...has been on MSM giving his opinion and the people are letting him know what they think.

Do you think that's going to convince him to switch?

Shall I go find super delegates who are not so public in their support and show you what they've said? Nah, why bother. You'll just make another excuse. But even a cursory assessment of the way Bernie supporters are acting on Facebook should be more than enough to let any reasonable person know why most of those supers won't be motivated to switch.

...if you are a public servant and you have publicly stated your opinion/beliefs/how you will vote you cannot be surprised when the public responds. It's part of your job to hear what the people have to say whether or not you agree with it.

The Super Delegates do not operate in a private vacuum, nor is it reasonable for them to act as if they are unapproachable. They had the option to be undecided until their state voted or until the convention.

My personal opinion is that the Super Delegates should not be involved at all; however as they are, they should have to follow the will of the people in the areas they represent.

Do I think Dean will switch, no I don't. Have I contacted him, no.....however if I get an email from him first, all bets are off.

And you say that "they should have to follow the will of the people in the areas they represent."

However, I notice all I see from Bernie supporters on Raúl Grijalva's page is applause for sticking with Bernie. Do you believe that he should switch to Hillary because Arizona went with her?

(waiting for the crickets. They need a crickets smiley)

The Super Delegates should follow the vote of the people they represent....in all cases.

No, I don't this type of behavior will change Dean's vote. However I think he needs to know what people think. I have been told many times, by politicians, that a well written letter carries more weight than a post online.

Well that makes you quite unique so I applaud you your consistency. It is a rare trait that you should be commended for.

However, if you visit Grijalva's Facebook, while there is not a place for Visitor posts, you can see occasional comments congratulating him for staying with Bernie, in spite of the will of the people. I'm curious why there is not one Bernie supporter who, thinking like you do, is concerned with Grijalva's going against the will of the state.

https://www.facebook.com/Rep.Grijalva/

You are absolutely right about a written letter. However, the volume of vitriol on those Facebook pages is probably incensing. As a person with 22 years in digital marketing, I know how much these candidates must cringe when they find out about all that horrific behavior on their social media pages. I can promise you that it has an impact.

I think Supers should be removed entirely but since they do exist, I do share your belief that they should vote to match the people they represent. However, what should a Super do in this scenario?

Let's say a Super is the Dem congressional representative for a district. That rep's district votes for candidate A but candidate B wins the overall state. Should that Super support candidate A or candidate B?

Ultimately, every method in which you try to graft super delegates onto a particular preordained path, whether it be supporting the popular vote nationally, delegate count nationally, the popular vote or delegate count of a state, or go granular right down to the district, every one of those methods is merely an argument for why we shouldn't have super delegates at all, and I agree that we should't. However, their expressed purpose is to go with what's good for the party. It'd definitely non-democratic and that's why I disagree with having them even though they just happen to be supporting my candidate, but that remains their purpose. Any attempt to graft them to another metric simply makes the argument that we should just use the metric we already have: pledged delegates.

....Senators should follow the state. I think a House Representative should follow their district. So that will certainly mix this all this up. It goes back to the will of the voters, meaning the actual voters who elected the person to office initially.


Why does the American system need to be so wonky?

Of course, even if that was the case, Clinton's lead at this point would be nearly 400 delegates and she would only need to win around 35 percent of the remaining delegates to hit 2383 by the Convention.

In other words, the race would formally end sooner under your approach than it will under the current rules.

Stop trying to inject common sense into all this.

people that way. thank god we know it has little to do with SBS himself.

....I don't think it is helpful at all. I cringe at many of the posts, but I haven't made them. I think everyone has a right to express themselves and contact their public servants about decisions that they make or statements made on MSM.

But each of you has the opportunity to reach out these people as their posts are all public I blurred them as an added courtesy but you can go to any of these pages and say, "hey, I don't think this is the way to reach people" and maybe that might impress upon the supers that Bernie's people aren't all bunch of histrionics.

....they will either listen or not.

It's not just Bernie people acting in an angry manner; I've seen supporters for all candidates acting poorly. Politics brings it out.

I will have to dig through Grijalva's page a bit more. Maybe it's there. Maybe it's not. I'm not saying it isn't out there but it's definitely not as strong or vitriolic but by all means, here is a list of super delegates with their affiliations. Maybe you can find me a super delegate page filled with vitriolic Hillary supporters?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Democratic_Party_superdelegates,_2016

....has received some nasty comments on his support of Bernie.


As far as vitriolic Hillary supporters, I need go no further than friends who instead of debating the issues began throwing around words like Berniebot, kool-aid drinker, and others. These are people I have been friends with for a long time and even when they voted for McCain in 2008 I never said anything except that their vote is their choice. Their vitriol and personal attacks have destroyed a friendship.

Edit: I get why people lash out, politics can be just soul wrenching. It's the personal attacks by people who know me in real life that bother me the most.

