from Breaking Barriers... all of you are using it

that was one thing I thought DEMOCRATS cared for. Oy the noise in 2000, and 2004. Now I know better, your outrage is truly situational. Ah yes, partisans...

Here is a clue for you. Less than 2000, that triggers an AUTOMATIC RECOUNT, not CANVAS there is a difference, in the state of California and none of us go for the vapors. In fact, I am surprised this does not happen in KY, or perhaps I should not be.

If Bernie wants to waste money go for it. Its not my money.

have diddly squat to do with delegates.

I know you guys do not care about election integrity, you are part of the problem. Live with it. At this point I consider both party partisans to really heave situational awareness when it comes to these messy issues. You either care about it all the time, or you don't. And let's be honest, among friends, you really could give a rats ass about it...

and if the parties pay for the damn thing themselves, I will not care how they select a candidate. for all I care they could go back to smoke filled rooms and make the dedazo official. But right now they should stop pretending they care. They don't

What the real deal is that the state pays for a re-canvass, the candidate has to pay for a recount in Ky.

Sanders chose to make the state pay for a re-canvass instead of paying himself for a recount. And over just a 1 delegate swing, like that's going to go a long way in closing Clinton's near-300 delegate lead.

Let it go, Sanders.

Save the state that money, or cough it up yourself if you're so concern about electoral integrity.

I do not expect you to understand it

"integrity check".

Now that's integrity.

You have no physical ballots. So yes, it is an integrity thing. Again, I don't expect you to get it. Though it proves why states need to go back to just paper and leave the computer aga behind

Why don't you get that?

Or was it silly when it was done in MN over such a small difference? Clue the Republican was ahead so I suspect you were not against it then. It was not silly when locally it was done for a council seat. Triggered and paid by me, and the rest of the taxpayers, over such a small difference.

You either believe in this, or you don't. You cannot be sort of pregnant either.

Partisans, both sides, always rail against it when it might disrupt their win. This is how you can tell a partisan from an election integrity advocate.

This is why in CA under 1 percent, unless the candidates, it has to be both, ask that it is not done...it is triggered automatically. It takes the party out of it. This is considered a gold standard. And yes, from time to time both candidates do...

costing the taxpayers of Kentucky thousands of dollars over 1 delegate.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141466323

You are telling me though that you do not care as long as your preferred candidate wins. You are the partisan one here.

and costing money for no good reason. I have no respect for him.

At least I'm honest when I say that since 2008 I haven't respected the Clintons at all. They ran a racist campaign against our current president and I haven't forgotten. You write as if this was your final straw. Maybe it was, but I highly doubt it.

I liked him for a long time. I would listen to him on the radio with Thom Hartmann all the time. I gave money to his campaign when he announced. I even have a Feel The Bern coffee mug!

I then decided to back Hillary.

Bernie has lost and needs to go home. The End.

I don't believe that any Bernie supporter would switch to Hillary just as I don't believe any Hillary supporter would switch to Bernie. I'm not going to go through the whole Columbo burden of proof to show why I don't believe you, so I'll just say I don't believe you. That's all.

Like your new choice of a candidate.
I have a friend who was a Cub fan. He never wavered in his support for his team.
Then I know others who wait to see who's ahead, and then decide that they're for that team.

He's not going to take it when he has reason to believe chicanery is going on.

It's no longer about the message.
Now it's all about Bernie.

He stands to gain nothing from this action. It can't and won't make any difference in the end, and the only reason he wants it done is for a pyrrhic victory to be able to say "he won Kentucky".

So people will be spending a lot of time (and taxpayer money) for no reason other than to satisfy the man's ego.

Insanity.

..."Kentucky is too close to call but Hillary Clinton is claiming victory there." THAT kind of insanity? There were inconsistencies with the counties in Kentucky and it would be nice if someone got to the bottom of it whether you like it or not.

I watched the news the night of the election. The results were pretty clear - there were a few counties still not completely tallied, but based on the percentages each candidate was winning there, it was statistically impossible for Bernie to win.

They even contacted the person in charge of certifying the votes and she stated the same thing. It was perfectly valid for them to call it for Hillary. And it was perfectly valid for Hillary to claim victory.

You're ignoring the actual math behind the process because it paints a picture you don't want to accept.

Considering nothing untoward happened, there is nothing to "get to the bottom of". It is nothing more than Bernie throwing a tantrum and trying to satisfy his own ego.

