I just changed my vote on DU from Sanders to Warren

[laurieu]

and will vote accordingly in the primary. What prompted me was the headline that Bernie isn't afraid of splitting the Progressive vote. Don't get me wrong, I like Bernie, Bernie's ideas are the way of the future. But I don't think that fear of Donald Trump is enough to get people, especially young people, out to vote if it's not a progressive candidate. We were all so very sure that Clinton would win, I really don't count on people being any smarter now. Of course, I'll vote Democratic nominee, no matter who it is.

[thesquanderer]

1. re: "What prompted me was the headline that Bernie isn't afraid of splitting the Progressive vote."

It looks to me like neither Bernie nor Warren are afraid of that. So I'm not sure I see the rationale for using that idea to choose either one over the other.

[pnwmom]

8. EW will strongly support the Democrat no matter who it is. Bernie has not demonstrated that. n/t

[thesquanderer]

9. Bernie was the first to sign the pledge to do so. (n/t)

[pnwmom]

19. The pledge can't require anyone to give whole-hearted, enthusiastic support. n/t

[questionseverything]

21. who campaigned more for hc after the primary?

Bernie Sanders did 52 campaign events in 14 different states for Hillary Clinton after he lost to her in the Democratic Primary. More than ANY other single surrogate during that time. Yet the lie that Bernie did nothing for Hillary still persists. He worked his ass off. https:// twitter.com/ryanobles/stat us/1134161858666147840 …
Shaun King on Twitter: "Bernie Sanders did 52 campaign ...
twitter.com/shaunking/status/1134179039743291392

[thesquanderer]

26. Interesting question. I know Obama campaigned for her a lot. Are you sure Sanders campaigned more?

[questionseverything]

31. i am not sure..can't find obamas final numbers for same time frame

https://www.npr.org/2016/10/29/499639406/obama-ramps-up-appearances-in-final-campaign-sprint


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidential_trips_made_by_Barack_Obama_(2016)

[pnwmom]

36. Bernie didn't do a single event for Hillary in June, July, or August, and only did 2 in September.

Yes, he did a lot in October.

EW, on the other hand, began to enthusiastically campaign for HRC in June.

https://www.npr.org/2016/06/27/483706454/elizabeth-warren-campaigns-with-hillary-clinton-goes-after-donald-trump

[questionseverything]

40. the convention wasn't until the end of july...so you could hardly expect him to campaign for her

while he was running

do you have a number for warren from august on?

[pnwmom]

41. All the R's candidates dropped out and got behind Trump in April, and Bernie had no mathematical

chance of a win by May, so, yes, I think he should have dropped out then and begun to campaign for her -- just like the R's were campaigning for Trump.

Because he didn't, she had to campaign on two fronts at once.

[questionseverything]

46. as a progressive , i see convention time to be the best time to force the party left

Bernie did that and I appreciate that

if you look at the superdelegates, he really had no path from before the first vote so I appreciate that the dnc let us have a primary

running for the leader of the free world is tough stuff

no one had provided numbers showing they did more events in the time frame after the convention than Bernie BUT comparing his effort to Obama and warren puts him in pretty good company

[ehrnst]

90. "he really had no path from before the first vote"

What do you mean? He did well at the start.

"I appreciate that the dnc let us have a primary"

Are you saying that they were considering not having primaries?

Can you provide a source for that?

[NurseJackie]

92. ...

[ehrnst]

93. .....

[TwilightZone]

43. Clinton was the presumptive nominee as of 6/6/16.

It was over at that point. Sanders could have started campaigning for her anytime after that.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/clinton-hits-magic-number-delegates-clinch-nomination

[ehrnst]

91. HRC won the number of pledged delegates needed be the Democratic nominee on June 6,

defeating her opponent, Senator Sanders.

That leaves the period of June 6 - the end of July, after the Democratic primary had already been won by HRC.

When the final whistle is blown in a football game, you don't see players still attempt to tackle the opposing team or keep trying goal kicks, because the game is over.

You would wonder what they were thinking.

