Election 2016

[Kaelik]

And Doom is smart? I don't think they are meant to represent the actual villains of the legion of doom. Pretty sure Vader wasn't in the legion either.

[Leress]

That's really a terrible pic.

I mean, really. Poison Ivy is openly bisexual and Apocalypse believes in evolution.

Umm... Apocalypse is not in that picture. Carson is Mysterio

Also

And Doom is smart? I don't think they are meant to represent the actual villains of the legion of doom. Pretty sure Vader wasn't in the legion either.

True since there is a mix of Marvel, DC, and Star Wars villains.

[Koumei]

I think hyzmarca was referring to Cruz being Apocalypse. And that was my first assumption, though seeing the helmet and lack of drill arm, I really have no clue who he is.

Of course, people generally have no clue who Cruz is, what with him being a maniac who flips positions as convenient, but I have no clue as to his costume.

[hyzmarca]

I think hyzmarca was referring to Cruz being Apocalypse. And that was my first assumption, though seeing the helmet and lack of drill arm, I really have no clue who he is.

Of course, people generally have no clue who Cruz is, what with him being a maniac who flips positions as convenient, but I have no clue as to his costume.

The Helmet looks sort of like Mr. Freeze's. But he never wore that shade of blue, and the cables look like Apocalypse's.

[Leress]

Cruz is Mr. Freeze.

http://oogeewoogee.com/the-republicans- ... n-of-doom/

[virgil]

Are there any citations I can use regarding the Nevada primary debacle, specifically where Sanders' supporters did tomfoolery the month prior; thus supporting the hypocrisy narrative?

[Mistborn]

Clinton supporters weren't calling for Clinton to Lower Taxes and Take Those FreeLoaders off Welfare to spite 40% of the Democratic party for the crime of being young and white.

Dude what the fuck. The Clinton campaign is for increased public spending. The Clinton campaign is for soaking the rich, like in all seriousness they have a better plan for soaking the rich that team Bernie because they can actually do math. For fvck sake SJ noise machine hasn't been great to Sanders supports but what they did expect? That they could just use right-wing talking points and not get their progressive credentials called into question?

[DSMatticus]

Nevada has a three stage caucus. The caucus in which the public votes determines how many representatives each candidate gets to send to their county's convention. Those representatives' votes at the county conventions determine how many representatives each candidate gets to send to the state convention. And finally, those representatives' votes at the state convention determine how many delegates each candidate gets. So caucus, county conventions, state convention. Here is a fairly accurate rundown of the entire thing. It doesn't mention Clark County (that's Las Vegas) specifically, but that's where the big upset happened - Clinton won the Clark County caucus, but enough of her representatives stayed home that Sanders won the Clark County convention, and this flipped the favorite for the state convention from Clinton to Sanders. If you want to know more about that, you can probably get somewhere googling Clark County convention and looking for articles from April.

Key points:

1) The headcount at the start showed Team Clinton outnumbering Team Sanders. The headcount at the end showed Team Clinton outnumbering Team Sanders. Team Clinton outnumbered Team Sanders. The cellphone footage you recorded while standing in the middle of a bunch of Sanders supporters does not prove otherwise (Wow! Such loud! Very noise!), it just makes you look like a stupid twat.

2) The rules were adopted as is from previous conventions with no surprises, secrecy, or last minute backstabs. It's actually Team Sanders which pushed for last minute changes, and it is the Team Clinton which said fuck off we're using the rules as they are and there's nothing you can do about it because we outnumber you and that's how voting works.

3) Of the 64 Sanderites who were disqualified for having invalid credentials, 50 were not actually there to vote even if they had been accepted. Of the remaining 14 who were there, 6 were accepted and ultimately ended up voting, and only 8 were ultimately present to vote and yet remained disqualified. Team Sanders needed 33 to close the gap. 8 is less than 33.

