Support NeoGAF

[pigeon]

I mean, politics ain't beanbag. Sanders is a politician, he's running a campaign for the nomination, caucus management and delegate selection are part of that process. Frankly, there's no excuse for Hillary to be losing at that stuff, either. She's done it before! In fact, it was kind of a big deal last time, so by the traditional Hillary approach she should probably be wildly overprepared for it this time around. If Sanders outplayed her that's basically her fault.

Are caucuses super dumb? Sure, maybe? Goes back to the big question of how political primaries should even be designed or whether they should even exist. Have to answer that question first before you decide how primaries should look, and keep in mind that the party could already have changed any of this stuff so presumably it didn't think of a particularly good reason to do so yet.

Does this hurt Sanders's claim to be a magical new kind of non-politician politician? Sure, I guess so. But I never believed that anyway because it was obviously bullshit! So it is not surprising at all to me that he is trying to do normal politician things.

Does this make a bunch of Sanders supporters hypocrites? Again, maybe, depends on what they're actually saying and doing. I don't really pay attention to them! But, I mean, they're just internet posters. You have to assume their thought processes are somewhat incoherent.

Is Sanders still going to lose? Like, obviously. These four delegates are not going to matter at the end of the day. He still has 296 more he has to steal!

 

[johnsmith]

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/09/19/nyregion/notes-on-people-some-disunity-along-the-united-way.html

What the hell

For the kickoff of the 40th annual Chittenden County United Way fund-raising drive in Burlington, Vt., the sponsors considered themselves fortunate to have as guests Mayor Bernard Sanders of Burlington and Gov. Richard Snelling of Vermont.

But the charity workers heard the sort of things they wanted to hear from only one of their guests.

''I don't believe in charities,'' said Mayor Sanders, bringing a shocked silence to a packed hotel banquet room. The Mayor, who is a Socialist, went on to question the ''fundamental concepts on which charities are based'' and contended that government, rather than charity organizations, should take over responsibility for social programs.

Governor Snelling sought to counter Mr. Sanders' remarks, saying: ''Charity is not a dirty word. We have discovered that you can't buy caring.''

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

I mean, politics ain't beanbag. Sanders is a politician, he's running a campaign for the nomination, caucus management and delegate selection are part of that process. Frankly, there's no excuse for Hillary to be losing at that stuff, either. She's done it before! In fact, it was kind of a big deal last time, so by the traditional Hillary approach she should probably be wildly overprepared for it this time around. If Sanders outplayed her that's basically her fault.

Are caucuses super dumb? Sure, maybe? Goes back to the big question of how political primaries should even be designed or whether they should even exist. Have to answer that question first before you decide how primaries should look, and keep in mind that the party could already have changed any of this stuff so presumably it didn't think of a particularly good reason to do so yet.

Does this hurt Sanders's claim to be a magical new kind of non-politician politician? Sure, I guess so. But I never believed that anyway because it was obviously bullshit! So it is not surprising at all to me that he is trying to do normal politician things.

Does this make a bunch of Sanders supporters hypocrites? Again, maybe, depends on what they're actually saying and doing. I don't really pay attention to them! But, I mean, they're just internet posters. You have to assume their thought processes are somewhat incoherent.

Is Sanders still going to lose? Like, obviously. These four delegates are not going to matter at the end of the day. He still has 296 more he has to steal!

Hillary's little fuck-ups like this, while not as prevalent as in 2008, are part of the reason she's more of my "I guess, if I have to" candidate for POTUS.

 

[aspiegamer]

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/09/19/nyregion/notes-on-people-some-disunity-along-the-united-way.html

What the hell

Stuff like this. You know the Clinton campaign and the GOP are sitting on a mountain of things like this. One awkward statement alone shouldn't ruin a career, but this looks like a perfect case of what happens when a candidate hasn't actually been vetted yet to the broader public. If people want to use the argument that Sanders has better likeability ratings, they need to understand that he's currently at his ceiling. Clinton, after 25 years of being perpetually harassed and hounded upon, is at her floor.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Stuff like this. You know the Clinton campaign and the GOP are sitting on a mountain of things like this. One awkward statement alone shouldn't ruin a career, but this looks like a perfect case of what happens when a candidate hasn't actually been vetted yet to the broader public. If people want to use the argument that Sanders has better likeability ratings, they need to understand that he's currently at his ceiling. Clinton, after 25 years of being perpetually harassed and hounded upon, is at her floor.

He's actually below his ceiling. His popularity has dropped.

