Bernie Sanders threatens to try and steal the nomination with Super Delegates, lol.

[Meldread]

I just watch Sanders given an interview to Rachel where he sketched out his plan on how he is going to win. In short, he basically said although he hopes he has more pledged delegates than Clinton, the truth of the matter is that it will come down to Super Delegates. He is hoping to make the case to the Super Delegates to persuade them that he is the better candidate against Trump. If that fails, he is planning to basically threaten the Super Delegates in the states where he won by a huge margin (such as New Hampshire) Donald Trump style, 'Hey there, Mr. Super Delegate, I won big in your state. That's a nice elected office you have there, it would be unfortunate if something would happen to it.'

I give Bernie kudos for finally deciding to fight. However, it's a bit ironic that this is his plan, considering that he and his supporters were talking about how undemocratic Super Delegates are and how they should be eliminated. So, now that he has fallen behind to the point where it is virtually mathematically impossible for him to overtake Clinton in pledged delegates, his plan is to toss all those sweet principles aside and do whatever is necessary to win.

I don't have any doubt that hordes of Sanders supporters will throw their principles behind as well and do the same. If he is able to pull it off it will be impressive, and he will certainly win my support for the nomination. It will make up for how he let DWS walk all over him. Of course, he still has to explain how he basically told the majority of the Democratic Party to go fuck themselves... but... oh well.

I admire those who are willing to make power moves like this--make no mistake, Clinton would have done it as well. I just find the 100% reversal so very delicious.

[Cheese Sandwich]

1. What bullshit. He did no such thing.

[Meldread]

7. Did you see the interview?

Rachel: I am not sure I understand, are you saying that even if you were behind in delegates--I know you think you won't be--but if you were behind in delegates; you would take this all the way to the convention and try and convince the supers?

Sanders: We are going to do the best that we can in any and every way that we can to win. But when you have states, for example like New Hampshire, where we won by 22 points, in other states where we've won by 25 or 30 points, I think it is not unreasonable for people of those states to say to those super delegates, "Hey, how about representing the people of our state and the outcome of the caucus or the primary?"

This is a direct quote, and it was a follow up question. Prior to that he said he was going to try and make the case to other super delegates that he was the person most likely to win against Trump, and that is why they should support him.

Bernie Sanders officially has a Super Delegate strategy. This is after spending the entire campaign condemning them.

Don't get me wrong. I am not saying it is a bad strategy. I am 100% in the camp that you should do everything in your power to win, and therefore if he can pull it off kudos to him. He will have my respect, my vote, and my support. He will have answered the lingering questions that I had about him, which caused me to reluctantly cast my vote for Hillary.

I just find it funny that so many 'I'm too pure to be tainted by trying to win' Sanders supporters are now going to have to explain why they are reversing their position WHILE AT THE SAME TIME claiming that they were actually standing behind principles in the past when Hillary Clinton was planning to do the exact same thing.

[Cheese Sandwich]

16. Ya I saw it. You're totally misrepresenting what he said. Or you don't understand it.

Clinton has most of the superdelegate endorsements right now. He wants some of them to switch. OK cool. So what.

Your headline "Bernie Sanders threatens to try and steal the nomination with Super Delegates" is bullshit.

[Meldread]

21. If Clinton is ahead...

If Clinton achieves the most pledged delegates and has to win the popular vote, which it seems very likely that she will... then what does that mean to you?

Sanders will be overturning the will of the voters of the Democratic Party, using Super Delegates to make himself the nominee. THIS IS HIS PLAN.

This is fine, it isn't breaking any rules. However, this goes AGAINST what he has said in the past regarding Super Delegates, and what many of his supporters said in the past about them as well. They called them undemocratic and wanted the system abolished. They were afraid that they would be used to put Clinton over the top, as she would quite clearly do so if she had to in order to win.

Now Sanders is saying that this is his plan. This would be going against the will of the voters. This is him tossing aside his old position on Super Delegates. His supporters certainly thought it was stealing an election when it was clearly Clinton and DWS's fallback strategy. Now that it is Sanders strategy it no longer becomes stealing?

[Cheese Sandwich]

23. That's a lame Clinton campaign talking point.

And Rachel played her campaign role well by asking the question THREE times. He absolutely did not say he thinks the superdelegates should override the pledged delegates. He dodged the question the first 2 times and on the third ask he said "I don't want to speculate".

Where are you finding the transcript?

Clinton has a massive lead with superdelegates. It's nonsense to suggest Sanders could get a majority of them to switch with anything less than 2026 pledged delegates, which would be just more than half.

