Support NeoGAF

[Frozenprince]

...he says, directly responding to a story about a black Clinton superdelegate being harassed by Obama supporters in 2008.

Gotta love it.

Superdelegates are such absolute bullshit.

I'm glad their phones are ringing off the hooks and their facebook pages are getting slammed but I would hope the vast majority contacting them are keeping it civil.

Edit: I don't blame them for cussing at some of these superdelegates though. For example all Washington superdelegates are for Clinton at the moment despite Sanders crushing Clinton there. And on it goes. This is not democracy. It's a rigged game and the fact that Sanders is doing so incredibly well despite it all shows that change will come. This very thread wouldn't exist if he wasn't a threat. I love it.

Quoting again because I saw this edit.

Yes, you should blame them because it's fucking disgusting. It's a horrible thing to do.

 

[Bel Marduk]

I'v had this conversation with friends 1000x.

It's never overt, obviously. But it's a very, very clear pattern. It's an attempt to point that minorities are inherently "different". They're not black voters they're "low information voters" They just need that one person in power because that person is "best" for them. Their best answer. It's subtle, it's never slurs or shaming, but in the end it's the same thing.

I find the casual racism displayed by many liberals to be a lot worse and more damaging than the overt racism thrown out from GOP shills. At least those idiots can be educated to change. The casual racism that just comes up in conversation about these things is exactly what's fucked this country up so bad.

I've heard this ridiculous argument before on right-wing talk radio

Quite a persecution complex you got there

Anyone can be racist but to imply progressives are more racist than conservatives? Amazing

 

[Frozenprince]

I've heard this ridiculous argument before on right-wing talk radio

Quite a persecution complex you got there

Anyone can be racist but to imply progressives are more racist than conservatives? Amazing

I'm gay and my whole life I'v been told "vote for them, they're whats best/know whats best for us".

Pretending that the problem doesn't exist doesn't fix anything.

 

[davepoobond]

It's rich to complain about how undemocratic super delegates are and then try to subvert the actual voted delegates by swaying the "undemocratic" delegates to your side so you can win undemocraticly

 

[LogicalFallacy]

I'v had this conversation with friends 1000x.

It's never overt, obviously. But it's a very, very clear pattern. It's an attempt to point that minorities are inherently "different". They're not black voters they're "low information voters"They just need that one person in power because that person is "best" for them. Their best answer. It's subtle, it's never slurs or shaming, but in the end it's the same thing.

Oh please. The same rhetoric is used by liberals when a state whose majority demographic is poor, uneducated whites (who would very much benefit from government programs) vote for republican candidates who would stifle government funding for programs under their policy. It's not necessarily used against minorities/oppressed groups exclusively, its a phrase meant to describe anyone who might not recognize the potential economic benefit they could receive under a candidate's planned policy.

The intent of the phrase is not to come off as racist. I do think the rhetoric of "that candidate is what's best for you" is problematic in that it indicates a sort of "I know better and you should listen to me, please" without providing much substance for the argument as to why that candidate is best much of the time. In cases where that substance is provided, I think the "what's best for you" bit is obviously a little more valid and justified. Using it willy nilly is going to build ire amongst the people you're disparaging, as seen by the portion of black liberals who are hesitant to support Bernie because his supporters seem so hesitant to view blacks who don't vote for Bernie/vote for Hillary over him as a group of intelligent individuals. But let's not pretend that that phrase is intended to specifically make blacks feel bad. It's intended to make anyone who doesn't agree with Berns feel bad. I don't think it's a good strategy, but it's certainly not a racist strategy, not as far as I've seen, anyway. It beats up all demographics equally assuming they don't agree with Bernie supporters. You might think that it occurs to blacks more than other groups (and that its code to refer to blacks in a racist manner) because that's your lived experience, and that's certainly valid, but my own personal experience tells me my liberal friends use it against my white self to disparage me for my Bernie skepticism. The phrase seems to be demographic-blind.

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

Gotta love it.



Quoting again because I saw this edit.

Yes, you should blame them because it's fucking disgusting. It's a horrible thing to do.

He doesn't seem to be responding to the replies he's gotten. I'm guessing it was a shitpost of the drive-by variety.

