Amy, Pete etc. need to drop off and redirect support to Warren.
Biden is a flame-out. Bloomberg is a no no!
14
And people have the audacity to gaslight us bernie supporters and tell us were crazy and just as terrible as trump supporters (!!!) for CORRECTLY believing there’s a backdoor conspiracy amongst DNC operatives to prevent Bernie from being the nominee.
38
If they do this, I’m done with politics until we get a real progressive party. The DNC and GOP are clearly just interested in the corporatist status quo, and raking in those big donor dollars.
Trump is horrible. Doing this is worse.
35
This is disgusting. I have absolutely ZERO interest in voting now. I am losing all faith in democracy. All any politician cares about is holding on to his or her job. Period.
15
Having these conversations prior to Super Tuesday is so counter productive and damaging to the democratic party. Every delegate and super delegate who has bashed the candidate who is winning so far ought to be relieved of their duty and replaced with someone else. They are the ones responsible for tearing the party apart. The press, in many instances, has also revealed their own bias and recklessness by choosing sides before Super Tuesday. I think it's time Nancy Pelosi calls on all the delegates to shut up, grow up and wait for the votes or lpse their delegate status. They have put a big C for Corruption and a big S for Stupidity on the party brand for being so utterly clueless, biased and hysterical over nothing. And to attempt to blame their utter contempt of the voters on the voters is beyond the pale. These cretins need to retire before they damage the party further and destroy it.
29
“Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, abruptly said she was resigning after a trove of leaked emails showed party officials conspiring to sabotage the campaign of Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.” - New York Times almost 4 years ago.
37
I don’t understand the antipathy to Sanders’ positions—he’s staking out a position where Democrats were once and should be now. I view him as the Democratic Party’s lost conscience. To ignore him by saying “Well, he’s not even a Democrat” says all I need to know about a person.
36
It's looking like Trump/Pence 2020! Democrats (my party) are their own worst enemies. If Bernie denied the nomination his fervent supporters will stay home or maybe even vote for Trump. We can look forward to the Federal district, appellate and Supreme Court being composed almost entirely of right wing ideologies.
17
This philosophy mirrors the acquisitive, market-centric amoralism of the modern Democratic Party with which he’s become so intimately aligned. Albeit in different ways, both are products of a hollow liberal culture that values individual success over collective solidarity, toasts the endless triangulation of its elites as a marker of enlightened realism, and allows the twin idols of wealth and celebrity to be its lodestars.
8
A vote for Bernie is a vote for Trump!
Even worse, voting for Bernie is a vote for numerous Republicans running for seats in the house.
10
"...Mr. Sanders edges out moderate candidates who collectively win more votes."
This isn't just disingenuous, it's an outright lie.
Popular vote for Sanders in Nevada caucus: 41,075
Biden, Buttigieg, and Steyer together: 40,897
Warren (11,703) and Sanders together: 52,778
I put the last figure there, because the authors are implying that Bernie wouldn't win if there weren't so many moderates running (which isn't true), but they neglect to recognize that Bernie is losing votes to Warren as well.
This is fake news, something the Times claims to abhor.
As far as interviewing "superdelegates", these people are already ignoring party rules, again. In the Democrat party rules, these delegates are actually defined as "undeclared". Coming out ahead of time and making their position known is what alienated so many Democrat voters in the last election.
Democrat leadership does not respect their own supporters.
If they were to ignore the months long effort of millions and bring in a dark horse candidate, like Sherrod Brown, you would see a mass exodus away from the Democrat party.
As far as the Democrats brushing up on their rules, they have repeatedly shown that their rules are only rules of convenience.
20
The DNC and Democratic poobahs have learned NOTHING from 2016.
They care more about the gravy train that keeps them fat and happy than they do about winning elections.
They don't care that Sanders seems to be demonstrating the same kind of energy and support that Trump had. HINT!
Sanders is not my first choice. But if he's got the momentum, it would be suicide to thwart Sanders and his supporters.
Whatever you fear Sanders will do in office, he will be heavily moderated by Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress. Or, he will be totally blocked by a Republican majority in either or both houses of Congress.
Anyone who is against Trump, and who therefore should also be against any Republicans, who are now just his rubber stamps, should be supporting ANY Democrat for President, and ALL Democrats for Congress and the Senate, period.
21
If Sanders goes into the convention with a substantial lead in delegates over any other contender, and is denied the nomination via a "brokered" convention, the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Party can bet their bottom dollar many Sandernistas -- as they did in key battleground states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, et alia in 2016-- will simply not vote (or vote Green), thus handing Mr. Trump a second term.
I was arrested protesting in Chicago in 1968. The theme of the antiwar element of the party after that fiasco was, "A Plague on Both Your Houses".
If Bernie has a substantial lead going into the convention, he's earned it. Have the convention, then, select a counter balancing Vice-Presidential candidate -- preferably a woman, ideally a woman of color with credibility -- and surround the campaign with the message that this is a Unity Ticket, of the whole party, of which Bernie is simply one part.
This year's campaign simply cannot be about Bernie. It has to be about Trump. And if the Party is unified, we'll win. If the Party elite stiffs Sanders when he's significantly ahead of the others in delegates, their undemocratic action will split the Party.
If the Democratic Party is going to prevent another four years of Trumpism -- and it is our moral duty to do so! -- then we have to unify around whoever has an overwhelming lead in delegates going into the convention.
If it's Bernie, so be it. And let's campaign as a unified Party.
19
Oh, no, not again... The picture of Rep. Steve Cohen mooning over Sherrod Brown says it all: Big Dem powers will do exactly what they please as they've always done and will risk another election to kill Sanders' chances. The nominee will be another connected and/or very rich white male who will pretend to care and shave a bit from the margins to toss to voters who've been bled dry by deregulation and greed. From the safety of Blue WA state, I may have to sit another one out.
Fwiw, I'm for Warren but would gladly support and vote for Bernie if he manages to survive the DNC.
13
The democrats are playing a dangerous game here. Its so early to put so much bad faith into the atmosphere. The fact of the matter is that Bernie has won the most "first time voters" in 3 states so far. If that continues, then he has something that the others do not. These discussions shouldn't be happening, since we can't trust politicians to see past their own reelection and we know they always think they know better than their own voters, these discussions were inevitable. But having so many faces on the record, that they are trying to find a way to steal a nomination just in case... is one heck of a bad look, and a HUGE mistake.
12
Why bother voting? If we get cheated out of our vote, I’m done. I won’t be a democracy smokescreen for the lords and ladies machinations. Electoral College, lack of fair representation in Senate (New Yorker- so I get cheated on both scores), superdelegates & unbound delegates swooping in to push us aside and choose whoever (we didn’t vote for)
Democracy? It’s a sham. I feel like vomiting red, white, & blue over the next Democratic politician who goes on about our brave service ppl risking their lives for our right to vote, to live in this greatest of democracies & then agree to subverting the will of the ppl with this delegate scheme.
13
Republicans fall in line, Democrats fall in love. Bottom line is, Sanders excites more Democrats than all the rest combined. Democrats win only when there is high turnout and high excitement, ie like the Obama years. Furthermore, forget your anecdoctal examples, the bookies are never wrong. Of all the Democrats, Bernie has the best odds as of right this moment, at a dismal +275, while Trump is overwhelmingly the favorite to win -180. Can we please have a winning strategy for once? Let's combine forces and do a Bernie + Buttegieg or Warren + Klobuchar ticket, you know, like diversify your portfolio or something. I am a liberal Democrat and I am sick of us losing.
4
I really, really don't get it. FDR won 4, count 'em, 4 elections after implementing far more "public/socialist" programs than anyone before or since. WPA, CCC, many public works projects, Hoover Dam, etc, etc, etc. Nothing B'Sanders has mentioned approaches FDR. Then the marginal income tax rate was over 90%!! It worked didn't it? How close are we to a repeat of the roaring 20's and the big depression of the 30's...a century later. Are we gonna wait to implement some of these programs until the economy collapses again? B'Sanders is kinda old already so the VP candidate could be more important than ever. If you don't like the FDR analogy, compare him to LBJ... the force behind the Civil Rights Act, the Great Society, the "War" on Poverty, etc, etc, etc.
It's already time to "fish or cut bait" and get on with it!
12
Here is my question for the Superdelegates and DNC "leadership" who feel Sanders' platform is too extreme: What exactly do they find moderate about the last three years of the Trump and McConnell march to monarchy? Last time I looked, the most EXTREME measure the founding fathers made available to constrain a President from abusing power operating above the law was (cue the ominous music) impeachment. Uh, how did that work out last month ? So, to follow the DNC's line of thinking --I guess we should have gone for a more "moderate approach " . . . the same way the DNC poobahs are preparing to engineer the convention (before Super Tuesday takes place) for a suitable, moderate opponent to Trump and the GOP . . . because , you know, we're dealing with such a moderate and measured administration. The GOP is running a campaign against the truth,while the DNC is looking to...Chris Dodd? (The pulse of the common man must waft across the waves of a yacht marina in Westport.) Good job Democratic power brokers! I am not a commie, socialist symp, getting ready to storm Wall Street. I am in my 60s. I am a grandchild of immigrants, raised by first generation parents who taught their kids to believe that honesty, hard work and education can be the foundation for whatever you want to achieve. They were FDR Democrats. And that is the same message Bernie is sending out, against a rigged economic game. Yet the party leaders are hissy fitting that he's not a "true" democrat. Hello?
13
I can't understand how people could be so servile that they would be fine with party elites selecting the nominee for them. The Democratic Party? What a misnomer! Call it the Oligarchic Party.
17
The world is watching, and the Japanese are already bracing themselves for a second term for Trump.
6
You guys do know that St. Bernie insisted on the current rules, right?
Please say yes. Or show me how I am wrong. Evidence would be, golly, really nice.
6
This type of thinking is what causes us to lose over and over again. While I loathe everything the Republicans have done since Reagan broke the air traffic controllers union/took the solar panels off the White House (can you imagine where we would be if we'd worked on solar since 1986?) to Mitch and Trump, they have consistently beat us by sticking together and backing whatever ridiculous thing they come up with. Instead of supporting a candidate and ideas that people actually want, we get to watch our leaders spend months trying to take him down in public! What they should be doing is yelling at the top of their lungs about how great it will be to work towards the things Bernie says he wants to do, how he has been on the right side of almost every issue during his long career, how we need Democrats down the line so we can accomplish at least some of it. But NO! They tear him down, try to put fear in the hearts of the people who support him, predict loosing everything if he is nominated. What the heck?
9
Anyone who's concerned by this discussion should watch Nomiki Konst's brilliant dissection of the forces at work--it's on YouTube.
For those who don't know, Nomiki was one of the Sanders appointees to the Unity Reform Commission, with an insider's knowledge of the process. For those who are disturbed by the present article--I won't spoil it for you, but I will say that she calmed a good deal of the fears that some are needlessly raising for their own benefit.
4
It's a safe bet that leaving Bernie unfettered will damage the Democratic Party, so there's good reason to undertake this effort. Sanders isn't even a Democrat, he's just using the party as a political cash cow. If he had the courage of his convictions he'd run as an independent.
7
If Senator Sanders falls just short of whatever the magic number is, and the so called super delegates deny him the nomination, Trump will win.
I have $250 in bets with my position being "Trump will not be re-elected". If the DNC railroads Bernie because their wealthy patrons don't want him, Trump gets another four years.
And the Democratic Party will continue to go downhill - just as the country is, unless you're rich.
12
Last cycle I grudgingly voted for Hillary because my then 6 year old daughter wanted me to vote for Hillary because of my wife's talking points to her. This year I have decided based on the pool - Bernie or Warren, and if neither of them get nominated, I am not going to vote.
I am not concerned about next four years; but I do think the inspirational message that Bernie brings will change US when these young people grow up and I don't want to support another middle ground candidate for incremental change.
I neither like Trump's policies on anything or his crude behaviors and deeply despise his supreme court nominations; but I do support his deconstruction of political and bureaucratic order.
8
@ beyond gravity How about the Supreme Court; do you care about its composition? Those appointments last well beyond 4 years.
5
We have already seen one of our two political parties crash and burn, choosing a slippery grip on power over their duty to the country.
Democratic elders, members of the party establishment, don't put your own interests and investments before the will of the people. Have we learned nothing from 2016? Allow the process to unfold, don't tip the scales, and if Bernie is the choice, then Bernie is the choice. Your ONLY job at that point is to support him with everything you've got.
10
The key takeaway here should be the way in which this debate over whether or not superdelegates should vote for the candidate with the most votes is in fact a distraction from the real issue, which is that superdelegates shouldn’t exist at all.
17
No matter which candidate wins the Democratic Primaries the COVID-19 will change the 2020 election and no one knows how. One threat is that the candidates shake a LOT of hands and other close contact actions in crowds. Given the candidates’ ages, the question is: whom among them will survive until November? For sure, many of us won’t be here to vote and the candidates are engaged in highly risky behaviors in the face of an evolving pandemic. The Black Swan swims into the elections of 2020. Sure hope the same risk faces Trump but we know he’s too scared of germs to expose himself to any risk. Though he may be desperate enough to win that he risks exposure at a rally...it’s the only upside to this menace that I can see. In trying to minimize the threat he becomes infected. Poetic justice.
3
John F. Kennedy & Lyndon B. Johnson in 1960!!
This is generational. My father wants Bloomberg. My son wants Sanders. I'm in the middle, I like both Bloomberg AND Sanders for different reasons.
The Democratic Party of 2020 may want to consider taking a page from the playbook of the late John F. Kennedy in the 1960 Presidential Election.
As you well know, Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson were rivals and opposites. Kennedy was a "liberal" North-Easterner and Johnson was a Protestant Southerner. Yet, Kennedy invited his rival, Lyndon B. Johnson, who had finished second on the Democratic Presidential primary ballot, to be his Vice-Presidential running mate. The liberal Northerner Kennedy understood that without Johnson's conservative Southern supporters, he could not beat Nixon in the General Election of 1960.
Whoever comes out on top should be extend an olive branch to whoever comes out in second place and invite that person to be on the ticket as VP. One thing I can tell you, with a ticker like Bloomberg-Sanders or Sanders-Bloomberg, the Democrats WILL win for sure!!
5
It’s a good idea and seemed like it would e been good for the party in 2016.
1
After 2016, why didn't Democratic leadership create new rules to prevent non-party members from running for offices? Bernie Sanders is on a massive ego trip, he does not mean well for this country because he's giving trump another four years. None of his extreme policy proposals will pass Congress.
At this very critical time he appears to be selling snake oil to a vulnerable young demographic. In Georgia, a potential blue state in 2020, Republicans are already running ads calling Sanders a Socialist/Communist.
It's very saddening to see Dems through this away.
8
No no no. Bernie is trying to change the rules HE helped rewrite in 2016 when he claimed the system was rigged against him back then. He’s doing it because what wasn’t working for him then is working for him now - so he literally is the source of what could bring him down this time. Ironic.
6
If something like this happens and Sanders is robbed of the nomination by the Dem's smoking-room decisions again, this should be the end of the Democratic Party. A party can't keep operating like this, and I'd rather see the party split into two official parties (only center-left and one progressive) than consistently be by puppeteered by party elites.
10
All this hubbub could be avoided with ranked choice voting.
8
The lack of sincerity from Demo party leadership is apparent from the simple fact that none of them are willing to seek serious discussion with Sanders on how he could become the leader of a united front against Trump-GOP anti-democracy, white racism and utter corruption and for a progressive platform of principle. Sanders chief crime is that he wants to tax the billionaire class who have gotten away with grand theft and he wants to do away with Big Money's domination of the political process- a scary future for politicians who have based their careers on the big donations and cushy perks Big Money uses to keep them in line.
10
Three words.
Ranked
Choice
Voting.
Keep doing it until everyone standing is over 15%. It would get the people campaigning for VP and self-funding billionaires out of the race, fast.
5
Everyone knows these two facts.
a) Only moderate Democrats took seats to give the House to Democrats.
b) The nation's voters are pretty decided about their votes in November so there is little wiggle room for either party.
Beyond that, there is only speculation.
2
@Commenters puzzled by this article by the new Ms Ember
The Times does not want Bernie. They also wanted Hillary. They went out of their way to endorse her early. They unleashed Paul Krugman on him. They unleashed all the lesser pundits on him. More dogs barked at the caravan than the ones in the Spice and Silk Roads combined over centuries. Bernie still moves forward amidst all the barking. He leads by TEN points!
10
The Democratic Party is experiencing a transition from the boomers to the younger generations. The establishment (boomers) are not happy about the transition. Keep in mind the established Dems voted for the Iraq War, the Patriot Act, sponsored mandatory minimum sentencing for non-violent criminals, are mostly anti-cannabis, voted against marriage equality forever, continue to ignore the student loan debt crisis, bailed out wall street while doing little for the middle class, continued the execution by drone program in the middle east, dropped the ball on climate change time after time, and allowed banks and creditors to take it to the middle class. I could go on and on, but the boomer dems have not ben progressive. I had hope that things would be different under Clinton and Obama, but Mr. I did not inhale and then Obama had Holder crack down on medicinal cannabis, they both proved me wrong. The Repubs attempted to repeal Obamacare over 50 times, meanwhile the Dems tend to give up after they bring up legislation one time. The younger generation is feed up with the moderate democrats and wish for a more progressive party, so of course the folks who have controlled the Dem party for the last 30-40 years are not happy with Sanders. The establishment (Dems) has not agreed with almost anything that Sander's has said over the past 30 years. He has been far too progressive for the Dems, it is time for the party to catch up to Sanders and say we agree!
15
@Patrick Snider
What a wonderful take and comment.
Well done Patrick.
5
Why is 'medicare for all' considered so radical?
It's what every modern country does except for us. Meanwhile we pay way more per capita and get worse outcomes for our trouble.
It seems like something that should have been done long ago. Will there be problems? Sure. We will work on them. What we have now is a huge mess, regularly bankrupts citizens, and drags down every single US business with employees. It's hard to imagine something worse other than a literal free-for-all with no rules at all.
13
The democratic establishment is saying the democratic constituent plurality is not capable of making an informed and functional decision, and they will make it for them. The establishment is correct
1
If the establishment want to bunch the moderate candidates together and say that collectively they received more votes than Sanders, then let's put the two progressives together and see where they all stand. Sanders+Warren is more than everyone else combined so far.
11
Voters preference is more aligned to personalities now, and less to their basic political leanings. If you do not accept this modern fact, then you cannot explain how Trump became the Republican nominee and then the President in 2016.
With the same acceptance, you will also understand that uniting the moderate base under a single candidate need not result in Sanders losing.
The old formulae are not relevant now. Bring yourself up to the present, and then plan the future.
2
If the Democratic party establishment goes this route they'll be handing the election to Trump, far more surely than any risk from having Sanders as the nominee.
I've been supporting another candidate as my first choice and was planning to vote for her in our Oregon primary in May, even if Sanders is leading convincingly at that point.
But if the party's so-called leadership is going to go this route, I'll cast that vote for Sanders just to make sure he has as many delegates as possible.
16
Bernie should unequivocally be telling his supporters that everyone should support the ultimate party nominee.
And even if he's leading the pack, it's likely he won't win a first ballot majority.
If Bernie then wants to prevail on a succeeding ballot, he'll have to find additional delegates willing to switch.
And if a majority of duly empowered delegates pick someone else, that's the ballgame under the rules. Then we're on to the general election, united in our desire to defeat Trump and Trumpism.
3
@Michael Tyndall
There’s got to be a better way to do democracy.
I support Bernie but don’t care if he supported new rules (or old ones). It’s a mess.
6
If the party hacks and VIP’s derail Bernie if he comes to the convention with big wins on Super Tuesday, they are handing the election to Donald Trump.
Seriously if the people cannot ever triumph, if the system is so rigged that Bernie cannot even get nominated, the support that Bernie engenders will not transfer to Biden or Bloomberg.
No one running other than Bernie shows any passion for the job. I agreed with No Matter Who, Vote Blue and said I would support and vote for whomever got the nomination in a fair contest.
That goes out the window if the status quo do nothings take the nomination away from Bernie, assuming he is the overwhelming favorite of just regular folks.
Only Bernie can beat Trump but the Democratic Party wants to have a replay of Hillary? The only way Bernie loses is by being attacked from within.
Stop being afraid of Bernie because the donor class and the fat cats are afraid of Bernie and this minority controls the party.
After Super Tuesday, we are going to see some candidates bow out. Bernie right now needs to court endorsements and do some old fashioned horse trading to over qualified people significan positions in the Sanders administration.
19
I admit that I am a bit concerned about Sanders winning the primary too, Trump will devour him. However, the other candidates brought this upon themselves by running bad campaigns. Why in the world did they jump all over Bloomberg in the Nevada debate? Their yelling all over one another in NC made none of them heard. Bad bad bad strategy! Trump is going to be all over Bernie's health issues, why are they not even talking about that?
They need to watch 2016 GOP debates and observe how Trump picked off all his GOP rivals one by one. The DNC needs to get these debates organized, I'm tired of the 'who can yell the loudest' contest - turn off the mics.
4
If ever there was a strong argument for ranked choice voting, this is it. Choosing a candidate based on a plurality of votes will anger those who do not like that candidate. However, allowing superdelegates to supersede voters, and choose to nominate anyone they want, candidate or not, is completely undemocratic. The same holds true for the electoral college, which gave us Donald Trump, and G.W. Bush before him. If you are supporting allowing superdelegates to decide who the nominee will be, you are supporting an undemocratic authoritarian practice. Allowing the candidate who receives a plurality of votes isn't ideal, but it's the best option we've got within our voting system. A lot of people are very worried about "commie" Bernie getting the most votes. It's possible Biden could still win a plurality. Will these same people be freaking out in that scenario? Would they want to allow the superdelegates the opportunity to choose a different candidate should Biden get the most votes? My guess is no. The solution to this kind of dilemma is simple: ranked choice voting, or even allowing a runoff election, would solve this problem. But our system hates even the threat of change. So, for now, we are stuck with this superdelegate and electoral college nonsense, both of which ensure the will of the voters matters not one bit.
9
Old coot and Eisenhower Republican who just voted for Bernie here.
I hope you youngsters who support Bernie won’t mind if I tell you that the more you talk about how Bernie is really going to take us back to FDR, the better. And the more you talk about how the American Way back when most of us thought America was pretty great involved a mixed economy with a well-regulated financial sector, Medicare, Social Security, cheap public colleges, and public roads, libraries, schools, and water and sewer systems, the better.
You might even consider making the election not just a referendum on President Trump but a referendum on the legacy of FDR versus the legacy of Reagan.
24
@Jack Very sad that anyone would think that the era of the Great Depression and World War II - when mockery of minorities, discrimination and segregation were not only widespread but legal, and poverty rates were far higher than today - would be a time it would be desirable to return to.
1
I think you’ve misunderstood—he’s recommending a return to the larger economic policies/goals.
5
Not quite. Overall poverty and inequality are much higher today than they were right after ww2. Both are now the highest today since 1929. The so called "golden era" in the US started right after ww2 and continued until .... well, when exactly? Hint: Until around the late seventies. And what happened then? Easy: That's when the era of neoliberal disaster capitalism started. And which still continues today. It's obviously on its last leg. And not just in the US.
3
Agreed. Sanders should not and can not be the Democratic Party nominee He hasn’t been vetted properly because none thought he would taken seriously. But charlatans have a gift ...
2
How is he a charlatan? I’ve been a fan since he started appearing on the Thom Hartmann show every Friday answering callers’ questions. He’s been a pretty consistent champion of regular people and the greater good. He’s staked out positions the Democrats abandoned long ago and should return to.
8
How is it in the interests of democract if the superdelegates ignore and override the will of the people as expressed at the ballot box and choose as a candidate someone who finished further down the list? I would consider any such candidate illegitimate from the start.
12
It's amazing that the party leaders think Sanders would cause downticket losses, but rigging the convention against him wouldn't. Do they have a clue how many people would sit it out if they tamper with this election?
17
Stupid stupid stupid. For years we have been talking about our polarized society -- it is, and ever more so with the foulness of the current administration. So, there is one candidate who actually inspires young people, and who is able to pull votes from across different groups. He endorses the best programs we have -- social security, Medicare, public education, environmental responsibility. Is there a "democratic leader" who honestly believes that the wimps currently classed as "moderate" would be anywhere near as appealing or as effective? or is it all about staying with the people you know....the ones who pat your back while you pat theirs. Notice that if you add up all the moderate percentages in Nevada, they do not equal Sanders. And stop being stupid.
13
It's just typical progressive mentality isn't it! Whether it's life...economics...the law...whatever aspect of the world you choose, the progressive will always SAY "everyone is equal and no one is above the rules"----and then immediately trot right off to twist those rules in order to exert favoritism or punishment unequally (and on the basis of their adolescent feelings). "No one is above the law!" (except illegal immigrants, Hillary, Biden...etc.)
Of course, children see no hypocrisy in it (which is why the Left wants to lower the voting age----liberalism being lockstep with foolish teenagers...a red flag indictment right there!). Reckless underachievers will sell their soul to play the game of PRETEND "humanism/altruism" (always paid for by other people)...and yet as Left-wing policies consistently require imposition upon others, thusly violating the Prime Principal of Humanism [every individual owns themselves]...it is impossible to be a liberal and a humanist. Which is why ADULTS DON'T VOTE DEMOCRAT.
I'd love to get Bernie in a "people's debate"...it's so easy to eviscerate socialists! The record proves it is a system which destroys human liberty and lives. Are you NYT readers howling yet? GOOD. Then name just one libertarian despot (there are zero). Now you wanna list all the tyrants spawned by socialism? The list is vast! Even if you omit Adolf Hitler who adamantly wrote: "I am a socialist!" (look that up---know who your bedfellows really are!)
2
Try it if you dare, DNC. As an Obama turned Trump voter, I’ll gladly stage a repeat performance per my voting record...
5
@Matthew Won't make a bit of difference as New York's electoral votes will go to whoever the Dem. nominee is. But by all means indulge your frustration.
Senator Sanders was cheated in 2016 so the theory of a "centrist" being able to win has already been tested and found wanting. Dinosaurs need to die. DC Democrats like Mondale and Schumer and Pelosi need to die off or go off and form their own Eisenhower Republican party. The US does need an Eisenhower Republican Party after all.
8
Why is the NYT stirring up this possible issue now?
It just increases Factionalism.
This is way too early in the Primary process.
Why doesn't the NYT just lay out all the rules instead of making their interpretation so mysteriously complex that only Nancy Pelosi can explain them?
Alright, I'll bite...
What happens if a candidate gets 49.999% of the Primary delegates for the first vote?
What's fair and what are the rules?
Could we get a clear quote from each of the candidates on First Vote: Plurality vs Majority?
Do we add combine votes by Faction: Progressive vs Moderate vs Oligarch?
Is anyone really suggesting that some rule change be made before the Convention?
Stop hyperventilating everybody!
Who is arguing about this now other than the NYT trying to stir up the Democratic establishment elite?
Someone has too much time on their hands.
5
I presume you are asking a rhetorical question up front.
It is clear to me what the NYT wants.
6
There's no math that puts a Democrat in the White House in November. If Bernie wins the nomination, he becomes the 2020 version of George McGovern and could lose the House for the Democrats. If someone else wins the nomination, the Bernie supporters will stay home or vote third party.
3
@Common Sense Returns Not true. As a Bernie supporter, whoever wins the nomination "fairly" gets my vote. The word fairly is the key. If some feckless egotists tries to rob him of the nomination because he or she thinks they "know better" than the voters, any sentient human being would find that unacceptable in a democracy.
5
It would be a huge mistake if the Democratic party leadership does this. It will send a message that they don't believe in the primary process and just want to keep their power. It will permanently alienate an entire group of voters, maybe forever. If they think they can get Sanders supporters to vote for an establishment candidate, they didn't learn anything from 2016.
The primary process must play out fairly. If it doesn't, people are going to stay home in November.
13
"In recent days, both Mr. Biden and Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts said that Mr. Sanders should not become the nominee if he arrived at the convention short of a delegate majority. “Bernie had a big hand in writing these rules,” Ms. Warren said during a CNN forum on Wednesday night. “I don’t see how he thinks he gets to change them now that he thinks there’s an advantage for him.”"
