- Joined
- May 5, 2019
- Messages
- 9,710
- Reaction score
- 4,685
- Location
- Staten Island, NY USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Thus far, few political pundits have parsed the implications of the Democratic Party convention set-up. Here's a start.
The actual primary process prior to the convention will cough up 3,979 'pledged' delegates apportioned among the various candidates.* It's an open and shut case if the front-runner has amassed 1990 or more delegates. Everyone parties and goes home. If the front-runner hasn't reached that total, the first 'vote' of the delegates will not produce a winner. The super-delegates then vote along with the delegates from the first vote. No delegates are pledged in this or subsequent votes.
Got that? OK.
Now, let's assume that Senator Bernard Sanders is the leading candidate as the primaries roll along. There will come a time when the other candidates, if they drop out, will insure that Senator Sanders isn't replaced by the super delegates with another of the candidates. He'll roll into the convention with the necessary votes.
If they decide not to drop out and someone other than Senator Sanders is selected by the convention, many of the Senator Sanders folks will, in all probability, not bother to vote. The effect of that is obvious.
There are other scenarios, I'm sure. Have at it.
* Nb. Some of them may be 'free' from the start if the person to whom they were pledged drops out and specifies that they should vote for someone else.
Bernie Bros will riot if the super delegates pick someone else.
There will be blood on the streets.
Thus far, few political pundits have parsed the implications of the Democratic Party convention set-up. Here's a start.
The actual primary process prior to the convention will cough up 3,979 'pledged' delegates apportioned among the various candidates.* It's an open and shut case if the front-runner has amassed 1990 or more delegates. Everyone parties and goes home. If the front-runner hasn't reached that total, the first 'vote' of the delegates will not produce a winner. The super-delegates then vote along with the delegates from the first vote. No delegates are pledged in this or subsequent votes.
Got that? OK.
Now, let's assume that Senator Bernard Sanders is the leading candidate as the primaries roll along. There will come a time when the other candidates, if they drop out, will insure that Senator Sanders isn't replaced by the super delegates with another of the candidates. He'll roll into the convention with the necessary votes.
If they decide not to drop out and someone other than Senator Sanders is selected by the convention, many of the Senator Sanders folks will, in all probability, not bother to vote. The effect of that is obvious.
There are other scenarios, I'm sure. Have at it.
* Nb. Some of them may be 'free' from the start if the person to whom they were pledged drops out and specifies that they should vote for someone else.
Thus far, few political pundits have parsed the implications of the Democratic Party convention set-up. Here's a start.
The actual primary process prior to the convention will cough up 3,979 'pledged' delegates apportioned among the various candidates.* It's an open and shut case if the front-runner has amassed 1990 or more delegates. Everyone parties and goes home. If the front-runner hasn't reached that total, the first 'vote' of the delegates will not produce a winner. The super-delegates then vote along with the delegates from the first vote. No delegates are pledged in this or subsequent votes.
Got that? OK.
Now, let's assume that Senator Bernard Sanders is the leading candidate as the primaries roll along. There will come a time when the other candidates, if they drop out, will insure that Senator Sanders isn't replaced by the super delegates with another of the candidates. He'll roll into the convention with the necessary votes.
If they decide not to drop out and someone other than Senator Sanders is selected by the convention, many of the Senator Sanders folks will, in all probability, not bother to vote. The effect of that is obvious.
There are other scenarios, I'm sure. Have at it.
* Nb. Some of them may be 'free' from the start if the person to whom they were pledged drops out and specifies that they should vote for someone else.
And that's why, it's vital that all registered/qualified voters vote.
It wasn't 80,000 Democrats and Liberal Independents that voted for tRump that got him elected; it was millions of voters that stayed home that allowed him to be elected.
BUT, HRC was a way over rated candidate, a over confident candidate and a damaged (by 6+ years of constant investigations, lies and slander) candidate; which was never factored in. I think liberal minded people looked at the polls, looked at a luke warm candidate that was supposedly a shoe in for election and figured; "**** it, what does she need me for?".
Now, fast forward 4 years and the horrendous presidency we've endured and those "**** it" liberals are going to vote. Oh, for sure they may say **** it again, but only if there's 4 feet of snow. Because then they'll be saying "**** it" Fred, warm up the car we're voting.
So far it looks like the Russian delegates are voting for Sanders.
If Bernie is the nominee he will be responsible for many people staying home and not voting or voting third party. But neither Bernie and his progressive friends care about that.
If Bernie is the nominee he will be responsible for many people staying home and not voting or voting third party. But neither Bernie and his progressive friends care about that.
My take?Thus far, few political pundits have parsed the implications of the Democratic Party convention set-up. Here's a start.
