Sanders defends campaign, accuses Nevada Democrats of bias
Source: Politico
In a lengthy statement, Sanders offered a broad rebuke of violence and harassment of any kind, but he put his focus elsewhere: accusing state party leaders of holding a biased convention intended to tip the scales in Hillary Clinton's favor.
Sanders laid out a list of grievances against Nevada party leaders, and took issue with a letter they sent to the DNC saying the Sanders campaign has a "penchant for violence."
"That is nonsense. Our campaign has held giant rallies all across this country, including in high-crime areas, and there have been zero reports of violence. Our campaign of course believes in non-violent change and it goes without saying that I condemn any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals," Sanders said.
The Vermont senator went on to list its set of charges against the Nevada Democratic Party at the convention.
"The chair of the convention announced that the convention rules passed on voice vote, when the vote was a clear no-vote. At the very least, the Chair should have allowed for a headcount," Sanders continued. "The chair allowed its Credentials Committee to en mass rule that 64 delegates were ineligible without offering an opportunity for 58 of them to be heard. That decision enabled the Clinton campaign to end up with a 30-vote majority. The chair refused to acknowledge any motions made from the floor or allow votes on them. The chair refused to accept any petitions for amendments to the rules that were properly submitted."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/nevada-democratic-convention-wasserman-schultz-223271
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)The chairman was a disgrace and no decent, honest person could defend the crap she pulled.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)Gman
(24,780 posts)Any more than the behavior of Sanders delegates was endorsed by him.
It has to do with the chair having enough votes to what he/she wanted to get done what they wanted. Nothing personal.
I'd say offhand that it sounds like Ssnders delegates weren't very up on Roberts Rules of Order. If you know those rules well you may not control a convention but you can sure make it hard to pass things. .
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)People are allowed to get angry when they're being jerked around.
Rockyj
(538 posts)& DNC! FIRE Debbie Wasserman Schultz NOW!
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
arcane1
(38,613 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Its a literal maxim by now...right up there with never believe a Bush. It makes sense given their alliance.
AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)You don't jerk around with the rules and expect people to be okay with that.
Just another example of the high disdain and condescension the party hacks at the DNC and state levels hold for their constituents.
Vote2016
(1,198 posts)Duval
(4,280 posts)Sanders is right and the Third Way strikes again. Thanks for the post, w4rma.
pengu
(462 posts)Sanders response is exactly right.
Gman
(24,780 posts)It's their fault Sanders delegates were assholes?
pengu
(462 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Gman
(24,780 posts)So you're saying the Sanders behavior was justified?
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Because there has been actual violence by Hillary supporters waged against both Bernie's campaign and his supporters. There was even a male Hillary supporter who physically assaulted a woman just because she's a Bernie supporter.
Do you condone that?
.
Gman
(24,780 posts)Bye bye. You're hopeless when you defend the Sanders delegates behavior.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)If you won't tell me which you are talking about I cannot address it.
.
Progressive dog
(6,934 posts)they try to intimidate everyone else at the convention. That's not democracy.
dubyadiprecession
(5,740 posts)Don't allow non democratic candidates (socialist for one) to run in future democratic primaries.
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)don't allow people who hold actual democratic values in the race, and don't let people who actually believe in democratic principles to vote. Especially when their preferred candidate is a republican in terms of her positions and wealth.
concreteblue
(626 posts)+ 1,000
laserhaas
(7,805 posts)Oldtimeralso
(1,939 posts)Laser102
(816 posts)nenagh
(1,925 posts)Well said
Gman
(24,780 posts)Join the effing Democratic Paryy if you want to run.
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)Gman
(24,780 posts)Only that the Democratic Party is the only viable way he has to run.
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)Moe importantly, he actually has democratic values.
OwlinAZ
(410 posts)AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)fasttense
(17,301 posts)Since when do a Democrats keep out people who want to be Democrats?
Joe Libermaan was allowed into the party and he was a VP nominee. Many a RepubliCON was allowed to run as a Democrat. Yet when they come from the left suddenly it's all "Oh we can't take members from other parties, oh no it will hurt us". Oh we can't have liberals in the Democratic party.
Since when have Democrats acted so much like RepubliCONS and acted all so exclusive?
Laser102
(816 posts)w4rma
(31,700 posts)Obviously they were registered. Somehow they became unregistered, afterwards.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)... and when they got to the convention, their registrations had been disappeared. I don't know if the facts of the Nevada State Democratic Convention of 2016 will ever truly be known. I personally wish that an independent investigation could be done to get to the bottom of the debacle. Violence should not be tolerated, nor should shoddy railroading DNC leadership.
zentrum
(9,866 posts)raindaddy
(1,370 posts)The big mistake the Democratic Party made was allowing 3rd way republicans to take over the party and exchange FDRs Policies for Reagen's?
