[US Election 2016] Democratic Primary Megathread III

[Kelinfort]

That makes zero political sense for you

*Shrug*, so did my dad, who voted for Obama the first time. I think we were fed up with the same, and Obama was a disappointment to us, so we voted for a third party candidate. And my dad can't stand Libertarians normally. He pretty much said something along the lines of that his views aren't really his ultimate goal for how he wants things to go, but we need a change, and he'd be a start. Similar to how I felt, really.

If you go off of that site, which I can't say how reliable it is (It has been proven not to entirely be great), Isidewith says I agree with him on 70% of issues.

Usually it's that 30% that matters a lot

[AiliailiA]

https://johnlaurits.com/2016/04/28/this-is-what-will-happen-at-the-democratic-convention/

This is a big deal. If you're thinking of not voting for Sanders because Clinton seems inevitable, take a look at this. Not sure how this math can be beaten.

I didn't read it right through. Right from the start I see the idea: what would it take for Clinton to secure the majority of ALL delegates (including superdelegates) with only pledged delegates.

That's kinda dumb. As if the superdelegates are all going to switch to Sanders

[Farnhamia]

https://johnlaurits.com/2016/04/28/this-is-what-will-happen-at-the-democratic-convention/

This is a big deal. If you're thinking of not voting for Sanders because Clinton seems inevitable, take a look at this. Not sure how this math can be beaten.

I didn't read it right through. Right from the start I see the idea: what would it take for Clinton to secure the majority of ALL delegates (including superdelegates) with only pledged delegates.

That's kinda dumb. As if the superdelegates are all going to switch to Sanders

And as some pundit pointed out recently, Sanders has been bashing the superdelegate process from the beginning, for him to turn around and say, "Please forget those mean things I said, vote for me!" sounds just a trifle hypocritical.

[The balkens]

I didn't read it right through. Right from the start I see the idea: what would it take for Clinton to secure the majority of ALL delegates (including superdelegates) with only pledged delegates.

That's kinda dumb. As if the superdelegates are all going to switch to Sanders

And as some pundit pointed out recently, Sanders has been bashing the superdelegate process from the beginning, for him to turn around and say, "Please forget those mean things I said, vote for me!" sounds just a trifle hypocritical.

Or rather hes a bit desperate. could be both.

[Corrian]

I didn't read it right through. Right from the start I see the idea: what would it take for Clinton to secure the majority of ALL delegates (including superdelegates) with only pledged delegates.

That's kinda dumb. As if the superdelegates are all going to switch to Sanders

Sanders supporters are just desperate at this point. Can't really blame them to be honest, though, just based off of the whole concept behind Sanders campaign: Trying to fundamentally change everything wrong with the current system.

[AiliailiA]

I didn't read it right through. Right from the start I see the idea: what would it take for Clinton to secure the majority of ALL delegates (including superdelegates) with only pledged delegates.

That's kinda dumb. As if the superdelegates are all going to switch to Sanders

Sanders supporters are just desperate at this point. Can't really blame them to be honest, though, just based off of the whole concept behind Sanders campaign: Trying to fundamentally change everything wrong with the current system.

Well I consider caucuses part of what is wrong, but I don't expect Sanders or his supporters will have much to say about getting rid of them.

[Corrian]

Well I consider caucuses part of what is wrong, but I don't expect Sanders or his supporters will have much to say about getting rid of them.

Most I've seen do. But some don't.

In fact, I've seen some go "He does well in caucuses because it isn't as easy to cheat"

[AiliailiA]

Well I consider caucuses part of what is wrong, but I don't expect Sanders or his supporters will have much to say about getting rid of them.

Most I've seen do. But some don't.

In fact, I've seen some go "He does well in caucuses because it isn't as easy to cheat"

So they want open primaries? Semi-open? Federalize voter registration? Preferential voting in primaries?

[MERIZoC]

Thing is, Obama should have talked about race more. He had the opportunity to bring a direct conversation about race to the table and didn't.

No, he didn't. I hate that narrative: "Our first black President was the ideal person to have the long-needed 'race conversation' with America."

