Haters start your hate engines!

Superdelegates aren't the only ones who don't literally, really, and truly vote until the actual convention. None of the delegates do—pledged or super. That's some risible bullshitting.

Superdelegates can change their votes, pledged delegates can't. That's some disingenuous bullshit of your own, Dan.

Let's just all chill out and wait to see what happens after tomorrow. It's going to be OK.

Is Dan going to ever apologize for the disingenuous "I don't care if it's Bernie or Hillary but Fuck Bernie Sanders" shit he's pulled this whole election cycle?

I have no doubt that Bernie will be clasping Hillary's hand high in the air after her acceptance speech in Philadelphia, sending a clear sign of party unity among the falling confetti and balloons; with the traditional retro "Happy Days are Here Again" theme almost drowned out by the resounding cheers.

If Hillary really has it all sewn up, why does it matter what Sanders does?

@5: Nope. How long did it take him to apologize for Iraq?

Chase: The only "disingenuous bullshit" I see at this point is Senator Tootsie Roll telling his band of Lost Boys that a strong showing in California will persuade the super delegates to ignore the will of the majority and hop on board his leaky and increasingly erratic Good Ship Lollipop. The chance of that happening is about likely as Dan suddenly deciding that he needed to attend a christian gay conversion camp. Neither one, thank god, is going to happen.

Generation routinely derided as overly narcissistic and entitled support narcissistic, entitled campaign

More at 11.

Bernie only needs one "super delegate" and his name is James Comey. Until Mr. Comey is "pledged," Bernie will stay in the game.

No serious Sanders supporter thinks he ever had a chance to "win".

Going to the convention is all about making the SDs actually vote. The SDs (and shillary) are terrified of being on the record; especially in places like WA with ~70% Sanders wins.

Bernie's in it til the voting happens. It's all about getting these fuckers (think Kilmer and Inslee) on the record because it's the beginning of accountability.

Obama clinched the nomination on June 4, 2008, with the pledged delegates he won in Democratic primaries and caucuses and with the support of superdelegates—including some superdelegates who jumped to Barack from Hillary. But Obama had more votes and more delegates and superdelegates were rallying around the clear choice of Democratic voters.

Actually, Obama did not have more votes than Clinton (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic…). That was part of Clinton's argument for staying in back in 2008: that the superdelegates should support the candidate who had received the majority of the votes.

In other words, Clinton in 2016 is in a stronger position than Obama in 2008, as she is leading in every measure.

@2: Pledged delegates are there to represent the wishes of those who elected them to be a delegate, but they are not required to vote for a specific candidate. That said, it would be dumb of one of them to go against the wishes of the primary or caucus voters that got them to the convention, similar to the way a faithless Electoral College voter would be damaging their reputation by doing so. The only time you're likely to see pledged delegates go against their candidate is in the event of said candidate dropping out and releasing their delegates to vote for the presumptive nominee. But if we're talking in terms of technicalities, there's nothing in the rules stopping them from doing so under other more arbitrary circumstances.

That Sanders was able to argue that the superdelegates should overturn the will of the voters because of some dubious polls and nonsense like "momentum" with a straight face, after months of arguing, correctly, that they're an undemocratic monstrosity is about as clear of evidence that he's every bit the cynical and manipulative politician his opponent is as I can imagine.

@10 I've enjoyed post-apocalyptic fiction and films as much as the next puerile adolescent, but now that I'm not 14 anymore, I'm absolutely certain I don't want to live in a post-apocalyptic reality. Be careful what you wish for.

You know how everyone said that W. was playing checkers while other world leaders were playing chess? It's not clear that T knows anything about game strategy other than flipping over the board and calling his opponents names.

He's totally unfit, unprepared, and personally unsuited to hold public office at any level.

Inslee's concern is what % of his actual voters in an actual election will be peeved if he goes on for Hillary. The 70% Bernie in a caucus is not representative of lazy old non-caucus voting, which is what matters.

Also, it's better if you say "$hillary" FYI.

Bernie actually lost the primary here in Washington but won because of the caucus. That's fucked up - people voting doesn't matter but privileged people with the time and energy to spend arguing in a high school gym get to decide.

