Great piece by Charles Pierce

[oldtime dfl_er]

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a31153751/bernie-sanders-democratic-convention-plurality-delegates/

From the article: "Only one campaign has people who disrupted the national convention in 2016. Only one campaign has people threatening to primary other progressive Democrats. And that campaign is the one pushing a candidate who isn’t really a Democrat anyway."


And I can't help it, I love his term "juicebox revolutionaries." Go ahead and OKBOOMER me.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Beloved progressive columnist Charles Pierce goes under the Bernie Bus in 1...2...3...

"Juicebox revolutionaries."

For the Sanders people to throw around accusations that The Man is keeping Bernie down again is to fail to recognize that Bernie is The Man this time around. And the prospect they could disrupt the convention if they don’t get what they want, in violation of the rules that they helped write, is the height of hubris, and you can ask Sophocles how that works out.

If you ask me what is the biggest stumbling block in the way of a Sanders nomination, I will tell you that it is a severe case of premature triumphalism among the members of his national staff and, god knows, among the angry children of the Intertoobz. Nobody owes Bernie Sanders anything. Nobody owes his campaign any more deference than they owe to the campaigns of any of the other surviving candidates. Only one campaign has people who disrupted the national convention in 2016. Only one campaign has people threatening to primary other progressive Democrats. And that campaign is the one pushing a candidate who isn’t really a Democrat anyway.

Yup.

[HarlanPepper]

2. Wow! Looks like Pierce has finally had it with Bernie.

Welcome aboard, Charlie.

[Cha]

33. Ikr!

[blm]

51. He's made it clear for a year he thinks Warren is the one.

He thinks her anti-corruption chops are the sharpest and will work hardest to defeat Trump.

[BeyondGeography]

3. "Sanctimonious ratfckers"

So true.

This is not to be missed. Pierce unloads his formidable writing arsenal here.

[Cha]

34. Wow

[DanTex]

4. Would be nice if instead of just bashing Bernie supporters, he would at least try to make

an argument as to why a GOP-donating corporate lobbyist should have a vote that counts thousands of times more than that of the average voter.

[oldtime dfl_er]

5. The Intercept?

If you want people to take you seriously, find serious sources.

[DanTex]

6. Yes. Something inaccurate about that story? Or you just don't like left-leaning media?

[HarlanPepper]

11. Putin leaning media is more like it.

[DanTex]

12. LOL. OK, so you don't like the Intercept. Is there anything inaccurate about the story?

[AllyCat]

41. The intercept is not a reliable source.

Agree with other poster. Putin-backed media. THAT is what I suspect we both disagree with.

[ancianita]

28. Prove it. Link it. You might not like Greenwald, but Jeremy Scahill's journalism is solid.

The Intercept is evolving. No sense in censoring its presence here if its opinions are grounded in fact.

[Cha]

36. greenwald.. one of 3 founders of the Intercept.. denies russian

involvement in the general election.

Glenn Greenwald Tells Russians Liberals Are Blaming Them As Excuse for Clinton

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/07/glenn-greenwald-tells-russia-liberals-are-scapegoating-them.html

[rockfordfile]

40. It seems that greenwald took the un-American route with Steven Seagal

[blue-wave]

16. OK, I can understand

your criticisms of a conservative writer. (Didn't I just see you here? https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287595856#post48) But now you're on this post attacking Pierce? Huh?

As I said before "Actually listening to and learning from people you don't agree with is not a bad character trait. It's actually a very American trait and sometimes they might have a valid point."

[DanTex]

17. Yes, I'm criticizing Pierce for attacking Bernie supporters and ignoring the fact that corporate

lobbyists are given the power of thousands of voters by the superdelegate system. Is there a problem?

[blue-wave]

23. No problem, not at all. I love America and the fact that you have the right to criticize.

Don't you agree?

Pierce I think makes an excellent point in his subtitle: "Bernie Sanders has surrounded himself with people so utterly pure in their own opinion of themselves that they object to compromises that they themselves made."

[Cha]

45. Or something like that. Mahalo, blue-wave!

[blue-wave]

57. Mahalo Cha!!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

13. Bernie himself is a superdelegate. The lobbyist in question is a member of the DNC

who is a former member of the Tennessee state legislature and an executive member of the Tennessee Democratic Party. That's one of the ways one gets to be a superdelegate:

Superdelegates fall into four categories based on other positions they hold, and are formally described (in Rule 9.A) as "unpledged party leader and elected official delegates" consisting of:

Elected members of the Democratic National Committee: "the chairs and vice chairs of each state and territorial Democratic Party; 212 national committeemen and committeewomen elected to represent their states; top officials of the DNC itself and several of its auxiliary groups (such as the Democratic Attorneys General Association, the National Federation of Democratic Women and the Young Democrats of America); and 75 at-large members who are nominated by the party chairman and chosen by the full DNC."
Most of the at-large members "are local party leaders, officeholders and donors or representatives of important Democratic constituencies, such as organized labor." There were 437 DNC members (with 433 votes) who were superdelegates at the 2016 Democratic National Convention.

