[Megathread] Bernie Sanders 2016

[Deleted]

Hell Yes! Also, what the hell you talking about?

[Wulfey]

Hillary supporters claim they want her to be president, but go out of their way to piss off and attack Sander's supporters. I hope they aren't so delusional that they think beating Trump will be easy and they won't need all the help they can get.

You will need to toughen up a bit if you want to be able to argue with people on an internet forum without getting your feelings hurt. Internet forums are rough places. The other side won't be kind to you.

// I argue on internet forums at full force, even above what I actually believe in, in order to magnify the debates between the sides.

[Daerio]

1. For example, you say "fake audits", etc. What makes you think that they are fake?

The video evidence of the election board meetings where the public scrutinizes the process.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSNTauWPkTc

The process itself as described by the people who run it. You can't even say it out loud without knowing how ridiculous it is.

2. You say "violating convention rules" but if they were violated then Bernie's team would have been able to object to the results. While grossly unfair, a voice vote, where the result is at the discretion of the chair is perfectly legal. The county change in delegates fits into exactly the same boat.

Strange, because when I watch what actually happened, that's not what I get at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka6SnkbuUPI

3. You say mass voter registration deletions. Those would have effected Clinton by as much, if not more than Bernie because that was in the heart of her stronghold.

Once again, no, because voters can be targeted based on many criteria. There are several factors that can be used to discriminate here. Either you're being just completely naive here, or disingenuous. I'll go with the latter.

4. The accusation about voter machines is based purely on the assumption that the exit polls are 100% accurate.

No, it's based on the fact that hand count audits of the votes don't match the machine counts of the same ballots, and this is a regular occurrence. This is in itself election fraud, but it's somehow discounted with some quick hand-waving and jibberish.

Please smile, because we're democrats! Lulz.

[triplesdsu]

Of course you did. Because you matter.

In other news, here's some videos for all you Bernie and Cenk/TYT haters:





You won't see Queen Hillary walking on the streets of San Fran among the people, or pulling crowds of tens of thousands of enthusiastic supporters. Nah... She likes her limousine too much, and her interaction with the people is either telling them to shut up or reading some fake ass speech.

Oh yeah, and Hillary just decided to refuse to debate Sanders ahead of California. Despite promising to do that back in May. Oh Hillary, so predictable with your lies.

Well... If she gets the nomination and avoids an indictment, it'll be fun to see Trump rip her a new one in the debates.

Bernie pulls in crowds of thousands of supporters. Hillary pulls millions of more voters. Guess which one matters. Why should she debate him? She won. It's over. Everyone knows that other than the Sanderistas. It's beneath her to debate him at this point and would be a waste of time and energy. The only one she should be debating is Trump.

[Vash The Stampede]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BnbwUT7lBg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWOuCfdJYMM

I don't know who they are but I hate them. Also, what do you expect Bernie to do? Punch them?

[Gray_Matter]

The video evidence of the election board meetings where the public scrutinizes the process.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSNTauWPkTc

The process itself as described by the people who run it. You can't even say it out loud without knowing how ridiculous it is.

I have seen the video. There is an accusation and it should be investigated. If anyone has committed election fraud then they should be investigated. That's a single incident. You can't transpose a single unproven incident to say that it's happening everywhere.

Strange, because when I watch what actually happened, that's not what I get at all.

I have seen the videos. Again, voice votes are in the rules. Is it a sh..y thing to do, yes, but it's not illegal. It's the same as the county where it was a sh..y thing for Bernie to pick up 2 delegates above what the people actually voted for. Both cases are sh..y and both cases are within the rules.

Once again, no, because voters can be targeted based on many criteria. There are several factors that can be used to discriminate here. Either you're being just completely naive here, or disingenuous. I'll go with the latter.

Where is your proof that only Bernie supporters were targeted? If it's the number of independents who voted for Bernie on the day because Jimmy from TYT said they should and those people's ballots were rejected then that's not really proof. They shouldn't have voted.

No, it's based on the fact that hand count audits of the votes don't match the machine counts of the same ballots, and this is a regular occurrence. This is in itself election fraud, but it's somehow discounted with some quick hand-waving and jibberish.

Please show the proof. I heard it from someone who heard it from someone is not proof. If there is proof then I am sure Bernie's camp would be very interested in it.

[therayeffect]

Shame the best candidate wasn't given a real chance to win the nomination. Oh well. Hopefully if she gets indicted for the shit she's pulled, it'll happen before the convention. If it happens in August or September... congrats to President Trump. I don't quite get how people don't care about being investigated by the FBI and I just can't see how she won't get indicted unless there's somehow crazy partisanship going on which is kind of feels like it based on all the crazy leaks.