[questionseverything]

100. hc said there was no hurry when obama had wrapped it up

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=clintons+bobby+kenedy+remark+concerning+obama&view=detail&mid=082711B61E212AF7D89D082711B61E212AF7D89D&FORM=VIRE

[ehrnst]

105. Not sure what you mean.

The pledged delegate count was very, very close at the convention in 2008, unlike in 2016.

She gracefully conceded supported Obama fully when it was apparent that she didn't have the delegates to win. She deserves the same respect that she showed her opponents. She was never hypocritical like others.

Maybe you can clarify?

[questionseverything]

107. the video i posted speaks for itself

if I tried to transcribe what she said I would probably get a hide so I won't

but I will say again, I have no problem with any candidate taking the fight to convention, I think that is the best time to win concessions from the party "elders" and move the party to the left

[ehrnst]

108. Even after the fight has been lost?

And what "concessions" from "party elders" do you think losing any candidates deserve? Why not simply accept that one lost and get behind the choice of the people?

I don't recall Hillary making demands for "concessions" in 2008.

[Hortensis]

110. You believe our presidential nominee's words wouldn't

be allowed on DU? Interesting suggestion.

As for that last, every two years we have a chance to affect our party big time by electing new people to governments at various levels around the nation. And we do -- every two years without fail, and occasionally even more frequently. And then there's the little detail of contacting our representatives in between to tell them what we want.

If you see yourself as always in opposition, hoping for chances to act out in the spotlight of national conventions, it's because a majority of your fellow Democrats made different choices than you wanted, not because we don't constantly affect the decisions and direction of our party.

[questionseverything]

111. i wasn't in opposition in 2008 or 2012 when obama was the nominee

and I believe Bernie won some minor concessions over super delegates in 2016

[ehrnst]

112. What is the problem with Superdelegates? After all,

Bernie was one himself.

HRC won the Democratic nomination by nearly four million votes - clearly the choice of Democratic voters. Not even close. That's just math, not superdelegates....

Popular vote:

HRC 16,914,722

Sanders 13,206,428

[Hortensis]

115. Oh, I forgot Sanders was a superdelegate. So I misspoke

in saying ALL of them refused to misuse their power to override the popular vote to make him the nominee.

He's going to be a superdelegate in 2020 again also, supporting his own contention about the threat to democracy supers could pose, so I need to remember that to avoid any sweeping statements about their actions without checking first.

[Hortensis]

113. Why were you in opposition in 2016 after your fellow

Democrats chose our nominee? ? Don't you believe in pluralism and democracy? The right of the people to choose? Are you already expecting to be in opposition to our candidate in 2020 then?

As for the superdelegates, given how one candidate asked the superdelegates to overset the popular vote and give him the nomination, a little tweaking wasn't the worst thing. Even though 100% of the supers refused without a second's hesitation to support the candidate's request, who knows, someday another candidate who was rejected by the Democratic majority might somehow do a better job of persuading them to corrupt the process.

In 2020 and going forward, of course, we'll still have to watch out for any candidates trying to use any means available to overset the will of the majority. (Funny how candidates chosen by a majority don't need to resort to election theft.)

[ehrnst]

114. +1000. (nt)

[ehrnst]

49. To be fair, he was a bit busy that August...

Trying to put out some fires in the PAC that had the same name as the book he released.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/25/fleeing-the-bern-half-of-staff-quit-sanders-legacy-project-before-it-begins

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

47. Why Bernie garners so much respect!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!! or
Elizabeth & Bernie 2020!!
Either way, welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

50. Just not as a Democratic Senator.

He's an Independent Senator (I-VT), remember.

[George II]

98. Shaun King?

President Barack Obama probably made more appearances than anyone.

In reality, BS didn't appear in public for Clinton until Labor Day, six weeks after the Convention, and many of those "52" (I doubt that number anyway) consisted of three or four appearances within a few miles of each other and for only five or ten minutes.

A half dozen years ago I campaigned actively for a friend of mine who was running for Mayor in town. I knocked on close to 500 doors, so in Shaun King's terms I guess I made 500 appearances for him.

