Superdelegates????

[Ernie S.]

Despite a resounding victory in New Hampshire and a virtual tie in Iowa, Clinton's massive superdelegate lead puts her ahead 481-55 in delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

How to you Sanders supporters feel about this crap?

How do you clinton supporters justify this shit?

Kinda. A super delegate can change their mind at any time. Their votes aren't actually tallied until the convention. So any 'super delegate' count is a hypothetical one.

The Super Delegates in practice always vote with people on a national level. They exist largely to create a sense of momentum and strength for the establishment candidate. If Sanders were to actually win the majority of the vote nationally its highly unlikely the SD's would stick with Hillary.

Depends on how much they need the money.
Shit! We have a primary process to allow the PEOPLE to choose who best represents them. This appears to make that process irrelevant. You all should be seriously pissed.

 

[Ernie S.]

Despite a resounding victory in New Hampshire and a virtual tie in Iowa, Clinton's massive superdelegate lead puts her ahead 481-55 in delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

How to you Sanders supporters feel about this crap?

How do you clinton supporters justify this shit?

Kinda. A super delegate can change their mind at any time. Their votes aren't actually tallied until the convention. So any 'super delegate' count is a hypothetical one.

The Super Delegates in practice always vote with people on a national level. They exist largely to create a sense of momentum and strength for the establishment candidate. If Sanders were to actually win the majority of the vote nationally its highly unlikely the SD's would stick with Hillary.

"Highly unlikely" is STILL to far from honest. A lot like "kinda pregnant".

Its never happened. Making an occurrence now highly unlikely. The Super Delegates record of voting with the people nationally is perfect.

You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

Precedent is in the past. We are discussing hillary clinton here. I wouldn't put anything past that pathological liar.

 

[Ernie S.]

Despite a resounding victory in New Hampshire and a virtual tie in Iowa, Clinton's massive superdelegate lead puts her ahead 481-55 in delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

How to you Sanders supporters feel about this crap?

How do you clinton supporters justify this shit?

Kinda. A super delegate can change their mind at any time. Their votes aren't actually tallied until the convention. So any 'super delegate' count is a hypothetical one.

The Super Delegates in practice always vote with people on a national level. They exist largely to create a sense of momentum and strength for the establishment candidate. If Sanders were to actually win the majority of the vote nationally its highly unlikely the SD's would stick with Hillary.

"Highly unlikely" is STILL to far from honest. A lot like "kinda pregnant".

Its never happened. Making an occurrence now highly unlikely. The Super Delegates record of voting with the people nationally is perfect.

You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

"highly unlikely" simply is NOT honest enough.

We're speaking about the future. The kind of certainty you're demanding isn't possible. We can only speak of what is likely or unlikely. Its highly unlikely that the SD will vote against the people
nationally.

How do we know? Its so rare that its never happened.

There is simply NO WAY you can justify the delegate count and even appear honest. They ARE stealing from that old man.

Again, not a single Super Delegate vote has been counted. Its all hypothetical. Unlike the standard delegates, the SD can change their mind at any time up until their vote is tallied at the convention. Their votes aren't actually counted until then.

You're lamenting about a 'theft' that hasn't even happened. Nor is likely to.

No theft yet but they be standing outside the bank with guns drawn and masks on. Don't for one second think that past practice matters one iota to hillary rodam clinton.

 

[whitehall]

It's a scam concockted by the DNC to make sure Hillary wins the nomination even if she loses the primary vote. Sanders supporters should be outraged but socialist stooges don't get outraged unless media propaganda sources say it's OK. .

 

[candycorn]

But remember DarkFury...they (Dems) are the ones who put the system in place. They (super delegates) aren't cheating him, they are using the system to vote for who they feel is best.

Unfortunately it's true....
Coin tosses and Super Delegates are part of the deal....

So much for the democratic process, huh Democrats?

I'm not a member of the Democratic Party but you're right, it is flagarantly undemocratic. Much like the GOP winner-take-all states.

The goal is to have as pristine a nominee as possible going into the General.

 

[candycorn]

It's a scam concockted by the DNC to make sure Hillary wins the nomination even if she loses the primary vote. Sanders supporters should be outraged but socialist stooges don't get outraged unless media propaganda sources say it's OK. .

Total rubbish. They had Super Delegates going back to the days of Mondale.