I will be shocked if Bernie supports Hillary. He's going to this generations Raph Nader, who knew that he was fucking the nation and didn't care.

I'm learning that pretty much everyone who ran for President this time around are nothing but throbbing pieces of shit along with their fire breathing supporters.

So fuck it all. Trump 2016!!!

One year ago bernie wasn't even a Democrat!

@16 "lazy old non-caucus voting"?! Wow. Sorry not everyone works a 9-5 job and can spend hours arguing pointlessly with other people in an unfamiliar location. Do you realize that you are basically calling all people who vote by mail lazy? And how insulting that is? Do you think the democratic process should be all inclusive or only for the people who are "good enough" to show up to a caucus? Can you say "lets exclude whoever when can because obviously they don't care" even though they may work 2-3 jobs or be disabled or have other commitements?

@2 - You don't know what you're talking about.

Congratulations on nominating a thoroughly corrupt, Kissenger-praising, warmongering charlatan who'll throw us all under the bus instantly for her Wall $treet paymasters. And worst of all, she may lose to Trump in November because over half the country despises her lying and rapacious greed. I'll stop by the Hallmark store for a card on the way home.

@10 - Good point, I don't think she joined the Illuminati until 2009 so that would explain the Obama presidency.

In absolutely no sense has Clinton "already" won the nomination. For Dan to criticize "bullshit" in such a bullshit way is, well, bullshit. But no one should be surprised by this after Dan presided over the ridiculous ECB non-endorsement. There's much of interest to say about this primary but none of it is to be found here.

@17 - Would you be happier if Bernie won because of the Primary that was held after the Caucus that he lost?

... being a fan of Bernie and logic tends to make me a Hillary defender in the comment threads. Jesus Christ people - yes, Bernie is a much better candidate. Blame the damn voters. The same people who chose Obama over Hillary are choosing Hillary over Obama. Maybe blame Bernie and his zealots for not realizing that at some point in a Democratic primary you need to stop being the firebrand outsider. Look at the success of the Tea Party vs the Occupy Wall Street movement. That's the democratic party. He ran to be that party's nominee.

On April 1, Clinton held a small 1% lead over Sanders according to Real Clear Politics. Today, three successive polls have shown Clinton with a 14% lead over Sanders, widening her polling average to 11.4%, and she is at her highest poll numbers since early January, while Sanders is polling down where he was in mid-March. Sanders has worn out his welcome in the nominating contest. Instead of trying to find a path whereby he could shape the direction of the party while not undermining HRC for the general election, he has refused to moderate his attacks on HRC and indicates that he will continue to do through the convention. He won't peel any superdelegates away from HRC, and he will start to alienate a wide swath of the Democratic base.

You should really buy that card from an independent book seller...

above @22
oops

If Bernie doesn't want to run in 4 years, his supporters better find someone as much like him NOW to prop up. It amazes me that we have 4-8 years to find someone we actually like but no one does anything about it until it's too late. Go out and find them now. If you can get yourselves to an all day caucus, you can get yourselves to the internet and go look for the next Savior of America.

@ 27/28,

Good point. Better yet, I'll make my own birdie card and sell it on Etsy.

Hillary will be less interesting than Obama but will probably do the job without major catastrophe. Trump would be a catastrophe on a civililzation-collapsing scale. Bernie would probably be a bad 1-term president, but it could make the country better if it resulted in his zealous supporters became permanent zealous civil actors. Which is unlikely because it doesn't make good long term Facebook.

the difference between the obama nomination and the supposed clinton nomination is that obama had 69% average overall favorability when they declared his nomination. right now, clinton has only 37.4% average overall favorability - meaning, more people do not want her to be potus than do, which is a very good reason for the candidate with the highest favorability ratings to stay in the race - especially when this article is completely biased and written by someone who has been writing bernie-negative articles the entire election cycle.

@26 your comment made no sense. Bernie won the WA caucus with a fraction of the vote (230k people). Hillary won the primary with people voting by mail (1.4 million) by 54%. So a tiny fraction (16%) determined the result for allocating our delegates. Doesn't seem fair. Fair for the privileged that have the time and energy I suppose.

