Sanders superdelegate switches support to Clinton

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2016 12:36 PM GMT
    theantijock%20engage%20stalker%20reducti

    https://www.rt.com/usa/343411-sanders-clinton-superdelegate-switch/

    Virgin Islands superdelegate who was supporting Bernie Sanders has switched his allegiance to Hillary Clinton. He’s citing Sanders’ alleged lack of clarity on plans for the US territories.

    Emmett Hansen II, the Democratic National Committeeman for the US Virgin Islands, has become Sanders' first superdelegate to publicly flip his support to Clinton, Bloomberg reported.

    "There are no more windmills to joust against and no more mountains to climb," Hansen said. "It comes down to one thing: what’s best for the Virgin Islands, to be fully incorporated into the United States."

    Hansen said he’d seen proposals for the territories by Clinton, which include the ability to vote in presidential elections, and get the same Affordable Care Act, Medicare and Medicaid benefits that are in the 50 states.

    Hansen complained of having been trying for months to get Sanders' aides to clarify the senator’s position on the Virgin Islands, but in vain.

    "I know a million different ways not to answer a question," Hansen said.


    6311194062_29b33c6fde_b.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2016 1:15 PM GMT
    It's only a matter of time before the rest of Sanders' purported delegates switch to Clinton, particularly in light of Sanders' recent lack of leadership in condemning his fans' violence and disruption. As I've always said, Sanders is not an authentic Democrat--he's an opportunistic, pseudo-Democrat who doesn't care about the Democratic Party under whose banner and auspices he's running. I am now seeing what I thought I'd see eventually from Sanders--and it's not a pretty picture.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2016 3:26 PM GMT
    Sanders really is what Republicans accuse genuine Democrats of falsely being - a Socialist. The ideological flip side of the extreme Right, but likewise full of similar pent-up anger and potential violence bordering on anarchy.

    Where I fault the Democrat Party is in having rules that allow a pretender like Sanders to seek their Party's nomination. And criticize their leaders for not being more vocal about objecting to it. Maybe there are some Federal rules that govern primaries, but I wasn't aware of any that would specifically prevent a Party from prohibiting this.

    Could a Republican also run in the Democratic Presidential primary, and vice versa? (Some Republicans complain that Trump is in fact a closet Democrat). States can have primary election rules that define what the Party affiliation of the voters must be, but I'm not sure how it is with the candidates.

    I believe mostly the candidates just do a self-declaration of their affiliation when they file, if they're even required to declare that at all, the assumption being that the Party's own primary voters will make the final decision on eligibility during the election. Except that doesn't work in States with "open" primaries that allow all voters to cast ballots for any Party's candidate. And some States don't have any voter primary, the selection being by Party delegates convening in various manners. Very haphazard.
  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4435

    May 18, 2016 3:57 PM GMT
    Sanders people and now Sanders himself are starting to really piss me off. I like a lot of his agenda, and I like that he's pushing Hillary to to address some important questions, but the lack of any agenda to accomplish it, and the extraordinary tantrum towards Barbara Boxer and Bernie's failure to handle it properly have soured me on him. There was a time when I thought a Hillary/Bernie ticket would be great but now I'm much more a fan of a Hillary/Warren ticket which goes to the same issues but with a sharper knife.

    Art, I'm not sure I agree. Bernie has always caucused with the Dems and his Independent status is much more a function of Vermont politics than a failure to support the right issues. And I think it is a good thing to allow some fluidity in the primaries to keep the parties from becoming ideological monsters. As repulsive as Trump is, one thing he is doing is (or was) pointing out that the Party of Stupid wasn't working in the interests of most Republicans. I'm not sure he is either, now, but that is the momentum behind him. Well that and racism and xenophobia and an odd relationship with women. (Gotta say, I like Ivanka.) But both parties needed some shaking up and the outsider status of Trump and Bernie have changed some unhealthy dynamics in both parties.
  • mybud

    Posts: 11838

    May 18, 2016 5:05 PM GMT
    Sanders is play "sour grapes" politics. I admit Clinton isn't without faults but Sanders recent crash and let it burn mindset and lack of control of his supporters show a lack of personal integrity.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2016 5:05 PM GMT
    DOMINUS saidIt's only a matter of time before the rest of Sanders' purported delegates switch to Clinton, particularly in light of Sanders' recent lack of leadership in condemning his fans' violence and disruption. As I've always said, Sanders is not an authentic Democrat--he's an opportunistic, pseudo-Democrat who doesn't care about the Democratic Party under whose banner and auspices he's running. I am now seeing what I thought I'd see eventually from Sanders--and it's not a pretty picture.