I got called a paid troll until I just said screw it and made my profile a public homage to all things me. But that didn't stop it. No, not at all. Some of the same folks that had called me a paid troll began to attack me personally, somehow forgetting to admit in the process that no, I am not actually a paid troll. I don't need Hillary's money.

But ultimately the attacks me don't matter. I'm not a super delegate. How these supers are effected by these attacks is the real point of my post.

both for gossip that is taken for news and as a way to communicate to candidates.
Seriously- does anyone care that phone calls and emails are recorded and FB posts like that do more harm than good? Does anyone care they are repeating bullshit rumors and embarrassing themselves and there candidate with their naivete? It seems not.

THIS is how Sanders wins over superdelegates???
remove the superdelegates and the nursing home guy still loses.

I see your point about harassment in threats but Bernie's not exactly in a walker.

Moreover, you must not have read my post. Since Tuesday, many have switched from attacking to pleading. Heck, some sound like they're downright begging. Couldn't they have tried that tact in the beginning?

I'm curious, though. Do you think these attacks will convince the supers to switch?

They alert on everything here. I do agree that there is a change in tone, but at the same time there still seems like that is a lot of anger.

Attacks are only going to make the super delegates strengthen their resolve.

And I agree totally.

Pick any one of them, find their Facebook, and see how they're being treated:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Democratic_Party_superdelegates,_2016

The bigger DPLs are waiting still! Except Bill, but no one expects him to do anything else.

allocated to individuals with unfettered discretion?

Best solution would be to get rid of super delegates moving forward. Remove them from the equation.

Get rid of them. If they're just going to support whoever has the most pledged delegates nationally, then what's the point of them really?

However, since so many Bernie supporters are saying they should not go with the pledged delegates nationally but rather their state majority, why are they not making the same argument about Raúl Grijalva? I know, I know, I'm only going to get crickets on that question or someone will jump in and call me a paid troll. Anything to avoid the actual question.

And by the way, wouldn't the supers going with the majority of their states still ultimately end up in a majority of super delegates for Hillary? It's merely a difference between racking them up now or racking them up later.

following the national winner.

Yeah, they'd be winner takes all at the state level rather than going with the proportional take at the national level, but ultimately they are going to be seen as a Fuck You spoiler no matter whose candidate is losing. The supers may be supporting my candidate in this instance, but I still disagree with them overall because that's what being consistent is about. For example, we might have a Pope that seems great, but once you set the precedent of making the Vatican the next Liberty university, you're chained to them whether the Pope is someone you can agree with or someone you can't.

Super delegates should go. But given that they're still here, I can't see how treating them the way they're being treated is a way to court their votes.

Yep. Took me days to make!

I thought you were a Hillary supporter being sarcastic then I saw your pro-Bernie posts.

You actually think I made these up?

Well, here are the receipts:

https://www.facebook.com/Howard-Dean-34668722504/
(click "Visitor Posts&quot

https://www.facebook.com/TammyBaldwin/
(click "Visitor Posts&quot

I'm floored here. Do you really think I was naive enough to post these screen captures without the power to back them up?

But, to quote you, thanks for the laugh. Well, it was more of a chuckle really.

Their candidate is a fail because of them largely.

I'm sure they persuaded zero supers with their hateful swarm attacks.

Here's Tammy Baldwin ...

...voted for Bernie. Why isn't she following suit as a Super Delegate? Her personal vote is one thing, but when the state you represent votes for the other candidate she should follow suit on her Super Delegate vote.

When Arizona went with Hillary?

My opinion is that all Super Delegates need to follow the vote of the people in their states. All of them, no exceptions.

As far as people on FB, that's their opinion and I can't bend them to my opinion.

But if you're not expressing this vitriol either way on Facebook, then my critique does not apply to you personally. It does, however, make a statement about why these super delegates probably won't go with the vote of the people in their states.

Mind you, it's not like that would help Bernie anyway. Whether the super delegates reflected the voters, as they most certainly will, by going with who has the majority of pledged delegates nationally, or whether they do so state by state, I doubt very much that the number will be all that much different. It may have a different psychological impact in that those news outlets that include the supers in the delegate counts may convince people that Hillary is the stronger candidate and you'd certainly have a point there. I agree that super delegates should go away, but I do not think this kind of behavior is going to gain their support. I imagine some of them will stay with Hillary out of spite towards people cluttering up their Facebooks with hate.

You're aware of that, right?

In my perfect world there would be no Super Delegates, it would just be the vote of the people. I find all of the different rules for each state to be a bit unfair. It reminds me of playing Monopoly with someone who made up their own rules. I'd like to see a universal method for each state regarding primaries. For the record I hate the caucus system.

I am a Bernie supporter, however I really think the election system here is messed up. My thoughts on this go back a very longtime.

