Here is the scenario---Bernie wins California and Hillary's email problems grow larger

[randr]

Discussion please

[beachbumbob]

1. No discussion needed

Hillary is our nominee...

[Jester Messiah]

51. Which is disastrous in the scenario given.

A nominee under federal indictment? In what world is that okay?

[puffy socks]

53. She's not under federal

indictment
In what world is it okay to continue lying about that?

[CorporatistNation]

56. Who Has Been Lying About What?

MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...

Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...

Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"

Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"

Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!

[puffy socks]

59. People who post that she

is under indictment.

That is a lie.

[CajunBlazer]

2. Dream on

[AtomicKitten]

3. She will cling to the nomination like grim death even if she takes the party down with her.

[Jack Bone]

4. leaves those 400 Supers that chose hillary 3 &1/2 yrs ago...

look awful silly now.

[BlueStreak]

8. Not as silly as they will look in November if they don't get themselves right now.

[leveymg]

13. Those 400 supers are all elected officials or DNC members. If the DNC leadership and executive

committees vote to release her delegates, the supers will do so. It really doesn't require her agreement.

But, I strongly doubt it would ever come to that. In fact, a deal has been in the works for a while. After all, they've had since March 2015 to put succession plans in place.

[cherokeeprogressive]

14. More like 8 years ago when the deal was made to give DWS chair of the DNC.

I think that was Obama's way of promising HRC the next administration. Think of how many elections that deal cost Democrats.

[Jack Bone]

18. and cost Obama...but us most of all. nt

[vintx]

34. The citizens of Libya and Honduras most of all. nt

[BlueStreak]

5. The barty bosses ignore the people, the polls, and the realities

and go forward as if none of this were happening, nominate Hillary and we lose.

Not many other ways to interpret it, I'd say. The party is excellent at shooting itself in the foot.

This should be a runaway election for us with that crazy man representing the GOP, but Hillary is barely even with him -- with Trump going up and Clinton going down.

[Metric System]

9. The people have chosen Hillary. Over 3 million more than Sanders.

[BlueStreak]

15. That is only because Sanders won more caucus states thean Clinton.

And Clinton loaded up on the earliest primaries. Since that time, Sanders has been winning almost everything.

When Clinton ran up that lead in popular vote, she was also leading Trump in the head-to-head by 10-15 percent. She is dropping like a rock. The superdelegates need to step in and prevent a disaster.

[bobbobbins01]

32. They know that.

Its been said so many times. They just lie and distort.

[hack89]

39. So the early states shouldn't count and we can ignore their votes?

really.

[BlueStreak]

43. The purpose of superdelegates is to

avoid catastrophes. There can be a good argument as to whether that is a good system in a country that likes to call itself a democracy. But that's what we have. It is a fact that Sanders trails Clinton in the "vote-based delegates" by a small margin. It is also a fact that Sanders has been closing that lead steadily since about the first half-dozen primaries, and he has been winning way more than half the states in the last couple of months 0-- in other words, Clinton is dropping and Sanders has momentum.

It is further a fact that the margin is close enough that the super-delegates can do what they are supposed to do and avoid the Clinton catastrophe.

They won't, of course, but that's because this is a bankrupt system.

Why don't you tell us why you think it is such a good idea to go forward with the candidate who:

a) Has been losing 2/3 of the elections for months now

b) Is losing ground in the head-to-head with Trump

c) Has never generated any excitement -- her events are 1/10 the turnout of Sanders'

Tell us why that is a wise move. It sounds like a very good way to guarantee failure in this election.

[hack89]

80. And overturning a democratic process by party insiders is your solution?

you plan to erase the choice of millions of Hillary voters and then expect them to vote for Bernie? To paraphrase a popular saying around here, Hillary or Bust. Bernie would not get my vote in such a scenario.

[BlueStreak]

84. That's what Seperdelegates do. And I would hardly call these primaries "democratic"

How is is "democratic" for the party to line up behind one candidate before the first ballot is cast, and to use all of its machinery to try to suppress the challenger.

This is politics, it ain't a pillow fight. But to make the "democratic" argument, that is absurd. How old are you anyway? That's a very childish view of the world, it seems to me.

[Scootaloo]

61. I looked over and over and didn't see the poster saying that.

Was it code? Invisible ink? Did you hit your head?

[hack89]

77. "Clinton loaded up on the early states"

Along with a comment that Bernie has been winning more of the later contest.

[onenote]

41. Mythology v. facts. You believe in the former. I rely on the latter

Myth: "Clinton loaded up on the earliest primaries. Since that time, Sanders has been winning almost everything."

