Superdelegates/DNC bias

[StLucieBengal]

(02-13-2016, 11:36 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Do people really think Sanders is going to run as an independent if he doesn't get the nomination?  Or is that just wishful thinking (from Dems or Repubs, or both?)

Sanders has the heart of the New Democrat party . It's nice to see they are having a civil war themselves between the establishment and the left.

As far as 3rd party ..... No idea if he runs or not.

[Rotobeast]

[fredtoast]

(02-12-2016, 10:41 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Well they are deeply seeded within the establishment of both parties.   That's the problem.   I wish sanders would win for the simple fact we would be breaking the progressive hold on one of the major parties.      Been there since Wilson for the democrats.

I'm sorry I am so late to this argument, but how do you define "progressive".  I always thought it meant giving the government power to solve problems.  Isn't that exactly what bernie stands for?  Why do you think Bernie is not a progressive?

[StLucieBengal]

(02-14-2016, 09:40 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I'm sorry I am so late to this argument, but how do you define "progressive".  I always thought it meant giving the government power to solve problems.  Isn't that exactly what bernie stands for?  Why do you think Bernie is not a progressive?

Bernie is a socialist. That's beyond progressive. The simple definition would be the establishment in both parties. I don't agree with Bernie but it's nice to see them moving to the left of the establishment. This is a positive for both parties to move beyond establishment candidates. Hope it continues. We will have some great debates moving forward.

[fredtoast]

(02-14-2016, 10:18 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Bernie is a socialist.  That's beyond progressive.  The simple definition would be the establishment in both parties.    I don't agree with Bernie but it's nice to see them moving to the left of the establishment.   This is a positive for both parties to move beyond establishment candidates.    Hope it continues.    We will have some great debates moving forward.

Sorry, but I still don't understand your definition of "progressive".  You use the term a lot, but I don't know what you mean.  It seems like at times you don't even know yourself.

How is "socialist" beyond "progressive".  And if he is then isn't he just an extreme progressive?  So how is a win for Bernie a defeat for the progressives?

[BmorePat87]

(02-15-2016, 12:03 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Sorry, but I still don't understand your definition of "progressive".  You use the term a lot, but I don't know what you mean.  It seems like at times you don't even know yourself.

How is "socialist" beyond "progressive".  And if he is then isn't he just an extreme progressive?  So how is a win for Bernie a defeat for the progressives?

Progressive is his way of insulting political moderates. His use of that word would be correct if this were 1916. Progressives of that era are similar to moderates of today. They don't want kids working in factories and support breaking up oil trusts. 

[fredtoast]

(02-15-2016, 01:35 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Progressive is his way of insulting political moderates. His use of that word would be correct if this were 1916. Progressives of that era are similar to moderates of today. They don't want kids working in factories and support breaking up oil trusts. 

I thought he knew what the term meant.  sometimes it seems like he does, but other times it seems like he is just going for laughs.

[Bengalzona]

(02-12-2016, 11:01 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Why are you hitting a stinky donkey in the junk ?


Is it an Italian thing ?

Indeed, it is:

[Bengalzona]

(02-12-2016, 05:45 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I've heard the term thrown around a lot in the past, but something has come up recently that made me really question them. In the NH primary, Sanders walked away with a win to the tune of 22 percentage points, yet he and Clinton walked away with the same number of delegates. All of this possible thanks to, you guessed it, super delegates.

On CNN, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, DNC Chair, was asked about this. The answer is, well, a more than a little concerning.




Is it just me, or does she make it seem like it doesn't really matter who the people vote for, because these unpledged, or superdelegates are assigned to pretty much level the field?

Combined with this recent news item, it seems like the DNC is doing everything it can, and not subtly I might add, to insure a Clinton victory.

Edit to add link to a story with the transcript: http://www.aim.org/don-irvine-blog/dnc-chair-debbie-wasserman-schultz-struggles-to-explain-why-nominating-process-isnt-rigged-against-sanders-video/

As I understand it, the Super-delegates were key to Obama winning the nomination in 2008 over Hillary.

I heard that the concept behind the "super-delegates" was similar to how the Electoral College works in the actual election.

At any rate, I'm pretty sure they don't hang out in the Hall of Justice with the Wonder Twins.

[StLucieBengal]

(02-15-2016, 01:35 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Progressive is his way of insulting political moderates. His use of that word would be correct if this were 1916. Progressives of that era are similar to moderates of today. They don't want kids working in factories and support breaking up oil trusts. 

It's the same people. The term progressives was demonized and they have become what we now know as moderates. Moderates are worse than either a conservative or a socialist. They walk the line and they end up just spending like crazy to both domestic and the military.

[fredtoast]

(02-15-2016, 11:11 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: It's the same people.  The term progressives was demonized and they have become what we now know as moderates.     Moderates are worse than either a conservative or a socialist.    They walk the line and they end up just spending like crazy to both domestic and the military.

After all this time throwing the term around I just now figured out that you do not even know what it means.

Being a progressive has nothing to do with being a moderate.  Where exactly did you get your definition of "progressive"?

Maybe I am wrong about this.  If so please show me where you got your definition of "progressive"

[BmorePat87]

(02-15-2016, 11:11 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: It's the same people.  The term progressives was demonized and they have become what we now know as moderates.     Moderates are worse than either a conservative or a socialist.    They walk the line and they end up just spending like crazy to both domestic and the military.

lol, ok.