When Bernie loses NY

[TMontoya]

Will people here being screaming about "fraud" because some random independents on the internet whine about their "registration" being changed? Oh and when he loses NY he then would need to win every single remaining state by 65% or more.

[Punkingal]

1. You call voter disenfranchisement complaints "whining?"

Sad.

[TMontoya]

2. Rules are rules

Independents have no right to vote in a closed Dem primary and frankly no one's registration is magically changing. These are people who never were registered as Democrats.

[Punkingal]

9. You have absolutely no way to know that.

Furthermore, the Secretary of State in Arizona has said that it did happen.

[CalvinballPro]

25. You're going on about disenfranchisement, but what about Nevada?

Sanders supporters sent false mailers to delegates, then had people ready to take their place at the county convention. The will of voters was overturned, but in Sanders favor, so I guess that's OK then, right?

[pandr32]

26. Crickets...

Shhhhhhh!

[CalvinballPro]

30. Crickets from the hypocrites.

Should we have expected any different? I'm starting to wonder what other crimes are OK as long as it's in nomine Bernie.

[timmymoff]

79. baloney

Hillary delegates for some reason failed to show up. I repeat for those so damn thick they can't understand. Hillary delegates failed to show up, just like they failed in 2008. Now someone who has been running for president since 2006 you would think would learn that, but alas, they also failed to learn from regime change, and free trade support. So why should we expect them to learn from this? It's obvious they didn't. you can whine all you want about Nevada but the fact of the matter remains, voter suppression and failure to show up as a delegate are two completely different things. If for some reason you are not smart enough to understand this, that is your problem.

[CalvinballPro]

80. They failed to show up because of a mailer sent out telling them they didn't have to.

And yet somehow the Sanders campaign had people READY to take their place. Somehow the Sanders delegates knew to show up. Clinton's delegates were disenfranchises by slimeball tactics by Sanders' Nevada crew.

Your side is so desperate, and yet you have no qualms about violating laws and ethics in service of your St Bernard.

[timmymoff]

82. Proof please

And considering she had the same exact thing happen with her delegates in 2008, are you sure it just isn't complacency? I'm betting it is just as I said, she fails to learn from her mistakes because her ego doesn't allow her to think she is ever wrong.

[tonedevil]

29. Can you prove your...

allegation regarding these false mailers? Because I am sure you are straight up lying.

[frylock]

33. Yes, liars gonna lie.

I'd like to see proof of the liar's errrrrr.. poster's allegations myself.

[frylock]

31. cough*bullshit*cough

[surrealAmerican]

37. The false mailers came from the county.

Sanders' delegates also received those mailers. Their campaign noticed the information was wrong, and called all their delegates with the correct information. The people who were "ready" were elected delegates for Sanders - not extras.

[choie]

53. That is a lie

That notice was mailed to delegates on both sides.

[nadinbrzezinski]

60. Back in the real world, *both* Sanders and Clinton supporters got these mailers

I blame the clinton campaign since the Sanders campaign got a whiff and did a massive outreach to get delegates to show.

From the evidence we have it seems the Clark County Democrats were responsible for spreading the false news.

[Goblinmonger]

67. If that were true, you'd have a point

But being that it is absolutely untrue, you might want to stop making yourself look silly by spreading such horrible untruths.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. So you are calling the Secretary of State in AZ, the Governor, and the AZ Democratic

party LIARS? How does that work?

I am glad you find no issues with voter disenfranchisement, Moreover, if somebody registers as dem, no mater how old they are, they can legally participate.

IGNORANT POST OF THE DAY.

[LonePirate]

54. Actually, it depends when they registered or declared for the Democrats in NY.

An independent who changed their party affiliation months ago (November or later) will not be able to vote in the NY Dem primary. I suspect people like this will be the source of most of the complaints.

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. You of course are NOT aware, and this is willfull

that people are checking their registrations not just in New York. I did in California. This is a real problem. You are hiding your head in the sand... and please continue to celebrate voter suppression. It is something that the (former) party of the people took seriously.