[ehrnst]

39. What was the reason that the pledge was considered necessary again?

[thesquanderer]

42. IMO? To remove doubt that was unfounded in the first place. (n/t)

[ehrnst]

44. Unfounded?

That idea someone would run as a Democrat in primary, only to turn around and not run in as one a general or serve as one if elected?

https://www.sevendaysvt.com/OffMessage/archives/2018/08/21/bernie-sanders-declines-democratic-senatorial-nomination

[thesquanderer]

66. As I said, yes, unfounded, *IMO*.

No way was Sanders going to not back the Dem nominee against Trump. IM very-strongly held O.

[ehrnst]

74. That's not what the pledge was about - it was about promising to

run in the general and serve as a Democrat.

You still think that the idea that a Democratic candidate might NOT serve as a Democrat is "unfounded?"

[thesquanderer]

80. Not sure what you're talking about. Here is the entirety of the pledge:

The Pledge for Presidential Candidates:

We must defeat Donald Trump. The first step is a primary contest that produces a strong Democratic nominee. The second step is winning the general election. We will not accept anything less. To ensure this outcome, as a 2020 Presidential candidate, I pledge to:

1. Make the primary constructive. I’ll respect the other candidates and make the primary election about inspiring voters with my vision for the future.

2. Rally behind the winner. I’ll support the ultimate Democratic nominee, whomever it is -- period. No Monday morning quarterbacking. No third-party threats. Immediately after there’s a nominee, I’ll endorse.

3. Do the work to beat Trump. I will do everything in my power to make the Democratic Nominee the next President of the United States. As soon as there is a nominee, I will put myself at the disposal of the campaign.

[ehrnst]

82. Then we're talking about different pledges.

Last edited Tue Sep 10, 2019, 10:56 AM - Edit history (1)

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/05/700524861/bernie-sanders-signs-democratic-party-loyalty-pledge-for-2020-run

Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders has signed a loyalty pledge, promising to run and govern as a Democrat if he wins the presidency in 2020, a new requirement for candidates that largely grew out of his own 2016 campaign.

The pledge Sanders signed was given to all active Democratic presidential campaigns last week. It affirms to the DNC chairman that they "are a Democrat ... are a member of the Democratic Party; will accept the Democratic nomination; and will run and serve as a member of the Democratic Party."

I thought that you were talking about this - my mistake.

Link to tweet

[DownriverDem]

29. I keep in mind that not everyone thinks like me.

I support Biden, because this election will be won in the middle. Until we get rid of the Electoral College, that's a fact. Biden can win the Electoral College which means state by state. It's a numbers game. trump does not want to run against Biden. Biden knows how it works in the Congress and the White House. He was a very involved VP in the Obama Administration. I have all the confidence in Biden that he will move us left (Don't forget it was Biden that convinced Obama to support Gay marriage) Biden running with a strong, progressive, Dem woman would be formidable. We have never had a woman VP. She too will be very involved as VP just like it was with Biden and Obama. She will be positioned to be President. I fear for my country. We must win. That's all that matters.

[laurieu]

52. I think one is more electable.

Sorry to say that it comes down to that. My fear is that progressives battling will give the nomination to Biden, so I'll go with the Progressive front runner. If Obama's coattails weren't enough to get someone as smart and witty as Clinton into office, they sure aren't going to work for Biden. BTW, I don't know if I'm breaking DU rules by saying this.

[thesquanderer]

64. re: "I'll go with the Progressive front runner"

Perfectly reasonable. But let's say that, the week before your state's primary, Sanders is polling such that he seems more likely than Warren to beat Trump (i.e. he's more electable). Would you switch?

[Garrett78]

116. They're definitely hurting one another's chances. The difference is Warren could actually...

...win the nomination. I don't think she will, but she could. Sanders, though, has no chance...unless he's going to somehow do much, much better than he did in 2016 among Black voters. And, while not young, Warren is younger than Sanders by a fair amount.

If one of them were to drop out in the name of boosting the chances of the other, that person should be Sanders. Warren would likely win both Iowa and New Hampshire, which wouldn't necessarily lead to her winning the nomination, but it would likely sink the Biden ship. Biden's support in South Carolina and beyond would collapse.

But Sanders won't drop out, so it's a moot point.

[FM123]

2. Welcome!

[OldManTarHeel]

10. Yep . . Glad to have you with us !

[mikeysnot]

3. that will show him!