The second lesson the DNC needs to learn is outside their shrinking bubble Hillary Clinton is not only not seen as trustworthy, she's not well liked.
And if they lose even a percentage of the millions of Sanders supporters they'll find themselves a dying marginalized party representing 20% of the public with no hope for the future after their mostly old fart base dies off.
frylock
(34,825 posts)I don't believe that they will learn much, however.
ripcord
(5,553 posts)Might have to stock up on popcorn for Philadelphia.
AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)Willful ignorance.
AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)...so we all can continue to bitch that nothing ever changes.
Right. Got it.
Your post shows exactly what is wrong with the party right now.
Nihil
(13,508 posts)They are burning through their supply of sleeper trolls these days ...
240 posts in the previous 14 years, 393 in the last 3 months:
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 632
Number of posts, last 90 days: 393
Favorite forum: General Discussion: Primaries, 278 posts in the last 90 days (71% of total posts)
Favorite group: Hillary Clinton, 41 posts in the last 90 days (10% of total posts)
No wonder we're seeing so many dubious new registrations - they're running
out of old accounts to dust off ...
Vote2016
(1,198 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Kingofalldems
(38,520 posts)w4rma
(31,700 posts)elljay
(1,178 posts)Kingofalldems
(38,520 posts)He in no way is a republican.
Good try though.
elljay
(1,178 posts)doesn't change the fact that Obama and Hillary are the equivalent of Nixon in terms of policies. Those of us who remember what the word liberal means and what it meant to be a Democrat before the party was moved to the right know the difference. I want the Democratic Party to go back to being the progressive, populist part it used to be instead of the corporatist, center-right party it is now. So, yes, to me and to other progressives, Obama and Hillary are your basic Nelson Rockefeller, Jacob Javits, Lowell Weicker 60s Republicans.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)raindaddy
(1,370 posts)And actually I think Weicker was more progressive than Clinton and Obama
pokerfan
(27,677 posts)The further this party moves to the right, the farther right the Repugs move.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)You can't be so stupid as to pretend that's not the case.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)of that time.
Eisenhower was just about as liberal as Obama is.
Kingofalldems
(38,520 posts)hell they campaigned on SS and were actually somewhat pro union back in the day.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)You still think you're the ones being bullied.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)They did not allow the Bernie supporters to bring motions or speak as they should have.
And then, although the group was nearly evenly divided, they held a voice vote and did not allow a recount or even try to appear to make a fair individual count.
The Hillaryites demonstrated that they are lousy organizers and do not value fairness at that Nevada convention.
I hope they can do better in the future.
When you think you are ahead, you have a special responsibility to be inclusive and gracious to others.
That strategy, that morality, that sense of fairness was completely missing at the Nevada convention. And the lack of those qualities was not the fault of the Bernie people who were not even allowed to speak up or meaningfully participate.
OwlinAZ
(410 posts)The Clintonites have more practice being diabolical and vicious.
johnp3907
(3,737 posts)ejbr
(5,858 posts)on the Internet without substantiation. Excellent syntax, however.
rladdi
(581 posts)the Tea Party that hijacked the GOP. But Bernie's action is even worst. The Democrats had the chance to win over the Senate and maybe the House in November, but he has destroy that action now.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)How in the world could anyone claim that Bernie hijacked anything when Bernie supporters were not allowed to bring motions or speak.
This is Hillary's problem. Not Bernie's.
Hillary had a democracy problem. She can't tolerate it. She can't let others speak.
Think of her difficulty in being civil with Black Lives Matter, with Greenpeace and other groups. This is Hillary's problem, not Bernie's.
Someone pointed out to me today that Bernie was trained in non-violence in CORE as a young man. He is non-violent. It's the Hillary people who do not allow others to speak or participate. That incites violences.
ejbr
(5,858 posts)Any lottery numbers?
ReRe
(10,597 posts)... to have the nerve to say Bernie "hijacked the Democratic party." No, no. no. no. WJC/HRC are the ones who did the hijacking of the Democratic Party back around 1992, officially. Look it up. Good place to start is Al From, the Koch brothers and the DLC.
How on earth has Bernie assured a failure of winning back the House and the Senate in November? I disagree. I estimate that the House and Senate will gain in Democrats in November, and at mid-term of a Bernie Administration the Democratic fix will be back in for a Democratic majority for many years to come.
Welcome to DU.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Bernie and liberals are trying to get it back to fighting for the people instead of the corporations.
.
Gman
(24,780 posts)If you don't like the way the chair rules someone should have run against and hear the chair.
Sounds like some people got schooled in Convention Politics 101.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)opinions about the rules. But they were not allowed the time to speak or raise motions.
That is precisely what the argument was about. The organizers of the Nevada convention did not give opportunities for Bernie supporters to participate meaningfully or speak.
