Former Sanders campaign chairman: Don't expect email list to be shared with DNC
Source: The Hill
BY MALLORY SHELBOURNE - 01/16/18 01:09 PM EST
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is unlikely to get the email list from Sen. Bernie Sanders's (I-Vt.) 2016 presidential campaign, according to Sanders's former campaign chairman.
I dont think you should expect that to happen. If people think the Sanders list is just an ATM, theyre sadly mistaken, Jeff Weaver told Politico.
Its a list of millions of people who are motivated by a certain policy agenda. If they think it can be easily transferred, I think its a fantasy. The news outlet reported that DNC chairman Tom Perez has requested the list and other material as he seeks to rebuild the committee after Hillary Clintons 2016 loss to President Trump.
Sanders had supported Perezs opponent, Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), in his bid for the chairman position. Ellison, after losing to Perez, is now deputy chair of the DNC.
Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/369158-former-sanders-campaign-chairman-dont-expect-email-list-to-be-shared-with
mchill
(1,015 posts)brush
(53,470 posts)samnsara
(17,570 posts)Sophia4
(3,515 posts)go to Democrats if the Democratic Party were united.
It's up to winners to win back those they beat in the contest. Same for politics.
It's up to Democrats to win back Bernie supporters. Lots of work to do in that area.
Especially in certain states.
Scolding people who don't vote Democratic will not help win elections.
brush
(53,470 posts)he wants to run as a Dem?
But I have the feeling by the time 2019 rolls around there will be new, younger candidates who don't give us the feeling that we've been there and done that divisive thing already.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)If someone wants to get on the Democratic list, they can. Bernie is not collecting names at this time or soliciting a lot of donations as far as I know.
This is an argument over nothing.
brush
(53,470 posts)Sanders' ex-campaign manager said don't expect Sanders' email list to be shared with the DNC in the 2020 campaign.
Call that silly if you want.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)Most people on Bernie's list are probably on the Democratic Party list already. They are probably registered as Democrats if they voted in Democratic primaries. I doubt that there are many people on Bernie's list who aren't on the Democratic Party list already.
brush
(53,470 posts)This silly pronouncement by his camp is starting the divisiveness all over again.
But it probably won't matter, by 2019 there will be new candidates like Kennedy, Booker, Harris, Brown, Castro, et all who will be much closer in age to young Dem voters.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)He is probably trying to do what he thinks the people on the list want.
And most people on the list probably don't want the Democratic Party to view them as Sanders supporters. Maybe that explains the hesitation. People should be free to vote for and support the candidate of their choice.
The Democratic Party does not need the names of Sanders supporters. They probably already have those who are interested in supporting the Democratic Party.
brush
(53,470 posts)supporters but Democratic party supporters that is if Sanders expects to be on Democratic Party primary ballots.
No one wants a repeat of the divisiveness of the last campaign.
A certain someone has to decide if he's a Democrat again.
KPN
(15,587 posts)their email address list (whether from Bernie or not) does not make that person a Democratic Party supporter.
This is a lot about nothing, a meaningless issue. Policies are meaningful, actions and results are meaningful, not email address lists. People are not going to suddenly become Party "supporters" we all know this principally means donors) simply because Bernie handed over their email address to the Party.
brush
(53,470 posts)They're the ones who want to be on Democratic primary ballots, use party infrastructure and party email lists but don't want to share their own.
Ain't gonna happen this time around.
Plus, there will be several new, younger and attractive, actual, real Democratic candidates for 2020 who will make Sanders' old-hat divisiveness look like a "been there, done that" 2016 leftover.
KPN
(15,587 posts)it is only an issue because some people choose to make it a mountain out of a mole hill. It's more about Bernie and about people having an issue with the Democratic Party's performance on the economic front over the past 40 years than it is about email lists.
I do agree that Bernie's time has passed and new faces will be stepping into the forefront in 2019-20. But I also expect Bernie will be on message and will play a role (a message I support) as long as he is able bodied.
brush
(53,470 posts)and recessions. Surely you've noticed that historic fact.
Many of Sanders' ideas are valid and could have been better deployed if he were a member of the Democratic Party.
In fact, he would've done much better in the 2016 southern primaries and may have even been the nominee in 2016 had been a member of the party who had forged alliances with southern AAs, a significant part of our base.
KPN
(15,587 posts)Wage rates haven't kept even with inflation over the past four decades; labor unions have been basically neutered over that same time frame; manufacturing jobs have declined precipitously here while rocketing steeply in what were "underdeveloped" nations as a result of American manufacturers relocating to those nations to take advantage of vastly lower labor costs (often more than 90% less). At the same time, the cost for higher education has skyrocketed out of reach for most without incurring massive debt; housing costs have appreciated by as much as 3-400% in many parts of the country; health care costs and insurance for those who can afford it have far outpaced wage growth AND inflation.
As for your last statement, you made my basic point -- the anti-Bernie sentiment is about a label, not policy or positions on issues (though I'm skeptical about that when I see the views of some "democrats" which means it's basically about, as a poster in another thread a week or so ago put it, butt-hurt. Never mind that Bernie has voted with Democrats more than most other Democrats in Congress throughout his career. Geesh!
brush
(53,470 posts)Reagan decimated the unions in the 80s by firing PATCO strikers; repug-run corporations have been off-shoring jobs for decades; repugs fought tooth and nail and quashed Hillary's universal healthcare proposals during the 90s; repugs have always and continue to fight against minimum wage growth, even overtime has just about been eliminated with repug-approved trickery, (they've also been fighting for decades to roll back FDR's and LBJ's social programs). And as I mentioned before, repug policies that favor the rich always caused recessions, economic hardship, job losses, home losses etc.
