obvious. Of course I am simplifying a bit to make the point, but sometimes it really is just a matter of starting with the right (correct) foot to successfully negotiate the climb into the cliff dwelling.
RIP
actually 5 of 6 seems pretty solid. /s
the question I would ask Sanders-
"If they steal the nomination from you(and your supporters)on the second ballot, will you campaign for the DNC choice as you did in 2016? Or would that be enough to release you from your pledge of loyalty? "
This is the only weak spot in their scheme.
Thanks for putting the light on this.
edit- actually they would be fine if Sanders sat out the campaign. What they can't have is Sanders running third party.
If Sanders has signed a legal agreement with the DNC
as before, what would be the legal ramifications should he run third party? My state has a “sore loser” law which I believe prohibits him from running here, which sucks. Not to mention the combined wrath of the establishment.
I wonder if Bernie’s fallback is to wake up the youth to become active in the political process. He may be ready to win, but may understand the forces arrayed against him—and us. This is his last hurrah. He’s the guy who will plant a tree in whose shade he will never sit.
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"
I will say this about that ...
While I am not he, Bernie and I are in about the same situation with respect to our professional circumstances. With respect to influencing the youth: I don't expect to live long enough to see the outcomes of my present efforts. But, "if past is prolog" then …
RIP
I’m the same age as Raggedy Ann so I’m on my
way out, too.
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"
That’s why the youth
and their next moves are so important to the future of America.
"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11
Yep. That’s why Bernie is planting the tree under which he
may never sit. For our kids and grandkids.
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"
maybe some of our legal beagles can help here
Of course it won't matter if Bernie accepts the convention result and goes out to campaign "because Trump".
To me this is most likely outcome. Looks like our only shot is first ballot win.
https://www.npr.org/2019/03/05/700524861/bernie-sanders-signs-democratic...
Ballot access
Even if Bernie said “fuck this shit I’m out” and wanted to run third party, I think his only option would be to run as a libertarian because I don’t think anyone else is on the ballot in all 50 states and the deck is equally stacked on getting even the greens on, let alone anyone else at this point. Somehow I don’t see that happening.
The flip side is, the same goes for Bloomy. I find them taking him in much more likely than Sanders, but I think Bloom’s real game is buying the DNC.
At any rate, I’m pretty sure the door for any possibility of Bernie making a third party run is shut at this point (and I still don’t think he would anyway.)
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Summary For those With A Short ...
RIP
If you haven’t seen this clip from Rising/The Hill
Sums things up perfectly:
[video:https://youtu.be/mjW_zh-xEXA]
Bloomberg’s performance is a distraction. This is the real deal here. BOHICA baby!
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Some Final Thoughts From ...
But the bottom line is, all of us are united in defeating the most dangerous president in the modern history of this country. That we agree on. But where we don't agree, I think, is why we are today the only major country on Earth not to guarantee health care to all people, why three people own more wealth than the bottom half of America, when 500,000 people sleep out on the street, why hundreds of thousands of bright young kids can't afford to go to college, and 45 million remain in student debt.
Bottom line here: Real change never takes place from the top on down, never takes place from an oligarchy controlled by billionaires. We need to mobilize millions of people to stand up for justice. That's our campaign. Join us as berniesanders.com. Thank you.
Bernie Sanders
I am going to play the Angels advocate here,
I disagree with some peoples take on this.
While I don't like the answer of 5 of the 6 candidates, I think what we all really want is for the DNC to follow its own rules.
An answer I would have liked better is:
"the process needs to be allowed to play out in accordance with the rules, but the superdelegates should have the integrity and common sense to support the candidate that the majority has shown their preference for, any other option could be the end of this party as we know it".
I don't want to be part of a group that wants the DNC to adhere to rules closely when it favors me/us and not when it doesn't.
But that being said, if the first round of voting shows a solid leader then the second round should reflect that. I get that one upside of SDs is that one candidate could be doing great and half way thru the primary it is discovered that they are deeply flawed. Though that candidate gets no support thru the second half of the primary they hold on to a plurality of the pledged delegates. This would be the arguable upside and purpose of SDs. I wish one of the candidates would have pointed this out. SDs obligation should be to guarantee that the nominee be the one that the majority of the public wants.