As Bernie would say, "I wrote the damned rules!" Warren is right: Sanders can't have it both ways.
5
@L Sanders never said anything that implies he would not follow the rules. What he implied was he will not be alright with being robbed of the nomination on the whim of Super Delegates just because they don't like him. He wants the will of the voters and delegate wins to be respected as they should be.
5
The New York Times has become the one of the most misleading and biased papers obviously heavily influenced by the establishment and their opinions and scare tactics especially when it comes to progressive candidate. This article basically says the power brokers will decide at the convention, the voters be damned. I will support whoever the nominee is but if it is obvious that the status quo corporate dems cheat Bernie out of the nomination there will be a backlash like you have never seen nor heard. Let's throw in a a Bloomberg, a Brown a whomever that do not have a chance in hell and lose! just because you are scared.
15
I want nothing more than to see Trump gone. If the Democrats deny Sanders his rightful nomination, I will sit out the election, torpedos be damned.
16
Such "leadership" prefers to doom the opportunity to catalyze a progressive Democratic movement and to forego winning both the Senate and the House in addition to the Presidency simply because they're curmudgeons and closet supply-siders.
To win in November, embrace the movement, ride the wave that our younger generation is at last energizing. Bernie is the catalyst.
For the economy to grow, get more cash into the pockets of people who will spend it. Bernie will do that.
Bernie needs everybody's support to win an outright majority of delegates so these super (sic) -delegates don't screw things up for everybody to the left of Michael Bloomberg.
14
The democratic party is resigned to thinking that the candidate who is clearly winning can not win.
The democratic party is regressive and marginally better than the GOP.
10
Sanders is currently "winning" in a few small states, and is also winning among Democrat voters without the big turnout he keeps predicting. That is hardly reassuring that he will attract independent and some Republican voters which he must to beat Trump, to say nothing of what it will do for all those moderate Democrats who won in the last midterm. The fear that a Sanders nomination will result in not only not gaining control of the Senate but losing the House should not be underestimated.
4
@Kathryn
Who is showing more promise? Who is turning out more people? Who is getting more votes? I'd love to know who you think is a shoe-in, instead of just the constant naysaying of Sanders. You won't name a more viable candidate because you know there isn't one.
3
I’m a seventy year old white suburban Mom in Oregon and if the DNC tries to steal the election from Bernie, I will be very tempted to sit out this election in spite. Articles like this make my blood boil. What didn’t they learn in 2016? I used to be proud to be a Democrat but not anymore. The very idea that they are already plotting how to stop him should give everyone pause. Let the process play out my elbow. I have had friends face bankruptcy and also almost die because they ignored symptoms because they were underinsured. Basta with the half measures, we need systemic change.
19
That is part of the reason Hillary Clinton lost. Voters like you who were Sanders supporters sat out the 2016 election. If you all do that in 2020, a Trump win is guaranteed. I could not live with that on my conscience.
4
After the 2016 debacle, there was a lawsuit filed in Florida alleging fraud against the DNC, because they pretended to hold a primary election, but it was essentially rigged in favor of Hillary Clinton. There were several mechanisms used besides the heavy hand of the superdelegates. The DNC’s defense was that they could write their own rules; they are not obliged to hold free and fair primaries. Essentially they could meet in a hotel room over cigars and pick somebody. (This was news to me, or I needn’t have donated from my meager charity budget to support the candidate of my choice.) Ultimately, the court allowed the DNC’s position to stand, saving them millions in damages.
I wouldn’t recommend the DNC try these shenanigans again, seeing how the 2016 election turned out.
16
Asking for a friend;
Is it considered to be pro-choice if a man hypothetically orders a woman to “kill it?”
9
"Supporters of Mr. Sanders said that blocking him from the nomination if he had the most delegates would repel progressives, and would deliver a second term to Mr. Trump." The DNC will lose in Nov if they stab a knife into the back of progressives. The Corporatists are in full panic.
12
Given the outdated electoral college system today, what matters first is carrying swing states such as Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and perhaps North Carolina or Florida. Can the Bernie "revolution" carry all the blue states, as well as win the swing states? Secondly, imagine President Sanders with a Republican Senate and House. What will four more years of disappointment and frustration mean to our younger voters and the future of our country? Finally, can Bernie's health hold up for a second term? Remember Obama's last year as a lame duck. The Senate would not even consider his Supreme Court nomination.
2
Everything about this article is depressing. But the saddest moment is when Bernie is called "an existential threat." This is how Bernie talks about climate change. The Democratic party is a sham if it fears Bernie as much as all of us should fear climate change.
15
Our two-party system is the reason I'm now "unaffiliated." I'm so tired of having men, and it is men. shoved down my throat by a group of individuals with a group think. Whatever happened to the idea of one person one vote? Hasn't happened in my lifetime. Way too much money in our political parties for freedom to be reality. Sorry, Dems, but you're going to in-fight until the Russicans secure four more the nitwit we now have.
10
@PSJ "One person, one vote" hasn't happened (at the Federal level) in the history of our country, because the political system was intentionally not designed that way. And don't count on that changing in the foreseeable future. As you say, it's just an idea.
@PSJ
Sorry, but I've got to disagree here. Women can be and are just as involved in this "group think" two-party system
{cough, Hillary, cough}.
2
What these bought-and-paid-for, corrupt politicians fear is democracy. They do not fear that a Socialist will be defeated. They are terrified that Sanders will succeed. If these "leaders" are stupid enough to steal the nomination for the billionaire backed candidates, they will only turn a whole generation of young Democratic Socialists into Revolutionary Socialists.
10
Anybody but Trump. Period. I don't care who it is. Trump was going to "drain the swamp", remember. The swamp has never been filled with more swamp dwellers than now. any one of the current contenders would be better than the psychopath in the WH.
7
Steady as she goes, DNC, steady as she goes.
Read Friedman's column, and get a true democrat to explain it to you.
New Deal Tom
2
Here is an article describing some of the "superdelegates". It's shocking. These people want to choose who our nominee is; our country is corrupt and rotten. https://theintercept.com/2020/02/27/dnc-superdelegate-convention-gop-donor/
7
But I don't understand--Bernie himself helped to write the rule in 2018 that says a plurality isn't enough and it has to go to a second ballot. Of course he doesn't want to follow it now as he probably will only have a plurality, but is that fair? What if it were Biden with a plurality and not a majority. Wouldn't he demand it go to a second ballot? I am so against the superdelegates, but he agreed to them in 2018. With everything falling down around us, I feel we have to at least hold onto the rules. And BTW, I'm fine with him as the candidate. I'm a Warren voter, not a moderate.
4
@Judith Dancoff
If following the rules leads to chaos and defeat, no thanks. I don't care how Sanders will feel about it. I care how voters will feel about it. I guarantee it will not go well.
Sanders is a dud. We need Joe Biden!
2
Hey, NY Times. If you had the ear of so many superdelegates, why not talk to them about childhood poverty in one of the richest countries on earth? How about the folks, including my own parents, who can’t call 911 because they can’t afford the $500 ambulance ride? Instead of kicking democracy in the guts (again), how about using your journalist power for good?
20
The DNC is a joke. The Democratic party is dead. They can't even listen to their own voters.
15
agree DNC is a joke. If the DNC ignore the will of the people and vote for a candidate that has less delegate counts than Bernie then they have no moral authority to talk about voting suppression or about democratic values.
8
Rather than on stopping Trump, those Democrats are focused on stopping Bernie Sanders at any cost. That speaks volumes about what kind of party that has become.
15
Here we go again, the New York Times slamming Bernie several times on each day's page.
15
It's my party and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to, cry if I want to...
Fools.
7
On Super Delegates
Bernie Sanders on his strategy to overcome "uphill fight" to nomination BY EMILY SCHULTHEIS
MAY 1, 2016 / 12:22 PM / FACE THE NATION - CBS
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/bernie-sanders-acknowledges-his-uphill-fight-in-democratic-race/
1
Michelle Obama, if you are reading this, put an end to all the madness -- RUN!!
3
I check the state-by-state polls regularly.
Sanders and the other Dems are doing just fine. I think Sanders can take al least 276 electoral votes. That does not include Ariz, Fla., or Ohio -- all possibilities.
The sam
Trump is a scoundrel. There, I've said it. I feel better.
Do these people think another candidate will get Trump liute?
5
Hey Dem. Party.
THIS is why I no longer donate directly to YOU.
THIS is why I left the Party, and only register D. to vote for candidates such as Sanders.
To all those peeps who have been gaslighting their Left saying "no, it's not rigged", "conspiracy"....THIS is why.
Hypocritical disingenuousness.
We ALL know. It is in broad daylight.
The REAL telling, is that nowhere does the Dem. Party talk about working WITH Sanders. They still control the purse strings in congress, and much of the power in Gov. ANY of his policies would be watered down, but at least Left leaning and a change from 50yrs. of Moderate giveaways to the Right.
Pull your heads out Dems.
Change is coming.
You can be part of it or pushed to the side.
Change is coming...and it's here. NOW~!
15
Agree!
7
Grow up Democratic establishment. Your mismanagement of the party for the last generation does not leave us mourning your passing. It has long been said that the Republicans fear their base (how true today) while the Democrats hold theirs in contempt (how true today). Step aside from the absurdity of destroying the party to save it. Do you old guys think you're back in 'Nam again? The smell of political napalm in the air does not smell like victory.
12
The Dems will get what they deserve, a bellowing fool who rants against billionaires and big companies literally every 90 seconds and who will go down to almost the greatest defeat in history, since he probably will win CA.
5
@No As well as at least 4 or 5 other blue states. This isn't 1972 or 1984, as much as some bitter people would like to pretend that it is.
If the party big wigs try to steal the nomination from Bernie it will be like Chicago 68.
5
Wow, that turned out so well in 2016 they want to try it again!!
You would think the party would learn...
11
I actually am hating the DNC and their ilks more than the RNC right about now. Still will vote for Bernie and only him.
5
I think it's tragically funny that Democrats accuse Sanders of not getting people out to vote. It's stupid to use that as a point because it's not like any of the other D candidates inspires people any more than Sanders!
10
Did you notice Obama calling out a Republican super pack for using his voice from his book to distort it into him saying negative things about Biden? The Republican dirt, filth, lies, and downright abuses machine will turn Bernie into Bernie Burger's, especially since Bernie said he wants none of Mike Bloomberg's help. How stupid and obstinate and spiteful is that? Trump has a bottomless pool of dirty money and Bernie says "no thanks" to help he will need. Flat out immovable and stupid. That is how he will govern......different policy's, definitely for bettering people's lives, but there is no room for anything but his highway, in other words divisively as Trump and the far right do. Bloomberg, mr personality, does not bother me in fact i really like his organizational skills and wish he was in charge of this virus. Joe Biden will bring decency back to our land and make sure NATO stays viable. Bernie will bring more chaos and division. Those are my pick's, and yes, i flat out hate Sanders. He might be the only non democrat posing as a Democrat that could cause me to sit this election out. I would vote for any of the other candidates although i'd have to vote for Warren with a clothespin on my nose, and Pete blindfolded. When will people understand this is not about free candy that will never come to pass, but defeating the greatest threat to our country in my 75 year's.
2
@Hal Paris
"free candy that will never come to pass"
Hey, that's the Hillary Clinton "can't do" spirit that had so much success 4 years ago!
10
Dems and the NYT just don’t like Bernie.
Like Trump he fills stadiums and offers an economic rebalancing that will drive a new prosperity for everyone.
10
Two sides of the 21st Century Democratic Party, exemplified by
1) Dodd (CT):
“People are worried,” said former Senator Chris Dodd... a former Democratic National Committee chairman who ...endorsed former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. “How you can spend four or five months hoping you don’t have to put a bumper sticker from that guy on your car.”
and
2) Kleeb (NE):
“We don’t have to freak out,” said Jane Kleeb, the Nebraska Democratic chairwoman, who helped write Democrats’ presidential nominating rules and supported Mr. Sanders in 2016. “We shouldn’t be second-guessing voters. If that’s what our party leaders are going to do, you’ll see rebellion not just in the presidential race, but in down-ballot races as well.”
I'm oversimplifying exemplification. But note the back & forth futility of these election comments! Why is this even a "thing," as they say?!
If the rules are the rules, and Bernie agreed to them, though compromising, fine. He's not trying to cheat his way in.
BUT I think he knows that the establishment Dems are afraid or wary of him.
Not because he isn't a real Democrat, or even b/c he's a Democratic Socialist.
But because he wants to get Dark Money out of government.
And even though Pelosi & Schiff et al. seem like heroes to many Dems since the hearings, too many Democrats don't fight hard enough against corporate influence. (Not underestimating McConnell's stonewalling, btw.)
Bernie/Legit Blue 2020
9
The establishment Democrats don’t understand the sea change that has occurred. Voters on both the Left and Right are tired of their respective establishments. They’re tired of constantly being sold out to the powers that be. There are strong populist movements on both sides. Of course the the populists on the right are uninformed and gullible, hence Trump. But make no mistake, in their misguided election of Trump, there was a strong desire for a better life for themselves, muddled though it was with bigotry and irrational fear and spite.
As a liberal, I support Sanders over the likes of Biden who has long history of protecting financial institutions and corporations over the well-being of the average citizen. I was disappointed in Obama’s terms. He rode in on a promise of change and he gave us more of the same.
Most of my liberal friends feel the same, but that’s only half of it. I bet that Sanders will get a surprising amount of votes from people who voted for Trump. It sounds nuts, but it was nuts to learn about all those people who voted Obama and then Trump.
The 99 percent may be divided, and a very large portion are certifiable morons and bigot, but we are still the 99 percent, and we want our due at long last.
14
I’ve been wishing all along we could have Sherrod Brown as our candidate. Add Kamala Harris as his VP and we’d have a Blue Wave for sure. Get smart delegates & do something about securing the best possible ticket.
1
@M. Simons - You want a ticket that has invisible candidates ? Nobody has heard of Sherrod Brown and Kamala was not widely supported.
6
You want to really destroy the Democratic Party? Nominate someone who is not a member of the Party and has hated it his whole life, Sanders. And maybe the "journalists" can stop with the term 'establishment'.....we know you want Sanders to win to increase circulation but you dont have to be so obvious about it.
4
If Sanders is denied the nomination despite winning a plurality, I'll cancel my NYTimes subscription, put my head in the sand and try to ignore the heat as this world burns.
11
So much for democracy i guess, eh ?
10
The Democratic National Committee, in its wisdom gave us Hillary, The Democratic National Committee is a muscular atavistic visage of the Mayor Daley Machine that perpetrated abuses of the 1968 Dem Convention that beat and criminalize the Democratic youth of that era. If you are not forward looking you are bound for the mistakes and failures of the past...
8
As some commenters suggested, the US should have adopted the multi-party system some time ago. Now it is even clearer that both Democrats and Republicans cannot be comfortably unified under the principles/policies of each party (except Republicans by fears, but uncomfortably).
It would be far more reasonable to split both parties at least by 2, i.e., Democrats into Progressive and Center-left and Republicans into Traditional and Far-right. Then, as many European and some Asian countries do, each party seeks coalition to form a government. This system gives far more flexibility and adaptability.
6
A ham sandwich. I would vote for a ham sandwich if I thought that sandwich would beat Donald Trump in November.
I would not ask the sandwich if it's a Democratic sandwich or a Republican sandwich-I already know that the sandwich would be far preferable to Trump, and the sandwich is an American sandwich-so voila.
Bernie Sanders is an American. I don't care a whit what his political party is!
All hands on deck, people! I'm not a big fan of Bernie but...hey Democrats, it's time to wise up, it's time to put party aside for the good of the country.
Just do it.
9
@Dave - everyone loves a ham sandwich...except the pig :)
1
Do we ever need a 3rd party!
( And a whole bunch of changes to even pretend this is a democracy.)
Sanders is the only piece of sanity in the madness.
8
Are Dems so young that they don’t remember conventions of decades ago, when voting was ongoing and often contentious? But informative and fun to watch.
Or are they prepared to carry out the protests that hounded Humphrey’s convention, and effectively ushered in the start down the extreme right wing tyranny we are now enduring?
If not: Get behind somebody who has a shot at beating our current “national socialist,” or be prepared to live in a fascist country.
One might like Sanders, but he is not the one to defeat Trump, particularly not if all those young progressives don’t vote!
Or don’t complain—emigrate!
2
@Kathy
I note that all of you people who claim Sanders could never win always fail to introduce us to the person who can. Give us a name. Otherwise, you're just shouting at the wind.
10
If Sanders has a plurality and the party awards the nomination to anyone else, Chicago '68 is going to look like Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm, and November 2020 is going to look like November, 1972, only more so.
8
If Bernie wants Democrats to follow his suggestions, why doesn't he become a registered Democrat? Unbelievable!
1
The DNC is doing a very good job showing why Sanders isn't a registered Democrat.
2
I wonder why Bernie agreed to the rules? Helped create them actually.
2
What if Bernie is the candidate and loses not just the presidency but ALSO the house AND the senate?
Sanderistas cannot imagine that possibility, but it’s exactly why I cannot sleep at night. I remember history and I sure don’t want it to rhyme; because this time, the president is a direct threat to 224 years of democracy. We have a great example of what to avoid right across the pond named Jeremy Corbin.
We don’t need 4-8 ? more years of Corona-King Donald unchecked by McConnell and crew.
2
How do you argue from one side of your mouth that we need to get rid of the Electoral College as it not being Democratic, yet behind the scenes manipulate delegates to undermine Democracy?
10
Where would the Republicans be now if superdelegates had taken Trump out? Picking up the pieces, that's where, Unlike Trump, Bernie does represent change. I will vote for any dem (except maybe Bloomberg) but yes, Bernie voters will stay at home and we'll have 4 more years of this circus
3
There's one more option that could avert an either-or disaster. Change the rules to add a new round of voting after Round 1 that DID NOT include super-delegates.
The same 3980 delegates would vote (call it Round 1A) - but they would be free to vote how they wanted, as they would in the current rules for Round 2. That would allow for deal-making AMONG THE CANDIDATES or their already elected (pledged) delegates - but not the super-delegates.
If Bernie could convince enough delegates to come over to him (eg from Warren) to reach a 1991 majority - he'd win. If another candidate could assemble a coalition to get him or her to the 1991 majority - he or she wins.
Either result would require coalition-building (not a bad prospect), would clarify the ideological divide, would take place relatively in public and would avoid accusations of party-boss manipulation. The public process might mollify supporters of the candidate(s) who lose. Maybe even some Bernie supporters.
(Such a rule change could be done by floor vote at the start of the Convention.)
1
Laurie, Bernie is more of a Democrat than any Democratic politician. Read your history.
13
I don’t know who Laurie is, but I agree fully.
9
As well they should....He’s a democratic socialist, not a democrat. No reason they should necessarily rally behind him.
2
Thank God he isn't a "Democrat" what a joke. Using this as an excuse to criticize him. I will vote for Bernie even if he is a Republican, a socialist, communist whatever you people use to label him cause it's the principles that matter.
10
They slept while Bernie and his thirty percent had a clear opening to become leader of the pack. If the party has to be damaged to stop Trump from being becoming King I say so be it. Bernie's promising a chicken in every pot is not going to fly in the real world.
“At some point you could imagine saying, ‘Let’s go get Mark Warner, Chris Coons, Nancy Pelosi,’” he said, while preparing to introduce the former Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., at a campaign event near his home on Sunday. “Somebody that could win and we could all get behind and celebrate.”
I am in disbelief that there are people in the party who are so out of touch with reality that they actually think this way. Look at those three names and imagine any of them winning a presidential election. This is why we need to weed out the establishment of the Democratic Party. This is just delusional.
9
Love to see Bernie and Elizabeth team up and chase Trump right out of the white house!
6
No one wants Bernie but the people.
14
The Times does not want Bernie. They also wanted Hillary. They went out of their way to endorse her early. They unleashed Paul Krugman on him. They unleashed all the lesser pundits on him. More dogs barked at the caravan than the ones in the Spice and Silk Roads combined over centuries. Bernie still moves forward amidst all the barking. He leads by TEN points!
5
It’s impossible for those who exist in the imaginary world of Sander’s and his die-hard supporters to grasp the concept that you can’t win by losing. That’s why his support among the vast majority of Democrats is so very, very weak.
2
@AndyW
I invite you to name the person who has strong support among the vast majority of Democrats. Because at this moment, that "very, very weak" support is still stronger than anyone else you can name.
9
Please spare me the "Bernie has integrity" baloney.
The fact that he's "consistent" in mouthing the same rhetoric incessantly is no indicator of integrity. It reflects the fact that he's never grown beyond the Marxist ideology he's been hawking for 60 years; ergo, he has nothing else to say.
Only three contests into this nomination process he now wants to change the rules of the convention -- rules that he helped write -- taking the exact opposite position from the one he took in 2016. On what planet does that equate to integrity?
What's more, Bernie brags that wife Jane is his top adviser. She drove Burlington College into extinction and bailed out with a $200,000 severance after hooking up her daughter's woodworking school with a partnership with the college that funneled $500,000 her way after mom bailed. Within months of the school's closing, Sanders bought a $600,000 four-bedroom summer home on an island with 500 feet of beachfront property.
If the Trumps pulled a stunt like that, they'd be rightly condemned for grifting. The only difference is that the Trumps are world-class grifters while the Sanders clan are comparative amateurs.
Millionaire Bernie reminds me of the guys in the Politburo in the USSR, the party bigwigs who rode around in limousines "serving the people" while the common folk stood for hours in breadlines. That brand of integrity I can do without.
Thanks, Bernie, but I really don't want you to bring the Workers' Paradise here.
You're a phony.
5
Mainstream corporate media plays a big hand in the fight against "progressives" aka the true Democratic Party that supports #FightFor15 "living wages" #Unions, and especially #M4A -- A national system like the other top 20 nations of the world that negotiate prices, block profiteering and oversee true health care for EVERYONE.
Today, in a top-right prime spot offered by the New York Times is a "helpful" article written for undecided voters that claims to present the best points about each candidate. Here's how the information begins about Senator Sanders, written by Jamelle Bouie: "If he wins the nomination, whether outright or at the Democratic Party convention this summer, Senator Bernie Sanders will be the most left-wing politician ever nominated for president and the only self-described “socialist” to ever run on the ballot line for either of the two major parties." ----- Has Bouie never heard of self-identified Democratic Socialist, President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal that was a grassroots movement to fight back against government support of the high-risk investments crowd that crashed the US Economy?
FDR did a great job for "We The People" introducing Social Security to save the elderly and disabled from poverty and putting millions of suffering unemployed people back to work on nationwide road and bridge infrastructure projects. He was elected three times by massive popular support of the people. (2-Term POTUS limit set as result.)
10
And the superdelegates did such a good job for the Democrats in 2016?
10
Let's not forget, Clinton won the popular vote by a large number. She lost in key electoral states (Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin) where enough Sanders primary voters went with Trump in the general election. They are responsible for the current administration.
1
Are the party “elders” really going help get Trump elected?
6
@Broken
It seems clear they'd rather see Trump win than Sanders.
6
Trump and Sanders are megalomaniacs and demagogues: the former from the extreme-right; the latter from the extreme-left spectrum of US politics.
Gerrymandering, Electoral College, Super PACs, Putin AND Bernie Sanders are the main reasons why the highly qualified Dr. Hillary Clinton "lost" to Donald Trump.
In 2016 Sanders assisted Trump in the character-assassination of Hillary Clinton and brainwashed his base to see her as the "crooked Hilary" apostrophized by Trump, to the point that 12% of his followers decided to vote for Trump after Sanders had lost the Democrats' nomination.
Will Sanders commit fratricide again to Jo Biden in 2020?
https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/545812242/1-in-10-sanders-primary-voters-ended-up-supporting-trump-survey-finds?t=1582848677349
3
The biggest fear about a brokered convention is that the party inner circle will coronate someone who didnt even participate in the grueling primary process, or someone like Kamela Harris, who was supported by only a tiny minority of Democrats. The image of a savior on a white horse is often given, but it would be more like the four horses of the apocalypse. Everything Bernie Sanders has said about the party will have been proven true, and it will richly deserve defeat not only for the presidency but for every congressional race across the country. By the time of the convention, coronavirus should be well established in the general population, so that pox will be another punishment visited upon the huddling delegates as they plot to override the will of the people.
7
I’m a life-long democrat and a progressive. Come November, I would support any democratic candidate, moderate or progressive, that came to the convention with a plurality of delegates won in the primary.
The day the DNC/superdelegates decide to choose their own candidate is the day I quit the party.
I’ll sit this one out before I vote for a sham.
Thanks superdelegates for ruining the political process.
12
I'm starting to get the feeling that party leaders may actually be encouraging all these weak moderate contenders to stay in the race until the bitter end... perhaps there's fear that no single moderate candidate pitted against Sanders will win the majority. So keep them all in there for as long as possible. That way center-left voters have their pick and no one winds up with a majority, ensuring that the party establishment gets a brokered convention and effectively avoids any risk of nominating a progressive candidate. Nice job. If Trump wins another four years, it'll be because of this nonsense right here.
8
I mean we’ve been harping on the fact that Trump lost the popular vote.
The last I saw in this Democratic nomination contest, Bernie Sanders has 43 delegates and he currently leads the pack for the nomination.
This comes after two caucus states and one voting primary in predominately white voting groups.
It takes 1991 delegates to win the nomination.
Let’s not hyperventilate as Democrats. Let the process work.
7
@JT FLORIDA and if the democratic doesn't work, we can always count on rich Uncle Mike to bail us out
1
It doesn’t seem democratic at all. Yes, a plurality isn’t a majority, but delegates & superdelegates going with whoever is insanely disconnected from the voice of the voters.
If Bernie gets a plurality, it’s quite likely he’d also have been the 2nd choice of many voters, if they’d had that choice. This could bring him to a majority.
4
You want to beat Sanders? Then get some of these moderate contenders out of the race. Sanders support is really no better than 2016 and some would argue its weaker than 2016. Moderates combines have have earned the majority of votes in every primary/caucus so far. At a minimum, Steyer and Klobuchar need to get out of the race because they have no chance of winning the moderate vote. I'm a big Buttigieg fan but I don't see him beating Biden or Bloomberg at this point (and his time will surely come provided that Trump doesn't win again and our democracy is not destroyed). Party leadership needs to push on some of these candidates to get out of the race. If Sanders can get 50% of the vote in the election, so be it. But the splintered moderate vote at this point is handing him a plurality and risking nominating a candidate that is not a favorite of a majority of Democrats.
1
It seems typical of Sanders not to want to along with the traditional process, But then he does not call himself a Democrat in Congress and perhaps feels less identity with the party then the other candidates. He is concerned that the super delegates would be able to vote on the second round but those were the rules agreed on. Apparently he is not satisfied with the super delegates no longer having a vote in the initial round. He also wants to get rid of closed primaries where only registered Democrats can vote. Obviously Sanders is trying to rig the primary process in his favor. Fortunately there are people in the party strong enough to stand up to his tactics and not cave in to his attempts to gain the nomination by changing the rules.
1
@Bob
You should worry a lot less about the rules and a lot more about what imposing those rules would do to our chances of winning. If Sanders has twice as many delegates as the next nearest candidate, and he doesn't get the nomination, all hell will break loose and the split in the party will suppress turnout with tragic results.
You moderates can scream all you want about that, but the results will be the same. Go ahead and tell all of those people who went out to vote or caucus that they wasted their time and their votes don't count for anything.
8
Basing myself on this article, it appears that the Democrats have given-up on beating Trump, and are now going into survival mode in terms of other elected offices.
Trump can be beaten by Michael Bloomberg. But it is appears that the Party is not willing to undergo the restructuring that would ensue as a result of his nomination and victory over Trump.
1
@nikolai burlakoff not sure if we can stand three Bloomberg terms
3
I don't think having 26% of delegates with two other candidates on 25.9% should mean you're automatically the candidate. But if Bernie comes in with 40% and then the party machine pulls a candidate out of their hat - either someone with far fewer delegates, or even someone who didn't even run - you bet your behind that there won't be any "unity" after that. I mean, can we be serious here. If your plan is to stop Bernie from being nominated in those circumstances - then your plan is to re-elect Trump.
9
I plan to vote for Bloomberg in the primary in Washington.
Why? The Democrats have marched too far to the left.