 

[User 463088]

I mean, politics ain't beanbag. Sanders is a politician, he's running a campaign for the nomination, caucus management and delegate selection are part of that process. Frankly, there's no excuse for Hillary to be losing at that stuff, either. She's done it before! In fact, it was kind of a big deal last time, so by the traditional Hillary approach she should probably be wildly overprepared for it this time around. If Sanders outplayed her that's basically her fault.

Are caucuses super dumb? Sure, maybe? Goes back to the big question of how political primaries should even be designed or whether they should even exist. Have to answer that question first before you decide how primaries should look, and keep in mind that the party could already have changed any of this stuff so presumably it didn't think of a particularly good reason to do so yet.

Does this hurt Sanders's claim to be a magical new kind of non-politician politician? Sure, I guess so. But I never believed that anyway because it was obviously bullshit! So it is not surprising at all to me that he is trying to do normal politician things.

Does this make a bunch of Sanders supporters hypocrites? Again, maybe, depends on what they're actually saying and doing. I don't really pay attention to them! But, I mean, they're just internet posters. You have to assume their thought processes are somewhat incoherent.

Is Sanders still going to lose? Like, obviously. These four delegates are not going to matter at the end of the day. He still has 296 more he has to steal!

It's a little more complicated than that. Yes, Hillary's campaign should have been making sure their delegates and alternates got out. That's not in question. Part of that problem lies with her team. No issue at all.

However, a few different things went on. It appears as though the Clark County Democrats sent an email (and posted on Facebook) that if you registered on Friday you did not have to go to the convention today. When people asked for clarification, they doubled down on that. This was not correct information. You could register, but you still had to be there when the doors opened per caucus rules. The issue is how many people (and it could be on both sides) registered but didn't go today because they didn't have to. I'm not sure how you fix that at this level.

The second issue is that in the same county the credentials chair was suspended because she provided the Sanders campaign with information about Hillary's delegates that she wasn't supposed to. She was a Bernie supporter (which is fine) but there were questions about her neutrality. They almost had to call the police to remove her after she staged a sit in.

The third issue was Bernie's team did pull a Ron Paul by telling their supporters this was a chance to basically redo the state, and to bring as many people to the caucus as they could. It was intentional. It was dirty as hell, although, technically within the rules.

Assuming it's not corrected at the state convention, it's only two delegates. She still won the state. However, if a fictitious Bernie supporter is fine with this, I feel they've lost the moral high ground when it comes to things like super delegates. You can't simultaneously say we have to only go by the will of the people AND say you're fine with this. That's intellectually dishonest to me. To quote the great philosopher George W. Bush, you "can't take the high horse and claim the low road."

Let's be frank. If this had been Hillary's people all hell would have broken lose. We all know it. She was magically to blame for Maricopa County not having enough polling locations, but St. Bernie's campaign never, ever plays politics. They never, ever do anything morally ambiguous. It's only that she-witch Hillary who does. That's tiring. Very, very tiring. To be clear, I'm not offended that he did it. I think the "we have a second chance to win this" is gross and underhanded, but, hey. This ain't RuPaul's best friend race at the end of the day. But, like his artful smears, he needs to own this shit.

No Bernie's team probably didn't break any rules. The Clark County Democratic Party needs to clear up what information was given, and try and see if anyone did sign up yesterday but not show up today. If so, we need to see about fixing this at the state convention.

Cock uses are still stupid.

Yes Hillary should have had her people on top of it better than they were.

 

[<+)O Robido O(+>]

Does this make a bunch of Sanders supporters hypocrites? Again, maybe, depends on what they're actually saying and doing. I don't really pay attention to them! But, I mean, they're just internet posters. You have to assume their thought processes are somewhat incoherent.

...alrighty then.

 

[User 463088]

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/09/19/nyregion/notes-on-people-some-disunity-along-the-united-way.html

What the hell

You know the GOP is sitting on a fuck ton of this stuff. I'm sure Hillary's people have it too. Just absolutely ridiculous stuff. Makes him look like a total ass.

You tie this to the socialist/atheist thing and you're going to sink him so damn hard.

 

[StopMakingSense]

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/09/19/nyregion/notes-on-people-some-disunity-along-the-united-way.html

What the hell

Bernie's exactly the type of guy you invite to your charity event and pull that shit.

 

[makingmusic476]

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/09/19/nyregion/notes-on-people-some-disunity-along-the-united-way.html

What the hell

This doesn't seem unlike many of the arguments made here on gaf, that charities are far too ymmv, and government programs are the best way to ensure that anti-poverty programs are available all across society.

Granted, this was a horrible venue at which to point that out.