At the end of the night, the narrative from the Berniebros here was "he tied in KY and won OR!". If that is the case, then why challenge a tie? But even if one is honest and accepts he lost KY, the fact remains that he has nothing to gain there.

He's throwing a tantrum because things didn't go his way. It's not about "getting to the bottom" of anything. It's about a pyrrhic victory to be able to saw "we won KY". And for that stupid sound byte, he's costing time and money for lots of people and further whipping his already irrational supporters into even more of a frenzy.

That's just how it is whether you like it or not.

She's the woman who ran for the senate in 2014 as a "Clinton Democrat" even though Obama was still in office. Yeah, I'm sure her word is legit.

And I'm sure yours is too using words like "berniebros". If you don't mind, you can blow it out your ass.

that leads only to Trumps victory.

It's not about the voters. Not the vast majority who aren't fanboys and fangirls, anyway.

But he has the right to do this, that's the rules of the game. I don't understand why some of the Hillary supporters are objecting so much.

He's speaking up for what we want.

The motive: ego gratification as resounding defeat approaches.

One advice for Bernie: GROW UP.

in my state, where we sort of believe in election integrity, none has to requests it, In fact, it trigger an automatic RECOUNT.

Over Hillary.

Greg Pallast has said it, and I have as well. All this shit is a dress rehearsal for November.

I care, but I will be laughing. Mostly at the situational ethics of the issue.

but pretty much.

There is an election integrity movement in this country that has been begging for this sort of thing for a long time. It has a lot more to do with ensuring fair elections than it does about either candidate.

Telling Bernie to grow up because he requests a transparent election is the height of arrogance.

'The system is rigged because I'm 3 million votes and hundreds of delegates behind.

The DNC is rigged.

Everything that denies me votes is rigged.'

And on and on and on. Bernie's actions in the last month comprise the height of arrogance.

I wish Bernie would focus instead on solidifying his supporters into a lasting movement that actually gets results.
Like winning elections. Because he sure as heck isn't winning this one.

By the way, this is not just limited to the candidate you hate. Oh and don't cry in November if both Pallast and me are correct and all this crap is just prologue.

Perhaps you should ask Bern about integrity. His seems to be slipping away by the day.

this is not a baseball game, stop treating it that way

a recount and for what? I sincerely hope he loses a delegate or two...now that would be so funny.

He's behind because the system is rigged.

It is not about Bernie, it is about fair elections.

And if you're too ignorant to realize that we have a serious problem with our election system, then maybe you ought to take the time to learn about it before you make an even greater fool of yourself.

Winvote. But they replaced them all. At least they are gone in Fairfax County, the largest jurisdiction. Now we fill in bubbles on paper and the machines we have only read the ballots.

I doubt it because here in Ohio...Kasich has moved to help steal Ohio...in 16...and I don't see anything changing. I worry way more about that than Bernie's pitiful recount in Kentucky ...waste of money and waste of time....we don't even win Kentucky...so can't even say it helps in the general...priorities are important.and Kentucky is my last one...

I just hope that Bernie's lawyers are working hard on this to make sure that it is publicly monitored (as in Florida 2000), because if it's not no sane person should believe the results.

My guess is that if the recount is done fully and transparently, a lot of people are going to be very surprised at how far the results of the recount will differ from the current official count. If it does differ by a lot, every other Democratic primary should be thrown into question.

However, the problem is that apparently Kentucky uses DREs, meaning direct recording electronic machines WITHOUT a paper trail. Does anyone know what percentage of votes in Kentucky are counted by those fucking black box voting machines? That could be very important. If the election was rigged on those machines, it will still be rigged, and I don't know how they are going ascertain the actual vote count.

And for those complaining that this is a waste of time and money, etc. etc., I assume that either you are terribly naive or that you don't care much about fair and transparent elections.

when sent to the SOS. A recount would be what you are thinking about. It is just as important for the integrity of the process

It seems to me that unless the votes are recounted you're going to be likely to miss something big.

But that's impossible in Kentucky because at least some of the vote if not most of it is processed and counted on DRE machines with no paper trail. And if electronic rigging of this election occurred, as I strongly suspect, it most likely was done with the DRE machines. So I don't know what can be accomplished under the circumstances. Our election system is so bad.

Florida was an election...Bush was selected...we are talking about a primary that is meaningless in terms of delegates...it sure won't put Bernie over the top.