Even Bernie Sanders is far more liberal now than he was a few years ago. He used to be opposed to illegal immigration which he said took advantage of immigrants who were willing to work under bad conditions. Now he seems to want open borders. (Candidates should clarify what they would actually DO, not just mention "children in cages" and expect us all to be horrified.)
What I find most objectionable in the positions of Sanders and Warren however is the "wealth tax" they propose. A book by Saez and Zucman recently appeared, "the Triumph of Injustice," which argues for such a tax.
But although the vast disparity between rich and poor in the US is undeniable, I find their argument for a wealth tax to be quite weak. It might require a constitutional amendment. It would encounter fierce opposition. The motivation seems partly to destroy the wealth of the billionaires even if it does not elevate the living standards of the poor.
And universal health care will take time. Sanders does not have an adequate plan to train the new doctors needed to deliver the care.
Saez and Zucman are wrong about one key point. They say capital is taxed too little. But the current interest on 10-year treasuries is below 1.3% while inflation was 2.3% in January. That's a negative return on capital, about -1%.
This is a hidden tax on old folks who save.
1
@Blaise Descartes
Agree, a wealth tax is crazy.
Yet to the poor and those who see themselves as poor in relation to others, the equality of all being poor makes no difference to their current state. Its basically win/win.
I believe the wealth tax proposal is aimed at individuals, leaving corporates with a vast competitive advantage. Is there actually a difference between an individual with $100B in assets and a Corporation with the same assets?
"(Sanders) will lose to President Trump, and drag down moderate House and Senate candidates in swing states with his left-wing agenda of “Medicare for all” and free four-year public college."
THis is absolutely what I believe. Isn't that sad?
Free college and Healthcare for everyone would mark dramatic, incredibly productive improvements in everyone's lives.
These are the very two subjects that are bankrupting the middle class and condemning the poor to the never-ending circle of despair.
It's not a "left-wing" idea to have health care for all, it's a human idea.
1
I want an end to the divisiveness in the country. I want a candidate who could potentially unite the country. That candidate is not Sanders. He is an American version of Jeremy Corbyn. While he may be sincere in his views, he is caustic and intolerant of those who disagree with him. His viewpoint with its socialist, progressive dogma is anathema to many voters. Unless he can demonstrate that more than 50% of the Democratic Party supports him, he should accept the convention's decision if it goes against him. As a lifelong Democrat, I could, and would, vote for him, but my heart would not be in my decision. Choosing between Trump and Sanders is being between a rock and a hard place.
1
I'm gratified that the majority of commenters on this article are as outraged as I am about the arrogance and cluelessness of the Democratic Party "leaders."
I support Bernie as the most straight talking and consistent candidate of the bunch, but I will support any of the democratic candidates currently in the race if they win the nomination. I will NOT vote for a democratic candidate selected at a brokered convention if that candidate is not one of the 7 that have participated in debates and made their positions known.
In that case I will write in Bernie.
8
And here it is. Ever since 2015, the DNC has rallied against Sanders, desperately arguing that he couldn't amass sufficient intersectional support to win the ticket. They argued that he didn't have enough Black support, enough support from the Latino community, enough support from Women.
Here he is now, having won a crushing victory in Nevada, polling far above any other candidate in most demographics, polling better than other democratic contenders in head-to-head matchups with Trump, and boasting the highest favorability rating of any democratic candidate. But what do we hear now? That the DNC still doesn't want to support him, but now it's because he's a socialist and won't amass enough support from some other conveniently inaccessible demographic.
It turns out the only support Sanders is lacking is that of the democratic elites. The sad reality is that the 1%, the Blankfeiln's and Bloomberg's of this world, the same rotten apples that have benefited the most from our rotten form of capitalism, are the only ones who refuse to lend Sanders' their support.
Who is the second choice of Biden's supporters? Sanders. What about Warren? Still Sanders. The idea that Sanders not getting a plurality of delegates means that he is not what the people want simply doesn't hold ground. Sanders is far less polarizing than the DNC is trying to suggest, which is why this feels like usurpation, pure and simple.
11
Hasn't anyone figured out that what we have now is why people vote for Trump and Sanders and that is the overwhelming percentage of voters. Its going to get a lot worse as the poles move further and further from the center.
3
So they want to lose. If they subvert the will of the people, it will be the end of the party.
10
Can we get away from the false narrative, that there is truly a major difference between the elite of both parties. When it comes to health care and economics (arguably the most important issues effecting the majority populace), both parties are indentured to the multi millionaire and billionaire classes and those supposedly representing our interests.
To argue that voting and supporting Bernie would be the demise of the Democratic Party, is simply wrong. The party was severely decimated when Bill Clinton took his reign of terror and turned the party into a corporate free-for-all, by eliminating welfare, important regulations, anti-trust provisions, and promoting NAFTA, GATT, Three Strikes and the list goes on. The Democratic Party aborted all of its humanity under Clinton in exchange for power. money, corporate control, Wall Street and the like. Bernie is merely trying to get back to its FDR roots--not that radical of a concept.
So when I read in these pages the notion that the Democrats will lose as though there was truly something worth saving, I have to laugh.
Bernie is the last hope for all of us, and if we are denied our due process, a revolution is inevitable and a third party will emerge. Maybe it is about time.
12
@Katherine
I've always thought it was about time that a third party emerged. Bernie Sanders should have turned his movement into a strong, grass roots, political party, funded by the people and focused on those who have never voted and those disenchanted with what we have. These two parties are how old? Centenarian, bicentenarian? oligarchical organizations ready to support any war and subservient to powerful economic interests. The US today is the only country where universal healthcare is considered a radical proposal. Feels like we are living in a past century, when men still used wigs.
7
Way back in the '60s a British comedy troupe called Beyond the Fringe did a skit about the US in which, among other things, they talked about politics. The exact wording is lost in my memory but the gist of it was this, " The Americans have two parties, the Republican Party, which is like our Conservative Party and the Democratic Party, which is like our Conservative Party." Having read this article it is plain that nothing has changed in over 50 years.
9
If the establishment had let Bernie win legitimately last time, instead of propping up HRC, we wouldn't be in this mess; Bernie would be running for re-election, we'd still be fighting global warming and our government institutions wouldn't be gutted....
9
Sanders and Bloomberg aren't democrats. One's a Socialist and the other's a Republican. I won't vote for either of them. Give me Biden, Klobuchar, Yang, etc., but Sanders and Bloomberg -- not a chance.
1
Unless the USA has changed dramatically since the 60s when we did duck and cover drills at school, Sanders would cost us the House along with the presidency and Trump would have another four years to destroy the republic.
2
@Worried but hopeful
Yes, the USA has changed dramatically in the past 60 years, Mr. Van Winkle.
7
Dear NYT writers, please do not let your confusion confuse us. Bernie position has always been clear: the nominee should be the candidate with the most pledged delegates at the end of the primary. All comparisons with 2016 that do not recognize how that race was affected by superdelegates are in bad faith: all the running tallies of that primary included superdelegates and the count was already 500+ to 0 before the Iowa caucus. Bernie position was, back then as it is now, that the nominee should be determined by pledged delegates only, I.e., by voters. His stance was rebuked and he was told to accept the rules. Anyone with a honest memory will in fact remember that Hillary was declared the nominee by the AP just BEFORE the California primary, when a couple of super delegates moved to support her. Only when Bernie was put in front of this, he made that move for the superdelegates. The huge hypocrisy is on the side of those who criticize him now, who are basically claiming that first Bernie was wrong for wanting to change the rules instead of accepting them, and then he was wrong for playing by them after having criticized them. Basically for such critics Bernie is never right. Now the critique gets even more absurd: Bernie asking to respect the voters in 2020 is wrong because in 2016, he made a move for the superdelegates following the rules existing in 2016. Whoever has to come up with this mental gymnastics to score points has checked her integrity at the door long ago.
9
This article is part of the very movement against Bernie that you claim ISN’T being orchestrated. As a life-long Democrat it has become quite evident in the past two presidential election cycles that it is not the party for liberal ideas. The Straw Man fallacy used against liberal-minded candidates that their “not electable” is a poor smoke screen for the facts: The Democratic Party as it stands cares more about staying in power than listening to the changing needs of the people that populate their voter registration forms. When we leave, and we will, we’ll see how they proceed.
7
Are democratic leaders seriously suggesting that, should Sanders not win a majority of delegates, they will consider giving the nomination to someone like Sherrod Brown, who has won ZERO delegates? This is complete lunacy. They will lose the progressive base forever. These out of touch plutocrats need to disabuse themselves of this fantasy. Sanders is likely to win the nomination - if that indeed comes to pass, the party must do everything it can to support him in November.
Furthermore, while Sanders is not my first choice, he has won the most votes thus far. Comparing his individual total to the collective total of the moderate candidates simply makes no sense. The media should cease making such statements - they are neither meaningful nor relevant.
8
I’ve voted democratic for 40 years, often having to hold my nose while doing so because the democrat was merely the lesser of two evils.
I would not have to hold my nose to vote for Sanders.
And these shenanigans by the Democratic Party are pushing me to the point where I might sit this election out.
11
Oh let Bolshie Bernie have the nomination . Then let’s watch him and the rest of the Democrats lose all.
Even if he wins he does not stand a chance of getting any part of his agenda through the Congress.
No matter to me if Trump wins , if he packs the Supreme Court with right wing judges , destroys the environment , runs up a massive deficit , let our infrastructure go to rot along with our educational system. I will most likely not be around to suffer the consequences.
However many of Bernies supporters will and they need to put their realistic future expectations at the center of their thoughts.
We will get to a universal health care , more effective , affordable college education through evolutionary processes supported by Democrats , centrist a Republicans and Independents the latter being the biggest voting bloc of all.
So let’s stop being obstinately idealistic and take a big dose of realism
1
Why would anyone trust the DNC to make the right choice this time, when it clearly had no idea how to win the last election? Nothing says "Vote for us!!" like the self-inflicted wound of derailing the momentum of your most popular candidate, just three months before the election.
Will it be Bernie's fault if, after Super Tuesday, the four other Democrats with the worst showings in these primaries don't leave the race, so the two strongest candidates can try to tackle Bernie? How about the DNC, on March 10, get all seven candidates in a room and tell the bottom four to do the right thing and get out of the way, or risk the embarrassment of the DNC publicly abandoning them as viable nominees? If those bottom-dwellers refuse to step aside, then it's not Bernie who will be responsible for destroying the party. It will be eating itself from within.
9
Here we go again - Dems are rolling out the boogieman just before Super Tuesday and (meaningless) South Carolina. Got to protect party interests at all cost and we know the price they are willing to pay: Trump is in the WH.
Fact is, South Carolina and any other state who hasn't carried a Democrat candidate into the WH in decades simply doesn't count in the primaries. Sorry. Clinton supporters were like "uhhh she won Arkansas and South Carolina, and....." Who cares? Last time South Carolina went "blue" was Jimmy Carter - that's what? 4 1/5 decades. That is 3 human generations.
Whether a candidate can carry the states that are in play for Dems that is what matters. This is were turnout for the party will have an impact, including down ticket. And whoever gets voters to turn out in those states is who matters.
But, Dems don't seem to learn the lesson they have been exposed to for the last decade+. That's because there is just no difference between old-guard Dems and Republicans - as far as "serving their masters" goes. Maybe the speed at which the non-privileged get fleeced and the country is sold down river is slower, but the trajectory is the same.
The Dems stopped being the "working people" party circa 1992. Since then, farmers, workers, social justice, climate, education, rural development all got sidelined by the people running the DNC - told to mind their place and stay in line or else ladies don't get to decide about their lady-bits anymore.
And here we are.
8
Hey, in 3.5 years, I have never seen Trump higher in the polls. The last meat Rasmussen poll has him at 52 ... just saying. Dems, let’s get our act together soon.
@Independent You do know that Rasmussen is always the outlier poll. I believe Trump friend runs it. Try Nate Silver's 538 or Real Clear Politics for real polls.
1
Bernie is not my first choice. Or my second or third. But if a he can win the support of a majority of delegates (not counting Super-Delegates) he should be the nominee. The Democrats made a good decision, keeping the Super-Delegates out of the first ballot. But I think they should go a step further and leave them out of the second and maybe third ballots too. The first ballot will include some delegate votes for candidates who have already dropped out. The delegates are bound by rules to cast their votes that way. At that point if there is not a majority for one candidate, the delegates should have the option of changing their votes in the second ballot for the candidate they think their constituents would choose among those still in the race. If the candidate is chosen without the intervention of Super-Delegates it will be seen as reflecting the will of the voters. If, on the other hand, they step in during the second ballot tip the nomination, it will be seen as the party elite taking the choice out of the voter's hands. Not good for anybody.
5
"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer, the minority leader, hear constant warnings from allies about congressional losses in November if the party nominates Bernie Sanders for president."
It's not about Congressional losses -- the anti-Sanders faction is afraid the wealthy will no longer support them if someone who doesn't put their interests first is nominated.
14
The moderates need to consolidate, now. Meet and decide who will move forward and the other three drop out. Fall on your swords to save the nation and wholeheartedly endorse the individual who moves forward. So the ballot would have Bernie vs. one moderate. My choice would be either Amy or Pete to move forward to challenge Bernie.
4
@Bailey remember what happened the last time a moderate ran against Trump?
4
@Bailey DNC elites would ever let that happen - it would defeat their whole strategy, which is to run multiple candidates to prevent Sanders from winning on the first ballot and allowing Sueprdelgates to select the nominee.
Sanders would CRUSH any "moderate" the DNC put up and win on the first ballot. This is why they're all staying in the race until the convention.
10
@Erik Frederiksen That particular person was carrying far too much baggage, I gladly voted for her BTW. I personally think Bernie has a similar amount of baggage (a different set though) and will fail in the general, I would be very happy to be wrong and will gladly vote for him though too. I know, I know Bernie's proposals are not actually that radical. Plus I really want someone under 70 on the ballot, I'm 63 just FYI. This really is quite a chess match, eh?
I think it is valid that if progressive candidates(Sanders and Warren combined) pick up more than 50% collectively it needs to go to the progressive candidate. If it less than 50% then I think there is validity in choosing a candidate that best represents the will of the collective people. Obviously can't ensure House and Senate seats up and down the ballot. My prediction (which is worth nothing) is that Sanders either wins it on the first ballot or Warren tells her people to vote on the first ballot for Sanders to avoid superdelegates.
4
I used to like Warren but she is easily spooked. Trump would chew her up
1
Interfering in this way would hand the election to Trump. If the Democrats don’t accept his victory, I think most supporters (including myself) would either sit out the election or vote third party. Dems would have absolutely no moral high ground.
15
If Sanders has substantially more delegates but less than needed for the flat out win, and if the superdelegates take him out, I will not vote for their nominee in November. Done. It will be the second time the right wing Democrats puts their finger on the scale to subvert democracy. It’s not even just about Sanders. It’s about the People choosing. For the last 40 years we have been held back and always pushed to do the “safe thing.” I want to do the best thing, not their idea of safe. If it happens there will be riots also. Currently the unfairness against Sanders by the media and the Pelosi types is unhinged. I, and I suspect millions more will leave the Party. If we then start a third party the former Democratic Party will certainly be decimated. I am sick of the corruption and won’t take it any more.
24
Democrats may have a "devil's choice" on their hands -- rebuff the front runner who lacks the majority of delegates on the first ballot, then try to muscle in with an "elitist" choice of someone who's inside the beltway but who never ran in a primary.
Why would die hard Sanders supporters, denied their front running candidate, feel enthused about campaigning for the likes of a party-elite chosen Brown, Warner or Harris? Democrats did that against the delegate front runner Kefauver in 1952 and look what happened.
8
I hope the Democrtatic establishment takes heed of the at this time 3899 comments and perhaps thousands more replies generated by this piece. Before they decide to scuttle Sanders should he receive the most delegates.
If they have decided they must destroy the party in order to save it, and surrender the next four years to Trump, that Trump is the lesser of two evils, I will never forgive or forget them.
17
Don’t cheat Bernie. This will cause years and years of turmoil. Not worth it. Bernie will never beat Trump. Should he be able to, Congress will never implement his agenda. This will be a problem because more people will become disillusioned but at least we will be able to flush out the progressives. It is about time for a political reality check for them. Then maybe in 2024 we can get back to normal. And then we can start working on the problems facing this country. In the meantime, the moderate Dems who won their seats in 2018, can disavow Bernie. Hopefully, they will survive. We can deal with 4 more years of chaos, whether from Bernie or Trump.
4
It is outraging that the Democratic party leadership will ignore the will of the voters and if Bernie gets the plurality of the delegates does not the majority chose their own candidate.
If the they do this there will be several severe consequences:
1. The Democratic party is going to lose the elections in a landslide loss
2. It will prove to the American people that the Democratic party does not care about the will of the people but rather, as the republican party, about the will of it's corporate and billionaire lords.
3. As a result, it will be destroyed for a long time
I've voted Democrat in every election in the last 20 years and contributed to several Democratic candidates. If this happens I will actively support any candidate, including Trump, that will opposite this shame candidate. There will be many many like me.
P.S. Bernie has the best chance to beat Trump and create an unprecedented Democratic momentum. Because his agenda is clear, $15 minimum wage, free college tuition, Medicare for all, Green deal, limit foreign intervention and defense budget. It is certainly a liberal agenda, but it is supported by most Americans, including most working-class Americans and many Trump supporters. You listen to Biden or the other candidates and it is not clear what they are for and how their agenda can help the ordinary American.
17
Let's listen to our younger voters who will inherit the mess we have created for so many years, giving in to corporate interests instead of working for a clean and sustainable planet. They are going to vote for Bernie because they have the courage of their convictions. The younger generation are much more worldly and informed about how other countries believe health care is a right. I say to all of us graying baby boomers,"Listen to your children!"
14
But what if they don’t vote, and assume the older generations need to vote instead? It’s quite annoying!
@Kathy Well...Why would they want to vote for the same old same old? I know the mantra...vote for any of the Democrats so we can get rid of Trump.
4 years ago I swallowed hard when I had to vote for Hillary....there's something in Bernie's message that inspires them. Health care, student debt, the huge disparity in wealth in this country, climate change....these are important to all of us but especially the younger generations. If they are smart I think they must vote to get rid of Trump first and them put some serious pressure on whoever wins the presidency.
1
I’m a Democrat and I’m voting for a Democrat. Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat and has already said that Democrats should “watch out.” He’ll take party votes while he’s threatening the party? I could go on but it’s not worth the time. Neither is he.
5
Hey, the US has been leading the world in installing corporate puppets for going on more than a hundred years now. Why should hometown USA be any different? All that wasted energy, what a shame. The real reason people want more of same is they don't actually want to do anything at all. Complacency of the mind and spirit so debilitating that all one can do is shop. Thank goodness we have the DNC to keep us corporate. What would we do if we were actually left to decide for ourselves? Who cares. We'll obviously never need to know.
6
I can’t believe that Sanders will allow this to wipe out the Democratic Party. He complains about billionaires buying there way into the White House well his free Medicare for all and free education is unsustainable and shame on him for stirring up so much enthusiasm for this. We need to save our environment and have health care but not Medicare for all. I had a doctors appointment today and my doctor told me no one in her field will want Medicare patients . They won’t get paid . The VA program Community care is failing because the government was taking to long to pay the doctors and they have left in droves. Trump and his corrupt bandits will get a second term all because Sanders.
4
Yes, how can we possibly do what every other first world country does? It's just not realistic. Maybe if we cut taxes again for the wealthy?
1
This is just more evidence that the Democrats have little tolerance for real democracy.
19
And the opposite, one can assume, is 4 more years of the national socialist Trump? That would seem to be the correspondent’s preference.
Even those not on the Bernie Bro Bandwagon have to concede he’s more forthright and honest than flip-flopping Liz. He’s been consistent in his messaging - Bern It Down, Bern It All Down - for all his many decades in politics. And he has never wavered from his unapologetic admiration for a Soviet or Castro-style form of government. The man has passion, conviction, and will likely have a plurality of the party’s voters and delegates. The party elites will tear the party asunder if they try to sabotage his candidacy again as they did in 2016. If Pete, Uncle Joe or Liz don’t end up outpolling him in the primaries, let him be the nominee, and the chips fall where they may come November.
7
Maybe the solution is to have a brokered convention with the superdelegates picking a moderate (Biden, Bloomberg, Klobucher or Buttigieg) who agrees to take in Bernie as VP.
2
I can't possibly see that ever happening. I think Sanders would refuse, and I can't say that I would blame him.
5
@Lilly
I'm not voting for a moderate just because Sanders is the VP. That means nothing to me. It's a fool's bargain.
3
@J.C.
A fool's bargain sounds like exactly what the Sanders supporters deserve
There are probably so many good things to say about Bernie, that I'll add my mild disgust that this angry old man with radical ideas thinks at his age that he should hold the reins of an entire nation and have his tentacles of control all over the world. Notwithstanding Trump's malignant narcissism, that is a kind of ego that I have trouble comprehending.
3
@The Pessimistic Shrink “angry old man with radical ideas” you mean Trump?
3
It will be interesting to see what will replace both completely degenerate parties of this so called democracy.
Both republicans and dems insuring their demise.
5
I like the bellowing about how if Sanders doesn’t have the first-ballot votes he needs to win, and the superdelegates kick in according to rules THAT ST. BERNIE INSISTED ON, all the Berniacs will torch the DNC and refuse to vote in the actual election.
As they so often say, better four more Trump years and a lot more misery—the more misery, the more the unbaptized will See The Light.
4
Bernie should have run as the Green Party candidate. Still people are going to blame the DNC because they feel their candidate should have won. He won't become President. We don't live in a Democracy they say disregarding the pathetic choices they make for presidential candidates
Texas congressional candidate Wall is say Godless Socialist are on the march. She wants to build the wall. Bloomberg ads make him sound like he single handedly saved NYC in '01. His Democratic party opponents say he's racist. Bernie is even running an ad wanting to stick it to Exxon. In Houston?
20% does not make a majority to most of us but when those 20% think they are the only ones who possess the intelligence and morality to vote Wall just might be right. Not about the wall, that is.
2
Nothing matters Trump will be re-elected in a landslide.
2
There might be more
The Democratic Party might resort to a rule change to stop Sanders
"2020 ELECTIONS : DNC members discuss rules change to stop Sanders at convention"
"about a half-dozen members have discussed the possibility of a policy reversal to ensure that so-called superdelegates can vote on the first ballot at the party’s national convention. Such a move would increase the influence of DNC members, members of Congress and other top party officials, who now must wait until the second ballot to have their say if the convention is contested."
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/31/dnc-superdelegates-110083
If so, it would diminish the will of registered voters, including myself
3
let it go
Whoever is running the party has already failed us. The current crop of humans running are pathetic at best,
Maybe Bloomberg can win, but no one else is near it....
3
Let’s b talk about Bernie and Elizabeth as purveyors of pot. A priority on Day 1! No wonder they have a big following among the young. I was flabbergasted!!! I was a teenager in the 60s and lost family and friends to drug and alcohol addiction - all starting with party pot. I see thousands drug addicts eating up Social Security. We already have several generations addicted to social media - now throw in stoners and we are on the “eve of destruction”. I would vote for Bloomberg if only for his sane response to this idiotic “priority” . I worked in medical research for decades and amazed that the media has spent more time on a few thousand deaths from the the coronavirus and not the tens of thousands in this country dead because of the opioid crisis.
1
As a Trump supporter all I can say is: don’t let the DNC steal this from you again, Bernie! Fight!
7
And that would be the end of the Drmocratic orty for a generation.
9
We need to somehow get through this election and then it is time for a new progressive party.
4
If the Democratic big wigs do that, we'll vote Trump one more time.
2
Harry Truman said it best given the choice between a real Republican and a Democrat who acts like one he preferred the former. The days of the Clinton-ista fraudsters are over. Democrats can win this if they don't install a pablum eater. Its Bernie or Warren. Whover has the most primary delegates and I agree that Bloomberg's cognitive slip that he bought supertuesday delegates should be looked into. He coudn't manage a Dairy Barn.
6
First...I am a Democrat. I am again so horribly disappointed with the Democratic Party aka the DNC. What a bunch of self-protective bureaucrats...and anti-democracy too. This whole fiasco of the "super delegates". After everything that they did in 2016 to throw away the votes of millions of people because the DNC were committed to Hillary. Here we are again...talk about destroying the party! Hey DNC...let the people vote! Get rid of the super delegates and let the people vote! Keep your fingers off the scale...let the people vote!
9
After 50 years of voting for only DEMS in Presidential elections ... I will NEVER vote for a Socialist who has repeatedly lies about his absurd 'promises'.
And for all you young folks waving his banner: look up McGovern & brace yourself for total humiliation post Election Day.
1
Remember that Trump is a “national socialist.” You can look it up. Bernie is a democratic socialist. Big difference!!!
1
These people, the ones who don't like Bernie, have given us Trump/a republican senate/the supreme court/local losses.......they should just shut up and let the people decide. Simple
8
I think there is a strong geo-political influence in this primary race. My friends in Chicago and on the East Coast are freaking out at the possibility of a Sanders nomination, not because they don't want him, but because they have become convinced, mostly by the incessant pro-Anybody Else media barrage and the DNC, that he can't unseat Trump. I don't experience that attitude out here in a city filled to overflowing with young adults who desperately want real change and a brighter future.
Additionally, I assume no one can or will beat Trump, mostly because of voter suppression, Russian and GOP disinformation, the media obsessing over every inane comment this clown makes, and the good old Electoral College. With no expectation of getting the WH, I'm going for flipping the Senate, holding the House, and I've already cast my primary vote for someone I truly believe in, which is Senator Bernard Sanders. BTW, this crazy, radical Bernie Bro is a 70 yo lady who suggests you try just supporting the person you think has the best ideas and see how that works out.
6
Having a plurality of delegates is part of a failure to achieve the majority required, and does not entitle any candidate to the nomination. That’s not how conventions work, or how runoff elections work. Neither Lincoln or Wilson, nor Adlai Stevenson, had the most delegates on the first convention ballot. No non-Sanders delegate is obligated to vote for Sanders if he fails to achieve a majority on the first ballot.
6
The article doesn't point out that in 2016, Bernie said that if a candidate got a plurality but not a majority, that candidate should NOT automatically be nominated. That was because Hillary seemed the candidate most likely to be in that position (in the end, she won a majority). Now, when he is the candidate most likely to have a plurality but not a majority, he has reversed his opinion. The cynicism and hypocrisy is worthy of McConnell.
8
WIn-Win:
Bernie drops out and throws his support to Elizabeth Warren, while telling his supporters if they don't vote for her they are letting down the "revolution." While making good on his campaign motto that "it isn't about me, it's about us," he also brings a younger more moderate (social democrat who believes in capitalism), and more electable person into the "movement."
The Dems unite around ideas and Warren's Cabinet, consisting of rival candidates, and soundly defeat the ignorant, unqualified, lying buffoon temporarily disgracing the White House.
7
We tried that the last time, how do you think that worked out?
4
@Ben Bryant Bernie is never going to defer to Warren and She isn’t going to win the nomination.
4
My concern is that if the Democratic party leadership pushes back too hard on Bernie's rising tide of popularity that the party stands to weaken itself even further by destabilizing the sanctity of the votes of all those who support him. And if Bernie does pull out a big majority of the votes then it is up to all of us and especially the media and democratic leadership to hear the message of the people and look deeply into Bernis' ideas and help to find ways to support them and work with him. It will be a real call to the Democrats to re-think how we do business. I would rather see a complex deomcratic party with candidates coming from different points of view WORKING TOGETHER than anything else and if Bernie is folks' choice then the party must and should support him and stop whining about attacks on capitalism ( which needs all the guardrails put back on it possible). Thanks - Liz UT 84124
6
Here is another thought. Say Bernie becomes the candidate and wins the election. What are the most important things in our country that have been damaged by the Trump administration? What would need to be done to correct them?
Strengthening of the separation of powers and closing gaps in the Constitution that allow an administration like Trump to exist would be a good start. Rebuilding the State Department, rebuilding our image in the world, rebuilding the Justice Department, the intelligence agencies would be another.
Restoring confidence in the FBI, refining immigration law, providing infrastructure plans, filling vacancies so institutions can operate efficiently would be another group along with restoring and working to defeat global warming. That alone would take 4 years.
