SANDERS MUST CONCEDE AND ENDORSE HILLARY CLINTON IF HE WANTS TO SPEAK AT THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION

[Iamaartist]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/06/16/1539301/-SANDERS-MUST-CONCEDE-AND-ENDORSE-HILLARY-CLINTON-IF-HE-WANTS-TO-SPEAK-AT-THE-DEMOCRATIC-CONVENTION

Tonights episode talked about concessions Bernie Sanders would most likely receive even if he stays in the race until the Democratic Convention. 1. Democrats will probably get rid of Super Delegates. Also, the Democrats will most likely get rid of Caucuses to make everyones vote be counted, not just those that can attend Caucuses. Same Day Voting and Open Primaries are determined by the state so that is not set at the Democratic Convention.

The most important thing you will learn in this clip is that THERE ARE NO CONCESSION SPEECHES AT THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION AND THERE NEVER HAS BEEN! So, Unless Bernie Sanders concedes and Endorses Hillary Clinton then he will not get to speak until Thursday after the vote on Wednesday night where the Candidate is elected. This is the way it has always been and this will not change.

Joy Reid talks about Bernie Sanders coming in pretty late to the game after thinking he would win California and have more leverage. She also discusses the issue of the removal of Debbie Wasserman Schultz and why it most likely will not happen. Also,Gov. Ed Rendell discusses the fact that there are no concession speeches. Sanders does not and will not get to make a speech or plea to the Super Delegates before the vote of all Pledged and Super Delegates. Watch the video below and it explains how speeches work at the Democratic Convention

If this is true I didn't know....this

more on article......

[BobbyDrake]

1. No more double standards for Bernie Sanders.

I'm glad Democrats are pushing back against his obviously petty ransom list. He's stupid for thinking everything has to change just because he demands it. We have a presumptive nominee and the refusal of Bernie Sanders to acknowledge that changes nothing.

[Iamaartist]

2. I agree I didn't know this..oh well for BS...

[Cha]

4. The only thing burnie's refusal to Acknowledge Hillary as the winner does is..

make sanders look bad.. worse.

[Cha]

3. THERE ARE NO CONCESSION SPEECHES AT THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION AND THERE NEVER HAVE BEEN

First BS wants to Flip the SuperDs and then he wants to get rid of them... he needs to make up his damn mind.

No getting rid of Super Delegates just because burnie sanders says so.



Thank you, Iaaa~

[Iamaartist]

5. I agree....Cha

BS cant,make demands,who is he to do so..?? so its time for him to go home...

[stonecutter357]

28. Good morning Cha.

[Cha]

29. Good Morning Mr Stonecutter!

[ehrnst]

57. Ted Kennedy conceded at the 1980 election

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/senator-ted-kennedy-concession-speech-1980-democratic-national-convention-article-1.399129

[NurseJackie]

6. Good! That's more like it.

[Iamaartist]

10. I agree Jackie more like it....

I wonder if he knows this?????

[livetohike]

7. If I was in charge of the convention, I wouldn't let him through the door.

The Primaries are over. He needs to get over it and go back to being an Independent.

[Iamaartist]

9. Good I am glad time for him to go back to his job.....

[PJMcK]

26. Be generous. We have a big enough tent

Let him in but don't let him speak unless he endorses the Democratic nominee. I just think we need every vote we can get in the GE. Senator Sanders' supporters, most of who have sincere views, should be welcomed as well provided they support the Party and its nominee.

Secretary Clinton is a gracious woman and has been a class act. I'd like to follow her lead on this.

[jimw81]

8. Joy reid

Has to be best reporter on twitter and on tv. Sanders speech tonight dictates everything.

[liberal N proud]

11. Getting rid of the Super Delegates because an outsider couldn't take over the party?

DUMB, DUMB, DUMB!

I bet the Republicans wish they still had Super Delegates. Open Primaries are another STUPID idea.

These assholes didn't play by the rules so the rules have to be thrown out? They were there to protect from just such shit from happening.

LOOK AT THE REPUBLICANS and Their TRUMP problem!

[Cha]

12. I know that makes no ******* sense. I was shocked when I

read it.

I hope it's a stupid mistake.

[Iamaartist]

13. DUMB IS RIGHT WE DONT WANT TO CHANGE...

[Koinos]

14. Good to see this clarified.

His so-called "concession speech" at the convention would probably turn out to be anything but a concession speech. He would use the microphone to agitate his delegates and cause the same sort of ruckus we saw at the Nevada convention.

[Iamaartist]

15. iI didn't know either ,,,,,

[Cha]

16. Oh yeah.. burnie's nothing if not a trojan horse.

What do you think about it saying.. "they'll probably get rid of the Super Dels"? That's seems absurd and bizarre.

They're our backup.. the repubs wish they had them right Now.