Basically, literally nothing that Team Sanders has complained about is actually true. What actually happened is that when the convention chair declared that Team Clinton outnumbered Team Sanders and Team Sanders realized that they meant they had lost, about a hundred of them rushed the stage and started screaming death threats at the chair. They're shitbags.

[RadiantPhoenix]

1) The headcount at the start showed Team Clinton outnumbering Team Sanders. The headcount at the end showed Team Clinton outnumbering Team Sanders. Team Clinton outnumbered Team Sanders. The cellphone footage you recorded while standing in the middle of a bunch of Sanders supporters does not prove otherwise (Wow! Such loud! Very noise!), it just makes you look like a stupid twat.

As I understand it, all they needed to listen for was whether anyone from either side disagreed with the rest of their own side. If nobody did, the bigger group wins. I don't think it's a loudness contest, I think it's just a quick-and-dirty way to do a regular vote.

2) The rules were adopted as is from previous conventions with no surprises, secrecy, or last minute backstabs. It's actually Team Sanders which pushed for last minute changes, and it is the Team Clinton which said fuck off we're using the rules as they are and there's nothing you can do about it because we outnumber you and that's how voting works.

Actually, changing the rules required a 2/3 majority, not just a simple majority, per the rules. I'm not sure what would happen if 51% were unwilling to approve the rules but 49% were unwilling to change them, but that didn't happen.

[DSMatticus]

As I understand it, all they needed to listen for was whether anyone from either side disagreed with the rest of their own side. If nobody did, the bigger group wins. I don't think it's a loudness contest, I think it's just a quick-and-dirty way to do a regular vote.

I think you misinterpreted something there. My point is that the headcount establishes that Team Clinton was larger than Team Sanders, and a shitty ass cellphone recording of the Sanders supporters next to you shouting loudly isn't evidence of anything to begin with. I am making fun of the people who think loudness means something.

Actually, changing the rules required a 2/3 majority, not just a simple majority, per the rules. I'm not sure what would happen if 51% were unwilling to approve the rules but 49% were unwilling to change them, but that didn't happen.

I'm aware, but it wasn't particularly necessary to mention. It's impossible to have any kind of majority while being outright outnumbered.

[Kaelik]

Clinton supporters weren't calling for Clinton to Lower Taxes and Take Those FreeLoaders off Welfare to spite 40% of the Democratic party for the crime of being young and white.

Dude what the fuck. The Clinton campaign is for increased public spending. The Clinton campaign is for soaking the rich, like in all seriousness they have a better plan for soaking the rich that team Bernie because they can actually do math. For fvck sake SJ noise machine hasn't been great to Sanders supports but what they did expect? That they could just use right-wing talking points and not get their progressive credentials called into question?

Um... I think you might be like, completely insane. Also you have no idea what I am talking about.

First off, the number one point I really shouldn't have to make is that Clinton Supporters are not the same people as Hillary Clinton. This should be insanely obvious to anyone with a brain. So pointing at Clinton's actual campaign is in no way even remotely related to an allegation that Clinton supporters are calling for Clinton to move right to spite the Democrats who disagree with her.

Secondly, since apparently I have to make this qualification, even though for god dam sure no one else in the thread is making it, I don't think every Clinton supporter is making this absurd nonsense claim. Just really dumb ones. (Here including, apparently, Frank Trollman, although not exactly, he's just declaring she should move back to where she was before the primary started or something. Whatever.)

Thirdly, I can't personally speak to what "Sanders Supporters" expected, because of not being one, but off the top of my head, what I expected was that when Sanders put forth zero racist or sexist talking points, and then the vast majority of his supporters never uttered any racist or sexist talking points, that maybe we could talk about literally anything else besides how "white" and "male" Sanders supporters are as if they were relevant criticisms, rather than basically proof positive that at least 15% of Clinton supporters are fucking idiots that easily counteract whatever similar percentage of Sanders supporters are sexist Democrats who have just been waiting for the moment to shut down those filthy women. (PS, those same allegations where made about Obama supporters eight years ago, they might even have been true, but maybe it's time to admit that the existence of some section of assholes in the Democratic party isn't actually relevant to... anything at all.)