But what would Bernie's administration main effort be? It would be trying to put a square peg in a round hole by making Medicare for all the top priority. To accomplish this, they would need to change hundreds of the laws that affect the process, requiring a mountain of effort. That’s not to mention the turmoil that will be caused by trying to fund it.
Our government needs repair, compassion, moderation of the divisiveness. Medicare for all can wait while we fix what we have wrought over the past four years. Bernie and his plans are here at the wrong time in history.
5
@TC
Would you be saying this if you had health issues and no insurance? Restoring confidence in our FBI and other so-called, deep state agencies and departments, improving our global reputation and other more abstract and politicized "calamities" are of less REAL importance than is massive wealth inequality in America today. IMO, these past three years have not been good in many ways. But our constitution and the fundamentals of our country have NOT been dismantled as commonly portrayed in the media, who have profited immensely by promoting this narrative. The economic and environmental problems that Bernie would target are, in contrast, VERY tangible and far less open to partisan interpretation.
7
With that type of thinking there will NEVER be a right time in history.
4
@TC Medicare For All has been waiting for 100 years. The younger generation will wait no longer. Take real progress off the table and voter turnout goes down massively.
4
In the early 20th century, there was a Progressive Party (uppercase). I think it's high time--past time--to organize a new one with the same name. I've voted Democrat in every election since 1971, but I no longer recognize my party, and I will leave it in 2021.
Anyone else care to see a new third party as an option?
21
Independents are left out of this election: having a choice between Trump and Bernie I’ll vote none.
Democracy is not about forcing people to vote the interest of one party.
I’d like each voter have a choice among all candidates who made it into the primaries, even if this means two rounds of elections as is the model elsewhere, more people would have a voice.
1
If the Democrats didn't want a non Democrat winning the nomination, they should have never let one run. I am not convinced Sanders will even be the nominee, but if he is it would be a disaster to thwart the will of the electorate.
5
Why have primaries and caucuses at all if the party is not going to pay attention to the people who are civic-minded enough to participate in these things? We Democrats are constantly decrying all the tricks Republicans use to discourage voting. Why don’t our party leaders understand that, by threatening to rig the nomination against one candidate and in favor of another, they are undermining democracy in way that’s just as reprehensible?
Is Senator Sanders my preferred candidate? No. Amy Klobuchar is, but she’s not going to win the nomination. Therefore, I will vote for the Democrat (or in Sanders’s case, the Independent) who is the Democratic candidate because the Supreme Court is at stake here.
13
@Drusilla Hawke How is requiring a majority "rigging" the nomination? That's the way the rules have always been, it's nothing new. Sanders is looking for special favors that no one else has ever gotten.
It's time to allow the pendulum to swing forcefully to the left. The Democratic establishment's fear of losing house seats only shows their continued sympathy toward the conservative cause. We've moved way past the Clinton-Gingrich pseudo-bipartisanship and compromises that allowed deregulation to corrupt our economy and opened up our telecommunication infrastructure for foreign attacks. The "norm" of the establishment's governing philosophy is part of the problem. The bridge they built toward the 21st Century is now leading us back into the "gilded cage" of the Republican party, which is still the party of Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover. If the populist movement of 1890s had woken up the working people of this country, it certainly was the start of a revolution century in the making. And Sanders is right in saying that we ought to continue the unfinished work of the New Deal and the reparation for slavery. And this time, culturally, we ought to demystify the role of the American government once and for all, if we still believe in a government for the people.
13
Allowing a Republican billionaire buy into the DNC primary race is not democratic. Trying to sabotage Bernie Sanders at all costs, using cronies, MSM, corporate dollars, is not democratic. Planning to use superdelegates to take the nomination from him, again, is not democratic. Negating our primary votes is not democratic! Why are we even bothering to vote at all? The DNC does not have the values that FDR had, nor JFK, LBJ, MLK, or Bobby Kennedy. If protection of wealth and donors is their true mission statement, as it seems to be, then we as progressives, need another party. But you should change your name because the DNC is not Democratic.
19
@Sue M.
Right on!
Perhaps the Democratic money brokers trust that Democrats will vote for their candidate as long as all the Republicans can do is produce a Trump.
Your comment led to a fantasy debate in which FDR was participating in the ongoing series.
3
I did not think Bernie was a Democratic Party member. He is an independent. Which tells you something about his personality. Trump more than most republicans, could be considered independent. Look what he did to the Republican Party and it’s members. Turned them into sycophants. I think Bernie should also be stopped. He is following the rules now. The Democratic Party rules. Which he is not a member of. He did nothing to help Hillary Clinton in 2016. He could have gone out and rallied his supporters to support the democratic nominee. He did nothing of the kind. Is this really what we think is the future of democracy in America? How about we take the White House, the Senate, keep a congressional majority, then change this country. We as democrats need realistic messaging for all Americans.
3
If they're going to argue that the technical winner of a contest with agreed-upon rules does not actually have the broadest support, they should have risen up and called for revolution when Trump won the Electoral College but lost the popular vote. The hypocrisy is enraging.
We have right now an illegitimate president who was not elected according to the actual will of the people. And he will use all the powers of the incumbency to rig the next election in his favor, and will refuse to leave if he loses. THAT is the threat we should all be focusing on. The nominee we choose to go up against him MUST be seen as the legitimate winner who played by primary rules and won the most delegates, not a candidate of secret conversations and backroom deals. If Bernie wins the most delegates, then so be it. That is the champion that Democratic voters chose. Let him fight.
7
"...Mr. Sanders edges out moderate candidates who collectively win more votes."
This isn't just disingenuous, it's an outright lie.
Popular vote for Sanders in Nevada caucus: 41,075
Biden, Buttigieg, and Steyer together: 40,897
Warren (11,703) and Sanders together: 52,778
I put the last figure there, because the authors are implying that Bernie wouldn't win if there weren't so many moderates running (which isn't true), but they neglect to recognize that Bernie is losing votes to Warren as well.
This is fake news, something the Times claims to abhor.
As far as interviewing "superdelegates", these people are already ignoring party rules, again. In the Democrat party rules, these delegates are actually defined as "undeclared". Coming out ahead of time and making their position known is what alienated so many Democrat voters in the last election.
Democrat leadership does not respect their own supporters.
If they were to ignore the months long effort of millions and bring in a dark horse candidate, like Sherrod Brown, you would see a mass exodus away from the Democrat party.
As far as the Democrats brushing up on their rules, they have repeatedly shown that their rules are only rules of convenience.
12
I am a life long Democrat. Sanders is not now nor ever been a Democrat, and I don’t understand how he is allowed by the party to run for President under as one
I would vote for Sanders over Trump, but under no other circumstances, and with a clothes pinned nose.
6
@Blue
He's allowed to run as a Dem because the Dems by themselves are not capable of pulling from their ranks a single candidate that could come close to beating Trump. Which is why we're stuck with the clown car of losers we have now, plus two "sortaDemocrats," ie Bernie & Bloomie, both of whom are the only ones running as Dems that have a shot.
If the Democratic party goes ahead with a brokered convention and selects a nominee other than the one who has the most votes, they will fulfill what Breitbart commentators have been saying for years: that Trump makes the left lose their minds.
5
Bernie is the only candidate that can beat Trump. He's also the only candidate that can unify the Democratic party. The Third Way is the wrong way. They have been losing, and often to monsters, since Bill Clinton continued the misdirection started in 1968. Their failures are the reason we have Trump and McConnell now. We need democratic Democrats and not plutocratic ones.
8
I can see the Trump ad now: "I was chosen by the will of the people! The Democratic nominee was chosen in dark, smoke-filled rooms away from the public eye! What happened to democracy? Sad!"
5
Bernie didn’t write the rules for the super delegates. Bernie’s team wanted them eliminated and majority wins. They had to compromise as the committee was filled with a majority of Hillary Clinton establishment power brokers.
Establishment Wins Again as DNC Rules Committee Rejects Proposal to Abolish Superdelegates
After leaked DNC emails, Rules Committee vote on superdelegates was seen as key test of party unity ahead of convention by Jon Queally, staff writeronSaturday, July 23, 2016
“After several rounds of voting Saturday afternoon, an effort by progressive Democrats to abolish what they see as the anti-democratic superdelegate process was defeated.
The amendment, co-sponsored by 52 members of the Democratic Party Rules Committee, was defeated when 108 members voted against and just 58 voted in favor.
Though a stinging defeat for those who campaigned in favor of the rule change, spearheaded largely by Bernie Sanders delegates and progressive advocacy groups, supporters took solace that because more than one-quarter of the committee voted 'yes' they will able to introduce a minority report during the full convention next week and demand a floor vote.”
4
Super delegates will only be voting if no candidate gets a majority of the delegates On the first ballot. If that happens that means that Bernie Sanders did not get a majority of the delegates. He would not be a clear favorite. Therefore the superdelegates decide. That’s the way it works. What do you want to do keep holding votes until your candidate wins?
"...Mr. Sanders edges out moderate candidates who collectively win more votes."
This isn't just disingenuous, it's an outright lie.
Popular vote for Sanders in Nevada caucus: 41,075
Biden, Buttigieg, and Steyer together: 40,897
Warren (11,703) and Sanders together: 52,778
I put the last figure there, because the authors are implying that Bernie wouldn't win if there weren't so many moderates running (which isn't true), but they neglect to recognize that Bernie is losing votes to Warren as well.
This is fake news, something the Times claims to abhor.
As far as interviewing "superdelegates", these people are already ignoring party rules, again. In the Democrat party rules, these delegates are actually defined as "undeclared". Coming out ahead of time and making their position known is what alienated so many Democrat voters in the last election.
Democrat leadership does not respect their own supporters.
If they were to ignore the months long effort of millions and bring in a dark horse candidate, like Sherrod Brown, you would see a mass exodus away from the Democrat party.
As far as the Democrats brushing up on their rules, they have repeatedly shown that their rules are only rules of convenience.
3
I can see the Trump ad now: "I was chosen by the voters of the Republican party! The Democratic nominee was chosen by the Party elite in dark, smoke-filled rooms away from the public eye! And they call themselves Democratic! Sad!"
2
Won’t happen because Bernie will be the nominee.
Good one though :-)
1
I wish I felt Bernie could win the national election . I do not. The thought of living in Trumpistan until 2024 is, well, unthinkable. And it's not just Trump, but his sycophants who will continue his policies when he implodes, explodes or is finally removed by enough Republicans finding their spines and coming to their senses. God save us from that - and hopefully, from Bernie. But if he's the nominee, I'll be campaigning my tail off for him.
1
"...Mr. Sanders edges out moderate candidates who collectively win more votes."
This isn't just disingenuous, it's an outright lie.
Popular vote for Sanders in Nevada caucus: 41,075
Biden, Buttigieg, and Steyer together: 40,897
Warren (11,703) and Sanders together: 52,778
I put the last figure there, because the authors are implying that Bernie wouldn't win if there weren't so many moderates running (which isn't true), but they neglect to recognize that Bernie is losing votes to Warren as well.
This is fake news, something the Times claims to abhor.
As far as interviewing "superdelegates", these people are already ignoring party rules, again. In the Democrat party rules, these delegates are actually defined as "undeclared". Coming out ahead of time and making their position known is what alienated so many Democrat voters in the last election.
Democrat leadership does not respect their own supporters.
If they were to ignore the months long effort of millions and bring in a dark horse candidate, like Sherrod Brown, you would see a mass exodus away from the Democrat party.
As far as the Democrats brushing up on their rules, they have repeatedly shown that their rules are only rules of convenience.
2
@Peter Rasmussen THIS!
The establishment of the party ( you know who you are) and the media have to end the panic and get a grip. Let the people decide.
What is happening is democracy and it's to be welcomed and celebrated not feared. Ask what you are afraid of after you puncture the balloons of "socialism" ( fearing we will lose our ballooned capitalism) and money issues to pay for what we seem to have enough money to pay for in tax cuts and war.
9
This could see the death of the DNC. It is already damaged from its attempt to gift Clinton the nomination last time. The brand cannot survive another scandal.
9
So out of touch. The centrist candidate already lost, in 2016. I'm feeling the Bern — power to the people!
11
Any way you slice it, the convention will be a horror show.
And a lot of us can’t wait!
2
I am strongly supporting a change in government in this country and independent of my preference would support any honest candidate from the Democratic Party. However, I think that Democrats lack a strategy that shows competency and honesty. The flood of candidates also led to the expected embarrassing behavior in the debates. And now we also see that the DNC tries to repeat the undemocratic meddling from 2016.
For months I am trying to communicate concerns to the DNC through their website. There is no way to directly email and get a person to respond. The website is nothing more than a way to collect email addresses and phone numbers. No communication. The behavior of the DNC directly leads to Independents voting GOP and Democrats staying at home. If there is no way for me to communicate with Democratic leadership, I will start a local campaign in my state that calls the DNC out for what they are: "Meddling, incompetent crooks".
So, Mr Perez, go through submissions from New Mexico and reply to me, you have my contact information. Talk to me and prove that you still have the good of the country as your goal.
We need regime change, and if you are not up to it, step down and let's reset the game before it is too late.
A very concerned citizen!
2
If I remember correctly, these was the sort of clown-car activities that guaranteed the match-up of Hillary and Donald. How did THAT turn out? Was that worse than the prospect of Bernie Sanders being the Democratic nominee? I would venture to say "yes". Either you want a Democracy, or you don't. The Republicans faced a similar dilemma in 2016. Donald Trump was forced on many Republican voters, largely in part to the problem of "Democracy". (Well, that....and the two-edged sword of gerrymandering).
I am sick of the DNC manipulating the will of the voters, and pulling levers behind the scenes, throwing around its weight...and trying to subvert the will of the voters. Do we need to defeat Trump? Obviously. But at what cost, if the grand poobahs decide to deny Bernie what he has earned? Donald Trump (and his senate enablers, these are the greatest threat to America that we have ever faced, but to deny the candidate (who most deserves the nomination), the opportunity to run against Trump....this could be the end of the Democratic Party.
8
Absolutely insane that these people, who claim to be scared of Sanders' unelectability (despite doing better than the other top 6 competitors in recent head to heads vs. Trump in NH, VA, TX, PA and MI), are so blinded to the obvious, glaring fact that the winner of a stolen nomination is so easily the most unelectable candidate!
The general electorate is not so wedded to the DNC rules as these insiders are, and they are just begging for a Trump reelection if they go through with this. The general electorate did not have a chance to set these rules. Plenty of us who will be resigned to voting for even Bloomberg if he wins things fair and square, will in no way vote for a stolen nominee.
3
"Nancy Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer...hear constant warnings from allies about congressional losses in November if the party nominates Bernie Sanders for president."
Who exactly are these "allies"? And why are so cocksure that the Republican/crossover voters who would vote for a conservative-leaning Democratic presidential candidate just to get rid of Trump will also vote for down-ticket Democrats?
If we really want to take back the Senate, we need to turn out our base by nominating an honest-to-god New Deal Democrat. Pandering to the other side's base hasn't worked so well for us in the past.
And enough with all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the idea of a brokered convention! FDR was nominated at a brokered convention. As he later described the situation during his run for re-election in 1936:
“We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace—business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.
"They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.
"Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred.”
6
I just donated to Bernie again, too.
Also Wisconsin Democratic Party and Fair Fight 2020 (Stacey Abrams' voting rights group).
This True Blue DEMOCRAT loves Bernie and Elizabeth!
10
Democratic party establishment leaders and superdelegates:
Don’t you realize you’re shooting yourself in the foot with this kind of rhetoric?
Bernie Sanders is one of the most remarkable and authentic politicians of our time and a singular gift to the body politic. Voters sense it, feel it. He radiates it.
9
"Democratic Leaders Willing to Risk Party Damage to Stop Bernie Sanders"
Warning: If you do this you won't just damage the party, you will totally destroy it.
The job of political leaders is to understand what is happening within their ranks and why. What is happening is voters are sick and tired of politicians who are owned and corrupted by wealthy and corporate donors.
If the leaders of the democratic party continue to listen plutocrats AND overturn the will of their own primary voters, the party is doomed. Doomed. AS IT SHOULD BE. Sadly, America will go down with it. Is this really the kind of "leadership" you want to be remembered for?
5
I will vote for Bernie in Nov regardless of whether I write him in or if he's the democorp nominee. In discussions with every one of my associates/friends on this topic, no one I know will vote for any other democorp candidate, only Bernie. Period. It's way past time for the democorps to self destruct. Bernie 2020.
3
@A C
In discussions with my narrowminded friends who think just like me, we agree that we are right, and everyone else is wrong. Period.
That's how your comment sounds.
1
Just out today. The 2 most contentious states, Pa & WI, state polls, conducted by LOCAL pollsters beyond repute. Only Sanders beats Trump in both. In Pa, only Sanders beats Trump, period, by +3. Biden tied. It can't be electability then can it? It's more about the fiefdom set up by the Clinton cartel, and the feeding at the trough, now isn't it.........
11
Attention Bernie supporters. The Democrats are out to get your man and after they do will expect you to support their choice.
1
I voted for Stevenson and I’ll vote for Bernie. The Democratic Party took a tremendous whacking under Obama’s years losing seats at every level across the country to that other crowd and why people’s faith in the government serving them is down to approximately 30% and so do not vote and money rules. Bernie is changing that – wake up “super delegates.”
3
These people are utterly delusional. I'm no fan of Sanders, but this would tear the party apart and make the Democratic nomination virtually worthless. This isn't the 19th century - you can't hold primaries in 50 states, and then nominate some "dark horse" candidate who wasn't even running for President.
7
Until Mr. Sanders discloses his complete medical records, his candidacy remains deeply flawed. His honesty can and should be questioned.
1. He pledged full disclosure to Sanjay Gupta shortly after his heart attack. He now renounces that pledge and refuses to provide "full disclosure of medical records..." See that promise 6 minutes in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePp9Ds8JFY4
2. As a 78 year-old man with a recent heart attack, his life expectancy is less than 5 years according to a "gold-standard", peer-reviewed study. https://www.cardiovascularbusiness.com/topics/acute-coronary-syndrome/study-65-older-mi-patients-die-within-8-years.
3. Just releasing his heart ejection fraction as Mr. Bloomberg has, would partly allay justifiable fears about his suitability to survive a Sanders presidency: https://www.mayoclinic.org/ejection-fraction/expert-answers/faq-20058286
What is Bernie hiding?
4
Life long Dem here. Bernie is not my first choice, but please stop with the fearmongering. He is simply a New Deal Democrat. So is Warren. The sky won't fall and the world won't end with New Deal Dems in charge, and life might get better for all Americans. Can't say the same about a second term for the current denizen in the WH, or any Reeps.
6
Make the Democratic party democratic again. Or, maybe for the first time.
4
I guess Democracy isn't a virtue to the Democratic Party.
5
The electoral college and “superdelegates” both should be scrapped. As far as coronating whomever arrives at the convention with the largest percentage of delegates, that depends on the percentage. If it’s 40%, no - let the battle rage and the best candidate win. But if it’s 75%, that’s another story - the will of the majority of voters must prevail.
I don’t like the behind the scenes machinations of the Democratic Party attempting to take down Sanders. He was good enough to caucus with them.
And, by the way, he’s my last choice. I support Buttigieg. But I don’t want to see Sanders getting the shaft - that’s just wrong. If he wins, let’s passionately support him! He’s infinitely superior to Trump.
5
By waiting more than 15 paragraphs before acknowledging that “Historically, superdelegates had always supported the candidate who won the most pledged delegates,” the authors are guilty of a clear - and seemingly intentional - misrepresentation.
The article spends 15+ paragraphs describing the “overwhelming opposition to handing the Vermont senator the nomination if he arrived with the most delegates but fell short of a majority." It describes the views of two superdelegates who believe “the nominee should have a majority of delegates” and “that superdelegates should choose a nominee they believed had the best chance of defeating Mr. Trump if no candidate wins a majority.”
A couple of paragraphs later, the article quotes Jay Jacobs complaining that “Bernie wants to redefine the rules and just say he just needs a plurality.”
But again: superdelegates have always cast their vote with whoever comes to the convention with a *plurality* (aka the most votes) ... until now. In other words, it’s not *Bernie* who wants to redefine the rules, it’s the Dem establishment.
But Lerer and Epstein (or their editors) don’t bother to mention this critical contextual fact for another 15+ paragraphs.
By failing to note within reasonable proximity the falsity of Jacobs' claim (that it is *Sanders* who wants to “redefine the rules”), the article essentially allows Jacobs’ claim to stand and thereby puts its thumb on on the scale against Sanders or any truly democratic process.
6
Is it considered to be pro-choice if a man orders a woman to, in Bloomberg’s words, “kill it?”
6
" From California to the Carolinas, and North Dakota to Ohio, the party leaders say they worry that Mr. Sanders, a democratic socialist with passionate but limited support so far, will lose to President Trump, and drag down moderate House and Senate candidates in swing states with his left-wing agenda of “Medicare for all” and free four-year public college."
Fallacy: Only if people don't vote for their down-ballot. It's crucial to consider that there are two elements moving forward this election season. The defeat of Trump and capturing the Senate while keeping the House. Along with that, are all the local races which are equally important. Anyone who chooses to stay home and not vote for Sanders if he were the nominee is equal to casting a vote for the third president impeached in history.
"Mr. Sanders and his advisers insist that the opposite is true — that his ideas will generate huge excitement among young and working-class voters, and lead to record turnout. Such hopes have yet to be borne out in nominating contests so far."
Fallacy: It has been openly discussed that the possibility of the reported lower turnouts during the past primaries/caucuses is that it is very possible voters have decided that they will in fact vote for whoever ends up being the nominee and will allow those who do participate to make the decision for them.
The DNC will have created a nightmare and signaled the end of their relevance if they choose to decide for the voters - democracy indeed...
1
I was prepared to support any of the Democratic candidates except for Bloomberg, just like I voted for Clinton, though I am a Bernie supporter, but if Bernie has the most votes and delegates going into the convention and they give the nomination to someone else, not only will I vote for Trump, but I will vote Republican up and down the ballot for the next 10 years!
11
Proof that you don’t love your country. Trump is a vile, detestable human being who has dragged your country and her institutions into the mud and he has been supported by his craven Republican cronies. You would vote for him/them for ten years out of spite? Are you one of those who didn’t vote for Hillary and gave your once-proud country to Trump? Dems know that Republicans are terrified of “socialists” so this is strategy, not dirty politics.
1
Sanders is leading with a multi-cultural, multi-generational coalition of voters, including many first time voters.
Just reading this plan is incredibly disturbing. It sends the message that many party leaders would rather lose to Trump than vote for Sanders.
I've voted democrat for 35 years. I no longer donate to the Democratic Party because of behavior like this.
And though I support Sanders I've been planning to vote blue no matter who-- but I have limits.
15
ach, remember the Super Delegates like Howard Dean who chided all of us ‘voters’ that THEY knew better than our choices and that, despite Sanders winning popular votes in 2016, THEY knew who ‘we’ needed in order to ‘Win the White House’...
and they’re doing it all again
2
Many Bernie observers who thought he was some sort of saint may be shocked to observe a 40-year politician acting like a politician. Bernie joins the party only when he needs it. He insists on changes to the rules. Then, when things look complicated, he thinks the rules shouldn't apply to him and starts to stir the pot months before the convention.
10
@ Mary no mention of Bloomberg not being unaffiliated but actually being a full fledged Republican?? The DNC are hypocrites.
2
If Sanders falls short of a majority, let's give the nomination to someone who falls even shorter of a majority. What could go wrong?
14
If the Party decides that people's votes don't matter in July, it has no right to be upset if those voters decide that their vote doesn't matter in November. It's a straight line from one to the other.
10
If they deny Sanders even if he has won the majority of delegates I hope that he forms a third party and moves his forces to get himself on the ballot in at least the swing states. The DNC needs to wake up and smell the coffee. For those who work hard, can't pay their bills, face large health insurance co-pays, drive on crumbling bridges and roads and whose children are drowning in college debt, "we don't need no centrist right Democratic bosses and leaders".
8
It's so early. Let's see how things look after Super Tuesday, or even a week later, when my state weighs in. Voters need to feel like they're doing their part to select our next nominee, and that our voices will be heard.
Just now, if % for Bernie and Eliabeth is greater than the % for all the more moderate candidates combined. If that's still the case after more results are in, perhaps some of the moderates will drop out. Endorsements will matter. Voters will exercise, I believe, common sense. It appears that more Bernie supporters would vote for Elizabeth than for the more moderate candidates. She is a capitalist who knows what the role of government needs to be in a capitalist country. Here Republican brothers have good conversations with her. As the economy starts to look rockier, who would be better to guide us to better times? She understands the ways in which greed and inadequate government regulation led to the 2008 debacle. She sees the ways we're approaching that danger again. She will look out for Us, not the richest people, when the pie is shrinking for a while.
I put my faith in the voters. Please don't weigh in as Democrats to render those of us who are able to vote powerless and overruled. Let's follow the convention rules in good faith.
2
Pundits are doing all they can, along with the party establishment, to confuse the real issues before us.
In 2016, Sanders polled Far better than Clinton against Trump. The Party establishment chose to support the establishment candidate. The root issue is control of the party: by voters or by the establishment. There is an enormous anti-establishment sentiment among voters that the establishment (financial elite) and The media they own are trying to suppress. "Electability". 'Red Scare' tactics. "Not someone you'd have a beer with", as though that is what matters. These are the smokescreens of the establishment.
Sanders's proposals are enormously popular with the general public, including poorer Republicans. If the Democratic establishment is actually concerned about defeating Trump, getting fully behind a populist platform is absolutely the way to do that. It was anti-establishment sentiment that got Trump elected. Sanders is positioned to capture the anti-establishment voters that got Trump elected. When he does that, and additionally has the support of the rest of Democrats he will not only mop the floor with Trump, he will have long coattails for the house and Senate.
Yes the establishment (extremely wealthy who control the party) is concerned... that they will lose power to the popular will of rank and file voters. The actual arguments put forth against Sanders's proposals is not that they wouldn't be a good thing, but simply 'we can't do that'. Why Not?
9
I’ve heard a lot of voters who identify with establishment candidates mostly because they believe such candidates are more electable, not because they ACTUALLY have a problem with anything Bernie has said. There’s this assumption that mysterious other people will. Isn’t that odd?
6
@Aaron
It's the DNC that is selling this line, and now moving on to that he will hurt candidates down-ballot, with no evidence of this. It's the same Trump fascist ploy that if you repeat something often enough people will believe it. Why should we believe that the people who got it so wrong in 2016 will get it right this time? They are desperately afraid of losing their power, period.
5
@theresa
Of course they are afraid of losing their power and their donors. Sanders is asking them to go from a few select (and sleazy) rich donors to millions of middle income donors.
Weinstein, Ed Buck, Epstein, Zuckerberg...which one hasn't been convicted of a heinous crime or is just plain creepy?
Sanders's donors aren't rich Hollywood or Silicon Valley types that invite you to fancy parties. Who wants those kinds of people at the policy table?
3
@Aaron People are irrational creatures. I've faced the same people. They want what Sanders is fighting for but they let themselves get in the way of themselves and shoot themselves in the foot before they even get out the door. It's like that old saying: "If you don't think you can, you can't. If you think you can, you might."
1
If Sanders has more than 40 percent of the delegates, and the superdelegates weigh in without getting the normal delegates on board, I will not vote for the Democrat. Further, I will leave the party that I have voted for for decades. Decades longer than Bloomberg has been a Democrat.
I won't vote for Sanders in my state's primary. He is not my first choice. But if elitism wins over democratic principles. If our primaries don't matter.
it will be a pox on both Democrats and Republicans. It will be no better than Trump.
I am anybody but Trump in a fair fight fir the nomination. If elites mess this up, I am out. And will campaign for others to be out too.
The people don't like the elites. Of either party. They messed up America. It is time to let the people, or their delegates decide. Not Party insiders.
6
What gives the DNC the right to negate the will of citizens who vote overwhelmingly for a specific candidate? If the DNC resorts to this tactic, its going to have blowback they may never recover from.
The times they are a changin', and the DNC can either get off the train that defines the anachronistic policies of yesteryear or wither away as Progressives move to create a working people's party that recognizes and addresses the needs of a majority of working Americans.