@34 or it could also be that a large percentage of Bernie voters didnt bother with the mail in primary BECAUSE it doesn't matter with the caucus results. We may never know for sure.

@ 34,

We also were told for months not to bother voting in the primary since the results wouldn't matter, so many Sanders supporters cacaused but didn't vote in May. Obviously, that skewed the results.

@ 30, Bernie will be 79 in 4 years. To even talk about him running them is stupid. s

@35 @36 Right. Obviously. And no Hilary supporters caucused at all. That's why 1.4 million people sent in their ballots. But the Bernie supporters were underrepresented! There is a media conspiracy against Bernie! The super delegates should switch sides! It just goes on and on and on.

I'm starting to not like Bernie's style. Congratulations Hillary.
Pity another big mouthed man is just proving the point, again.

There's fighting the good fight. Then there is howling at the moon.

I hope Bernie does the gracious thing.

Gradual progress is much better than a violent jolt in reverse. The American system, with federalism and the division of powers among the branches, is ill-suited to revolutionary change. I hope Bernie and his supporters will remember the lesson of Bush v. Gore, and conclude that false equivalencies between the Democratic and Republican Parties are...false.

Dan's professional descent commenced with the last SECB debacle. It continues.

For the life of me, I just don't understand why Dan is such a huge shill for Hillary. I'm fine if he wants to favor her over Bernie, but the disdain he's shown for Sanders and his supporters is just . . . . disappointing.

Sanders supporters should be pushing hard for a Clinton/Sanders ticket, because Hillary's going to get arrested by the DOJ any minute now and then Bernie would be the President. Because, they (and the GOP) really, truly believe that's going to happen.

Right?

Or was that just campaign bullshit?

Bernie said he would be in the fight until the last vote is counted. The last vote will be counted next Tuesday at the DC primary. Then he should graciously offer his support to the winner of the primary process, just as Hillary did 8 years ago.

If he doesn't, he will prove his campaign is no longer about his issues but rather his ego. And that would be unfortunate.

I find it deeply humorous that Bernie supporters couldn't bring themselves to spend 50 cents for a stamp and tell the entire country how much they support Bernie.

Not a very good political decision -- they had an opportunity to really bring it home. And didn't. For 50 cents.

As my dad used to say to me -- for a smart person, you can be really dumb sometimes.

Bernie supporters pride themselves on being really really smart. Yeah.

Dan, true Berners are never going to vote for Killary. Sorry( they will, however, write his name on their paper ballot, after they complete all required paperwork in their respective states before the deadline to do so. --- http://www.ballotpedia.org & http://www.fairvote.org & http://www.politicalcompass.org )

Hey Bernie Supporters! CALL U.S. Senatresses Cantwell and Murray, and whoever is "your" CONgressional rep in OUR State: Tell them you will not vote for them as they pledged to support Hitlary even though The Peoples' Senator won every county in the Evergreen State!!! Pffft!!! --- https://berniesanders.com & http://www.counterpunch.org & http://www.blackagendareport.com .

@45: NO way are the tens of MILLIONS of Sandernistas going to vote for a Klandidate who would be too right-wing to be the REPUBLICAN nominee three decades ago!!! Shillary has more in common with Trump and the other Goppers who want/ed to be prez than with Bernie. Pah!!! --- http://www.huffingtonpost.com & http://www.alternet.org & http://littlesis.org .

@42, the "disdain" Dan's shown for Sanders is pale compared to the terminology that Sanders supporters are using toward Clinton. "Shillary", "killary", etc. -- really awful examples of immature and irrational opinion.

@9- It's not nice to talk about Boomer's support for Hillary (or Trump) that way.

@50- I have seen Bernie supporters and Sen. Sanders himself referred to with derogatory language far more often than I've seen Bernie supporters use insults against Hillary. The "Bernie Bro" meme is not that well represented in reality. Just look at this thread; You've got some deranged shit from 5th columnist that suits the meme but all the rest of the insults are aimed at Bernie Sanders and his supporters.