 

[candycorn]

Despite a resounding victory in New Hampshire and a virtual tie in Iowa, Clinton's massive superdelegate lead puts her ahead 481-55 in delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

How to you Sanders supporters feel about this crap?

How do you clinton supporters justify this shit?

I think the shit will really hit the fan if Sanders wins the majority of votes in the primaries and yet loses the nomination. There will be blood in the streets.

The same is true if the GOP robs Trump if he wins most of the primaries. Except in Trump's case, there won't be a riot. He will either go third party or call on his supporters to boycott the election, thereby handing the election to Clinton.

Hillary Clinton in 2008 won the individual Primary vote, 18.1 million to 17.6 million for Obama, yet she lost the nomination for Presidential Candidate for the DNC....I don't remember the riots back then about super delegates?

About half of the super delegates/unpledged delegates have chosen not to commit to supporting Hillary...and a couple that have, have already switched their commitment from Hillary to Bernie.

Sanders knows the rules that were set before the Primary began.... he needs to get his rear in gear, and secure those super delegates.

IF Sanders makes no effort to do such, then perhaps he truly does not want to win the nomination and possibly be President... and is just in this race to have his political positions be heard....????

It is not entirely that easy. Super Delegates are awarded based on a number of criteria; chief amongst these are long-term party patronage. That usually (but not always) coincides with the ability to win in the General as you saw with President Obama taking some SDs away from Clinton though they had previously pledged to then Senator Clinton.

Bernie cannot fire up the charm offensive then start wining and dining them and expect to get support. He needs to win by a couple of touchdowns and he'll see the move being made toward him by the SDs happen organically.

I doubt he would even see it then.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Despite a resounding victory in New Hampshire and a virtual tie in Iowa, Clinton's massive superdelegate lead puts her ahead 481-55 in delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

How to you Sanders supporters feel about this crap?

How do you clinton supporters justify this shit?

This is as ignorant as it is naive.

 

[Care4all]

Despite a resounding victory in New Hampshire and a virtual tie in Iowa, Clinton's massive superdelegate lead puts her ahead 481-55 in delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

How to you Sanders supporters feel about this crap?

How do you clinton supporters justify this shit?

I think the shit will really hit the fan if Sanders wins the majority of votes in the primaries and yet loses the nomination. There will be blood in the streets.

The same is true if the GOP robs Trump if he wins most of the primaries. Except in Trump's case, there won't be a riot. He will either go third party or call on his supporters to boycott the election, thereby handing the election to Clinton.

Hillary Clinton in 2008 won the individual Primary vote, 18.1 million to 17.6 million for Obama, yet she lost the nomination for Presidential Candidate for the DNC....I don't remember the riots back then about super delegates?

About half of the super delegates/unpledged delegates have chosen not to commit to supporting Hillary...and a couple that have, have already switched their commitment from Hillary to Bernie.

Sanders knows the rules that were set before the Primary began.... he needs to get his rear in gear, and secure those super delegates.

IF Sanders makes no effort to do such, then perhaps he truly does not want to win the nomination and possibly be President... and is just in this race to have his political positions be heard....????

It is not entirely that easy. Super Delegates are awarded based on a number of criteria; chief amongst these are long-term party patronage. That usually (but not always) coincides with the ability to win in the General as you saw with President Obama taking some SDs away from Clinton though they had previously pledged to then Senator Clinton.

Bernie cannot fire up the charm offensive then start wining and dining them and expect to get support. He needs to win by a couple of touchdowns and he'll see the move being made toward him by the SDs happen organically.

I doubt he would even see it then.

So, since he knows and new the rules and situation before he even began his run, did Bernie Sanders ever, truly, want to be President?

 

[Skylar]

Kinda. A super delegate can change their mind at any time. Their votes aren't actually tallied until the convention. So any 'super delegate' count is a hypothetical one.

The Super Delegates in practice always vote with people on a national level. They exist largely to create a sense of momentum and strength for the establishment candidate. If Sanders were to actually win the majority of the vote nationally its highly unlikely the SD's would stick with Hillary.

"Highly unlikely" is STILL to far from honest. A lot like "kinda pregnant".

Its never happened. Making an occurrence now highly unlikely. The Super Delegates record of voting with the people nationally is perfect.

You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

"highly unlikely" simply is NOT honest enough.

