[Beautiful Liar]

Originally posted by MAKSIM

But that isn't what is happening at all. Hillary is substantially leading among the popular vote and pledged delegates. The voice of voters are not being ignored if the candidate who is receiving the most votes is the one winning.

are you referring to the GOP nomination? That isn't gonna happen but it was leading in that direction which makes it not fair... and this has nothing to do with Hillary's Popular vote, Sanders issue is the Super Delegates of the states he won going into Hillary's pocket therefore the voice of those STATE voters are being ignore even if those Super Delegates did go to him he will still be losing but the fact they are NOT going to him at all is the moral of the issue

[Icarus]

Originally posted by Ramcoro

Then what's the point of Hillary running and winning then?

Don't get me wrong, I think people trying to shame others into voting is really distasteful. It's not like one person individually can decide the election, and it is your right to vote for who ever you want or not vote at all. But if we want to talk more abstractly about the electorate as whole, then that's more fun/interesting to talk about.

I think if someone feels that the result of the election is going to have a real impact on their life, then it's understandable if they get frustrated with people who vote differently

[Aden]

Originally posted by Mickey

It's not possible to go to the second ballot. But if neither of them concede, they both make speeches before the first ballot trying to sway the superdelegates - that's what they're referring to, I think.

Oh okay, I see. It sounds like a huge waste of time, though, since by then Hillary will probably have enough delegates to win the nomination and like 3-4 million more votes than Bernie.

But if Bernice wants to keep clawing then let her, I guess.

[Eros]

Also even if they decided to allocate the superdelagates the way y'all seem fit (which is counterintuitive and makes the entire point of them useless), Hillary would still be winning by a large margin!

Didn't someone here recently allocate them?

[Beautiful Liar]

Originally posted by Eros

Ok so the opposite of party loyalty basically, which is whatever. But essentially what that accomplishes is jack sh*t, and ends up shooting everyone in the foot. But the thing is that the Bernie supporters are predominantly white, which would be the group least affected by a Trump presidency so who gives a **** about everyone else as long as they really showed the Democrats whats up, right? Its an immature mentality to have, and really not where the focus should be ENTIRELY. I don't think, to some degree, its bad to champion for your candidate with these kind of measures. And I'd say even less so in another race, but the one we're facing now with Trump? We don't need this right now. There are other ways of going about this.

Also, just to briefly touch on what you were saying there on the end. I'm just gonna laugh cuz its so SO SO inaccurate it hurts.



And Hillary and her campaign are just trying their best to thwart off a Trump presidency by reminding everyone that they're trying to get to a similar place at the end of it all. And create party unity. If Bernie continues going the way he's going now, all he's gonna do is leave the democratic party fractured, and thats NOT WHAT WE NEED GOING INTO A GENERAL ELECTION WITH TRUMP AS THE NOM!

But sis almost every day in her rally speeches since New York she brings up how Sanders and his supporters need to unite behind her.... Literally no shame but I love it

[Aden]

Another thought is that if Hillary does reach the magic number before the primaries end (which seems likely at this point), they probably won't let Bernie have a contested convention.

[bleuwaffle]

Originally posted by Ramcoro

Then what's the point of Hillary running and winning then?

Don't get me wrong, I think people trying to shame others into voting is really distasteful. It's not like one person individually can decide the election, and it is your right to vote for who ever you want or not vote at all. But if we want to talk more abstractly about the electorate as whole, then that's more fun/interesting to talk about.

Sure, and by running and winning she's guaranteed her supporter's vote. But the DNC shouldn't assume Sanders supporters are going to rally behind her by default.

I refuse to vote for someone that's for fracking and the death penalty for example, regardless of party affiliation.

[Beautiful Liar]

Originally posted by Eros

Also even if they decided to allocate the superdelagates the way y'all seem fit (which is counterintuitive and makes the entire point of them useless), Hillary would still be winning by a large margin!

Didn't someone here recently allocate them?

Primaries on both sides should simply be "winner take all" meaning all those delegates are "bound to them" and at the end of the Primary the person with the most delegates is the nominee there have been times where the person with the most popular vote lost because the other candidate had more delegates Hillary herself was a victim of this The proportional state rules and Super Delegates is a old system that needs to go away it causes a lot of controversy..

[Javan]

Do y'all think the indictment will be in the primaries or general election?