    I often might not believe a thing until I see it; and even then, I question it. So I don't know that this portends to either of your concerns.

    On the switch, that might be foreshadowing or it might be coincidental island politicking. Even if it trends, it might have initiated as island politics alone. And what makes me think that: well, wasn't there just a ta'do about USVI GOP delegates? So this could be a bit more of that squeaky wheel, though it could roll into anything.

    To your charge of Bernie appearing Nader-ish, I won't believe that until I see his actions and hear his post national convention words should Hillary get her expected nomination.

    I believe him to be a man of his word. Here is his word:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton_us_5706fbbde4b03a9e75d3fd93
    As the two Democratic presidential candidates engage in some of their sharpest attacks of the campaign, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Thursday affirmed that he would support opponent Hillary Clinton in the general election if she wins the nomination.

    “Sure I will,” he said, when pressed by CBS News’ Charlie Rose in an interview. “Look, as I said a million times, I think the idea of a Donald Trump or a Ted Cruz presidency would be an unmitigated disaster for this country. I will do everything in my power and work as hard as I can to make sure that that does not happen. And if Secretary Clinton is the nominee, I will certainly support her.”


    So far from what I've seen, to me Bernie very much is a Democrat, my kind of Democrat of the Democratic Party we thought we had before the Republicans pulled our party too far right on their way off the religious cliff. I like Bernie a lot though I don't care for many of his supporters.

    But there are many of those supporters aren't there. And that alone, even by his loss, will pull the party away from being too far to the right. Because instead of Hillary just trying to appease anti-Trump Republicans, she'll have to concern herself with the concerns of the left. As it should be. The electorate is finally the fuck waking up to the ridiculousness of the Republican Party Religious. Why should Democrats follow the right off that cliff?

    So to me, Sanders is not just a Democrat, but a Democrat taking our Party back. It never should have veered this far right in the first place.

    While you'd call Bernie a divider, I think that maybe anti-Bernie statements such as yours or anti-Hillary posts such as metta's are much more so currently divisive of non-Republicans, even if you wind up eventually being correct, which I doubt. He's a candidate for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States of America. He's not a Nader. He's not a Trump. Were this the Democratic Party before it swung so far to the right--pre-Clinton v.1--then I'd be just as right to suggest you a Conservative GOPer disguised as a Democrat as you think you are right to call pSanders pseudo.

    Or are you suggesting that parties ought to be monolithic and rigid. In which case we never would have swung this far right that Sanders Democratic voice would now sound foreign to its own Democratic hearing. When I listen to him, I hear the reasons why I've been a registered Democrat since the 1970s.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2016 5:14 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said...a pretender like Sanders ....


    ...says the guy who supported CRIST
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2016 5:21 PM GMT
    Destinharbor saidSanders people and now Sanders himself are starting to really piss me off. I like a lot of his agenda, and I like that he's pushing Hillary to to address some important questions, but the lack of any agenda to accomplish it, and the extraordinary tantrum towards Barbara Boxer and Bernie's failure to handle it properly have soured me on him. There was a time when I thought a Hillary/Bernie ticket would be great but now I'm much more a fan of a Hillary/Warren ticket which goes to the same issues but with a sharper knife....


    How would he serve the Democratic Party better, by letting go of his issues this early? By disbanding his anti-Trump supporters, or by pushing hard to turn the left away from where the right has dragged us over the years and then to deliver his supporters to Hillary should she win the nomination?

    Because wouldn't that be the second best play if you're not going to get the nomination yourself? Or does he strike anyone as a career politician fighting for progressive change who would just throw it all away?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2016 5:27 PM GMT
    mybud saidSanders is play "sour grapes" politics. I admit Clinton isn't without faults but Sanders recent crash and let it burn mindset and lack of control of his supporters show a lack of personal integrity.


    again...