Wrong. DEAD wrong. As a rule of thumb, white people aren't going to listen to a black person telling them they don't treat black people fairly. There's too much "us-and-them" baked into that conversation to begin with, and (speaking about white people as a white person), having one of "them" tell "us" that we suck just begs for the very people who most badly need to listen to that conversation to tune out.

No, the next WHITE President is the right person to have the long-needed "race conversation" with America. Done that way, it's "We white people really NEED to do better if we want to see an end to racial animus," rather than "You honkies are still oppressing us, sucker!"

I don't fault Clinton for trying to do that with gender, though I don't think she's done the best job of it.

No women is, for the same reason that it needs to be a WHITE President who takes steps to lead the country out of the mire of continuing race discrimination. The equally long-required "sex conversation" is going to have to be conducted by the first MALE President to follow our Nation's first FEMALE President, so that it can be "You know, we guys have to stop being such assholes" as opposed to "All men are sexist jerks!"

No please, get more patronizing.

[Ashmoria]

because she isn't under criminal investigation.

Then what is the FBI doing?

they are making sure her server is OK. having a private email server isn't a criminal offense.

[Ashmoria]

Well I voted today.

In a decision that I am certain will shock all the long-term participants of this thread, I had pretty much made up my mind to write in O'Malley, and be done with it, and had even rehearsed some statements for Sanders supporters disappointed that I, as a progressive voter, declined to back their candidate. Unfortunately, due to a quirk of this state's electoral laws, O'Malley did not qualify as a write-in candidate. So I threw up my hands and then voted for Hillary, falling back on my longstanding position: I'm willing to vote for Bernie Sanders, but not in a primary.

weird.

does that mean that if you had written in his name it wouldn't even have been tallied anymore than if you had written in mickey mouse?

[Arumdaum]

My mom and I just voted for Bernie Sanders through mail. We're both first-time voters. I guess we both turned white today.

Also, voted for some provisions and other races. Voted against incumbent senator, who voted to try to make English the official language of the US, abolish the estate tax, encourage study of flat taxes, and voted to lower capital-gains taxes, in favor of a relative nobody who is more progressive.

Voted against incumbent representative who is a Blue Dog.

Voted for the incumbent governor, though.

My sister is also going to vote for Sanders, and my dad would also vote for him, but he's in Korea, and doesn't want to register as a Democrat (he calls Republicans "the billionaire party," and the Democrats "the millionaire party"). We currently live in Oregon, which has a closed primary. He voted for John Kerry in 2004, but he said that was only because he wanted to express how much he didn't like George W. Bush.

[Arumdaum]

No, he didn't. I hate that narrative: "Our first black President was the ideal person to have the long-needed 'race conversation' with America."

Wrong. DEAD wrong. As a rule of thumb, white people aren't going to listen to a black person telling them they don't treat black people fairly. There's too much "us-and-them" baked into that conversation to begin with, and (speaking about white people as a white person), having one of "them" tell "us" that we suck just begs for the very people who most badly need to listen to that conversation to tune out.

No, the next WHITE President is the right person to have the long-needed "race conversation" with America. Done that way, it's "We white people really NEED to do better if we want to see an end to racial animus," rather than "You honkies are still oppressing us, sucker!"


No women is, for the same reason that it needs to be a WHITE President who takes steps to lead the country out of the mire of continuing race discrimination. The equally long-required "sex conversation" is going to have to be conducted by the first MALE President to follow our Nation's first FEMALE President, so that it can be "You know, we guys have to stop being such assholes" as opposed to "All men are sexist jerks!"

No please, get more patronizing.

only white people can solve racism

and only men can solve sexism

[MERIZoC]

No please, get more patronizing.

only white people can solve racism

and only men can solve sexism

Apparently.

[Geilinor]

only white people can solve racism

and only men can solve sexism

Apparently.

That's because white people generally wouldn't listen to a black president if he talked to them about race. There are people who think that Obama is racist or that he's behind Black Lives Matter or that he's not American.

[MERIZoC]

Apparently.

That's because white people generally wouldn't listen to a black president if he talked to them about race. There are people who think that Obama is racist or that he's behind Black Lives Matter or that he's not American.

They're brain dead fuckwits who are already racist and aren't going to listen to a white race traitor try to tell them how to treat uppity negroes.

