Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TDale313

(7,820 posts)
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 04:06 PM Jun 2016

Can't both be true?

Can't it be the case that yes, Hillary has won Democratic Nomination and that yes, there are widespread issues with our electoral and nominating process that can and should be addressed? And that while it may not have changed the result, it's not ok if voters were denied their right to vote or if their votes were not counted or counted correctly? (Personally I'd add can't we agree that Superdelegates are inherently undemocratic but I know too many Hillary supporters are way too invested in defending that part of the process.)

24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Can't both be true? (Original Post) TDale313 Jun 2016 OP
Absolutely. Juicy_Bellows Jun 2016 #1
Sure. And we need look no further to start than Hortensis Jun 2016 #10
I agree. It's a big mess and it needs to be fixed and certified if faith in the Juicy_Bellows Jun 2016 #11
Ppen up registration and re-registration, make it as easy Hortensis Jun 2016 #13
I've got no problem with that at all. Juicy_Bellows Jun 2016 #15
Oregon does it and has mail-in ballots. Hortensis Jun 2016 #17
I live in Oregon. Juicy_Bellows Jun 2016 #19
Oh, I love this forum for this stuff. I've read Hortensis Jun 2016 #21
I imagine they are non-postage paid as well. Juicy_Bellows Jun 2016 #22
May your stamps always adhere. Hortensis Jun 2016 #24
Yes nt Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #2
That level of nuance will be gone in a few days. Too few are capable of it, and too many underpaid. arcane1 Jun 2016 #3
Lol...the irony CorkySt.Clair Jun 2016 #7
Here's an example of two things that can't be true. Trust Buster Jun 2016 #4
Yes LoverOfLiberty Jun 2016 #5
Can't we also agree that caucuses are undemocratic? They obviously are. YouDig Jun 2016 #6
That's a revolutionary stance, as the Party is often very pro-caucus, Harry Reid helped push Bluenorthwest Jun 2016 #12
Can't we agree that caucuses are inherently undemocratic? oberliner Jun 2016 #8
Can we agree about Caucases being undemocratic? And that having the first two lunamagica Jun 2016 #9
I have no problem with low cost, low risk states being at the front end HereSince1628 Jun 2016 #16
Yes. randome Jun 2016 #14
Absolutely. JoePhilly Jun 2016 #18
Yes. And it can also be true that BS supporters called many things "fraud" that were in no way Squinch Jun 2016 #20
Jumping on the bandwagon of every wacky conspiracy theory that some blog posts TwilightZone Jun 2016 #23

Juicy_Bellows

(2,427 posts)
1. Absolutely.
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 04:12 PM
Jun 2016

No one, regardless of party or candidate, should tolerate even the slightest impropriety during the voting process - FULL STOP.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
10. Sure. And we need look no further to start than
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 05:59 PM
Jun 2016

the caucuses, which are very effective in suppressing the vote and keeping control in the hands of local power structures. Of course, the states will have to do that, though the national party might have to somehow come up with some of the extra funding needed to help make it happen--in those states at all willing.

Given the wide-scale election tampering by hostile outsiders through open primaries, intended specifically to overset the will of the party faithful, that also needs to be addressed and put a stop to. But the states will also have to handle that also.

Then there is all the inexcusable sloppiness, negligence, and opportunity for tampering at the state and local levels. This one's really big. The states, counties, precincts, and local party structures will have to fix that item by item or through complete overhauls of their systems. And we really, really need a truly effective and frightening federal mechanism for tossing governors and other state officials in prison, go directly to jail, do not pass go, for election tampering.

Lotta work to do.

Juicy_Bellows

(2,427 posts)
11. I agree. It's a big mess and it needs to be fixed and certified if faith in the
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 06:05 PM
Jun 2016

democratic process is to survive.

I do believe in open primaries though, I understand the party may not like them but the draconian registration laws in places like NY are too much in my opinion. Closed or open, either way, I'd like it to be uniform across the nation but I know that's unlikely.



Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
13. Ppen up registration and re-registration, make it as easy
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 06:10 PM
Jun 2016

as possible right up as close as workable to the election, but no to open primaries. The malicious tampering with the Democratic Party elections in this primary was huge.

It won't do left-leaning indies any good to be able to wake up on election day and think, "Gee, I think I like X better after all" if they're outnumbered by conservatives determined to make sure their choice is canceled out.

They'll just have to have their "gee" moment a couple days earlier.