 

[StopMakingSense]

This doesn't seem unlike many of the arguments made here on gaf, that charities are far too ymmv, and government programs are the best way to ensure that anti-poverty programs are available all across society.

Yeah, but there's a way to say that without being a dick.

 

[neurosisxeno]

Yeah, but there's a way to say that without being a dick.

Like with a Hillary 2016 banner behind you.

 

[Ogrekiller]

This doesn't seem unlike many of the arguments made here on gaf, that charities are far too ymmv, and government programs are the best way to ensure that anti-poverty programs are available all across society.

Granted, this was a horrible venue at which to point that out.

All you would need to do is bring up the VA scandal in conjunction with this and BOOM

 

[Tubie]

I'm sure the Clinton camp has the same shit the GOP has on him.

It is remarkable just how nicely Clinton has treated him so far in this primary.

 

[User 463088]

All you would need to do is bring up the VA scandal in conjunction with this and BOOM

And his "people die in hospitals everyday" in relation to the VA.

 

[neurosisxeno]

I'm sure the Clinton camp has the same shit the GOP has on him.

It is remarkable just how nicely Clinton has treated him so far in this primary.

According to Clinton, Bernie is being so mean to her she doesn't even want to have joint events (debates, town halls, etc.). Apparently she already forgot what 2008 was like...

 

[Tubie]

According to Clinton, Bernie is being so mean to her she doesn't even want to have joint events. Apparently she already forgot what 2008 was like...

I'm sorry I don't get it, do you mean debates? What other joint events would they do?

I'm confused because the Clinton camp has offered him debates at different dates and times before the NY primary and he's said no to all of them.

 

[User 463088]

Town Halls aren't joint events and don't have to be approved by the other candidate.

They were both at a dinner this evening, although Hillary was better received than Bernie. He managed to not leave immediately after speaking this time, though!

 

[Atomic Playboy]

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/09/19/nyregion/notes-on-people-some-disunity-along-the-united-way.html

What the hell

I mean, I'm supporting Hillary, but this seems completely irrelevant to what's going on. This was 35 years ago. Charitable giving 35 years ago was completely different than what we have to day. And someone running on a socialist platform should be against charity, because they think it's the government's role to provide that funding instead. This is just such a completely absurd point to bring up with regards to Bernie. It strikes me as someone looking for dirt, finding absolutely nothing, and ending up with "well he didn't agree with United Way in the early-80s."

 

[Maledict]

That was fecking weird. I watched an old YouTube video covering the 2008 Democratic primary and it was about HILLARY CLINTON CLAIMING THAT OBAMA WAS AGAINST NAFTA. And they think it helped her win Ohio.

How come no one wrote any of this shit down for the 2016 election?

*coughs*

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=199346572&postcount=18479

I was there! At the time the actual attacks were mostly by Obama's team against Hillary for NAFTA, which didn't work at all. Obama even had a dicey moment where an aide was caught telling the Canadians that his hostility to NAFTA was just political cover and that he did really support it.

And god knows TBH. I suspect it's because Devine is an idiot, but also because they think this is a very different campaign environment.

 

[User 463088]

I mean, I'm supporting Hillary, but this seems completely irrelevant to what's going on. This was 35 years ago. Charitable giving 35 years ago was completely different than what we have to day. And someone running on a socialist platform should be against charity, because they think it's the government's role to provide that funding instead. This is just such a completely absurd point to bring up with regards to Bernie. It strikes me as someone looking for dirt, finding absolutely nothing, and ending up with "well he didn't agree with United Way in the early-80s."

There are certain things you should never be against when you're in politics. Charity is one of them, especially when you're invited to a charity event. As to the absurdity, stuff like this is porn to people like Rove. He'd use the hell out of this. This is the stuff any of us can find fairly easily online. I can imagine the stuff Clinton and the GOP has is a lot more fun than this. It goes back to why Bernie is the bigger risk. He's never been vetted before.

 

[kmag]

I mean, I'm supporting Hillary, but this seems completely irrelevant to what's going on. This was 35 years ago. Charitable giving 35 years ago was completely different than what we have to day. And someone running on a socialist platform should be against charity, because they think it's the government's role to provide that funding instead. This is just such a completely absurd point to bring up with regards to Bernie. It strikes me as someone looking for dirt, finding absolutely nothing, and ending up with "well he didn't agree with United Way in the early-80s."

He stood up and said it at a charity fundraiser. There's having a valid argument then there's just being a dick about it.

 

[Tubie]

According to Clinton, Bernie is being so mean to her she doesn't even want to have joint events (debates, town halls, etc.). Apparently she already forgot what 2008 was like...