[Koinos]

18. Elizabeth Warren is at least one super who has voiced her opposition to superdelegates.

It could be that the call to abolish superdelegates is coming from Democrats, and Bernie's opposition only happens to coincide with the consensus view. Superdelegates were unnecessary this time, since Hillary won the majority of pledged delegates.

I agree with you, however. It is good to have them in the event of an emergency. Increasing the number of open primaries could lead to more trouble in the future. For many reasons, I think that open primaries are a very bad idea. Democrats should pick their own nominees.

Bernie's opposition to superdelegates, followed by his resorting to them, is clearly a self-contradictory position (like many of his other positions).

Caucuses should indeed be abolished. Many participants felt bullied by Bernie's supporters. Many others did not attend for fear of being bullied or for other personal reasons. It is not a democratic method of choosing a nominee.

[Cha]

20. Thank you for that.. I'd like to know why Sen Warren is opposed to Super Dels.. and

if she has an answer as to what we would do if there's ever a situation with the Democrats in the future.. like the gop is having right now with trump?

BS excoriated SuperDels in the beginning and then he wanted to flip them, while his supporters were harassing them.. now he wants to get rid of them but not before flipping them.

Is anyone in authority keeping track of his whip lash positions on SuperDs?

[Koinos]

21. I'm curious about Elizabeth Warren's position myself.

I think she wields more power than ever before, because of her tromping on Trump and her strong endorsement of Hillary Clinton. I believe she has bumped Bernie and is the new leader of the progressive movement in the Senate. So we may see her influence felt at the convention, especially if Hillary gives her the VP spot. She is regarded as a strong progressive AND a loyal Democrat, something Bernie was both unwilling and unable to achieve.

[LiberalFighter]

27. Most of the superdelegates were not around when they were first implemented.

And since then very little may have been discussed about them as to the purpose. When they have their spring meeting they need to have a presentation about the history of them.

[splat]

42. Superdelegates were invented to forestall the George McGovern debacles

...and the Bernies.

If a demagogue were to sweep the electorate off its feet, party stalwarts -- superdelegates -- could stop the madness. Yeah, GOP, I'm talking about you.

[LiberalFighter]

46. Bernie and his people are complaining about them because they can't convince them to support him.

He must have something against free will.

[Her Sister]

17. DEMS need to stand strong! Not allow anyone to try to weaken our party!

Supers and closed primaries keep us strong! Losers that can't concede and end things properly don't get concessions. He's proven he won't be an asset.

[Koinos]

19. Troy didn't survive the Trojan horse.

I think the Democratic party can survive an attempted usurpation by Bernie Sanders.

[Iamaartist]

43. Great statement so true we are fine the way we are........

[Princess Turandot]

22. The DNC *can't* get rid of caucuses, AFAIK. That choice is set by state law...

as are all of the various election laws that impact when people can register, closed or open primaries etc. While CA allows the political parties to decide if they will allow unaffiliated voters to vote in their primaries, that ability is granted to them by CA election law, not the DNC. That's why the R's had a closed primary and the D's had a semi-open one in 2016.

Effectively, many of Sanders' demands cannot be directly satisfied by the DNC, because of this. I have to believe that he knew that when he made them..

In a bipartisan effort, Minnesota's legislature did promptly vote in May to switch to a presidential primary in 2020, because the voters were ticked about an assortment of problems that had occurred with the 2016 caucus. But so far, they're the only state to change.

[LiberalFighter]

31. At least three states could go directly to primaries. Nebraska, Washington and Idaho.

The other states likely could too for those that have their regular primaries early enough.

The rules could be set up that would result in a state losing bonus delegates if they don't use a primary already available for that purpose. For states that don't and they don't enact a law for a primary they would lose other bonus delegates.

[DURHAM D]

35. The party pays for caucuses.

The state pays for primaries. The states with caucuses are saving money by not having primaries and given that they are mostly red states why would they help out Democrats?

Caucuses suppress voting which is something Republicans really really like so you want to punish Democrats in red states even further by devaluing their votes?

[LiberalFighter]

36. For states that have a primary but used a caucus it shouldn't be a problem.

It isn't that states don't have primaries. They all do. It is just that half of them have their primaries later in the year so they have caucuses. Washington and Nebraska still had voting for president even though caucuses had already been held. So for states that already have primaries during the presidential primary season they should use primaries instead of caucuses. That would reduce the number of caucus states from 14 to 7. Colorado and Hawaii would should be friendly to the idea of having their regular primary earlier so that it could also include the presidential. That would reduce it down to 5 states that might only do it as a caucus. All red states.

If they make no real effort to change the system then yes their delegates should be reduced. Actually, they just won't get bonus delegates. Their regular delegates that are based on voter turnout for the Democratic President would still remain. The current method of delegate allocation is based on incentives. Besides voter turnout for Democratic President states also have delegates based on whether they have a Democratic Governor or congressional member.