I'm sure that's not news to you. Put the blame where it belongs.
And as for Sanders, his reluctance to join the party worked against him, because even though he voted with the Democrats he never had a chance with super delegates in 2016 one reason being he entered the race late, and second being because most went with Hillary and her long history as a Democrat who worked, forged allinance with and raised funds for other Democrats.
Bernie didn't have any of that going for him because caucusing with is not the same as being a long-time party member whose policies could have had strong impact. Him keeping the party at shoulder length for years hurt him.
KPN
(15,587 posts)with all of that. No one can deny that. At the same time, blaming the Repugs for everything is disingenuous. Certainly, if nothing else it casts us Democrats as ineffective. But that's not the case. We've been extremely effective on social issues when you compare where we are today to the 1960s-70s. Likewise on environmental issues. The same cannot be said for labor, tax, trade, welfare and other issues. Even when we've had control, we've cut deals with Repugs that favored corporations and Wall Street over common people and the poor. Not too long ago we were buying into "chained CPI" for crying out loud -- a slow road to poverty! There are many other similar instances where Dems supported economic policies that have hurt the middle class/poor and in so doing disappointed many Party and now former party members and non-voters. Blaming everything on Repugs is irresponsible and a recipe for further party ineffectiveness. We have a tremendous opportunity with the dominant public anti-Trump sentiment to regain control of the legislature and executive branches at the fed level and in many States. We better take advantage of that opportunity in the next two election years and when we actually have control again. There are literally millions who are skeptical about us doing that based on past experience. Millions.
Regarding Bernie, you continue to make my case that it's more about the label and butt-hurt than anything else; as well as his campaign's case about the party establishment. Where's the commitment to policy. It certainly isn't in the record or results on the economic front.
brush
(53,470 posts)party with many allies who would've backed his 2016 bid but he chose his own path for years.
As we look back on it, there was little chance that a last minute interloper was going to get the party nomination over a long-time party member.
That's one reason why people join a party.
Frankly, it was Sanders' lost, and the Party's.
KPN
(15,587 posts)elected in Vermont as a Congressman early on running as a Dem. I don't have any real insight to that though.
He ran as a Dem in part because he did not believe he could win the GE as an Independent and, I assume, he did not want to give the WH to the Rs just by doing so. In retrospect, I think he ran initially to start a movement back to the left within the D Party. He was certainly successful in that regard. And, frankly, I really do not believe for one second that his candidacy was THE reason we didn't win in 2016. There were many other factors of far greater significance in my view. That's why I defend Bernie when he gets beat up here by those who hold that grudge. We can do better.
He and his stole it without an apology or sorry, IIRC they tried to lay the blame on the DNC
brush
(53,470 posts)Response to Sophia4 (Reply #89)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)It's not like Sanders voters are in the witness protection program, right?
To the extent that the Democratic Party has spoken to the issues that Bernie voters care about, I am sure that they have signed-up for e-mail lists, made donations, and otherwise made themselves known.
Or are you saying that the Democratic Party has been hostile to these issues, yet still feels entitled to use these voters as an ATM? That would be a problem, wouldn't it?
-app
Demsrule86
(68,348 posts)brush
(53,470 posts)That pronouncement came from the Sanders camp.
That is no way to ingratiate one's candidate into the party again.
The party wants to consolidate an email list for all Democrats to share.
The Sanders' campaign seems again to be signaling they don't want to do that.
If they don't that's fine, but I highly doubt that stance will get them on Dem primary ballots.
There will be many new, younger, attractive candidates running who won't be carrying that "been there, done that" divisiveness baggage.
Demsrule86
(68,348 posts)I am not trying to win anyone back...they want the GOP then let them go on their merry way.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)so those have to be won back.
A lot of them are probably pretty sick and tired of Trump. The Democratic Party has only to show the traditional values of the Democratic Party -- and they will return.
That is how we can win the Senate and House this year -- winning back a lot of disaffected voters in certain states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, etc.
I think we need a strong election-protection effort in those states. I worked election protection in Ohio in 2008. It was very important. I am inclined to think that it made a lot of difference. I also went to Washington state for election protection work at one point, and it made a huge difference there.
We need to have a strong Democratic victory this very year.
Here in California, we need to go into the rural Republican districts and talk to Republican voters about how the Republican tax bill will affect them and why they should switch parties and vote Democratic -- or not vote at all. I'm very willing to help out.
Demsrule86
(68,348 posts)I believe that some who voted for Sanders in the primary never had any intention of voting for him in a general...they were mostly in open primary states and just causing trouble. These do not represent sincere Sanders voters.
As for the rust belt, Trump promised them jobs...nothing to do with Sen. Sanders. And pres. Clinton signed NAFTA ...still an issue here. The MidWest is hurting, they took a chance on something different and there are racial issues too. We just took a Wisconsin senate (legislature) seat that had been held by the GOP for 17 years! We won by 10 %...a 27% improvement over 16 so I think many in the rustbelt (I live in Ohio) now realize Trump is a grifter and a liar. Healthcare is a big issue too. The tax cut is hated here. Many in Cleveland and other cities pay high taxes and the state taxes deduction limitation has enraged folks who see a giveaway to the rich and a generally screwing of working people. Also, Paul Ryan's comments about Social Security and Medicare are not playing well here. Even with the gerrymander, we have a chance to takes GOP seats.
