2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHow the AP Screwed Sanders, and Other Tales From Tuesday Night
Yup, it's the Pitts.
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/36350-how-the-associated-press-screwed-sanders-and-other-tales-from-tuesday-night
Wait, what? Yeah, they did that. They polled a bunch of Democratic Party elites -- "superdelegates" -- and decided Clinton had enough delegates to call it a day. The margin? One delegate. Five primaries and a caucus that would have decided the race fair and square 24 hours later got tossed into the dustbin because the AP wanted the hot take, the big scoop, and in doing so broke a cardinal rule of journalism: They became the story instead of reporting the story.
The "news" media's reaction to that declaration was like tossing a live hand grenade into a hedge filled with chickadees: lots of squawking and flapping and smoke and a ringing in the ears from the explosion. All the AP had to do was wait a day. They didn't, and it was a mess. Beyond the impact on the presidential side, there are the down-ticket races to consider. The AP's little wingding certainly depressed voter turnout across the board -- exactly 354 people voted in the North Dakota Democratic caucus on Tuesday -- and that depressed turnout affected down-ticket races all over the country.
Sanders supporters by and large have been reading the writing on the wall for a while. All they wanted was the opportunity to die on their feet, to take it to the end and let the chips fall. Now? They're pissed and feeling cheated. We're deciding nominees through polls of party elites? It was as undemocratic an act as I have ever witnessed after Bush v. Gore and the shenanigans in Ohio in 2004, and there will be consequences down the line, especially for Clinton. Good luck bringing Bernie's folks into the fold for the big push to November after that crud. It was disgraceful.
msongs
(67,193 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)onenote
(42,374 posts)as they've been doing all along.
Let's imagine for a moment that this survey produced information that a number of previously uncommitted SDs were now ready to jump on Sanders side (or that AP had otherwise learned that some Clinton SDs were switching to Sanders as Sanders was hoping they would). Now let's imagine that AP had that information -- which would have been a big shot in the arm to Sanders and would have lent credence to his claim that the SDs were flappable) on Monday, but doesn't publish it until after the voting on Tuesday.
The Sanders campaign and his supporters, quite justifiably, would be up in arms about the media "hiding" that helpful information.
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,297 posts)The man has the keenest eye around these parts, and this post shows just how keen.
Thank you, Will, and thank you, KamaAina, for bringing this to us.
A big, fat K&R.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)ever since he left.
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,297 posts)blm
(112,919 posts)heh
.Will Pitt.
; )
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)How the AP Screwed Sanders, and Other Fairy Tales From Tuesday Night
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)PADemD
(4,482 posts)I would be willing to donate to a fund if Bernie decides to sue.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)And given the 1st Amendment, I would hope that anybody tried would be held in contempt by the judge.
Feeling cheated and robbed. And bullied and mocked for my values and beliefs. And for not immediately turning my cheek like a meek little kitten.
It will be a long way back to the fold. I'm not done grieving, pouting or feeling sorry for myself.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)voter turnout. 8:20 pm. No time for the Sanders camp to effectively communicate its patent manipulation but perfect timing for the morning news.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)And really, Pitt thinks it's unusual that a caucus in a tiny state got barely any turnout?