Just for clarification, what does this have to do at all with what you are quoting me on?

I even replied to you last page (Hillary offered him multiple debate dates and he has said no to all of them), very curious about your thoughts on this now.

 

[neurosisxeno]

Just for clarification, what does this have to do at all with what you are quoting me on?

I even replied to you last page (Hillary offered him multiple debate dates and he has said no to all of them), very curious about your thoughts on this now.

Your comment about how nice Clinton has been. She hasn't been all that nice, and has tried to completely flip the narrative that Bernie is aggressively attacking her. Is there a source on her offering multiple debate dates because as recently as last week she was claiming she didn't want to schedule anything until his campaign was "nicer" to her.

 

[SenorArdilla]

Someone explain cock use for me.

 

[CCS]

Someone explain cock use for me.

Adam got over excited during Washington.

 

[User 463088]

Someone explain cock use for me.

My phone autocorrected caucus to cock use.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Your comment about how nice Clinton has been. She hasn't been all that nice, and has tried to completely flip the narrative that Bernie is aggressively attacking her. Is there a source on her offering multiple debate dates because as recently as last week she was claiming she didn't want to schedule anything until his campaign was "nicer" to her.

Fallon said that the Sanders campaign had rejected Monday night’s proposed debate because it wants a New York debate to take place after Tuesday’s primary in Wisconsin.
Fallon said the Clinton camp had proposed two other options, both rejected by Sanders. One would be a debate on the night of April 14; the other would be a debate on the morning of April 15 on ABC’s Good Morning America.

http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news/world/2016/04/02/clinton-sanders-trade-barbs-over-debate.html

 

[neurosisxeno]

http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news/world/2016/04/02/clinton-sanders-trade-barbs-over-debate.html

I'd have to hear more about the Thursday night one to understand rejecting it, but the Good Morning America one is a no brainer. Why would Sanders agree to a debate that airs on a segment almost exclusively watched by Clinton supporters?

EDIT: As for the Monday one; "Briggs took aim at one Clinton proposal in particular: an encounter on this coming Monday night, which would coincide with the national championship game in men&#8217;s college basketball."

 

[excelsiorlef]

Someone explain cock use for me.

They're small and tiny. They tend to suck and leave a bitter after taste and due to taking all day to finish they limit how many people actually come.

 

[CCS]

They're small and tiny. They tend to suck and leave a bitter after taste and due to taking all day to finish they limit how many people actually come.

Dead.

 

[User 463088]

They're small and tiny. They tend to suck and leave a bitter after taste and due to taking all day to finish they limit how many people actually come.

Hahaha

 

[Tubie]

Your comment about how nice Clinton has been. She hasn't been all that nice, and has tried to completely flip the narrative that Bernie is aggressively attacking her. Is there a source on her offering multiple debate dates because as recently as last week she was claiming she didn't want to schedule anything until his campaign was "nicer" to her.

In this very thread today:

Apparently not that desperate for a debate: https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN/status/716306134030761984

And if you type "clinton offers bernie ny debates" in google, you get stuff like:

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/hillary-clinton-s-campaign-says-bernie-sanders-rejected-new-york-n549671

 

[shinra-bansho]

The Nevada thing is a who cares. The Clinton campaign should probably get their shit together for the next phase of the stupid caucus system.

People should stop trying to make scandal and drama unironically. The Dems are boring, live it, love it.

 

[neurosisxeno]

And if you type "clinton offers bernie ny debates" in google, you get stuff like:

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/hillary-clinton-s-campaign-says-bernie-sanders-rejected-new-york-n549671

And as I said above, a debate during the NCAA Championship game or on a Friday morning isn't exactly an ideal solution. That Thursday night one I find curious, I'm wondering what the justification there was, but the other 2 are time slots that just don't make sense.

 

[Brawndo Addict]

There absolutely is a charity-industrial complex so to speak; you can make a lot of money taking advantage of other people's good will. Your most visible charities being peddled by celebrities and corporations nowadays are all garbage "awareness" builders that do nothing but perpetuate themselves. That said, sure, in a perfect world sure you wouldn't need charities, but in the real world it's not practical or ideal for the government to literally try to solve every single problem that society and individuals might face so charities will always have a place.

But I see nothing wrong with being critical or wanting to hold charities to a higher standard. And there's certainly value in trying to combat the right-wing argument that charities are how we should fill the gap between what the government provides and what people need. Now was Sander's being rude with those comments? Probably, but it's out of context in time and place so it's hard to know how appropriate or not it was given the culture/politics of that decade. Sometimes people get so stuck in their own echo chambers and ways of thinking that you have to shock them out of complacency to get them to realize that something is wrong.

