General Discussion

still_one

(92,497 posts)

207. Like it or not those self-identified progressives who refused to vote for her or made a willful

Fri Oct 20, 2017, 10:30 AM

Oct 2017

Last edited Fri Oct 20, 2017, 11:37 AM - Edit history (1)

Decision not to have f••led the country for decades to come

Every Democrat running for Senate in those critical swing states lost to the establishment, incumbent, republican

The Jill Steins, Saranfons who pushed the theme that a trump win would lead to a victory for their revolution, are so pathetic, I want to puke

The republican Senate just passed the first hurdle to trump's tax plan

2016 is not going to stop this. Even if we win the House, the odds are so much against us in the Senate I suspect the direction of the country will be changed for decades to come, and not in a good way based on the judicial appointments

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

263 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Democrats Plan to Name Lobbyists, Operatives as Superdelegates [View all] RandomAccess Oct 2017 OP

Oh for god's sake they are trying to give us another unpopular candidate? lagomorph777 Oct 2017 #1

ANOTHER unpopular candidate? Eliot Rosewater Oct 2017 #4

Post removed Post removed Oct 2017 #6

Wasserman is clearly God. JHan Oct 2017 #12

be careful DonCoquixote Oct 2017 #158

I think I'm safe... I was being sarcastic anyway ;) JHan Oct 2017 #173

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #184

Like it or not, she is not the most popular. alarimer Oct 2017 #202

Like it or not those self-identified progressives who refused to vote for her or made a willful still_one Oct 2017 #207

Oh, VA is now going to be privatized, they cant wait to kill veterans next. Eliot Rosewater Oct 2017 #211

Just as it was after 2000. You would think people would have learned their lesson...they Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #219

Exactly still_one Oct 2017 #234

The voters chose last time. George II Oct 2017 #5

What in the fuck is going on at DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND????? Eliot Rosewater Oct 2017 #8

Bots and trolls are out early. coolsandy Oct 2017 #29

How do we tell the difference Omaha Steve Oct 2017 #38

"Spot a Bot: Identifying Automation and Disinformation on Social Media" emulatorloo Oct 2017 #63

thanks for your post... n/m bagelsforbreakfast Oct 2017 #253

Prop or Not has a list of suspect sources, lapucelle Oct 2017 #139

THIS TheDebbieDee Oct 2017 #55

Some think you are making a joke or being hyperbolic. You are not. Eliot Rosewater Oct 2017 #123

I thought the same thing when I read the headline peggysue2 Oct 2017 #122

Nothing good, Eliot Hekate Oct 2017 #131

Seemed to me the Democratic base really liked, appreciated, valued Cinton her experience, Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #17

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #166

Millions among millions. Well ahead of any of the others. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #171

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #177

Fuck this divisive shit. SaschaHM Oct 2017 #21

the hectoring will never end ... JHan Oct 2017 #31

Exactly. Irony is lost on some. nt. Amimnoch Oct 2017 #34

Are they really that dense that they don't think the negatives of a certain senator... brush Oct 2017 #106

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #167

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #178

+1,000 murielm99 Oct 2017 #93

+2.9 million votes unpopular nt Sunsky Oct 2017 #25

The voters chose last time, picked the person with the popular support. Ninsianna Oct 2017 #36

So The 3Mil + Me. Oct 2017 #42

No one gave us a candidate...there was a primary...and a candidate won...no super delegate had Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #52

They want to believe misinformation. LiberalFighter Oct 2017 #105

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #179

What do you mean another unpopular candidate? murielm99 Oct 2017 #82

The voters did choose. LiberalFighter Oct 2017 #102

Oh ffs. Hillary won the popular vote by 3,000,000 counted votes, probably more ... Hekate Oct 2017 #130

The voter chose last time too. HRC won 55 percent to 43 percent. StevieM Oct 2017 #144

I could probably care less Loki Liesmith Oct 2017 #163

Post removed Post removed Oct 2017 #172

Voters choose their candidate. When haven't they? (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #190