Now, Fourthly, on to my main actual point. My point was merely that 4 months ago, things were great, because the expectation was that 40% of Democrats voting for Sanders would make clear to the actual nominee that she needs to do a good job explaining exactly how she is going to be on left on issues like for example Capital Gains and Campaign Finance.

See for example:

I'm totally a shill for Hillary, but I don't actually want people to stop voting for Sanders.

...

And let's be honest here: Bernie Sanders is short on workable policy proposals, but he does make a forceful and compelling argument for tackling issues relating to the tax code, health insurance, higher education, and campaign finance. These are important issues, and having Sanders talk about them makes the Democrats more popular and also makes the Democrats a better party by compelling them to deal with these issues. Sanders talking pulls the party in the right direction on several very important issues, and that's good for America.

Where as now, we have descended into the hell of terror that is May, where Sanders spends 100% of his time saying that Clinton takes Bribes, and Clinton supporters, instead of taking some kind of reasonable position, like "Since Clinton doesn't take bribes (or well, does, in the same way that all politicians do, where the donors pay for access instead of results, and they get to have their say, and that definitely influences the politicians, but doesn't necessarily involve any quid pro quo, IE the same thing Sanders does too), she needs to focus on the issue of campaign finance reform, and Wall Street and Banks and shit, and show how her position is an actual leftist position so that people can get behind her" becomes "Fuck all these white men, The People Have Spoken, we want our politicians to take bribes and sell the country for money!"

And the real bottom line is that the entire argument that the winners have to woo the losers isn't just stupid - it's fucking dangerous. That argument is the entire Tea party argument that Obama needed to give them everything they wanted even though they lost. That mindset is why our government doesn't work right now and we do not have to foster that shit on the left.

Because you know, apparently the fact that Clinton will win the primary means that the position of "campaign finance is a problem" lost, and wooing the people making it, such as by explaining to them why Clinton has policies that will help on these issues so they should vote for Clinton, is now somehow DANGEROUS!

Because Clinton definitely didn't win on any other issues, like her actual executive experience, or popularity, or nostalgia for the 90s, or 24 years as a successful national politician rather than one most people never heard of, or hey, even her blatant lies during debates that she would be able to compromise with Republicans to get legislation passed.

Because just remember kids, compromising with Republicans is why we should vote for Clinton, but god forbid she compromise, or even woo, democrats to the left of her, that's just fucking absurd.

Look, I'm not saying this fucking mess is the sole fault of Clinton supporters, you can probably tell because of how the post you quoted started by talking about how Sanders and Sanders supporters are at fault. But to pretend that many Clinton supporters, including and especially people who should damn well fucking know better, trying to make the Democratic Primary about how anything to the left of Clinton, or any concerns about the fact that she is one of the primary beneficiaries of the incredibly badwrong shit pile that is current campaign finance system is really just a racist sexist white man jew who's opinion we should ignore for that reason, and definitely not address in any way, is okay, is really fucking annoying. I would love to live in a universe where that didn't happen. Instead, I live in a universe where that is the second worst thing that has happened in the primaries, and therefore, according to the BUT SOME OF THEM ARE WORSE!!!!!!! principle of wrongness cancellation, that apparently makes it totally okay and wonderful, and we should really just do it all the time, and I'm in the wrong for including a complaint about Clinton supporters descending into shit too, because BOTH SIDES CAN'T BE WRONG! ONE HAS TO BE 100% CORRECT MEGA GOOD GUYS!

[SlyJohnny]

Agreed with everything Kaelik said.

Also, that's just how American politics work. The Bernie supporters who are muttering about voting for Trump and the Republicans for Hillary people are cute, but they are a tiny minority.

I knew a guy who was a campaign manager for George Bush (senior), and the way he describes it is you're not likely to sway the people who've voted liberal for 30 years to suddenly vote for you, but you might convince them to stay home. American political discourse is aimed at committing character assassination on the other guy, while galvanising your own party's base by convincing that you genuinely represent them, so the sometimes-voters will actually show up on voting day.