The Clinton campaign is pushing this lame talking point based on the theory that you always accuse your opponent of committing whichever dirty trick you are getting ready to commit.

[Meldread]

24. There is no Clinton Campaign talking point, LOL.

If you think I am some how a rah-rah Clinton supporter, then you've lost your mind. Just read some of my other posts in this thread.

I support Sanders effort here 100%. The entire reason I cast my vote against him in the Primary was because I didn't believe he had what it took to actually lead a revolution. Once he got to the White House, he'd be knifed in the back by establishment Democrats and eaten alive by Republicans. I didn't believe he commanded enough ruthlessness and political skill to actually do what would have been required of him as both a revolutionary candidate and a President. This would have then in turn damaged the entire liberal movement.

I made that decision after he failed to deal with the DWS issue. He let DWS effectively campaign for Clinton and spit in his face openly. She humiliated him again and again in public. Allowing her to get away with that sent a message to the Democratic Establishment that Bernie Sanders was a squish, and as leader of the Party they wouldn't have to follow him. They could work against him. He needed to knife DINO Debbie to send a message to the other Democrats that if you crossed him, he wasn't afraid to purge one of his own. He needed to demand that she step down (especially as he knew he had his own ally waiting in the wings to take control of the DNC), and then if she failed to do so he needed to campaign for her primary challenger. He needed to go to war with her, openly. He failed to do that. This cost him my support.

Do I think Sanders is going to somehow pull off this stunning upset? No. I think it is a huge Hail Mary pass. However, it really is his only path to victory at this point. If he is able to pull it off, it will have proven my judgement of him wrong, and I would become an enthusiastic supporter. My fears about him would have been completely erased.

There is virtually no chance of him being successful, but this is now his strategy. I am watching and holding out a glimmer of hope for his success. I actually believe he has a good case to make to the Super Delegates. There also might be some... indirect promises made. "Hey, I hear France is nice come this time next year. Did you know we'll need a new Ambassador when I am President?"

[Cheese Sandwich]

25. "this is now his strategy" .... no it really is not

That's not his strategy and good thing because there's no way it could succeed.

Hillary has overwhelming dominance with superdelegates and she will hold most of that. But many are also uncommitted.

If Sanders can win the elected delegate count, can reach 2026 pledged delegates, then MAYBE superdelegates will realign to neutralize HRC's superdelegate advantanage.

Bernie's only path is to reach 2026+ pledged delegates and then hope for supers to shift around a bit.

Superdelegates are part of the picture. Bernie certainly won't be able to win without peeling off some of Hillary's. That's not any change of strategy.

[Meldread]

29. You are not listening to me.

I KNOW THAT BERNIE SANDERS HAS VIRTUALLY ZERO CHANCE OF SWAYING SUPER DELEGATES!

There.

Sanders has stated his plan now involves trying to sway the Super Delegates. This is fine. This is a legitimate use of the system and the rules as written. It is unlikely to happen, but this is really the only way forward as the math is strongly against him.

I actually think Sanders has a strong case to make as to why he'd be a better General Election candidate. However, I don't think it will actually move anyone. I admire the man for fighting all the way to the bitter end, though.

[Cheese Sandwich]

36. How many would we really need to switch? At this point if only 100 supers shift from HRC to Bernie..

it could neutralize her lead with superdelegates.

So in the unlikely, but possible, situation where he came into the convention with a lead in pledged delegates, it's very easy for me to imagine 100 supers shifting from HRC to Sanders.


soure: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

===============

712 total superdelegates

356 needed for half.

245 still on the table

26 currently for Sanders

467 currently for Clinton

=================

So imagine Bernie coming into the convention with a majority of pledged delegates. It's easy to then see how he could reach 356 superdelegates by combining uncommiteds and peeling off about 100 of HRC's.

I understand this is unlikely. I'm just saying it's not a new thing in his strategy. We've been talking about it for months on this very website.

[Meldread]

41. ...but he is not going to lead in pledged delegates.

He is going to have to win every state going forward by at least 58% or more--EVERY SINGLE TIME--to actually beat Clinton in pledged delegates. That's the math on pledged delegates.

His best case scenario is for him to continue winning states, and then take New York and California as well. If he can take New York and win most of the remaining states, he can make an argument to the Super Delegates that Clinton has some serious electability issues. He can argue that a sizable portion of the Democratic Party, despite being told the contest is over, is still not rallying behind Hillary. This means they are voting against her--they are rejecting her. He could point out that she couldn't even win in the state in which she was a Senator.