Yeah, I think the fix is in. alarimer Oct 2017 #200

Well who is the DNC for then? JustAnotherGen Oct 2017 #209

The people did choose. Look at the raw numbers of votes, and who received the most votes even still_one Oct 2017 #208

You mean like the person who beat another supposedly popular person by 4 million votes? stevenleser Oct 2017 #212

BAD news. elleng Oct 2017 #2

It is nothing. There have always been supers...but voters decide. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #57

It seems they are hell-bent on continuing to lose. alarimer Oct 2017 #204

I don't care for this idea. It closes off more of the process from the people. Frustratedlady Oct 2017 #3

These are people who have jobs...should they be excluded from the party...ah no. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #58

Read the whole article. murielm99 Oct 2017 #98

I did read the entire article and my feelings were then posted. Frustratedlady Oct 2017 #175

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #168

if they are paid by the wealthy to back certain policies, they should have NO role yurbud Oct 2017 #205

Lobbyists and political operatives? guillaumeb Oct 2017 #7

Read the article...these are people who work for various organizations.... Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #59

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #180

Smdh. Have they not learned anything?! demmiblue Oct 2017 #9

They are paid not to learn. That's the point. Hassin Bin Sober Oct 2017 #11

Yep. This. TDale313 Oct 2017 #66

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #169

What should we have learned? How exactly have the supers harmed anyone? Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #60

What good do they do? Hassin Bin Sober Oct 2017 #110

Actually it's people who are lying about super delegates role are poisoning the well... bettyellen Oct 2017 #187

Perhaps you should tell this to the Congressional Black Caucus ehrnst Oct 2017 #195

Division for one fallout87 Oct 2017 #155

Yes, I have the very same problem with the caucus system. ehrnst Oct 2017 #196

Too bad. They serve a purpose...several in fact. And this has nothing to do with supers. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #220

They have nothing to do with votes...nothing...you want to have one person one vote...go after Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #221

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #261

A big who cares...all of the supers were in Hillary's corner in 16 and she still lost. Barak Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #262

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #181

Gee, what a surprise democrank Oct 2017 #10

Such a Dumb Move. Perez is out of control lovemydogs Oct 2017 #13

What does the Deputy Chair Keith Ellison think about this? YOHABLO Oct 2017 #112

Will Bernie respond? Not Ruth Oct 2017 #14

Why would he? George II Oct 2017 #32

He has expressed concerns about the superdelegate system... Not Ruth Oct 2017 #116

Why should he care though? George II Oct 2017 #161

Because he is on the Democratic Leadership Team. aikoaiko Oct 2017 #213

In the Senate, not the DNC. George II Oct 2017 #214

Yes. That is true, but that still makes the DNC an interest of his. aikoaiko Oct 2017 #215

Not really. But maybe if he joined the Democratic Party it would. In fact, he'd automatically.... George II Oct 2017 #217

You mean like caucuses do? ehrnst Oct 2017 #197

Bernie has nothing to do with this radical noodle Oct 2017 #44

In what way? murielm99 Oct 2017 #103

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #182

He's not a member of the indicated party. Codeine Oct 2017 #188

Oh boy... disillusioned73 Oct 2017 #15

Yes, but the divisive folks who keep attacking Dems seem determined to keep dividing. Ninsianna Oct 2017 #46

And yet this whole thread pscot Oct 2017 #170

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #183

Since the nominee last year secured a majority of regular delegates Trumpocalypse Oct 2017 #16

Yup ++++++++++ JHan Oct 2017 #19

Exactly. And there were other factors for the GOP, too. LisaM Oct 2017 #28

Superdelegates are a nonsense idea Kentonio Oct 2017 #76

Well, it's never happened, for starters. LisaM Oct 2017 #87

Yes, if people are worried about voters not having a say, caucuses should be the first thing to go ehrnst Oct 2017 #192

I felt so bullied at the 2008 caucus for supporting Hillary. LisaM Oct 2017 #216

Yeah it would have been terrible if the Republicans had super delegates moda253 Oct 2017 #92

It would have been hilarious, because it would have divided their party straight down the middle Kentonio Oct 2017 #97