[defacto7]

4. A good move.

[Autumn]

5. Neither Bernie or Liz are afraid of splitting the Progressive vote.

They both know that either of them will have that voting block. Odd that you go from one to another and use that as a justification.

[ehrnst]

6. I've never even remotely seen that attitude from Warren. (nt)

[happy feet]

12. Only one is a Democrat

[Autumn]

13. Hate to burst your bubble but both are Democrats. Unless you consider party leaders to be liars.

He caucuses with them, they allow him to run as a Democrat so they consider him a Democrat.

[DownriverDem]

20. Hate to tell you

but this is the Democratic Party Presidential Primary. Some folks seem to forget that.

[Autumn]

22. Hate to tell you but he's running under the Democratic banner AS a Democrat in this

Democratic Party Presidential Primary with the blessing of the Democratic party and the DNC. If you think that the DNC leadership is getting too forgetful you are free to voice your concerns to them, I saw Perez on TV last week and he seems very sharp, not at all forgetful.

[ehrnst]

25. Hate to tell you, but he serves in his job as Jr. Sen. from Vermont, in which he is listed (I-VT)

If you think that the Senate administrative staff is getting it wrong, you are free to voice your concerns to them.

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/

Let us know what they say.

[NurseJackie]

53. Yes. Thank you. The "as-a" qualifier really doesn't do it for me. I want the REAL THING!

Yes. Thank you. The "as-a" qualifier really doesn't do it for me. I want the REAL THING!

All I'm trying to say is that I want someone who is loyal to the party and who isn't afraid to identify as a FULL TIME DEMOCRAT... not just when it suits them... no matter who he (or she) may be.

[TwilightZone]

45. No, he's an Independent who runs as a Democrat...

and caucuses with the Democrats. He runs for president as a Democrat because that's his only realistic option as far as winning goes.

He's been quite clear on that.

That doesn't make him a Democrat. It makes him an Independent.

[Autumn]

51. According to the Democratic Party he's running as a Democrat in the Democratic primaries.

Take it up with them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/05/700524861/bernie-sanders-signs-democratic-party-loyalty-pledge-for-2020-run

Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders has signed a loyalty pledge, promising to run and govern as a Democrat if he wins the presidency in 2020, a new requirement for candidates that largely grew out of his own 2016 campaign.

The pledge Sanders signed was given to all active Democratic presidential campaigns last week. It affirms to the DNC chairman that they "are a Democrat ... are a member of the Democratic Party; will accept the Democratic nomination; and will run and serve as a member of the Democratic Party."

It's an issue that arose during Sanders' first presidential run, with concerns among some Democrats that the longtime independent and self-described democratic socialist, might run as a third-party candidate after losing the nomination to Hillary Clinton.

At the same time that the party adopted the loyalty pledge for presidential candidates, it also made changes to the nominating process that were sought by Sanders and his supporters, like minimizing the role of superdelegates.

[NurseJackie]

54. So sorry... but "as a" isn't as good as the genuine article. I prefer a FULL TIME Democrat who's

So sorry... but "as a" isn't as good as the genuine article. I prefer a FULL TIME Democrat who's doesn't play these maybe/maybe-not and peek-a-boo games with the party.

[Cary]

67. So now you approve of the DNC, eh Autumn?

[NurseJackie]

73. Good catch!

[Cary]

76. Ikr?

[ehrnst]

83. I know... being CONCERNED that people here were calling the DNC "liars."

Goodness!

[Cary]

103. Yes, which is it?

[ehrnst]

78. According to his Staff, he's Ind, Senator who only identifies as D when he's campaigning.

You should take it up with them...



Call his office and ask them - point blank:

Is Bernie a Democrat?

U.S. Senate
332 Dirksen Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
tel [phone]
fax [phone]

Get back with us when you find out, OK?

Let us know if they think "that Democratic leaders are lying" or if they think that "Perez is getting forgetful."