For the record, my registration is in order.

[LonePirate]

61. Your condescension does not mask your ignorance.

There is nothing in my post that celebrates voter suppression. Pointing out a fact about NY election law in a thread where the OP is about voting in NY should be something you applaud. Instead you hurl baseless insults, presumably to discredit the distribution of factual info. The very first question that should be asked of anyone who claims they were not allowed to vote in NY is when did they register as a Democrat?

You obviously want an open convention per your previous OP; but stifling the truth in order to promote chaos to help ensure that open convention actually occurs is a nefarious and disgusting tactic.

[nadinbrzezinski]

62. Pointing out that people who have been registered DEMOCRATS FOR YEARS is not condescencion

even in the states of New York and Pensilvania.

I have no idea who is doing this, but somebody is hacking into voter databases. The SOS of Arizona suggested as much before the State Assembly.

And that is that silly shitty condescending point I am making. Wake up and smell the damn coffee... and chiefly THINK. If I can change your party registration from Dem to Mars coalition for the current primary, how difficult do you think it will be for me to remove you from the voting rolls in November?

Jesus people lack imagination I swear

It brings voter caging to a whole new level. And you think this has not been happening before? Well Mexico comes to mind... for example. In case you wonder, they use the same exact software used in the United States.

[LonePirate]

66. You are arguing about points I never said or made.

I said it matters when someone registered as a Dem in NY and I said it should be asked when they registered if someone says they were not allowed to vote in NY. In your tin foil hat covered brain, that somehow translated into me supporting voting disenfranchisement via database hacking. I can only surmise that you jump to conclusions without hesitation given that a simple investigative process is ignored in favor of an unverified theory from a Republican politician trying to cover their own ass.

Are voter registration databases being hacked? I have no idea. Should it be investigated? Yes. Should it be investigated as to whether someone restored an old database back-up during a systems or software upgrade or some other common type of administrative incompetence occurred? Yes. Which of these is more likely to have occurred?

[nadinbrzezinski]

68. My tin foil hat is covered by what actual officials have said

you lack imagination in many ways.

I am sorry you do. Have a good day.

For the rest of the class, since at least 2000 we have been having pretend elections, and switching results by 2 to 3 percent (which would flip and election in most cases) is hardly that difficult.

[LonePirate]

75. So your reading comprehension sucks and you believe what Repub politicians say?

That's basically the summary of our entire conversation.

[nadinbrzezinski]

76. Sadly I am having a conversation with a person

who hardly understands how elections are flipped and you are hanging on to the fantasy that this only happens to newly signed people. If you believe that, we are wasting our collective times. I know better.

[LonePirate]

77. There you go again. Roping me into a conversation I never joined.

Let me spell this out very clearly to you given how we have already established your reading comprehension sucks.

Mary Sue Voter goes to her polling place in Brooklyn on April 19 and tries to vote for her candidate. The election worker tells her she is not eligible to vote. Mary Sue says she is a registered Democrat and even shows her voter registration card to prove it. The election worker asks when did Mary Sue register as a Democrat.

(1) If Mary Sue says she registered as a brand new Democrat back in February after never having registered before, the election worker should realize she is definitely an eligible voter. She should be given a provisional ballot that definitely should be counted and the reason for Mary Sue not being on the list of eligible voters needs to be investigated, regardless if it is due to a clerical error, some other screw up or some outside entity hacking the database or performing some malicious activity.

(2) If Mary Sue says she has always been registered as an Independent but she changed her party affiliation back in December, the election worker should tell Mary Sue she is ineligible to vote per New York law. There is nothing to investigate here.

(3) If Mary sue says she has been a lifelong Democrat who registered years ago and has voted in every election for years/decades, then she should be given a provisional ballot and the reason for her absence from the eligible voter list needs to be investigated just as in the first case.