[Kaelik]

Agreed with everything Kaelik said.

Well I hope you don't agree with the part where I implied that all Clinton supporters are anti-semites.

[virgil]

Basically, literally nothing that Team Sanders has complained about is actually true. What actually happened is that when the convention chair declared that Team Clinton outnumbered Team Sanders and Team Sanders realized that they meant they had lost, about a hundred of them rushed the stage and started screaming death threats at the chair. They're shitbags.

"And how does that mean that Sanders "stole" the delegates in the first place? Because Hillary's delegates didn't show up? Does that mean if I _really_ support a presidential candidate but can't find the energy to go vote that the other candidate "stole" the presidency from me?"

[name_here]

"Stole" is a bit of an overstatement. It's more that caucuses are known to be stupid and bullshit because it's possible to win at the phase with the most voters and lose in later phases and reversing it in stage 3 is no more bullshit. So far as I'm aware the Sanders campaign did not do anything actively bullshit at that phase but simply won because caucuses are stupid rather than the bullshit exploits that Ron Paul's campaign attempted.

[Username17]

Basically, literally nothing that Team Sanders has complained about is actually true. What actually happened is that when the convention chair declared that Team Clinton outnumbered Team Sanders and Team Sanders realized that they meant they had lost, about a hundred of them rushed the stage and started screaming death threats at the chair. They're shitbags.

"And how does that mean that Sanders "stole" the delegates in the first place? Because Hillary's delegates didn't show up? Does that mean if I _really_ support a presidential candidate but can't find the energy to go vote that the other candidate "stole" the presidency from me?"

Credentials chief Kramar, a Sanders supporter, sent emails to Clinton delegates that they did not have to attend the county conventions to be counted. Then the Sanders campaign packed the seats of the Clinton no-shows with unelected recruits off reddit.

This would be something you could write off as being the sleazy actions of random agitators that were ultimately unaffiliated with the Sanders campaign, except for the minor detail that Sanders' official nonpology statement for the Nevada debacle spends the entire last paragraph defending Kramar and claiming that she was threatened with arrest for "operating too fairly." Bernie has explicitly taken ownership of those hijinks. It was a stolen election, and the Sanders campaign approved of the tactics and still does.

-Username17

[virgil]

[citation needed]

At least, that was their response.

[DSMatticus]

Basically, literally nothing that Team Sanders has complained about is actually true. What actually happened is that when the convention chair declared that Team Clinton outnumbered Team Sanders and Team Sanders realized that they meant they had lost, about a hundred of them rushed the stage and started screaming death threats at the chair. They're shitbags.

"And how does that mean that Sanders "stole" the delegates in the first place? Because Hillary's delegates didn't show up? Does that mean if I _really_ support a presidential candidate but can't find the energy to go vote that the other candidate "stole" the presidency from me?"

The people of Clark County showed up to support Clinton by a 10-point margin of victory. That's what the caucus was; that is the part of the process that is open to the voting public, and in Clark County Clinton won 55-45. If you think those people's votes don't deserve to count because their indirect representatives ultimately betrayed them (by failing to attend the convention and perform the civic duties which they were assigned by the voters), then I assume you have no problem at all with superdelegates. You know, indirect representatives who are empowered to do whatever the hell they want, including outright betray the wishes of the people who elected them. But more importantly than that, if Sanders didn't steal the Clark County convention, then Clinton did not steal the Nevada State convention. Sanders won the Clark County convention because too many members of Team Clinton stayed home, and Clinton won the Nevada State convention because too many members of Team Sanders stayed home. The situations are in fact symmetrical.