But leave it to Chuck Todd to ask a question that deserves a lengthy and nuanced answer and expect everyone to give it a yes or no answer.
The scenario you discribed is somewhat valid
But I would have said, "Barring something unique like the leader shooting someone in the middle of the street in front of the convention center."
But seriously you reminded me of the 2016 primaries. After the southern primaries and Hillary's "big lead" Bernie started clobbering her. Someone should have cared that Hillary piled up a ton of delegates in states that would go 65 - 35 for the republican. It was clear that once people got to know Bernie he was the winner. Or when people started to notice the ridiculous discrepancy between precincts with paper records and without (Hillary had a 35% advantage when there was no way to verify the vote total and a 4% advantage when there was - all early and from deep red states)
On to Biden since 1973
If I remember right
Bernie clobbered HER in the NH primary, and HER was awarded half the delegates. Sounds fair, right? Since it was such a drubbing the minions of HER were saying the loss didn't matter because she had enough super delegates to win. That early in the primaries and she already had it in the bag according to her campaign.
I think this was the original intent:
referencing your "An answer I would have liked better is:". This is like the discussion of what happened about 250 years ago. Original intent was grounded in the reality that we cannot know the future therefore we are forced to adopt an adaptive algorithm to provide adaptability for unforeseeable circumstances.
Why is it that most people do not seem to understand this most fundamental of knowledge of command and control. In a more mundane example everyone knows that riding a bicycle requires constant adjustment to prevent a crash due to unforeseeable circumstances. Why is it so difficult to see in the case of a social construct such as the one under discussion?
RIP
@PriceRip Wow. That is a great
Wow. That is a great analogy:
"In a more mundane example everyone knows that riding a bicycle requires constant adjustment to prevent a crash due to unforeseeable circumstances. Why is it so difficult to see in the case of a social construct such as the one under discussion?"
I am going to start using that one.
and doh- I think you are right to suggest that 2016 is a year that SDs maybe should have stepped in and turned the nomination over to the candidate that showed they were more likely to win. Of course I am showing my bias and now advocating for the SDs to overturn the "will of the voters". She did arguably have a plurality of "counted" votes. Sketchy as it was.
Never mind
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
So, what's the Republican Plan B
...when they have a rogue candidate who attracted voters with promises; generous promises that happen to conflict with the deals Party bosses have already made with their Big Donors? By the end of the Primaries the maverick candidate will be holding a large plurality of state delegates, when suddenly the bottom falls out and the candidate is embroiled in a wild scandal. Party Leaders insist he is too disgraced to become the Party's Presidential nominee. The candidate denies all allegations. Yet his popularity with Primary voters remains strong.
.
The simple truth is that both Parties are facing the same dilemma — and both Parties have the same choices and the same authority to take action. Leaders of both Parties can take over the decision-making process at any point during the Convention. They are free to name their own nominee — even one who did not participate in the Primary elections. Neither Party requires Super Delegates to do that. Yes, the Primaries revealed voter's preferences — but so what? Those votes aren't legally binding and they never were. Political Parties are not part of the government. They have no oversight or regulations to follow. They are private clubs and their appointed Leaders can make or break or change the rules whenever they want to.
The only reason that the Democrats invented the Super Delegates was to give them something to hide behind and provide cover for their overt manipulation. And, in truth, the Democrats do have it tough. Not only do they manage the Democrats — a coalition of political Centrists — but long ago they were tasked with suppressing the voice of the American Left. In the early days, the American Left included former slaves, uppity women, immigrants, and poorly-paid workers who wanted to unionize for better conditions. The monied elite who ruled during the first Industrial Revolution managed to suppress the rise of the Left incredibly well here in the colonies, although in Europe they were unable to do the same, and the Left gained a strong foothold as a political Party that represented the People.