This is not difficult to understand and it has been the basis of this entire thread and conversation apart from your ramblings about hacking or other voter disenfranchisement/suppression tactics. Nobody is questioning the possibility that those things exist; but you're the only one having that conversation. I have been talking about voting in NY and what a likely claim of disenfranchisement will boil down to there (item 2 above). Human error of some type - be it registering too late, printing the wrong voter list, a screw up involving a stored procedure on the voting database or whatever - is far more likely to be the cause of the problem of Mary Sue being unable to vote than someone hacking the database.

That's not to say that database hacking is not possible. It's simply less likely than far more common and far more mundane reasons. Now it seems you have also moved on to software or human tampering with vote tallies after Mary Sue has voted which has not been part of this conversation until you just now broached the subject.

I do find it interesting how you and others seem willing to jump to the conclusion and immediately believe that illegal actions are responsible if your candidate does not win instead of simply accepting the much more probable scenario of your candidate not receiving as many votes as the opposing candidate. why is everything a conspiracy to some people?

[nadinbrzezinski]

78. This is not rambling this is you trying to kill a conversation

both parties should have, and every voter should worry about. Election integrity is not rambling. Hacks are not mysterious. Nor are they conspiracy theories.

You can either be an adult, or not. I think you prefer to ignore this. I guess realizing how compromised elections are, gives you a tummy ache, and to be frank, it gives a tummy ache to any who believes int he myth of american exceptionalism.

Have an excellent day. I have some more reading to do on that other conspiracy theory called income inequality. Like voting issues, it is a thing

[LonePirate]

81. You just implied that EVERY voting/election irregularity has a malicious cause.

You seem incapable of believing the far more likely scenario of unintentional (but still egregiously wrong) actions impacting someone's right to vote.

I come down on the side of the Occam's Razor principle of the simpler explanation being the far more likely one. By no means does this indicate that far more complex and unlikely actions (database hacking) are never the cause. It's just that they are much less likely to be the cause. For whatever reason, you seem to think they are always the cause and you erroneously think I believe they are never the cause. For you, someone is always mucking up things for evil reasons and in the most complex and extraordinary of ways. I simply feel the more ordinary reason is often but not always the correct one.

Do I need to explain this again or in a different manner given the previous proof of your reading comprehension difficulties?

[nadinbrzezinski]

83. Reading comprehension issues

Cuyahooga County in 2004 was stolen, hearings were held, the report from Congressman Conyers as the chair of that Ad Hoc committee appeared in FULL in Excelsior in Mexico City. Think about that one. The election literally hung on that county in Ohio, and your mainstream media never really told you there were actual hearings... or for that matter extensively reported on it. WHY?

2000 Florida, the News Consortium found that Gore won the election. The day it was announced something minor was going on in the country... you remember that as 911. The day of the announcement it was a hell of a coincidence. By the way, they were the SAME FUCKING outfit that put out the Gore wins Florida that was retracted. Their history until 2000 was fucking 100 percent accurate. Again, fucking chew on that.

What happened the other week in AZ, is agreed to be suspicious at the very least by the DEMOCRATIC PARTY, the SOS and the Governor both republicans. The three entities have asked for a fucking DOJ investigation.

These are the three more obvious examples. When you have reports all over that people are seeing their party memberships CHANGE when they have been in your party for decades, that suggests of hacks. You do not have the imagination to even conceive of that, or comprehend the implications.

And with that, dinner had, I really need to get back to work with that other conspiracy. And in your mind I probably need to get tin foil by the metric ton. And by the way, this is what makes stealing elections in the United States so damn easy. People truly believe in faerie dust.

[upaloopa]

3. When they are not true or conspiracy, yes

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

5. The SoS of Arizona conceded that people's registrations were changed due to a glitch...

She even said someone in her office had issues regarding it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

63. The AZ SOS, the Governor and the Democratic party of AZ do not believe

this was a conspiracy, or at least not in the sense you are thinking They are even asking the DOJ to help

[MFM008]

11. In one state -NO

not at all. In every state he doesn't win, yeah.
Remember, the GOP are FAR more likely to do sneaky crap with voting rules in states than the democrats.

