David Axelrod: a very awkward position to be if you`re trying to lead a political revolution

[question everything]

comments on "Face the Nation"

David, it looks like on Tuesday Hillary Clinton is going to lock things up, but Bernie Sanders says there is going to be a contested convention. Explain how those two things can happen and what that means?

DAVID AXELROD, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CONSULTANT: Yes, I think we need a little reality check here. <The> fact is, she needs about 60 delegates to clinch <the>nomination. There are 781 at stake in <the> next few days. And so she will probably - she will almost certainly clinch <the> nomination before <the> polls close in California. She will have led <the> primary season in delegates by pledged delegates, elected delegates, by about 300 delegates or more. And<the> popular vote by three million. And now Bernie Sanders is in <the>ironic position of turning to these super delegates, these party officials, these -<the> party elite, to overturn <the> verdict of voters. And I think that that`s a very awkward position to be if you`re trying to lead a political revolution.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-transcripts-june-5-2016-trump/

and scroll down, way down..

[CrowCityDem]

1. All Bernie has now is an argument that we need to steal an election to save democracy.

[Agnosticsherbet]

4. I can almost hear him, "In order to save Democracy, we had to burn it to the ground."

Last edited Sun Jun 5, 2016, 09:10 PM - Edit history (1)

[Armstead]

25. That was already done about 30 years ago

We're arguing over the ashes now

[question everything]

32. Like Grover Norquist, who wants to deprive funds (taxes) from the government

thus shrinking it until we can flush it down the tab..

[Agnosticsherbet]

34. Norquist waned to drown government in a bathtub.

[geek tragedy]

2. Bernie can talk the talk, we'll know this week whether he's willing to walk the walk, i.e.

act out of his principles even if they contradict his electoral self-interest and his ego

[Agnosticsherbet]

3. A revolution against the party elite that asks the party elite to overthrow the will of the voters..

pretty much defines awkward.

[rhett o rick]

7. The "will of the voters" as indicated by a corrupt election system.

[Agnosticsherbet]

8. The will of the majority of the voters as defined by votes cast by voters.

The will of a majority of the voters in a majority of the primaries.
The will of a majority of the voters in states that had open primaries.

Only in caucuses conducted so that the majority of the voters do not have a chance vote is Sanders winning.

I abhor corrupt caucuses and hope we can all work togeather to get rid of them before the next primary.

[rhett o rick]

10. It is well know around the world that our election system is the worst of all modern

countries. We know the Oligarchy stole the election in 2000 and 2004. They are stealing this one also. It will be difficult to dislodge the Rich and Powerful from our supposedly representative system, but we won't stop until it's done. Sadly we have to fight so-called Democrats that are comfortable with the Corptocracy.

A Goldman-Sachs presidency will not help those among us struggling. They will work for higher corporate profits which brings more homelessness and poverty.

[Agnosticsherbet]

12. Yet, somehow, the will of the voters is still heard. The elites should not coronate Sanders.

[rhett o rick]

14. What an ironic thing to say, "The elites should not coronate Sanders."

I agree actually. The elites should not coronate anyone and that includes Clinton, the elites clear favorite. But not to worry, your corrupt system that guarantees that the Corporate Candidate wins will not fail you. You will get your chance to gloat.

What is funny here is that I've been complaining about the Super-Delegate system from the beginning. And been told by the Clinton side that it's the system and live with it. I wish they'd have to eat their words.

[Agnosticsherbet]

15. His call to super-delegates to anoint him is his call to the elite.

Super-delegates will support the side that won a majority of Democratic votes and pledged delegates. That will not be Sanders.

So yes, he is calling to be the choice of the elite.

[rhett o rick]

17. He is calling for the Super-Delegates to make this corrupted election right.

[Agnosticsherbet]

18. He calls it a corrupted election because he has lost.

Super-delegates are not going to fix the election for someone who did not get the votes of the Democratic Party members.