@22:

In addition to the states' requirements, the party rules state (Rule 12.J): "Delegates elected to the national convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them."

I know perfectly well what I'm talking about.

The WA "primary" was a meaningless straw poll. The caucus, problematic though that process is, was the one that mattered here. No one needs to waste a stamp on a worthless consolation prize.

Wow. 1.4 million votes is meaningless. You're quite the decision maker. From your own quote, how can WA state give such a large share of delegates to Bernie when Hillary won the primary by 54%. Oh, right, you've decided that those peoples votes don't matter. How convenient.

@ 55, It's the Democrats' own rules that stated the May primary results were meaningless, so your argument is almost as dirty, deceptive, and disingenuous as a Clinton Foundation accounting statement.

@54, if you're right, why was it that only Bernie supporters didn't vote in the mail in primary? Was there a memo that I missed? The only way Bernie gets the nomination is if the superdelegates reject the clear choice of those who voted in the Dem primaries and caucuses. Not going to happen, nor should it.

Clinton supporters hate the caucuses as much as Sanders supporters hate the super delegate system. It's hard to deny that giving a 400+ delegate head start to the favorite seems outrageously unfair. But the DNC is a private club and they make the rules. And most Clinton supporters gave up on the caucus system after spending way too many cringe-worthy hours listening to "real progressives" get all passionate and full of themselves over dreadful candidates like Dennis Kucinich, so that's not fair to us either.

I have a solution: First order of business at the Convention would have both sides agree to change the rules and eliminate all super delegates, and count only the elected ones. Pretend the supers never existed. So at this point Sanders would need about 460 more delegates to win the nomination, and Clinton would need about 215 more. I think we should all join together and get rid of that unfair super delegate crap right now! It's the right thing to do.

Caucuses would need to be addressed at a state level, so the Clinton folks are screwed on that one. Doesn't matter.

I notice that Hillary supporters are able to completely ignore the rampant fraud and voter disenfranchisement that has occurred in every single state that has voted or caucused this year. "It was a glitch!" Hillary supporters say, if they acknowledge it at all. "An error!" "It's hectic at a polling place; mistakes get made!" Funny that every single one has favored Hillary and disfavored Bernie. If Hillary supporters want to ignore these, like they ignore Hillary's record, fine. Just take note that Bernie's supporters are not going to forget, and no amount of screaming about Trump is going to get the bulk of them to vote for her. Ever.

Many Bernie folks have a range of reasons to not support Hillary. Mine are that she is the War Monger's War Monger. As Secretary of State she killed nearly half-a-million people and was responsible for the destruction of Libya, Ukraine, Venezuela and Syria. She has stated she will bomb Iran and with "finish off" Syria. Trump will take America back150 years, no doubt about it. But Hillary will be responsible for the deaths of million, and if she bear-baits Russia and China, she may well kill us all.

Are you seriously that blinkered, Zurls? Trump would take the world further into petulant and mad land. He'll join the other petulant brats leading Syria, Russia, nth Korea etc;
You really want your country's highest office to be reduced to that level?

Whatever you say, Zurls. Are you sure your tin foil hat isn't on too tight?

@59 Every single state? Sounds like Bernie must have benefited from fraud and voter disenfranchisement then as he won quite a few states. Someone better look into this!

I think you're onto something there though. Clearly an evil genius that while operating under the cover of US Secretary of State was actually directing the militaries of Russia, Syria, France and Britain and also nefariously undermining the great 'Bolivarian Revolution' (by I'm guessing hoarding toilet paper?) would be a far worse choice for president than Trump.

She'll kill us all!

Granting for the sake of argument that Hillary single-handedly destroyed Libya, Venezuela, Syria and Ukraine ... doesn't she get any credit at all for the long list of countries she didn't destroy?

I don't know which is worse — the deluge of condescending snark from Hillary's camp, or the ragesplosion/meltdown from the Sanders camp.