Why don't you tell the Congressional Black Caucus it's a "nonsense idea" ehrnst Oct 2017 #191

They do have winner take all primaries in some states Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2017 #50

This is the truth and why we have super sysem...hehe. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #61

Skeptical, matters how many and what kind of lobbyist ... of course I'd rather none but they're from uponit7771 Oct 2017 #18

These are good changes. Didn't Sanders want the DNC to be shook up? From the Hill FSogol Oct 2017 #20

thanks for that added info. JHan Oct 2017 #27

I'm willing to give Perez the benefit of the doubt mountain grammy Oct 2017 #39

All those make perfect sense. n/t radical noodle Oct 2017 #47

Apparently the only diveristy they approve of is their own, not actually trying to Ninsianna Oct 2017 #48

Thank you for this sensible post. murielm99 Oct 2017 #104

dems let a non democrat run for the nomination. whats the prob? nt msongs Oct 2017 #22

I'm in favor of eliminating the superdelegates. dawg Oct 2017 #23

And they also keep us from having a monster candidate radical noodle Oct 2017 #49

I don't think that is true. dawg Oct 2017 #75

If the GOP had had them, we radical noodle Oct 2017 #95

Superdelegates are undemocratic by definition. Bernie's attempt to appeal to the supedelegates ... dawg Oct 2017 #111

And they were used by media outlets to paint a false picture of the primary... TCJ70 Oct 2017 #113

No the the truth was one candidate was way ahead and the other candidate had no chance... Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #141

That's true radical noodle Oct 2017 #128

I am too. I don't appreciate the SDs announcing their choice TexasBushwhacker Oct 2017 #152

Perhaps you want to inform ehrnst Oct 2017 #246

Why? dawg Oct 2017 #247

I can't believe this absurd system hasn't been abolished after last years debacle Takket Oct 2017 #24

The eventual nominee didn't need the superdelegates to win. JHan Oct 2017 #26

. Takket Oct 2017 #35

Do you know the purpose of superdelegates? JHan Oct 2017 #37

Caucuses are the most undemocratic thing radical noodle Oct 2017 #88

The Nebraska caucus allows voting by mail Omaha Steve Oct 2017 #99

That's the exception instead of the rule radical noodle Oct 2017 #101

So lobby for change of the caucus system Omaha Steve Oct 2017 #117

I'm in Florida with primaries radical noodle Oct 2017 #121

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #185

Exactly. Those who can't take time off work, the elderly. ehrnst Oct 2017 #245

You do know that states (all of them) are the ones who determine this, right? ehrnst Oct 2017 #243

No it is not Omaha Steve Oct 2017 #251

Do you have a link to where you got that information? ehrnst Oct 2017 #255

To start I live here and was active on the state and county level as a labor delegate back then Omaha Steve Oct 2017 #259

yep, yet we barely hear complaints about them from those who fuss about superdelegates... JHan Oct 2017 #109

Apparently the SD are much more important than the voters in primaries MichMan Oct 2017 #157

But when has this happened? JHan Oct 2017 #174

Have you informed the Black Congressional Caucus? ehrnst Oct 2017 #256

yeah the caucus system is lousy too, but that doesn't make your case for superdelegates. Takket Oct 2017 #159

To prevent a Trump. It makes no difference. The supers have never influenced any primary in our Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #62

I'm not opposed to superdelegates but having lobbyists among them is just octoberlib Oct 2017 #72

Read the article...these are people who work at various places...not what the article paints them as Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #80

"WTH do we have this system for" There are two reasons we have this system stevenleser Oct 2017 #235

Debacle? In what sense? George II Oct 2017 #41

You mean when people voted and the one with the most votes was declared the candidate just like in Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #64

Oh, you mean because of the harassment and threats made by a some Ninsianna Oct 2017 #153

The optics on this are really bad. octoberlib Oct 2017 #30

Only for those who are looking for an excuse to bash Democrats. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #65

Superdelagates are undemocratic MichMan Oct 2017 #33

The primary has always chosen the candidate...the Supers are a safety feature... the same is true Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #67