Democratic Governors (including territorial governors and the Mayor of the District of Columbia). There were 21 Democratic Governors who were superdelegates at the 2016 Democratic National Convention.

Democratic Members of Congress. There were 191 U.S. Representatives (including non-voting delegates from Washington, D.C. and territories) and 47 U.S. Senators (including Washington, D.C. shadow senators) who were superdelegates at the 2016 Democratic National Convention.

Distinguished party leaders (consisting of current and former Presidents, Vice Presidents, congressional leaders, and DNC chairs). There were 20 of these who were superdelegates at the 2016 Democratic National Convention.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate

This person is only one of 771 superdelegates, and he won't be voting unless there isn't a majority winner after the first ballot. These are the rules Bernie agreed to in 2016. Too fucking bad if he's butthurt about them now.

[DanTex]

15. So it's good for GOP-donating corporate lobbyists to be superdelegates because....?

I missed the part of your post where you explain why that's a good thing, and why nobody should be bothered by it.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

18. Not my circus, not my monkeys - it's Bernie's circus and Bernie's monkeys.

Bernie negotiated the DNC's rule changes in 2016 but apparently he didn't object to a lobbyist who had occasionally donated to GOPers being one of 771 superdelegates under the rules for appointing them. I was in no position to object, but Bernie was.

[DanTex]

19. So there's no reason. That's what I thought. My point exactly.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

20. It's not up to me. If the DNC has reasons for allowing this person to be a superdelegate,

they are theirs, not mine. I'm not a member of the DNC and have no control over it. Bernie, however, was involved in getting rules changed that he thought would favor him (but now he's butthurt because maybe they won't). Why didn't he object to this lobbyist being a superdelegate?

[DanTex]

24. It's not up to me either, but it's obviously not a good thing for GOP-donating lobbyists to

have so much influence over who Dems nominate. It doesn't have to be up to me for me to have an opinion about it.

[ramen]

35. +1

[2naSalit]

22. Pretzelogic capabilities noted. ...nt

[2naSalit]

21. +1

[Mr.Bill]

39. Do you know that it's common

for lobbyists to donate to both sides of a political race? They do it to hedge their bets.

[SharonClark]

42. Is it good to have Nina Turner, who voted for Jill Stein, as a superdelegate?

She shouldn't be a superdelegate and neither should people who aren't elected Democratic officials.
Maybe that can be fixed after the election.

[BeyondGeography]

14. While you're here, do you think Bernie supporters could actually handle a moderate on the ticket?

Like, say, Klobuchar, who has called Bernie’s goals pipe dreams but whose name is being pushed by many well-intentioned people.

Personally, I think their heads would explode.

[MarcA]

43. It's just more Bernie Bashing from Hoveround Centrists.

Something that thrives on "liberal" DU.

[Hekate]

50. How many layers of insult is that?

[blm]

52. Pierce isn't even close to being a centrist.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

53. Charles Pierce? A "Hoveround Centrist"?

But didn't I say upthread that the Sandernistas would throw him under the bus, too? Nobody dares disrespect Dear Leader.

[Cha]

54. What are you Talking About? "Charlie Pierce.. a centrist"?!

Please explain.

[ehrnst]

61. Well what about the former Paul Manafort associate?

Yanukovych was ousted in 2014 after he halted Ukraine’s movement toward the European Union, yet Devine offered to help Manafort’s efforts in the 2014 Ukraine election — for a price. “We are ready to take on this project,” he wrote to Manafort partner Rick Gates, for $100,000 per month (payable in advance), $25,000 per week of runoff, a $50,000 “success fee” and expenses including first-class airfare. In June 2014 — even as talks about the Sanders presidential run were getting underway — Devine went to Ukraine to help remnants of Yanukovych’s party reforming under a new name. “My rate for something like this would be $10,000/day, including travel days,” he wrote to Gates.

Manafort, who worked for the world’s sleazebags, made no pretense of scruples. But Devine was the guy molding the Sanders campaign as a righteous, everyman’s insurgency against the corrupt, wealthy establishment. Devine, who had worked on Sanders’s first campaign for the Senate in 2006 (the same year he plotted Yanukovych’s comeback), earned more than $5 million for his firm from the populist Sanders presidential campaign and at least $10 million in commissions split with another firm, according to a Slate tally.

Devine, through an employee, declined to comment Wednesday.

Devine wrote with Manafort a January 2006 memo when Russia was cutting off gas supplies to Ukraine, showing Yanukovych how to ride his “good neighbor” policy toward Russia to victory. He became prime minister. Devine drafted a presidential victory speech for Yanukovych in February 2010 (“We are all Ukrainians first,” the American wrote) and later that year wrote talking points showing how Yanukovych and his party could attack the opposition.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-bernie-sanders-ad-man-who-played-paul-manaforts-game/2018/08/01/0df78c18-95c7-11e8-a679-b09212fb69c2_story.html

And Superdelegate Ocasio-Cortez, and Superdelegate Rashid Tlaib whose votes count thousands of times more than that of the average voter are endorsing a candidate before they know who their constituents support.