[Red Oak]

21. Whining is today's meme from camp weathervane

[Gregorian]

4. My name is Bernie Sanders; prepare to die!

[RobertEarl]

19. Quit that

We will assimilate, not exterminate. Not that we need the few H campers, but we are just nice people and will allow them to repent.

[Gregorian]

44. Do we always have to use the sarcasm smiley.

[RobertEarl]

46. Tell it to the OPer

this whole thread was a joke and I get that you were joking. I was not. We will assimilate the wayward H campers and let them come sit by the fire that is Berning.

[democrattotheend]

6. I took a screenshot today of my voter registration status

Which shows that I am registered as a Democrat at my new address. If I get to the polls and discover that my party status has been changed, damn right I'm going to be screaming about it.

I wish I had thought to take a cell phone picture of my registration form before I sent it.

[politicaljunkie41910]

34. So if you get to the polls and discover that your party status is changed,

who are you implying changed your democrattotheend's status and what is their motivation, and are you a democrattotheend now or were you previously a democrattotheend ??. It's interesting that you claim to be a democrattotheend but your candidate of choice doesn't feel the need to make the same proclamation. Its seems he just wants to use the party to the maximum extent possible to further his own personal gain.

[beedle]

59. A purity test?

and an ironic one as well, given the "just wants to use the party to the maximum extent possible to further his own personal gain" comment and the lack of certain "Democrat's" reluctance to address campaign finance reform, or big banks.

[Goblinmonger]

69. Your whole post reads a little like McCarthy

You might want to walk back some of that rhetoric. Just a suggestion.

[LonePirate]

55. What state, if you don't mind sharing?

[democrattotheend]

85. New York

I said what I said in response to a Hillary supporter's suggestion that "whining" about being illegally disenfranchised is just being a sore loser if Bernie doesn't win here.

[morningfog]

7. Welcome back, buddy!

[NWCorona]

8. And when Bernie wins NY

Hillary and her supporters will move the goalposts once again.

[TMontoya]

10. Not happening

He's FAR behind in NY and NYC alone is Hillary territory.

[NWCorona]

12. This should scare team Hillary

Her lead is evaporating and there's still two weeks before the primary.

Not looking good for Hillary

[TMontoya]

13. Actually it makes me smile

She is leading by wide margins including the outliers. A 15 point win by Clinton puts the nomination firmly in her hands.

[NWCorona]

14. Check back next week when it's tied and when Bernie's +5 the week after

Hillary is only going down in the polls.

[TMontoya]

16. Not happening

Her lead will likely stay the same or go higher. Either way Clinton wins NY. Easily.

[NWCorona]

17. Like I said check back

It will only take a few seconds.

Time is on Bernie's side.

[TMontoya]

20. I will

No one is flipping to Bernie in that large of a number espcially in NY on a closed primary. NYC alone is strong for Clinton.

[NWCorona]

22. We will see soon enough

[TMontoya]

23. Yes

We will indeed.

[panader0]

41. Hillary'e biggest lead was when she announced her candidacy

It's been on a steady decline ever since.

[RobertEarl]

24. Flashback!!

Bernie will be done on super Tuesday! Didn't you the the memo?

Bernie: he keeps going and going. Poor H camp is Berning up!

[TMontoya]

27. Actually

He was done March 15th so not too far off.

[frylock]

35. Yeah, you can tell by the way he's been racking up wins that it was over on 3/15.

[RobertEarl]

42. Earth to TMontoya

He's gonna steal NY from H camp.

Sad for you folks, I know, but you'll get over it and learn to Love the Bern. It's coming. get ready.

[TMontoya]

45. No happening

NY is Clinton country. HI message simply does not resonate with NY.

[RobertEarl]

48. H is dust in the wind

She done blowed up and only the establishment likes her.

Come sit by the fire that be Berning. You know you want to. It's ok, let the other H campers laugh at you, before long they will be joining you.

