@MilkmanDan

I don't like the notion of free super delegates but they didn't swing the primary. If they were taken out of the equation, Hilary still had a majority. Party favouritism and a media sense of inevitability probably did though.

The main conclusion I drew from the result is that in dire economic times, people will hold their nose and vote their perceived economic interests above anything else. I mean Clinton got 65% of Latinos vs. Obama's 71% in 2012 - Trump got a larger share than Romney. In most of the battleground states Clinton only won 50-55% of women.

Tack onto this the insider vs. outsider narrative, and the desire for a 'change' from government policy associated with Obama / Democrats, and you have a the holy trifecta. In hindsight it's easy to see going after Trump's character was a distraction.

I think she is WAY more disliked now by the general public then she was before the primaries started. Also so few knew much about Bernie at the get go. I doubt she would fare well against Sanders if they had a redo. Although those super delegates may make it close. Without them she would have probably lost and in a redo without them she would get crushed im guessing. I hate her so much (more than trump as i just laugh at his nonsense) but still am more comfortable with the same trending downward shit we have had forever (Clinton) then something super unpredictable and ugly(Trump). But that's just me and my cushy life and opinion.

I watched the convention live on YouTube feeds and PBS news. The T.V. news version filtered out most of the chanting and used camera angles to omit the protest signs. In the later days of the convention the DNC made a sheet of chants designed to counter the protesters chants. It worked well. Just watch Leon Pennata's speech to hear the background chants from Sanders states(where there were no microphones) start and be drowned out be the Clinton states where the crowd mics were placed.

The walkout in @notarobot's video was real. Hundreds of Bernie supporters did walkout after the roll call. It was not on the same day as Clinton's speech. Some delegates planed another walkout during Clinton's speech but never went through with it. The Craigslist ads are likely fake.

Alex Jones is a lair. He puts out enough BS to distract from anything real. It is disgusting how he uses his website as 'sources now confirm' while his website is just quoting from his show. It's worse than the propaganda network PBS news has become.

So I used an link affiliated with Alex Jones for an image of unhappy DNC delegates, and that makes the argument invalid? Do you think that image was staged?

Here. Is this better?

https://twitter.com/TheBradMielke/status/758820748811116546/photo/1

Where were these people at Hillary's coronation speech?

Do you think they suddenly changed their minds and started thumping their chests for Hillary?

How would you fake it? It's possible the youtube poster misrepresented the timing of the video it looks like it's the preamble to Hillary's acceptance, not her actual corination, but it's clear there is a schism in the Democratic party.

"DEMOCRATS CHANGE SIGNS FROM “HILLARY” TO “LIAR” DURING DNC"
http://www.infowars.com/democrats-change-signs-from-hillary-to-liar-during-dnc/

Trump as president will be the same as Trump as presidential candidate. There won't be policies and solutions, he wants to be a demagogue, giving speeches and basking in the adulation. He will delegate the hard work of running the country to other people and stoke his ego presiding over ridiculous meetings where he gives directions and derides his cabinet for failing. "You're fired!"

President Trump will get nothing done and when he pushes the wrong buttons he'll be impeached. The Trump presidency will not be 4 years.

But this guy's video is full of shit. He blissfully ignores the fact that a president must compromise and sometimes even make the best choice from a list of undesireable options. No President can, or should be able to, get everything they want. You can never judge a politician based on every naive expectation you have, because you have the luxury of idealism while they're dealing with reality. The best you can do is support someone who's agenda best matches your own and applaud them when they succeed.

It's like pinball. You can use what control you have to push the ball where you want it but you cannot ultimately control where it goes.

This video starts out be denigrating the idea that game theory should influence our choices in politics. Well that's one of the stupidest things he could say. You cannot refuse to throw the dice in monopoly, claim all the properties and believe you're winning. You have to develop the best strategy you can for the best outcome you can manage with the rules that are in place. If you don't like the rules...change them before the next game begins. Of course, that would require you to make an effort in between games. You don't get YouTube views for that.

For a moment, assume for the sake of argument that Assange is right. Next round of emails gets released, there's damning evidence of criminal actions or other behavior that are sufficient to arrest or at least force Hillary to drop out of the race. What would happen if that does come to pass?

Would the Democrat party be able to name Bernie as their candidate, since he got the second highest number of delegates? He has already endorsed Clinton and officially returned to being an Independent instead of a Democrat (or at least says that he would return to the Senate as an Independent). In light of that, would they pass the torch to Tim Kaine as Hillary's VP pick?

It's all pretty weird and unprecedented. I can only think of the Nixon resignation as setting any sort of example; but maybe there have been Governor candidates disqualified due to criminal activity in the middle of a race before?

I must say, it seems to me that it would almost be a blessing for the Democrat party if it *does* come true and they revert to Sanders for the nominee. I tend to think he'd easily beat Trump in the general election (although having endorsed Hillary could be damaging), and we'd all have the benefit of having someone with actually positive favorability ratings on the ballot...

Probably all wishful thinking on my part as a Sanders fan. But still interesting to contemplate.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz Booed By Florida Delegation has been added as a related post - related requested by notarobot on that post.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz Booed By Florida Delegation has been added as a related post - related requested by notarobot on that post.

Thank you for the promote! Sanders has already pushed his agenda further than anyone could have imagined, and the fight is still not over. Will we win? (I'm a Bernie delegate in my county) No, but if we survive the Trump presidency for 4 years, the revolution, a mainly peaceful one at that, just may take place. Why we get Bush, Clinton, Bush, sprinkled with Obama, Trump on top is beyond me. Oh wait, Americans are lazy, God fearing idiots. Release the nukes.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz Booed By Florida Delegation has been added as a related post - related requested by newtboy.

I don't know any more, I think those hypothetical match up poles that have Bernie beating Trump by a higher margin than Clinton don't take into account the fallout from the only way he could be nominated now, if nearly all of the super delegates decide to overturn the result of the primary. And that would seriously piss off the majority of Democratic primary voters.

If it actually went down that way, I don't think Bernie would be up in the poles given how many Clinton supporters would feel cheated and betrayed by the party. I know that's ironic since Sanders supporters already feel that way, but overturning the primary is an epic level of shenanigans that would eclipse anything done to Sanders.

The only hope for a Sanders nomination is if Clinton implodes in the next 3 weeks, like by being indicted. Otherwise I think the best he can do is what he's been saying, try to affect the party platform.

Bernie should have gotten more delegates.

Hillary been around the block and know hows the game goes and knows how to duck and weave ( bribe) herself to victory.

Don't forget the 47 dead bodies Bills womens.

OK...I read it as "Hillary won" the primary election, or pledged delegate votes needed as well as more than enough unpledged delegates pledges, which she did, but not the nomination since he went on to say it was possible she wouldn't get it if, say, she died or dropped out before the convention.

I agree it would be smart for them to re-think their strategy and go with a better candidate to beat Trump if that's the main goal, and I'm afraid that Clinton is unpopular, secretive, and such an easy target for attacks that she can easily lose to a megalomaniacal demagogue, but I also see it would alienate >1/2 of democrats that want Hillary and make the party look terribly undemocratic if they did that...which they may be, but they sure don't want to prove that they are.

He said that "Hillary won" I'm assuming that means she won the nomination, which she hasn't.

And it wouldn't be that odd if the super-delegates backed Bernie, not because they are going against democracy, but because it was a close race and when you have to decide between running the 'favorite' by a narrow margin, or running the candidate that could actually beat Trump in an election.