Those Sanders supporter who were sincere in their beliefs mostly came back in my opinion. And a higher number of Sanders supporters voted for Sec. Clinton in 16 than Clinton supporters for Obama in 08. As for those few who did not...a giant fuck you goes out. If you didn't vote for Sec Clinton when the only other realistic choice was Trump than you are not and never were progressive. Are you listening JPR...fuck you all.
"While much was made of the so-called Bernie-or-bust phenomenon, the number of Sanders supporters who crossed party lines to vote for Trump in 2016 may not be that unusual. A 2010 study in Public Opinion Quarterly found that in the 2008 election 25 percent of those who voted for Clinton in the Democratic primary ended up voting for Republican John McCain, rather than Barack Obama, in the general election."
http://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-trump-2016-election-654320
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)Bernie's and Hillary's campaigns was Bernie's emphasis on economic disparity including the difficulty in getting jobs, the burden of repaying student loans and general unfairness in the economy. Hillary somehow did not emphasize the economic issues as much as Bernie.
So it is a mistake to say that people voted for Trump because of his stance on jobs and that Hillary and Bernie said the same things on that issue.
Jobs and the fact that the Republicans considered Hillary to have somehow done something wrong with her e-mails, etc. were the reasons that some who would more likely vote Democratic in the Midwest voted for Trump. Trump of course completely misrepresented, lied about what he would do about jobs although he did drop out of the TPP in order supposedly to protect jobs.
If Democrats want to unite the party, Democrats will have to emphasize economic, jobs and wages issues. Democrats will have to wrestle with the tax bill issue, keeping what is good for working people and getting rid of what is only good for the few at the top of the economic heap.
Democrats won by 3 million votes in 2016 but it was not a large enough margin to win the electoral college because those 3 million votes were in blue states that are cheated out of a voice in the electoral college.
Democrats need to embrace the Berniecrats if Democrats are to win in 2018 and 2020. It may be frustrating. Remember a lot of Berniecrats are young and have no experience in politics. But if we really want to win, we have to include in our Democratic Party people who voted for Bernie. It's up to the winners and the majority to reach out to people who may have disagreed and campaigned for Bernie and even voted for Trump.
Forgive and forget if you want to be elected in 2018 and 2020. And talk about economic issues. They are important. And the tax bill invites a vehement discussion.
Things look good for the Democratic Party this year. But we have to include people who voted for Bernie and Trump or we will lose. Time for bitterness is over. It has been more than a year. We as a nation and as working Democrats lose too much if we hold on to the bitterness.
Demsrule86
(68,348 posts)Go down to JPR and see who these asshats are ...promising not to vote for Democrats unless...blah blah...fuck them. I hope everyone of them pays through the nose for their stinking student loans...they basically sent Americans to their deaths. I have no intention of catering to Berniecrats who did not vote for Hillary... I don't even think they are progressive and any of their 'advice' would cause us to lose. Can I just say...I think it is unfair to link Bernie to these asshats...they are not progressive and not Democrats...90% of Bernie voters voted for Hillary...a bigger number than Clinton supporters who voted for Pres. Obama.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)who are the majority party came out to vote for her in Midwestern and certain other states.
Is unity in the Democratic Party unimportant?
How can the Democratic Party become more united and win in 2018 and 2020. The lack of unity in 2016 resulted in a loss, and that 10% of Bernie supporters who did not vote Democratic or maybe even stayed home plus those who switched from voting for Democrats to vote for Trump meant that Trump won.
What is the realistic solution to uniting the Democratic Party to the extent that we can win in 2018 and 2020?
If you have visited JPR, you know the problem I am talking about. What is your suggestion?
I don't mean to put you down or argue, but what is your proposal? I'm sincerely interested. How do we reunite the Democratic Party?
mchill
(1,015 posts)Ami Bera
This is not a particularly Democratic area, either.
"The guy they are running against him is a total newbie to politics, nice enough but very unprepared. Works as an atty for the state."
This is my friend's district and casual comment. She is very much involved with the California Democratic Party. She constantly talks about the Berniecrats disrupting things.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)out. We cannot win elections if "newbies" those intruders from the Progressive wing are snubbed and shut out by the "oldies" the traditionalists from the Hillary win. Everyone has to find common ground.
New candidates introduce new ideas. As Democrats we should welcome that. Let's stretch out our arms and allow the new ideas and encourage and listen to the rebels, decide which ideas can be incorporated and discuss the ones that can't.
Better a more progressive (or less progressive) candidate run against the sitting officeholder than that people stay home from elections. We all need to work together in the end.
The purpose of a primary is to enrich the "gene pool" of the party with new ideas and faces.
I remember way back when Barbara Boxer was a "newbie" in California politics. Everyone starts somewhere. Let's don't shut people out of the Democratic Party. When a party starts closing off and shutting new people and new ideas out, it's on ITS way out.
I love Patrick Leahy, and Dianne Feinstein and Joe Biden and all the rest of our elderly senators and representatives. But there comes a time when younger people have to take responsibility for the country and party.
Ami Bera and the Los Angeles Democratic Party will be just fine even if he is challenged from the left.
yardwork
(61,417 posts)It's up to citizens to protect our democracy by voting wisely. Anything less is complicit with the totalitarians.
msongs
(67,193 posts)niyad
(112,434 posts)TomCADem
(17,378 posts)He was running for the Democratic Party nomination.
KPN
(15,587 posts)TomCADem
(17,378 posts)Well, if Trump can deny climate change, why not deny that substantial resources are used by a party to conduct a caucus or primary to select a party's nominee.
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)He gets some funding and help for the Senate campaigns he runs, and he gave money to the DNC after he lost the primaries.
