Support NeoGAF

[Deleted member 231381]

Were he merely playing nice, all he'd get is a symbolic nod. What he's hoping is that the DNC is conscious of being scrutinized by a decent chunk of people they'd like to have vote for them, and acting with that consideration in mind.

Pretty much. It's not making up the rules as you go along, minority reports have been around since forever. Heck, it was a minority report responsible for endorsing civil rights and beginning the transition away from the Democrats being the (more) racist party.

 

[Suikoguy]

What Clinton should compromise on and what the DNC should compromise on are largely separate issues. There's a number of issues that Sanders might want Clinton to compromise on - financial reform, tuition reform, security issues like the Patriot Act - but given his intellectual background I suspect he'll be more likely to focus on change in the DNC and trying to get some Sanderistas into at least relatively key positions; the same way that Obama appointing DWS rather than Rybak was one of Clinton's conditions of support in '08.

OK, what is so different about those parts?

Financial Reform
Tuition Reform

I'll give you there being a difference on the patriot act. Although Sanders never brings it up or talks about it.

Also, Sanders is not an intellectual at all.
Sanders is a big ideas guy, and that's about it. He has no curiosity about policy at all.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I have two dogs.

They live as comfortably as most children.

 

[itschris]

This Bernie meme is so terrible that I don't dare post it with IMG tags:

http://i.imgur.com/59QV5BK.jpg

In less dank news:

Benchmark Politics: Why Republicans Will (Probably) Lose Senate Control

Also:

Benchmark Politics ‏@benchmarkpol 5h5 hours ago

An update: the GE model will be complete in 2 weeks and we will start running it after Clinton crosses the pledged delegate threshold

We feel the GE model will be even MORE accurate than the primary model that got us to this point

The Senate model will be done in 1 month and will start running after most senate races have been polled and we know the noms.

The house race mode will be done in 2 months and will be the most experimental mode, but it's also the one we are most excited about

I look forward to seeing their general election models!

 

[Bowdz]

He doesn't want complete control. If he did, he'd be openly threatening to run as an independent. He wants the control that he's due - in other words, whatever policy proposals he can get passed at the Convention. That's pretty fair. If he can persuade enough of Clinton's delegates combined with his own to get something passed, then that's not a Clinton concession, that's the Democratic party democratically deciding to adopt it, as have been the rules for an awfully long time. He's been turning down the olive branch because he reckons he can turn up with ~42% of the delegates and Clinton sure isn't giving him ~42% of the platform.

You're all much too worried about Sanders. He's brought in a demographic that Clinton didn't have the political or personal capacity to reach, and will give them to Clinton when the time is right. That benefits her in the long-run; she'll do better than she would have if he'd never run. She just has to wait a little longer, be gracious in her victory, and then move on to Trump. Besides, the Democratic party, while of course better than the alternative, is staggeringly undemocratic. A greater level of skepticism and scrutiny is a good thing.

From your lips to God's ears.

I sincerely hope that's how it plays out, but I honestly think the rhetoric he has routinely used is going to make it extremely hard to walk back when he decides to endorse Clinton.

 

[johnsmith]

They live as comfortably as most children.

And they probably get spanked less than Cruz's.

 

[shinra-bansho]

OK, what is so different about those parts?

Probably the lack of detail and nuance in the Sanders plan, where bullet points are repeated twice.

Maybe he wants more repetition in the party platform.

Audit the Fed and put some farmers on.

 

[royalan]

Were he merely playing nice, all he'd get is a symbolic nod. What he's hoping is that the DNC is conscious of being scrutinized by a decent chunk of people they'd like to have vote for them, and acting with that consideration in mind. It's cynical, but I gotta give the man credit, it's probably his best bet.

I would agree with this until recently. But Bernie lost even that level of sympathy from me when he, a) encouraged his supporters to look at the process in its entirety as corrupt; b) parroted lies via his campaign that Hillary and the DNC were involved in a money laundering scheme; c) responded to his supporters doxxing and harassing/threatening DNC heads and Hillary supporters with, "Oh yeah of course that was bad BUT they kinda had it coming you know?" followed by more parroted lies about what went down in Nevada.

This isn't good faith criticism by any respectable measure. This is smear tactics. Bernie's campaign is becoming increasingly toxic, and I would hate to see the party set a bad precedent by cowtowing to it. Shit like that is what led to Republicans being hijacked by the Tea Party. At this point, a symbolic nod to Bernie Sanders would be all that he deserves.

 

[Spoiled Milk]

And they probably get spanked less than Cruz's.

Cruz spanks his dogs?