This comments section is a shit show, the Stranger's coverage of the primaries has been a shit spectacular, and the election itself almost assuredly will be a shitstravaganza. Should be fun, rooting for Boring to defeat Stupid in November. Can you believe there are people who are disillusioned with our electoral process?

This:

"I'm pretty sure it was pre-ordained in some back room that HRC would get the nomination. I'm sure she'll be nominated even if she's indicted. " (@10)

And This:

"If Bernie doesn't want to run in 4 years, his supporters better find someone as much like him NOW to prop up." (@30)

Those are two sides of the same coin, being, Bernie Sanders doesn't level grind. He may have been a senator for 30 years, but he carefully avoided doing any of the hard work of building and supporting a movement until this year. It's all well and good to have your +5 Sword of Divine Justice and +8 Armour of Truth and Light, but if you're a Level 4 cleric up against a Level 15 Red Dragon, you're going to have a hard time, especially when the person on the other team is (for all her faults) a hard-core policy wonk who has been working on building a coalition and a platform for years. Compare HRC and Obama in 2008....the Obama campaign's level grinding and campaign planning was nothing short of breathtaking, and he did his level grinding to match her in wonkiness. Sanders isn't doing that, and it shows.

Also, about the building a team part of level grinding....Sanders until recently didn't pay attention to the down-ballot races and the class-based argument he has been making is so rigidly focused on social class that it ignores how race, gender, sex, and social class all get mishmashed together. Talking down Planned Parenthood because PP went with the person whose voting and SecState records jived with their goals? Seriously? The whole business about primaries in the deep south don't count as much as elsewhere, and the subsequent pissing-off of black and hispanic voters who correctly smelled what the Sanders campaign was stepping in? Seriously?? These are the groups that he could have reached, goals he could have worked towards, if he had specifically tried. He didn't.

It's not Clinton's fault if her opponent isn't willing to get down in the trenches and do the hard dirty work of campaigning.

The Stranger trying to suppress the vote in the California primary? I never thought I'd see the day. Bye Felicia.

Pleeeeeease let this Democratic shitshow, which was not supposed to outlast the entertaining Republican shitshow, be over sooooooon.

@#2 -under Demo Party rules delegates can vote for any nominated person on any ballot. That's way they're called pledged instead of bound delegates. You are thinking of the rules for the other guys.

@#2 -under Demo Party rules delegates can vote for any nominated person on any ballot. That's why they're called pledged instead of bound delegates. You are thinking of the rules for the other guys.

@65: I'll happily vote for Boring over Stupid. That's a good chunk of the problem with American politics TBQH; people demand politicians to be entertaining more than competent. And thus the carnival barkers get elected, and the policy experts get left out in the cold.

@67 "Bye Felicia." Now there's wit for you.

@53 They haven't actually voted yet which is what Dan said. And they aren't REQUIRED to actually vote a certain way. "in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them" allows for all sorts of wiggle room. What if my conscience tells me that the Hillary email nonsense has changed the feelings of my constituents. My conscience would compel me to vote for Bernie, right? Regardless, they haven't voted. You are the kind of Bernie supporter that drives other people away from Bernie. You're not helping.

@66. "Talking down Planned Parenthood because PP went with the person whose voting and SecState records jived with their goals?"

Whereas Sen. Sanders record didn't? Bullshit. That is the gripe. PP does not usually make endorsements when both candidates are pro-choice, but did in this race because the teally are part of the Democratic Establishment, like Dan Savage they are backing a malfunctioning machine over an electable progressive.

A $hill is a person who publicly helps or gives credibility to a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization. $hills can carry out their operations in the areas of media, journalism, marketing or other business areas.

Eight years ago to this day, Barack Obama clinched the delegate count to win the nomination. Hillary Clinton refused to drop out, citing that due process had to take place. I don't recall this kind of pressure being laid on Clinton to drop out. I don't recall anyone saying Hillary was hurting Obama's chances by not dropping out. I also don't recall Dan writing political posts that implied Clinton was delusional. Why won't Hillary's supporters grant Bernie the same respect that Clinton demanded 8 years ago?