Fact: The primary season began on February 1. It has been going on for four months. In the first two months, Clinton won 20 contests and Sanders 15. In the second two months, Clinton has won 7 contest (9 if you include the non-binding contests in Nebraska and Washington state), and Sanders has won 6.

[BlueStreak]

46. You are cherry-picking

Since March 22,

Clinton has won AZ, NY, MD, CT, DL, PA, and KY

Sanders has won ID, UT, HA, WA, WI, WY, RI, IN, WV, and OR

[Number23]

63. "Sanders has been winning almost everything."

That's what YOU wrote. And then you put forth information that destroys your own point.

By your own info, since March 22, Clinton has won 7 and Sanders has won 10. Clinton's states have had the largest numbers of votes and delegates as well. That doesn't come close to looking like "Sanders has been winning almost everything."

[BlueStreak]

73. In the General, Sanders will win the states where Hillary loaded up

Sanders has a much broader appeal. Clinton has 52% unfavorable. That number is not going to change much. Normally you don't have a prayer of winning with numbers like that. The only way you can win in that case is:

a) if there is a strong third party run, like Ross Perot. That is how Bill got elected after all.

b) If your opponent (Trump in this case) has equally bad negatives.

There won't be a strong 3rd party, so your entire hope must lie on Trump's negatives hurting him more than Hillary's negatives.

Or you can go with the guy who doesn't have the problem with the negatives and is generating POSITIVE excitement, bringing out crowds 10 times larger than Clinton. Sanders can reach beyond the "party faithful". And the problem with the Dem party faithful, as opposed to the GOP faithful, is that the Dems don't vote very reliably. That's why we have lost both branches of Congress and most of the state legislatures.

Excitement, enthusiasm, passion are actually important in politics. The GOP is doing their usual wedge issue (the bathroom wars this time) to fire up their base. You can't counter that with a corporatist whose only real case for election is it is her turn and expect to win.

[Number23]

89. Sanders does not have broader appeal. He'd have broader votes too if he did.

And has been pointed out over and over again, Sanders' appeal and "excitement" comes from a very limited demographic, similar to those who are appealed to and "excited" by Trump.

Of the three, there can not be any serious question that Hillary is the candidate that has put together a much broader and wider coalition of voters.

[onenote]

65. I think you're the one cherry picking. What makes March 22 so special?

I picked a neutral dividing line - first two months v. second two months. You picked for one and only one reason: it works for you (for example, moving back one week to March 15 would turn the record from 7 Clinton/10 Sanders to 12 wins for Clinton and 10 for Sanders; or moving a week later would change the result to 6 Clinton/8 Sanders.

By the way, in what universe is winning 51 or 52 percent of the contests "winning almost everything"?

[geek tragedy]

45. Early states like New York, Pennsylvania and Maryland? nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

52. BBs would suggest those states are demographically undesirable, especially the former and the latter

[Scootaloo]

62. Late April isn't "early"

I think he means Iowa, new Hampshire, Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, and Virginia

[geek tragedy]

64. That was my point. Clinton has won the big, diverse state primaries

in every single month they've been held. She won Texas, Georgia and Virginia in February, she won Ohio and Florida in March, and she won Maryland, Pennsylvania and Maryland in April.

[Scootaloo]

66. Ah yes.

Every state Clinton wins is diverse, every state Sanders wins isn't. My favorite example? Kentucky, which Clinton supporters were screaming was "white as a lily and racist as hell!" before its primary. And then she wins by half a percent and suddenly it's a diverse state.

It's been fascinating to watch diversity bloom instantly, or wither on the vine, wholly dependent on who wins a primary.

[geek tragedy]

67. I didn't cite Kentucky as a diverse state.

Feel free to rebut the point I made.

[Scootaloo]

68. What point is that?

You cite Pennsylvania as a diverse state that Hillary won. Pennsylvania is 82% white. Unlike too-white-to-count Oregon (81%)

New York? 76% white. Unlike too-white-to-count Oklahoma (72%).

Even though we're contrasting primaries, I just gotta mention... I've even see Hawai'i labeled "too white to count" - with its 24% white population

My point is that Hillary supporters use "diversity" just to indicate any state Hillary Clinton wins, and to paint states Sanders wins as non-diverse by way of contrast. It's part of the "Sanders is a racist Jew" smear campaign I was telling you about.