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

I would agree with this until recently. But Bernie lost even that level of sympathy from me when he, a) encouraged his supporters to look at the process in its entirety as corrupt; b) parroted lies via his campaign that Hillary and the DNC were involved in a money laundering scheme; c) responded to his supporters doxxing and harassing/threatening DNC heads and Hillary supporters with, "Oh yeah of course that was bad BUT they kinda had it coming you know?" followed by more parroted lies about what went down in Nevada.

This isn't good faith criticism by any respectable measure. This is smear tactics. Bernie's campaign is becoming increasingly toxic, and I would hate to see the party set a bad precedent by cowtowing to it. Shit like that is what led to Republicans being hijacked by the Tea Party. At this point, a symbolic nod to Bernie Sanders would be all that he deserves.

I wasn't looking at it from the perspective of having sympathy or hatred for it, just strategically. I really don't care one way or the other what Bernie Sanders does, because I don't think he really has any power to make Trump president. He's an inferior version of what Bill Bradley was back in 2000, really, and likely equally doomed to obscurity. If he wants to be dragged into the sunset kicking and screaming, let him.

 

[excelsiorlef]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...-americans-see-clinton-as-lesser-of-two-evils

Sanders: Americans see Clinton as 'lesser of two evils'

Thanks for the party unity, Bernie.

“No I wouldn’t describe it, but that’s what the American people are saying,” he said. “If you look at the favorability ratings of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, both of them have very, very high unfavorables.”

...

"We need a campaign, an election, coming up which does not have two candidates who are really very, very strongly disliked,” he said in an interview with ABC’s “This Week” set to air Sunday. “I don't want to see the American people voting for the lesser of two evils. I want the American people to be voting for a vision of economic justice, of social justice, of environmental justice, of racial justice."

What a fucking weasel. Just like he didn't mean PP was part of the Establishment, he meant PP was part of the Establishment, oh wait no what he really meant was everyone who runs it is part of the Establishment.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Were he merely playing nice, all he'd get is a symbolic nod. What he's hoping is that the DNC is conscious of being scrutinized by a decent chunk of people they'd like to have vote for them, and acting with that consideration in mind. It's cynical, but I gotta give the man credit, it's probably his best bet.

Edit: Also, welcome back, Crab.

Also also, all primaries should either be open, or closed but with same-day registration, for both parties. If they are not, the DNC and GOP can fund them, themselves, instead of leaving independents on the hook for a process they're not allowed a say in without compromising their sense of political identity.

Hell no.

Republicans should be given a chance to en masse influence the Democratic nomination

 

[SheSaidNo]

Hell no.

Republicans should be given a chance to en masse influence the Democratic nomination

Is there any proof that this happens?

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

It is absolutely true that Americans seem to generally view this election as a choice between the lesser of two evils, even more than usual, given the unfavorability with which both candidates are viewed.

 

[Box of Kittens]

I would be more OK with Sanders have significant influence on the platform if his message were what I thought it was going to be when the campaign started, i.e., basically pushing the Democrats to the left. The problem is that in most of the cases where his proposals differ from Clinton's, her's are just better. They're more thorough, take the results of research into account better, etc. But really my big problem is with his message of "big progressive change is easy to accomplish and I'd be able to get it done with no trouble because the only reason it hasn't happened yet is corruption" along with a healthy dose of "I'm the only one who cares about [thing that Clinton and Democrats in general address]." Basically, the message is too much about him and too little about policy, because he actually seems to have little real interest in policy.

Also, Sanders is not an intellectual at all.
Sanders is a big ideas guy, and that's about it. He has no curiosity about policy at all.

One of the things that really soured me on Bernie Sanders as a politician is his lack of intellectual curiosity. You can see that in the way he really refuses to consider new perspectives, such as the way he brushes off anyone who doesn't agree with him that income inequality should be their top concern. It actually bothers me some to see him praised by a bunch of the left for the same things we (rightly) criticized George W. Bush for.

 

[GregLombardi]

...



What a fucking weasel. Just like he didn't mean PP was part of the Establishment, he meant PP was part of the Establishment, oh wait no what he really meant was everyone who runs it is part of the Establishment.

I think my biggest problem with what he is saying is that Clinton is not the lesser of two evils, and he is essentially equating her. She is completely un-evil. She's just a master politician.

Otherwise, I know what he is TRYING to say, which is that we shouldn't have elections where people are unexcited about their presidential candidates. Unfortunately, he is once again setting up lots of damning attack ads for Republicans, which is unacceptable and of course, shows his complete lack of political savvy.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Is there any proof that this happens?

