This really sums it up

[amborin]

This is the perfect symbolic ending to the Democratic Party primary,” wrote the Intercept journalist on Tuesday. “The nomination is consecrated by a media organization, on a day when nobody voted, based on secret discussions with anonymous establishment insiders and donors whose identities the media organization — incredibly — conceals.”

He went on to write that while being the first female nominee of a major political party in the U.S. is important symbolically speaking, there is not much else to be thrilled about with regards to the results of the 2016 primary contests.

From The Intercept:

[Monday] night, the Associated Press — on a day when nobody voted — surprised everyone by abruptly declaring the Democratic Party primary over and Hillary Clinton the victor. The decree, issued the night before the California primary in which polls show Clinton and Bernie Sanders in a very close race, was based on the media organization’s survey of “superdelegates”: the Democratic Party’s 720 insiders, corporate donors, and officials whose votes for the presidential nominee count the same as the actually elected delegates. AP claims that superdelegates who had not previously announced their intentions privately told AP reporters that they intend to vote for Clinton, bringing her over the threshold. AP is concealing the identity of the decisive superdelegates who said this.

Although the Sanders campaign rejected the validity of AP’s declaration — on the ground that the superdelegates do not vote until the convention and he intends to try to persuade them to vote for him — most major media outlets followed the projection and declared Clinton the winner. ... The decisive edifice of superdelegates is itself anti-democratic and inherently corrupt: designed to prevent actual voters from making choices that the party establishment dislikes. But for a party run by insiders and funded by corporate interests, it’s only fitting that its nomination process ends with such an ignominious, awkward, and undemocratic sputter.

snip

the actual substance — rallying behind a Wall Street-funded, status quo-perpetuating, multimillionaire militarist — is grim in the extreme. The Democratic Party got exactly the ending it deserved.

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/glenn_greenwald_spot-on_ap_premature_declaration_hillary_clinton_20160608

[tonyt53]

1. Yep, we did. We got rid of the sore losers.

[peace13]

4. Pretty impressive response.

[dchill]

6. Leaving you with a MAXIMUM 29% share of the electorate.

Try to get the substance of the article, and ruminate.

[TwilightZone]

9. Only if you don't understand who independents are.

The vast majority of them lean left or right. They're independents only because they don't bother with party labels. The number who are truly independent is a small fraction of the total. The ones who lean left will go primarily to Hillary.

As for 29%, that's outdated information. Dems are now 36% of the electorate and rising. They've been the largest voting bloc in the country since December.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/party-identification

[dchill]

13. Everybody is a fraction of the total.

How much of the uptick in Dem registration do you attribute to Bernie Sanders' candidacy? What happens now?

[tonyt53]

28. In states with those open primaries, they registered as indies. CA showed the influence of Bernie

in the Democratic Party registration.

[dchill]

38. CA showed the influence of the AP.

[George Eliot]

49. What about the influence of Jerry Brown?

He campaigned for Hillary. Me, I think it was jerry and minorities. I'm not sure the AP bad a big influence there. But the AP ploy was a dirty trick IMO.

[larkrake]

39. that dem number includes progressives, thanks to Bernie, so dont include those

they wont vote for lesser, they will vote only downticket, then there are the flood of dems leaving the party because it is going dark. They will likely pick and choose on the ballot and it wont be for a wreckless hawk as pres. Luckily they wont vote trump. You end up with 20% of the dem electorate. add minorities who feel they have to vote and she wins, but not by dems, and not by a large margin.Once she is in the WH, every betrayal will drive dems to leave the party. Loyalty died this year, in both partys for jamming bad candidates down our gullets

and dems are not the largest block- Indys are over 40% and growing hugely after the convention.If they ever organize, both the DNC and the RNC will die off.

[lapfog_1]

19. The real question is

What is the goal of the Hillary Clinton campaign... was it ONLY to win the nomination?

If so, congratulations.

If not, "getting rid" of anyone who might vote for Hillary in the general election might not be such a good idea, right?

[ljm2002]

23. Y'all can go ahead and be sore winners in the primary...

...then see how well your candidate does in the general.

Good luck with that.

[peace13]

2. Bleak....

..couple that with the fact that I can't get the song, There's Got to be a Morning After out of my head and today is....well, today is a challenge!

[Trust Buster]

3. The time has come to lay down our digital arms. If we need a June 16 deadline imposed on us

by Skinner to moderate negative attacks, then that speaks badly of us. I propose that we surprise the DU Administration and reconcile before June 16.

[avaistheone1]

8. B.S. this is not a negative attack.

What the AP did is unforgivable. It undermines democracy imo.

[Trust Buster]

11. Re-read the last highlight in the OP and tell me that will fly on June 16.

[djean111]

5. Well, at least I can stop being whatever a "Democrat" is, these days! n/t

[vintx]

21. This. nt

[ncliberal]

43. +1. nt

[TwilightZone]

7. The AP can count to 2383. They did so, and reported the results.

The rest of the blather is just nonsense. Had it been another day later, Greenwald would still be whining.

[floppyboo]

12. Why is every critique 'whining'?

If 'whining' bothers you so much, you should burn all your history books right now.