Fullduplexxx
(7,818 posts)Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Post removed
livetohike
(22,084 posts)brush
(53,470 posts)about them that we've been there and done that.
kstewart33
(6,551 posts)delisen
(6,039 posts)to take you on a several month trip where you want to go.
The vehicle is free, maintenance is free-can't beat that. You even get to criticize its performance and appearance.
This illustrates the difference between people who see a political party as a home and those who see it as a vehicle.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)aint playin
Response to beachbum bob (Reply #8)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
comradebillyboy
(10,119 posts)Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to Wwcd (Reply #11)
GaryCnf This message was self-deleted by its author.
Paladin
(28,202 posts)beastie boy
(9,059 posts)And to keep Republicans in charge of Congress.
TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)play the unwitting wedge in the Dem party...
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)as a Democrat with party support. They shouldn't make that mistake again.
Response to pnwmom (Reply #14)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
procon
(15,805 posts)This boils down to money. That list is like his own personal goldmine that he uses to dig up donations from his fans to benefit only himself. If he gave it up to the DNC they would also mine it for money, but that money would go toward helping elect Dems all over the country.
Cut the man loose. At this point, Sanders is more a hindrance than a help,so let him go do is own thing all by himself.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)to everyone on the list with a link to sign onto the DNC list.
The point is that a significant percent of the Sanders list would NOT want to get email from the DNC and certainly would not contribute to it -- preferring more left targeted organizations. Not to mention, many do not even consider themselves Democrats. What they mostly agree on are the issues that Sanders and Clinton argued for in one of the most progressive primaries we ever had. In spite of the Democratic party and the nominee accepting most of these positions, there are many that do not see the DNC, the DSC, or the DCCC as largely progressive. It is very possible that most of the people on that list might not even open a DNC email or worse, resent that the DNC had their email.
However, the DNC can coordinate with Sanders when they want a consistent message going out. Assuming Sanders has people who can still send out emails, he could send either the same message or - if there is reason to - a complimentary email that is more "Sanders". You have a group of people who - at least 2 years ago - respected Sanders. His name on that message might be more powerful to that group of people than the same message sent labeled DNC.
My reason for believing this is that I KNOW I was far more likely to read and contribute to candidates after getting emails from johnkerry.com than any of the standard Democratic solicitations. Kerry wrote very persuasive arguments for supporting various Democrats and, as far as I was concerned, he was a trusted source. I was in a relatively small portion of the Democratic population for whom Kerry became the nominee I most believed in in my life. I know there is a group - I suspect it is much larger for whom Sanders was that inspiring candidate. The highest concentration of those people to be found are likely to be on his list. Something from Sanders will be more powerful. (The Kerry comparison probably understates this because Kerry was far more a loyal, liberal Democrat and Sanders is an independent who caucuses with the Democrats. I would imagine that their supporters might have a similar difference.)
Another memory about the Kerry list was that in 2007 there were many angry people here on DU who were furious that "Kerry gave his list to Obama". In fact, he did not do that for the very reason cited by the angry Clinton and Edwards people - that they did not give him their email so he could give it to anyone or anything else. What he did do - when he endorsed Obama is to send an email with his endorsement speech and a link to Obama's website where people could sign up. Beyond that, the email list was used only by him. He closed johnkerry.com completely when he became Secretary of State.
I realize that the DNC is different than one of the competing primary campaigns, but Sanders doing that for the DNC would allow him to keep faith with people who would be angry if he gave anyone the email list while allowing the DNC to "get" some new email addresses. I would note that the list of email addresses from people who WANTED to be on the DNC list would be far more valuable than the full list.
Response to karynnj (Reply #17)
Post removed
karynnj
(59,475 posts)This goes far beyond the accusations that his data person "looked" at some of the Clinton stuff in the DNC's database.
Not to mention, I think Sanders fundraising was almost entirely internet based -- and most was from people going to his web site. By and large, even if Sanders got the Clinton email or phone list, it would not be a list that would be very good for telemarketing - or even emailing to. Most people on that list would be solidly for Clinton.
Not to mention, this does not change anything I said on what might be the most successful way for the Democrats to "use" Sanders email list.
Response to karynnj (Reply #28)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)the primary. As I said conspiracy theory -- and weird ones at that.
Response to karynnj (Reply #46)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
Cha
(295,903 posts)The fundamentals are whats going to be important, not whether we have Bernies email list or not, Dillon told the news outlet."
From the link..
I agree.
Wwcd
Response to Cha (Reply #70)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)All this excitement is ridiculous.
Bernie is probably right. Those who supported him and want to support Democrats now are probably already on the Democratic list.
Those who supported Bernie but don't generally want to support Democrats probably would not respond to communications from the Democratic Party anyway.
Democrats are wiser to just respect Bernie's wish to protect his list.
They are just :"Those who supported him and want to support Democrats now are probably already on the Democratic list." What does this even mean...what list were they on before? So you are talking independent third party voters? People for Stein?
Interesting.
Wow the peeps that supported BS as a Dem hate Dems and refuse to respond to them. On again off again and they are very fickle.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)It's easy to get their names and addresses. And if the Democratic Party invites comments on websites or signatures on petitions that would appeal to Bernie supporters, the Democratic Party will get the names without having to ask Bernie.
It's very easy if you have a good attitude.
I should explain. In California you have to be registered as a Democrat to vote in a Democratic primary -- or as an independent and know enough to request a certain kind of ballot.
A lot of Bernie supporters are registered as Independents or as Democrats in California. All the Democratic Party has to do is to send door-to-door canvassers to the addresses of Independents to find out whether they are Democrats.
In my neighborhood we get canvassers before every election.