On topic, stuff like this harassment campaign shows why Sanders needs to be a vocal leader in calming down his supporters. They're not only asking for superdelegates to ignore the will of the people (who have overwhelmingly sided with Clinton, at least so far), but they're taking the divide that already exists in the Democratic Party and tearing it apart even wider. Sanders needs to step up and tell these people to cut this shit out and begin the healing process.

 

[Nickle]

If I judged any candidate based on their supporters then every single candidate would be garbage. Let's not pretend that HilaryGaf hasn't had a huge amount of fanboy shitposts this election season, this isn't just a Bernie thing.

 

[legacyzero]

That's a hell of a blanket statement to make. I'm a Clinton supporter and I'll admit to her making some glaring mistakes in the past.

Apologies. I more mean Hillary supporters that snark me here on GAF in political threads.

Maybe try reading articles before commenting next time...

I did. Thanks, though.

Edit: wasnt quoting in context of the article but rather the post.

 

[Bel Marduk]

I'm gay and my whole life I'v been told "vote for them, they're whats best/know whats best for us".

Pretending that the problem doesn't exist doesn't fix anything.

As someone who is gay AND married I resent that Clinton didn't support our equal rights until 2013 when it was politically expedient to do so

She even called straight marriage the foundation of western civilization

Sanders is far stronger on gay rights and has been his entire career

 

[Slayven]

the main argument is now "general election polls, without any context applied and still 200 days out, show sanders winning against trump by a wider margin"

even though it ignores the fact that GOP attacks are baked into clinton's numbers and not into sanders'

Sanders haven't been touched this election, his own campaign has been his worse enemy. Clinton had been benevolent and not targeting him because it would be a waste of time. The GOP would wear him out if they turned a minimal of their guns on him

Why won't you let Sanders look out for you?

I don't fuck with anyone that fucks with Cornell West.

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

If I judged any candidate based on their supporters then every single candidate would be garbage. Let's not pretend that HilaryGaf hasn't had a huge amount of fanboy shitposts this election season, this isn't just a Bernie thing.

You're right. Any "fanboy" of anything has the potential to be a shitbeast.

In this particular instance, at this particular moment, the Sanders shitbeasts seem to be on the prowl more than the Clinton shitbeasts (not on GAF. The harassment campaign asshats). That could flip at any time though, so stay tuned.

 

[butzopower]

I'm sure there's more to it and I can totally believe that there are Sanders supporters engaging in actual harassment, but coming up with a list of superdelegate's contact info seems completely legitimate to me. In fact, it sounds exactly like how a representative democracy should work, you should easily have access to the people who represent you so that you can tell them how you feel so that you feel they're representing your interests, and not your personal interests. I really don't think your personal friendship with the the Clintons since the 70s should mean you can write off the majority of your constituents who don't agree with her policy. A superdelegate is in a special position of power and it seems ridiculous for them to consider people expressing their opinion of how they'll use that power as harassment.

 

[davepoobond]

As someone who is gay AND married I resent that Clinton didn't support our equal rights until 2013 when it was politically expedient to do so

I'm curious what your cutoff year is for being glad someone supports gay marriage.

 

[Fusebox]

I have no problems with this, if you're s super delegate you should be subject to the same lobbying the rest of the system is.

 

[Frozenprince]

I have no problems with this, if you're s super delegate you should be subject to the same lobbying the rest of the system is.

Which includes threats of violence and racial slurs?

 

[LogicalFallacy]

I have no problems with this, if you're s super delegate you should be subject to the same lobbying the rest of the system is.

Well, threats of violence and insulting super delegates isn't a very winning lobbying strategy, I would imagine.

 

[Hoho for breakfast]

Yes, you should blame them because it's fucking disgusting. It's a horrible thing to do.

Depending on the situation sure. If we're talking about harassment then yes, it's a horrible thing to do along with being completely counter productive. I'm saying though if someone is mad and simply uses a cuss word, I don't blame them a bit. A lot of people are mad. It's inevitably going to happen as long as things are the way they currently are. People want a fair process and this is not it.