[Demsrule86]

13. I prefer to fight Republicans but that is just me.

As a woman I find Bernies's attitude toward Hillary appalling. He is so entitiled.

[rhett o rick]

16. Bernie is "entitled"? Pure projection. The Clinton followers didn't even want a primary because

they think SHE IS ENTITLED TO BE PRESIDENT. They justify the lies and cheating because SHE IS ENTITLED TO BE PRESIDENT.


"As a woman I find Bernies's attitude toward Hillary appalling." Really, we haven't overused the gender card yet? Are you really saying she needs special treatment?

Don't bother with a response, I would see it. Bob-Bye

[Demsrule86]

50. she won

She has the most delegates which is how we always select our candidates...the entitled person is Bernie...who wants supers to select him even though he lost.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

23. No, it isn't. You're just totally wrong about that.

It is widely believed around the world that an extremely close election in 2000 was probably miscounted and that the way that was dealt with was suboptimal.

That America's election system is the worst of all modern countries? Not so much.

[rhett o rick]

27. Sorry but I am not drinking whatever you are. There were a lot of manipulations that occurred in

Last edited Wed Jun 15, 2016, 11:37 AM - Edit history (1)

2000. In a close election it doesn't take much to push one way or the other. Same thing happened in 2004. And it looks like it's happening again. Now each and every case the candidate that the Powers That Be support win.

I don't know what you think of President Carter but this is what he said,

"In the context of the Carter Centre’s work monitoring electoral processes around the globe, Carter also disclosed his opinion that in the US “we have one of the worst election processes in the world, and it’s almost entirely because of the excessive influx of money,” he said referring to lack of controls over private campaign donations."

Now those that side with Clinton and the billionaires won't like what he has to say.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

48. You've just moved the goalposts.

"Is it true" and "is it widely believed around the world" are two totally different questions.

*You* may believe that America's electoral system is one of the worst; you may even be right. But, rightly or wrongly, most people around the world don't believe that.

[rhett o rick]

52. You've got a lot to say about the world's belief but what do you believe?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

53. I would say that America's elections are within the top 30% worldwide by most measures.

Take a look at some of the competition...

[Recursion]

49. That's not even remotely true

Where do you get that idea?

[seabeyond]

22. You argument seems to be, .... Steal the votes that were stolen from us.

[Feathery Scout]

26. Corrupt enough to skew the vote by 3 million votes?

Is there any evidence of that?

[rhett o rick]

29. 3 million votes is a lie. You leave out the states that used the caucus system. But you know that.

Lies, cheating, changing voter's registrations, etc. Those that accept that are not Democrats.

[GulfCoast66]

40. Yep

Like Washington State where Bernie won the caucus and went on to clean up...oh, never mind.

[question everything]

33. If this is a "corrupt" election system then why are you fighting to be a part of it?

Go and start a new party, start from scratch like... the teabaggers. Get your own representatives and drag Congress to a halt.

[TimPlo]

35. Tea party was not a 3rd party

It was a movement that started at grass roots with in the GOP because of the corruption of Bush and McCain lead GOP was. It was then co-oped and stolen by money from the Koch brothers, thus protecting the oligarchy that controls this country. For you to think they are a 3rd party is rather ill informed.

[question everything]

36. No, they are not. But they certainly influenced Congress and these elections

They brought down the speaker - Boehner - who just could not control them, and Ted Cruz, and perhaps others, were considered the "darlings" of the tea party.

Still, I suppose that if they want, they can split the GOOP party and start afresh. History is full of similar examples.

[BootinUp]

5. K & R

[imagine2015]

6. Another mouthpiece for Clinton has spouted a campaign talking point. And it totally false. A lie.

Which is something Hillary Clinton is very familiar with.

The election will not be clinched on Tuesday.

And what makes Axelrod's comment really bad is that he knows it is false!

But that won't stop him and other surrogates for Hillary from lying.

Sorry folks.

