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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(108,033 posts)
Mon May 2, 2016, 09:11 PM May 2016

Sorry, Bernie, but you can’t “contest” the Democratic Convention. Those aren’t the rules.

Senator Sanders has made it abundantly clear that he will not suspend his campaign prior the convention. If it were simply a matter that he truly believed that all voters should have the opportunity to vote for the candidate they prefer and not be denied that chance simply because their primary comes later in the process, that would be one thing. However, Sanders plans to use these last few primaries to boost his argument that he should get the nomination, regardless of the will of the voters.

In a news conference today, Senator Bernie Sanders addressed the fact that he has essentially lost the democratic nomination to Hillary Clinton, by double-talking his way around a plan to flat out subvert the will of the democratic electorate and steal the nomination at the convention. This is simply unprecedented for a candidate to lose by over three-million votes and insist he should be declared the winner.

First things first; Sanders seems to think that because Hillary Clinton will not have the “magic number” in pledged delegates alone, that this makes the July DNC “contested.” This shows an amazing lack of knowledge of the process. The correct term Sanders should be using is “brokered”, however terminology aside, it still will not apply to the convention. A convention becomes brokered only if a candidate fails to secure a majority of overall delegates after the first ballot, this includes ALL delegates including the super delegates. Sanders appears to be operating under the misguided idea that the first ballot is pledged delegates only and that therefore Secretary Clinton will not have the required majority. However, as the first ballot will include all delegates, Secretary Clinton will have a majority and there will be nothing to “contest” or broker.

While Senator Sanders continues to talk about “flipping” the super delegates to his side, this is extremely unlikely. His argument is that if he carried a state by a significant margin then those super delegates should support him. However, when examining the super delegate breakdown, even if he were to flip the delegates from the states he has carried by large margins prior to the first ballot, he would come nowhere near the majority he would need because those states by and large were much smaller states, with an insignificant number of super delegates. The states that Secretary Clinton carried by extremely large margins have much higher super delegate counts. In fact, Sanders would end up with only about 200 of the 700 super delegates, leaving Hillary with roughly what she has now and the clear majority in both pledged and super delegates. He also seems to think that even if he loses a state, the delegates should still support him for coming close, saying that if he “does well” in California (even if he loses), that should be enough for them to flip.

http://www.dailynewsbin.com/opinion/sorry-bernie-but-you-cant-contest-the-democratic-convention-those-arent-the-rules/24652/

17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Her Sister

(6,444 posts)
2. Yes I agree! His so important news conference today!
Mon May 2, 2016, 09:32 PM
May 2016

Again like the article says: Sorry, those aren't the rules!

plus

Obama needed the supers to get him a majority, too, and no one called it a “contested convention” because that would’ve been stupid and asinine.


http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/5/2/1522281/-No-Bernie-the-superdelegates-won-t-bail-you-out-because-you-didn-t-get-more-votes

HRC GOT THIS!

skylucy

(3,739 posts)
3. Thanks for clarifying this. I have been listening to Sanders talk about a "contested" convention and
Mon May 2, 2016, 09:36 PM
May 2016

am perplexed by his arguments. I am just a long time Democrat and political junkie, but I'm shaking my head at the hypocrisy of Sanders and his surrogates regarding the primary process. Do you think that Sanders is actually that ignorant of the Democratic primary process/convention rules/delegates? Or perhaps he knows that his arguments are bogus and is underestimating our intelligence and the level of knowledge rank-and-file Dems have about this?

savalez

(3,517 posts)
4. More on this...
Mon May 2, 2016, 09:51 PM
May 2016

From Josh Marshall of TPM

Now, 'contested convention' doesn't have any real technical meaning. But it certainly seems like Sanders is saying there will be no move to building party unity in advance of the convention (put that off to August, apparently) and his campaign will force genuine votes on the floor of the convention while pressing Super Delegates to back him.

Let's set out explicitly what this means: there is simply no way that Sanders can catch up with Sen. Clinton in either delegates or the popular vote. He may prevent her from getting to 50%+ of the pledged delegates, though I'm skeptical of that. But she will come to the convention as the clear winner in delegates and the popular vote. That means - and the Sanders campaign is saying this openly - that their plan is to get Super Delegates to overrule the results of the primary selection process and make him the nominee.

First of all, there's simply no way that is going to happen. This is why the whole super delegate question has been largely bogus from the beginning. You can say all these super delegates support Clinton. But there's simply no way they wouldn't flip to Sanders if he had a clear majority of the delegates, especially if he also had a clear majority of the popular vote. It's not just me saying that. Look what happened back in 2008. Virtually all the Clinton super delegates eventually flipped to Obama.