We're speaking about the future. The kind of certainty you're demanding isn't possible. We can only speak of what is likely or unlikely. Its highly unlikely that the SD will vote against the people
nationally.

How do we know? Its so rare that its never happened.

There is simply NO WAY you can justify the delegate count and even appear honest. They ARE stealing from that old man.

Again, not a single Super Delegate vote has been counted. Its all hypothetical. Unlike the standard delegates, the SD can change their mind at any time up until their vote is tallied at the convention. Their votes aren't actually counted until then.

You're lamenting about a 'theft' that hasn't even happened. Nor is likely to.

No theft yet but they be standing outside the bank with guns drawn and masks on. Don't for one second think that past practice matters one iota to hillary rodam clinton.

Its the 2nd primary. Out of 50. Take a breath.

 

[Skylar]

But remember DarkFury...they (Dems) are the ones who put the system in place. They (super delegates) aren't cheating him, they are using the system to vote for who they feel is best.

Unfortunately it's true....
Coin tosses and Super Delegates are part of the deal....

So much for the democratic process, huh Democrats?

I'm not a member of the Democratic Party but you're right, it is flagarantly undemocratic. Much like the GOP winner-take-all states.

The goal is to have as pristine a nominee as possible going into the General.

It is and it isn't. If the Super Delegates were to give the nomination to a person that the people hadn't supported nationally, you're absolutely right.

But they never have. They have always sided with winner of the popular vote.

The purpose of Super Delegates seems much more about creating the perception of momentum and inevitability for the establishment candidate. Even when its not inevitable. As Obama demonstrated dramatically.

 

[Skylar]

Despite a resounding victory in New Hampshire and a virtual tie in Iowa, Clinton's massive superdelegate lead puts her ahead 481-55 in delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

How to you Sanders supporters feel about this crap?

How do you clinton supporters justify this shit?

Kinda. A super delegate can change their mind at any time. Their votes aren't actually tallied until the convention. So any 'super delegate' count is a hypothetical one.

The Super Delegates in practice always vote with people on a national level. They exist largely to create a sense of momentum and strength for the establishment candidate. If Sanders were to actually win the majority of the vote nationally its highly unlikely the SD's would stick with Hillary.

Depends on how much they need the money.
Shit! We have a primary process to allow the PEOPLE to choose who best represents them. This appears to make that process irrelevant. You all should be seriously pissed.

Its a matter of practical power. If the candidate the people wanted was overlooked in favor of the establishment candidate on the national level on a Super Delegate technicality......many of the people who voted for the overlooked candidate wouldn't vote in the general election. You'd dramatically increase the odds of a republican victory in doing so.

Money follows power. And power follows victory in the general election. Super Delegates overturning the will of the people nationally runs counter to the interests of power. And thus, most likely wouldn't happen.

 

[Skylar]

Yeah, 'coin flips' and this. The Democratic Party is a real mess. What's going on?

it was a tie. What did you want them to do? Rock, paper, scissors?

And out of 13 tosses, Clinton won 7.

 

[Skylar]

Despite a resounding victory in New Hampshire and a virtual tie in Iowa, Clinton's massive superdelegate lead puts her ahead 481-55 in delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

How to you Sanders supporters feel about this crap?

How do you clinton supporters justify this shit?

Kinda. A super delegate can change their mind at any time. Their votes aren't actually tallied until the convention. So any 'super delegate' count is a hypothetical one.

The Super Delegates in practice always vote with people on a national level. They exist largely to create a sense of momentum and strength for the establishment candidate. If Sanders were to actually win the majority of the vote nationally its highly unlikely the SD's would stick with Hillary.

"Highly unlikely" is STILL to far from honest. A lot like "kinda pregnant".

Its never happened. Making an occurrence now highly unlikely. The Super Delegates record of voting with the people nationally is perfect.

You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

Precedent is in the past. We are discussing hillary clinton here. I wouldn't put anything past that pathological liar.

If she had the kind of power you've imagined, she'd already be president. This being her 2nd run at the presidency clearly demonstrations that there's a serious flaw in your logic.

 

[Care4all]

The GOPers should worry about their own unpledged delegates swinging the vote away from Trump, and to an establishment candidate when Trump overwhelmingly has won the vote of their constituents...

Start your outrage threads now, on your own Party antics.