If he is still doing well in the national polls against Trump as compared to Hillary then he can use those as well.

He can use Clinton's high unfavorability against her.

He can then turn to all the attacks Trump has used against his rivals during the Republican primaries and point out how many of those attacks work against Clinton, and how he is immune to them.

He can then turn to the various scandals that loom over her and the baggage she brings with her as a nominee.

These are all strong arguments against Clinton that work very well for Sanders. He could then point to his long record as Senator, and point out how he has always been willing to work with establishment Democrats to get things done.

Finally, for those that aren't swayed by his arguments, he can have indirect offers and promises made--such as handing out ambassadorships, and letting people know that there might be a place in his cabinet for them.

If he can bridge the gap enough in pledged delegates, keeping it close, he might be able to do enough to sway just enough Super Delegates to his side to pull off an upset. It's a long shot that is not likely to work. However, if he is going to win, this is the path he must take.

[TM99]

37. 3 VT superdelegates pledge for Bernie Sanders

"The people of Vermont have spoken," said Condos, who earned his superdelegate status as the vice chairman of the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State.

Jerman is the vice chairman of the Vermont Democratic Party. Both Deans and Jerman said their choices do not reflect the views of the state party, which is officially neutral in the contest between Sanders and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, Gov. Peter Shumlin and former Gov. Howard Dean have all pledged to support Clinton, sparking a backlash among some people who them going against the wishes of Vermont voters. Sanders overwhelmingly won the Vermont primary, earning 86.1 percent of the vote and winning every town. Clinton failed to meet the threshold to win any of the state's 14 pledged delegates.

Dean tangled with people via Twitter earlier this week over the issue, pointing to Clinton's greater vote tally nationwide and saying he had to do what he thought best.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2016/03/08/three-vermont-superdelegates-pledge-bernie-sanders/81484706/

[BeyondGeography]

2. Sounds like a Plans R Us plan

I hope he got it on sale.

He's in denial. Someone needs to tell him to stop embarrassing himself. But when you've gone your own way all your life who might that be?

[think]

5. Hillary embarrasses herself every day. Her time as SoS showed that well...

Your country has a horrible human rights record but needs weapons? No problem! Donate to the Clinton foundation and ole hillary will fix you right up!

Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department

BY DAVID SIROTA @DAVIDSIROTA AND ANDREW PEREZ @ANDREWPEREZDC ON 05/26/15 AT 8:44 AM

~Snip~

Sales Flowed Despite Human Rights Concerns

Under a presidential policy directive signed by President Bill Clinton in 1995, the State Department is supposed to specifically take human rights records into account when deciding whether to approve licenses enabling foreign governments to purchase military equipment and services from American companies. Despite this, Hillary Clinton’s State Department increased approvals of such sales to nations that her agency sharply criticized for systematic human rights abuses.

In its 2010 Human Rights Report, Clinton’s State Department inveighed against Algeria’s government for imposing “restrictions on freedom of assembly and association” tolerating “arbitrary killing,” “widespread corruption,” and a “lack of judicial independence.” The report said the Algerian government “used security grounds to constrain freedom of expression and movement.”

That year, the Algerian government donated $500,000 to the Clinton Foundation and its lobbyists met with the State Department officials who oversee enforcement of human rights policies. Clinton’s State Department the next year approved a one-year 70 percent increase in military export authorizations to the country. The increase included authorizations of almost 50,000 items classified as “toxicological agents, including chemical agents, biological agents and associated equipment” after the State Department did not authorize the export of any of such items to Algeria in the prior year.

During Clinton’s tenure, the State Department authorized at least $2.4 billion of direct military hardware and services sales to Algeria -- nearly triple such authorizations over the last full fiscal years during the Bush administration. The Clinton Foundation did not disclose Algeria’s donation until this year -- a violation of the ethics agreement it entered into with the Obama administration....

http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187

[BeyondGeography]

6. Hi Jack!

How ya doing?

[think]

9. Just fine. How's life in denial?

[BeyondGeography]

10. He wants party favors from the party he's been blowing off all his life

So he can beat an uber-establishment candidate like Hillary who is beating him? Sad.

[think]

13. Yes. Hillary is entitled to super delegates. Sanders is a pauper who doesn't deserve consideration

Yeesh.....

[RobertEarl]

3. The supers are not owned

And where the hell do you come up with this:

"...he basically told the majority of the Democratic Party to go fuck themselves"

[DJ13]

4. I seem to remember that the DNC made some noise about using the supers to overcome

.....a potential Bernie lead in the convention when they were afraid it looked like he might run the table on Hillary.