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/19/us/politics/bernie-sanderss-campaign-accuses-head-of-dnc-of-favoritism.html?_r=0
    Mr. Sanders has condemned violence and harassment by his supporters and has vowed that he will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald J. Trump from becoming president, even if he is not the Democratic nominee.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2016 5:33 PM GMT
    Destinharbor said
    Art, I'm not sure I agree. Bernie has always caucused with the Dems and his Independent status is much more a function of Vermont politics than a failure to support the right issues. And I think it is a good thing to allow some fluidity in the primaries to keep the parties from becoming ideological monsters. As repulsive as Trump is, one thing he is doing is (or was) pointing out that the Party of Stupid wasn't working in the interests of most Republicans. I'm not sure he is either, now, but that is the momentum behind him. Well that and racism and xenophobia and an odd relationship with women. (Gotta say, I like Ivanka.) But both parties needed some shaking up and the outsider status of Trump and Bernie have changed some unhealthy dynamics in both parties.

    You make some valid points, if I may be permitted to judge. I also think Sander's caucusing with the Senate Dems was as much a function of their needing the 2 Independent Senate votes desperately, to reach a filibuster-proof 60-vote supermajority.

    Which during the last 2 White House Admins only occurred for 1 month, despite past Repub claims on this site to the contrary. During Obama's first term, from the moment when Al Franken from Minnesota was finally seated months late in summer 2009 after frivolous Republican delaying lawsuits, until Ted Kennedy died a month later.

    Then the Senate was back to only 57 Democrats and 2 (not always reliable) Independents. Allowing Republicans to filibuster freely and earn their title as the "Party of No" in their attempts to make Obama fail.

    But caucusing with Democrats did not make Sanders a Democrat himself. He was an expedient for the Senate Democrats. In turn, by granting him better access to the workings of the Senate, Sanders was expected to vote with the Democrats on key issues. Each making a pact with the Devil, at least from their individual viewpoints.

    But you speak of "ideological monsters", and I would agree with that concern. Look at the Republicans with their "purity tests". This is how you radicalize a Party, and further distance it from ordinary people and their needs. Think of the extreme examples of the various monolithic Communist parties around the world, to follow that premise to its logical conclusion.

    Nevertheless, I still think someone running for a Party's highest political nomination should have at least some Party credentials. While not having to pass a test, like the Republicans try to apply, but having some qualification for running under the banner & policies which others whose support they seek have developed & value.

    And if they want to change or evolve those policies, there are better ways without hijacking a Party and unilaterally imposing change from the top-down. Like some kind of tyrant & dictator, as history has proven. A path that Trump is already well down.
  • mybud

    Posts: 11838

    May 19, 2016 2:37 PM GMT
    theantijock said
    mybud saidSanders is play "sour grapes" politics. I admit Clinton isn't without faults but Sanders recent crash and let it burn mindset and lack of control of his supporters show a lack of personal integrity.


    again...

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/19/us/politics/bernie-sanderss-campaign-accuses-head-of-dnc-of-favoritism.html?_r=0
    Mr. Sanders has condemned violence and harassment by his supporters and has vowed that he will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald J. Trump from becoming president, even if he is not the Democratic nominee.
    Well actions speak louder than words...
  • rnch

    Posts: 11525

    May 19, 2016 2:48 PM GMT
    mybud saidSanders is play "sour grapes" politics. I admit Clinton isn't without faults but Sanders recent crash and let it burn mindset and lack of control of his supporters show a lack of personal integrity.





    Agree. and agree.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2016 9:39 PM GMT
    mybud saidWell actions speak louder than words...


    Actions can be just as deceiving as words. Actions and words should at least match but even then I question authenticity and motive. Besides that, I know that supporters don't always reflect the values of their champion. Or is every single one of Trump's supporters a race baiting bigot? (Okay, well, maybe 90% of them but it can't be all of them--so, a bad example but you get the point.) Or are there many who think he's just kidding, will say anything to get into office and then magically become a good person once behind the wheel.

    I am mostly a Sanders supporter, but also I like Clinton, while I very much dislike Trump. I'm not real into bamboozlers even if they call it business. But I've spoken to a number of Sanders supporters who by their thinking I don't care for very much. So these freaks do not reflect upon me even while we might see similar images when looking into the Sanders mirror. Likewise, they don't necessarily reflect upon him. Particularly not the SandersOrBust morons. Anyone who would switch from Sanders to Trump is not a Democrat. They're just an idiot.

    So on the one hand we see a kook like Trump running for office who attracts some--you know, outside of the KKK klique--otherwise reasonable people; while we also see a reasonable guy, Sanders, also attracting some kooks. Perhaps it helps not to confuse the two.