Someone was talking about Hillary having the popular vote and therefore the superdelegates should be sided with her. Which of course makes sense until you see that it's currently at 400 hundred something to 31 in her favor. That's not fair or balanced. It's by design which is wrong and will hopefully someday be corrected. Even if Sanders ended up with the popular vote do we really believe that these superdelegates would suddenly flip for Sanders? I certainly don't believe that.

 

[Frozenprince]

Depending on the situation sure. If we're talking about harassment then yes, it's a horrible thing to do along with being completely counter productive. I'm saying though if someone is mad and simply uses a cuss word, I don't blame them a bit. A lot of people are mad. It's inevitably going to happen as long as things are the way they currently are. People want a fair process and this is not it.

The process to elect the president, the ACTUAL election, is completely and totally fair.

This is a private election, held by two groups, to decide who runs for the executive for them while receiving the backing, financially and politically, of the party.

That's it. It doesn't need to be "open and fair" because it's NOT AN ACTUAL GOVERNMENT FUNCTION.

Swearing at someone who is just trying to do their job because the person you like has a less than 5% chance of winning isn't okay.

 

[Slayven]

Well, threats of violence and insulting super delegates isn't a very winning lobbying strategy, I would imagine.

The Ole Reverse psychology, works all the time

 

[Zornack]

Sanders is far stronger on gay rights and has been his entire career

Nope. He saw it as a states' rights issue and refused to support gay marriage until 2009.

 

[bishoptl]

Hey, was there a thread created about how so many clinton supporters were mocking Jane sanders? How they started a disgusting hash tag and everything? Just wondering

Funny, when I take a look at your account privileges, thread creation seems to be active. Did you create a thread? Because I can take a look at that too.

Or are you just looking to derail and deflect?

Take your time.

Which includes threats of violence and racial slurs?

Vote how we tell you, blacks

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

The Ole Reverse psychology, works all the time

"I was going to cast my superdelegate vote for Hillary Clinton because she's way in the lead in both the popular vote and pledged delegate count. On the other hand, dankmeme69_420lulz says he'll punch my groin until it catches fire if I don't vote for Sanders. Gotta go with Sanders here."

 

[Frozenprince]

Nope. He saw it as a state's rights issue and refused to support gay marriage until 2009.

BUT HE MARCHED WITH DR KING

 

[Bel Marduk]

I'm curious what your cutoff year is for being glad someone supports gay marriage.

Equality is a moral issue

There's a right and a wrong here

I guess that because George Wallace repented against racism as an elderly man that it excuses all of his segregationist activities prior to that?

She's a lot better than Ted Cruz and she'll have my vote against any Republican but lets not pretend that she's any sort of crusader for gay rights

 

[Matt]

Equality is a moral issue

There's a right and a wrong here

I guess that because George Wallace repented against racism as an elderly man that it excuses all of his segregationist activities prior to that?

She's a lot better than Ted Cruz and she'll have my vote against any Republican but lets not pretend that she's any sort of crusader for gay rights

Once again, Bernie is no shining star on this issue.

 

[eBay Huckster]

just ignore everything she did at state and in the senate to advance LGBT rights, the only thing that matters is whether she supported same-sex marriage before the early 2010s

e: that's not to say she's some perfect figure, just that the wallace comparison is pretty out of line

 

[dave is ok]

Superdelegates is a dumb system and hopefully the Democrat Party will ditch it if they want any members born after 1985

 

[Frozenprince]

Equality is a moral issue

There's a right and a wrong here

I guess that because George Wallace repented against racism as an elderly man that it excuses all of his segregationist activities prior to that?

She's a lot better than Ted Cruz and she'll have my vote against any Republican but lets not pretend that she's any sort of crusader for gay rights

But none of them are, that's kind of the point. It's all empty rhetoric to obfuscate the history they have of waffling on things to get people to vote for them because "they know what's best for you" because they've "always been allies" even though that's bullshit.

I'm trying to illustrate that none of these people are honest, or really should be president.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Equality is a moral issue

There's a right and a wrong here

I guess that because George Wallace repented against racism as an elderly man that it excuses all of his segregationist activities prior to that?

She's a lot better than Ted Cruz and she'll have my vote against any Republican but lets not pretend that she's any sort of crusader for gay rights

Gay rights is much broader than gay marriage.

Hillary did a lot for gay rights as First Lady, senator and Secretary of State.