That was just a few weeks back, so why worry ig he chooses the same tactic?

[NuclearDem]

8. ...because his campaign has made a habit of treating superdelegates as the enemy of democracy.

In other words, hypocrisy.

[RobertEarl]

11. He scares them

He might use their system to beat them. The OP says as much.

[Meldread]

14. I'm not worried. I support him doing this 100%!

My knock against Bernie, and the reason I threw my support behind Hillary, was the fact that he was tepid. He talked a great game, but he wasn't willing to get down into the shit and actually fight to win. When you get down into the shit, sometimes you get covered in shit, but it's worth it when you are fighting for what you believe in. I thought Bernie Sanders was too nice, a guy who saw himself on some type of high moral perch, someone who would be willing to lose a war if it meant he had to win dirty.

My biggest fear was that he would make it to the White House, and then get knifed in the back by establishment Democrats and eaten alive by Republicans. This would then damage the liberal movement as a whole.

Republicans have the Buckley Rule, which states that you should try and elect the most conservative candidate that can win. I have the Alexander Hamilton Rule. When faced between the choice of Thomas Jefferson, his rival, and John Adams, he wrote this: "If we must have an enemy at the head of Government let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures." This is what Hillary Clinton is to me, my enemy, an individual who is not part of the liberal movement, someone for who we are not wholly responsible, and someone we can oppose once in office, while still being better than the alternative which would be a Republican. We would bide our time and wait until we had a stronger candidate that we could rally behind to take the Presidency, while focusing our efforts on building liberal candidates up at the grassroots level, putting them in state legislatures, and in the House and Senate.

If Bernie Sanders could pull off such a stunning upset, it would disprove all the fears that I had about him. What I find funny is that I have been attacked constantly by Sanders supporters every time I wanted him to go negative, to fight harder, to be more aggressive--to in essence get dirty and do what was necessary to win. They held themselves so snobbishly high up on their moral perches. Now, faced with potentially losing, Sanders (belatedly) decides that he is actually going to do whatever is necessary to win. Good for him. I think it is probably too late at this point, but depending on how he wants to play things there might be a path--a narrow, but foreseeable path. It would, however, require him to do things that many of his staunchest supporters would feel oh so dirty about.

However, I predict that many of his supporters, especially those who put themselves high up on their moral perches, will do a complete 180 degree turn. We will find that, faced with losing, their lofty morals were not as rock solid as they claimed. I enjoy watching this happen, because I despise hypocrites. I despise people who are not willing to actually fight for what they believe in using all means necessary to achieve victory, and I despise those who look down their noses snobbishly at those of us who do.

[Codeine]

12. "After a lifetime of trashing your party

and carefully keeping myself at arm's length I'd like to invite you to take your support away from one of the most important power figures in Democratic Party history and send it my way."

One foresees very few takers of that specactular offer.

[Meldread]

20. It's not likely to happen, but he deserves respect if he can pull it off.

It would be one of the biggest political upsets in history. There is virtually no chance of it happening, but who knows? Maybe he can find some type of leverage.

On the other hand, I wonder if his supporters will throw him under the bus as they so often enjoy doing to others? LOL. Will they call him a sell out to the establishment? Will they wonder what he promised them?

Or will we come to learn that they never had any real values or principles at all, and that they were just as committed to doing whatever it took to win just like Clinton?

Oh, this will be so delicious.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. What is laudable about thwarting the will of the people?

[workinclasszero]

46. Right LOL

If thats Bernies cynical, not to mention MASSIVELY HYPOCRITICAL plans to thwart the will of the majority of democratic voters...

[ViseGrip]

19. Don't forget the shenanigans in Iowa, the party closing the books on the totals.

[geek tragedy]

28. You are going to get banned for this post.

I just wanted to let you know thank you for finally stepping over the line.

[ViseGrip]

17. You mean the super delegates Hillary is using? Looks like only half the country has voted, anyway.

So why not allow the people to vote? The super's didn't care if Sanders won, they are counting them in now. But you never know what a long slog looks like, so maybe they won't care if Hillary won in the end, if she can't beat Trump?

[Meldread]

22. I would hope that the Supers will support whomever is the best candidate for the party and can win.

I am not one of those rah-rah people who loves the primary process. I would much rather have the parties setup where liberal activists controlled the party and then selected the nominee at a convention. If I had my druthers, that is how it would work. I think most voters are too ignorant to actually make a competent decision on who is qualified to be placed in elected office, and that the political parties need to be gatekeepers to keep the crazies and the unqualifieds out (see Donald Trump).