[George II]

68. This is from his own Senate web page:

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/

WASHINGTON, September 8 – A groundbreaking Government Accountability Office (GAO) study commissioned by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), released today....

https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/S4VT00033/1318178/

1. Bernard Sanders
72 KILLARNEY DRIVE
BURLINGTON, VT 05401

2. Identification Number: S4VT00033

3. Party: Independent

[Autumn]

72. Take it up with the DNC George, they have him listed as a Democrat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/05/700524861/bernie-sanders-signs-democratic-party-loyalty-pledge-for-2020-run

Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders has signed a loyalty pledge, promising to run and govern as a Democrat if he wins the presidency in 2020, a new requirement for candidates that largely grew out of his own 2016 campaign.

The pledge Sanders signed was given to all active Democratic presidential campaigns last week. It affirms to the DNC chairman that they "are a Democrat ... are a member of the Democratic Party; will accept the Democratic nomination; and will run and serve as a member of the Democratic Party."

It's an issue that arose during Sanders' first presidential run, with concerns among some Democrats that the longtime independent and self-described democratic socialist, might run as a third-party candidate after losing the nomination to Hillary Clinton.

At the same time that the party adopted the loyalty pledge for presidential candidates, it also made changes to the nominating process that were sought by Sanders and his supporters, like minimizing the role of superdelegates.

[ehrnst]

79. Take it up with his office and Senate.gov that he's a Democrat and not an Independent...

U.S. Senate
332 Dirksen Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
tel [phone]
fax [phone]

Let us know what they say.

[George II]

85. I don't have to take it up with anyone, Autumn. Virtually everyone here knows what he is....

....including many who won't "openly" admit it - he's an independent, has claimed to be an independent most of his elected life, and the fact that he runs as a Democrat for a few months every four years won't change that.

In fact, he has already filed with the FEC his candidacy for the Senate in 2024 as an Independent!

https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/S4VT00033/1318178/

I guess he doesn't expect to win the Democratic nomination for President next year.

I'm curious, as a Steyer supporter, why are you so gung ho for the independent Senator from Vermont?

[Autumn]

86. I like the Democratic candidate from Vermont George. I'm curious, as Undecided why are

you so gung ho for the former VP? That Bernie filed with the FEC his candidacy for the Senate in 2024 as an Independent is irrelevant. This is 2019. He is running as a Democrat, he signed "THE PLEDGE" and all that good stuff. Oh, he even released his taxes. The DNC, you know that organization, considerers him a Democrat. I'll take their word on that unless you can change it.

[ehrnst]

89. The fact that he represents Vermont as an Independent is not irrelevant to the voters in Vermont.

The DNC, you know that organization, considerers him a Democrat. I'll take their word on that unless you can change it.

Can you provide a link to where they say that he's a Democrat? Not "filed for candidacy as a Democrat," but an actual capital D Democrat - identifying as one in his position as a politician.

Because otherwise, your're insinuating that that Senator Sanders' staff, the Senate, and Bernie himself are as you put it "liars" - or "getting forgetful."

That's pretty harsh.



https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/poverty-a-death-sentence-sanders-declares-as-gao-links-inequality-to-mortality



http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=S000033

But do tell us what's got you rooting for Steyer, Autumn? Throwing your hat into the ring for a billionaire Wall Street Goldman Sachs hedge fund manager is a BIG u-turn for you, isn't it?

[ehrnst]

23. Not when he's at work, doing his job, but only when he's on the campaign trail for POTUS

When he is doing the job that he states makes him qualified to be POTUS, voting and representing Vermont, which is his entire time on the job, he is officially an Independent.

What percentage of his time do you estimate he's campaigning for POTUS, and therefore actually identifying as a Democrat?

[ehrnst]

24. What party leader(s) has stated that Senator Sanders serves as a Democrat?

Link please.

I'm sure that you're eager to 'burst my bubble' however, I think you may be mistaken on this.

But do share.

[ehrnst]

27. No, actually he's an Independent, and doesn't consider himself to be a Democrat.

He serves and votes as an Independent

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/

He stated that he runs as a Democrat for POTUS because of the money and media.

During a town hall-style event in Columbus, Ohio, the independent Vermont senator said, “In terms of media coverage, you have to run within the Democratic Party.” He then took a dig at MNSBC, telling Todd, the network “would not have me on his program” if he ran as an independent.

Money also played a role in his decision to run as a Democrat, Sanders added.

“To run as an independent, you need — you could be a billionaire," he said. "If you're a billionaire, you can do that. I'm not a billionaire. So the structure of American politics today is such that I thought the right ethic was to run within the Democratic Party.”