Hillary and her dead end supporters are going to have to fight it out at the convention.

[reddread]

11. once you know someone will lie to you

why would you continue listening?
they defeat themselves with brazen tactics.
completely unworthy

[Lord Magus]

19. It's not a campaign talking point. It's a fact.

The Sanders campaign demand that the media not count superdelegates unlike in 2008 and every other primary going back to 1984 is nonsense.

[MadBadger]

20. LOL, Long time Obama advisor, David Axelrod is no Hillary shill

[rhett o rick]

30. Yes he is.

[stevenleser]

9. Sanders and his supporters are angry the people have stolen his nomination.

And yes, are looking for the party elite to rectify that injustice.

[grossproffit]

28. After referring to them as the establishment and oligarchy. You just can't make this chit up.

[hopemountain]

21. why is david axelrod shilling for hillary?

hmmmm??

question everything. and as dad would say "don't trust no one."

[stevenleser]

24. Because she is the Democratic nominee. Axelrod is a Democrat. nt

[rhett o rick]

31. Lies, lies and more lies. She is not the nominee and he is a pathetic Democrat. But then

you seem to be able to bend with the wind, the power wind. Always like to side with the power, right? Well the People are tired of those that you revere so deeply and will work to throw out the corrupt that you side with.

[stevenleser]

39. Don't expect other people to share in your silly denial. She is the nominee.

As far as your silly attempt to analyze me goes, spending 5 cents on Lucy Van Pelts amateur psychology would be time and money better spent.

[rhett o rick]

42. LOL. You aren't worth my time and I am not sure why I failed to put you on ignore.

Bob-Bye #88

[geek tragedy]

37. Common sense and math are biased in favor of Hillary.

Bernie will continue his fight against both.

[hopemountain]

41. thank you, geek tragedy. nt

[rhett o rick]

43. We will fight on against those that have brought us 2.5 million homeless American children and

16 million American children living in poverty. But your corporations won't be stopped until we have no health care and lose our SS benefits.

Your Goldman-Sachs has their eye on the privatization of SS. You'll blame it on the bad Republicons but your billionaire friends will all be to blame.

There are two sides to this class war and we aren't going to quit until we drive the Wealthy 1% and their minions out of our government.

Shame on those that choose to side with the money and not the People.

[Beacool]

45. Face it, your guy lost.

This is still a democracy and the winner gets to be the standard bearer of the party. We, Hillary supporters, went through the same disappointment in 2008.

It is, what it is.

[rhett o rick]

46. Gloat if you will but your candidate supports those that brought us the poverty

and homelessness and we will fight those you revere so deeply until we drive the corrupt out of our government.

As far as living in a democracy, maybe you didn't read this princeton study:

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746

The Rich and Powerful run our government and Clinton supporters support them.

[tandem5]

38. Voters are the establishment! Under the bus with you!

[Beacool]

44. It's more like a revolution against democracy.

What else to call it when the candidate who is far behind in the pledged delegate count and the popular vote expects the party establishment to subvert the will of the people and nominate him instead of the candidate who rightfully won the nomination???

Sounds more like a totalitarian regime, than democracy in action.

[rhett o rick]

47. It's a revolution for democracy. We now have a corporate run oligarchy. But you embrace

it because you like to be on the tough side. The side that supports the poor and struggling, not so much. Well we will fight you and the wealthy you revere so deeply.

[Jester Messiah]

51. It's a fairly untenable position, for sure, in a situation rife with untenable positions.

But I think there's a very strong case to be made that if you don't want to see President Trump in January, you need to have Bernie at the top of the ticket in November. A lot of people voted for Hillary early in the primary season who might have since come to regret that vote in light of successive events. Now you've got a frontrunner who looks to be in serious danger of federal indictment. THAT is an even more untenable position than Bernie's. The SD's need to do the job for which they were established and safeguard the party from the disastrous outcome that a Hillary nomination will be.