Sanders says having Southern states vote early "distorts reality."

[bigtree]

Jesse Lehrich ‏@JesseLehrich 1h1 hour ago
Sanders says having Southern states vote early "distorts reality." http://time.com/4293069/bernie-sanders-says-democratic-primary-schedule-distorts-reality/?xid=tcoshare …

...what happened to their 'better campaign' boasts after New Hampshire?



Edgeoforever @edgeoforever
memories...

[beam me up scottie]

1. Retweeting something said in February? I see the deflection is in overdrive.

Hillary and Bill keep stepping in it so you have to try to gin up old outrage against Bernie.

[IamMab]

12. Today, I saw a Sanders supporter post a video of Hillary from 2004.

Apparently the statute of limitations goes back a lot further than February. The crime bill video is what, 1996? But we can't quote Bernie's campaign strategist from 2 months ago? Are you for real?

[beam me up scottie]

14. Was it about civil rights? Doesn't her judgement and record count?

It should, it's one of the reasons I can't support her.

[IamMab]

17. Non sequitur nt

[beam me up scottie]

19. You brought it up.

[IamMab]

21. No, what you mentioned had nothing to do with what I mentioned.

The post I cited was not about civil rights. Hence, your obvious attempt to change the subject was a complete non sequitur.

[beam me up scottie]

23. You didn't specify so I guessed what you were referring to.

Next time you should be more clear about what you're upset about, the only post I saw was about her opposition to marriage equality.

It's not my fault it took her until 2013 to evolve.

[guillaumeb]

2. Agreed. The Southern states are generally more conservative,

thus allowing a more conservative candidate to build up an early lead. A far better approach would of course be a national primary day for all 50 states.

[hill2016]

3. in a crowded field

the most well-known candidate would win.

[guillaumeb]

4. That is a possibility. But starting the primary race in a conservative area

tends to reinforce the idea that the electorate as a whole shares the southern conservative viewpoint.

[mythology]

37. You do realize the primaries started in Iowa and New Hampshire right?

The Democratic primary electorate in those two states are very liberal.

In Iowa and New Hampshire 68% of Democratic caucus goers identified as liberal.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-democratic-iowa-caucuses-begin/


http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/new-hampshire-early-exit-poll-results-are-democrats-more-liberal-n515011

Kind of awkward for your point.

[bigtree]

5. the people who vote in those Democratic primary contests in the South aren't conservatives

...a majority are black. many, are Latino, as in Florida's primary election which chose Hillary in overwhelming numbers.

They are our party's and this election's most dependable voters. Dismissing that vote as 'conservative' is a lie and a slap in the face to an important and vital base of voters in that region.

Moreover, it's an amazing charge when Sanders has most of his votes coming from less diverse constituencies like Utah and Wyoming which aren't exactly bastions of liberalism.

[Fawke Em]

7. Many black Southern Democrats aren't conservative?

Think again.



It's not a matter of color. It's a matter of progressiveness.

[geek tragedy]

11. care to guess who won the "very liberal" vote in every single

southern state?

[Fawke Em]

42. Laughable.

I have contact with most "very liberal" person in my state and we all went Bernie.

I'm sure a moderate liberal in the South thinks he or she is liberal, but they're not.

BTW, my entire neighborhood is COVERED still in Bernie signs. We're all mostly union.

I'm proud to be from that whitish green area of East Tennessee/West North Carolina that went for him.

Thank you.

[bigtree]

13. it's a despicable lie

...that lie is why you and your campaign are losing that vote.

[Fawke Em]

43. What's a lie?

Those "Democrats" voted against Transgendered people.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/3/25/1506355/-NC-HB2-Anti-LGBT-Bill-The-Roll-Call-Vote-And-Time-To-Shame-Some-Bad-Democrats

Grow up!

[m-lekktor]

27. exactly. fuck those bigots. nt

[Fawke Em]

44. Thank you.

[guillaumeb]

10. What I actually said was:

Agreed. The Southern states are generally more conservative,
thus allowing a more conservative candidate to build up an early lead. A far better approach would of course be a national primary day for all 50 states.

And I stand by that comment. And while a majority of Democratic voters in those states might be non-white, they do not vote as consistently as the white voters. This lack of consistent participation might partly explain why the GOP has such a lock on government in the South.

And Sanders essentially tied Clinton in her home state of Illinois, a solidly Democratic and very diverse state.

[bigtree]

16. the demographic of the Democratic vote in the South is NOT conservative

...the majority of Democratic voters may well be overshadowed by conservative republicans, but our Democratic vote there is solidly liberal.

It's an outright lie to claim that there is some black conservative majority there.

[guillaumeb]

18. Perhaps you should reread what I actually said.

It would save you the work of constructing your straw men and attacking what I did not say.

[bigtree]

22. the entire statement is a distortion

...Hillary is not a 'conservative' candidate and Democratic voters in the South aren't advocating for conservative issues.

These distortions you're promoting say a lot about why the Sanders campaign lost the Democratic South. They NEVER respected these voters and they can't help themselves denigrating them even further today.

[guillaumeb]

26. You are certainly using a lot of straw. Remember that straw is very flammable.

The problem with an analysis of Clinton's positions is that any analysis might be outdated quite quickly as the positions evolve.

And given Clinton's far stronger name recognition, it is not surprising that she did relatively well in the early primaries.