POLITICO has previously reported that Sanders initially resisted running as a Democrat, but was convinced by his advisers that it was necessary.

https://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/bernie-sanders-independent-media-coverage-220747

[NurseJackie]

63. And then there's this...

Bernie Sanders BS I'm a socialist

[ehrnst]

81. Do you consider Senate.gov and his staffers to be liars?

Call them and tell them to change his party affiliation on the Senate.gov website...

U.S. Senate
332 Dirksen Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
tel [phone]
fax [phone]

Tell us what you find out, 'K?

[ehrnst]

34. Indeed. It's Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

Right there on the Senate.gov website.

[Dorn]

18. Are we saying that Warren has agreed to drop out rather then split the vote? This post is confusing

From the quote (see below) Bernie has said if the progressive vote splits and Biden wins he won't quit -- so I guess this means that Warren will quit?

In an interview with Yahoo News last Thursday, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., brushed off the possibility that he and Sen. Elizabeth Warren could split the progressive vote, creating an easy path for former Vice President Joe Biden to win the Democratic presidential primary.

[JonLP24]

35. Good point

[LittleGirl]

7. Welcome

I like Pete too. I voted for Bernie and Hillary before.
Vote Blue, no matter who.

[LiberalLovinLug]

11. Since they both have similar platforms

I would hope that if, say, Biden was still the front runner, and the combined popularity of Sanders and Warren were greater than Biden, that the candidate that has the least support between the two of them, would drop out and encourage their supporters to support the other one.

That is presuming folks are voting for policy and not race, orientation, or gender.

[MasonDreams]

14. The "super delegates" will nominate Warren over Bernie on the second ballot.

And that's OK 😊 Bernie will not run third party. He is all about getting someone to do something that the people actually want. Instead of what the donor class want to stick the people with. There I have said it, publicly,
before I die. I feel much better now

[laurieu]

57. I agree with you, MasonDreams.

Whether you want to call him a Democrat or an Independent or whatever, he's a reminder of what the Democratic Party should be about.

[ehrnst]

84. Which Democratic candidate do you think is only doing what "the Donor class wants?" (nt)

[George II]

87. It's just another catch phrase used to bash those Democrats....

....who can actually work with Democrats day to day and who will remain Democrats long after July 16, 2020.

There's also the catch phrase "millionaire and billionaire class" which has recently been contracted to only "billionaire class" for some unexplained, but fully understood, reason.

[ehrnst]

88. You know Bernie became a "super delegate" in 2015, before he ran for POTUS, right?

He has known how they work and what they do since before he ran.

He ran anyway.

[MasonDreams]

94. Sen. Sanders has worked within the system.

I think he has been very successful. I just think if you win by compromising core principles, you may discover you haven't really won.
Thomas Paine said "moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice".
If we do not trust the WeThePeople (voters) to choose, then we should change demo prefix of the word democracy.
If we continue to slide right towards the madness of king twitler.

[ehrnst]

95. So, you're saying that he was a "Super delegate," but didn't really mean it?

Or are you saying that he attempted to change the Superdelegate process by joining? I haven't heard anything about him trying to change it before he was a POTUS candidate. Maybe you have?

I just think if you win by compromising core principles, you may discover you haven't really won.

You mean like someone attempting to win by using Superdelegates to overturn the actual vote of WethePeople? That hasn't been done successfully, to my knowledge. Superdelegates have honored the choice of wethepeople.

If we do not trust the WeThePeople (voters) to choose, then we should change demo prefix of the word democracy.

So don't you think that we should eliminate caucuses? Because if there's anything that could negate the votes of the vast majority of wethe people of a state in a primary year, it's a caucus. Caucuses disenfranchise many groups of people - those with aspergers, the disabled, those with small children, those with hourly jobs, older people who can't stand for long periods of time, etc.

[MasonDreams]

96. I could be wrong, I only took one course in poli sci but,

I thought super delegates were created so that if the voters choice was McGovern (who lost 49 states) the super delagates could vote for a centrist. A firewall against unelectable peacenick pinko poets like McGovern if you will.
I could be wrong, what are they for?