@76 the Hillbots are wanting Bernie to drop out so Hillary can suck up and get all the GOP support she can get in November. That's the difference: we've got a Goldwater Girl as the nominee!! So good luck with that!

@75: Yes, and everyone who disagrees with you is a Clinton shill. (Excuse me, $hill.) I've heard it all before, you ignorant, paranoid, little twerp.

@66 - That was win and an awesome read. I completely agree.

@77 - You realize that's where the country is today right? The country is to the right of Goldwater. And in this case, that Goldwater Girl (as ludicrous as that slam is) is STILL better than Trump if for nothing more than Supreme Court Justices.

Fuck, I'd take a David Souter (Bush 1) or even a Sandra Day O'Conner (Reagan) on the Supreme Court over a Scalia, Thomas, or Alito any day, even if it is a lesser of two evils situation.

Bonus: If you want your President being able to appoint Supreme Court justices, you better get control of Congress too. We did that by rewarding our Dems when they passed the ACA (still far more progressive than anything that we had before) by getting them re-elected in the face of a huge coordinated negative publicity blitz from the right OH WAIT. No, we didn't do that, we let Congress get taken over by the Republicans and then bitched that nothing ever got done.

The fucking short sighted self-fulling cynicism of people never fails to blow me away.

@65 Consider that a fair amount of the snark is not coming from 'Hillary's camp' but rather from those of us on the left who are dismayed by how much this election has exposed the fact that we have almost as many ignoramuses on our side as there are on the right.

@76, because Trump wasn't the alternative eight years ago. This is an unprecedented fuck up, you notice that?
A man like Trump, a everyone who says boo to me will be taken down man, might be voted President of the USA.
Give Bernie the same room as Hillary had, who has the time? Democrats need to shut the fuck up and fight this maniac. Have you not seen this lunatic talk.

@73: "in all good conscience" doesn't say anything about telepathy. There is a clear procedural difference between pledged and unpledged delegates - that's why they're called "pledged" or "unpledged". Voters get to tell the first kind who to vote for . Dan is pretending there's no difference. So are you, which just makes you look like an idiot. If that gives you a bad feels about being a Bernie supporter, tough shit - stop acting like an idiot.

"PP does not usually make endorsements when both candidates are pro-choice, but did in this race because the teally are part of the Democratic Establishment"

@74, in PP's own words:

"When you see their records side by side, there’s no question why the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. She has simply demonstrated the strongest record, clearest leadership, and most focused commitment to women’s health of any presidential candidate.

For anyone who supports Senator Sanders, know we are grateful for his strong record on reproductive rights. This endorsement doesn’t mean we’ll do anything negative about Sanders’ campaign. Instead it means that for the first time in history, we have the chance to help elect someone who’s been fighting to expand reproductive health and rights for decades to the White House, just when we need that kind of champion the most.

- See more at: https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/…"

It's the difference between an ally and a champion. Sanders has been an ally to women's equality issues and a champion for income equality issues. But, without giving an honest thought or discussion on how inequal treatment due to gender/biological sex (including LGBT issues as well as cis-women issues) and due to race/ethnicity--meaning, US society values the work that white men do more because it values white men more, and that cannot be mitigated with simple "rising tide lifts all boats" argument--he's going to have to deal with the judgment of people who will see a better option and choose that better option. A champion, instead of an ally.

So, if PP choses the champion who has been publicly level grinding for years and making it a priority, as opposed to somebody who has always been on their side but not level grinding, is that a bad thing? Again, Sanders could have done these things. He didn't. His opponent (for all her flaws) did.

And for that matter, if an organization that busts its chops to make sure a systematically underserved population gets critical health care and education despite the level of harassment and legal obstructionism and death threats and firebombings is a member of The Establishment....does that mean that the establishment is 100% bad?

@76:

2008: Clinton and Obama were much closer in pledged delegate count. Clinton also arguably won the popular vote.

And Bernie told Hillary to get out of the race.

2016: Clinton has an impressive pledged delegate count. Clinton has won the popular vote handily. See?

And Bernie says he wants to stay in the race.

LOL. Sure pant Hillz as a hypocrite, but Bernie is painted the same way.