If this is how Hillary wants to organize this country, count me out.
There is a joke going around in California that if Trump is elected, we will all move to Mexico because then there will be a wall to keep Trump out.
Maybe that joke should apply if Hillary wins too. I do not like the dictatorial stink that permeated the Nevada convention.
I realize that they may have made their rules before they realized that Hillary would face a strong challenger, but that convention (at least what I saw of it on videos) was not democratic in the slightest.
When you have a large crowd separated in its opinion on a motion by at the most 30 votes, you do not hold a voice vote. You have to count the votes.
The organizers of the event should be fired.
With power goes responsibility, and they bore their responsibility very irresponsibly.
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)That's why the Constitution has a provision that members of Congress can't increase their compensation for the incumbent congress, only for one where an election has taken place in the meantime. I think it's just bizarre that Sanders supporters were unhappy with simple rules like requiring that delegates be members of the Democratic party as of May 1 2016. From what I've read so far, the proposed rule changes were absurd on their face and appeared to be rooted in tantrum logic.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Roberts Rules of Order are not absurd on their face. They are routine and prevent a lot of discord and unfairness.
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)My understanding is that there was a vote on the ruleset that was conducted by paper ballot first thing in the morning, and it seems the Sanders people were not prepared for this. What the Sanders delegates proposed as an alternative seems irrelevant, since the window for making that decision had already closed.
By the way that understanding is based on the timeline of events in the Bernie Sanders for President Reddit group, so don't try accuse me of being taken in by the media or some bullshit. It seems to me that if Sanders delegates didn't have their act together to be in the convention hall at the opening of business that's their problem.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)much harder for her to win in November.
This "victory" for Hillaryites was hardly worth it.
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)You could not run a church social like that.
The way to organize that meeting would have been for the leading Hillary supporters to meet with the leading Bernie supporters and agree in advance on the rules. The Hillary supporters should have made sure that Bernie supporters had a say not just in the organization and schedule of the convention but in the rules about, say, when a voice vote needs a count because it is nearly 50/50.
I grew up in a minister's family. Managing a church involves dealing with dissenters, haters (yes), troublemakers and lots of lovely people. Even lovely people get angry and fly off the handle. The leaders of the Nevada convention could not have organized a church supper. Absolutely an incompetent bunch. Sorry. They had no tact.
I think they purposely tried to stir up trouble.
I suggest that Hillary and her supporters read the book, Non-Violent Communication by Rosenberg. They are going to need the skills that are taught there.
PBass
(1,537 posts)Not very realistic. Would you suggest that all the states let Clinton and Sanders tell them what their rules will be?
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)The credentials committee which rejected the 64 delegates was composed of an equal number of Hillary and Bernie supporters and a joint chair. It's particularly amusing that you think it is Hillary supporters who need to read a book on non-violent communication. It's plain that the Sanders campaign was disorganized, given the failure of hundreds of delegates to even show up, but somehow you manage to put the blame for that on everyone else.
pnwmom
(109,028 posts)called for the police to kick them out for trespass.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)that organized the event chose rules that were intended to silence and frustrate any dissent or an expression of opinion by those who opposed the opinions of the committee.
That's lousy, undemocratic organization.
Hillary's campaign and the Nevada Democratic Party need to apologize to Bernie voters.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Probably did not change anything much, but it made them look like jerks. It would have cost the Nevada PTB nothing to be gracious. But no....
LiberalFighter
(51,403 posts)is if instead of the committees being split evenly between both campaigns would be if only Sanders's delegates were on the committees.
Except for a few, most of those 64 delegates did not even show up. Even Sanders' campaign couldn't locate them. In fact, 23% of Sanders' delegates from the county convention didn't even show up to the state convention.
ejbr
(5,858 posts)address the concerns at hand.
LiberalFighter
(51,403 posts)ejbr
(5,858 posts)convince me. But thanks for "trying"
modestybl
(458 posts)Sanders is showing the Dems what a real leader is all about. Not accepting the b.s. story from the Clinton crowd. Those Chicago-style cops cordoning off the stage were in an excellent position to arrest anyone causing violence. They didn't, because it didn't happen.
But that is not going to stop "Correct the Record" squad from spewing their garbage all over social media..
KoKo
(84,711 posts)And Sander's Campaign Manager, Jeff Weaver, made TOAST of the David Brock "Super Pak" Lies...On Air Today!
Darb
(2,807 posts)Loosen em up, bernies. You could get a tumor.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)Stryguy
(209 posts)[img][/img]
Snarkoleptic
(6,002 posts)I'm astonished that the "thrown chair" is such a focus, in light of the mischief of the party chair.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Bernie4People/status/732619789424832512/video/1
d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)You have my thanks!