Remember when the repukes turned the word liberal into something bad bad. That bugged me. We are coming back, thanks in part because the word liberal was literally carved in stone at institutions of higher learning.

I caucused once, mostly lived in primary states. You are correct, I am not a fan of caucuses.
I think lots of things should be updated. Iowa and NH are not very diverse. And they carry more weight. I've lived in red states, there nobody I voted for got elected, not @ federal level. In the last few months Congress's power of the purse has been usurped!! Money for housing our military families is going to the wall.

How do you think our system can be improved?

[ehrnst]

97. Well, as Samantha Bee put it:

In case a con man or someone who is wildly extreme on either end of the spectrum gets the nomination, ala Trump, the Superdelegates (who are limited number of experienced Dems - former POTUS, long time Senators and congresspersons, etc) serve as the instructor's brake in a driver ed vehicle, so we don't Thelma and Louise ourselves like the GOP did, who were ready to give their collective left nut for something like that when Trump got nominated.

A firewall against unelectable peacenick pinko poets like McGovern if you will.

Well, not simply "peacenik pinko poets" as you put it... From Wikipedia:

After the 1968 Democratic National Convention, at which pro-Vietnam War liberal Hubert Humphrey was nominated for the presidency despite not running in a single primary election, the Democratic Party made changes in its delegate selection process to correct what was seen as "illusory" control of the nomination process by primary voters.[16] A commission headed by South Dakota Senator George McGovern and Minnesota Representative Donald M. Fraser met in 1969 and 1970 to make the composition of the Democratic Party's nominating convention less subject to control by party leaders and more responsive to the votes cast in primary elections.

The rules implemented by the McGovern-Fraser Commission shifted the balance of power to primary elections and caucuses, mandating that all delegates be chosen via mechanisms open to all party members. As a result of this change the number of primaries more than doubled over the next three presidential election cycles, from 17 in 1968 to 35 in 1980.[16] Despite the radically increased level of primary participation, with 32 million voters taking part in the selection process by 1980, the Democrats proved largely unsuccessful at the ballot box, with the 1972 presidential campaign of McGovern and the 1980 re-election campaign of Jimmy Carter resulting in landslide defeats.[16] Democratic Party affiliation skidded from 41 percent of the electorate at the time of the McGovern-Fraser Commission report to just 31 percent in the aftermath of the 1980 electoral debacle.

Further soul-searching took place among party leaders, who argued that the pendulum had swung too far in the direction of primary elections over insider decision-making, with one May 1981 California white paper declaring that the Democratic Party had "lost its leadership, collective vision and ties with the past," resulting in the nomination of unelectable candidates. A new 70-member commission headed by Governor of North Carolina Jim Hunt was appointed to further refine the Democratic Party's nomination process, attempting to balance the wishes of rank-and-file Democrats with the collective wisdom of party leaders and to thereby avoid the nomination of insurgent candidates exemplified by the liberal McGovern or the anti-Washington conservative Carter and lessening the potential influence of single-issue politics in the selection process.

Following a series of meetings held from August 1981 to February 1982, the Hunt Commission issued a report which recommended the set aside of unelected and unpledged delegate slots for Democratic members of Congress and for state party chairs and vice chairs (so-called "superdelegates" ). With the original Hunt plan, superdelegates were to represent 30% of all delegates to the national convention, but when it was finally implemented by the Democratic National Committee for the 1984 election, the number of superdelegates was set at 14%.[18] Over time this percentage has gradually increased, until by 2008 the percentage stood at approximately 20% of total delegates to the Democratic Party nominating convention.

Certainly with the advent of massive misinformation, even on the part of hostile countries, the populace at large may be at risk of even more of what we saw in 2016 going around social media, and I personally believe that a safety brake managed by people who really know what the job entails, and should definitely have a familiarity with the nominee has far more potential good than bad.

So, here are my questions again:

So, you're saying that he was a "Super delegate," but didn't really mean it?

Or are you saying that he attempted to change the Superdelegate process by joining? I haven't heard anything about him trying to change it before he was a POTUS candidate. Maybe you have?

I just think if you win by compromising core principles, you may discover you haven't really won.

