Bernie is not a Democrat. What gives his supporters the right to criticize?

[dutch508]

The HILL-BERN wars continue!

hill2016 (364 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251752079

Bernie is not a Democrat. What gives his supporters the right to criticize the super-delegates


Last edited Sun Nov 1, 2015, 12:52 AM - Edit history (1)

which have been part of the nomination process since 1984?

You can't change the rules this late in the game just because you don't like the results.


Some posts claim that he couldn't get on the ballot in Vermont as a Democrat.

Here's the last GE ballot from Vermont. Clearly shows someone running as a Democrat for the House of Representatives.

https://www.sec.state.vt.us/media/616758/2014-GE-Sample-Ballot.pdf


If I just join a society, do I as a newcomer and outsider have the right to criticize the election process? Or would I be taken more seriously if I have "paid my dues" and have some seniority?

 

JackInGreen (1,685 posts)
1. Link?

Or...wha? I mean, are you thinking we should call the primary off or he should bow out because the super delegates have decide some....4+/5ish months away?

hill2016 (364 posts)
17. I'm thinking that his supporters shouldn't complain about super delegates going to Hillary because it's part of the nomination process. Has been for 30 years.

frylock (28,326 posts)
28. Yeah, well tough shit.

Phlem (4,745 posts)
45. holy ****ing shit.

And we shouldn't complain about Kings and Queens cause that the way it's been done for ages!

Really!?

Because the stupid is really starting to hurt.

bravenak (16,670 posts)
3. He cannot tell Democrats how to run their primaries. Not his place. He did not join OUR party.

pinstikfartherin (399 posts)
51. Apparently swear a blood oath.

That's right! You must swear an oath to Lord Jackass, sign your name in blood, and vow to never include someone who will not do the same...even if they support the same ideas. It's all in the handbook.

Seriously, this stance is that kind of stupid.

MohRokTah (10,052 posts)
26. Nope, really, he's not. He's nothing like being a Democrat.

Mostly because he's never been a Democrat.

bravenak (16,670 posts)
52. He is not a democrat

bravenak (16,670 posts)
102. Someone on ignore must have replied. It kicked this post back up.

MohRokTah (10,052 posts)
33. Show me where in the consitution it bans super delegates. eom

hill2016 (364 posts)
71. as a newcomer and outsider why do you think he should have any influence in how the DNC runs its nomination process?

hill2016 (364 posts)
25. aren't the people who are actually in the party the ones who define what the party is?

delrem (8,281 posts)
48. wtf?????

from whence was this pulled?

We all know that Hillary Clinton is the only anointed Democrat.
We all know that she will command the super-delegates, just as she will command the DNC, the DLC, and the Party itself.
Nobody expects to "change the rules".
We're all watching

highprincipleswork (325 posts)
56. So you like super-delegates? Isn't that special? The whole process is exceedingly special.

The whole process, especially this year, to select our best representative is really very special, and especially undemocratic. But some seem to like that. Perhaps it's because their candidate is the best-known, their candidate is ahead.

Have they looked at the DNC fund-raising lately? Have they viewed election results in recent years? Not a lot to crow about.

I suppose Debbie Wasserman Schultz thinks it's just fine. Others may feel it's just fine. They may even celebrate.

Hiding your head in the sand while many of those around you are disaffected or downright fighting mad is a strategy that works for a while. I just don't think it's a very good strategy in the long run.

Yes, we need more debates and a more democratic process to select the truly best candidate. Failing that, we don't have a unified party. We don't really have a unified anything. But those who are betting in a certain direction are certainly celebrating early.

Well, I guess they'd just get the big corporations to come and pick up the bill. That will really tie the bow up real nicely.

Star Member highprincipleswork (325 posts)
133. truly can't appreciate the consciousness of the usual Clinton fan

Besides the fact that it's all so obvious that she will be willing to sell out any of a number of cherished New Deal institutions that keep so many of the truly disadvantaged and the just moderately disadvantaged and the once middle class in something like a decent life, and that she's all too wiling to go to war, can you not see how the very system that supports her and sustains her is not very "democratic" or reflective of the true will of the people? Can you not see that limiting the public access of other candidates, while fiendishly clever and politically, strategically sound, also cuts off the Democratic Party potentially from those who see their candidates marginalized.

