Dem Establishment Would Rather Lose to Trump To Keep Their Grip on Party

[Gagaloo911 12,959]

So the NY Times interviewed 93 superdelegates and Democratic elites and discovered (shockingly!!) they would be openly willing to risk damage to their own party and losing to Trump by stealing the nomination away from Bernie if it means keeping their grip on power over the Democratic Party

Here's the article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/27/us/politics/democratic-superdelegates.html

And here's a video covering it all:

 

[gabeoz 7,915]

The fight between establishment dems and progressives over the party is what will tear it apart. The establishment must let go, they’re doing much more harm than good.

[Morphine Prince 109,649]

Dems are playing a dangerous game. I wish we had a true leftist party in the US. 

[Gagaloo911 12,959]

For anyone who understands that elites keeping and holding onto their power and access is more important than anything else will not be surprised by this 

Afterall, if Bernie is the nominee and wins all that is over for them 

[REALITY 80,162]

Shocker!

It's like establishment Democrats and Republicans come from the same place! This is why we need to elect Bernie. 

[WildAmerican 13,672]

I mean, I'm worried about nominating Bernie. It could potentially be a disaster for the party. But they should follow their own rules. If he gets a majority of the pledged delegates, it should be him, no question.

[rojo 560]

Let it be clear. They prefer to have Trump than Bernie for president. They are so gross. This is what their priorities are and its exactly why they need an overhaul 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

6 minutes ago, WildAmerican said:

I mean, I'm worried about nominating Bernie. It could potentially be a disaster for the party. But they should follow their own rules. If he gets a majority of the pledged delegates, it should be him, no question.

This is about a plurality. So if he for example gets 1800/1991 needed. They would pick someone who got much less over him  Not because of anything the voters want, but they would be inserting their own will over the voters and picking someone who possibly wasnt even in the primaries and who didn't even run.

We've been saying this for MONTHS now on the left.

The oh-so sacred Democratic party is NOT really resisting Trump. They are telling people "Yes, 4 more years of Trump is fine"

Disgusting. "Democracy" is a joke.

[WildAmerican 13,672]

Just now, ItsTommyBitch said:

This is about a plurality. So if he for example gets 1800/1991 needed. They would pick someone who got much less over him  Not because of anything the voters want, but they would be inserting their own will over the voters and picking someone who possibly wasnt even in the primaries and who didn't even run.

We've been saying this for MONTHS now on the left.

The oh-so sacred Democratic party is NOT really resisting Trump. They are telling people "Yes, 4 more years of Trump is fine"

Disgusting.

Well that's obviously abhorrent. The person who gets a plurality should get it. They're digging their own grave if they subvert that will of the voters and give it to someone who has far less.

What would probably end up happening  would be a unity ticket would form of the delegate leader, and a 2nd or 3rd place finisher as VP. The person with the most should be at the top of the ticket though no matter what. 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

1 minute ago, WildAmerican said:

Well that's obviously abhorrent. The person who gets a plurality should get it. They're digging their own grave if they subvert that will of the voters and give it to someone who has far less.

What would probably end up happening  would be a unity ticket would form of the delegate leader, and a 2nd or 3rd place finisher as VP. The person with the most should be at the top of the ticket though no matter what. 

This article literally suggests crazy ideas like making Sherrod Brown the nominee, and making Michelle Obama or Kamala VP  

Again, it is clear that the fear of Bernie is not a loss, it is a victory. That they are willing to completely say **** you to a major portion of the electorate AND their own party (the left) and know it could result in major division, a loss, etc... It's not about Bernie losing based on some "oh they'll say hes a socialist!" down-ballot fear like they are saying in the media.

[Shadow 6,697]

Trump was elected the first time because of this attitude to rob Bernie's nomination. They were so shocked and upset about Trump winning even though by splitting moderates from leftists, they made it possible. Looks like it might happen again...

[brizoda 4,176]

They have rotten souls

[PetiteMonstre 69]

Both parties have way too much power and even mathematically speaking - ignoring Bernie's influence right now is downright sinister. If it were the other way around, there would have been serious calls for him to drop out if he was polling the way literally ANY other democratic nominee is right now. 

[Lilmonzter 2,864]

All the signs point to a trump2020 tbh

Atleast he won't change the status quo

[Harris Walz 2024 1,451]

The rules have been set and all parties agreed to them. You can't change them because you don't like the end result. The nerve of some people, I swear.