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

[Economy 52,839]

2 hours ago, Democrats 2020 said:

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.

All of this is not surprising to me.

 

Bernie's supporters are extremely excited and dedicated

 

But regardless of whether or not Bernie's plans turn out to be great for America the changes he's proposing are quite significant. He himself has refered to it as a "revolution"

 

These things NEVER happen smoothly in any Nation. Big changes always come with a lot of resistance, skeptics and critics and people and political powers who want to resist the change.

 

Frankly that was super predictable from the beginning and anyone that honestly thought it was gonna be an easy battle just because Bernie is dedicated and his base is dedicated was being delusional. It was never going to be as easy as get him elected and get all these changes going

 

I'm not putting him down to be clear. A lot of ppl on GGD know I'm skeptical of how far he wants to take some of his plans but that's not what I'm commenting about ATM...

 

I'm saying for better or for worse, either way very big proposed changes always result in sh*t like this. The US has actually been very peaceful on the grand scheme of things so far considering how violent some Nations get at the prospect of really big change

[27monster27 15,847]

No wonder maps that show democracies across the globe label the United States as a flawed democracy.

[Woolfsmck 2,763]

46 minutes ago, 27monster27 said:

No wonder maps that show democracies across the globe label the United States as a flawed democracy.

Because they are outside looking in...

The view is less clouded by 'news'

 

American media's is less about information as it is about inluence...

Most money wins the votes...and good ideas , that aren't profit centric , get skuttled.

[JusKeepBreathin 19,311]

Another Hill YouTube fantasy article. 

Bernie doesn't stand a chance against Trump. In South Carolina the Republican party are running ads that are anti Biden because they want Bernie to win. 

Bernie has already lost Florida and he isn't even the nominee yet. 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

"Well, the system is flawed and thats just how it is!" is a garbage response to something that is patently undemocratic

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

2 hours ago, Economy said:

I'm saying for better or for worse, either way very big proposed changes always result in sh*t like this. The US has actually been very peaceful on the grand scheme of things so far considering how violent some Nations get at the prospect of really big change

Oh sis

If you're trying to say that at least the U.S. isn't assassinating political dissidents to the establishment in its own country, then sure. But we do it elsewhere, we have no moral high ground, only a false semblance of it.

[Economy 52,839]

27 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

Oh sis

If you're trying to say that at least the U.S. isn't assassinating political dissidents to the establishment in its own country, then sure. But we do it elsewhere, we have no moral high ground, only a false semblance of it.

Ur missing my point completely I didn't say Americans are acting with some "high moral ground"

 

Very few if any Countries have ever shown themselves to be any better if they were presented with a very real prospect of rapid change

 

I'm saying the US isn't reacting that bad by world Standards (so far)

 

And I'm saying u should not be surprised at all by this that's happening. "Revolutions" never happen smoothly and without resistance and if anyone actually thought it was gonna be that easy then those people are full of wishful thinking that's my point

 

Ppl get triggered that Bernie gets treated the most unfairly by media but that literally is to be totally exepcted. When u present the biggest changes out of everyone u will by far face the biggest amount of scrutiny along with it

 

U can't have ur cake and eat it too. When u propose huge changes ur gonna get a huge amounts of support of dreamers that support your ideals and want that change but your also going to face an equally strong resistance from people who do not want the changes and the media is never fully neutral they always have bias and we know that

 

It's always like this is any Nation and it was fully predictable that these struggles would happen with Bernie

 

 

[Woolfsmck 2,763]

8 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

Oh sis

If you're trying to say that at least the U.S. isn't assassinating political dissidents to the establishment in its own country, then sure. But we do it elsewhere, we have no moral high ground, only a false semblance of it.

Lemme see ..Castro imprisons political opponents...

Kim dumb dog in N.Korea executes anyone who criticizes him...

Putin's political opponents never exist...

Trump is firing advisors who blow the whistle on him

Hitler.......

 

am I clear enough here...😉

[Economy 52,839]

3 minutes ago, Woolfsmck said:

Lemme see ..Castro imprisons political opponents...

Kim dumb dog in N.Korea executes anyone who criticizes him...

Putin's political opponents never exist...

Trump is firing advisors who blow the whistle on him

Hitler.......

 

am I clear enough here...😉

That's my point

 

Portugal where I used to live is another example. Democracy was a constant failed idea and didn't come to happen until the Countries own Military had to assassinate the Dictator in 1974

 

And he wasn't even a harsh dictator (by dictator standards anyway). The death penalty did not exist, he wasn't putting opressive policies in place to impoverish people and he wasn't super wealthy because he actually didn't keep much wealth for himself

 

A political revolution still required military action and assassination

 

Anyway Bernie's revolution is a lesser extreme than dictatorship turning to democracy but u get my point. Big changes always come with resistance everywhere. Social and among Political ellites alike... And in modern times media as well

 

What I was trying to say is that on the grand scheme of things to how severe protests and violence can get with very significant changes...