Make no mistake, Progressives fully intend to challenge sitting Senators and Congresspeople no matter the outcome of this election. If those politicians continue to distance themselves from assuring the health and welfare of the electorate, they will be relegated to the past.
Right now, as the DNC overrules the will of voters nationwide, they simultaneously invigorate and strengthen a new generation of Americans willing to fight for a new American renaissance unfettered by greed, unscientific thinking, and the muzzling of the country's collective imagination.
7
I never thought I would ever vote for a candidate in the primary election simply because no candidate in the history of American politics has sincerely stood for the things that I do (minus one from almost 100 years ago) Bernie is that one exception. Sanders is getting tons of people just like me to vote that never would have and the DNC is blatantly turning them away; that is very disconcerting to people like us. If they continue with this mindset, by the next election cycle we will begin to see the Democratic party fade into obscurity, if they are so lucky.
5
If you want trump to win, then support Sanders. Very simple choice.
He may end up with a plurality but he does not represent the majority of Democrats. Joe. Amy & Pete will split that vote.
Unfortunately neither he nor is supporters - unlike the other candidates - will support anyone else. Just like they failed to support Hillary.
4
I do not support Bernie Sanders and prefer any of the more moderate candidates, PB, MB, AK, JB in this order. But if Bernie is what the majority of the democrats want so be it.
However, if Bernie is the candidate I am not sure how I would vote in the general election. In Venezuela, from where I emigrated, we got a hard lesson of the difference between promises and results and as a consequence I am not a big fan of socialist revolutionaries.
6
Democratic megadonor urges Pelosi and Schumer to pick a candidate in a bid to stop Bernie Sanders in order to stop the surge of Sen. Bernie Sanders. Bernard Schwartz CEO BLS Investments.
We have here is a classic example of party leadership and their big money donors doing everything they can to thwart the will of the people. If we are ever to take back our government from the moneyed interests that control it, we need to support those who defy the status quo. Bernie Sanders is such a candidate. I am an independent, but I will change my registration so I can support Bernie in the primary. Opposing our broken political system is an uphill battle, but when an opportunity presents itself, I think it's worth the effort.
Bernie2020 NotMeUs
8
Rep. James Clyburn's endorsement of Joe Biden last night was like nothing I'd ever seen before. It wasn't the usual string of political bromides and cliches. His sincerity, his depth of emotion was so genuine, his conviction so profound, it choked me up.
Clearly, he's a man whose patriotism isn't the cheap stuff of rally-goers waving American flags like party favors. He went to jail for his convictions. He's faced firsthand the worst of this country, and still he loves America and strives to make it what he believes it can be. I can't say I'd have maintained his kind of faith if I had to walk in his shoes. Hearing him speak, I could see why his word carries so much weight with his constituents. I haven't been that moved since I heard Dr. King's last speech before he was assassinated, and that speech brought tears to my eyes.
I've been promoting Bloomberg on these threads, thinking he had the best shot at unseating Trump. After last night, I can't. Rep. Clyburn knows Joe Biden and trusts Joe Biden. He spoke from his soul. Most importantly, his own fundamental decency declared itself in his every word.
I trust this man; and if he trusts Biden, that's enough for me. I had despaired of finding a candidate I could believe in. No more. The rest of the field just seem so shallow to me now.
The best thing Mr. Bloomberg can do is to drop out of the race, endorse Joe Biden, and offer his campaign all the help he can give to defeat Trump.
There needn't be a brokered convention.
3
Sherrod Brown? Michelle Obama? I want to vote for someone who actually wants to be president and has gone to the trouble of running.
A brokered convention would be disastrous. It would cause a lot of disgusted Democrats to stay home. Bernie Sanders getting the nomination without winning a majority of delegates would be almost as bad and would cause different folks to stay home. We need everyone to vote.
Democratic voters: If your candidate is not in one of the top 2 positions when your state's primary rolls around, make your choice from the top 2. I was planning to vote for Elizabeth Warren, but since it's now obvious she's not going to be the nominee, Sanders it is, to boost his delegate count in my state.
4
If Democratic leaders don't step in winning with Bernie is fraught with extreme difficulty.
Seems like our political parties are due for a shake-up. Allegiances can change. I guess it's about time.
1
It just shows how desperate they are maintain the status corporate quo.
2
They're risking more than intra-party damage. They will be giving away the Presidency to Trump and very likely destroying the Democratic Party as we know it. I have never sat out an election and have never voted for any other than the Democratic candidates. Depending on how this plays out, however, I may have to reconsider seriously my support for this party of the people.
6
Reading this piece, I am really curious to hear how Warren can argument that the rules state that Bernie “should not become the nominee if he arrived at the convention short of a delegate majority.” The rules do not say that this should not happen, they only say that it’s not automatically the case (the only automatic nomination with the current rules is at the first ballot after having got 50%+1 of the pledged delegates). From the second ballot on the rules only say the superdelegates enter the scene, but do not prescribe anything on how they should vote. Bernie’s position is that they should not replace the popular will with their will. Claiming as Warren does that such a position is tantamount to breaking the rules is disingenuous and clearly in bad faith. It surprises me that an intelligent person as Senator Warren would think that voters cannot see that pinning her hopes of becoming the nominee only to a scenario in which the superdelegates reverse her likely gap in pledged delegates makes her position as self-serving as she charges Bernie’s to be. And even more, that in evoking such a scenario she is basically advocating a massive disenfranchisement of those progressive voters she claims to be the best to represent. Of course they should take her word on this, they can’t be trusted in making that choice by themselves.
Has anyone made the point yet that business's of all sizes will no longer be responsible for medical insurance. Can't that be spun as a positive to all corporatists?
2
Every time a question is asked at a debate, the candidates need to use their time to explain how we got into this mess, how Trump and Republicans have made it worse, and that Democrats can help workers, retired persons, elderly, and sick. It's not hard. Tax policy. Check. Environment. Check. Social security. Check. Better and cheaper medical coverage. Check. Immigration common sense. Check. Gunsense. Check. The rich and powerful have taken over this country, robbed the middle class, turned on the poor, and left all but a few to fight over the remains. Tell that story and the rest will take care of itself.
2
Bernie must abide by the rules which apply to all of the Democratic candidates otherwise, why bother to establish rules? He knew what they were when he requested to run.
I am tired of hearing how unfair it would be not to GIVE him the nomination; no matter how many times he has run. Young people are threatening to stay home on election day. STAY HOME and hopefully grow up when you can't have your way.
4
It seems very strange that the party's (Dem and Repub alike) have absolutely no say in who runs under their name. These are private political parties. It seems anyone running should have the party's approval BEFORE running. Because they have no say, we get people like Trump who are not Repubs, are not Dems but just hijack the party for their own ends.
The Dems did try to put their "approval" on the nominee in 2016 via their Super Delegate system. that worked to keep Bernie out (Hillary had enough superdelgates before the primaries really even got going). But it seems they picked the wrong person. So who knows what works best to get the best candidate.
I don't have any special feeling for Bernie, but I bet he gives Trump a run for it, and very well could win it. They basically have the same message but Bernie has the advantage of telling the truth while Trump simply lies about what ever he claims he is going to do (very little of what he promised, outside tax cuts for the rich and appointing ultra right wing judges, has been done. Even his wall is a complete failure).
2
To everyone who is saying the plurality winner should be the nominee period, let's look at Paul LePage. I'd like to see the superdelagates use RCV on their ballots. Well, really, I'd like to see RCV for all elections, but...
I don’t actually hold Sanders personally responsible for it, but unfortunately it seems while many of his supporters may dislike Trump for his policies (or attempts at policies), when it comes to the overall gestalt at the root of their movement they subscribe to the same tenets as Trump: “the system is rigged” conspiracy theories, overweening paranoia, an us-versus-them mentality, and a tendency to double down in the face of criticism.
It will be interesting to see how y’all react if/when Sanders is nominated and he tacks towards the middle in the general election, as he will have to in order to have a chance at winning.
4
So Democratic leaders would rather self-destruct than support the people’s choice just at the time America needs them the most because they too are so beholden to the rich and Republicans. Why not? They did their part in 2016 to get Trump elected and want to do it again.
2
If one of these gentleman is elected president his age at the time of his inauguration will be;
Senator Sanders --- 79 and 4 months;
Mayor Bloomberg --- 78 and 11 months;
Vice-President Biden --- 78 and 2 months.
Recall that Franklin Roosevelt died three months after the beginning of his fourth term and was succeeded by the new VP, Harry Truman, formerly a senator from Missouri.
We need to have complete health records for each of these candidates and also, fairly soon, their choice for vice-president.
3
Irrelevant. We have VP’s and Speakers of the House if needed. JFK was assassinated when he was a mere “youth.” We survived the death of a great President. Bernie is in good shape. Did you see him in the debates?
5
@Blunt
Seriously? Is that the best defense you have, that the health of a candidate for the highest office in the land is "irrelevant"? When the candidate is only 3 months past his most recent heart attack, and only one rant away from his next one, his health is VERY relevant.
1
His health is fine. I don’t know about yours. Or Trump’s for that matter.
2
The Democratic Party is not listening to the voters. If they muddy the waters, we will have another debacle like 2016.
3
If Bernie wins & is denied the nomination by the power brokers, the buyers & the bought, there will be no Democratic presidency. It's that simple.
6
Of course the bigger problem with our democracy is that Al Gore and Hilary Clinton got a majority of the votes cast, but did not win. The Kerry loss was also suspect. Hilary’s margins in beating Trump far surpassed Gore’s win over Bush. How is that democratic? Can we fix that?
4
I'm not much of a Democrat, since I'm not a fanatic. As it is now, Republicans and Russians are pretending to be Democrats in the press in order to steal yet another Presidential election. I sure don't know what to do about that, but in order to oust Trump, I have already mailed in my California Democratic Party Primary ballot with Mike Bloomberg marked as my choice for President because he is willing to do whatever it takes to defeat Trump.
While other Democrats are also claiming that, I seriously doubt that they can actually do what it takes to defeat Trump. However, there is no doubt in my mind that Mike Bloomberg can get it done.
2
Sounds like 2016 redux. Sanders represents a return to the progressive agenda of the New Deal and the DNC hierarchy is living in Clintonland. What's Clintonland? It's the 50 years drift of the Democratic Party to tail-end the GOP in its embrace of Wall Street the Neoliberal program of shifting the tax structure and the dismantling of social reforms. How well did that work in 2016? Not very.
Anybody advocating that strategic vision is doing so because of their connection to the vested interest gravy train and (contrary to their claims) will guarantee the re-election of DJT. Talk about self-serving panic mongering.
These complacent people want to retain/return to a world that no longer exists. That's a dangerous fantasy. They represent the voice of privilege and hopefully, that voice will fail. However, getting an absolute majority with a field of six or so candidates is a tough nut for anyone to crack.
These people want to save the Democratic Party? Right now they are working feverishly to bury it.
3
How about the moderates agreeing to pool their votes on the candidate who has the plurality of votes among them and agreeing on Tom Friedman's proposal to form a team of rivals to take down Trump.
4
Can a Yang math person explain how difficult it would be with so many voters to have any candidate break the 50% mark or lap everyone else. It’s statistics.
If that’s the case those with power just flood the elections with many people and have the privileged connected few choose.
2
Look at it this way. Is there anyone who is a sure bet to beat Trump? No. Are some candidates more likely than others to beat him? Yes. Is there any way to find out other than having a general election? No. The Democrats’ obsession with beating trump and thinking they can make the odds of beating him a sure thing are hurting themselves. Just let it play out.
3
If Bernie has a substantial plurality of delegates and is denied the nomination by the party establishment then I predict it will be the end of the democratic party. The amount of replies to this piece which claim to have unassailable knowledge of who will win is astonishing. I remind you all of this:
1. Centrist dems lost the presidential election in 1988, 2000, 2004 and 2016.
2. 70% of those under 40 identify as democrats, mostly supporting Bernie and progressive causes, where do you think the future in this party lies?
3. Choosing someone besides Bernie will almost assuredly not obtain the goal-to defeat Trump, given the very predictable anger and resentment in the progressive community and their distaste for the neoliberal policies which have landed us here .
4. Old people should get out of the way--no one is taking your Medicare yet. To denigrate young people who live in an entirely different economic reality that you did in the 1980's as completely out of touch and selfish is ignorant-they will be dealing with climate change, automation, China, pandemics, social injustice, lack of housing, mass migration, long term and student debt, all problems created by the Baby Boomer class.
5. Denying Bernie misses the point-you cannot deny an idea whose time has come-democratic socialism maximizes fairness, social justice, and sustainability issues and collective action. Dems can either embrace the change or disappear like the Whigs as the post-65 crowd disappears.
6
The same arguments put forth for McGovern in 1972. That worked well.
@James
Its not the argument James, its the moment and the demographics, let 1972 go, it was 50 years ago.
2
@RSR
1972 was also when Bernie was in his prime.
I've seen nothing but negative articles trashing Bernie Sanders on your site. Certainly Sanders deserves his fair share of criticism, but there's been nothing fair about his coverage by the Times. I've seen the same Republican fear-mongering about Sanders on this site. To be fair this isn't just the Times, but I had higher standards for you.
I've heard nothing from liberal news sources, but "Bernie has no chance at winning" and "Our only hope of winning is a moderate unity ticket". Hilary Clinton, the Democratic establishment and moderate darling, couldn't beat Trump in 2016 when he was considered "unelectable", even by Republicans. Why has the fact that a moderate couldn't win before magically changed? Are Democrats under the illusion that Trump's presidency has somehow hurt his electability? Let's ignore all the massive advantages any incumbent president has, Trump has had a fairly strong economy, which is probably the best argument a president can make to get re-elected. If you think the scandals have hurt him, think again. No one was under the illusion that Trump was a saint.
Bloomberg recently admitted that Bernie likely would have won if he was the nominee in 2016. Why isn't the same true now? The DNC and the Democratic establishment colluded to keep Sanders from getting the nomination in 2016 and gave us Trump. You've spent the last 4 years telling us how evil Trump is, now you're going to let him win again by doing the same thing... Definition of insanity anyone?
5
Don’t worry, the dog barks, the caravan moves on. These dogs are hired dogs. Hired by “masters of the universe”. Until they are not. As Bernie quoted Mandela, (I slightly paraphrase) the impossible is impossible until it becomes possible. We shall overcome. We, the 99 percenters (actually I am a 0.1 percenter but I am betraying my class).
4
The party has officially lost its mind. I knew it from the time when the battle cry was to find the candidate who could best beat trump. Not find the best candidate to be president. Just the one who can beat trump.
The only shed of sanity in this whole article came from Walter Mondale who said he would vote for the best person to be president.
Shouldnt that be the priority. Do we really want a president who can actually do more harm to the country than trump, just because they can defeat trump? That's really cutting your nose off just to spite your face.
1
The oligarchs are panicked.
The same DNC that has presided over the slow decline of the Middle and Lower classes is panicked.
Good. Time for New Deal and LBJ Democrats, not the Clinton wave.
5
I don't think it's a given that Sander wouldn't win the presidency. Look at Trump. Too bad he's just a mirror image of Trump in that way.
If Sanders gets the Dem nomination, then Trump will win in November *and* retain a majority in the Senate. Vladimir Putin knows this, and that is why Putin is supporting Sanders through internet manipulations (e. g., his IRA).
Buttigieg is the only one I have confidence in to beat Trump in November.
2
Putin seems to be helping both candidates. Why? To sow doubt about the legitimacy of whoever wins.
2
What would be the point of causing the same damage they claim to be worried about if a candidate is nominated?
I think it would be the end of the Democratic Party if it were to cheat one of its candidates. People would realize it’s simply a corrupt cartel that really serves its elite members, not the voters or citizens or its members!!
I think it would great if they did such a corrupt thing because it would finally show what they really are
3
The moderate politicians suggesting that Michelle Obama, who has repeatedly said she never wants to run for office, should be on the ticket are outright delusional.
6
I’ve always thought of the FNC as an untrustworthy organization. And I’m a registered Dem. They’ve bungled and deceived, lied and injured the party. It is the DNCs fault that Trump is here by running HRC last time. I just hope someone with sense is watching behind the scenes. It’s obvious that Bernie will be the nominee without DNC bungling, and the next President as well. If DNC fights it, Trump will become king.
3
A lot of people are going to sit out again this election because of how corrupt our political system has become including the DNC. If Bernie has a momentum, why don't they take advantage of it like the republican did with Trump The democrats still live in the Clinton era and the notion of we go high when they go low and I want really know how it's working for them.
My son canvassed for Clinton in 2016 by calling people and 90% will hang up on him or don't talk because they didn't like Hillary . Now he's canvassing for Bernie and 85% of people he's calling are engaging and asking questions.
So stop saying Bernie stole the election from Hillary . It's the democratic top that lost the connection with its base .
5
In other words, the Democratic Party leadership bowing to the rich and special interests would rather see Trump elected than Sanders.
5
Please answer these questions:
If for any reason Bernie Sanders were to exit the Primaries prior to the Convention:
1. Would all the anti-Bernie Sanders voters quickly transform into anti-Elizabeth Warren voters?
2. Can a candidate, who declares that they are exiting the Primaries or suspending their campaign, reassign the delegates, that they’ve already won, to another candidate or what?
2
So telling that they're not worried about Bloomberg in the same way. Maybe it's because he doesn't seem likely to win, but it might also be that they are so much more comfortable with corporate centrism than what made their party ever be the thing it is today - New Deal SOCIALISM. That is wildly popular even though we do not use the word. I think they're as wrong about Sanders' viability as the Republicans were about Trump's, though for different reasons.
3
A candidate with 35% support from his own party, promising to change the healthcare plan of 67% of both parties, has a low probability of winning 51% of electoral votes.
That said, I would vote for any of the Democratic candidates, or their pets, before I vote Republican.
11
How about looking at things another way?
How many people in the bottom quartiles of the country would benefit from the ideas Bernie wants to implement?
Rawlsian justice tells us to maximize the welfare of the least fortunate before we optimize the utility of the rest.
We have to choose: do we want an oligarchy to continue ruling the nation or do we want to join the democratic club of nations like Denmark, Sweden and Norway?
Your choice fellow Americans.
Bernie and Warren in 2020. Best ticket we have. In that order.
7
@Fred
As we head into a recession due to the Corona virus pandemic The voters may regret not having Medicare for All.
If you think Bernie can’t win over Trump, then you need to make the case for who can. Biden? Mayor Pete? Warren? Seriously?
3
Sanders is an independent and not a Democrat, so there can be little wonder why the party machine is not wholly supportive of his candidacy.
2
Let's be clear. This debate would be totally unnecessary if we had adopted ranked choice voting across the board. Because we have not done so, we cannot say with any reliability who the "consensus candidate" would be if the leading candidate falls short of a majority.
If the leading candidate leads by a wide margin, but falls short of a majority, that candidate's supporters will, with good reason, expect their a candidate to prevail. Moving to deny such a candidate the nomination would be a mistake of epic proportions.
A contested convention is unworkable under the current format unless it is a close race, or perhaps if it is not close but the lead candidate has not secured more than about 30% of the vote.
Sanders is not my preferred candidate, but the hyperventilating about him and his supporters is counter productive. He may well be the nominee, and I will enthusiastically support him if he prevails. Furthermore, it is my firm belief that we must come to view the primary process as a process of inclusion and we must work to make it so. The primary process is a time to attract voters to a diverse field of candidates and must work to ensure voters feel heard so that we can count on their continued participation in the general election.
12
I have wavered between Bernie, Joe and Mike. I am afraid, as are many, that Bernie can't beat Trump, due to his socialist leanings/agenda!! Younger Americans do not have any idea (unless they are VERY well read) about the Joe McCarthy era, and the sigma that Socialism and Communism is given in America. Joe does have empathy with the voters, but he carries it a bit TOO far. I find myself thinking, "Enough Already!" Last night Mike Bloomberg REALLY impressed me with his knowledge and well thought out plans for America regarding Climate Change and Gun Control in the CNN Town Hall Meeting. I wish the debates could have allowed him to express these ideas in similar detail (which btw, were an embarrassment to the Democratic Party. Democrats came across as not being able to find their way out of a paper bag). I like Mike's business approach to getting things done, in addition to being able to work with a diversity of people (what other city can equal New York ? Which is why I still love it. ) I sincerely think he will make a great President of the United States.
254
@Lois Lettini And will continue the contempt for women of the current occupant.
89
@Lois Lettini I think Bloomberg has illustrated how he works with different groups of people and that's for blaming one group for all the crime.
77
@Lois Lettini
Lois, I appreciate your thoughts. As a younger American, I can say that I'm well aware of the stigma that McCarthyism brought as far as communism and socialism dog-whistles.
I would invite you to consider this: among younger Americans, and communities of color, I cannot overstate how much of a stigma Mike Bloomberg and his legacy of stop-and-frisk and sexist comments carry. Please consider the possibility that Bloomberg will drive an enormous part of the Democratic electorate away, and that you might not be hearing from them much because they may not be in your circles.
173
A Sanders win is the best possibility of removing money from our politics.
Of course Climate Crisis and Healthcare would be higher on the list of priorities, but without congressional support, it's all a pipe dream anyway.
7
@DP Removing money from our politics? Sorry. I thought you said "from our pockets". I was about to agree with you.
Democrats have good reason to be nervous about Bernie. But Biden may just pull it off yet, since beginning in South Carolina, the playing field is more level, as I note here. Take heart, sensible Democrats! https://realcontextnews.com/democrats-look-disastrous-but-biden-may-yet-save-them-from-themselves-starting-in-south-carolina/
3
Absolutely no young people will vote for Creepy Uncle Joe.
1
And another thing: I know it's not politically correct, but...do we really want this election to be decided by...children? I'm sure I'm not the only one who is decidedly uneasy about the many photos of the Avatar thronged by masses of under-thirty-somethings. I mean, most of us were there once. It was a good time, but it's an excellent thing we weren't able to effect cataclysmic political decisions.
8
Perhaps we should return to nobler times, when only men could vote. Or better yet, restrict voting to white property owners.
Your perspective is decidedly undemocratic.
34
@TMS You mean the 'children' you feel free to send to die in the middle east, enslave with student debt and crushing precarious gig jobs? Yeah, they are just immature brats who don't know what's good for them. Your generation failed . Failed big time. Failed at the basic function of a human being - taking care of the children.
37
What a great idea- let's shrink Dem base even more
18
If we had ranked choice voting, as the NYT recently suggested, I seriously doubt Bernie would have even a plurality of delegates going into the convention. The progressive lane (Bernie plus Elizabeth) so far gets only about 30-40% in state polling. The majority of Dems so far appear to favor a moderate candidate. That seems to be the fact, but I'm open to change my opinion after the super Tuesday vote.
And regardless, I'll vote blue no matter who we nominate because I care about our country's future. Remember, half a loaf is far better than no loaf at all. And if your slice of the political spectrum isn't popular enough, work harder to sway more voters.
2
Superdelegates are anti-democratic, and they have a wildly disproportionate influence.
The three states with the largest numbers of pledged convention delegates (chosen via the primary process) are California with 415, New York with 274, and Texas with 228. So the superdelegate count at 771 is MORE THAN THE TOTAL OF CALIFORNIA AND NEW YORK COMBINED. In fact, you can add in 1/3 of the Texas delegates and still not reach 771.
IMO that's not putting a thumb on the scale, that's putting a LEG on the scale.
Superdelegates favor the status quo. If we ever want to see any change in the direction of the party, we need to abolish the superdelegates.
22
I can't understand all the angst. If Bernie or any other candidate doesn't win a majority, then the convention can be brokered. They all agreed to these rules when they started. There is no thwarting the will of the people. The will of the people is constituted by a majority. I also think think the first reaction of many commenters here is to threaten to skip the election if this occurs and the nomination goes to someone else, but then they will cool down and vote for whomever the Democratic nominee is. It's either that or Trump.
3
@Judith the point is that the rules are undemocratic. I'm not voting for an undemocratically elected nominee, even if it's Bernie.
1
I will vote for Trump and GOP for the next 10 years if they do that, that’s how angry I would be.
1
"Mr. Sanders argued that he should become the nominee at the convention with a plurality of delegates, to reflect the will of voters, and that denying him the nomination would enrage his supporters and split the party for years to come."
Why does the headline put the blame for the split on the majority of Democrats?
It was Sanders who came in to the 2016 Convention with 4 million fewer votes than Clinton and yet made the story about whether he would be willing to accept the will of the majority---his supporters booed speakers, and all the stories going in to the convention were about Bernie, Russian leaked emails that helped him (forcing DWS to step down), rather than stories about the progressive agenda supported by the winner of the primaries and the majority of delegates
Now once again Sander claims that he should be the nominee even if he is unable to get a majority of the votes, and if not, he will blame the majority, who prefer others, for "damaging the party"---and the press appears to be buying in to this story.
There are many progressive alternatives to Sanders who are better able to work with the majority of Democrats to regain the Senate, hold the House, lead & unify the nation & pass a progressive agenda.
This article, for example, mentioned Sherrod Brown. If Bernie rejects Sherrod Brown as a consensus candidate, that would demonstrate that Bernie is all ego, not policy, and it would be Bernie who, once again, as in 2016, damages the party and helps Trump.
7
Lol you're thinking of Clinton.
1
The anti-Bernie democrats in this article are neo-liberal and not Franklin Roosevelt Democrat’s, which is what Bernie most reflects. While Bernie self describes as a Democratic Socialist, Franklin Roosevelt in his day was accused of being a Socialist. Roosevelt’s 1944 Second Bill Of Rights, presented in his State Of The Union address, is basically what Bernie has been advocating for years. Read it below and ask yourself whether what Bernie is aiming for is as radical as the neo-liberal Democrats have convinced themselves. Yes, it will be extremely challenging to achieve, but so was Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, which the republicans will undermine, dismantle, and/or privatize if Trump gets a second term.
FDR’s 1944 Second Bill Of Rights:
-The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;
-The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
-The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
-The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
-The right of every family to a decent home;
-The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health
-The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
-The right to a good education.
21
Amen. I'm 51 and a New Deal Democrat. Sanders and Warren have it right.
4
Would someone just tell Bernie's wife to stay off RT television?
And help Bernie be a better campaigner. And that goes double for his bros. If the kids want Bernie, fine, but they need to register and vote. If in the end they find something better to do that day -- we'll be living with the results for decades.
2
The "kids" do want Bernie, and they are voting. That is why he is winning.
1
But RT is perfect for Communists.
If the Democratic leaders can't even support their own team, then it's time they step down because they definitely don't understand the definition of "democratic". By the people. for the people. That's all Bernie is about.
15
The DNC risks loosing a generation of young voters if they withhold the nomination from Sanders, and there might not be a Democratic party left if they do. Anti-establishment sentiment is very high with many voters. Handing the nomination over to another NY billionaire or another so-called "electable" centrist like Biden/Pete/Klob will risk the party splitting up for good.
You have to ask yourself, what are the real interests of establishment dems who think universal health care and fighting rising inequality are not worth fighting for? It's not worth being a member anymore if they aren't.
19
How can they not be freaked, and act?
Democrats made tremendous gains in traditionally unfriendly territory during the mid-terms. Those candidates are put at risk by a Sanders candidacy.
And it isn't just the House we should be talking about. It is the houses of every state legislature in the nation who will draw Congressional and legislative maps.
If Sanders doesn't draw in the middle (and centrism is legit), then you get not only 4 years of Trump, you've lost the redistricting battle before it started. And, you lock-in 10 years of Trumpism. I doubt we can survive 4 more years of Trump. I'm certain we can't survive a country gerrymandered for 10 more years of Republican advantage.
The Democratic leaders are freaked. And, I'm very glad they are. They know the game, and they know truly what's a stake.
5
Bernie is polling stronger than any other Democrat now, he’s passed Biden and is now seen as the most electable as well
5
This attitude is really making me question my future support of the DNC. The Sanders camp is correct; he will bring out the vote and beat Trump. If the DNC doesn't play fair, AGAIN, they will turn away a huge chunk of voters and their centrist candidate will lose. It's already happened once, and Trump was the result. Clinton was a centrist candidate; look how well that turned out (TWICE - 2012 primary and 2016 general). The public realizes that drastic policy changes are needed, and they will not support a candidate who doesn't promote them.