[SheilaT]

40. Clearly you haven't been paying attentiion.

Ever since Super Tuesday Bernie as outperformed the polling almost every single time. And usually by huge amounts.



And that came out in the middle of March. You might want to keep in mind that he's won 7 of the last 8 contests, and gained delegates in Nevada when some large number of her supporters, oh that dedicated crew! didn't bother to make it to the second level of delegate selection.

[dr60omg]

56. Do you realize this is data over time

Please recognize this is data over time and there is a general trend. The outliers or anomalies are usually not weighted and it is hard to judge a statewide race in a primary anyway ...

[Politicalboi]

15. You are dreaming

2 weeks and Panama Papers which put the Clinton Foundation right in the middle of this new money laundering mess. Good luck with that.

[StevieM]

38. What goal posts are being moved? Hillary is leading by over 200 pledged delegates. (eom)

[NWCorona]

39. You will see soon enough

[cannabis_flower]

65. It was over 240 a week ago!

Perhaps next well it will be over 150.

[StevieM]

70. First of all, you just proved my point.

Hillary isn't moving the goalposts. They are the same now as they have always been--a majority of pledged delegates.

I am not sure what the exact PD total is, just that it is over 200. I believe that Bernie picked up 11 delegates from Wisconsin and will pick up another 10 in Wyoming.

If you are predicting that the next contest will produce a 50 delegate pickup for Bernie then that will require a 20 point victory for Senator Sanders. It is possible that he could do it, but we have yet to see the evidence that he will. And I don't consider his win in Wisconsin as evidence that he will have a comparable win, let alone a larger win, in New York.

But we will find out in 13 days.

[cannabis_flower]

84. There are 23 primaries left

If Bernie could manage to pick up an average of 10 delegates at each primary he could still catch up. I'm not saying it's likely but it's not impossible. The big numbers are in New York (291) and California (546).

Now New York might be favoring Hillary right now but Bernie is closing, but it is a closed primary so that might not be good for Bernie.

California however, is a mixed primary, meaning that you can vote in the California primary if you are registered as a Democrat or if you are unaffiliated. If a lot of Californian Republicans are unhappy with Trump and Cruz and have changed their registration to unaffiliated Hillary could have a June surprise. Especially if the pollsters have been polling likely Democratic voters.

[QC]

28. Meh, somebody loses New York, somebody else loses a sock.

These things happen.

[villager]

32. That's kind of a whiney OP, yes?

Yes.

[Depaysement]

36. Another troll, another ignore nt

[jwirr]

43. Not unless there is evidence. We are the group that uses

facts.

[TMontoya]

47. We have all the evidence we need

Polls show it and the voters of NY will show it. She is widely popular in NY. Good luck with Bernie winning on with just college kids. Who half probably aren't even registered to vote. Or registered as Independents.

[basselope]

58. Sorry to burst your bubble.. she ain't that popular in NY.

[TMontoya]

73. If you say so

"Please proceed"

[basselope]

74. I plan to.

[ibegurpard]

49. you think the shit that went down in Arizona was a joke?

Get bent.

[SheenaR]

50. 107 Posts

And 90% have been antagonistic. How about an issues based thread as to why she will be successful in the remaining states

All of your OPs have been hit and run jobs on how he has no shot. Anyone with a keyboard can do that.

If Bernie loses NY, he loses. The expectations are that he will not win.

If she loses, her campaign is in serious trouble.

[mehneh]

52. You're crushing it :D

I support a more positive bridge between the Hillary people and the Bernie people. These posts are like muck.

[dchill]

51. The title of this OP should be...

When Pigs Fly.

[revbones]

64. Depends

on whether any occurs. See that's the benefit of principles...

[pdsimdars]

86. Global warming is much worse than they said

because if that happened it would mean that HELL FROZE OVER.


Really I don't know if he will, because he has so many things stacked against him but I've learned not to bet against him, especially when they said they have a good chance to win it.