In fact, 39 percent of Sanders voters said they would vote for Trump over Sanders in the fall. For Clinton, nine percent of her voters say they plan to come out for Trump in the general election.

West Virginia has an open primary, meaning independents can vote in the Democratic contest. With the GOP nomination wrapped up, it's possible mischievous Trump supporters sought to damage Clinton, the likely Democratic nominee, by voting for Sanders.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...rs-boost-bernie-sanders-west-virginia-n571791

Happened this month

 

[royalan]

Is there any proof that this happens?

Exit polls in several states (particularly PA) have shown that it does happen.

To what degree though, I'm not sure. Still I don't think it should be encouraged.

Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with parties being against same-day registration.

 

[Suikoguy]

Hell no.

Republicans should be given a chance to en masse influence the Democratic nomination

Here is what i'd be happy with:

Get rid of caucuses, if that means the party helping pay for primaries in all 50 states so be it. In exchange, i'd agree to semi-open primaries in all states. Although I have many reservations, such as: what would be the fucking point of registering for anything but being independent?

Ideally, what i'd like to see is all states be closed primaries, with same day registration for new voters. Changing parties must be done one week before the first primary date.

 

[pigeon]

lol

The thing that surprised me but probably shouldn't is that Trump is still better net favorability than the GOP itself. Shows just how tanked that brand is.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Here is what i'd be happy with:

Get rid of caucuses, if that means the party helping pay for primaries in all 50 states so be it. In exchange, i'd agree to semi-open primaries in all states. Although I have many reservations, such as: what would be the fucking point of registering for anything but being independent?

Ideally, what i'd like to see is all states be closed primaries, with same day registration for new voters. Changing parties must be done one week before the first primary date.

Boom.

 

[SheSaidNo]

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...rs-boost-bernie-sanders-west-virginia-n571791

Happened this month

West Virginia does not have same day registration and they are semi-closed. I think the benefits of having same day registration outweigh fears of repubs or dems voting for the other team.

 

[royalan]

Here is what i'd be happy with:

Get rid of caucuses, if that means the party helping pay for primaries in all 50 states so be it. In exchange, i'd agree to semi-open primaries in all states. Although I have many reservations, such as: what would be the fucking point of registering for anything but being independent?

Ideally, what i'd like to see is all states be closed primaries, with same day registration for new voters. Changing parties must be done one week before the first primary date.

I agree with this.

Lately, I've also have been wondering if this election's primary schedule has been worth it. Obama did credit a drawn out primary for helping him seed his ground game in the general, but further extending it this year has only made the primary more drawn out and taxing. And 08 was a primary between two candidates that, while competitive, ultimately respected each other, the process and the party. Having to contend with an obstinate Bernie Sanders for this long is definitely hurting Hillary's favorables, and giving him ample time to spin lies about the party's legitimacy. With 08's schedule, Bernie would have been snuffed out by now.

 

[Suikoguy]

West Virginia does not have same day registration and they are semi-closed

WV is an archaeological study of people left behind by democrats who never bothered to change their registration.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

HRC at Trayvon Martin dinner, via @tamaragitt: "if you want to imagine Trump's America..., picture more kids at risk of violence & bigotry."

https://twitter.com/Taniel/status/734196567150854144

Pivoting to the right.

 

[SheSaidNo]

WV is an archaeological study of people left behind by democrats who never bothered to change their registration.

Wouldn't same day registration help with that then?

 

[RustyNails]

Mehdi Hasan of AJE takes Trump's security adviser to task in a preview clip. Where can I watch the full version?

 

[Suikoguy]

Wouldn't same day registration help with that then?

The effort to change registration was more than the need to vote in the Republican primary.

 

[excelsiorlef]

West Virginia does not have same day registration and they are semi-closed. I think the benefits of having same day registration outweigh fears of repubs or dems voting for the other team.

And yet 39% who could vote and voted for Sanders are GE Trump supporters.

It's exactly an example of what same day would open in the future.

 

[Y2Kev]

The platform means jack shit. Seriously, who has ever seen it referenced, read aloud, cited in a debate, on TV, by talking heads, in the paper, anywhere? I say let him have it. The Democratic party SHOULD stand for those things. Let the candidates differ on how they get there, but allowing even the optics of a floor fight over the equivalent of toilet paper scribblings seems weird to me. The networks don't even televise the platform debate.

I don't understand how the platform works in terms of amending it. Does it require majority vote? If so, then I don't agree Sanders should get 42% of the delegates by right (if Trump wins, non-idiots are not going to get 48% of his policy). But I don't think "right" is what matters here. We should end this amicably since a) I think it's the right thing to do and b) it would be stupid to do otherwise since it just doesn't matter.