Did the runner up in Michigan have more delegates than the winner or am I wrong? MichMan Oct 2017 #134

The winner in each state had more pledged delegates than the loser. stevenleser Oct 2017 #236

Amen!! Duppers Oct 2017 #198

The only Superdelegates should be ELECTED Democratic state and nationwide office holders Yavin4 Oct 2017 #40

Why? Those folks are already supers Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #68

It should be limited to just them. Yavin4 Oct 2017 #96

ELECTED office holders RicROC Oct 2017 #78

But they will be a "diverse" group of lobbyists and operatives! m-lekktor Oct 2017 #43

Worry about superdelegates GulfCoast66 Oct 2017 #45

This Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2017 #53

THANK YOU! (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #193

Post removed Post removed Oct 2017 #51

No, I think this article is bullshit and an attempt to divide us...that being said I didn't try to Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #69

How do you know that? George II Oct 2017 #71

I found this through jury service IronLionZion Oct 2017 #79

But you're not the one who I asked. Interesting. George II Oct 2017 #81

A hide on DU is undemocratic? LanternWaste Oct 2017 #91

Your post which divides and and misleads doesn't make me happy. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #54

So nothing new then is what you're saying? Superdelegates is still a sucky idea, and the weight of JCanete Oct 2017 #56

Their vote is not more important than the primary voter...they are 'just in case' something goes Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #70

You are right in part. They have the power to do what they want though. The biggest issue I have JCanete Oct 2017 #74

If the Republicans had superdelegates, there would be no President Trump iirc. They were jealous OnDoutside Oct 2017 #77

A President Trump is not something we are in danger of on the left. nt JCanete Oct 2017 #133

Given the dirty tactics employed by the GOP I could see them pulling a stunt in our primary and the Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #140

We are dealing with Democratic voters who won't go for GOP bullshit. Sure, sometimes, we've got JCanete Oct 2017 #150

Are you kidding me? We are dealing with progressive voters...the same voters who fell for the Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #225

No, that is ridiculous. How many progressives fell for russian lies? Hardly any. What percentage do JCanete Oct 2017 #226

Have you missed the discussions about this ? Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #229

and how many people bought into the lies? Show me a study that quantifies that, not simply JCanete Oct 2017 #230

There are dozens in the links I sent. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #242

come on...point to one of them. I don't know that its true that enough of us can be swayed JCanete Oct 2017 #249

Since the delegates always vote for the person who wins the primary...Democrats should understand Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #84

Since the delegates always vote for the person who wins the primary... TCJ70 Oct 2017 #86

but we don't. Its a perfectly fine obfuscation if a certain representation benefits the interests JCanete Oct 2017 #118

One last time...we have proportionate voting...supers put the winner over the top reaching the Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #227

why? That's only by a function of the rules anyway. Otherwise a simple majority would be over the JCanete Oct 2017 #228

It doesn't work that way...this is not the time to upend things...and I like having supers. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #244

why wouldn't you like it? That's the point. If you have a certain political bent, Supers are super. JCanete Oct 2017 #248

you do understand their main purpose is to put a candidate over the top... who has won the primary. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #222

To be clear RandomAccess Oct 2017 #119

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #176

Superdelegates need to go TCJ70 Oct 2017 #73

That is untrue. I can't really discuss it. But that race like all others was decided by voters. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #85

It's not untrue... TCJ70 Oct 2017 #90

Oh please, you know we can't discuss the last primary...but that is simply not true. A certain Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #94

There's nothing wrong with discussing it, you just can't re-fight it... TCJ70 Oct 2017 #108

okay, I'm not refighting here but discussing - please review the delegate count prior to.... George II Oct 2017 #127

We know who won. Superdelegates didn't tip Clinton into the winning column from the losing one. JCanete Oct 2017 #232

Then why are people still going on and on about it? George II Oct 2017 #238

I can only speak for me. I don't see why we need them and I just explained to you how they are JCanete Oct 2017 #239

Apparently important people in the Democratic Party feel they're necessary, and they've been.... George II Oct 2017 #240

please never fall back on that kind of argument. If they can explain it to us in a way that JCanete Oct 2017 #241