[TwilightZone]

15. A critique based on intentionally false information is not a critique.

It's whining. Greenwald knows full well that he's lying and pushes on regardless.

[floppyboo]

20. A critique is an argued opinion based on interpretation of facts

that invites a counter critique of its flaws. Which facts do you find were interpreted falsely?

[senz]

22. Hillary now has 2,178 pledged delegates. We do not know how the SDs will vote in July.

2,178

[Trenzalore]

42. You don't know how the pledged delegates are going to vote either

Bernie and Hillary can mend fences in the next 3 weeks and he releases his delegates.

Something unfortunate could happen to either one of them.

That is why they are calling it the presumptive nominee and not nominee.

[ljm2002]

25. First, they did not just "count to 2383"...

...they actively solicited commitments from uncommitted (or not publicly committed) superdelegates. "We've been rounding up superdelegates" from an AP email.

Second, even the DNC has chided the media about including superdelegates in the counts, and yet they had to include them to get to 2383.

Had Hillary reached 2383 in pledged delegates, I would certainly have no objection to that being reported, the very instant it happened. But to have the media play an active role, and then make a breathless announcement the evening before 6 states including California voted, and having to include superdelegates that they had actively solicited -- that is an outrageous turn of events. Shame on them for doing that.

[azurnoir]

10. I missed Hillary's victory speech last was she wearing Tweed by any chance?

[bvf]

16. *Snerk*

That'll go woosh! with a lot of folks, but it's very apt.

Hope Google doesn't break.

[azurnoir]

17. well I'm not sure if it's still in fashion oe what

[libdem4life]

18. Apt, it is.

[edgineered]

30. Damn surprised that it took 26 minutes

for the woosh! sound to make it into print.

[uponit7771]

26. Yeap, ANOTHER sanders post making an issue of what Clinton wears... .sigh... so deaf

[bvf]

31. Whoosh! (Never gets old, Ed.)

[Faux pas]

14. Kickin' for the truth!

[AllTooEasy]

29. Bullshit: This is how it ended

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512157764

...by people VOTING

[senz]

24. Yep. The last cheating dishonesty in a long dishonest career.

Investigators are still on her tail.

[msanthrope]

27. Ask Ken Starr how that worked out for him. nt

[bvf]

33. Better you should ask Al Gore.

[msanthrope]

34. Al forgot to use a popular President, and got screwed by Nader. nt

[bvf]

35. Al didn't dare let a blown president

with near-record-high negative ratings anywhere near him. By the time Clinton left office, 58% of voters--all voters--deemed him untrustworthy and dishonest.

Hillary's numbers are already in the same ballpark. If she manages to squeak by Trump in the GE, which is doubtful, she'll make him look like a piker on that score, less than halfway into a first and only term.

Enjoy.

[msanthrope]

36. Nonsense. Clinton had record approval ratings leaving office. And your use of the term

"blown" reflects poorly on you....not President Clinton.

James Wolcott described this faux outrage about fellatio....

http://thecommons4change.blogspot.com/2005/04/james-wolcott-on-some-sad-laps-no.html?m=1

[bvf]

37. Nope. Not nonsense at all.

As he was leaving office, a CNN/USA TODAY/Gallup poll revealed 45% said they'd miss him. While 55% thought he "would have something worthwhile to contribute and should remain active in public life", 68% thought he'd be remembered for his "involvement in personal scandal", and 58% answered "No" to the question "Do you generally think Bill Clinton is honest and trustworthy?".

Emphasis mine.

As to "blown," would you have preferred the term "unfaithful"?

Again, not nonsense. Use your head.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_image_of_Bill_Clinton

[msanthrope]

40. 73% approval rating after impeachment...from your own link. Thanks for proving

my point.

Don't let the Clenis get you down.

[bvf]

41. So you can't dispute the numbers I posted, choosing

instead to wrongly call them "nonsense" before going for the Big Deflect.

Typical. What synonym for "Clinton blow job" would you prefer I use in the future? Hate to offend your delicate sensibilities, so I offer that in the spirit of unity.

Who knows? Maybe the next administration will bring us a reason to seek out new and better synonyms for "cuckold," as well. Or maybe, just "repeat offender."

Perhaps not, though. Given how poorly Hillary's stacking up against the idiot Trump, we probably needn't worry so, at least about that.

My original point stands. You can't truthfully deny it, much as you clearly, desperately want to.

[msanthrope]

44. I find that the people most concerned about Bill's infidelities tend to have Karma

revisit them at a date certain....see, Newt, Craig, Vitter, Starr.....don't fear the Clenis.

[bvf]

45. So you have nothing to say

but still insist on saying it.

OK. Dealing with people who do that is the easiest thing in the world.

[msanthrope]

46. Oh....I think I said it. You did, too. Or did you not realize precisely what you telegraphed to

us all?

[msanthrope]

32. Ask Ken Starr how that worked out for him. nt

[Tarc]

47. "The Democratic Party got exactly the ending it deserved"

Yep, the voters voted; they didn't pick Bernie.

How 'bout that?

[Doctor_J]

48. She is the establishment candidate. All of the money and media are in her favor.

Quite enlightening and revolting