 

[Nickle]

You're right. Any "fanboy" of anything has the potential to be a shitbeast.

In this particular instance, at this particular moment, the Sanders shitbeasts seem to be on the prowl more than the Clinton shitbeasts (not on GAF. The harassment campaign asshats). That could flip at any time though, so stay tuned.

I agree that Sanders definitely has more fanboys, but there's no point in attacking Sanders for what these people say or do (unless he actively supports what they are saying).

 

[Hellwarden]

Man, this harassment is fucking grosssssssss.

 

[Matt]

Superdelegates is a dumb system and hopefully the Democrat Party will ditch it if they want any members born after 1985

...?

Strange post.

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

Equality is a moral issue

There's a right and a wrong here

I guess that because George Wallace repented against racism as an elderly man that it excuses all of his segregationist activities prior to that?

She's a lot better than Ted Cruz and she'll have my vote against any Republican but lets not pretend that she's any sort of crusader for gay rights

As someone pointed out above, neither was Sanders. That doesn't make Clinton's approach on the topic correct (in fact, it's something I personally hold against her and all politicians who didn't have the courage of their convictions because they knew they couldn't get elected without being against gay marriage), but to paraphrase you, let's not pretend he's any sort of crusader for gay rights.

 

[norm9]

Superdelegates is a dumb system and hopefully the Democrat Party will ditch it if they want any members born after 1985

Nah. They'd be fine with superdelegates if they were winning for their particular candidate.

 

[Frozenprince]

Gay rights is much broader than gay marriage.

Hillary did a lot for gay rights as First Lady, senator and Secretary of State.

She was one of the biggest proponents of the equality act, IIRC.

 

[Bel Marduk]

Nope. He saw it as a state's rights issue and refused to support gay marriage until 2009.

Wow

That article is a mess

It says right there that Sanders spoke out against doma (which Bill Clinton signed into law) in 1996

I guess he didn't speak out on it enough times to satiate the writer of this article?

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...huck-todd-bernie-sanders-there-same-sex-marr/

 

[The Adder]

Some god damned perspective

Hilary stands at 1280 delegates (not counting Super)

Bernie has 1030 (not counting Super)

There are 1,955 left (again, not counting super)

They need 2383 total to win flat out.

To come out ahead of Hilary before the Super Delegates are counted (not flat out win, mind) he needs 56% of the remaining delegates.

Given that he's behind in all four of the remaining biggest states (New York - 247, Pennsylvania - 189, California = 476, New Jersey - 126), no other state has even 100 delegates, and his wins tend to be by very thin margins, yes. Not counting the Super Delegates it is still mathematically impossible for Bernie to win.

Barring some cataclysmic event.

And to further put my numbers into perspective.

If Bernie gets 49% of the delegates in the big states that he's losing, and then wins 60% of EVERY SINGLE OTHER REMAINING STATE, he STILL comes out with 2089 delegates to Hilary's 2176 BEFORE super delegates.

The only thing that would be against the will of the people is pressuring the super delegates to vote for the candidate the people didn't.

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

I agree that Sanders definitely has more fanboys, but there's no point in attacking Sanders for what these people say or do (unless he actively supports what they are saying).

Isn't silence a tacit form of approval? He's the leader of the band. At some point, he needs to put down the baton and tell the third chair screw ups to shut the fuck up.

 

[Frozenprince]

Isn't silence a tacit form of approval? He's the leader of the band. At some point, he needs to put down the baton and tell the third chair screw ups to shut the fuck up.

I am honestly stunned that he hasn't put his foot down about this shit yet.

It's been months of this, non-stop, his supporters are not helping him he needs to put a stop to it.

But, once again, he doesn't seem to understand optics at all.

 

[Shihon]

I was neutral to Bernie awhile ago but as time goes on its become clear. He needs to go,everything he's doing is dividing the democratic party and asinine yet hypocritical at best. This is the same guy that goes after Clinton for fundraising,but never tells you that most of that fundraising money goes to the down ballot which he has no interest all all in supporting. How are you gonna get things done if your president and have no ''Dems'' to support you? Political revolution my ass!