[Jordkloden]

Both of my parents voted for Bernie in PA, at my behest.

[Kelinfort]

only white people can solve racism

and only men can solve sexism

Apparently.

I'd argue that a black president like Barack shouldn't be expected to cure racial ills through a conversation with people who already despise him.

The whites who admire him will listen, but the others will undoubtedly double down.

[MERIZoC]

Apparently.

I'd argue that a black president like Barack shouldn't be expected to cure racial ills through a conversation with people who already despise him.

The whites who admire him will listen, but the others will undoubtedly double down.

I don't think anybody should be "expected" to solve a problem. I think they should be expected to try.

[Kelinfort]

I'd argue that a black president like Barack shouldn't be expected to cure racial ills through a conversation with people who already despise him.

The whites who admire him will listen, but the others will undoubtedly double down.

I don't think anybody should be "expected" to solve a problem. I think they should be expected to try.

He has tried. The problem is mainly because of whites. We live in a world where racial discussion scares a lot of us. Maybe not a majority, but a substantial amount of people. And a lot will shut out any discussion at all. Whenever Obama lends an olive branch to people, they tend to shy away, sadly.

[MERIZoC]

I don't think anybody should be "expected" to solve a problem. I think they should be expected to try.

He has tried. The problem is mainly because of whites. We live in a world where racial discussion scares a lot of us. Maybe not a majority, but a substantial amount of people. And a lot will shut out any discussion at all. Whenever Obama lends an olive branch to people, they tend to shy away, sadly.

Well, as someone who isn't shying away from that, I'd welcome a discussion, and he's not bringing it.

[Kelinfort]

He has tried. The problem is mainly because of whites. We live in a world where racial discussion scares a lot of us. Maybe not a majority, but a substantial amount of people. And a lot will shut out any discussion at all. Whenever Obama lends an olive branch to people, they tend to shy away, sadly.

Well, as someone who isn't shying away from that, I'd welcome a discussion, and he's not bringing it.

He's tried. Especially after Trayvon Martin and Ferguson. The problem is, we weren't willing to try.

[Ngelmish]

Well I voted today.

In a decision that I am certain will shock all the long-term participants of this thread, I had pretty much made up my mind to write in O'Malley, and be done with it, and had even rehearsed some statements for Sanders supporters disappointed that I, as a progressive voter, declined to back their candidate. Unfortunately, due to a quirk of this state's electoral laws, O'Malley did not qualify as a write-in candidate. So I threw up my hands and then voted for Hillary, falling back on my longstanding position: I'm willing to vote for Bernie Sanders, but not in a primary.

weird.

does that mean that if you had written in his name it wouldn't even have been tallied anymore than if you had written in mickey mouse?

It would have effectively spoiled the ballot, and there were important local primaries and for my house seat. It was frustrating, but to be fair, I badly lost the argument in this primary ages ago. It's not as if I have to belabor the point any further.

[Guy]

My mom and I just voted for Bernie Sanders through mail. We're both first-time voters. I guess we both turned white today.

Also, voted for some provisions and other races. Voted against incumbent senator, who voted to try to make English the official language of the US, abolish the estate tax, encourage study of flat taxes, and voted to lower capital-gains taxes, in favor of a relative nobody who is more progressive.

Voted against incumbent representative who is a Blue Dog.

Voted for the incumbent governor, though.

My sister is also going to vote for Sanders, and my dad would also vote for him, but he's in Korea, and doesn't want to register as a Democrat (he calls Republicans "the billionaire party," and the Democrats the "the millionaire party). We currently live in Oregon, which has a closed primary. He voted for John Kerry in 2004, but he said that was only because he wanted to express how much he didn't like George W. Bush.

Wyden is a really mixed bag. He's the most liberal Senator if you look at some of his policy positions, and one of the most centrist ones if you look at others. (Especially liberal on social and military issues iirc, more moderate on economic issues, if I remember correctly.) I can't see him ever losing re-election, though.

[USS Monitor]

dont be ashamed of it.

And I'm a Sanders supporter, so it is kinda depressing

I know that feeling. Some of his "supporters" on the internet are so stupid I can't tell if they're for real or trolling.