[Matchles]

Shame the best candidate wasn't given a real chance to win the nomination. Oh well. Hopefully if she gets indicted for the shit she's pulled, it'll happen before the convention. If it happens in August or September... congrats to President Trump. I don't quite get how people don't care about being investigated by the FBI and I just can't see how she won't get indicted unless there's somehow crazy partisanship going on which is kind of feels like it based on all the crazy leaks.

He was given a real chance. He squandered it. Maybe if he didn't spend 25 years alienating everyone he has ever worked with, he would have had more endorsements (i.e. super delegates) in the Senate. Instead the only guy he has is the first term Junior Senator from Oregon. Maybe instead of bitching about closed primaries his campaign took some initiative to register his independent supporters. He has run one of the worst campaigns from a contender I've ever seen and if any year was primed for an outsider, it was this year. He had no competition other than Clinton.

- - - Updated - - -

I love how you slam people who bring up Hillary and Benghazi, then turn around and use the false narrative of "bernie bros". As if that's a thing.

18% was one poll, lets forget the average polling that has her 9.5% when in a mixed election that allows independents to vote you can be sure Bernie will be much closer.

He better hope so. He needs to win California by 28%

[Gray_Matter]

He better hope so. He needs to win California by 28%

My calculations put that target at 34%, provided he wins NJ by 29%.

[triplesdsu]

But Bernie also pulls in Millions of voters, last I checked it was about 10 million vs 13 million. It would actually be much closer, but Bernie does better in caucuses which have terrible voter turn out, and don't even give official numbers so they aren't included.

Hillary does Better in Primaries, especially closed primaries that exclude one of the largest voting blocks. Independents, which coincidentally Bernie does much better.

Bernie does better in caucuses because of the lower turnout and rewarding the diehards. Check Nebraska for example. He won the caucus but during the primary with roughly 4 times the turnout he lost by double digits. Ill take 3 mil more votes over 10k groupies any time.

[Wulfey]

Bernie does better in caucuses because of the lower turnout and rewarding the diehards. Check Nebraska for example. He won the caucus but during the primary with roughly 4 times the turnout he lost by double digits. Ill take 3 mil more votes over 10k groupies any time.

Caucuses are literally the biggest vote suppression mechanic currently running in American politics. Especially 8 hour ones on work days. Who can go to such a thing? I can barely vote by mail and I have my mom fill in my ballot most of the time.

[Gray_Matter]

I'd take the person who does better with independent voters and beats the GOP presumptive nominee in virtually every General Election poll by larger margins.

The problem with the general polls at the moment is that the GOP have coalesced behind Trump but there hasn't been any such coalescence behind Clinton because she is still in the primary. There are also a lot of Bernie supporters that are saying that they won't support her because it benefits their cause and makes Bernie seem more electable. Clinton supporters are unlikely to say that they wouldn't vote for Bernie because she has pretty much locked up the nomination already. I would imagine that it would be the same if the roles were reversed. Some angry Clinton supporters vouching to never vote for Bernie. The question is how many of them decide to support Clinton and how many don't after Bernie is beaten and also how Bernie reacts after he has formally lost.

At the moment, it's Sanders refuses to play nice

Also, it doesn't matter if there are a quarter of a million pi..ed off Bernie supporters in California but would make a difference if that was the case in Ohio.

[Matchles]

I sorta knew Bernie wasn't going to win majority of pledge delegates after he lost NY, It's a state I thought despite it being closed he could of done much better in. He still has a chance at preventing Clinton winning the plurality. He has won 21 contest so far, and he should be able to a few more. This despite going against one of the largest most coordinated political machine seen is so many years. I believe it actually worked against him being only between himself and Clinton. Biden was polling very well and had a good chance at winning the nomination, and I believe would have taken more from Clinton than from Sanders. Also i'm pretty sure Weaver, Chaffe, and O'malley who had a super-pac did much worse than Bernie.
.

Perhaps. I know he is shooting for 25 wins and I do believe he will use even a narrow victory in California to take it to the convention. Biden would likely pull from Clinton but he could also get a lot of the middle of the road Dems that just don't like her, which are likely Sanders voters at the moment. I do think Sanders hurt himself by not having a Super PAC. I get that it is central to his message. But with one he could have left them to do the personal attacks on Clinton and the Dems at large while largely sticking to his message with his own campaign speeches and ads. I know that is what turned me off to him. I've been a Democrat all my life (outside of the times I registered unaffiliated because I was working for Republicans and didn't want to cause them any grief from constituents). Sanders keeps framing it as the entire party is corrupt. I don't like DWS, and I don't know many who do. But his attacks on the party are also attacks by proxy on the good men and women that I have voted for.