Look, Bernie may never get the kind of following that warrants a nomination. But a truly team-playing, confident candidate would say, sure, give them the debates they say they need. We're going to win this thing anyway.

But no. The cagey game continues. The cagey game is not a very high principled game, however. It will never get you the kind of enthusiasm that has been seen in the Bernie camp. And it's mostly because we've all been here before, and seen how the cagey game is a set-up, a hoax, a mirage.

Bernie is a Democratic candidate such as we see very seldom, who puts principle first, and they are principles that Hillary has spent months copying and imitating. In short, they are popular ones.

It's just that he will stand up for them, and she will do what is politically expedient.

I am sickened by the process, and what we choose to settle for, and how the game is already so rigged with big money and super Pacs and super delegates and everything that is wrong and can never lead to something right.

Ronald Reagan scared us all so much so many years ago, and there just hasn't hardly been a truly decent day since.

MADem (118,475 posts)
64. They can criticize all they want.

It won't do them any good. The party is a political organization. People who work within the party, contribute their time, energy and resources to it, and work within the structure of the party have influence within it. People who come in from outside can't elbow their way to the front of the line and change the rules.

That's life. They're free to gripe, but they'll need to put their shoulders to the wheel for awhile before they are listened to, and when they demonstrate a little loyalty, they'll get a little loyalty.

That's how "parties" work.

demwing (14,692 posts)
146. And what will you do to stop us? Complain? What gives you the right to complain?

^ That's the Democrat party I know and love! If you are off the [D] plantation then **** YOU!

Might as well just crown her royal sorriness now...

[franksolich]

Might as well just crown her royal sorriness now...

I think so, and I'm not being sarcastic at all in saying that.

There's really no point in Democrats fighting each other, and competing for funds, when they clearly have their best possible candidate out there.  The Democrats need to get along with each other, and to give money to her, and her alone, if they entertain any hopes of winning in 2016.

By fighting each other, supporting a divisive number of candidates, and giving a little bit of money here, a little bit of money there, the Democrats are neglecting "unity"--and unity wins elections.

[Big Dog]

Lucy just pulled the football away, and Charlie Brown is not happy.

"AAAAAAAGH!"

[DumbAss Tanker]

The more slick, legalistic political-machine shenanigans Hitlery's gang pulls against Bernie to clothesline him, the more it will depress Democrat voter turnout among the Millennials.  Keep it up, Democrats!

[98ZJUSMC]

If I just join a society, do I as a newcomer and outsider have the right to criticize the election process? Or would I be taken more seriously if I have "paid my dues" and have some seniority?

You should have started earlier.......


.....but your buddies agree with you.

[Ptarmigan]

hill2016 (364 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251752079

Bernie is not a Democrat. What gives his supporters the right to criticize the super-delegates


Last edited Sun Nov 1, 2015, 12:52 AM - Edit history (1)

which have been part of the nomination process since 1984?

You can't change the rules this late in the game just because you don't like the results.


Some posts claim that he couldn't get on the ballot in Vermont as a Democrat.

Here's the last GE ballot from Vermont. Clearly shows someone running as a Democrat for the House of Representatives.

https://www.sec.state.vt.us/media/616758/2014-GE-Sample-Ballot.pdf


If I just join a society, do I as a newcomer and outsider have the right to criticize the election process? Or would I be taken more seriously if I have "paid my dues" and have some seniority?

So, you are not going to vote for someone who does not have a "D" at the end no matter how left they are?

bravenak (16,670 posts)
3. He cannot tell Democrats how to run their primaries. Not his place. He did not join OUR party.

Bernie Sanders is still a leftist. No?

bravenak (16,670 posts)
52. He is not a democrat

Let me ask you this. If Hillary Clinton was a Democrat, while Barack Obama is an Independent. Who would you vote for?

[thundley4]

hill2016 (364 posts)
17. I'm thinking that his supporters shouldn't complain about super delegates going to Hillary because it's part of the nomination process. Has been for 30 years.

DUmmie Hillbots are more than willing to let their betters make their selection for them.

[franksolich]

DUmmie Hillbots are more than willing to let their betters make their selection for them.

Of course.

Remember, the primitives aren't like decent and civilized people; they can't think on their own.

So it's in their own best interests to have people who know what they're doing--in this case, professional Democrats with time, energy, and money invested in the Democrat party--make those decisions for them.

Isn't this why they like the boss system of big city machines so well?