 

So far the prospect of a possible Bernie Presidency and revolution has still not resulted in anything more than dirty politics, and major media scrutiny. That's really not that bad all things considered

[Whispering 18,865]

That’s not what this article says.

 

“This article is based on interviews with the 93 superdelegates, out of 771 total, as well as party strategists and aides to senior Democrats about the thinking of party leaders. A vast majority of those superdelegates — whose ranks include federal elected officials, former presidents and vice presidents and D.N.C. members — predicted that no candidate would clinch the nomination during the primaries, and that there would be a brokered convention fight in July to choose a nominee.

In a reflection of the establishment’s wariness about Mr. Sanders, only nine of the 93 superdelegates interviewed said that Mr. Sanders should become the nominee purely on the basis of arriving at the convention with a plurality, if he was short of a majority.”

 

At this point in the race, 86 out of 733 are thinking that there might be a brokered convention...if Sanders doesn’t win a majority.

All of this could change dramatically in less than one week. Remember, less than three per cent of the delegates have been allocated so far. 

Let’s see what the next week brings.

[Bt1 5,213]

It all depends on how many delegates or votes Bernie gets. If Bernie gets 1500, Biden 800, Bloomberg 800, maybe it could happen.

But if Bernie gets 1900 delegates, it wont happen. It would be better if people would start to drop our after South California, so that a candidate could get the delegates before the convention.

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

4 hours ago, Economy said:

Ur missing my point completely I didn't say Americans are acting with some "high moral ground"

 

Very few if any Countries have ever shown themselves to be any better if they were presented with a very real prospect of rapid change

 

I'm saying the US isn't reacting that bad by world Standards (so far)

 

And I'm saying u should not be surprised at all by this that's happening. "Revolutions" never happen smoothly and without resistance and if anyone actually thought it was gonna be that easy then those people are full of wishful thinking that's my point

 

Ppl get triggered that Bernie gets treated the most unfairly by media but that literally is to be totally exepcted. When u present the biggest changes out of everyone u will by far face the biggest amount of scrutiny along with it

 

U can't have ur cake and eat it too. When u propose huge changes ur gonna get a huge amounts of support of dreamers that support your ideals and want that change but your also going to face an equally strong resistance from people who do not want the changes and the media is never fully neutral they always have bias and we know that

 

It's always like this is any Nation and it was fully predictable that these struggles would happen with Bernie

 

 

I was arguing that "at least the U.S  has actually been very peaceful on the grand scheme of things" isn't accurate. It's a misconception about the history of the United States when it comes to putting down progressive and left wing dissidents and protestors. We have plenty of a violent past with that, and we also commit such acts internationally. We have not done it peacefully throughout history, we just present it as such.

Which is why I referenced assassinations. That we don't necessarily stoop to that level (at least not domestically) doesn't mean we don't have our own skeletons. "It could be worse" is not really a compelling case to people who are affected negatively by this.

I said nothing about resistance to progressive movements. That's an obvious given. I am not shocked at it, I am saying it should be fought against.

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

3 hours ago, Whispering said:

That’s not what this article says.

“This article is based on interviews with the 93 superdelegates, out of 771 total, as well as party strategists and aides to senior Democrats about the thinking of party leaders. A vast majority of those superdelegates — whose ranks include federal elected officials, former presidents and vice presidents and D.N.C. members — predicted that no candidate would clinch the nomination during the primaries, and that there would be a brokered convention fight in July to choose a nominee.

In a reflection of the establishment’s wariness about Mr. Sanders, only nine of the 93 superdelegates interviewed said that Mr. Sanders should become the nominee purely on the basis of arriving at the convention with a plurality, if he was short of a majority.”

 

At this point in the race, 86 out of 733 are thinking that there might be a brokered convention...if Sanders doesn’t win a majority.

All of this could change dramatically in less than one week. Remember, less than three per cent of the delegates have been allocated so far. 

Let’s see what the next week brings.

You're right the article is not "shocking proof! dnc confirms they want 4 years of Trump" but that's fine because the case isnt being made that it does say that, the thread is taking on the slant of the video in the OP that is making the case based off of this reporting - and that is what the OP is presumably looking for reactions to. 

 86 out of all asked superdelegates are considering a brokered convention, not 86/733. We don't know if they asked all of them. If they did, they would have likely included it in the article that they had. 

[Whispering 18,865]

3 hours ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

You're right the article is not "shocking proof! dnc confirms they want 4 years of Trump" but that's fine because the case isnt being made that it does say that, the thread is taking on the slant of the video in the OP that is making the case based off of this reporting - and that is what the OP is presumably looking for reactions to. 

 86 out of all asked superdelegates are considering a brokered convention, not 86/733. We don't know if they asked all of them. If they did, they would have likely included it in the article that they had. 

86 out of 93, but there are 733 total. Not everyone will read the article. Many will just read the misleading title and comment.

It doesn’t hurt to give a little more information, especially considering that many people won’t bother to read the article that is linked. 

[Emvee 8,825]

It’s not 1992 or 2008. People are more aware than ever that the establishment is ****ing us over and those “rules” are undemocratic.