This is easy here. Just go door to door. That's how you win elections anyway. Most Bernie supporters agree with a lot of Democratic views on the issues. The Democratic Party does not need Bernie's list.
I've been an active Democrat for many years. This is ordinary work that we who are active do.
It's very easy if you have a good attitude.
Why do we need to get BS supporters with a so said "good attitude", they should be after the same things we all believe in. Why are they so hard to get?
So are you going door to door to make this happen? I am not from CA. you are. You are part of the Democratic party. Do it!
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)We also table at for instance farmers' markets.
You write up a petition and get people to sign it. Then you have their addresses, telephone numbers, etc.
Demsrule86
(68,348 posts)This is true in every state I have ever lived in.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)My neighbors across the street voted Peace and Freedom and I do not know what all for years. Reaching out beyond party lines on issues and bringing people to vote for Democrats can work. The tax bill and Trump's rudeness are good playing cards for Democrats this year.
You win elections by bringing in voters who might not have voted for your party in the past. It is especially important to bring in young voters.'
Another way you can reach out is by putting up a table at events like the farmers' market and registering and talking to voters there. You will talk to Republicans, Independents and Democrats. Only put charming, patient people at tables. It's a great way to reach out to voters who may not be registered as Democrats. Lots of women goo to farmers' markets. Smile. Be friendly. Don't worry too much about the politics or persuasion. Make a good, warm and friendly, welcoming impression. That is what wakes voters up and allows them to check into the Democratic candidates at home after they meet you. If they like you, they will be open to voting for your candidate.
Do this also on college campuses and at other events.
Demsrule86
(68,348 posts)etc. On election day, in the late afternoon we get lists of those who have not voted and go back asking if they need rides...I drove a number of people to the polls in 16. And I am proud to say our small Ohio city went for Clinton...wish I could say the same for the state.
progressoid
(49,825 posts)Don't know about the Clinton call lists because I only did door knocking in 2016.
lapucelle
(18,037 posts)and designated as "No Party Preference" voters.
No Party Preference Information: Voting in the California Presidential Primary Elections
Voters who registered to vote without stating a political party preference are known as No Party Preference (NPP) voters. NPP voters were formerly known as "decline-to-state" or DTS voters.
For presidential elections: NPP voters, unless they choose otherwise (see below), will receive a non-partisan ballot that does not include presidential candidates. A nonpartisan ballot contains only the names of candidates for voter-nominated offices and local nonpartisan offices and measures.
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/political-parties/no-party-preference/
snip--------------------------------------------------
Can you be registered as an Independent?
For the Democratic primary, if you're unaffiliated (no party preference, in California), you can vote in the Democratic primary. But if you're registered in the American Independent Party, that's a party affiliation that's neither Democrat nor Republican, so you can vote only for AIP candidates.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)I appreciate your clarifying my post.
We always explain the meaning and history of the American Independent Party when we register voters.
I think my post was unclear about Independent voters in California. They register no party preference.
Thanks so much.
Hekate
(90,189 posts)...ultimately had a large say in the contents of the Democratic platform at the Dem Convention.
In what way have he and his supporters returned the favor since then? Because in the political world of reality the Party did him and his a massive favor. Massiive.
Yet here we are a year into a virtual fascist and racist takeover of the federal government and the lower courts with certain persons still saying they will stay home or vote third party should their favored candidate not make it out of the primaries.
Me.
(35,454 posts)And...as Our Revo said they'd be open to supporting the Republicans, is that who they'll be sharing the list with, including the data stolen from Hillary.
Response to Me. (Reply #44)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
Me.
(35,454 posts)why are we Dems expected to put up with this? I feel like we've been robbed and nothing is being done about it but rewards, in the form of a free pass, are being handed out.
Wwcd
(6,288 posts)Some twisted s***, isn't it.
And thank you for a truthful answer...you don't often get that with this subject.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,097 posts)a lot to say and it would not be controversial anymore, but I cant.
Me.
(35,454 posts)Though I suspect there will be more freedom to express our thoughts and support only DEms as time moves through this year.
The Polack MSgt
(13,159 posts)Where did you intend to post this? Not on DU obviously - DU is for Sturm und Drang.
Like the old Monty Python skit "I wanted and argument - Sorry this is abuse"
karynnj
(59,475 posts)I hope that more people will move beyond the camps formed in 2015/2016. I would have expected it to have become better by now. I know this did not happen after 2000 or 2004.
The Democratic party needs everyone pushing for victory in 2018. However, as we do not have the Presidency, we do not really have a head of the party. (I know people say that is the DNC head, but in reality, that has not been the case at least in modern times.) That means that we will and should have many voices trying to define our vision. I heard Keith Ellison do a great job in a speech in Burlington where he spoke of essentially the same things as the 2016 platform, but called it an American vision. You could say that Oprah's speech also expressed a vision. Until we again have a Presidential nominee, any calls to have ONE voice are premature. However, the goals, policy and vision defined by any potential leader of the party are all moves in the same direction. Until then, any path to reach people that works should be used.
mcar
(42,210 posts)Isn't Bernie on the DNC's Unity committee? How does this selfish act lead to unity?
Seems to me that when Bernie says unity, he really means do what I want.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)My argument is that even if there was ONE absolutely identical message to get out, it might be read by more and accepted by more if the message is sent to people who signed up for the DNC by the DNC and to the Sanders list by Sanders. (Obviously, the source of the text should be attributed to whomever wrote it.)
mcar
(42,210 posts)But that's still no reason to withhold the list. The DNC could send out the same message, one from Bernie, another from someone else.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)under the Sanders name? Other than being more complicated, how does that help?
mcar
(42,210 posts)How does that double standard help?
karynnj
(59,475 posts)Response to karynnj (Reply #40)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)Response to karynnj (Reply #47)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
brush
(53,470 posts)All Democratic candidates share.