They've explained it. Actually they explain it every few years going back to 1968. It's not... George II Oct 2017 #250

I explained to you my problem with superdelegates, to which you didn't feel it necessary to allay my JCanete Oct 2017 #252

All I have to do with the superdelegates is participate in electing the people responsible for.... George II Oct 2017 #254

Makes sense to me not fooled Oct 2017 #114

The media is just stirring it up. LiberalFighter Oct 2017 #83

exactly, and these are long term Dems too...who work at various places. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #89

Keeping long term Dems out of the process is totally wrong. LiberalFighter Oct 2017 #100

And they are reliable...I can't tell you how many times new folks promise so much but all Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #143

Superdelegates are like the electoral college... Joe941 Oct 2017 #107

Actually, they only serve as a mechanism to de-legitimize the average person's vote. dawg Oct 2017 #115

That is untrue. They have no affect on the vote. And they have never "given" us a candidate. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #145

disagree... Joe941 Oct 2017 #194

They have no affect on the vote...people in a primary choose a candidate...and there have been no Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #218

Need to have super delegates MyNameGoesHere Oct 2017 #120

The DNC seems intent on pissing off the base again. I really don't get it. Vinca Oct 2017 #124

Who is this base? ismnotwasm Oct 2017 #125

Everyone who wants their vote to count in the primary. Vinca Oct 2017 #126

Ok ismnotwasm Oct 2017 #136

That's a pretty insulting statement to make. Vinca Oct 2017 #142

I dispute that any who are bothered with this are the base...the base can be counted on always... Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #147

So "one man one vote" means nothing to you? Vinca Oct 2017 #156

If it was pre-ordained they wouldn't even hold the primaries and caucuses tammywammy Oct 2017 #162

Hmmm RandomAccess Oct 2017 #164

I don't agree with you at all...you see I want to win. Go after the grass roots locally Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #223

Let me tell you a story... about a man named Ralph Nader who like Jill Stein cost us a Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #224

I've been around long enough RandomAccess Oct 2017 #260

But see that is where you are wrong...both are the reason...so those who support protest votes and Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #263

The base isn't pissed off because the base doesn't pay attention to this shit Fresh_Start Oct 2017 #231

1) Lobbyists for what, exactly? Planned Parenthood has lobbyists. They're on our side. ... Hekate Oct 2017 #129

Exactly!! I was just going to post something like this but decided to give props instead. Caliman73 Oct 2017 #132

Thanks. I need a vacation, after this thread. Hekate Oct 2017 #135

Yeah ismnotwasm Oct 2017 #138

How about Fox "News"? QC Oct 2017 #137

So people who work for Fox News can't be Democrats and active in the party? It is a job. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #148

Not really... Caliman73 Oct 2017 #151

It was Sanders who wanted the SDs to give him the nomination, over the objection of the PDs. StevieM Oct 2017 #146

UNACCEPTABLE Amishman Oct 2017 #149

I have words... Duppers Oct 2017 #203

If they can help us win, who gives a shit? Blue_Tires Oct 2017 #154

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2017 #186

hey i got a fucking crazy ass idea............ Takket Oct 2017 #160

Preferential voting is a GREAT idea RandomAccess Oct 2017 #165

I do not support caucuses or superdelegates, but until Russian hacking is fixed Not Ruth Oct 2017 #206

We are the DEMOCRATIC party and we need to start acting like it LostOne4Ever Oct 2017 #189

Well said! Duppers Oct 2017 #199

... LexVegas Oct 2017 #201

It will be interesting to see JustAnotherGen Oct 2017 #210

Makes me very happy depending on what the lobbyists are lobbying for stevenleser Oct 2017 #233

last primary state voted one way, delegates with supers ended up voting the other at convention dembotoz Oct 2017 #237

You mean lobbyists like NARAL, the Medical Marijuana Project and Children's Defense Fund? ehrnst Oct 2017 #257

One sure way to turn off more voters.. and.... SoCalDem Oct 2017 #258