Juicy_Bellows

(2,427 posts)
15. I've got no problem with that at all.
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 06:15 PM
Jun 2016

That sounds like a workable solution that I imagine most people could get behind.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
17. Oregon does it and has mail-in ballots.
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 07:41 PM
Jun 2016

Interestingly, though, where states have tried maill-in, for those people who don't mail them in right away, the response rate drops significantly below just going out on polling day. So the states have to mail follow-up reminders to try to bring the numbers up. Who'da guessed?

Juicy_Bellows

(2,427 posts)
19. I live in Oregon.
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 07:44 PM
Jun 2016

I think one thing that may contribute and that I had to do was to buy stamps - who the hell uses stamps anymore? I would be all for a slight tax to have postage paid return envelopes for ballots. As long as I don't lose them, I should have enough stamps for my lifetime now (20 forever stamps should about do it).

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
21. Oh, I love this forum for this stuff. I've read
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 08:22 PM
Jun 2016

about Oregon, but no one mentioned stamps! As you say, who uses stamps anymore? Though if they're older they might be able to find an old $0.37er in the back of a drawer. If a $0.17er or several $0.03ers turn up with more poking around, they're a go.

But I believe what I read about states' experience with mail-in wasn't confined to Oregon. Maybe the other states didn't spring for postage either, but I'm sure it wasn't mentioned.

Juicy_Bellows

(2,427 posts)
22. I imagine they are non-postage paid as well.
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 08:25 PM
Jun 2016

I now keep my stamps in a safe place for elections. I thought it was an interesting facet of the process and you're right, you never hear about it.



I like civil discussions myself and I've enjoyed our chat!

 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
3. That level of nuance will be gone in a few days. Too few are capable of it, and too many underpaid.
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 04:12 PM
Jun 2016
 

Trust Buster

(7,299 posts)
4. Here's an example of two things that can't be true.
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 04:21 PM
Jun 2016

Super delegates cannot be "inherently un-democratic" while small Caucuses and open primaries to determine the Democratic nominee IS democratic. Point being, this thread is too cute by half. You wish to end un-democratic behavior that you think did not benefit Sanders but also wish to ignore the un-democratic behavior that you believe benefitted Sanders. No Dice.

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
6. Can't we also agree that caucuses are undemocratic? They obviously are.
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 04:23 PM
Jun 2016

The fact that Bernie and Berners can't see that is one of the prime pieces of evidence that they don't actually care about democracy, they just care about Bernie winning.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
12. That's a revolutionary stance, as the Party is often very pro-caucus, Harry Reid helped push
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 06:07 PM
Jun 2016

Nevada to go caucus in 2008, the Democratic Party in Washington sued the State to insist upon that caucus. I don't care for caucuses, but the Democratic Party sure does. So the call to end caucuses is in fact a call for reform of the process and a reform that is not going to be fully supported by the Party without much persuasion.

 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
8. Can't we agree that caucuses are inherently undemocratic?
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 04:25 PM
Jun 2016

Or are Bernie supporters way too invested in defending that part of the process?

lunamagica

(9,967 posts)
9. Can we agree about Caucases being undemocratic? And that having the first two
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 05:48 PM
Jun 2016

contest be in NH and Iowa, two of the least diverse states in the nation is undemocratic?

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
18. Absolutely.
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 07:43 PM
Jun 2016

Oh ... on your last point ... the attack on Hillary supporters regarding super delegates ... you do realize that she'd win without them ... and now its only Bernie supporters who are PRAYING that the SDs flip to Bernie.

Is THAT something that we can agree is also TRUE?

Squinch

(50,773 posts)
20. Yes. And it can also be true that BS supporters called many things "fraud" that were in no way
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 08:19 PM
Jun 2016

fraudulent. Like the New York registration period as an example.

Disclaimer: no I don't like it, but it was put there by Republicans (because Democrats don't get off their asses in the off year elections) and it applied to supporters of both candidates. Hillary's supporters just dealt with it and BS's called it fraud and filed a specious lawsuit, all the while calling Hillary's supporters names about it.

TwilightZone

(25,342 posts)
23. Jumping on the bandwagon of every wacky conspiracy theory that some blog posts
Sat Jun 18, 2016, 08:26 PM
Jun 2016

that's based on complete nonsense doesn't prove anything. It just makes people look silly and a little gullible.

It also overshadows instances of real voter suppression, like the AZ GOP drastically reducing the number of polling places ostensibly as a budgetary matter. *That* is overt voter suppression.

We have superdelegates so we don't end up with the left equivalent of Donald Trump. The GOP is wishing they had SDs with similar influence to ours just about now.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Can't both be true?