Also, has anyone over at the DNC realized that trying to force the nomination of a centrist candidate plays perfectly into Trump's 'deep state' mantra?
12
Make America great again -- as it showed it could be in the election of 1964!
Both wings of the Democratic Party seem intent on repeating the fiasco of 1968 -- but this time, we face an outcome far worse, even, than the election of Richard Nixon.
This time, instead of Richard Daley, we confront the possibility of a President declaring a State of emergency and imposing martial law.
2
Don’t worry. POTUS will let your convention descend into riot with no intervention.
Even if you avoid the fiasco of 1968, you’ll get the fiasco of 1972 in the election.
I am an independent who usually votes for Democratic candidates but I’d prefer if we had a strong just-left-of-the-center party.
4
Given what the Dem leadership did to quietly undermine Sanders in 2016, one has to wonder what they're up to this time behind the scenes.
As for this story and a multitude of others like it as well as the constant parade of pearl clutchers on the cable channels, I'll bet they amount to a succession of trial balloons floated to gauge public reaction to stealing the nomination from Sanders.
Or, maybe more likely, they're trying to accustom the voting public to such a scenario through mindless repetition.
10
If centrist Democrats were truly concerned about beating Sanders, then the ones who are doing most poorly in polls and votes would drop out. Mind you, many Waren voters -- perhaps a majority, but I haven't seen a study yet -- would also be supporting Sanders if she dropped out.
Sanders is the only candidate that beats Trump in all the general election polls in February. And usually, Sanders is quite ahead of the other democratic candidates. But don't take my word for it. Look for yourself.
Let's stop approaching American politics as though we are campaigning in the 1990s.
9
If the DNC enacted rules, they should follow those rules. Look on the bright side: a contested convention would draw more eyeballs and interest than the scripted affairs political conventions have become.
3
Whoever the voters choose during the primaries should be the Democratic nominee. I could support Bernie or Elizabeth Warren.
I am not a hardcore “ Sandersnista “ but if Bernie is chosen by
the people and his nomination is superseded by a “brokered”
convention I will leave the Democratic Party and enroll in a progressive third Party.
Because it will mean that the System is indeed rigged by both the Republican and Democratic Parties.
9
There is an argument that Mr Sanders should be given the chance to fail. The downside of that, as the supporters of Mr Corbyn discovered in the UK, is 4 more years of Mr Trump. But that harsh lesson does help to teach that, in a democracy you can have the best policies but they are meaningless without electability.
3
@Melbourne Town
So...like the lessons losing centrists have learned for over 4 decades now?
Guess who's the one's paying the price for our overlords slow learning...hint...it's not them.
4
Bernie Sanders wrote the rules he now wants to break. The only person currently trying to 'steal' the nomination is Bernie Sanders. Elizabeth Warren, in a Politico article today, said that he was flatly reversing his position from when he helped write those rules about NOT letting anyone have the nomination with just a plurality of votes in 2016. Warren said he was doing it solely to give HIMSELF an unfair advantage. The number of people posting here who are writing to defend this dishonest behavior tells me a lot about the nature of his supporters - either they are not researching the story at all, or will excuse inexcusably dishonest behavior from their preferred candidate while blaming anyone BUT him. I thought we were about removing trumpian behavior - not excusing it the way the republicans do.
5
@Amrak
Seems more people are choosing to believe Sanders than Warren doesn't it.
BY the by...who's the one projecting here? Just like Trump, casting falsity's and pointing fingers Amrak?!
2
The Democratic National Committee, reshaped by Clinton in the 90's is to the right of the people who vote in the Democratic Party primaries. The apparatchiks who dominate the party are to the right of the people who are going to vote for the Democratic Party presidential nominee. Their goals are not the goals of the electorate that supports their nominee. The superdelegates who are freaked out by Sanders are freaked out not because he might lose, but because of how far to the left of them Sanders is. The Democratic Party from Clinton to Hillary has supported many awful laws and actions, from "reforming welfare" to destabilizing Libya and Honduras. Since the corporate dems took over, they have moved the part to the right and that is the only way they think. The corporate Dems see the Republicans move right then they think the Democrats must move right as well. Remember when Mondale tried to go to the right of Reagan in 1984? How did that work? The election of Trump shows that people are tired of corporate inside the beltway politics. Now that Trump has shown himself to be just as corporatist as the rest of the Republicans the opportunity for Democrats to win is by moving left and supporting the aspirations of the poor, working and middle classes. Don't listen to the corporatists. Their class interests supersede their party allegiance.
7
So many issues with this line of argumentation. The fact that Rep. Don Beyer and others would even consider figures like Nancy Pelosi, or anyone who has not done the hard work of campaigning and building trust with voters, as a unifying candidate shows how removed they are from the general public.
It also discounts how removed the general public is from traditional "left-right" ideology or party loyalty. Millions of people feel frustrated that their lives haven't significantly improved under either party's leadership. We understand how huge the flaws in our political & economic systems are. That's why we are rallying behind candidates like Trump and Bernie - we don't trust the "insiders" to make big systemic change that is desperately needed.
I also know plenty of my 20-something friends, who don't follow politics as closely I do, would be stunned and confused if Sanders is leading the others, by far, in primary voting only to be overruled by an unelected group of unknown people. Yes, I understand that the rules of the convention allow it, but it would only deepen the level of distrust in our politics and pave the way for even more disaffected Trump voters.
As Robert Reich wrote in the Washington Post: "The best way for Democrats to defeat Trump’s fake populism is with the real thing, coupled with an agenda of systemic reform. This is what Sanders offers. For that reason, he has the best chance of generating the energy and enthusiasm needed to regain the White House."
9
Not sure obsessing so early about Bernie obscures the larger challenge. Flipping the Senate offers a new President the keys to car. Absent taking McConnell's gavel away from him Bernie or any other victorious Democrat stymied by Dr. No.
Spending other people's money risky at best but Bloomberg and Steyer should be throwing money into every race including McConnell's seat. High anxiety over an undecided vote non productive. Advice to the hand wringers propel your candidate to victory over Sanders.
3
Young, energized voters came out for McGovern in 1972 as well. That turned out well.
2
@SPH
And (Gene) McCarthy. Remember "Clean for Gene!" That certainly scared the guys over at CREEP.
I'm going to be fortright and clear about the Democratic leaders' intervention in the nomination of Sanders or any other candidate (they are already doing their best to obstruct the path of Sanders, as has media platforms such as the NYT by long ignoring him or covering him in negative ways when the opportunity comes, until now that they cannot avoid some of the op voices after the primaries in some states.
I am a Democrat and I will not vote if the Democratic PArty intervenes in blocking the way of any candidate (i.e. Sanders). I believe many others will too.Not even Republicans tried that card in blocking their own wild card, Trump. And Sanders is not, by far, the equivalent to Trump. To do so is authoritarian politics, borderline corruption. It reinforces the metaphor of
the swamp" that Trump has pushed. I repeat, I will not vote in November, if the Democratic Party blocks the clear popular will of the party. We will have to ride the Trump nightmare to its end (people will wake up eventually, as with McCarthy).
8
It is not messing with the process to insist on a second ballot when the first fails to produce a majority. The rules are the rules.
2
Bernie may get 30% of the vote, but moderates have the majority. Bernie does not deserve the nomination, he is a divisive figure who cost the democrats the 2016 election with his Bernie or Bust approach.
4
I was raised among the Democratic "establishment" - but now I'm a "progressive" as I find my view "left" of the "establishment." The "Democratic Establishment" has to own up to its own responsibility for creating the fertile environment for a demagogue to capture the hearts of so many working-class Americans. When the DLC came into being and pushed for "moderate" and "business-friendly" policies - the party reneged on the commitment made by FDR to help those without a voice (or $ to hire a voice.) I do fear what the "Socialist" label will do to Bernie in the general election. But the DNC can't complain that he now wants a rule change when they just did the EXACT SAME THING - by allowing Bloomberg into the primaries and onto the debate stages. With that move - they showed their true colors - well it's one color and its $$. The DNC has, once again, sold the soul of the Democratic Party. Whatever happens in Milwaukee they OWN IT.
6
When a car is skidding on the highway you want to avoid over correcting and sending the car skidding in the opposite direction. What you want is a steady hand on the wheel, steering just enough to regain control.
2
@Bello
OK, but what do you do when almost everyone who wants to drive is too old, and should have their keys taken away?
1
If Sanders gets the nod there will be no Democratic party. We will lose the House, the presidency and any chance to regain the Senate. Is it worth the risk, Bernie Bros?
5
What I find dangerous about this article/conversation is that it is fanning the conspiracy fears that the Democratic Party is out to "get" Sanders. A position that unfortunately he himself sometimes inflames and that goes back to 2016. It's also a position by the way that feeds directly into Russian interference propaganda! So be aware of that folks. And please note, as this article does, that Sanders and his team were totally involved in writing the current rules concerning delegates. An outright majority of pledged delegates is needed to win the nomination. The DNC bent over backwards to work with Bernie (an independent democratic socialist) to set the current rules in motion. Despite rumors and/or protests by Bernie's supporters, Sanders can't and isn't entitled to change the rules now. If it is a brokered convention, so be it. That's not the end of the world! And if it's a brokered convention that tells you that Bernie's platform is not as broadly endorsed or as supported as many insist. By running again Bernie spilt the liberal/progressive base. He has to live with that decision. He keeps claiming his platform will turnout historic numbers of voters. So far that hasn't happened. It didn't in NV where only 15% of reg dems caucused. If the convention is brokered, that means compromise. Adults who want to beat Trump should be able to handle that. Beat Trump: that's the goal.
3
Who said Politics is a fair fight? Bernie is not a Democrat, so if Dem Party officials feel he will hurt the rest of the ticket and should be stopped, so be it.
3
I get the fear behind Bernie's hypothetical nomination. I have my doubts whether he could win. But I have no doubt that if he gets the most votes, and the party prevents his nomination, they will annihilate democratic voter trust in the system and lead to people either voting Bernie third party or not voting at all. If he gets the most votes and they block his nomination, they're guaranteeing a loss to Trump anyway. If you're going to lose, as least lose running the candidate that the PEOPLE chose.
6
This is not new news. Sanders knew it all along. The candidates knew it all along. The insiders knew it all along. Bloomberg especially knew it all along, or else he would not have entered the race.
The Sanders campaign wanted the nomination in the first round from the get-go because they knew it all along that this could happen. I honestly did not expect Sanders to pull this out of his hat though, to be able to claim victory by plurality. When I heard that question presented to the candidates at the Nevada debate and then Sander's answer, I groaned like an old dog. Then I rolled over and went to sleep. Just call me "Blue Will Doo". Wake me up on November 4th, or not.
2
If the winner of the most votes does not become the nominee, I'll only vote for down ballot candidates. I'll leave the president blank. I'm sure there are millions more like me, many of whom live in swing states and not in deep blue NY like I do.
4
This is just undemocratic.
I understand forcing a 2nd round of voting. What I don't understand is why you think that it's okay to deny him the nomination with 40% of the party but give it to someone with even less support.
The only way to avoid this is for 3-4 candidates to drop out next week, but I'm not holding my breath.
I will vote for whoever wins the nomination, but this is exactly why I refuse to join the party. The idea that votes don't matter is infuriating.
2
This is the way nominating conventions are supposed to work and used to work. Either you have enough committed delegate votes to win the nomination or you don't. If anyone fails to go through the process and falls short of the required amount, the convention is free to, and should, consider possibilities after those first couple rounds.
The problem is, who among the Democrats has the stature and wide-spread goodwill to get the nomination that way and still unite the party? Only 2 names come to kind - Oprah and Michelle.
I would point out though that with moneybags Steyer and Bloomburg, that sort of contested brokered convention might be ripe for finanicial shenanigans to actually buy the nomination - that's kind of a new and unpleasant wrinkle in an old story.
2
Its a simple mathematical question of lost votes
Will more votes be lost if moderates are off-put by a Sanders nomination
or
Will more votes be lost due to dissatisfaction that Bernie didn't receive the nomination although he received a much larger plurality of the vote.
Either way, all these canidates get what they get for being scared to challenge Hillary in 2016 (Biden and Warren)
2
Lots of people I know, probably myself included, will sit out the election if Sanders wins in the primaries and is denied the nomination because he’s not the choice of “party leaders”.
Why bother to have primaries at all if it all comes down to the will of these “party leaders”? Do they actually think that dismissing the will of the electorate is a winning strategy?
6
Polls have Sanders beating Trump by greater percent than all the other candidates.
What's the problem?
6
The problem is that the paper you are reading doesn’t like that. That is what all this is about. They now added Lisa to Sydney and Jonathan to keep cranking the presses to produce more of these fake concerns. You want to know which way the wind is blowing? Ask the tens of millions who are sending their lunch money to Bernie. You don’t hear much about that in the Times.
Bernie is leading in the national polls by over TEN POINTS. RealClear Politics website has been clearly showing what is going on.
5
I am 66, have vote Dem all my life, identified as a Dem. If the Dems block Bernie again this year, I think I am done voting. The Dems do not value my vote or the vote of millions of Dems. The insider Dems are playing a power game I am not really privvy to.
I can't believe some pols allow themselves to be quoted as opposing Bernie. It is as if they do not realize they are opposing the will of the people.
5
This will be my first time voting. I’d have no problem voting for a totally new party created by Sanders if the Democratic leadership decides to nuke its credibility. They have to understand how many young people don’t owe the party any loyalty.
3
Well, there it is in black and white. Straight to you from the Democratic Party establishment’s most trusted media scribes. I have maintained for some while that the Democratic Party establishment and many of their supporters in the corporate media would rather lose to Donald Trump than have Bernie Sanders become president. Based on this article, there’s no question of it. Here’s what we can know for certain. If Bernie Sanders comes to the convention with a substantial lead among pledged delegates and the nomination is given to someone else, the Democrats will lose disastrously. Apparently for a lot of the corporate Democratic leaders, never Trump does not apply to Supporting Bernie Sanders if he is the nominee.
4
I registered as a Dem in Florida (I was Independent) so I can vote for a moderate in the primary. I know quite a few people have done the same. ;)
2
I’m 49 years old. My parents grew up venerating FDR. My father fought in WW2 as a teenager. It was FDR who led the entire nation and the “greatest generation” through that brutal crucible, almost to the end, until he died in April, 1945. He was beloved and so wildly popular he won 4 elections. My grandparents revered him for leading the country out of the abject despair of the Great Depression. My grandparents and parents would easily recognize Bernie’s program, it’s basically a delayed continuation of what FDR started. My 20 something children and many of their friends enthusiastically support Bernie’s program. People who claim that the Sanders agenda is somehow antithetical to American values are either hopelessly biased or grossly ignorant of US history.
6
Why should the Democratic Party feel compelled to nominate someone who is not a member of said party? Bernie, after all, is an independent who caucuses with the Democrats in the Senate.
5
Interesting that Sanders helped draft the rules and now he doesn’t want to live by them. He wanted to steal the nomination from Hillary in 2016, now he just wants a guaranteed win.
4
This article articulates clearly what everyone feeling the Bern already knows. Just like in 2016, the "Democratic" elite will stonewall his nomination in any way possible that doesn't fall outside party rules as in, if it's not clearly illegal to block his nomination, then it's legal and OK to do so even if the majority of the Democratic party clearly supports his nomination. This isn't about the leadership deciding who's right, it's about respecting the plurality!
Trump rejoices I am certain! Gonna be a long four more years...
2
The reason there were and are still are so many candidates in the field is a direct result of the DNC rules changes with respect to Superdelegates.
Multiple candidates make it very difficult if not impossible to win on the first ballot.
That gives the DNC Superdelegates the power to select a nominee.
The whole thing was designed, from the get go, to stop Bernie. This is OBVIOUS to anyone paying attention. Why its not news?
4
I supported Bernie in 2016 & again this year.
Until last week.
I no longer support Bernie Sanders.
I've always assumed Bernie is wise, a clever old poll. And his loathing of Trump seemed even greater than HRCs in 2016.
Surely Bernie realizes that the most job of the Democratic nominee is to beat Donald Trump.
Right?
Apparently not.
I was horrified last week when Bernie praised Castro's literacy program. A day later, Bernie doubled down on the remark.
In the words of Mayor Pete "The Democratic candidates now have to talk about Fidel Castro."
Of all Bernie's weaknesses, this has seemed the greatest - his past support for people like Castro. It was with disappointment that I watched him cherish endorsing the literacy program, insisting we recognize the good in Castro.
Trump is probably licking his chops.
Then came word Bernie will refuse financial help for the campaign from Mike Bloomberg, who's generously said he'd bankroll Democratic candidates.
That was the end with Bernie. We need Bloomberg's $$ to fight the hugely wealthy Trump campaign.
That Bernie would put his ideology above doing what it takes to win - by 2x praising Castro, then refusing Bloomberg's financial help - signal to me Bernie's so stubborn & rigid he can't beat Trump.
This race must be about beating Trump, not Democratic Socialism.
I want a nominee who'll use all legal means to get an advantage over Trump.
I'm shocked to learn Bernie won't.
So long Bernie. It's been nice knowing ya.
340
Guess you weren’t a fan of Obama then? Both Sanders and Obama used the same language to praise their literacy program and denounce the authoritarian regime as a whole
290
He doesn't have to accept Bloomberg's money. Let Bloomberg run whatever ads he wishes to defeat Trump, Sanders doesn't need to coordinate with Bloomberg. Bloomberg's contributions are conditional, so Sanders is wise to keep a firewall between himself and Bloomberg.
As for his Cuban educational position, good ideas can come from anywhere. That's the power of a democracy.
130
@fast/furious
His praise of a successful literacy program lost your vote? I'm not buying it.
231
I am a supporter of Bernie Sanders. I am a lifelong Democrat who would never vote for a Republican because, as a senior citizen interested in politics since I was a child and canvassed for Adlai Stevenson against Ike, I have come to know as an absolute, invariable truth that Democrats in office govern more beneficially for the people they govern than Republicans ever do. And this holds true at every level of jurisdiction everywhere.
However, if Bernie is seen to be cheated by the party hierarchy out of winning the Democratic nomination, the party officials will regret it. While I personally will certainly support the eventual nominee, and nearly every Sanders supporter will support the Democratic nominee if that nominee is seen to have won fairly, if the process is viewed as rigged then many Sanders supporters may sit on their hands in November.
This would spell disaster for the Democratic Party, not only for its chances to win the White House but for all down-ticket Democrats on the ballot.
If, as this article seems to describe, the party goes all out to defeat the people's choice of a nominee, then only the unacceptability of Donald Trump will have the potential to save them, and that is a very dicey proposition indeed.
Keep it honest. Keep it straight. Keep it fair. That is how we will win. Cheat the voters of the party's most enthusiastic base and we will lose.
1192
@Dr. Planarian There is no chance Democrats win if the steal the nomination from the person with the most votes. I will encourage people to sit out and many others will as well.
47
@Dr. Planarian
Perhaps you have not read the article fully?
I repeat @Holmes' comment here, so I don't have to write it again: (by the way, I also like very much Bernie's proposals, however the US has to change, but incrementally. "REVOLUTIONS" never work. Show me one that has, please)
Holmes' comments:
Reading through the comments here I'm struck how many NYT readers seem to be missing the point or did not fully read the article. The superdelegates would not be voting to take away what the people want. If Bernie only gets a plurality of delegates, it means a majority of voters did not choose to vote for him -- this explicitly indicates that a majority of voters do NOT want Bernie.
And to be clear, the article did not say the superdelegates wouldn't choose Bernie, it simply said the superdelegates would choose the candidate most likely to win the general election. Winning the general is too obvious a goal to need to be stated, but here we are. Bernie refuting this agreed-upon process that he himself helped create is absolutely Trump-like in it's ridiculousness.
59
@Dr. Planarian
There has been no talk or suggestion of cheating.. Only of following the rules.
..-- However, Sanders now finds that the convention rules are not acceptable to him..?? He feels if he gets to the convention with the most delegates, but not a majority to win.. that he should nevertheless be the candidate..
-That goes against the rules, & is not how Sanders felt in the past.. It's clear that Sanders feels he should not have to abide by the convention rules..but that other candidates should..
.-- It really sounds as though the one we need to worry about cheating.. is Bernie Sanders.
51
As we agonize on who can beat Trump, we focus on this individual or that one. In reality, it is not an individual, but the people pulling together, who will remove Trump--as well as resolve other major catastrophes facing us, like climate change. In the words of Tielhard de Chardin:
"When humankind realizes its power as community,
it will be a quantum leap
greater than the dawn of reason."
2
If the Democrats are going to override the majority of the party, they should do away with caucuses and primaries and pick a candidate behind closed doors. Then Bernie could run as a Democratic Socialist party nominee.
5
Even if you argue that a plurality, not being a majority, is insufficient to elect a nominee, having superdelegates decide the outcome would be infinitely worse. These superdelegates are party insiders, who tend to share a common point of view which is definitely anti-Bernie.
The primary system itself is flawed. There should be a popular vote nationally, followed by repeated votes with the least well performing candidates eliminated, until a candidate has a majority.
Having a relatively small number of biased people choose the nominee will both damage our democracy and kill the chances of ALL Democrats. People will simply sit the election out. If you think this will help anyone but Trump and the Republicans, think again.
6
Trump has been recorded saying he feared HRC choosing Bernie as her VP because of his base, he can't beat Bernie. I understand Bernie is a threat to the riches obscene wealth and privileges, but we are literally at life and death now with the coronavirus spreading and climate change. Life and sustainability for the generations to come should be the number one priority of everyone.
5
Dem party leaders want to give us a centrist because it worked so well in 2016, losing to the most unpopular candidate ever.
8
First of all, I think the DNC is out of touch. I supported and voted for Bernie in 2016. Now I'm supporting Warren. Why don't the big wigs in the DNC get behind her? Isn't there something missing in this narrative? I believe that the general public is tired of being left out of the equation when it comes to economic progress. The DNC is comprised of mostly elite, well-paid people and they don't want to see their meal ticket go out the window. Any destruction of the Democratic party has already begun back in the 90's with compromising our basic liberal values for neo-liberalism, half measures, blatantly liberal and sexist policies. It's going to bring itself down because you can't have all the power and the money at the top.
6
I am not a partisan of any party. 3 weeks ago, I offered here my view of what Democrats should be doing in order to have any chance of defeating Trump. That was simply my analysis, not advice since I have no desire to help any party gain power.
I wrote then that Democrats were foolish to compete with each other over who can promise the most free stuff and who would punish well off people the most. That would just assure a Trump victory.
I wrote then that Democrats had been handed a winning hand by mother nature and the Chinese people. That winning hand was the corona virus. Democrats could beat Trump if they directed their campaign exclusively to offering concrete, specific, intense efforts to prevent the virus from coming here and contain it when it did.
But several weeks ago, Democrats were still intensely committed to their socio-political correctness that demands open borders to welcome foreigners to the US even if those foreigners are bringing severely contagious disease. Europe, too, was similarly wedded to their politically correct openness.
Now this Chinese disease is in Europe and growing. Soon it will be growing out of control in the US (because Trump did not impose a travel ban that kept out all foreigner citizens from the US until this disease is under control).
Now, finally, Democrats are beginning to focus on this disease. But they only criticize Trump, offering no concrete measures, just wanting to throw more money at governent.
1
The Clinton strategy lost in 2016, bolstered by party leader errors. These superdelegates don’t know who can beat Trump. Picking someone unvetted who did not have guts to run in primary and hasn’t gotten a vote such as Brown is untenable. Brokered convention yes if no one meets threshold. Overriding voters with party insider guessing is a recipe for disaster.
5
The DNC rules have always been dumb and the "everyone gets a trophy" system produces this problem. However, these are the rules. Sanders tried to tell us in 2016 that HRC shouldn't get the nomination, even though she went over the number of delegates to get the nomination WITHOUT the super delegates. Which was of course, bonkers. The rules are the rules though. If no one reaches the 1900 or so delegates required for the nomination, the process will play out according to the rules. Rules Sanders had a huge part in writing, despite the fact that he's never been a Democrat in the first place.
2
We need ranked choice voting. That would have eliminated the whole situation.
3
No matter what your viewpoint, no matter what happens or who wins, you need to go out in November and vote for the Republican candidate.
A lot of Bernie's cultists pouted in 2016, voted for the fringe 3rd party candidates or didn't vote at all in "protest," and look what that got us.
1
The same Democratic leaders producing all the losses for the last decade?
2
"Risk intraparty damage." So these "party leaders" are saying they would rather Trump win than Sanders be at the top of the ticket.
So in essence the will of the people will not have been enough to change the awful course these people have taken us on. If these "party leaders" are to be that rotten, there is truly only one course of action to take: too much has been lost already, time to let the house burn down.
2
60% of Democrats in Nevada want Bernie's Medicare for All, and a majority of all Americans want Medicare for All.
That makes Bernie the Centrist candidate.
Bernie has the highest net favorables of any candidate amongst Democratic voters, is the Senate's most popular politician, and the candidate most Democrats expect to win over Trump.
Head-to-head, Bernie beats all the other Democratic candidates, including Bloomberg by 15 points.
https://twitter.com/Rationalist69/status/1231350010492674050
If Bernie does not get the nomination, plurality of not, if the Voters are stabbed in the back by the DNC superdelegates, millions of once Democrats will vote for Trump - and all the Republican down-steam candidates in the swing states.
The goal will be to wipe out this anti-democratic corporate party forever and rebuild from the ground up. We already have the grass-roots and we have the Independents, who represent 41% of the electorate versus the Democratic party with only 28%.
Once we get rid of these Republican collaborators, we can finally go after their Republican buddies, whom they've protected for decades. The reason nothing changes is because we have not cleaned house. Trump will help us with that.
2
Does anyone know anything about the Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf as a possible Democratic dark horse candidate in a brokered convention or a substantial Vice President choice? He seems like a maverick, leftist, and a unifier. Pennsylvania was one of those states that felled Clinton in 2016.
2
Democratic voters are already cynical about whether elections will carry out the will of the majority. You just have to look at 2016 when Mrs. Clinton received three million more votes than Trump. Politicians like Trump routinely lie. Media companies like Fox also lie .Social media businesses like Facebook aid liars and enemy propaganda agents.
The most important political question in 2020 is not what policies we choose but how we decide our elections. Are they free and fair? Are they corrupted by the money of Bloomberg, Steyer, and Citizens United?
If super-delgates and party officials overturn the will of the people, the Democratic Party will be badly hurt. It is far more important for the Democrats to show its constituents that it is conducting a fair process than to choose a candidate picked by the super-delegates who will defeat Donald Trump.
Bernie Sanders, like Barry Goldwater, before him is building a social movement. Goldwater lost badly in 1964,but his movement persisted to elect Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, George Bush Sr. and George Bush Jr.
The greatest managers in baseball, Connie Mack and Branch Rickey did not overly concern themselves with winning one season. They developed great farm systems, introduced talented blacks into baseball, and had overall winning seasons for decades.
We must disenthrall ourselves from short-term thinking.
2
At this point I would prefer four more years of Trump with a Democrat House and Senate than four years of Bernie with a Republican House and Senate.
I hate to say that because Trump is a wholly unqualified President but I think his damage can be limited if we get rid of his enablers in the Senate. While the Scandinavian model of democratic socialism is probably in our future, America is not ready for Bernie's program. He would be a one-term President with a wasted term since nothing would get done. What's the point?
@Scott Werden
Whether we get a fully functioning Scandinavian system if Bernie gets in does not matter. This is a long-term proposal. Bernie will change the conversation and put forth the vision, and that is how things start. Then the Big Idea gains momentum and the impossible happens.
Everyone who goes on about a single term President or Bernie - or anyone - not getting anything done with the Republicans do not realize that everything starts with Vision. Then the idea takes shape when the time is right and then nothing can stop it and becomes inevitable.
1
All because progressives don't have the votes and refuse to acknowledge it.
2
This is insane.
I’m a Warren supporter, but I’m smart enough to recognize that if Sanders finishes with a large plurality of delegates and the primary popular vote, denying him the nomination will hand the general election to Trump. Bernie’s hardcore supporters form 20% of the Democratic Party electorate. If he gets rolled in a brokered convention, they’ll stay home in November. It’ll be 1968 all over again.