The actual primary process prior to the convention will cough up 3,979 'pledged' delegates apportioned among the various candidates.* It's an open and shut case if the front-runner has amassed 1990 or more delegates. Everyone parties and goes home. If the front-runner hasn't reached that total, the first 'vote' of the delegates will not produce a winner. The super-delegates then vote along with the delegates from the first vote. No delegates are pledged in this or subsequent votes.
Got that? OK.
Now, let's assume that Senator Bernard Sanders is the leading candidate as the primaries roll along. There will come a time when the other candidates, if they drop out, will insure that Senator Sanders isn't replaced by the super delegates with another of the candidates. He'll roll into the convention with the necessary votes.
If they decide not to drop out and someone other than Senator Sanders is selected by the convention, many of the Senator Sanders folks will, in all probability, not bother to vote. The effect of that is obvious.
There are other scenarios, I'm sure. Have at it.
* Nb. Some of them may be 'free' from the start if the person to whom they were pledged drops out and specifies that they should vote for someone else.
My take?
If Bernie falls short with only a very narrow lead between himself and the #2, it will be an open-field contested convention if the supers don't give it to him in round 2. If he has a substantial plurality, say 20% (or more) over the rest of the field, they'll have to give it to him.
Bernie Bros
Well, thank you! And Ditto!I was hoping you'd respond. I find your comments thoughtful and well worth reading. The Democratic Party has several ways of losing the election before November. I rather hope that the Democrat movers and shakers are aware of the pitfalls ahead.
Regards.
You know what I think will be poetic justice? If tRumps, trumpsters in SC try to **** with the primary and vote for Bernie trying to tip the scales so trump has a softball opponent, and then Bernie whips tRumps fat ass!
There's only so much the DNC can do with Bernie, just as their was only so much the RNC could do with Trump. Ultimately, even though not legally required to do so (political parties are non governmental private entities), the party will have to concede to the rank & file.
You've lost me with the bolded. Perhaps you're deriving intention, from what I believed was non-biased, non-ideological factual analysis?Why does democracy pain you so much? The horror, the voters will pick the best candidate over one who is more corrupted for powerful interests at the expense of the voters. Maybe the party is wrong to put the voters so low in their priorities?
Hi! I'm not so sure, having not polled a statistically sound sample of Sanders supporters, that they don't care. I propose, without proof, that some of them may be hoping that the overwhelming desire to unseat President of the United States of America Donald Trump will over-ride petty partisanship.
Regards.
You know what I think will be poetic justice? If tRumps, trumpsters in SC try to **** with the primary and vote for Bernie trying to tip the scales so trump has a softball opponent, and then Bernie whips tRumps fat ass!
Hi! I sincerely doubt that such will happen. Thanks for replying, though.
Regards.
You've lost me with the bolded. Perhaps you're deriving intention, from what I believed was non-biased, non-ideological factual analysis?
I'll be happy to clarify.You sounded disgusted by the party 'having' to listen to the 'rank and file', i.e., the voters, viewing it as a loss to the preferred result of the party getting to choose an 'insider' and push them on the voters. I was responding to how that sounded. Perhaps you didn't mean that tone about it, feel free to clarify.
Thus far, few political pundits have parsed the implications of the Democratic Party convention set-up. Here's a start.
The actual primary process prior to the convention will cough up 3,979 'pledged' delegates apportioned among the various candidates.* It's an open and shut case if the front-runner has amassed 1990 or more delegates. Everyone parties and goes home. If the front-runner hasn't reached that total, the first 'vote' of the delegates will not produce a winner. The super-delegates then vote along with the delegates from the first vote. No delegates are pledged in this or subsequent votes.
Got that? OK.
Now, let's assume that Senator Bernard Sanders is the leading candidate as the primaries roll along. There will come a time when the other candidates, if they drop out, will insure that Senator Sanders isn't replaced by the super delegates with another of the candidates. He'll roll into the convention with the necessary votes.
If they decide not to drop out and someone other than Senator Sanders is selected by the convention, many of the Senator Sanders folks will, in all probability, not bother to vote. The effect of that is obvious.
There are other scenarios, I'm sure. Have at it.
* Nb. Some of them may be 'free' from the start if the person to whom they were pledged drops out and specifies that they should vote for someone else.
I'll be happy to clarify.
No, I am not disgusted with democratic representation, I believe the party should generally follow the rank & file popular vote. But I do believe that in a contested convention, the horse-trading among the various delegates that leads to a nominee is a normal and reasonable part of the convention. But to that effect, I'm making this last remark in reference to only the regular delegates. I'd abolish superdelegates. I'm perfectly fine with a gaggle of regular delegates banging-away to get to 50% = 1. That's their job!
Bernie can beat Trump but he might cost us congress. With the right candidate it should be another blue wave election, just like 2018.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?