[geek tragedy]

69. 1) you cited two relatively small states (Oregon and Oklahoma)

Oregon is less than 1/2 the size of Pennsylvania, for example, not to mention Florida, NY, Texas.

2) diversity means more than "non-white"--large states have more diverse economies, more geographical variation, complex governance issues

3) even considering the above, Sanders has lost the non-white vote in virtually every primary state.

4) Sanders is not a racist or a sexist. He is behind the times in how he perceives race and gender as political forces, as his perspective is that of old school white leftists who obsess over class and treating other divisions as imaginary distractions

[BlueStreak]

74. Most of those states will not be in play

Neither Sanders nor Clinton will win Texas. Either Sanders or Clinton will win PA, NY, and MD.

FL, OH, VA, and GA are battlegrounds. I believe Sanders is the better bet in all of those except possibly Georgia because of the Clinton's enthusiasm gap. And I don't think Clinton will win GA in either case.

This is all about winning. We are not going to win with Clinton. She is dropping like a rock.

[geek tragedy]

76. LMAO. Bernie lost FL and VA by 30 points. He lost OH by 17 points. nt

[NorthCarolina]

17. What if Bernie gets to the convention with more pledged delegates though?

Since pledged delegates are earned by people voting for you, and given that caucus states make the 3 million more votes claim less significant than some are making it out to be, would it not make sense that the pledged delegate metric is more reflective of the mood of the country than vote tallys...given, as mentioned, the caucus states who don't count the actual number of caucus goers?

[Txbluedog]

22. If he manages to get a pledged delegate majority then he gets to be the nominee

[Arkansas Granny]

26. But that is a mighty big 'f'.

[Demsrule86]

29. If Bernie has more pledged delegates whe would be the candidate

But he won't...not mathematically possible.

[bobbobbins01]

33. Ummm, yes it is.

I thought you Hillary folks were all about the math. Of course it is mathematically possible.

[lmbradford]

54. Then he wins

That should be our focus. Pledged delegate majority. Supers will jump. They wont go against the voters.

[Ed Suspicious]

78. This 3 million number is fantasy.

[yourout]

6. Ring Ring....."Hello it's Joe Biden...what can I do for you?"

The party elites would rather lose than have Bernie win.

[leveymg]

16. Let's say there's a second ballot. Would you support Warren if she were drafted at the Convention?

[yourout]

21. Yes but...Bernie better have a big say in what goes down.

He has earned it.

[leveymg]

25. Seconded.

[NorthCarolina]

24. Why would Warren do that after Bernie fought so hard to earn it?

Personally, I don't think she would snub Bernie like that.

[yourout]

27. I don't think she would either but if it came down to Warren or Clinton it would be an easy choice.

I still think Bernie is our best shot at the White House.
Hell....he might be our only shot.

[Demsrule86]

30. There is no second ballot in a Democratic convention

You don't get a do-over...sorry.

[grasswire]

58. wrong again. nt

[thesquanderer]

31. It's hard to imagine a scenario that goes to a second ballot.

Assuming that Sanders and Clinton are on the first ballot, and every super delegate votes for one of the two of them, then one of them has to win on the first ballot.

[Ed Suspicious]

79. Why?

[Babel_17]

7. Out come the surrogates with their message to the voters

[KingFlorez]

10. You wake up and punch a hole in the wall for dreams being so cruel

[Henhouse]

12. LOL....n/t

[BlueStreak]

11. I am soooo tired of defending Clintons

from their serial offenses of poor judgment. It seem I have been doing this for 20 years.

Oh wait. I HAVE been doing this for 20 years.

We had to defend that oral sex wasn't really sex, and that "is" wasn't really what "is" normally means. and all the rest.

I will defend Hillary on the Benghazi thing. That was an unfair attack. But this email stuff is pure Clinton.

These people need to leave -- forever.

[Scuba]

70. Yep, me too.

[annavictorious]

19. Here's what happens: the democrat who won the most delegates

gets the nomination.

At this point, it's no longer a fever dream. It's a full blown delusion.

[winter is coming]

20. And then we lose. n/t

[hack89]

40. So the SDs should ignore the primary results and pick the runner up?

why let people vote in the first place if their votes are worthless?

[Waiting For Everyman]

23. We'll find out if they actually do the job they exist for:

to prevent a failed candidate from getting the nomination.

The party should have prevented her from running in the first place. The email hack was discovered before she even started her campaign.

They let this election go on under false pretenses and covered up for her, now this is their mess and they own it, and it's their responsibility to rectify it.

A lot of blame for this election situation we're in falls on the party and the supers. Every Dem voter has the right to be angry at them for it.