The case where supers might really come into play would be a situation where one candidate had a thin lead in delegates but had clearly lost the overall popular vote. The popular vote has no formal meaning in the process. But such a mismatch between the two outcomes might allow the super delegates to feel they could get away with or even have an obligation to step in.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/what-is-sanders-thinking

George II

(67,782 posts)
5. I don't know that anyone in history has "contested" a convention when there were only two candidates
Mon May 2, 2016, 09:54 PM
May 2016

Plus, "contesting" generally takes place after the first ballot and no candidate get a majority of votes*.

So, how the fuck is he going to "contest" the convention? It won't even be "brokered", either - again, just two candidates. Which candidate's camp is he going to be "brokering" with?

*maybe he'll try to get some delegates to not vote on the first ballot so Clinton won't get a majority of delegates voting for her, but she'll STILL get a majority of votes.

Case closed. Over. Bye bye Bernie.

displacedtexan

(15,696 posts)
6. Sanders isn't mistaken.
Mon May 2, 2016, 09:58 PM
May 2016

He's deliberately omitting the fact that the supers are built in and 15% of the total delegates.

DURHAM D

(32,610 posts)
9. BS is just looking for a reason to attend the convention.
Mon May 2, 2016, 10:32 PM
May 2016

He and Mrs. Grifter will be cruising all the hospitality suites and crashing parties in pursuit of Lobster Sliders to match the quality of the one's they had on their flight to see the Pope and also some complimentary bottles of wine.

I bet he asks the DNC to pay for his room as well as Tad's, Jeff's, Nina's and Killer Mike's.



I am so over this bunch

SharonClark

(10,014 posts)
10. Today it was "contested convention"
Mon May 2, 2016, 10:40 PM
May 2016

yesterday it was "public funds shouldn't pay for partisan primaries". It's the outrage of the day and they keep making shit up.

Cha

(297,304 posts)
14. This is what a BS presidency would have been like.. Double talk.. double speak
Tue May 3, 2016, 12:38 AM
May 2016
First things first; Sanders seems to think that because Hillary Clinton will not have the “magic number” in pledged delegates alone, that this makes the July DNC “contested.” This shows an amazing lack of knowledge of the process. The correct term Sanders should be using is “brokered”, however terminology aside, it still will not apply to the convention. A convention becomes brokered only if a candidate fails to secure a majority of overall delegates after the first ballot, this includes ALL delegates including the super delegates. Sanders appears to be operating under the misguided idea that the first ballot is pledged delegates only and that therefore Secretary Clinton will not have the required majority. However, as the first ballot will include all delegates, Secretary Clinton will have a majority and there will be nothing to “contest” or broker.

And, one who would not be dealing in facts.

The contradiction between these two strategies by the Sanders campaign is disturbing and exposes a new level of hypocrisy. In his first argument, Sanders says that the super delegates should vote based on popular vote from their state, but in the second argument he is saying they should ignore the will of the people and vote for him because he is polling slightly better. He is, in effect saying he wants to steal the nomination not just from Secretary Clinton, but from the members of the democratic party who have given her a decisive victory.

Regardless of Sanders strategies, back-up plans and other machinations, there will not be a brokered convention and Senator Sanders will not be the nominee. He may spend the next two months pretending otherwise, but the democratic nomination process is over for everyone but Sanders and his most confused supporters.

sanders may or may not be "misguided".. either way he's trying to dupe the American People and we've already had too many Presidents like that.. No Thank you, BS.

Yo Mama~http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=122726



BootinUp

(47,165 posts)
15. I agree, and actually a little surprised by Bernie. Of course I wasn't paying
Tue May 3, 2016, 12:41 AM
May 2016

attention in March when I guess he had threatened to do this then.

Cha

(297,304 posts)
16. I just updated my post to add the last two important paragraphs, FYI.. Yeah.. unfortunately,
Tue May 3, 2016, 12:51 AM
May 2016

I'm not surprised and even expected it.. I've been sickeningly aware and paying too much attention to what he's up to and his MO..

My hope is that.. his supporters(not the ones like on DU, of course) but, those who actually care about not handing the 2016 election over to a maniac like trump will start to rebel.. there's one revolution for him.

Propane Jane ?@docrocktex26 · 55m55 minutes ago

The truly disgusting part about Bernie's contested convention aspirations is how he thinks he's entitled to override the will of POC/women.

https://twitter.com/theonlyadult



Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Hillary Clinton»Sorry, Bernie, but you ca...