To be frank, your friend sounds exactly like one of the assholes I am talking about whose respect for democracy extends exactly as far as his candidate's winning streak and not an inch further. The fact is that when the people voted of Clark County voted, Clinton won. In a sane world, that would be the end of the debate, but because Nevada is a caucus state, there is an opportunity for the electoral process to fail the voters and betray their clearly stated wishes. That is what happened at Clark County Convention when Sanders won the convention despite losing the popular vote. Remember when Bush 2.0 lost the popular vote and still ended up president? Yeah, fuck that. Shit like that is shameful and disgusting. And it's just as disgusting when your favorite candidate happens to benefit from it.

EDIT: As for the email thing, I've seen that allegation swing both ways. Both Team Sanders and Team Clinton claimed to receive misleading emails leading up to the Clark County convention. I have seen one screenshot of the hypothetical email in a minor blogosphere article, but that is 1) so ridiculously easy to fake I can't take it seriously, and 2) does not establish a pattern that either side was preferentially targeted with the misleading email. I don't think it's particularly worth talking about; it may or may not have happened, who knows. Though I do feel the need to point out that an official who supported Sanders was deposed for leaking Clinton's delegates' emails to the Sanders campaign. That is frowned upon exactly because it opens up delegates to the sort of misdirectional bullshit that people claimed happened. But even in that case I'm more likely to attribute to sloppiness than part of some conspiracy to mass-email Clinton supporters with misleading information - but she definitely ended up making such an attack possible, so despite what the Berniesphere has to say about it it was right to depose her.

[virgil]

When Hillary, or her supporters, make the claim that she has "the most people who have voted for her" they are being ignorant or willfully deceptive! Her having the most votes when Sanders buries her in every poll only highlights how many people they are not letting vote because they are not registered as democrat or, in some cases, haven't been registered since a year ago. Ridiculous!

Also Sanders wins in every open contest.

Frankly, anyone who thinks Clinton has more general support at this moment is delusional. And the Democratic Party pretending otherwise just reeks of condescension. They are doing everything they can to push it to their insider candidate. The person they know will stick to the status quo. They do not want the upset. I almost wonder if some of them would take Trump over Sanders since he would have similarly oligarchy-friendly positions fiscally.

I am refraining from responding to this person, but holy freakin' crap I wish I could find the words to articulate my frustration with this person that for complicated reasons I can't fully ignore...

And I'm pro-Bernie, which makes this all the more frustrating.

[Kaelik]

When Hillary, or her supporters, make the claim that she has "the most people who have voted for her" they are being ignorant or willfully deceptive! Her having the most votes when Sanders buries her in every poll only highlights how many people they are not letting vote because they are not registered as democrat or, in some cases, haven't been registered since a year ago. Ridiculous!

Also Sanders wins in every open contest.

Frankly, anyone who thinks Clinton has more general support at this moment is delusional. And the Democratic Party pretending otherwise just reeks of condescension. They are doing everything they can to push it to their insider candidate. The person they know will stick to the status quo. They do not want the upset. I almost wonder if some of them would take Trump over Sanders since he would have similarly oligarchy-friendly positions fiscally.

I am refraining from responding to this person, but holy freakin' crap I wish I could find the words to articulate my frustration with this person that for complicated reasons I can't fully ignore...

And I'm pro-Bernie, which makes this all the more frustrating.

The first rule of Delusional Club is that you always talk about Delusional Club.

[Username17]

Hillary has won 12 open or semi-open contests. Hell, she carried Ohio by 14 points. She won open primary South Carolina by a surreal forty seven points. Sanders does have an edge with non-Democrats and has a huge edge with people that say they intend to vote for Trump but for whatever reason are voting in the Democratic primaries. But the idea that Clinton can't or hasn't won open contests is simply false. The very first contest was a semi-open caucus full of white people, and Hillary narrowly won Iowa.

The idea that Hillary Clinton is not legitimately winning the Democratic Primary Election is intensely undemocratic and wholly delusional.