5
I will never vote Democrat again if “the party” violates its bargain with members ensuring the people control the process. If it isn’t _our_ party, then I’ll gladly leave.
4
I continue to be dismayed that this entire article like so many others completely dismisses Elizabeth Warren as someone who has actually gotten things done for Americans...already. We elected a woman last time and we could do it again. You can keep dismissing white middle-aged college-educated women like myself at your own peril but I for one don't want another old white man running the country. I am not alone in that.
1
This is why we need ranked choice voting.
2
He won’t fall short anyway. But that these people prefer Trump over Sanders tells you all you need to know.
5
This is rich, "Bill Clinton, in calls with old friends, vents about the party getting wiped out in the general election."
My spouse had just said it is the Clintons who, between them, ruined the Democratic party - first Bill and then Hillary (complicated by Bill baggage, 30 yrs of radical right pummeling and 2016 election interference by Russians), jockeyed into the nomination by the party establishment. Biden should have run in '16 when he still had his spark.
Before the primaries have resolved, we should not be hearing of such possible convention manipulation.
6
Bernie is talking about issues other countries worked out a long time ago --paid tuition, healthcare, childcare, family leave. America is a mess with economic inequality. we need a good overhaul. Ofcourse billionaires and corporations hate him and they want us to be afraid. But lets make the rich pay their fair share and do we really need to support so much war and weapons of mass destruction? Bernie is FDR.
7
How about the party officials and grand Pooh-bahs asking Kobuchar, Steyer, and Bloomberg to stop campaigning and let the public choose between Bernie, Warren and Buttigieg? Of course, Bloomberg will never withdraw until doom is certain.
3
Just waking up to the fact that Sanders is new hope for this country. If a pathetic liar and egomaniac can be president, Sanders is highly qualified to be one. Also, I stopped being a democrat when democrats began alienating the middle class going back to Obama era. This article shines light on the lasting problem with the present democratic party that is fighting the change.
4
Bernie is leading by 10 points in the national polls (Real Clear Politics).
The dog barks, the caravan moves on. Sorry New York Times you have to go better than Lisa and Sydney to spin it in the direction of the one percent you represent (more like you defend with your last erg of energy).
5
This article makes it clear that the Democratic Party elite actually do not trust the working class, the poor, the minorities, and the progressives who support Bernie. The Dem elite have nothing but contempt for those voters. Not only that, but the elite don't believe in grassroots democracy.
What the Dem elite don't realize is that we Bernie backers are sick and tired of their elitism, their self-importance, their vacuous slogans, their neo-liberal economics, and Joe Biden's ridiculous Ray-Bans.
4
Sanders is the Democrats’ Trump.
Would the NYT endorse Bernie vs Donald or would it abstain?
1
Not surprising! The party of spineless jellyfish is gonna take down someone who has stood for the people for four decades. They should be ashamed of themselves. COWARDS.
7
Not again!
3
Hmmm ... conspiracy anyone? Check out who is actually pushing for a brokered convention:
https://theintercept.com/2020/02/27/dnc-superdelegate-convention-gop-donor/
1
Democratic party has departed from its values becoming the party of the rich and the powerful. Reading this article clearly demonstrates the disconnect between the party leaders and its constituents. Democrats need Bernie Sanders to bring back what they were meant to stand for.
8
Saunders wouldn't look like the runaway canfidate if so many moderate candidates weren't splitting the vote. I'm voting in the California Democratic primary in a few days. I would love it if the party leaders would simply tell me who to vote for.
That sounds strange as I write it but I have never been so undecided in my vote and everyone I talk to is in the same place as me.
I want to defeat Trump, hold the House, and take the Senate. I want the Democratic president to help the country heal, appoint a good cabinet to restore the decimated departments, adhere to the Constitution. I want the Democratic Congress to restore what Trump and the Republicans have tried to ruin (like ACA) and to develop legislation to prevent another Trump from happening again.
I don't object to many progressive ideas but we need to right the ship first.
3
@Linda W
Then you vote for Bernie. (Liz isn't going to win.)
If you put in a Leftish Pres. the congress will moderate policys, but they will have a "Left" lean to them.
Install a "moderate" Pres. and he/she gets moderated by congress, you get a "Right" leaning policy.
Just what we've had for 50yrs. now.
Ever more Rightward.
Sanders is the correction. The beginning.
It won't be, and can't be a Socialist Utopia, congress won't move that fast.
You wish moderate progress...vote a Leftish Pres.;
Candidate Senator Sanders.
4
@Linda W Trump will defeat any of those from Democrat Party
Of course they are, they were in 2016 too, and they can expect the same results. As old Joe would say "The fact of the matter," is that the operating members of the DNC are of the class that benefits from right wing economic policy, and so they would rather Trump win a second term than Bernie Sanders win a first.
9
Since incumbency gives a candidate tremendous advantage, the number of primary candidates could be narrowed by widespread consensus that there should be an upper age limit on a first term presidential candidate. Its not realistic to believe that someone who is sworn in at the age of 78 will be able to perform through to the end of a second term, when they'll be 86 years old. I see only three Democratic presidential candidates running now that could reasonably be expected to win a second term.
This is no more of an age discrimination argument than the lower age limit already enshrined un our constitution.
@Greg You’re right: Tulsi Gabbard should be the nominee.
@David: Or Warren, or Buttigieg, or Klobuchar. Anybody that could stay chance of reelection a second term. 45 is the oldest fort term president, and the median age for that is 55 years, with Democrats tending to be younger. We need to be practical, or the White house is going to become the world's most elaborate assisted living facility, headed by a egomaniac wearing gold threaded adult diapers.
What am I missing? Did Sanders or did Sanders not participate in the making the rules for this go-around?
Do the rules say (or not say) that someone has to win a majority of the delegates in order to become the nominee? A majority, not a plurality, even if -- and especially if -- nobody has a majority after the first round of voting?
Is he trying to change the rules mid-stream? What did Bob Dylan have to say about that?
4
@dtm
He and some of his surrogates were part of the negotiations. They were easily outnumbered by the DNC/Hilarities.
The Super Delegates were left in to give the "Private Party" control over all. The Super's were knocked to the second vote as concession to Sanders et al.
He was never for Super's. It's how compromise works when one is the minority power.
3
People keep saying that if Sanders didn't get a majority of the votes then the majority of people are not for Sanders.
But that is true for all the other candidates as well.
9
@Independent Yes. That doesn’t change that no majority equals no guarantee of being nominated.
2
Just donated to Bernie again, and gonna go make some calls for him this afternoon! People power over the corrupt establishment hacks who lost us the White House, Supreme Court, and most state governments.
30
Everyone getting heated about this article.... some mention "why else would Russia support Sanders" and other alarmist ideas. Just go out and vote and don't waste your time on these what if articles. Then vote against Trump no matter who the nominee. Dividing the voters is what Trump AND Russia wants.
11
@Will Goubert
But we were told for years that Russia supported Trump. Now you're saying Russia supports Sanders. Why would Russian support both Sanders and Trump?
that's EXACTLY what Putin wants. he wants Sanders v. Trump. he wants to start a very bloody civil war in America.
I don't care who gets it, I will vote blue. Still have hopes for Warren but will vote for Bernie happily.
17
The DNC are willing to rig the system again.
Democrats are showing they do not believe in democracy unless they they stage the results in advance. America will reject them in 2020 as Democrats are showing they are not to be trusted.
8
Urgent message to the Democratic Party: you will lose power for a generation if you override a clear plurality.
15
No they won't. Democrats will always hate the Republican candidate more than they hate their own party's corruption. That alone will be enough to get them to vote for a Democrat in 2022, 2024 and every national election in perpetuity.
1
If the Democrats again sabotage Sanders, the Party is destroyed.
Ask yourself this question: Why, other than a corrupt loyalty to the donor class, would Democrats prefer either Billionaire Bloomberg (a Republican with huge flaws on women, blacks, & economic policy) or Trump to a progressive like Sanders?
I've now lost all respect for Ms. Warren, as it is clear she is turning the knife she put in Sanders' back with the women claim.
Bernie has consistently opposed the anti-democratic elite manipulation by the Superdelegates. His position in 2016 is NO DIFFEReNT than it is today. Warren knows that the DNC rules concessions on Superdelegates was NOT what Sanders sought, but the DNC elites desperate attempt to maintain control. Shame on the NYT and Warrant for
11
I've seen several comments like this one suggesting the Democratic establishment prefers Trump to Sanders. I would agree the DNC still appears to be incompetent, but I've yet to hear any Democrat actually say, suggest, imply, or even hint at this. The reason for interest in people like Bloomberg or Brown is to recapture conservative Democrats who voted for Trump last time. Someone as divisive as Sanders will generate a massive conservative turnout, which loses the presidency, both houses of Congress, state legislatures (the ones behind all the gerrymandering), governors, and judgeships. I mean, you wanna talk about destroying the party, Sanders will sink the entire fleet. My suggestion: beat Trump first, THEN address climate, healthcare, public education, jobs, etc. with progressives in subsequent elections. Trying to do everything at once will fail.
Because it worked out so well last time the Dem establishment suppressed Bernie, in favor of Hillary.
I used to be a solid Dem until 2016, when I was a Bernie supporter and was disappointed by the action of Debbie Wassarman-Schultz and other Dem elites to suppress Bernie. (This was revealed to us by a Russian hack of the DNC server, which I have to say I am very grateful for.)
The Democratic Party no longer deserves its name. Further ttempts to suppress Bernie -- in favor of Grandpa Joe, most likely -- will not only backfire in this election, but will drive away the millions of Bernie supporters who believe their candidate deserves the same chance as any.
17
@Unconventional Liberal
The Fix was also revealed by Donna Brazile:
"Brazile’s account is explosive for what it tells us — for the first time — about the nature of the fundraising agreement between Clinton and the DNC. What she charges is that the DNC, when starved for financial resources, agreed to trade a seemingly large part of its autonomy for Clinton’s help raising money — and that this agreement was inked in August 2015, long before voting in the 2016 Democratic primary had even begun."
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/2/16599036/donna-brazile-hillary-clinton-sanders
Donors can only give $2700 to an individual candidate - but with Hillary's Joint Fund Raising Agreement with the DNC, donors wrote checks to the DNC's Hillary's Victory Fund for $353,000, which then went into Hillary's pocket.
1
@Unconventional Liberal Because the loss of the Supreme Court for a generation is the appropriate penalty if Sanders isn't the nominee? The loss of voting rights, the loss or mutilation of Social Security, Medicare and Medicare, the bull-dozing of public lands, the wholesale denial of climate change (the effects of which are forever, not just four years), all these things would be appropriate penalties for not supporting Sanders?
Because that's exactly what you're suggesting.
Stunning to see the behind-the-scenes hysterics and machinations out in the open.
What is the Dem leadership thinking, no one is watching?
9
The fact that Bernie , again, is doping so well indicates that the establishment Democratic party is done.
7
Just wondering if the superdelegates will pledge not to vote for a billionaire candidate who bought his way into the primary process...
7
When will the DNC learn something! We are up against a two year old and no one knows how to handle him. Wasn't anything learned in the last election?
The people choose........not the party. If he has the numbers stand beside him. Anyone of them is better than trump.
These last debates were pathetic. A different format has been in need for a while. With all the mudslinging and interruptions going on it looks like the GOP debates where the one who won is the one that doesn't know how to debate.
These are all intelligent, articulate candidates, whoever told them to act like this is so out of step with the public and what we need and expect from them. This pony show is clearly being put on by people that aren't in touch with their constituents.
Now they aren't backing the popular candidate because they don't like him? Didn't Bernie have the popular votes in the last primary, but you pushed Hilary? Let the people decide, it's suppose to be our vote.
Anyone of them is better than what we have!
3
The DNC is looking to shoot themselves in the foot again by trying to prevent Bernie from becoming the nominee. And articles like this just go to show how the media is in on it. The people want real change with a real progressive candidate, just as the other side wanted change by electing a conman as president over tricky centrist elite Hillary Clinton.
4
This looks as if the party will do anything to hang on to the 6 and 7 figure jobs that being within the parties apparatus brings with it. Well, it doesn't matter. When the party itself goes on the trash heap, most of the pollsters and super delegates can go the republican party
5
Glad to know my vote counts!
1
Polls still show Bernie beating Trump in the General Election at the very least. Articles like this just further solidify my belief that the media hates Bernie too. He's a threat to the system and you know it.
5
Classic hypocrisy on display. The wealthy power-players in the democrat party recognize that a Bernie presidency might strip them of not only some of their power, but their wealth as well. IOW, progressive social and economic policies are great for the "little people" but super scary when they come to your own front door. Funny to watch.
7
Everyone has been saying that the Republican party is imploding, but it looks like it's actually the Democratic party that's being self-destructive here.
Talk about a circular firing squad. Well, more like a large blue firing squad aiming at the nation as a whole, being aided by a large red firing squad doing the same thing.
3
I'm sure none of these "officials" are under 50.
Come gather 'round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You'll be drenched to the bone.
If your time to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin'.
4
I wish they could just let us vote and let the chips fall where they may.
4
Democratic Party "leaders" better not mess up this election like they did in 2016. Voters do not want a repeat of the Hillary Clinton campaign.
4
Given Bloomberg’s debate statement that he “bought” the new 2018 Democratic Congresspeople who are now all superdelegates, the DNC should publish all the financial conflicts of interest the superdelegates have. How many have been funded by Bloomberg, etc.?
Voters deserve this transparency.
6
@M
I'm wondering how many in Charleston Debate audience were funded by Bloomberg, given (1) cost of tickets and (2) boos when Bernie spoke.
1
I'm already thinking of leaving the party after a lifetime being with the Democratic Party.
9
Did the DNC learning nothing from 2016? Tom Perez has been terrible for this party and needs to step down.
4
Not a word about the DNC’s active (anti-democratic?) support for Clinton over Sanders in 2016. You’d think that could provide some necessary and dare I say journalistic context to your claims about Bernie’s super delegate position back then.
Oh and great job verifying Warren’s claim about Bernie writing the rules. Would be a shame to just leave such a strong claim from a rival candidate hanging there unchecked as if it’s an apparent fact.
7
They'd rather Trump and the destruction of their own party.
1
@Anthony The Democratic Party is already destroyed: The AOC already stated that someone like her & Biden wouldn’t be in the same party in most European Countries. The Democratic Party is currently 3 wings: 1. Lefty/Commie: The AOC/Sanders; 2. Old Middle Left: Biden/Bloomberg; 3. Young Middle Left: Bootie-Judge/Amy K. The Leftists will never unite with the Middle Left. The ironic thing is that it took a life-long Democrat (Trump) to unite the Republican Party. The Democrat Leadership hopes that a life-long Republican (Bloomberg) will unite the Democrat Party. It won’t happen.
Sanders or I'll vote for Trump. I won't put up with this!
4
@Paula
Um, Sanders or not voting sends a clearer message, if that's how you want to proceed.
Easier to detect if the Dem vote drops while Trump's remains the same.
The Democrats have the guts to do what the Republicans should have done in 2016.
2
@Palma You mean: LOSE?
1
Bernie and his followers are going to hand trump a second term.
3
Good news. Sanders is too radical and much too old to be president of anything. Hey and what about that heart attack. No thank you.
2
It would be a mistake for Democratic party leaders to oppose the will of the American people.
4
It is a pity that most Americans continue to view socialism, only through the Soviet- cold war lens.,
4
But..But.. But I wanted someone to pay off my student loans! No fair!
2
Those democrats who would rather continue on the Trump train then allow Sanders, who is clearly the one the people want, to run and win...it is shameful, shortsighted, and shows that those dems are as corrupt and selfish as the Trumpists. It's about power, not the common good. Sanders really is about the common good, and so are all decent people.
3
This makes me want to vote for Sanders.
9
Lisa Lerer is the new Sydney Ember. I wonder who her father-in-law is? CEO of Hedge Fund XYZ?
7
@Blunt
Thank you for confirming what I've said since Ember started tagging Bernie.
The bias is shameful.
3
The candidates for the Democratic Party nomination have treated each other in the last two debates with a degree of animosity that can only be explained by their personal ambitions, since there are no serious differences in their policies. It is now quite likely that Senator Sanders will have a large plurality of delegates going into the convention. If he does not win on the first ballot, it is just as likely that he will not be the nominee because the delegates pledged to the other candidates and especially the super-delegates will coalesce around a more "moderate" candidate, possible Mayor Bloomberg. There will likely be a great deal of anger on the floor of the convention. Even the slightest spark, such as a minor push or an unkind phrase, could then ignite a terrible scene. All Americans can only hope that the convention organizers take the appropriate precautions.
This is painful to watch. First of all, I agree with those commenters who point out that this column does not say that Sanders would be denied the nomination should he enter the convention with a majority of delegates. That is an important distinction. Secondly, I trust that several candidates will read the writing on the wall after Super Tuesday and drop out. Then the remaining primaries can determine the most viable candidate to represent the Democratic party in the election. Hopefully we can at least agree that no outcome is more frightening than Trump's reelection. And, finally, it is clear that either the Democratic party sees fit to adopt ranked voting in future primaries or it will see the formation of a third national party. Maybe it's time for three parties regardless. Because this approach is leading us straight toward the abyss.
6
We need five political parties.
6
I have a serious question. If we're still stuck with the Electoral College how are five parties going to work in electing a President? To me, the EC forces two major parties.
If the candidate with a plurality of votes doesn't get selected in a possible convention, I and lots of my friends will exit the democratic party once and for all. Status quo, business as usual for the elite will not stand for another 4 years. Enough is enough! The US is supposed to be a democracy, but this ridiculous process has just about nothing to do with representing the peoples' will anymore...banana republic!
17
Be our guest
The old democratic horses are stomping in their gilded stalls. Time to turn them out to pasture or risk a backlash stronger than the glue from their aged remains.
14
Bernie Sanders is NOT a registered Democrat. His listing on the current U.S. Senate roster says he is “Independent,” Not “Democrat” or even “Social Democrat.”
Why does he insist on, and why does the Democratic Party allow his running for POTUS on Democratic ballots, rather than on a state’s “Independent” ballot or “Social Democrat” ballot?
6
Who cares? Voters love him and he is leading by ten points in the national polls (real clear politics).
Wake up.
5
You cannot win as a 3rd party candidate in a two party system! The electoral college makes sure of that.
1
@Worke
The fact that Bloomberg is a "Democrat" and Sanders is not should tell you everything you need to know about how desperately the party needs reform. People respect Sanders because he sticks to his beliefs instead of bending to wealthy donors. That's what integrity looks like.
3
The Clinton wing of the Democratic party just can't seem to stop inserting itself where it no longer belongs. It's the Clintonistas who are fomenting this idea but they are now likely in the minority, which is all the better for everyone else.
16
Agree, wholeheartedly. The Clintons must exit the stage. They introduced the failed neo-liberal program to the Democratic Party in the 1990s, had a good run, got rich while the rest of us got poorer. Time to go. The country needs a new direction.
5
Been reading about the impending demise of the Republican party for years now. I never bought that ridiculous prediction, it seems to be going pretty darn well for those reactionary, money-over-country (well, money over everything). In the meantime, the Democrats are disintegrating before our eyes, all by their lonesome. The way things are going, Trump is unbeatable. All that will be left will be the hand-wringing repetitive analyses about How Could This Happen Again!? What a bunch of ...
3
Bernie will win and reunite the party under a social democratic banner. FDR style. Bill Clinton and even Barack Obama inflicted huge damage on the party by moving it to the right to the point that the difference between the economic policies of the two parties were minimized. Trump found it extremely easy to dismantle the few things still in place from the old datly.
Bernie in 2020 for anyone with a sense of fairness and justice. John Rawls is the man he follows not Karl Marx.
5
These are the same people who complained Sanders supporters did not show sufficient party loyalty. Such hypocrisy. Are they the least bit self-aware?
13
Superdelegates are a relic of an elitist society and along with the college vote needs to be demolished.
But I fear too many excited voters will be too co placenta to turn up in the primaries and inadvertently help the establishment hold on to its undemocratic stranglehold on power.
4
If the Democratic Party plays dirty with Sanders like they did in 2016 ... I will vote for Trump again. Be warned.
9
@WATSON
But don't vote just for Trump, also vote out the swing state moderate Democrats. We will start a new People's Party in 2024.
This is sickening behavior from the "Democratic" Party leaders. Let The People decide!!! "Government by the people" is the credo of our democracy. If Bernie Sanders gets the most votes, he should win the nomination. Period.
10
This a joke to ease tension about the epidemic, Right? A risk of damage to the Dems concerning a nominee? Did your paper cover their final debate? It was beyond ludicrous. Any one of their Candidates is not qualified to run anything let alone be a U.S. President. The response will be "oh, there are Senators & millionaires, etc". Living in alternate Universe would be better than Warren as a Commander in Chief. Want to take a risk? Find a new candidate somehow. Either way - Trump in a Landslide!
4
The stupidity here; is that the intra-Party damage that is inflicted by not having the largest delegate holder getting the nomination is just as real down the ballot as at the top of the ticket.
There may be more "moderate" interests who own their delegates like Speaker Pelosi owns James Clyburn, her pet Poodle (that she's lent to Joe Biden). But those down ballot Democrats in Congressional Districts carried by Donald Trump, need enthusiastic Sanders supporters to save their down the ballot seats, if they are to have a prayer of staying in the House and keeping their Democrat party in the majority.
There's no way that Biden or any of his cheap clones can bring out Sanders supporters (after the convention) for a multi-State late-October "hold the Fort" effort, down the ballot. When, Sanders has already been sold down the river, before labor day at the Party's National Convention in July.
It is a Catch-22 situation. And Democrats should have the courage (that the Republicans had in 2016), to ride it out with the Bernie-Bros. And see if they manage to make it into the White House.
Romney-Bush Republicans despised Trump's people in 2016. But without them no Republican would have made it to the White House especially not Jeb Bush.
And kicking Trump out of the Convention, would have lost that 24% point advantage that Trump gave the Party in non-college young white men. I emphasize young, white men.
The "Never Sanders" Democrats, are missing this stark reality.
8
Just like in 2016, the DNC's short-sighted, back-firing agenda will again hand Trump another victory this November.
7
It seems to me you buried the lede. The top should read “Bernie Sanders Crafted the Rules for the Democratic Primary, Now He wants to Change Them to Suit Himself.” How very Trumpian, no wonder he also applauds other authoritarians.
7
@Bernhard Gunther He did not.
1
Where’s Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to help us understand what’s best?
Rather than destroying just the Democratic Party, could we please finally kill the two-party system? As the old wasps fade, it’d be nice to have some real changes, and a better model of representation.
6
Smells of the Hilary group again. Bernie is a force. Will another defeat wake them up?
8
"people are worried", No only those sellout Democrats who made millions off of Wall St and real estate and who have abandoned New Deal principles of the party are worried, a.k.a DINO's or Republicans in Democrats clothing. They are scared that they will have to cough off some of their ill-gotten- gains from the last 20 years. New Deal? whats that? Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Housing assistance, Food Stamps- what are those? To think only 4 big donors tried to put together an anti- Bernie PAC... we know who actually runs things in the party. Here's a word of advice to these mainstream Democrats pretending to be Democrats: you can run but you can't hide... or buy , cheat or steal out of this mess that you have turned the Democratic Party into.. time to pay the dues that have been long overdue.
15
The Democrats are doomed. They must let this run its course, whether or not a brokered convention, then support their candidate, whoever it is. They just aren't smart enough to figure that out.
3
The DNC knows they are going to lose but at this point is just deciding which of these dim bulbs will cause the least negative impact to down ballot candidates.
3
@Jonathan
The democratic party should cut a deal with its Left. It will allow their candidate, Bernie, to be the nominee if the Left takes responsibility for the party's losses.
Time for the Left to grow up. There's no such thing as a free lunch. Literally or figuratively.
Do not bend the rules to fit your notion of who the candidate should be. If Sanders qualifies, then he is the nominee. He’s not my first choice but if he wins the nomination then he’s my guy. If there’s a way the democratic mucky mucks can lose in November, they’ll find four of them.
5
@J
The DNC Democrats often look dumb as they invariably find a way to lose, but that assumes they want to win. If you see them as snake in the grass Republicans, everything makes sense.
This is absolutely insane. These people are worried about Sanders not beating Trump? Oh I see, these people are the experts. These people are the ones who knew how to beat Trump in 2016, is that right? There must be something more to this. This sounds like corruption at some high levels for such anti-democratic talk to be promulgated...
9
Poll released by Muhlenberg College today: In Pennsylvania, Sanders beats Trump 49-46. Biden v Trump or Warren v Trump is a dead heat, 47-47. Trump beats Klobuchar 45-44. Trump beats Buttigieg 46-45. Trump beats Bloomberg 48-45.
Why is the DNC undermining the front-runner, when the front-runner has the best chance to win the most important state? This is political malpractice!
11
@Rob
It's just the DNC Republicans doing their job.
1
"... splintered primaries on Super Tuesday and beyond, where the liberal Mr. Sanders edges out moderate candidates who collectively win more votes."
Nevada voted 60% for progressives. If you think you know what will happen in all states over the next weeks, you need to think again.
Nobody knows, but we do know Bernie's polling numbers just keep getting better - tops/tied with Biden among blacks, far ahead among Latinx-ers, for example.
5
@John D.
According to Slate, polling of independents shows the majority *do not* support a socialist. Sanders will never win with just the Leftwing, and he is alienating moderates.
Political reality has a moderate bias.
@AACNY, that's your bias, AND it has zero, zip, nada to do with my comment. I'm talking about the primaries, and the statement in the article is questionable at best.
1
Frankie say relax. All you old "moderate" Dems are fretting about nothing. Bernie has amped up the turnout enough to where he will get the nomination. In November we will kick DJT out of the White House and into the "Big House."
Not to worry....We got this
10
Bernie is our middle finger to the Democratic Party. Win or lose in November, it's time to redefine and rebuild the Democratic Party. All these 70 and 80 year old politicians need to leave the stage. They didn't get anything done. Housing, medical care, and college are unaffordable or so expensive that there is no escaping deep debt for life. Forget about any type of meaningful career. We've reduced to human widgets to use and discard as needed. Democracy is failing the average American. I wish we had a more viable candidate but Bernie is it and I'm okay with it since Trump is getting re-elected anyway.
6
The Democratic Establishment got Hillary Clinton elected President, so they must know something.
Right?
Here the Democratic Establishment goes again, stealing defeat from the jaws of victory.
How many elected seats have the Democrats lost nationwide in the last 10 to 15 years?
Thousands.
And you think we should listen to the Democratic Establishment now?
MB
8
You can be sure that Trump and the Republicans are creating an attack arsenal of nicknames, negative sayings, historical “errors”, exaggerations, and flat out lies for every and any possible Presidential nominee similar to or more toxic than they had in defeating Hillary Clinton.
Every one of them is thusly vulnerable, so don’t overemphasize Bernie’s so-called issues. That is so disingenuous and unself-examined and is just a fig leaf for Factionalism and your personal choices.
Most candidates will not melt away like Senator Al Franken did.
Bernie Sanders is resolute and capable of outmaneuvering those scurrilous personal and “electability” attacks as he managed those of the South Carolina Debate. Vote for a future you can believe in. Don’t settle for the crystal ball of “electability”! Bernie is a winner!
5
Again- ranked voting in primaries would solve this problem. Crickets....
4
Wow . . . Mondale looks really fit and healthy! Great pic!
1
Wow.
One hopes that these are just musings intended to damage Sanders’ campaign ahead of Super Tuesday and that Democrats are not stupid enough to deny Sanders the nomination if he has the plurality of delegates.
There is no better way to ensure a second Trump term than to alienate 20-40 percent of the Democratic base.
And the “white knight” options they propose? Michelle Obama??? Nancy Pelosi??? Sherrod Brown???
That’s insane.
But the reality is that Sanders will probably outperform the DNC’s predictions on Super Tuesday, as he did in Nevada, and get the majority of delegates. Then they can be honest... what really scares them is not losing with Sanders at the top of the ticket, it’s winning with Sanders at the top of the ticket.
7
To the DNC:
This is what democracy looks like. All the handwringing, fear mongering, and hysteria over Sanders is getting ridiculous. Chris Matthews compared Sanders victories to a Nazi invasion and Joe Scarborough compared Sanders to a 9/11 hijacker and Donald Trump.