And the Democratic South seems to have become a permanent minority party. I blame inconsistent turnout and racially motivated gerrymandering.

[bigtree]

29. such dismissal of the voters there like they're horses in a race

...there is nothing relevant or correct in your characterizations of the majority of Democratic voters in the 2016 primaries.

This is some inartistic revisionism from the Sanders campaign which once postured like they were going to sweep that vote.

[guillaumeb]

30. Are we speaking/reading the same language?

I find your responses to be totally off the point of my responses.

[bigtree]

31. you have a distorted narrative of the Democratic vote in the South

...which doesn't deserve mollycoddling.

[Fawke Em]

46. Yes, it is.

Just proved it to you and you called me a liar.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/3/25/1506355/-NC-HB2-Anti-LGBT-Bill-The-Roll-Call-Vote-And-Time-To-Shame-Some-Bad-Democrats

[Gothmog]

6. Sanders is trailing by 2.5 million votes

It is sad that the sanders folks cannot deal with the real world

[Fawke Em]

9. Not technically true.

In many caucus states, they don't release the final number of individual voters - only the number of delegates.

You know as well as I do that Alaska had more than 540 voters.



Hell, these are just Hillary supporters and she lost there BIG. This is probably 200 people alone in Anchorage.

[Gothmog]

36. The fact that you disagree with or do not understand the fact does not make it false

Sanders is trailing in popular vote. Caucuses are undemocratic events which is why Sanders is doing well.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

33. he is trailing by 8% of delegates, with 40% yet to be awarded.

[Bonobo]

8. He's right. And let me add something important here:

The DU meme that only black people live in the South is so fucking stupid. You act like only POC live there and that, therefore, it represents a mandate for POC, ignoring the fact that -for one thing- black people are not a monolithic entity that exist for your campaigning purposes.

It is overall more conservative than the north, and if you don't believe me, please read some history.

[dsc]

24. A plurality or majority of every southern state in this primary was black

except in TX, FL, and OK. The fact is the median voter in over half those states was black. No one is saying only blacks voted in our primaries but again in all but the three I listed a majority or plurality of the primary electorate was black.

[Bonobo]

28. Majority and plurality are vastly different.

When you say "pluraility", does that include "White" as a group?

[grossproffit]

15. Yeah, swing states like Idaho, Nebraska, Wyoming, Alaska & Utah should go first.

[msongs]

20. what 3 things could those states possibly have in common? besides not being "southern" nt

[grossproffit]

32. Open + caucus = Bernie!

[stevenleser]

38. ROFLMAO!!!

Well played!!!

[frylock]

25. Hillary Supporter will go back to hating and denigrating the Southern states in the GE.

Bank it.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

34. isn't that why they changed the order from 2008? so her strong states would vote first

and she could show a big lead. It was all supposed to be over months ago before people had a chance to learn about Bernie.

[mythology]

39. You do realize she lost the south badly to Obama in 2008 right?

Did this supposed conspiracy (aided in no small part by California opting to move their primary back from Super Tuesday under the obviously made up idea of saving $100 million - like anybody would care about that little money) manage to look into the future and see that the then unknown opponent(s) of Clinton would fail to do well with black or Hispanic voters when they were concocting this evil plan of theirs?

Also considering Clinton is expected to win in New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and California, why didn't they put those states earlier?

Your conspiracy theory doesn't pass the laugh test.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

41. you do realize the DNC votes on the schedule, yes? here is a detailed article

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-party-approves-2016-presidential-primary-schedule/

The Democrats' plan recommends that the New Hampshire primary be held on Feb. 9, followed by the Nevada caucuses on Feb. 20 and the South Carolina primary on Feb. 27. Other states could hold their contests from March 1 through the second Tuesday in June.

The DNC decision does not set in stone the 2016 primary schedule but discourages states from trying to jump ahead in the calendar. In the past two presidential election cycles, Democrats and Republicans have scheduled the early contests for February but then allowed them to take place in January after states such as Florida and Michigan violated the party's rules and moved up their voting.

Among Democrats, there has been little discussion thus far of states trying to move ahead in the calendar. Like the party did in 2012, the plan awards bonus delegates to states that agree to hold their primary contests later in the spring.

[sadoldgirl]

35. To be honest, I don't even understand why

IA and NH are the first.

Yes, I would like to see staggering over time, but
1 Southern State,
1 North Eastern state,
1 Western state,
1 Westcoast state

And so on. Don't keep it regional for a long time.
Can someone, please, tell me, for instance, why
CA is supposed to come so very late?

Perhaps it should come right after TX?

[mythology]

40. They moved it back because it didn't make sense for California

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article24686011.html

Here are some relevant points:

"The early date, they hoped, might focus more attention on the Golden State. "Now California is important again in presidential nominating politics," Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said at the time.

But more than 20 other states moved their primaries up, too, and California, if not the afterthought it was in previous elections, was marginalized yet again.

"We've learned that shifting a date doesn't matter," said Jaime Regalado, executive director of the Pat Brown Institute of Public Affairs at California State University, Los Angeles. "Only if we had a more competitive balance between the two parties, then I think we would play a larger role Then they simply wouldn't drop in, parachute in to get money, and leave."

"consolidating the presidential and statewide elections, supporters say, will save state and local elections officials about $100 million."

[Warren DeMontague]

45. He's right. We should either rotate or randomize which states vote first.

I dont know why that would even be a controversial suggestion.