To me, the Super Delegates are like a Dinner Show performance. The actors are political quasi-celebrities and up-and-coming Party players, who are flown to the Democratic National Convention to provide a distraction and cover for the Party Boss's imperious decisions. Super Delegates enjoy cocktails, a fancy dinner, and a nice hotel room — at the Convention, they show-vote the way the Party instructs them. The Left is, thus, subsumed by this spectacle. Later they can vote for a Party-approved candidate, who will move them further from their goals.
The Republican Party has the identical power without the overhead of Super Delegates. They don't bother with that nonsense because they don't really try too hard to hide what they are doing behind the scenes.
This, of course, is merely another way to explain the situation.
Yes, on all fronts.
What I find ironic is that Herr Drumpf and Sanders have forced them to expose themselves for what they are. The masks are coming off and now it will be time for the people to decide if they want to continue with the charade or if they want something real, something that will change lives for the better.
"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11
@wouldsman A plurality voting system
A plurality voting system is what gave the French the choice between Le Pen and Macron. If Sanders has 31% and the next person had 30% then some good-faith brokerage is probably in order. If Sanders is >= 10% ahead of his nearest challenger he ought to get the nod. The only way for the Dems to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory is to do something so foul that it masks the stench of the deranged dotard.
History Repeats
itself, if we don't learn from it. If we actually learn from history, "identical initial conditions" do not of necessity lead to "identical results". This should be a part of everyone's educational repertoire.
So let's institute real representative government (Force the bastards to do the right thing.) then stay ever vigilant. It is time to act, and Bernie has demonstrated he knows how to do this very thing.
RIP
If we look to the past, super delegates have no honor.
Bernie won my state by double digits. Every super delegate announced their support for Hillary. Why it would be different this time.
In 1968
The democratic party was exposed tor what it was all along. What the kids learned in civics class was pretty much BS when it came to politics, and the dems response to any outside resistance was the same as republicans. Billy clubs, tear gas and show trials. This disruption brought about a new type of leadership willing to listen to all people, who were then promptly shot. From then on the democratic party has built a firewall to make sure 1968 will never happen again.
Some advice for the "OK Boomer" brigade. If you think vote blue no matter who is the answer, ask yourselves how we got here. The people we voted are the same people you're voting for (some literally) and when we expected them to fight for us, they compromised, they showboated. Over and over, year after year, and here we are. So I hope you have a better plan than we did, because you're gonna need it.
Depends on where you got your civics/American
Political History education from. Not all Boomers are flaming idjits! Rec'd!!
Inner and Outer Space: the Final Frontiers.
I was there during the 50s and 60s
Many of us did the right things, but "the powers that were" didn't listen!!! And, fyi, "vote blue no matter who" was never part of the plan!!!
For What It's Worth Imagine
RIP
The blue no matter who
seems to be the mantra at TOP. Even Bloomberg. That I can't figure.
I checked back there the other day ...
… then I took a long, hot shower …
RIP
Save some soap for the rest of us.
won't help
Good one!
Maybe I’m misunderstanding that quote
but I don’t think it’s the youth, who I associate with “ok, boomer” who are blue no matter who.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Boomers, of course, were the ones clubbed in '68
something awful happened in the 80s, though, and many phony hippies/lefties decided money was more important than heaven on earth.
This makes me so very sad.
I was fortunate to be with a group of peers that stayed the course and we had many victories. Perhaps the isolation of being in Nebraska during the 80s helped us keep the faith baby.
It wasn't perfect, but compared to the conditions out here in my home state I am now contemplating not bothering to contact some of my long lost friends of old. The new norm here may not be to my liking.
RIP
To continue a theme:
[video:https://youtu.be/HOgSTD7Kjrw]
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
Thanks, I needed that,
, Neil Young is always good.
RIP
For those uninclined or unable to listen, the song includes
these lines:
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
"Something awful happened in the 80s"
. Truly. Supply-side economics sounded so innocent. The valorization of greed in public culture through big hits like Dallas, Lifestyles of the Rich & Famous, and Wall Street seemed so coincidental. Deregulation resulting in mergers, acquisitions, and buyouts seemed entertaining from a distance. The sprouting up of shopping malls filled with chain stores seemed modern, even as Main Street businesses disappeared one by one. All under Reagan.