His Super Delegate vote is for Sanders. But FL went for Hillary by 30 points?


But of course many Bernie supporters are silent on that issue. You being an exception


There is a lot of Pot and Kettle stuff going on.

... and I mean that honestly. I have an obsessive devotion to consistency. I will be the one that noticed the change in the premise from a movie to its sequel. I'm the Annie Wilkes screaming that he never got out of the cock-a-doodie car. Inconsistencies and hypocrisy explode in my brain whether I want them to or not. So I appreciate people like Bjornsdotter who are willing to stand for a consistent application of principle.

However, I also believe that she, like me, is the exception to the rule. Many people lashed out at me on here and said I'd be ok if Hillary was invited to the Vatican instead of Bernie. How little they know me. Quite frankly, had that been a stunt she pulled, I'd have instantly switched my support to Bernie over it. That's how much it pissed me off and that's how consistent I am so when I meet a Bjornsdotter, I give her props.

while the larger class of pledged delegates be awarded proportionately (i.e., the superdelegate should vote based on which candidate won that state's primary).

Of course, if that is how it worked, Clinton's lead now would be over 550 delegates and she would need only 28 percent of the remaining delegates to capture the nomination.

I don't think that's what you want.

...is for there to be no Super Delegates at all. Just the vote of the people and then however it shakes out it shakes out. I don't like the idea of an "Overlord" delegate fixing where they think the people made a mistake.

Clinton just needs 35 percent of the remaining delegates to win the nomination outright.

Yes I support Bernie, but that support does not influence my belief about the American election system. If you had asked me the same question 20 years ago my answers would have been the same.

I think the system here is wonky.

It's not even their established mission. What you really should be arguing for is getting rid of them.

...but I think when you are an elected representative and you choose not to support the candidate your voters elected I think you can expect some discord.

I am against all Super Delegates and I don't care who they support. The system here is wonky.

But barely anyone in play today had anything to do with their implementation. From what I've read, the party used to have a far greater role in picking the candidate than they do now and the supers were a way to balance both ends of that spectrum.

Moreover, what we think about what the delegates should do is one thing. It does not change the fact that they exist and they operate according to specified rules. And it also does not change the fact that you can catch a bee better with honey than with vinegar and if you want super delegates to do what you think they should rather than what they are specified to do, well, being nasty to them isn't the way to accomplish that and it's clear that you recognize this also.

... but will it warm her to the idea of Bernie? That remains to be seen, doesn't it?

I think you missed the memo.

to the ones on Dean's page.

Then it's kind to blur out their names - they would have been right there in the post.

... except Raúl Grijalva of course. Gotta love their lack of consistency.

Whatever the super delegates should or shouldn't do is secondary to what their actual purpose is, which is to vote based on the good of the party and was specifically designed to avoid grass roots populists.

I am all for getting rid of the super delegates. It makes things simpler anyway. But given that they are in place at this time, berating and threatening them probably isn't the way to earn their vote.

Hillary supporters win the assholes of the internet award.

Hillary supporters seem to have the most backassward sets of principles.

Democracy is not as important as arbitrary party rules

Complaining about voter disenfranchisement is just whining

"The Poor" is just another voting block and has no relationship to poverty

Political activism doesn't count unless it's part of the establishment party system

Random name calling from some Bernie posters is all on Bernie, but a 'child porn' attack on Bernie from a known Hillary supporters has nothing to do with Hillary.

50 years of consistently progressive policies makes Bernie a 'fake'. 50 years of consistent policy flip-flopping based on political expediency makes Hillary a 'true progressive'.

Hillary supporters vote for the most hated Democratic candidate possible without appealing the 22nd Amendment, then lecture Bernie supporters that if Hillary loses it will be their fault.

They have no leg to stand on.

... these nasty assholes remind me of the out-of-touch parent who brings their spoiled child over to your house, lets them wander around breaking shit, throwing tantrums, and showing nothing but disrespect, then comes up with the lame ass excuse "Oh, he's just expressing himself." WTF!!

You and I are old skool!

I remember Gladys Knight on The Talk when they were discussing Janet Jackson trying to get the cell phone back from Paris...

"That child wouldn'ta had teeth."

Well, I'm sure she was exaggerating (though this is Gladys we're talking about—I wouldn't wanna cross her), but the fact remains, we really do live a world now where their place runner up is a thing to throw a party for.

To hear the new age child-rearing gurus talk about the way I was raised and disciplined, it's a wonder we even have a functioning civilized society.

isn't trying to subvert democracy with superdelegates.

And the child is not an adult, although the difference is hard to determine.

Few people in the game now are responsible for them and if you think we should get rid of them, and I actually agree that we should, then why didn't Bernie start a revolution for that before I ran out and bought an I'm a Democrat button and decided to ride the party's coattails. Sounds to me like he didn't bother to understand the rules because he carpetbagged his way into the party.