I expect them to prevent a certain disaster in the Fall, if HRC is nominated. It is NOT up to Sanders supporters to save them from themselves if they fail to pull the emergency brake on this.

They should start doing it NOW, behind the scenes if necessary. But the sooner the better.

[hack89]

42. So if they steal the nomination for Bernie

what do you tell Hillary's voters? "Tough shit we don't really care about democracy - electing Bernie is more important than trivial things like that."?

[JudyM]

47. Putting aside the stealing meme... She has now been shown to have been outright lying about

what many in the intelligence community feel is a significant matter. She is a candidate for president. Is that more your idea of democracy?

[hack89]

75. The voters are what makes it a democratic process

not party insiders deciding . Don't you agree?

[JudyM]

82. A democratic process requires more than just voters voting.

[hack89]

83. So the voters deciding is not the most important thing?

Do you support a similar mechanism for the general election? What if the electoral college decide a Sanders presidency would be bad for America - you would be perfectly fine with them choosing Trump even if Bernie won? After all, winning the most votes is not the most important thing.

[JudyM]

85. I said it is not the *only* thing. Some semblance of veracity in the candidates, for example, and

honest coverage by the media so that people can be reasonably well informed about the candidates' histories and positions. An election process that is structured so as to neither advantage the establishment's preferred candidate nor to disenfranchise voters. Etc. Those are some of the significant matters I am referring to.

[hack89]

86. So in other words the Democratic primary was rigged therefore the results can be ignored.

got it. Expected nothing less from a Bernie supporter. It is going to be a hard dose of political reality the day after DC votes.

[JudyM]

87. You have some expertise, now in yet another post, of putting words in people's mouths.

Never said that, and will excuse myself here since your responses aren't rationally based.

[hack89]

88. You are the one that wants the SDs to give Bernie the nomination, correct?

even though you refuse to articulate a specific rational.

[Demsrule86]

28. Dream dream dream...

not happening.

[randr]

35. This is not a dream

but it could become a national nightmare.
IF, a big IF, Hillary can not get the email stain off by convention time we have an important decision. Do we assume she may improve her polling before the GE or do we take steps to assure we are safe regardless of what happens to her.
I for one choose country over party.

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. You are right, not a dream...but a national nightmare

[B Calm]

36. I stopped defending the Clintons after NAFTA, but I came back and defended them

during the impeachment. That said, I'm tired of defending them. I just want them to fade away somewhere in upstate NY.

[randr]

37. On this I am with Bernie

I am sick and tired of hearing about Hillary's scandals also.

[iwannaknow]

38. This is not all that unlikely of a scenario

And it would be a game changer

[geek tragedy]

44. She's the nominee. Period. nt

[XRubicon]

49. I vote for the nominee.

Period.

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. The party elders are weighing that I suspect

If they are not, well they are more incompetent than tne average pol

[imari362]

55. She gets the nomination.

While her supporters make pretend that Trump and Republican will play nice with her, because.....

It's a "rightwing smear", Trump are not into those.

It's sexist and Trump will never go there.

They've already thrown the kitchen sink at her, Trump has no ammo.

It's racist...is there any POC involved her?, Trump will pop up his big tent of welcome to all POC.

It's Islamaphobia...her top aide is a Muslim...Trump is welcoming to all Muslims in America

The scenario I see involving HRC being in the general

[mikehiggins]

57. Whoever comes out of the Democratic convention will be our next POTUS

There has not been a GOP primary this time around. If this collection of fools and buffoons is the best the GOP can come up with they deserve to lose. Trump is just the icing on the cake.

Clinton or Sanders. That's it. There is no way this nation could possibly elect Donald Trump to the White House even if the PTB somehow allowed it.

If there even is an indictment (which I really doubt is likely for all of my Sanders partisanship) the choice would be between the Democratic contestants, either of which would be legitimate as opposed to the Trump Chump.

From my point of view, the argument that Trump could possibly win is the creature of the media and pollsters and not based in the Reality Universe at all.

[ReRe]

60. It'll probably be...

... the other way around. Hill's problems grow and as a result, Bernie wins CA and all the rest of the states, even NJ. How's that?

[99Forever]

71. Correction: UNAUTHORIZED PRIVATE SERVER PROBLEM

And the myriad of LIES, LIES, LIES she has told repeatedly about it.

[jalan48]

72. Hillary is forced to withdraw with much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

[B Calm]

81. Plus Obama fails to endorse Clinton for fear the Justice Department may indict her.