[Eros]

Originally posted by Beautiful Liar

Primaries on both sides should simply be "winner take all" meaning all those delegates are "bound to them" and at the end of the Primary the person with the most delegates is the nominee there have been times where the person with the most popular vote lost because the other candidate had more delegates Hillary herself was a victim of this The proportional state rules and Super Delegates is a old system that needs to go away it causes a lot of controversy..

I'm gonna come back to you with some reading material so you can get more acquainted with how the system works and why it is how it is rn.

Also the popular vote situation with HRC in '08 was tricky! So you can't really use that as an example.

[RatedG²]

Originally posted by B94

I agree she needs to stop, she may get a small percentage of them if she's lucky. Voters are almost divided in half since no one is willing to back down in either fan base. I'd be surprised if he decided to go back as independent, however he's denied that. I guess it looks better for him towards delegates if he sticks to the DNC.

Small percentage? She'll easily grab over half, if not more, of his voters.

[Icarus]

Originally posted by Javan

Do y'all think the indictment will be in the primaries or general election?

Did a conspiracy theorist reddit Bernie Bro tell you that she would be indicted? They were lying to you

[RatedG²]

Originally posted by Beautiful Liar

Primaries on both sides should simply be "winner take all" meaning all those delegates are "bound to them" and at the end of the Primary the person with the most delegates is the nominee there have been times where the person with the most popular vote lost because the other candidate had more delegates Hillary herself was a victim of this The proportional state rules and Super Delegates is a old system that needs to go away it causes a lot of controversy..

If it were winner take all Hillary would've won months ago. If anything the democratic system now is more fair the the republican system. The republican system starts off as proportional so people end up getting a fair share of delegates but the last contests are winner take all because if someone is locked in a close contest it's there to block that challenger from being a force. Democrats have it always proportional so as long as you don't write off sections of the country you should be able to catch up at some point in time

[Aden]

Originally posted by Javan

Do y'all think the indictment will be in the primaries or general election?

Neither one because the Bernie bro wet dream of Hillary getting indicted isn't actually going to happen.

[bleuwaffle]

Originally posted by IcarusIsFlying

Did a conspiracy theorist reddit Bernie Bro tell you that she would be indicted? They were lying to you

Originally posted by Aiden

Neither one because the Bernie bro wet dream of Hillary getting indicted isn't actually going to happen.

She's got 12 FBI agents investigating her. This is not just for show.

[Javan]

Originally posted by bleuwaffle

She's got 12 FBI agents investigating her. This is not just for show.

Hmmmm ok. So even if they let her off the hook, any one of those agents can come forward and start bring messy

[Beautiful Liar]

Originally posted by RatedG²

If it were winner take all Hillary would've won months ago. If anything the democratic system now is more fair the the republican system. The republican system starts off as proportional so people end up getting a fair share of delegates but the last contests are winner take all because if someone is locked in a close contest it's there to block that challenger from being a force. Democrats have it always proportional so as long as you don't write off sections of the country you should be able to catch up at some point in time

Actually the media is constantly saying if Republicans had Super Delegates they would of most likely rally around Marco Rubio and John Kasich despite Trump having 10 more million votes than them both, can you imagine that mess and proportional rules can be unfair because many "rural" areas are not part of congressional districts and award "ZERO" and rural areas is a area in which Sanders does well in..

[@michael]

Super delegates voting with their state would not change the current delegate count. Hillary would still have a massive lead.

[RatedG²]

Originally posted by Beautiful Liar

Actually the media is constantly saying if Republicans had Super Delegates they would of most likely rally around Marco Rubio and John Kasich despite Trump having 10 more million votes than them both, can you imagine that mess and proportional rules can be unfair because many "rural" areas are not part of congressional districts and award "ZERO" and rural areas is a area in which Sanders does well in..

They would've tried I guess but if Trump still had the lead in pledged delegates as he does now they wouldn't have voted against him at the convention. If they did it would end the party

Democrats don't have to worry about congressional districts but if they did then actually they'd be over represented. Rural areas don't have as many people as urban centers yet they'd be awarded the same number of delegates as the bigger congressional districts if the dem race was like the republican race, thereby giving sanders more of an advantage than he has now. I never said proportional rules would be fair generally but it's more fair then the republicans. And still if it were winner take all, this race would be over because Sanders doomed himself when he wrote off the South and didn't win a single state in that region.

[Beautiful Liar]

Originally posted by @michael

Super delegates voting with their state would not change the current delegate count. Hillary would still have a massive lead.

We established this it's the fact they aren't which is Sanders argument how can we say it's a fair system