Right, that’s my point. He’s always wanted to do away with superdelegates. He does now and he did in 2016. I’m not sure how that’s a flip flop or an inconsistency.
All true with the exception of Biden. I believe him when he says he chose not to run because his son had just died.
Guy cant go one town hall without breaking down in tears when he brings his son up to this day.
Right, that’s my point. He’s always wanted to do away with superdelegates. He does now and he did in 2016. I’m not sure how that’s a flip flop or an inconsistency.
He just needs to live until December, tbh
I don’t see anything from Sanders’ mouth inconsistent with what he’s saying now - he’s always been of the viewpoint that there should be no superdelegates whatsoever.
Point me to the specific quote you’re saying is inconsistent with what he’s said this time around.
Maybe if he wanted to do away with super delegates he should have actually joined the party to influence the rules. He sure wasnt above trying to use them.
He did influence the rules dumbass. Now superdelegates don’t cast their vote until all the primaries have happened when 4 years ago they cast their vote simultaneously with the primary in each state. That rule change was because of Bernie’s influence.
Better question is why are moderate Democrats ok with the concept of superdelegates at all. Shouldn’t the voters be able to pick the candidate themselves without party elites like that spear chucking baboon Donna Brazile having an outsized influence?
Still waiting for you to point out the quote showing him flip flop on delegates.
Honestly I see superdelegates as somewhat of a necessity to ensure party survival. It’s not difficult to see somebody that’s popular coopting a party. It’s a double edged sword for sure though, as it can easily be abused
Superdelegates good, EC bad.
... and the will now whine about the current rules. Bernie’s another little demagogue who wants to ram his vision down everyone’s throat.
Maybe he does, but that’s different than him changing his stance like Pocahontas is claiming he did. His stance with respect to superdelegates has consistently been that they should go away completely.
Actually you are TOTALLY wrong. In 2018 Sanders helped write the current rules.
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/de...c-move-n903866
... and he is a little two faced .
Are you seriously so dense you don’t get the difference between compromising vs. getting what you want?
Sanders did what he could to mitigate the effect superdelegates have. It’s not like the party gave him the power to write whatever rules he wanted and it was his sole decision to make it so superdelegates continued to remain a part of the process. He was never going to get the DNC to completely do away with superdelegates, so he found a creative way to reduce their impact as much as possible. That’s not in any way a flip flop or inconsistency.
Read the article you linked. The superdelegates themselves were against any change at all, so the side that wanted change had to compromise.
It's like thinking Obama wanted this nerfed and ty version of the ACA because that's what got passed.
that’s exactly the comparison I was thinking of...this is the equivalent of Republicans who criticized Obama for passing a weak stimulus package that had very little immediate impact when it was the Republicans who weakened it in the first place.
It said some were against a change. Wow, big shocker. Where does it say that Bernie didn’t like this proposal? Where does it say Bernie had an alternate proposal. Or are you just pulling these ideas out of your ass. I do see where Bernie approved, even praised the changes and now doesn’t support or approve them. Talk about dumb asses. Pocahontas is dead right in what she said and you’re dead wrong.
Last edited by picnroll; 02-27-2020 at 11:44 PM.
Bernie has said countless times that superdelegates shouldn’t exist to begin with. There was no point in formally proposing the elimination of superdelegates when that was never going to happen. The fact Bernie got the DNC, an organization that goes with the status quo as much as it possibly can, to make such a big change was a big accomplishment worth praise.
Are you seriously trying to argue that Bernie had the ability to remove superdelegates from the equation completely and voluntarily elected not to?
Its like Chinook said, Obama approved what was ultimately a ty watered down ACA that didn’t include a public option or any substantive cost control because it was an improvement over the status quo, but according to your logic that means the ACA in its current form is exactly what Obama was pushing for all along even though the ACA he wanted was a lot different.
CHICAGO — The Democratic National Committee is set to vote this weekend on a Bernie Sanders-backed plan to weaken the influence of superdelegates in what has become a contentious showdown between factions at a time when the party is trying to project unity.
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/de...legate-n903606
“The reform package, pushed by DNC Chairman Tom Perez and allies of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, among others, passed overwhelmingly by voice vote at the DNC’s summer meeting here — two years after the process started.”
Warren’s 100% right in everything she said in spades. You’re totally wrong.
Last edited by picnroll; 02-28-2020 at 12:04 AM.
Once again, is it your contention that Bernie had the ability to completely remove superdelegates from the equation and voluntarily elected not to?
Those quotes about this being a “contentious showdown” only corroborate what I was saying. The Sanders supporters wanted X, the establishment superdelegates wanted Z, so they ended up with compromising on Y. This is how politics work.
And Bernie probably just wanted to be coronated socialist king of America too. Do you disagree that he agreed to, even had a large part in establishing a set of rules for the 2020 nomination process and now he things those rules shouldn’t apply? Do you disagree that everything Warren said is factual?
Answer my question first and then I’ll answer these.
I have searched and I can find no article where Sanders states a position on having no super delegates or proposing an alternative to super delegates in selecting a nominee where there is no clear cut majority candidate. Point me to one and I’ll believe you.
You’re never going to answer my question so just to further demonstrate how re ed you are:
1) I disagree that he “agreed to” the current set of rules. Just like all the other candidates, he’s subject to the set of rules eatablished by the DNC whether or not he likes them. The fact you are incapable of making the distinction between voluntarily agreeing with rules and being involuntarily subject to rules makes me wonder if you have temporal lobe damage.
To make a comparison that your very limited brain might be able to grasp, I have to dress business casual for work every day because it’s a rule I’m subject to as an employee of the company I work for. That doesn’t mean it was my decision or that I actively sought to make the rule requiring a certain dress code. If it were up to me I’d wear gym shorts and a t shirt every day, but since I want to earn a paycheck the same way Bernie wants to be president, I have to suck it up and play by the rules I don’t like.
2) I agree he’s of the personal opinion those rules shouldn’t apply just like he always has been.
3) Warren’s claim that Bernie was ever against the candidate who won by a plurality getting the nomination is false. He definitely tried making an appeal to super delegates at the end of the primary to create a contested convention but that doesn’t mean he agreed with the rules as they were written - he was simply doing everything he could to win. Trying to capitalize on rules as they’re written =/= agreeing with them.
I ask you to point to an article where Sanders states his opinion and you haven’t. He agreed to a set of rules, help write them and not doesn’t want to be held to them. Warren called him out. You’re either re ed, full of or both. Waste of time. Adios.
I didn’t ask you to believe me, I asked you to answer my question.
Not a tranny post if he's not crying about nothing once again.
hopefully he doesn't last til next week.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)