Sanders move does not bother me. If he can pull it off, kudos to him. He will have my respect. Hillary would do it in a heart beat, and I would respect her for doing it as well. I am a firm believer in fighting for what you believe in--even if that means you have to fight dirty.

[KingFlorez]

18. That is a strategy that will not work

But at this point all he has left is Hail Mary passes to nowhere. He is really making himself look ridiculous.

[arcane1]

26. Superdelegate votes can be "stolen" now? I thought they vote how they wish?

Pretending that an attempt to convince them to change their vote is the same as "stealing" their vote is dishonest enough to be counted as a bold-faced lie.

Why are you telling lies? Is the truth not enough for Hillary? Again?

[Meldread]

31. Sanders supporters have consistently bad mouthed the Super Delegate system.

They have claimed that Hillary was planning to steal the election via the Super Delegates. I was merely using their rhetoric.

I am actually 100% supporting Sanders in this move, and wish him the best of luck. You can view my other posts in this thread.

[bkkyosemite]

27. Don't put words in Senator Sanders mouth. I heard what he said and it was not what

you have posted.

[nc4bo]

32. Seems someone always has to clean up behind these messy folks. We need a Swiffer! nt

[jillan]

30. Have you been to the ear doctor recently because that is not what he said.

[litlbilly]

33. You people make me sick

[litlbilly]

35. and another added to my ignore list.

[thereismore]

39. Haha, mine too. nt

[MaggieD]

38. He's delusional

The supers aren't going to support him. That should be obvious by now. For one thing they are actual Democrats. The same Democrats he's been dissing for 30 years.

[Gothmog]

40. Sanders has very little chance of flipping any super delegates

These super delegates care about the party and down ballot candidates. Sanders does not care about the party or any down ballot candidates. Sanders will not find many super delegates who will listen to Sanders rather weak arguments

[UMTerp01]

42. Obviously Sanders can do NO wrong

If Hillary was behind in pledged delegates by the amount Bernie is and she went on Rachel Maddow with this, the Bernie folks would be implying the same thing that this OP is suggesting of Bernie. Maybe not use the word 'steal' but there would've been an article about it, probably saying that Hillary was delusional. The same math that has been said over and over about why Hilllary will win in the end because it will simply be virtually impossible for Sanders to overcome doesn't matter. If Hillary was behind, Sanders supporters would be using the same 'math' argument. Now I absolutely believe Bernie should stay in until the last state votes. Anyone suggesting he drop out should just sit down and hush. But there is ALWAYS some sort of explanation for Bernie. He is THE PERFECT CANDIDATE who never misspeaks and never is doing what was clearly obvious to me in that Rachel interview.

[Meldread]

43. This exactly what angers me as well. Thank you so much! Welcome to DU.

I am 100% fine with Bernie using the system and doing whatever it takes to win. I would WANT my candidate doing everything in their power to win. You fight because you believe that getting into a position of power will be good for the party and the country. You fight because you believe that the policies you support are worth fighting for.

The difference between myself and the average Bernie Sander supporter is that my values are clear. I support Bernie's effort to fight his way to the nomination through whatever means he has to do it. I support Clinton's effort to the nomination through whatever effort she has to do it. Eventually, the best candidate will emerge, and we will rally behind that candidate to defeat the Republican.

The problem? Bernie Sanders supporters want a system that is rigged in their favor. If Clinton does something, she is a cheater. If a reporter publishes a story that even remotely is not favorable to Sanders, they throw that reporter under the bus--even if they have been lifelong liberals! However, if Sanders does the same action that they'd claim Clinton was cheating to perform, they would praise it as wonderful. If a disreputable reporter, one hostile to the liberal movement, said something against Clinton or positive of Sanders, then that person deserves to be praised.

It is, frankly, disgusting. These are people without a true moral core. They have no real values. They have liberal leanings, but they are not really part of a liberal movement. It is clear based on how many openly say they will not vote for the Democratic Nominee if THEIR candidate does not win. Imagine if Hillary was losing, would we see this from Hillary supporters? Some, maybe, but nowhere near the same degree.

This is the problem. This is the rot at the core of the liberal movement. There are millions of great and decent Sanders supporters. I count many of them as friends. Nothing of which I have written describes them. However, here on DU we see the trash of the Sanders movement on full display far too often.

[Surya Gayatri]

44. K & R enthusiastically. Delicious, indeed.

His Pureness begins to let down the purity pretense and show his real ambition.

[NurseJackie]

45. it won't work.

It's a political stunt. Done for show.