Then came Clinton with WTO/GATT, NAFTA, the 1996 Telecom Act, the repeal of Glass-Steagall...
And then came George W. Bush.
The American people lost so much.
Lurking in the wings is Hillary, like some terrifying bat hanging by her feet in a cavern below the DNC. A bat with theropod instincts. -- Fred Reed https://tinyurl.com/vgvuhcl
"5 of 6 Dem hopefuls on debate stage tell voters to FUCK OFF"
should be the title of some article. But even if I had the writing skills I am too pissed off about these assholes' betrayal to write coherently.
Everyone needs to be this angry,
even angrier. Bernie is forcing them to show their hand and they don't know what else to do than show their hand. It is now up to us.
"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11
Yep. One undeniable good result of Bernie pushing back,
regardless of the outcome, is that he is forcing them to crawl out from under their rocks and show their true selves to the world. After 2016 there were lefty types I know in real life that didn't really understand (and sort of denied) that the DNC had cheated Bernie. But it will be hard to overlook this time around.
Actually you should write the article
"5 of 6 Dem hopefuls on debate stage tell voters to FUCK OFF"
I am living proof that you can do it.
RIP
If they think it's only Ds vs. Rs,
, Our team vs. Their team, if that's the only way they can see it, if the concept of 1% vs. 99% is vague and meaningless to them, then they will vote Blue No Matter Who and later wonder why things never seem to get better for the average person. They'll also take offense at anyone who dares to criticize the Democrats, much less suggest a third party.
It's gonna take some educatin'. A couple of days ago I received three copies of Krystal & Saagar's Populist's Guide to 2020, which is selling like crazy all over the world, and am hoping it might open some eyes (haven't read it yet).
We need to look past "party" and recognize our basic commonality as citizens.
Lurking in the wings is Hillary, like some terrifying bat hanging by her feet in a cavern below the DNC. A bat with theropod instincts. -- Fred Reed https://tinyurl.com/vgvuhcl
My latest mindset and phrase
I like to use, and I read it somewhere so it isn't mine, is that the fight is up and down, not right vs left, not black vs white, not Boomer vs whatever, up and down and that means yes, the filthy rich sociopaths are the problem, anything less than calling out that FACT is just diversion, distraction and divide and conquer. If we keep buying in to the same old stale narrative of just who our enemy is, we'll get the same results we've gotten so far. Divide and conquer works, if it didn't our owners would not have used it since inception.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
Yep, the fight is vertical,
, not horizontal. Just telling it that way might be the simplest way to open people's eyes. TPTB prefer us to fight amongst ourselves. They love idpol, dueling political parties, and especially antifa/nazi scuffles.
Jimmy Dore's wife Steph Zamorano sometimes wears this T-shirt --
https://shop.spreadshirt.com/TJDS/women
Lurking in the wings is Hillary, like some terrifying bat hanging by her feet in a cavern below the DNC. A bat with theropod instincts. -- Fred Reed https://tinyurl.com/vgvuhcl
If the DNC cheats Bernie out of his nomination again
that will be the end of the Democratic Party.
IF Bernie then turns and enthusiastically stumps for whoever the nominee is from that group of maniacs, I will be done with him (and the whole fucking corrupt process of electing a President in the United States).
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
Your point is important. I hope someone with a big microphone
on the left openly tells Bernie that if he is cheated then endorses the beneficiary of the cheating, he will be doing more damage to democracy than Trump. That he himself would be pissing on basic fairness and decency. It would announce to the world that he rewards cheating, lying, stealing, and spitting in the face of voters.
Then the charge of sheep herding would be valid
During the last primary there were some Leftists who charged Bernie with herding young people and others into the democratic party to be used and abused. To become a member of the party where progressive ideas go to die.
sometimes we have to pretend we didn't hear that
I wasn't happy with Bernie talking about the Russians at that debate. It shows that no matter how good he is on some issues he's still part of the game.