These are the states that had caucuses:
Alaska
Colorado
Hawaii
Idaho
Iowa (June 7)
Kansas
Maine (June 14)
Minnesota (changed to primary in 2020)
Nebraska (May 10)
Nevada (June 14)
North Dakota (June 14)
Utah
Washington (May 6)
Wyoming

The dates are when they held other primaries that were no later than the primary DC had. All other states held regular primaries later.

[DURHAM D]

41. " they should use primaries instead of caucuses"

They should but they won't.

"If they make no real effort to change the system then yes their delegates should be reduced"

Who is "they"? The Democratic Party can not make it happened. The Republicans like to suppress votes...it is one of the things that gets them very excited. Why punish good Democrats living in red states?

Do you live in a blue state?

[LiberalFighter]

45. Really? Just a partial?

You used "they should use primaries instead of caucuses" instead of "So for states that already have primaries during the presidential primary season they should use primaries instead of caucuses." Each means something different.

True that the Democratic Party on its own can't make it happen but they can work towards it by having Democratic legislators push for it. And getting a campaign going involving the voters making a demand to have a primary instead of a caucus. Just like it happened in Minnesota. And the reason why it happened in Minnesota? Because the people did not like the way caucuses are conducted. If the people speak loud enough it could be done.

As for punishing good Democrats living in red states aren't they being punished by having caucuses? Not everyone that could is able to vote with the limited hours and accessibility compared to a regular primary election.

The allocation of delegates is based on incentives which is also saying that those not using specific rules don't receive an additional benefit. That won't change. Red states are going to receive fewer delegates than blue states with comparable population. It is a matter of how many.

It is an incentive for red states to support Democratic candidates by increasing voter turnout for our nominee. Doing so increases the number of delegates they will receive for future primaries. My state went from 72 base votes in 2008 to 96 in 2012. It went down to 83 for this year? Why? Because in 2008 they had a campaign in my state and won it the first time since 1964. It went down in 2016 because they didn't target my state in 2012. If Hillary wins this year in my state it will go back up.

For a comparison, Indiana has a population of 6,537,334 while Arizona has 6,553,255. Indiana has 83 delegates to Arizona's 75 delegates.

[Iamaartist]

47. You are right you cant change the laws.......

He can demand all he wants.......his not going to change anything,plus his not the nominee to demand anything......

[Thinkingabout]

23. I would hope he would concede and move towards the GE

[Surya Gayatri]

24. Massive K & R. Thanks for posting.

[Iamaartist]

48. Your welcome......

[creon]

25. I doubt

I doubt that he will "concede".
I think that he will go on until Clinton is actually nominated by the delegates.
What he will do after she is nominated, only Sanders knows that.

[CrowCityDem]

30. Absolutely. No one who is still a candidate should speak. It wouldn't be right to the winner.

[LiberalFighter]

37. I would redefine that statement.

Only the nominee should speak. Once a nominee has been elected Sanders would no longer be the Democratic candidate for President.

They might allow him to speak after the nomination is over but it better not be divisive. I would expect they would review it too.

[CrowCityDem]

44. After the nom is over, the only primetime space is for Hillary's speech. Bernie would be shut out.

[Iamaartist]

49. Right no one who is not nominee anyway should not have his say.....

[CrowCityDem]

51. Not if he's stilll technically running, no. Wouldn't be fair.

[redstateblues]

32. I have mixed feelings about giving Bernie any attention

Especially if he doesn't come out and support our nominee. It has been a relief not to hear him bellowing every day and wagging his finger. I think the fervent support of some of his followers is fading fast

[Iamaartist]

50. Right I agree he is also been fading in the media to.......

[LiberalFighter]

33. Candidates don't get to speak before the vote.

They have someone give the nomination and the seconding speeches.

[Gothmog]

34. No concession, no prime time speech

[workinclasszero]

38. Damn right!

I'm sure there's a 3:30AM slot open for those that fail to concede and endorse our nominee.

[Koinos]

39. Maybe he'll give his shopworn speech at the protest rally outside the Philadelphia convention walls.

[BootinUp]

40. My little thread in GD-P on it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512192162

[eastwestdem]

52. Then I hope he doesn't concede! I would be happy not to hear his annoying monotone again. nt

[Chichiri]

53. Didn't Ted Kennedy give a concession speech at the convention in 1980? nt

[ehrnst]

58. Yes. There are some history impaired wishful thinkers. (nt)

[Gothmog]

54. Sanders should not have a speech at the National Convention unless he concedes in advance

[Cha]

55. There's no more Primaires and BS is still Wasting Tax Payers' $$$$$ for his SS detail.

[ehrnst]

56. Ted Kennedy conceded at the 1980 election, so that's definitely wrong

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/senator-ted-kennedy-concession-speech-1980-democratic-national-convention-article-1.399129