If Sanders' camp doesn't want to do that, that's fine but good luck with getting on Dem primary ballots with that selfish attitude.
There will be new, younger, attractive candidates who won't have that "been there, done that already" feel about them.
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)list. And if they aren't, it's probably because they don't want to be on the Democratic Party's list.
So what difference does it make?
A lot of the information is probably already too old anyway.
Making a big fuss over this is just absurd.
Justice
(7,182 posts)and invite them to support the DNC or Congressional Democrats or Senate Democrats.
For people that get emails from Sanders - does he do this now? Has he every done it?
Does Sanders invite people to support individual Democratic candidates? Has he ever done it?
I think this statement is wrong - "significant percent of the Sanders list would NOT want to get email from the DNC" and there is no need to say that when the real solution is just for Sanders to send an email to invite supporters to sign up with DNC.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)I would say that there were TWO main points - one that Sanders could send an email inviting people to join the main Democratic lists. The other was that there is an advantage to having this parallel outreach under Sanders name. I used the example of the Kerry list which raised a huge amount of money for candidates in 2006. I also know that in 2005, allies of the DSC tried to (unsuccessfully) publicly pressure (using Daily Kos) Kerry into giving all his PAC money to the DSC - even as they ignored that DSC head, Schumer, actually had more money in his PAC.
Sanders has supported individual Democratic candidates and there were many DU threads on that. As to my comment being wrong, neither of us have any proof that could definitely decide who is right. I would argue that it comes down to the meaning of the word "significant" and I think it is very hard to argue that the proportion is insignificant. Because Sanders did NOT become the nominee, his list never expanded to get people for whom he was not the preferred candidate. Therefore, that list contains ONLY the portion of the population who supported a candidate who was pretty far from the organized center of the party. In addition, there might be many on that list who saw the DNC as against their nominee - even before the email hack.
What is known is that - at one time - these people liked Sanders enough to sign up for his email list AND they have not yet unsubscribed. This suggests that they either want or are at least not annoyed to get emails from him. It seems obvious to me that this is a self selected group of people for whom Bernie Sanders is the best messenger of a Democratic message. Consider that in addition to the Sanders list, there are MANY independent activists groups that are also messaging people. Move on and Bold Progressives are two of them -- should they also give their lists to the DNC and disappear?
Your post seems to assume that it would be best if the DNC was the exclusive messenger to Democrats and independents usually allied with us. I would argue that more is lost by having one voice than is gained.
Hekate
(90,189 posts)Historic NY
(37,449 posts)then blows smoke out of his ass.
Wwcd
(6,288 posts)Bank fraud Jane also.
Bla bla Pfft pffft
mcar
(42,210 posts)Gothmog
(143,999 posts)Shocked I say Shocked
disillusioned73
(2,872 posts)nothing has changed..people are so easily manipulated and/or disingenuous w/ their faux outrage..
shanny
(6,709 posts)just more shit-stirring imo
Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Post removed
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)didn't do what every other Democrat did, when they agreed to use the Democratic data base, and share his own data.
Wow.
Weaver is STILL a staffer. As recently as a week ago, Weaver made an official Sanders statement about the Federal investigation of Jane Sanders.
FSogol
(45,357 posts)Justice
(7,182 posts)Maybe Weaver is correct and the Bernie supporters would not support a Democrat or the DNC.
Why should Weaver (or Bernie) get to decide that? Shouldn't the people on the list decide? Shouldn't they get an email and be invited to participate - and then decide for themselves?
Response to Justice (Reply #41)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)Last edited Tue Jan 16, 2018, 05:41 PM - Edit history (1)
Nader-esque.
Wwcd
(6,288 posts)His words.
And don't get me started on "Rape Fantasy"
Nothing says Democratic Party like some 30 yr old's deep dark thoughts on Rape!
Ya. Go bern.
R B Garr
(16,920 posts)That divisiveness is obviously intentional.
samnsara
(17,570 posts)pecosbob
(7,502 posts)I'm not voting for Bernie Sanders in 2018...I'm also not voting for Hillary in 2018...can we move on now people?
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,110 posts)Congress to Democratic control... first things first.
Justice
(7,182 posts)pnwmom
(108,925 posts)with the DNC after the election -- as every other candidate agreed, all the way down the ticket. This is a way to build up the party for EVERYONE.
Bernie has broken the commitment, and we should remember that next time he wants to run under the party banner.
lark
(23,003 posts)There is no nominating process for Democratic Socialism. The only question is does he let Putin/drumpf or Stein types push him into running again? While i do like his policies, I am no longer fond of the man. I voted for him in the primaries last time, but highly doubt I'd do that again.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)I wouldnt either.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Was the DNC impartial in 2016,
or did someone have their finger on the scale?
And now they want Bernie's email list of supporters?
Uh, no.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)with the DNC to help build the DNC database and help everyone in the party.
Bernie's the only one who reneged on the deal.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)The DNC didn't play fair with him?
Isn't that what former DNC Chair Donna Brazile said?
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)through Hillary's proprietary data in the database, and even downloaded files of Hillary's into their part of the database.
That certainly wasn't playing fair, which is why he fired the ringleader.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Good for Bernie.
He's an honorable man!
End of discussion.
