Bernie Sanders campaign gets another win in Colorado
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by In_The_Wind (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).
Source: The Denver Post | The Spot
UPDATED: Bernie Sanders supporters won Colorados three seats on the Democratic National Committee, ousting longtime party leaders and Hillary Clinton loyalists.
The Democratic delegates at the state convention elected Terry Tucker, Jeri Shepherd and Mike Hamrick, the party announced late Monday. Sanders supporters pushed the slate and worked to get them elected at the party confab Saturday in Loveland, though the campaign said it didnt officially endorse them.
The selections give party outsiders a foothold in the state and national Democratic leadership amid concerns about bias toward Clinton and other establishment candidates. Sanders strong showing at precinct and county level party meetings helped him stack the deck at the state convention where he won the straw poll and claimed a majority of the delegates.
Two of Colorados current DNC members Mannie Rodriguez and Anthony Graves are Clinton superdelegates. The third, Lisa Palacio Padilla, is so far unpledged to a candidate. She is the sister of state party Chairman Rick Palacio.
Both Graves and Rodriguez sought re-election as DNC members but lost.
Read more: http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/2016/04/19/bernie-sanders-campaign-dnc-colorado/125654/#more-125654
DemocracyDirect
(708 posts)Now the revolution has really begun.
It will be 1000s of small battles, not the big one that the media is focused on...
... and trying everything they can to suppress.
merrily
(45,251 posts)beastie boy
(9,345 posts)w4rma
(31,700 posts)That one was a little flat. Kinda like the current support for the Establishment.
George II
(67,782 posts)....until after the convention, and by that time Sanders won't be a "Democrat" anymore, he'll be back to being an Independent.
Whatever they might do as DNC members won't do Sanders any good at all.
Lucky Luciano
(11,256 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....a "Democrat" (never even actually joined the Democratic Party) so he can try to get OUR nomination, and on the day after he's no longer a Democratic candidate he'll go back to being an Independent. He already has his Senate re-election committee set up for himself as an INDEPENDENT!
So what does this do for the Democrats? He probably doesn't even know their names and if he does, he'll forget about them the day after the convention anyway.
roody
(10,849 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)greymouse
(872 posts)You conveniently ignore his caucusing with the Democrats forever. Oh, and I suppose the fact that JFK was the Liberal Party's nominee would have your nickers in a twist.
I care about the policies the candidate has and his or her integrity. Bernie wins on both those counts, Hillary fails on both.
egalitegirl
(362 posts)He was independent of the Bush family unlike the Clintons. Bill Clinton was also an advisor of the Carlyle Group.
AllyCat
(16,187 posts)Kittycat
(10,493 posts)DU would have imploded with such treacherous behavior. They would have had him drawn and quartered in the square as a traitor to democratic values!
It will be great having all these new Bernie state leaders in the DNC, and helping elect state candidates. What a boost to the party this will be down the road, this is exactly what Bernie was talking about when he spoke of needing to re-energize and grow the party.
Lucky Luciano
(11,256 posts)That should be sufficient.
George II
(67,782 posts)...yeah, he votes correctly.
cprise
(8,445 posts)Sanders' support over the years. But its sounding to me like Party power and loyalty comes before the good of the nation.
Bohemianwriter
(978 posts)He's been caucusing with and for his entire time in Washintgton.
Tell it to the liberal wing of the democratic party.
Tell them that Bernie has never stood by their side, never voted with the democrats, or even have progressive ideals.
This is as funny as when Hillary was wondering where Bernie ws during the healthcare battle in the 90s. He stood right behind her when she thanked him for the support of a healthcare battle she would soon leave.
Hillary is now against universal healthcare. Wonder why. Do you think it has something to do with the money she took later from the insurance industry?
Got any more fibs about Bernie to debunk and link to the Hillary campaign?
w4rma
(31,700 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:20 AM - Edit history (1)
Bohemianwriter
(978 posts)The only lie here is the claim that Bernie has never voted with or caused with the African American caucus in Congress.
Tell it to the people he has been siding with.'
Claim is that Bernie has never been an ally of the Democrats.
Tell it to the fellow standing right behind Hilary as she thanks him for his support for universal healthcare.
Was your attack misdirected by any chance?
Response to George II (Reply #7)
DiehardLiberal This message was self-deleted by its author.
dflprincess
(28,078 posts)would like to see the Democratic party move away from the DLC/Third Way/"New" Democrats and back to it's traditional values.
Turn CO Blue
(4,221 posts)Because the 1800+ Bernie delegates in Philly will get a very good start in the meetings and breakouts that week on changing the Democratic platform to what is SUPPOSED to be, and the DNC members will continue those efforts during the year.
The current bottom three-quarters of the Democratic platform is paragraph after paragraph about keeping a strong military presence, wars, foreign affairs.
The domestic issues like jobs, our economy, civil rights, get one or two anemic sentences each.
We need a paradigm shift.
LiberalFighter
(50,928 posts)Not including automatic he only has 1205.
Turn CO Blue
(4,221 posts)Bernie has 1200 and will get around 45 to 50% of the 1400 remaining = 1800 to 1900 delegates at the Convention.
And they will be going to breakouts and meetings there. Even if he only kept the 1200 that he has now, that is a huge number in attendance at meetings; they will have a HUGE IMPACT on the agenda that week.
Igel
(35,309 posts)In my experience, often those who seek to power or position to "counter perceived bias" towards or against individuals or a particular set of doctrines feel completely justified in being biased themselves. To provide "balance." It becomes a matter of jockeying for power and position, not to advance but to push others out.
Then the committee or organization is reduced to snake pit until everybody realizes that they may have favorites, but using power to help "your guy" (or "gal" is simple malfeasance and instead of being an ethical imperative is simply unethical.
cprise
(8,445 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Oops, there goes that talking point!
Duval
(4,280 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)itsrobert
(14,157 posts)thanks
zentrum
(9,865 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)SoapBox
(18,791 posts)And it's all part of the Political Revolution to take back America (and the party) from the crooks and creeps.
Keep it going.
dae
(3,396 posts)RandySF
(58,823 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Iwillnevergiveup
(9,298 posts)some folks in Colorado are paying attention. Very good news!
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)Put the Bernie machine, aka "the people", back in control.
Nyan
(1,192 posts)What the hell are they talking about? Thank goodness for my ignore list!