You mean like someone attempting to win by using Superdelegates to overturn the actual vote of WethePeople? That hasn't been done successfully, to my knowledge. Superdelegates have honored the choice of wethepeople.

If we do not trust the WeThePeople (voters) to choose, then we should change demo prefix of the word democracy.

So don't you think that we should eliminate caucuses? Because if there's anything that could negate the votes of the vast majority of wethe people of a state in a primary year, it's a caucus. Caucuses disenfranchise many groups of people - those with aspergers, the disabled, those with small children, those with hourly jobs, older people who can't stand for long periods of time, etc.

[MasonDreams]

99. Was he a super delegate and did not mean it?

I do not understand the question. I didn't know he could have been a SD? he was an independent not a party member I thought? The part "did not mean it" I don't understand. Are you saying did he go to the convention as an SD but secretly did not want to be a SD.
Question 2 change by joining? How would I know? I have not met him and I've never been to Vermont or DC. Question 3 did he try to change the SD system before he ran? Again don't know. Before he ran I didn't know who he was to the extent that I may have gotten him mixed up with Barney Frank. Another hero on the hill.

I think lots of SDs pledge support before the voters of CA NY Illinois & Texas weigh in and I want to hear what they say first.

But the system is changed now yes? Not until the 2nd ballot now right?

I answered the caucus question. I would prefer primaries. But I have no idea about open or closed. Don't want repubs monkey wrenching but don't want to exclude the third or quarter that are not registered with either party.

[proud patriot]

15. sounds good to me

[we can do it]

16. 👍🏽

[djacq]

17. Not there yet.

But close.

[Auggie]

28. I switched from Biden to Warren a few weeks ago. She can beat Trump.

[barbtries]

30. i voted for bernie in 2016.

and regretted it soon after. won't do it again unless i have to. too much ego.

[blm]

55. Castro is in my top 5

I like smart and genuine.

[barbtries]

60. me too!

i like him so much in the first debate. lately Beto's been getting my attention.

[blm]

62. It's a good group

A group of winners.

[barbtries]

65. we have an embarrassment of riches.

there's a couple i would have to hold my nose, but i have no qualms about voting for the Democratic candidate when the time comes.

[FM123]

77. "we have an embarrassment of riches"

Yes! I keep saying this too - we Dems have so many great folks running.

[oldsoftie]

32. So now you're voting for a Democrat.

[LakeArenal]

33. Certainly a step in the right direction

[jcgoldie]

37. Welcome aboard!

We don't mind the crowd!

[DrFunkenstein]

38. I Love Bernie - I've Still Got His Sign In My Window

I just think that Warren has a clearer way forward with her actually turning progressive ideas into policy, greater message discipline, a greater range of emotions to tap, and will be such a fantastic choice for the first woman President in history.

[ehrnst]

48. Well, we did have a Democratic female candidate that got more votes than

anyone ever running for POTUS not named Obama, so we have that going for us.

[katmondoo]

56. Thank you

[randr]

61. A move in the right direction

No pun intended, really.

[customerserviceguy]

69. It's not a "vote", it's a preference

You get a vote if your state has a primary.

Still, it's instructive, I take it as a sign that Sen. Warren can capture at least some, if not much, of the support that Sen. Sanders has by the time actual voting starts.

[question everything]

70. Congratulations on choosing a Democratic candidate

[backtoblue]

71. Welcome to the Persistance!

[Jeffersons Ghost]

75. K&R

[Snarkyboots8]

101. Funny, I just changed my vote from Warren to Sanders.

Beware of wounded wild pigs named donnie trump!

[samplegirl]

102. Yes

she has a better chance!

[CentralMass]

104. Bernie has my primary vote.

[mvd]

106. I love Sanders and it was extremely difficult to change

He and Warren are so close that I wish I could list “either one.” This time I am putting beating Trump as my highest priority. There is nothing wrong with being old, but admittedly Sanders really looks and sounds old now. He spaced out before answering his first debate question. Warren is not young, but those years she has on Bernie make a difference. Plus, I am worried about the possible party divisions another Sanders run could cause. He has the best ideas of all of them IMO. And while he uses similar talking points, they are always valid. But I think Warren may better be able to explain her ideas to the voters.