Bye bye
Response to left-of-center2012 (Reply #106)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Response to left-of-center2012 (Reply #110)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Wwcd
(6,288 posts)I have no idea what this is about & unless its an answer to the data theft, then it's irrelevant.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)when the DNC gave him access to its database.
emulatorloo
(43,979 posts)N/T
Response to left-of-center2012 (Reply #87)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)I thought the agreement was that the DNC had certain voter database information that it would make available to all candidates. I don't remember an agreement by candidates to provide the DNC with donor information or, indeed, with any other follow-up they made based on the DNC's information.
BTW, that's why there was all this bullshit (repeated in this thread) about Bernie "stealing" the Clinton campaign's information. The Bernie staffer thought that the DNC wasn't properly securing each candidate's info, confirmed this suspicion by ascertaining that the barriers between campaigns could be breached, and reported the problem.
Putting that digression aside, though -- you've made an assertion about an agreement and a charge about Bernie reneging. Your statements don't accord with my memory but it's been a while and I might have forgotten something. Might I trouble you to provide a link for your serious accusation?
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)and even copied some items and put them out in the (figurative) garage in a box with their name on it.
Here's a link about the DNC and Bernie's voter/donor info. Look at page 3/16, item e, of the agreement
https://www.fastcompany.com/3061788/even-more-valuable-than-his-endorsement-bernie-may-have-started-sharing-data
On Tuesday morning in a carefully choreographed appearance in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Bernie Sanders ended his bid for the presidency and endorsed his fierce rival, the establishment candidate Hillary Clinton, much to the chagrin of millions of hardcore Bernie supporters.
SNIP
Its long been the strategy of the Democratic Party to pool the voter data collected by Democratic campaigns in a master voter record so that future campaigns could borrow it, benefit from it, and add data to it.
Both the Clinton and Sanders campaigns started with the DNC voter file, then began adding their own proprietary data to it at the start of the campaign. The campaigns use the same software platformNGP VAN for collecting and managing this data; but during the primary the campaigns proprietary voter data was kept in separate silos.
Then, on December 16 of last year, a Sanders data staffer got access to some proprietary Clinton voter data (the result of a software bug), and when the DNC found out it cut the Bernie campaigns access to its voter records in NGP VAN. Bernie sued the DNC for damages and the restoration of access to the voter records. The staffer was fired, and the whole mess was eventually worked out between the parties.
Buried in the court documents is the data agreement between the Sanders campaign and the DNC, which spells out the fate of his voter data. In short, the agreement states that if Sanders drops out of the primary race, the campaigns proprietary voter data is then joined with the DNCs master file, which it can then lend it to whatever campaign it sees fit. So, legally at least, and barring any separate verbal agreement between the parties, the Clinton camp can use the data for modeling and targeting right now.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)The DNC data base contains the list of voters, updated with information of how they stand on a given election. In the primaries, this usually contained info on whether they intended to vote and in the primary (and was it the Democratic primary) and if so who they favored. Every campaign I called or canvased for had a pretty similar scale where you indicated how strong that preference was. In the general election, it was the information was similar. That information was helpful for GOTV, but it had long term value as well.
( I don't know how well it was used because - at least in Morris County NJ, the number of inaccurate records where people had moved, changed phone numbers etc was pretty high. I wonder if they really did use our info on that to clean the files after the election.)
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)was supposed to be given to the DNC in exchange for renting the DNC database. The DNC database would thus be enlarged, which would help all candidates down the road.
The agreement is in the second document below, page 3 out of 16, and the clause is "e."
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000151-b72f-d1ae-add5-f76f14db0001
karynnj
(59,475 posts)Nothing anywhere in the op or in your link says that he did not transfer his "voter information". In fact, as they were using a DNC database, the DNC had all the data collected from everyone. They controlled the "walls or barriers" during the primaries - and I assume they worked to reconcile the info from various campaigns to get a more accurate data base going forward.
Given that the DNC controlled the database - remember when they did not let the Sanders people access it, it was never an issue of Bernie "giving" them the information. It was THEIR system.
What Weaver is speaking of is the email list that supporters added their emails to -- this is NOT what the DNC contract refers to.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)and other candidates collected on their own, including contact info (which includes emails) was supposed to be shared with the DNC AFTER the primaries. That's what they failed to do.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)They started with the voter information from a state and any past information they had. That info is used to generate the lists that you call from or canvass. This lists is designed to ideally have every voter in the district. (in states like NJ, it includes the registration info - D, R, independent)
The information entered by any campaign included any info on who they would vote for - in the primary AND if the person indicated that they were going to vote Republican. If you ever volunteered that information that you collected is what the campaign inputs into the database -- and that is the information that the contract is speaking about.
The email list that is referred to is the list that received email from Bernie including requests for money. This is a list that people signed up to be on.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)with the DNC after the primaries were over.
https://www.fastcompany.com/3061788/even-more-valuable-than-his-endorsement-bernie-may-have-started-sharing-data
On Tuesday morning in a carefully choreographed appearance in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Bernie Sanders ended his bid for the presidency and endorsed his fierce rival, the establishment candidate Hillary Clinton, much to the chagrin of millions of hardcore Bernie supporters.
SNIP
Its long been the strategy of the Democratic Party to pool the voter data collected by Democratic campaigns in a master voter record so that future campaigns could borrow it, benefit from it, and add data to it.
Both the Clinton and Sanders campaigns started with the DNC voter file, then began adding their own proprietary data to it at the start of the campaign. The campaigns use the same software platformNGP VAN for collecting and managing this data; but during the primary the campaigns proprietary voter data was kept in separate silos.
Then, on December 16 of last year, a Sanders data staffer got access to some proprietary Clinton voter data (the result of a software bug), and when the DNC found out it cut the Bernie campaigns access to its voter records in NGP VAN. Bernie sued the DNC for damages and the restoration of access to the voter records. The staffer was fired, and the whole mess was eventually worked out between the parties.