 

[Box of Kittens]

West Virginia was a case of a state where a bunch of people are registered as Democrats, most likely because they used to vote Democratic (WV was once a solid Democratic state) but now vote Republican. It's certainly the case that de facto Republicans were voting in the Democratic primary, but this isn't a case where closed primaries would prevent that.

I think open and closed primaries each have advantages and disadvantages, but I do think the situation where one party's primary is settled and the other's isn't (thus giving members of one party more incentive to try and interfere with the other party than participate in their own primary) is a good illustration of why open primaries aren't 100% a good thing.

 

[ampere]

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...rs-boost-bernie-sanders-west-virginia-n571791

Happened this month

I think that's mostly DINOs. WV is weird

Ideally, what i'd like to see is all states be closed primaries, with same day registration for new voters. Changing parties must be done one week before the first primary date.

I like this proposal. And early voting/absentee in every state too.

 

[SheSaidNo]

And yet 39% who could vote and voted for Sanders are GE Trump supporters.

It's exactly an example of what same day would open in the future.

You just supported a post that said "Ideally, what i'd like to see is all states be closed primaries, with same day registration for new voters. Changing parties must be done one week before the first primary date." WV registration date was three weeks before, so stricter than that. It's an example that would happen in your system as well.

EDIT: misread primary date instead of first primary date, thats pretty strict however. You want people to have registered in Jan?

 

[eBay Huckster]

Ideally, in this system WV would be nuked from orbit

 

[royalan]

The platform means jack shit. Seriously, who has ever seen it referenced, read aloud, cited in a debate, on TV, by talking heads, in the paper, anywhere? I say let him have it. The Democratic party SHOULD stand for those things. Let the candidates differ on how they get there, but allowing even the optics of a floor fight over the equivalent of toilet paper scribblings seems weird to me. The networks don't even televise the platform debate.

I don't understand how the platform works in terms of amending it. Does it require majority vote? If so, then I don't agree Sanders should get 42% of the delegates by right (if Trump wins, non-idiots are not going to get 48% of his policy). But I don't think "right" is what matters here. We should end this amicably since a) I think it's the right thing to do and b) it would be stupid to do otherwise since it just doesn't matter.

Ultimately, I think this is the reason why Bernie has repeatedly turned down Hillary's olive branch. The platform means jack shit, and he's not naive enough to not know that.

He wants a confrontation. Someone said here a few days ago that it seems like Bernie wants to replicate the 1968 chaos, and be at the head of it, and I'm starting to think that's likely. If not the nomination, he wants a fight no matter what.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Here is what i'd be happy with:

Get rid of caucuses, if that means the party helping pay for primaries in all 50 states so be it. In exchange, i'd agree to semi-open primaries in all states. Although I have many reservations, such as: what would be the fucking point of registering for anything but being independent?

Ideally, what i'd like to see is all states be closed primaries, with same day registration for new voters. Changing parties must be done one week before the first primary date.

Just do it like we do in Illinois, where you can request either ballot but can only receive one. Either that, or the parties can fund them themselves. If the parties want to treat themselves like private entities when it suits them, despite serving an essentially public function in an inevitably-two-party first past the post system, they shouldn't be receiving taxpayer dollars for their intraorganizational process.

 

[Suikoguy]

EDIT: misread primary date instead of first primary date, thats pretty strict however. You want people to have registered in Jan?

Ideally.

But in practice i'm not sure it would be needed, as once again you run into the cost/benefit ratio. I don't think enough people would bother to change registration to vote troll. The primary reason for that clause was NY as It's bullshit that NY requires party change in October, that's wayyy too early.

But if you can vote in either election regardless, the barrier for vote trolling is too low IMO.

Just do it like we do in Illinois, where you can request either ballot but can only receive one. Either that, or the parties can fund them themselves. If the parties want to treat themselves like private entities when it suits them, despite serving an essentially public function in an inevitably-two-party first past the post system, they shouldn't be receiving taxpayer dollars for their intraorganizational process.

That's an argument i've not seen, interesting point.

 

[SheSaidNo]

From the research I can find it seems like "raiders" people who vote in others primaries are minimal. http://www.polmeth.wustl.edu/files/polmeth/alvar99b.pdf

We undertake the analysis of primary elections from 1980 through 1996 using
both academic individual level survey data, media exit-polls, and aggregate election
returns on a county by county basis. We come to the following conclusions:
1. there is very little crossover voting in general in United States primaries;
2. the dierence in the amount of crossover voting between states with open
primaries and closed primaries is not substantively large;
3. the amount of strategic behavior on the part of voters is extremely small.