[Gray_Matter]

Perhaps. I know he is shooting for 25 wins and I do believe he will use even a narrow victory in California to take it to the convention. Biden would likely pull from Clinton but he could also get a lot of the middle of the road Dems that just don't like her, which are likely Sanders voters at the moment. I do think Sanders hurt himself by not having a Super PAC. I get that it is central to his message. But with one he could have left them to do the personal attacks on Clinton and the Dems at large while largely sticking to his message with his own campaign speeches and ads. I know that is what turned me off to him. I've been a Democrat all my life (outside of the times I registered unaffiliated because I was working for Republicans and didn't want to cause them any grief from constituents). Sanders keeps framing it as the entire party is corrupt. I don't like DWS, and I don't know many who do. But his attacks on the party are also attacks by proxy on the good men and women that I have voted for.

I think he has done his numbers some harm of late by keeping up the attacks. It would have been likely to make Clinton supporters more galvanized. A better message after Pennsylvania would have been for him to tone down the attacks and the voter disenfranchisement argument and just focused on his message. He would have more than likely gotten a bounce from the people who vote with their heart instead of what they think is achievable. By doubling down on the attacks and maintaining that there was a path to victory, I think he ended up costing himself a large number of delegates at the convention. Every time people thought the race is over, he has seen a bump.

[McCulloch]

So apparently Sanders wants say over Hillary's cabinet. What the fuck. When he's POTUS, he can pick his own fucking cabinet.

I don't think for a moment he would consult Hillary for his cabinet if the shoe was on the other foot.

[hrugner]

So apparently Sanders wants say over Hillary's cabinet. What the fuck. When he's POTUS, he can pick his own fucking cabinet.

I don't think for a moment he would consult Hillary for his cabinet if the shoe was on the other foot.

That seems weird. Were did you hear this?

[McCulloch]

That seems weird. Were did you hear this?

http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/05...lead-panel.cnn

After rewatching the video, it seems to be speculation on the part of the reporter. My guess it he's not basing it on nothing and has heard something to that effect, but my reaction was too strong for what we know now. That headline is really stupid. Clickbaity as fuck.

I sincerely hope Sanders doesn't expect say over the cabinet though.

[Deleted]

Sanders keeps framing it as the entire party is corrupt. I don't like DWS, and I don't know many who do. But his attacks on the party are also attacks by proxy on the good men and women that I have voted for.

The entire party is corrupt. This is obvious to any one who wasn't born yesterday. The amount of corporate lobbying and backhanders is hardly secret (cue matchless re-defining corruption in some bullshit way that makes obvious corruption not corruption).

"Good" is not a word any sane person would use to describe either main party.

[Dextroden]

The entire party is corrupt. This is obvious to any one who wasn't born yesterday. The amount of corporate lobbying and backhanders is hardly secret (cue matchless re-defining corruption in some bullshit way that makes obvious corruption not corruption).

"Good" is not a word any sane person would use to describe either main party.

I'm going to say that Bernie is just as corrupt then for drinking from the tainted well. (Affixing himself to their party for views and funds, then throwing them under the boss.

If you think the guy dedicated to ripping apart the party he desperately needed to "get visibility" is a good pick, you deserve all the disappointment coming your way..

[Daerio]

I have seen the video. There is an accusation and it should be investigated. If anyone has committed election fraud then they should be investigated. That's a single incident. You can't transpose a single unproven incident to say that it's happening everywhere.

It's a single incident going on in every state in the country. Every 2 years.

I have seen the videos. Again, voice votes are in the rules. Is it a sh..y thing to do, yes, but it's not illegal. It's the same as the county where it was a sh..y thing for Bernie to pick up 2 delegates above what the people actually voted for. Both cases are sh..y and both cases are within the rules.

Wrong again, as usual. What Sanders delegates were doing was entirely within the rules, trying to use an actual voting system. What Roberta Lange did was entirely outside the rules. It's not illegal, sure - but nothing that rich people do really is.

Where is your proof that only Bernie supporters were targeted? If it's the number of independents who voted for Bernie on the day because Jimmy from TYT said they should and those people's ballots were rejected then that's not really proof. They shouldn't have voted.

Oh, another straw man? Who said only Sanders supporters were targeted? Who established that as the metric for fraud?

Please show the proof. I heard it from someone who heard it from someone is not proof. If there is proof then I am sure Bernie's camp would be very interested in it.

You aren't interested in the truth, or in reality. You're interested in fantasyland where you can always believe what you're told by the mainstream.

- - - Updated - - -

Bernie does better in caucuses because of the lower turnout and rewarding the diehards.

And again, Bernie does better in caucuses because those can't be rigged by pre-loading a vote tallying machine.