 

[Ernie S.]

But remember DarkFury...they (Dems) are the ones who put the system in place. They (super delegates) aren't cheating him, they are using the system to vote for who they feel is best.

Unfortunately it's true....
Coin tosses and Super Delegates are part of the deal....

So much for the democratic process, huh Democrats?

I'm not a member of the Democratic Party but you're right, it is flagarantly undemocratic. Much like the GOP winner-take-all states.

The goal is to have as pristine a nominee as possible going into the General.

Winner take all is the way it should be, or does Mitt Romney hang out in the oval office 3 days a week?

 

[Ernie S.]

Despite a resounding victory in New Hampshire and a virtual tie in Iowa, Clinton's massive superdelegate lead puts her ahead 481-55 in delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

How to you Sanders supporters feel about this crap?

How do you clinton supporters justify this shit?

This is as ignorant as it is naive.

From baby Clay the idiot, I'll take that for what it's worth. (jack shit)

 

[Ernie S.]

"Highly unlikely" is STILL to far from honest. A lot like "kinda pregnant".

Its never happened. Making an occurrence now highly unlikely. The Super Delegates record of voting with the people nationally is perfect.

You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

"highly unlikely" simply is NOT honest enough.

We're speaking about the future. The kind of certainty you're demanding isn't possible. We can only speak of what is likely or unlikely. Its highly unlikely that the SD will vote against the people
nationally.

How do we know? Its so rare that its never happened.

There is simply NO WAY you can justify the delegate count and even appear honest. They ARE stealing from that old man.

Again, not a single Super Delegate vote has been counted. Its all hypothetical. Unlike the standard delegates, the SD can change their mind at any time up until their vote is tallied at the convention. Their votes aren't actually counted until then.

You're lamenting about a 'theft' that hasn't even happened. Nor is likely to.

No theft yet but they be standing outside the bank with guns drawn and masks on. Don't for one second think that past practice matters one iota to hillary rodam clinton.

Its the 2nd primary. Out of 50. Take a breath.

I just asked in the OP for you Democrats to tell me if you think having superdelegates is fair. You've made no attempt to answer the question and you're telling me to take a breath. OK I get it. You will not or can not criticize the Democrat Party. Fine. You're a hack. I haven't learned anything new.

 

[Ernie S.]

But remember DarkFury...they (Dems) are the ones who put the system in place. They (super delegates) aren't cheating him, they are using the system to vote for who they feel is best.

Unfortunately it's true....
Coin tosses and Super Delegates are part of the deal....

So much for the democratic process, huh Democrats?

I'm not a member of the Democratic Party but you're right, it is flagarantly undemocratic. Much like the GOP winner-take-all states.

The goal is to have as pristine a nominee as possible going into the General.

It is and it isn't. If the Super Delegates were to give the nomination to a person that the people hadn't supported nationally, you're absolutely right.

But they never have. They have always sided with winner of the popular vote.

The purpose of Super Delegates seems much more about creating the perception of momentum and inevitability for the establishment candidate. Even when its not inevitable. As Obama demonstrated dramatically.

Precedent is in the past. ANSWER THE DAMNED QUESTION!

 

[Ernie S.]

Despite a resounding victory in New Hampshire and a virtual tie in Iowa, Clinton's massive superdelegate lead puts her ahead 481-55 in delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

How to you Sanders supporters feel about this crap?

How do you clinton supporters justify this shit?

Kinda. A super delegate can change their mind at any time. Their votes aren't actually tallied until the convention. So any 'super delegate' count is a hypothetical one.

The Super Delegates in practice always vote with people on a national level. They exist largely to create a sense of momentum and strength for the establishment candidate. If Sanders were to actually win the majority of the vote nationally its highly unlikely the SD's would stick with Hillary.

"Highly unlikely" is STILL to far from honest. A lot like "kinda pregnant".

Its never happened. Making an occurrence now highly unlikely. The Super Delegates record of voting with the people nationally is perfect.

You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

Precedent is in the past. We are discussing hillary clinton here. I wouldn't put anything past that pathological liar.

If she had the kind of power you've imagined, she'd already be president. This being her 2nd run at the presidency clearly demonstrations that there's a serious flaw in your logic.

She isn't running against a black man this time. There is no flaw here other than your ability to answer a direct question