 

[Box of Kittens]

WV is an archaeological study of people left behind by democrats who never bothered to change their registration.

I did a quick and dirty analysis of presidential election results in West Virginia going back to 1988 (when WV was one of ten states Dukakis carried) in the last thread. What's striking about West Virginia's movement away from the Democrats is that it has been both rapid and consistent. Every cycle it has voted more Republican, relative to the country as a whole, than the previous one. Furthermore, it's typically moved somewhere around 5-10 points each cycle (the only real exception was Bill Clinton's reelection in 1996, where his support largely held steady from 1992).

 

[Suikoguy]

From the research I can find it seems like "raiders" people who vote in others primaries are minimal. http://www.polmeth.wustl.edu/files/polmeth/alvar99b.pdf

While I appreciate you sharing an actual study, can you think of one thing that may have changed between 1996 and now?

I can name 2.

1.) Social Media and the Internet.
2.) Party polarization.

 

[User 85168]

In time for All the Way releasing today, here's LBJ doing LBJ things.

 

[excelsiorlef]

You just supported a post that said "Ideally, what i'd like to see is all states be closed primaries, with same day registration for new voters. Changing parties must be done one week before the first primary date." WV registration date was three weeks before, so stricter than that. It's an example that would happen in your system as well.

EDIT: misread primary date instead of first primary date, thats pretty strict however. You want people to have registered in Jan?

To have changed affiliation? Absolutely. It prevents any sort of mid primary fuckery where if the GOP nomination is decided all of a sudden Republicans are changing to Democrats and fucking with their primary. Setting before the first primary ensures those changing affiliation are doing so for legitimate ideological reasons

 

[Mr. Lemming]

Exit polls in several states (particularly PA) have shown that it does happen.

To what degree though, I'm not sure. Still I don't think it should be encouraged.

Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with parties being against same-day registration.

Isn't PA a closed primary?

 

[royalan]

Isn't PA a closed primary?

Yes. But a few months ago the media made a big deal about thousands of Democrats switching their registration, and I believe exit polls showed a lot of voters voting for Bernie despite also wanting a president with less liberal policy ideas than Obama.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

To have changed affiliation? Absolutely. It prevents any sort of mid primary fuckery where if the GOP nomination is decided all of a sudden Republicans are changing to Democrats and fucking with their primary. Setting before the first primary ensures those changing affiliation are doing so for legitimate ideological reasons

If you want that, that's fine, but I don't want to pay for it, is all.

 

[Suikoguy]

Yes. But a few months ago the media made a big deal about thousands of Democrats switching their registration, and I believe exit polls showed a lot of voters voting for Bernie despite also wanting a president with less liberal policy ideas than Obama.

You can't determine the cause behind that based on that poll though, there are other reasons such as it being an "anti-Clinton" vote not a policy based vote.

 

[excelsiorlef]

If you want that, that's fine, but I don't want to pay for it, is all.

With all do respect you pay for a lot of things you'd probably rather not so sorry that isn't a convincing argument

 

[royalan]

You can't determine the cause behind that based on that poll though, there are other reasons such as it being an "anti-Clinton" vote not a policy based vote.

Sure. I don't claim to know to what degree that it happens. But I highly, highly doubt those were all "Not Hillary" votes.

I mean, with results like that, and this being the internet and all (we've had multiple people in this OT discussing changing their registration just to fuck with the Republican primaries in several states), I don't think it's an irrational concern. Especially as social media makes it easier and easier for groups to coordinate.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Wuth all do respect you pay for a lot of things you'd probably rather not so, sorry if that isn't a convincing argument

I'm happy to pay for things that don't benefit me if they have a collective social benefit that the government is justified in maintaining. A particular conception of the integrity of the presidential nominating process of private organizations that have no standing within the Constitution is not such a thing. If Democrats and Republicans want to have publicly funded primaries, their electoral process has to be functionally open to participation of the people paying for the process. A typically R-leaning independent voter should be able to cast a ballot to nominate Hillary Clinton as the best chance of stopping the Trumpocalypse, and a typical D-leaning independent voter should be able to cast a ballot for John Kasich or Paul Ryan or whoever as an alternative to a Bernie Sanders. If we're not going to hold the parties to their "this is a private organization" schtick that they use to justify undemocratic elements, then let's just treat the primaries like what they are - the election, part 1 - and open them up accordingly. The current system makes zero sense, especially since the parties do everything they can to squeeze the life out of any third party that becomes remotely viable, thus disenfranchising independents of any other viable options.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I'm sure he meant evil in the nicest way.

Like wicked cool. Or bitchin' ride.