Buried in the court documents is the data agreement between the Sanders campaign and the DNC, which spells out the fate of his voter data. In short, the agreement states that if Sanders drops out of the primary race, the campaigns proprietary voter data is then joined with the DNCs master file, which it can then lend it to whatever campaign it sees fit. So, legally at least, and barring any separate verbal agreement between the parties, the Clinton camp can use the data for modeling and targeting right now.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)It speaks of pooling the VOTER DATA. The data that is referred to - the proprietary Clinton and proprietary Sanders data, which were kept in separate silos on VGP VAN. NOTE THIS IS THE DNC's system controlled by the DNC.
Now look at the second highlight. It refers to the proprietary voter data and says that all campaigns agree that after they are out, the data belongs to the DNC.
NOTE: This is NOT their donor or email list.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Are you aware that all candidates, up and down the ticket, agree to share their information as a condition for using the DNC database? That works to improve the Database for EVERYONE.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Except Donna Brazile showed us in her book how the DNC was partial to just one candidate.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)with the DNC, one before and one after the primary win, and only the second contract gave her a preference.
Hillary and Bernie signed the SAME agreement with the DNC about sharing their data, and only Hillary kept her written, contractural promise. She has donated all her data to the party to use however it wishes.
https://www.fastcompany.com/3061788/even-more-valuable-than-his-endorsement-bernie-may-have-started-sharing-data
On Tuesday morning in a carefully choreographed appearance in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Bernie Sanders ended his bid for the presidency and endorsed his fierce rival, the establishment candidate Hillary Clinton, much to the chagrin of millions of hardcore Bernie supporters.
SNIP
Its long been the strategy of the Democratic Party to pool the voter data collected by Democratic campaigns in a master voter record so that future campaigns could borrow it, benefit from it, and add data to it.
Both the Clinton and Sanders campaigns started with the DNC voter file, then began adding their own proprietary data to it at the start of the campaign. The campaigns use the same software platformNGP VAN for collecting and managing this data; but during the primary the campaigns proprietary voter data was kept in separate silos.
Then, on December 16 of last year, a Sanders data staffer got access to some proprietary Clinton voter data (the result of a software bug), and when the DNC found out it cut the Bernie campaigns access to its voter records in NGP VAN. Bernie sued the DNC for damages and the restoration of access to the voter records. The staffer was fired, and the whole mess was eventually worked out between the parties.
Buried in the court documents is the data agreement between the Sanders campaign and the DNC, which spells out the fate of his voter data. In short, the agreement states that if Sanders drops out of the primary race, the campaigns proprietary voter data is then joined with the DNCs master file, which it can then lend it to whatever campaign it sees fit. So, legally at least, and barring any separate verbal agreement between the parties, the Clinton camp can use the data for modeling and targeting right now.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Beartracks
(12,761 posts)... some want to make sure it gets stirred HARD.
=========
ms liberty
(8,478 posts)Lots of energy involved in venting about what Someone said about what they think Someone Else might do. Mind you, they never reported on what Someone Else said when they asked them about what Someone said about what they might do, so we don't even know if they asked Someone Else about what Someone said. So the piece is all about Someone speculating about Someone Else.
So yea, shit stirring 101, from several directions. Some here are lapping it up because, Bernie.
emulatorloo
(43,979 posts)That incompetent fools strategery and hyperbolic bullshit is one of the reasons Sanders lost the primary IMHO.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)And millions of less votes.
emulatorloo
(43,979 posts)Cha
(295,903 posts)The fundamentals are whats going to be important, not whether we have Bernies email list or not, Dillon told the news outlet."
I agree.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)And technically, Bernie doesn't even merit discussion until he starts putting a 'D' after his name again...
Eliot Rosewater
(31,097 posts)I tried to act surprised. Cant.
I also noticed today his pal is posting at DU about why isnt the media taking Chelsea Manning seriously.
sigh
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1017475403
Wonder why he cares so much.
Cha
(295,903 posts)Response to Eliot Rosewater (Reply #76)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Post removed
Devil Child
(2,728 posts)Base on speculation by Jeff Weaver. No where does the article provide evidence that Sen. Sander will refuse to work with the DNC.
Just another anti-Bernie hit-piece.
emulatorloo
(43,979 posts)to selling comic books
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)will be like all of us come November.
Vote or stay home.
This is not the time to play games.
Response to wasupaloopa (Reply #105)
Wwcd This message was self-deleted by its author.
OnyxSharpie
(33 posts)Its clear hell be running in 2020. If he gives up that list, itll alienate his supporters more than it did when he supported Hillarys campaign. Those small donations were what powered his campaign in 2016 - no way could he take that chance. Now if he wasnt planning to run again in 2020, Id say he had no reason not to give up the list.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)on the Democratic Ticket in 2020. You don't support the party, you cannot run under it's banner.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Vinca
(50,170 posts)Bernie ran as a Democrat and it should be all hands on deck to oust Trump.
haele
(12,581 posts)In many - if not most - states, if you run in a state party Primary and take party money, your lists of supporters and likely voters are the property of the state party after the primary. That means email lists, also.
Haele
LexVegas
(6,005 posts)lapucelle
(18,037 posts)to do everything in his power to help those who entrusted him with that responsibility to reach out to as many potential voters as possible.
RandiFan1290
(6,206 posts)If I wanted the DNC to have my email address I would send it to them.
harun
(11,348 posts)DNC is doing everything they can to thwart Progressives, why would Progressives want them to have our email address?