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bernie-sanders-fundraise-down-ballot-democrats-maddow

Sorry to quote myself,but it seems some Bernie supporters are active in the thread that wasn't here earlier so I'd like to ask a question again.How are you gonna have a political revolution with no support from house/senate ''dems'' to back you up? Bernie has yet to support/fundraiser the down ballot like Clinton has been doing. Instead he's been complaining about all the money she's raised,so it should be no surprise no U.S. Senator has endorsed or supports him. Just wanna know your insight on this Bernie supporters?

 

[dave is ok]

People on GAF treat Bernie supporters like Trump supporters. It's fucking ridiculous

He doesn't need to "put his foot down" or apologize for anyone. Every candidate , including Clinton, has a few rabid dogs in their kennel

 

[Frozenprince]

People on GAF treat Bernie supporters like Trump supporters. It's fucking ridiculous

He doesn't need to "put his foot down" or apologize for anyone. Every candidate , including Clinton, has a few rabid dogs in their kennel

When he has people calling superdelegates, his future co-workers if he manages to win the nom through some miracle (how people quickly forget that), he ABSOLUTELY needs to do that.

Making threats is something that needs to be addressed.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

Yet another thing to add to the qualities it mirrors w/ Trump's campaign.

Not sure if serious.

 

[The Adder]

People on GAF treat Bernie supporters like Trump supporters. It's fucking ridiculous

He doesn't need to "put his foot down" or apologize for anyone.

That's the same thing Trump supporters say about Trump. The cognitive dissonance here is astounding.

 

[legacyzero]

Nope. He saw it as a states' rights issue and refused to support gay marriage until 2009.

I mean, is this really BAD, though? He's been principle on LGBT for a very long time. Im having trouble understanding how his state views thing was being against it. Help me out?

 

[Steel]

Isn't silence a tacit form of approval? He's the leader of the band. At some point, he needs to put down the baton and tell the third chair screw ups to shut the fuck up.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves, Bernie puts these types of things down every time he hears about them. While it's worth pointing out how rabid his supporters are, it's not worth tieing that to him. Remember, Hillary supporters started the birther shit, but we don't attribute the birther movement to her.

Actually I've seen several posts trying to say she started the birther movement. But still, no reason to stoop to that level.

Edit: The difference between Trump and Bernie is that Trump all but cheers on his supporters for the shit they raise. Actually, he does cheer them on. While Bernie basically says he doesn't want the votes of people like that.

 

[Frozenprince]

I mean, is this really BAD, though? He's been principle on LGBT for a very long time. Im having trouble understanding how his state views thing was being against it. Help me out?

It's not bad. There is never a bad moment to come out publicly in favor of equality in marriage.

It's just meant to point out that neither he nor Hillary have exactly been exemplars in terms of marriage equality.

 

[Zornack]

Wow

That article is a mess

It says right there that Sanders spoke out against doma (which Bill Clinton signed into law) in 1996

I guess he didn't speak out on it enough times to satiate the writer of this article?

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...huck-todd-bernie-sanders-there-same-sex-marr/

Sanders was against DOMA because he saw gay marriage has a states' rights issue. He thought that each state should decide who could get married, not the federal government. He has not been as much of an advocate for letting gay people get married as you are making him out to have been.

I mean, is this really BAD, though? He's been principle on LGBT for a very long time. Im having trouble understanding how his state views thing was being against it. Help me out?

No one is saying he's been against gay marriage but he was perfectly fine with, say, Vermont allowing gay marriage but New Hampshire barring it. Being for gay marriage, against gay marriage and thinking it's a states' rights issue are three different positions.

 

[teruterubozu]

Isn't silence a tacit form of approval? He's the leader of the band. At some point, he needs to put down the baton and tell the third chair screw ups to shut the fuck up.

Hillary never told the Hillaryis44 folks to tone it down. You can't manage every loon that supports you.

 

[legacyzero]

I agree that he should address it. Approach it as "communicate with our Super Delegates! But do treat tgem respectfully, and kindly ask for their vote."

No one is saying he's been against gay marriage but he was perfectly fine with, say, Vermont allowing gay marriage but New Hampshire barring it. Being for gay marriage, against gay marriage and thinking it's a states' rights issue are three different positions.

Makes sense.

But Im still failing to see how that affects his PRINCIPLE stance on it?