There are literally posts like that in this thread.

I don't see anything on that level on this thread. Sure, they're on quite a few others, but that's neither here nor there. We're not super delegates. How many votes is one super delegate worth?

Those posts and every one just like it in every thread that contains them is why I made it. It's one thing to defend a candidate or a fellow supporter. It's quite another thing to defend the indefensible.

"Fuck the liberals", or "and do you know what the millennials want to do, they want to shoot every third person on Wall Street and everything will be fine" really.

People will always -- and have a right to -- vent their frustrations at those who contribute to it. Such is life. Get over it.

I'm not personally offended. On the contrary, I'm glad they're doing it because it helps my candidate.

I'm just curious how you think it actually helps yours.

How very smug of you!

I merely said what I said because you founded your argument on a false premise. The real premise is merely the question: does berating and threatening super delegates help your cause or hurt it? I suppose we'd have to take this on a case by case because I imagine that some might respond to threats and abuse. My guess is, however, that most won't.

And none of those twitters were directed at you; are you really that thin skinned?

People vent and actually need to vent, and the just internet happens to be a place where they do that more freely because they're anonymous, mindlessly in the moment, and in almost all cases have no reason to be concerned about consequences as there are rarely personal repercussions. Are you really just realizing that now?

To answer your question, I don't care. Berating and threatening them won't have any effect at all ... they are already sold out. Frankly, sold their souls in my opinion.

Neither righteousness or outrage are generally my cup of tea.

As you calling it venting, I call it escalating and here is where that road leads ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511862044

... it certainly doesn't lead to super delegates changing their votes. I'm glad Bernie finally realizes this. Despite the physical threat against a super delegate referred to in the link above, I've also seen a number of Facebook posters (not Twitter for the record) turn to outright begging since this past Tuesday. And maybe that might work, but it should have been done long before now.

And as for this thing about selling their souls, one of the things I am most looking forward to not having to see after this primary season (second only to that infernal finch), are all these religious references to Bernie.

To paraphrase Saffie on the, well, fabulous show, Absolutely Fabulous,

"He's not Jesus Christ. He's not important. He's not even interesting!"

Feeling better now? I hope so. Sleep well.

Boy, you definitely don't know what I'm about. When I'm venting, they hear about it in other countries (kinda literally, now that I think about it). Trust me, this ain't venting. This is me having a little political fun a Friday night.

Justice demands more dead wall streeters than that.

... and your comment elsewhere talking about "when their heads are on pikes lining wall street" is rather interesting when your sig file says "ban all guns!" How do you supporters of mob violence to achieve your ends propose enacting your revolution? Pitchforks and torches? That might be all medieval-chic but something tells me the people you'd be going up against would very much have guns.

If you didn't catch that.

I am in a somewhat tough place, as I despise the idea of violence but know that those who stand against me are willing to and have killed millions of innocents to get what they want.

Well nothing breeds violence quite like fear of violence. Interesting how that works though.

In this country, we simply vote at the ballot box. Bernie couldn't convince enough people to vote for him and is losing the popular vote. Please don't even talk about superdelegates. Remember, votes are what matter most.

Next time bernie needs to get his ducks (or birds) in a row if he wants to win legitimately.

See my sig. LOL

He should also try holding rallies off of college campuses.

this time.

This time?

So you're calling me a sock account? Or is it paid troll? Anything else you wanna call me in your quest to be a moron?

Posts like yours make me chuckle endlessly that your candidate is losing. I suck that misery and find it sweet.

Call me a sock or a troll all you want. I don't care. I care that your candidate is losing and for that, I am filled with gladness.

Something neither you nor I will probably ever understand. And more than that, I like a president who can reach out to different types of people.

Your complaints of vicious, vitriolic hate is fucking rich.

Boy do you have thin skin. I call it having a sense of humor. Where are the threats and vulgarity and screeching found on those Facebook pages?

You forgot this gem ...

lashing out, not people trying to convince Dean of anything.

At least they don't sound like they're being paid to make those comments.

My profile wasn't enough proof that I'm not on Brock's payroll? LOL

I'm new here, so I really didn't know you were accused of that. I didn't mean to imply anything about you.

I do appreciate it. I don't really care about the name-calling but it does sorta shut down conversation, which is usually the point. When I put my real info to counterbalance the whole paid troll thing, one of the people who accused me of being a paid troll decided to attack me personally. Whatevs. I've already gotten new customers by changing my profile so, essentially, I went from not-paid troll to paid real person.

It simply doesn't.

or calling people and telling them Hillary dropped out.

I think I'd rather see some porn than get my tongue cut out. How 'bout you?

Welcome to ignore. You earned it.

I don't imagine he'll be the last.

I'm ok with being ignored. I still see your stuff so it means I always get the last word, which is truly one of life's great pleasures for me.