At the very least, you should probably research the people you're inviting to be guests or ask them how they feel about the organization. I don't think Sanders is the kind of person who would have intentionally kept quiet about his personal feelings on charities just to make a scene once he got there. I think they probably just invited him without putting much thought into it. I dunno, I just find this kind of stuff inconsequential even if it wasn't over 30 years old.

 

[Tubie]

And as I said above, a debate during the NCAA Championship game or on a Friday morning isn't exactly an ideal solution. That Thursday night one I find curious, I'm wondering what the justification there was, but the other 2 are time slots that just don't make sense.

Why hasn't he offered dates then?

All I see is excuses as to why not.

 

[neurosisxeno]

Why hasn't he offered dates then?

All I see is excuses as to why not.

From the above article.

In his statement, Briggs said that the Sanders campaign is “very pleased that Secretary Clinton finally has accepted our request for a debate about the needs of New York and America.”

“We have proposed other dates which they have rejected,” Briggs said of the Clinton campaign. “We hope we can reach agreement in the near future.”

 

[StopMakingSense]

Debate negotiations are boring and politicking them is dumb.

 

[Tubie]

From the above article.

Point still remains that Clinton has actually offered dates, and Bernie said no because at first he wanted it to be after Wisconsin, then he didn't want a morning debate, then it's Basketball. For a man so far behind overall and specially in NY, his actions make no sense at all here.

You would think he was confident in his message, even in NY, no matter the day or hour.

 

[teiresias]

Point still remains that Clinton has actually offered dates, and Bernie said no because at first he wanted it to be after Wisconsin, then he didn't want a morning debate, then it's Basketball. For a man so far behind overall and specially in NY, his actions make no sense at all here.

You would think he was confident in his message, even in NY, no matter the day or hour.

You don't understand. Those taking part in the Revolution can't get up early enough to watch Good Morning America.

 

[neurosisxeno]

Point still remains that Clinton has actually offered dates, and Bernie said no because at first he wanted it to be after Wisconsin, then he didn't want a morning debate, then it's Basketball. For a man so far behind overall and specially in NY, his actions make no sense at all here.

You would think he was confident in his message, even in NY, no matter the day or hour.

He declined a debate tomorrow night because it was during one of the biggest sporting events of the year--The NCAA Men's Championship game, and a debate that would be on a segment\time slot almost nobody under 50 watches. The Thursday night time slot confuses me and I've admitted as much, but those other 2 the Clinton campaign knew damn well he wouldn't accept.

 

[Tubie]

He declined a debate tomorrow night because it was during one of the biggest sporting events of the year--The NCAA Men's Championship game, and a debate that would be on a segment\time slot almost nobody under 50 watches. The Thursday night time slot confuses me and I've admitted as much, but those other 2 the Clinton campaign knew damn well he wouldn't accept.

So there you go, even to you what he's doing makes no sense if he actually wanted a NY debate to happen.

Can you imagine him shitting on wall street in a city where wall street directly employs thousands and indirectly employs even more?

He never wanted a NY debate and his team was banking on Hillary never calling their bluff.

 

[User 463088]

Debates at this point are pointless. Bernie wanted the argument more than the debate. Plus it's free ad time for him.

 

[BanGy.nz]

Can you imagine him shitting on wall street in a city where wall street directly employs thousands and indirectly employs even more?

He'd probably get bunch of national coverage talking about how brave and courageous he is.

 

[neurosisxeno]

Can you imagine him shitting on wall street in a city where wall street directly employs thousands and indirectly employs even more?

He's been hosting smaller events and doing just that. I imagine the kind of people who work on Wall St. who would be impacted by Sanders proposals probably were never going to vote for him anyway.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I think I may have posted it before but the Financial Activities category employs like 10% of the State in terms of private non-agri... that's a lot of people to write off, some of them probably aren't completely horrible people. Probably.

 

[noshten]

I think I may have posted it before but the Financial Activities category employs like 10% of the State in terms of private non-agri... that's a lot of people to write off, some of them probably aren't completely horrible people. Probably.

And some of them support his attacks on Wall Street, go figure

 

[down 2 orth]

Now I don't feel bad about superdelegates.

As far as I know, superdelegates don't count for anything unless there is no clear nominee by the time of the convention. I think they've only been used decisively once in the history of the Democratic conventions, and it was almost forty years ago.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Probably. But only the courageous five or so that aren't pure evil. The rest are presumably entirely beholden to their paymasters.