Superdelegate Nina Turner who has a vote that counts thousands of times more than that of the average voter, is on the senior staff of one candidate - who is also a Superdelegate....

[blue-wave]

7. It's about time!!

This should be a read for every true Democrat!!

[mcar]

8. It is a great column by Pierce

The problem, of course, is that one of those candidates, Bernie Sanders, has surrounded himself with people so utterly pure in their own opinion of themselves that they object to compromises that they themselves made. Consider that over the past couple of days—or ever since a CNN town hall in which Elizabeth Warren pretty much pantsed a Bernie bro on the very topic—that Sandersland completely lost its mind on this issue. These are the facts on the ground....

Bernie Sanders and his campaign are running in the Democratic nominating process at the sufferance of the Democratic Party. Not only that, but the campaign is running for the Democratic nomination under a system of rules that they themselves had a hand in drafting, and under compromises into which they freely entered. (Believe me, after 2016, there are Democrats who believe that nobody in that party owes Bernie Sanders a bean with which to bless himself.) That system was the product of vigorous and healthy debate. Those compromises were hard-won and not unreasonable. They—and the work that produced them—deserve the most basic respect of agreeing to adhere to them....

For example, there is a lot of loose talk out there about primarying Senator Professor Warren. Please. The only person remotely capable of mounting that kind of challenge in Massachusetts is Rep. Ayanna Pressley, who is currently one of Warren’s primary surrogates. And that’s not even to mention the kind of presumption it takes for various juicebox revolutionaries to make the threat in the first place. Because she told the truth about the fait accompli scam that the Sanders campaign is trying to run based on a fraction of a smidgen of the actual vote, she’s a neolib corporate sellout who wants to be Bloomberg’s vice president?

[MH1]

48. LOL, they're actually whining now that they'll primary Elizabeth Warren??

Good luck with that, bros.

[Sloumeau]

10. K&R

[octoberlib]

25. These are great points

1) Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat. He is an independent who quadrennially cosplays as a Democrat because he wants to run for president. For this, he should be eternally grateful that a) nobody makes the point that at least Ralph Nader had the stones to be an independent and run as an independent; and b) that he is running now and not back in the days when there really was a Democratic establishment that would have been able to crush him like a bug.

2) Bernie Sanders and his campaign are running in the Democratic nominating process at the sufferance of the Democratic Party. Not only that, but the campaign is running for the Democratic nomination under a system of rules that they themselves had a hand in drafting, and under compromises into which they freely entered. (Believe me, after 2016, there are Democrats who believe that nobody in that party owes Bernie Sanders a bean with which to bless himself.) That system was the product of vigorous and healthy debate. Those compromises were hard-won and not unreasonable. They—and the work that produced them—deserve the most basic respect of agreeing to adhere to them.

3) That’s the way it goes.


Nobody owes Bernie Sanders anything. Nobody owes his campaign any more deference than they owe to the campaigns of any of the other surviving candidates. Only one campaign has people who disrupted the national convention in 2016. Only one campaign has people threatening to primary other progressive Democrats. And that campaign is the one pushing a candidate who isn’t really a Democrat anyway.

[Squinch]

26. That is fabulous!!!

But I can't see most of the responses. If I were to guess that someone on my ignore list has hikacked the thread to talk about superdelegates, would I be right?

[octoberlib]

29. Yes.

[Squinch]

30. Lol! I'm psychic!

[redstatebluegirl]

27. I got ok boomered this morning.

He was a grad student in our department. I laughed at him out loud, poor little thing started to pout and didn't know what to say. He just hung his head and walked away.

[oldtime dfl_er]

31. haha

We're actually way ahead of the little juicebox revolutionaries.

[redstatebluegirl]

32. Yep.

[juxtaposed]

37. It still sounds like middle school to me. Just kids who can't get their way.

[TygrBright]

38. This paragraph... just... this paragraph...

He is an independent who quadrennially cosplays as a Democrat because he wants to run for president. For this, he should be eternally grateful that a) nobody makes the point that at least Ralph Nader had the stones to be an independent and run as an independent; and b) that he is running now and not back in the days when there really was a Democratic establishment that would have been able to crush him like a bug.

Truth.

I remember that Democratic Establishment. And today's Party leadership are wild-eyed revolutionary love children compared to what McCarthy was up against.

wearily,
Bright

[betsuni]

44. Last sentence of the article.

[Hekate]

47. Yes indeed. That was a righteous ass-kicking.

[Cha]

55. You made me look.. omG!

Who knew!

[Hekate]

46. Scathing & true & real. Charlie Pierce is my kinda guy. nt

[BootinUp]

49. lets make sure this is regularly kicked. nt

[Cha]

56. Yes.. bookmarked.

[octoberlib]

58. Kick.

[octoberlib]

59. Time to kick this again.

[Cha]

62. My thought exactly..

[dalton99a]

60. Well said.