As for links, I'm posting from my phone and can't post links. For the weird ass story of the Clark County credentials chief, go to the bottom of the Wonkette story Nice Grandpa Sanders Gonna Burn Your Shot Down. For Sanders' campaign deliberately setting fire to any reasonable doubt that they support her underhanded actions, go to the final paragraph of his official statement on the chaos in Nevada. There was no reason to discuss those hijinks at all, but instead of bothering to say that people's grandchildren should be off limits no matter how frustrated you are with the process, we get a whole paragraph trying to paint her as a martyr to the cause of fair play. It's Orwellian, disgusting, and frankly really weird.

All the shadiness, all the violent rhetoric, all the weird ass conspiracy theories, all of it could have easily been declared to be done by people who didn't speak for Sanders. But they weren't. The Sanders campaign issued an official statement that they embrace it all and the crazy scary bullshit goes all the way to the top. He crossed the fucking line, and this election is no longer amusing.

-Username17

[DSMatticus]

When Hillary, or her supporters, make the claim that she has "the most people who have voted for her" they are being ignorant or willfully deceptive! Her having the most votes when Sanders buries her in every poll only highlights how many people they are not letting vote because they are not registered as democrat or, in some cases, haven't been registered since a year ago. Ridiculous!

Also Sanders wins in every open contest.

Frankly, anyone who thinks Clinton has more general support at this moment is delusional. And the Democratic Party pretending otherwise just reeks of condescension. They are doing everything they can to push it to their insider candidate. The person they know will stick to the status quo. They do not want the upset. I almost wonder if some of them would take Trump over Sanders since he would have similarly oligarchy-friendly positions fiscally.

I am refraining from responding to this person, but holy freakin' crap I wish I could find the words to articulate my frustration with this person that for complicated reasons I can't fully ignore...

And I'm pro-Bernie, which makes this all the more frustrating.

Well, the obvious response would be to bomb him with poll numbers, but I'm sure he thinks the polls are just as rigged as the primary itself.

But yes, it turns out this person is fucking insane, and is living in a left-wing equivalent of the Fox News echo chamber that literally did not exist until this election cycle. Fuck me.

[Kaelik]

The problem is that Poll numbers actually do show Sanders with a greater margin of victory than Clinton in the general. (Or at least, did when I last looked.)

But of course, those polls are taken now, when Trump is attacking Clinton, Fox News has been attacking Clinton for 24 years, and Sanders is attacking Clinton.

Sanders numbers aren't going to go up once the general starts, because Fox and Trump are going to target him. On the other hand, there is every reason to believe that Sanders fully backing Clinton would push her numbers up in a way that Clinton backing Sanders wouldn't. And Clinton is certainly more resistant to attacks, since she's already endured every attack add that will ever exist for months at least.

[DSMatticus]

I'm pretty sure when he says "general support," he does not actually mean "support in the general." If he does, those numbers have never predicted a presidential race this far out more accurately than coin flipping and Clinton blows Sanders out of the water in primary polling, which is far more relevant to who's going to win, you know, the goddamn primary. Case and point: Trump is the most unpopular general election candidate ever to come out of a primary. In what way is general election polling relevant here?

I'm pretty sure this is some dude who lives in a super white, super liberal area and does not really understand the demographics of the Democratic party. Sanders is winning the white vote, they're splitting the latino vote, and Clinton is fucking decimating him on the black vote. He is in a position very similar to the one Hillary was in when she lost her primary to Barack Obama, so I have no fucking idea why idiots expect things to play out differently this time.

[Hiram McDaniels]

I'm a Bernie supporter, but I'm planning on voting for Hilary in the general. I feel like the sanders campaign started jumping the shark when Bernie started to feel like he could win. At that point it's like the fight became more important than the cause. Instead of doing what he probably should have done, like pimping progressive candidates for down ticket and local elections, he just doubled down on attacking Hilary.

I'd like to think that sanders will endorse Clinton after the convention and a lot of Bernie voters will follow, instead of going scorched earth and letting trump stack the Supreme Court with Antonin Scalias for the next 20 years out of pure spite. But maybe I have too much faith in humanity.