There are taboo subjects
about which Dem candidates are not allowed to speak honestly, and Bernie is an excellent barometer of them. They include Russia, Julian Assange, Trump, and 9/11. These subjects have been wrapped in media lies and no one is allowed to unwrap them.
Lurking in the wings is Hillary, like some terrifying bat hanging by her feet in a cavern below the DNC. A bat with theropod instincts. -- Fred Reed https://tinyurl.com/vgvuhcl
The latest from the Bernie campaign
suggests that he knows:
He's not pretending anymore that the Dems are not against him.
Lurking in the wings is Hillary, like some terrifying bat hanging by her feet in a cavern below the DNC. A bat with theropod instincts. -- Fred Reed https://tinyurl.com/vgvuhcl
Yes!
Sometimes he is too good at being a politician at the expense of more cynical among us. Bernie, I think, knows this is his last campaign, and he knows he needs to go for broke (as we used to say).
As I do not have any insider information, I can speak freely knowing full well this may only be wishful thinking: But if it were my call I would be "all in, cards face up" and with the biggest shit-eating grin saying "read'em and weep, muthafuckas".
RIP
I think we here instinctively understand
...what's going on, and force an inner evolution to stay ahead of it, day after day.
Distractions and pushback are being generated at a level above the artificial split that divides us into Democrats and Republicans. This can make the program hard to see. This week, for the first time ever, the radio stations in my State abruptly stopped using the words, "Primary Election." It's like those words never existed. Instead, they smoothly substituted the term "Voter Preference Polling" to describe this stage of the election cycle. By summer, we will all call them that.
This Orwellian word-flipping has been going stealth but strong in recent years. It's an insidious form of brainwashing that is very effective, especially when you have a highly coordinated media to execute it. This is very disturbing because they seem to be anticipating and countering growing public awareness at every turn. I suppose it is the Intelligence cartel that sits above the tiresome political realm.
Someday they will create enemies faster than they can destroy them.
I had no idea that particular phrase substitution was in motion.
I'll have to listen for that. Shit.
Deceiving citizens could be their
foremost domestic strategy, . From your report, it sure looks like it. So what is our best response? Pointing out the b.s. so others won't be taken in? If so, Twitter might be the quickest response, followed by essays/reports/articles/videos explaining what's happening more thoroughly. For that, it might be good to notify some of our communicators who already have an audience. This could include Caitlin Johnstone, Michael Tracey, Jimmy Dore, Kyle Kulinski, for starters.
I hope you have a Twitter account because what you just reported could be stated in a very short sentence and then broadly shared. (I do not have a Twitter account.)
Something to keep in mind is that they obviously fear an awakened populace. They fear our potential power, so they go to some lengths to keep us misled. We can undo that.
Lurking in the wings is Hillary, like some terrifying bat hanging by her feet in a cavern below the DNC. A bat with theropod instincts. -- Fred Reed https://tinyurl.com/vgvuhcl
I think the QUESTION sucks.
The question amounts to, do you prefer plurality victories, or backroom deals? My answer to that particular question as posed would have to be "As it stands, YES, plurality victory", but the process is horrible. The first thing that needs to happen is to eliminate all super delegates, right now, for this convention. But that still leaves it to a choice between a plurality or delegate deals, neither of which is, IMO, a good exercise in democracy. The entire issue would vanish if ranked choice voting were used nationwide.
The question: "You are ok with the DNC screwing over Bernie.
Right?"
"Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep."
And the way ...
is to force the DNC to not screw over Bernie. It looks like Bernie will be getting more votes than any other of the various candidates. Soooo, we should get everyone to help force the DNC to bend to the will of the constituents.
RIP
Grrrr. Warren.
IMO . . . Bernie knows this is his last "hurrah" . . .
If they cheat him . . . I don't know if he will play by the rules. The rest of us will not.
Marilyn
"Make dirt, not war." eyo