Instead of freaking out, the DNC would best serve the country by taking the concerns of Sander’s constituency seriously instead of dismissing them as fringe voters. Instead of constantly faulting Sanders for being a niche candidate, the onus is on the DNC to grow support for his candidacy.
I’m partial to Warren, but if Sanders has the most delegates, then Sanders is the nominee. For the DNC to do anything other than honor the will of the people, will result in Trump’s re-election and alienate voters for generations.
6
So, a fair choosing of a candidate is not going to happen in the Democrat Party.
I feel people were correct when they said it was a fixed choice.
This is what Putin and his ilk do...
2
The Democrat establishment and super delegates trying to rig the convention in order to stop Sanders are shameful. They ARE the swamp just as much as trump and the Republicans.
6
One thing people forget, or take for granted, is that any Democrat elected will right the wrongs of Trump. But that simply ignores the past 50 yrs, where Republicans have consistently pushed the Dems to the right. Whose to say Pete or Biden wouldn’t just be a Trump light, albeit without the bombast? Vote for areal change and don’t fret about “electability”—a fools stand brought to you by corporate America
4
Didn’t they learn anything last time?
2
This is exactly why the Republicans irrespective of the incompetence of their President, are laughing. Sitting in their rocking chairs picking their teeth drinking moonshine having a ball.
Democrats you had better stop bickering. I pray the youth in college those who are voting the first time forgive us older generation.
My granddaughter and her friends are prepared to turn up the heat. Democratics you better look listen and hear them, otherwise packup go home you will be wiped out by a President and his minions.
Im sicken by the display lack of respect you guys have. Hitting below the belt. Going back years to question in this new decade. what was said years ago.
Without sin cast the first stone. Oh to be a fly
on the wall.
1
All Democrats have done since the 2016 election is scream about Russian interference in the election, yet those same Democrats are about to nominate a Socialist to run for President. Oh the irony.
1
Respect the will of the people or we, and our planet, will be finished off by Trump and his buddies.
2
Oh Christ, here we go again. NY times article today. We were just talking about this, and how I was shocked at how they rigged it last time. Now they want to do it again? Not acceptable. They want to kill their own party instead of listening to the. Others. Those d””m establishment figures. They will put Bloomberg the loser or Biden as the candidate instead of listening to the party.nI was on the fence, now I’m definitely voting for Bernie.
5
I am a pre boomer who voted for JFK.
Bernie makes me feel as if i am back in the 1950's watching an old left winger on a soap box.
I also can't stand his voice .drooling and hand wave talking.
Joe Biden speaks as if he had a mild brain stroke, Warren can't help bringing her own personal life to us as an example of hardwork or suffering from her era.
Bloomberg is too stone faced ,makes one feel one has to be vetted to speak to him.
Mayor Pete way to young ,gets lost in unscripted statistical questions ,his cute little boy look against King Trump ,wont work.
I won't mention the other to vague candidates but feel that we Democrats are screwed.
Shame on the Party leaders for giving us this selection of background people not foreground people.
1
A very large number of Democratic House members have already publicly stated that they could not possibly support Sanders for president in their own Congressional Districts, even if Sanders wins the Democratic nomination for President. The nomination of Sanders would clearly be disastrous for the entire Democratic Party, the nation, and the world. The world economy would collapse, as currently indicated by the fears in global stock markets.
3
@David Replace "Sanders" with "Trump" and it could be a comment from four years ago.
Read Farhad Manjoo today. He's 100% right. We need to stop pretending we know the outcome, this is 2020.
3
This whole concept of "stopping Bernie Sanders" is just incredible. Has the Democratic Party ever tried to stop their front runner? Sometimes I think the NYT is just lost in some kind of elitist dreamworld. Sanders is the only candidate of the whole bunch who has any chance of beating Trump. Period. The rest are totally lame. As it stands now, Sanders is poised to win every single California delegate, since none of the other candidates are polling as high as 15%.
But the party is going to "stop him"? Please! He is a fundraising juggernaut and has the most passionate supporters of any candidate. So all this talk is just nonsense. If the party does take the nomination from him somehow and thwart the will of the voters, as that goofball Tom Friedman has recently suggested, it will be the end of the party.
14
The headline alone alerts readers to expect more breathless drivel about the election from the New York Times. What process should the Democratic Party have if no candidate receives a majority of delegates? What if there is a tie? What if? What if? We have barely begun the primaries, and the New York Times is already trying to depress the vote by inflaming passions over outcomes. With friends of democracy like the New York Times, who needs enemies?
8
Are we bringing back the smoke-filled room?
7
"2,375.5 delegates"
How does one come up with .5 delegate......?
1
"...the liberal Mr. Sanders..."
Sanders is about as "liberal", as his Nicaraguan and Cuban soulmates. He is a leftist ideologue, NOT a liberal.
3
@Peter
Republican talking point.
Sanders only wants to give us universal healthcare, university, Paris Climate Agreement like all the other first world industrial countries have had for years.
People in those countries are shaking their heads and wondering what is wrong with us.
Actually listen to what he says.
And we spent $3.5 Trillion for healthcare last year. The money is there.
3
Geez Louise, I just want to scream at the democrats sometimes. ow can so many supposedly smart people keep snatchign defeat from the jaws of victory.
Medicare for all and the Green New Deal are big-picture ideas that ANY democrat can get behind.
If the choice is between Joe and Bernie, I worry that Joe just doesn't have what it takes to face off against Trump.
If your;e worried about Bernie being alienating to centrists, then set him up with a crack team starting with Klobuchar as VP.
6
If Sanders wins and is robbed of the nomination, he probably has enough supporters to run as an independent. Many outraged voters could be on his side and, Trump will be re-elected by a landslide.
If the Democrats respect the votes and Sanders is nominated, he will hijack the party like Trump did with the GOP. But Sanders is not totalitarian or corrupt (just annoying).
Why Democrats accept that some of them have a vote with more wight than the everyday voter? Afraid that primaries voters might be stupid?
5
Now I know how the Palestinians feel. Democracy is fine....as long as we dont vote the wrong way!
12
Trump is right. Elections are rigged!
5
Heavens to Murgatroyd If you take Sanders out of the mix,
who is the DNC left with,
a bunch of sorry losers
10
The DNC, lock 'em up.
6
Any funny business on the part of the Democratic machine that utterly fails to understand the tenor of the times will be met with massive resistance as Democratic voters sit out the election or defect to the Republicans.
Hey Democratic machine operators: Don't do stupid stuff!
4
The Anti-Democratic Party...
6
The Democratic Party needs to take a look at the Reader Picks on this comment page.
Their trial balloon is going down in flames.
7
@McGloin
Oh boy, are you reading the situation wrong. The NYT comment section is like twitter: It bears no relationship to reality
2
It's all about the survival of this country as a Democracy - not a criminal Autocracy. Trump MUST be soundly defeated along with the Republican Senate at all costs, even if the Democrats think they are losing Party identity. History will tell otherwise and praise them.
Bernie Sanders would, in an ideal world, make an excellent President, but so would all the other D candidates. The problem is that I do not think Bernie would win against that orange moron sociopath and his cult. WIN FIRST with a unified platform, then fine-tune it to achieve those good things that Americans need, not what Republicans steal and pervert.
All this petty child-like squabbling is counter-productive - even if you're in second grade. You are defeating yourselves - something has to give or you are wasting your time. Losing to a narcissistic sociopath who would destroy this Democracy is a disgrace - remember that above all. Do you want to see that ugly orange face and hear that deranged, shrill whine for another four years? Do you want to see the Democracy for which our forefathers died taken over by a disciple of Putin? Do you want to see the Rule of Law erased and criminals running our entire government, backed by the NRA?
You know what you have to do - now DO IT!
3
They are selfish, reckless and stupid, and they are lying about why they are against him.
Sanders is probably the only one we who can beat Trump.
The establishment doesn’t want him because they are in the pocket of big money.
8
Maybe, if there's a brokered convention, the brokers should figure out which candidate excites voters the most or whose policies are supported by a majority of the population. There should be measures for each of those.
2
What none of these self-serving party morons explain is, who else has a path? They whine about a plurality? Which of their beloved bootlicker candidates is even close to one? We're not talking Bernie vs. Hillary here, we're talking Bernie vs. a cast of also-rans at this point. And the centrists won't winnow themselves down to one choice because like the party bosses, they're venal filth in it to enrich their networks of donors.
So what could superdelegates possibly do except throw their support behind someone with no popular support and weaken chances of victory in the general? And that is what they want to do! They'd rather have Trump than Sanders. They'd rather have Trump! We need to see who the enemy is.
11
If Sanders has a plurarity & doesn't get the nomination what will he do?
Stand as an independent or fully support whoever is nominated?
The machinations of Dem' party officials have a distinct whiff of Stalinism about them.
8
@VambomadeSAHB
It will depend.
If Sanders has 28%, Bloomberg 25% and Buttigieg 23%, I don't think anyone would make a big deal about a centrist being consensus lead with a progressive running mate.
If Sanders has 35%, Bloomberg 22% and Buttigieg 15%, on the other hand it's a much harder case to argue against Sanders.
They should really organize a run-off if none of the candidates gets 50%. Then there's no discussion or bitterness after.
1
I am of the school which believes strongly that if Sen. Sanders waltzes-into the convention with 49% of the delegates needed for the nomination, it will be stolen from him on the second ballot. "The rules" will be cited, along with "Well, Bernie AGREED to the rules!" and "b-b-But ___ GOT MORE VOTES!" All context removed, conveniently.
That having been said, I also have always been of the mind that "Vote Blue No Matter Who!" was a con from the first time this well-constructed (and likely, focus-tested to death) phrase appeared. Which was a year and a half-out from the 2020 Democratic Convention.
And when has this ever happened, in the past?
Ask yourself why it was necessary, so ridiculously early in the game, to inoculate Democrats against a potentially lousy nominee. Amazing how the Party machers somehow knew in advance that we would be required to, in the immortal words of Dr. Mrs. Biden, "hold your nose" and vote for whoever has the "-D".
When a "consensus" candidate gets the nomination, and then roundly Trumped, you can bet it will still be Bernie's fault, as well as all those misbehaving adolescents who stayed home, after you instructed them with grave authority that they'd better not.
News flash: scold 'em all you'd like. They really don't care what you think of them. And they won't be there on November 3rd for Bloomberg, Biden or a White Knight to be named later.
8
Democrats universally praise those Republicans who took stands against Trump prior to their convention and then maintained their opposition through the election and up to this day. I still consider them principled people.
I am not comparing Bernie Sanders as a person or a politician to that disgusting excuse in the Oval Office, or that he would be anywhere near as unfit for office. But, I really want to expunge that narcissistic creep - and his ilk - from government, now. I believe Sanders is not the best candidate - not even the 2nd or 3rd best - to get that job cone.
I was sick for a week after the 2016 election, and lost sleep contemplating 4 years of Trump; and, he's even worse than I imagined he would be back then. I don't want any part of "why don't we just do an experiment here with our country's future on the line?" if it can be avoided.
If Bernie's supporters are so butt-hurt if he doesn't get the nomination that they will stay home on election day, then they are idiots.
6
Or they are principled. Bernie supporters last time beat Hillary only yo have the nomination given to Hillary after losing. I voted her. Big mistake. Glad I didn’t voted for Trump though.
2
@DonnaS Trump alone vs. the entire Democratic party + a Republican traitor?
Trump's winning campaign writes itself.
No, no, no! Moving a dozen Dem senators to the cabinet will gut the Dem side of the aisle. Instead, if a Dem wins the White House, s/he should appoint as many Republican senators to the cabinet as possible, and then fire all of them as soon as their senate replacements are installed.
This is literally the only thing that will prevent me from "blue, no matter who". If Bernie loses fair and square, I'll hold my nose and vote for Biden, Bloomberg, or Buttigieg, or any other longshot blue tie. If, however, he goes into a brokered convention with a plurality of the votes but not enough delegates to push him over, I don't see the DNC not putting its thumb on the scale and simultaneously shooting itself in the foot, and I don't think I could bring myself to show up if I don't feel my vote was properly represented. What else would you expect to happen? The refrain is that 'Bernie Bros' stayed home on election night in 2016, and it was just enough in just the right areas that Hillary was able to lose an election that was practically in her pocket. They're kind of damned if they do, and only potentially damned if they don't put their thumb on the scale. Bernie is far less of a risk than willfully entering into that situation again. It's literally the only way to GUARANTEE Trump wins.
I've been registered as a Democrat for almost 20 years, but I've never considered myself a member of the party. I'm a liberal who votes Democrat, but I don't see the value of subscribing to a party-- that's kind of the idea of liberalism, that we are free of thought, not locked down into idealogical bubbles. This would be the final straw for me.
6
This rigging is of no surprise. First and foremost the lust for a well financed candidate (s) has brought us to the state. A state of denial. A state in which the party has become a colossal corporate-state party. Heck, even a limited voters financing plan for Democratic candidates could have been initiated four years ago to avoid dark money via billionaires, wealthy elites, corporations and superdelegates from polluting our process.
What so galling is that we have the DNC that has allowed a ridiculous primary process, has needlessly interfered in the process and who has known a debacle of this type was possible. And the about to resign leader of the DNC Tom Perez has shown his incompetence and or unwillingness to manage a fair and clean process. He even broke the rules to allow Billionaire Mayor Mike to buy his way into the debates and act as a straw-man and muddy the process even more to stop Sanders or Warren from getting the nomination. And there’s the evermore inexperienced corporatist Mayor Pete who has spent millions of corporate dollars on his vanity campaign only to poll near zero with minority voters. He too is in the race to draw-off votes from anywhere and everywhere starting with VP Biden. What corruption.
Now reality has hit the Superdelegates the party is in flux and Sanders is on the move and they are willing to usurp the Vote from BS or Warren to stay in power. Wait until they crush dissenting delegates at the convention. Repeat of 68’ anybody.
8
@Sendan agree fully. Dems are a dying party, have been for about 60 yrs now. I think this will be the final beat of the heart, if a plurality is ignored at the convention. We may very well get a viable 3rd party resulting from the dust after Trump gets his 2nd term, and possibly 3rd and 4th...
2
@fast/furious from DC (who fell out of love with Bernie because of Castro’s human life improvements in Cuba)
How can you be so superficial? Castro gave his 99 percenters a superlative Education and Healthcare system not even remotely commensurate with the poverty of the country (100 percent correlated with the US Embargo). Bernie stated a truth. He did not endorse Castro or his politics. He just stated a fact.
You don’t like truth? Statement of facts? What is it that made you all of a sudden lose faith in Bernie?
By the way, do you know ANYTHING about what happened in Cuba before and after the Revolution? Do you know that under Batista, Cuba was known as the whore house of the USA?
Do you know how many times the CIA tried to assassinate Castro? Including with exploding cigars?
Bernie for President in 2020. With or without your vote.
10
@Blunt
It's funny how you purport to rely on facts, truth and evidence, and then you throw out big, obviously false whoppers like saying that Cuba's poverty is "100 percent correlated with the US Embargo," which is a lie.
Interesting that the original comment by Fast/Furious moved up in the chronology to give it even more visibility. LOL.
2
I despair when reading these comments. It's as if we are pitting one cult against the other - Trump-ites and Sanders-ites - and to hell with the fate of the country!
Trump has already swallowed the Republican Party, now the Sanders contingent wants to make the Democratic Party the Party of Sanders.
They put Trump in office in 2014 because their man didn't get the nomination and they weren't willing to vote for the Democratic candidate - and now they are going to repeat that fiasco?
I am glad I am old and have no children. This country will not be worth living in after four more years of Trump.
2
@Judith Bartletti ACTUALLY, a horrible candidate named Hillary Clinton is what put Trump in office. Everyone I know hated her in liberal Cali, and we all, including me, voted for her. People just are not willing to do it a 2nd time. It is time to let the youth have the leadership. You will get to die at some point soon with the biosphere still relatively intact, whereas the youth may very well perish. We need a progressive, change-oriented party to survive. And yes, Sanders is the only True Democrat in the field, as very few exist anymore in the party. FDR would roll over in his grave at comments like yours. Are you a Republican, btw?
1
This is starting to sound like 2016 all over again. It’s going to condemn the entire world to four more years of Trump just because the Democratic establishment is in a snit about the S-word. The government philosophy you have now obviously isn’t working. People want a social democracy and it’s giving the old establishment on both sides of the aisle the vapours.
5
The Dems who would tear the party apart with their claim that “Bernie Can’t Win” are really arguing a self-fulfilling prophecy. If Bernie is the nominee, the Dems who claim to dislike Trump, but sit on their asses, are the only people who can stop Bernie from winning the Election. Trump, at best has 43% of the electorate. He only wins if a large chunk of the remaining electorate fails to vote. Once again Dems are their own worst enemy.
9
The grand poo-bahs of the Democratic Party, once again have it all wrong. If they repeat their same mistake of 2016, they'll get the same outcome in 2020.
Right now no one is focussing on what's good for the Party, or the US, they're only focussing on their egos.
Not that there's enough maturity or motivation right now, nor is there likely to be any. The results of the next primaries up to and including Super Tuesday will only fan the flames of vanity instead of providing the motivation for strategic reasoning to a national win in November.
It is an irrefutable fact in any democratic election process that you can't win unless you get your voters to the ballot box. Before worrying about anything else, some Democrats of reason and rationality should figure out how they do that. If they chuck Bernie outright they will lose voters, and perhaps the same with others; so how do you keep your voters regardless of who you choose as the nominee?
Secondly, narrow the field immediately to those candidates who should be given serious consideration. Steyer and Bloomberg should be out; now. They are only spoilers.
Next, who can excite the country? Bernie certainly has in a way that can't be denied. Maybe it's time to create two "dream teams" and let them finish the primaries. One for the progressives, Bernie and Elizabeth, and one for the moderates, Pete and Amy.
Joe, as your good friend Barack has already said, "You don't have to do this."
Focus on winning guys, not losing.
244
@Robit17 Steyer and Bloomberg and all the rest are the fall back plan for the party, the way they will force a 2nd vote at the convention.
Look for them to all stay in and make it much harder for Sanders or any one else to get a majority of the votes and then the super delegates can decide it at the convention.
Remember that in the eyes of the party there are 2 important loyalty factors that actually are of equal importance to the actual vote count:
1. Can the candidate bring in revenue (i.e. corporate sponsors) for the Democratic party in future races.
2. Are the loyal to and beholden to the party. To show that they need to accept large amounts of money from the party itself and it's major donors.
As far as the Democratic Party is concerned Sanders was never a Democrat because he didn't take their campaign money and they think he will hurt the revenue stream of the party by driving away corporate interests.
Remember that beyond winning an election the Democratic party has it's personal interests at stake also some of which have little to do with electing a president or any one else for that matter. They have an agenda of laws and spending that has noting to do with voters in many cases but a lot to do with lobbyists.
25
@Ben Jordan You are exactly right, Ben. And it is also why we Bernie Sanders voters support Bernie. It is also why both parties are failing and falling apart. Voters are sick and tired of politicians who are owned by and corrupted by their wealthy donors. This is NOT how democracy or America is supposed to work. It's just not.
17
@Robit17 Amy is not a moderate. She is a very conservative democrat - more conservative than Bloomberg. Look at how she votes.
10
I would like to propose a hypothetical to Bernie supporters.
What if the candidates running for President were 3 liberals, Warren, Sanders, and candidate Y.
To keep it easy, let's assume of the 3 liberals, Y and Warren each get 20% of the delegates and Bernie got 25%
They got 65% combined
Then let's assume a moderate candidate (say Bloomberg) got 35%
According to the argument Bernie and his supporters are making, Bloomberg- should win
They are saying that even though, in this case, the liberals are dividing up a majority of the vote, and therefore even though, in this case, 65% of voters did not choose him (and we do not know if they would have) that he should automatically get the nomination.
This is the argument they are making for Bernie.
So, if it is not your own candidate who benefits does your position still seem the most logical?
4
I see your point, but it might be moot. Sanders and Warren today have a combined delegate total of 51. The remaining, more moderate candidates, have a total of 46. If this continues, more voters are voting for the progressive candidate.
3
@Meg You just made the case for getting rid of this idiotic process that doesn't work any more and I mean the entire election is broken. Who's addressing that fact?
1
@Betty
If you look at states that allowed Independents to vote in the primary (Nevada did not and only 5% of voters bothered to show up) the opposite was true.
About 55% percent went with the moderates where independents could also vote so we have to see how this plays out in more states.
Also, Independents are the largest voting block at about 40% will be voting in the GE) they are the tie breakers in swing states.
3
For Democrats to take the White House, the Democratic Party needs to first fix the Republican Party. This can be done by running a moderate candidate who appeals to the Republican base. Democrats will vote for anyone-but-Trump (and anyone-but-Sanders for many). If Republicans have the same acceptable option, Trump will be gone. In 2024, the Democrats can run a more to-the-left candidate.
4
Noooooooo
Are you thinking of Mitt Romney?
@Richard Feldman This has to be the most ridiculous idea yet. Democratic party has only been trying this since the true Democrat days of FDR. The country has been failing ever since.
I need to quickly address a facile argument I keep seeing printed on the internet.
"If Bernie only gets a plurality of delegates, it means a majority of voters did not choose to vote for him -- this explicitly indicates that a majority of voters do NOT want Bernie. "
If you adhere to this rationale, then you have to acknowledge that the reasoning is more applicable to literally every single other candidate than it is Sanders. This isn't up for conjecture or spin. If you believe it's unfair that more voters didn't vote for him than did, you have to acknowledge that even fewer voters voted for anyone else.
25
@DataCrusader
Not logical -
One does not know who 'most voters' would actually support in your scenario - all we know is that he did not get majority support
This is why in some places the 2 top candidates have a runoff.
In such a runoff, the 2nd place candidate could win by a huge majority if most voters had chosen candidates similar to him/or her in policy positions in the first round but the vote was simply divided up.
5
@Meg That's what happened in the French election. Macron and Le Pen were very close in the first round (within 3pp), but Macron won convincingly in the second round as the voters for the other candidates overwhelmingly went for Macron.
5
@Meg It is exactly logical. My scenario is the current framework, and even if it were hypothetical, the case the the person with the most votes should lose the election to someone with less votes flies in the face of the "most voters didn't vote for them" argument.
As far as the red herring, we don't have a runoff in this situation. The seat is awarded by parties other than voters.
What if Bernie does not get a plurality but one of the other candidates does and the percentage between the two is 5%? Will Bernie's supporters be willing to name the nominee based on a such a plurality.
Ha Jolly Ha! Of course not. Why? Because the rules do not allow for such a selection.
Neither should Mr. Sanders disciples expect any of the other candidates to accept a simple plurality for Bernie.
I am getting the feeling that many people commenting do not understand the difference between a plurality and a majority.
5
Surprised, that DNC even entertained Bernie to represent himself as a democratic candidate considering he still considers himself as an independent. Mr. Sanders then becomes a trojan horse candidate to take the party in a different direction. If one thinks about it, there was a news recently that intelligence indicated foreign interference to prop Bernie. So if the moderate democratic voters then switch to GOP vote, then that would have been the best thought-out coup. GOP getting new voters, significant amount of voters.
1
Bernie appears set on blowing up the Democratic Party. Compromise, reaching out to moderates, helping candidates in tight races—not part of his DNA. I don’t think WINNING THE ELECTION matters as much to Bernie as being the one true Messiah. Do we really want for more years of a blisteringly angry old New Yorker?
@Hari If Bernie represents the democratic party I would expect the house to be lost also.
Sanders has earned the nomination. No one else is even close. If the Party leaders pick someone on their own, I won't vote for that person. It would probably be better in the long run to vote for Trump to teach the Big Shots a lesson.
5
Only three states have voted! Pretty sure people in the other 47 states would like to weigh in before Bernie is anointed the messiah.
3
@Paula Many people are going to do this. DNC, I think wants it. To the elites, at least Trump will make them more money.
Bernie is no more radical than was FDR. He's been working his whole career to strengthen and bring the New Deal up to date for this Century's challenges.
But, for the last 40 years, the Republican party, aided and abetted by the establishment, corporate Dems, have been working successfully to undo FDR's values, programs and societal benefits.
It's time to get back to strong Democratic values and a vigorous fight for them. Or at least what I grew up believing were the Party's values.
What is so frightening to the Party about that?
19
@David Keller
If you like those ideas, vote for Warren; she actually gets things done.
If you want to listen to a sickly old man who has never accomplished anything after 30 years in Congress, bark at the moon for another 4 years, vote for Bernie
for the record, if the party deprives Bernie of the nomination at an undemocratic brokered convention, I will not be voting for the "nominee" in the general. if these people believe that Trump is preferable to Bernie, they should go for it
11
Every Democratic member of the house is a superdelegate. Bernie will take lots and lots of districts by over 50%. How does a house member explain to their constituents that they voted against the candidate that their district gave over 50% of their support to? How does that member of the house argue they are supporting the desires of their district? I've ready many concerns about down ballot impact. Imagine you are a Democratic rep to the house and you vote against your district at the convention. Will you get down ballot support then? This cuts both ways.
8
On one hand I am not happy about this internal division; on the other, should the party agree on a nominee, that person will have been very well prepared to face anything that comes from the GOP !
4
Since FDR, the "Democratic" P has been moving further right on policy issues and legislation (see research). U.S. World dominance, globalization, capitalism, and wars. Many world governments, including ours, now exist only to enrich the elite and powerful. Even citizens believe the elite neo-liberal views, hence love of Trump, speculation, and "supposed human values."
We have <10 years to do a radical transformation of our entire energy infrastructure, reduce pollution and overpopulation, etc. "Moderate" democrats (their policy propositions more akin to classical Republicans of 40s) have done next to nothing on the core issues of our time. All votes are to support pointless wars, industry and/or special interests.
Truly, to not vote on a "change agent" (which only Sanders truly is) is species suicide. It took nearly 50yrs to get a completely corrupt and useless "Affordable" care act when Obama had the chance with Dems in power. You see, Obama was really a Republican (neoliberal, neocon, warmonger - Mr Droner) and bowed down to the elite.
Look back at all the icons of Democratic past since FDR, with the exception of possibly LBJ, JFK, and Carter, you only see charismatic individuals who promise loads of things, and accomplish a conservative or business agenda.
Truly, Sen. Sanders is THE ONLY democrat in the field. The rest are Republicans. Have voted lifelong Dem as "lesser evil." No longer. If Sanders is not selected, immediately going Indep. and writing him in.
10
The things Bernie proposes are not radical.
--What's radical is a healthcare system the costs more than any other in the world, yet leaves our country 43rd in longevity.
--What's radical is the pharmaceutical and insurance industries dictating policies that blatantly put profit before health.
--What's radical is the constantly-increasing inequality between the wealthy and the poor, even as regards lifespan: the richest 10% of Americans live 13 years longer than the poorest 10%.
I could go on, but you get the point. Senator Sanders, when you get beyond the arm-waving and eyeball bugging is simply stating what's true. And if you gave it attention, you'd be waving your arms too.
We need to keep Bernie Sanders' message front and center. We can't continue with the greatest percentage of our population in prison of any nation in the world. That's radical!
But, sadly, Senator Sanders may not be the individual who can, at the present time, implement his programs. We owe him a huge debt: what energy! What sacrifice! If we leave him out of things, that's to our shame.
If he wins the majority of delegates, then perhaps he can win the election. But, again sadly, I don't think that these things are possible.
I beg other Sanders' supporters to be practical and to deal with what shakes out in a practical way. Right now, I'll vote for Sanders. But if the time comes, I'll expect every Sanders' supporter to support the Democratic candidate, and I'll expect Bernie to lead in this.
3
Because of course they are.
Heaven forfend the people themselves get to decide who their nominee.
That smacks of democracy. And, we certainly can't have any of that.
4
About one-third of Democrats support Sanders. A majority of young voters do. The Democratic leadership, however, treats these young, passionate progressive voters as if they are an embarrassment and instead keeps pandering to older white voters who increasingly lean Republican. I guess I don't see how that's a winning strategy. The Democratic leadership has to get over its fears of progressive young people or it's going to go to the grave with its aging, declining base of old white people.
9
@617to416 Exactly my thoughts.
2