Here's Just A Small Sample Of What's Wrong With American Politics

[Teddy B 17,252]

This system is beyond dumb and rigged from the very beginning!

After Crushing Defeat, DNC Quirk Still Gives Hillary More New Hampshire Delegates Than Sanders

Posted By Derek Hunter On 9:11 AM 02/10/2016 In | No Comments

Though Bernie Sanders won the New Hampshire primary in a landslide over Hillary Clinton, he will likely receive fewer delegates than she will.

Sanders won 60 percent of the vote, but thanks to the Democratic Party’s nominating system, he leaves the Granite State with at least 13 delegates while she leaves with at least 15 delegates.

New Hampshire has 24 “pledged” delegates, which are allotted based on the popular vote. Sanders has 13, and Clinton has 9, with 2 currently allotted to neither.

But under Democratic National Committee rules, New Hampshire also has 8 “superdelegates,” party officials who are free to commit to whomever they like, regardless of how their state votes. Their votes count the same as delegates won through the primary.

New Hampshire has 8 superdelegates, 6 of which are committed to Hillary Clinton, giving her a total of 15 delegates from New Hampshire as of Wednesday at 9 a.m.

The state’s 2 remaining superdelegates remain uncommitted.

In the overall delegate count, Clinton holds a commanding lead after a razor-thin victory in Iowa and a shellacking in New Hampshire. Clinton has 394 delegates, both super and electorally assigned, to only 42 for Sanders.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/10/hillary-earns-more-new-hampshire-delegates-than-sanders-after-loss/?print=1

Edited February 10, 2016 by Teddy B

[smilesammich 10,727]

seriously. i feel bad for the kids who are genuinely passionate about 'getting money out of politics' because oh lawd, that's just one hurdle..but then i also feel like democrats need to wake up before the same downward spiral republicans died in will gobble dems up as well. they have to pay attention to right now instead of resting on trends from previous elections. for starters the democratic label does not necessarily imply liberal or progressive.

[Teddy B 17,252]

seriously. i feel bad for the kids who are genuinely passionate about 'getting money out of politics' because oh lawd, that's just one hurdle..but then i also feel like democrats need to wake up before the same downward spiral republicans died in will gobble dems up as well. they have to pay attention to right now instead of resting on trends from previous elections. for starters the democratic label does not necessarily imply liberal or progressive.

Delegates shmelegates. One person, one vote and be done with it.

[ExPatty 502]

It's a @*#(ing disgrace is what it is. What a scam. Sanders smokes the daylights out of Clinton and still can't beat her on delegates because she is the very definition of establishment. The only way Sanders can beat her now is not "fair and square" but overwhelmingly, with such a massively disproportionate amount of support that he either outnumbers the supers or gets these sycophants to change their vote.

[smilesammich 10,727]

It's a @*#(ing disgrace is what it is. What a scam. Sanders smokes the daylights out of Clinton and still can't beat her on delegates because she is the very definition of establishment. The only way Sanders can beat her now is not "fair and square" but overwhelmingly, with such a massively disproportionate amount of support that he either outnumbers the supers or gets these sycophants to change their vote.

what's crazy to me is how many 'older' female democrats are going absolutely insane with laying guilt trips on women who don't want to vote for a candidate simply because of gender and 'its time'. i could be wrong, but i don'tmany people voted for obama on such simple premises, he's black and 'it's time'. i mean i know a bunch of folks on the right think that, but that isn't what i saw or experienced with either election. he spoke to progressive ideals, i guess many who voted for him didn't realize how difficult it is to evoke change in a system that was outsourced years ago.

[Dashinka 24,494]

Who else is there in the Democratic party?

Edited February 10, 2016 by Bill & Katya

[Sousuke 1,214]

what's crazy to me is how many 'older' female democrats are going absolutely insane with laying guilt trips on women who don't want to vote for a candidate simply because of gender and 'its time'. i could be wrong, but i don'tmany people voted for obama on such simple premises, he's black and 'it's time'. i mean i know a bunch of folks on the right think that, but that isn't what i saw or experienced with either election. he spoke to progressive ideals, i guess many who voted for him didn't realize how difficult it is to evoke change in a system that was outsourced years ago.

Not surprising given her answer about being progressive was basically the fact that she is a woman.

Had I been Bernie during the debate I would have cut in and said something like "Wow, so that means Margaret Thatcher was a progressive?"

[Póg mo 1,749]

what's crazy to me is how many 'older' female democrats are going absolutely insane with laying guilt trips on women who don't want to vote for a candidate simply because of gender and 'its time'. i could be wrong, but i don'tmany people voted for obama on such simple premises, he's black and 'it's time'. i mean i know a bunch of folks on the right think that, but that isn't what i saw or experienced with either election. he spoke to progressive ideals, i guess many who voted for him didn't realize how difficult it is to evoke change in a system that was outsourced years ago.

I don't really quite understand why people think she stands a better chance against the Trump or who ever else wins the nomination. My father-in-law is very conservative, and he would likely vote for Bernie over Hillary.

[Robby999 1,024]

[Póg mo 1,749]

It's a @*#(ing disgrace is what it is. What a scam. Sanders smokes the daylights out of Clinton and still can't beat her on delegates because she is the very definition of establishment. The only way Sanders can beat her now is not "fair and square" but overwhelmingly, with such a massively disproportionate amount of support that he either outnumbers the supers or gets these sycophants to change their vote.

Change is never easy. You can't make expect the Establishment to give up and hand power off to somebody else.

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

Mahatma Gandhi

[smilesammich 10,727]

Not surprising given her answer about being progressive was basically the fact that she is a woman.

Had I been Bernie during the debate I would have cut in and said something like "Wow, so that means Margaret Thatcher was a progressive?"

i think democrats/liberals forget just how much the democratic party are a part of 'the establishment' as republicans. considering hillary is a woman, imo she has had to make even more concessions to establishment/money over the course of her career than a male candidate would have. no matter how progressive she might have been started out, she definitely isn't anywhere close to fitting in as progressive. the fact that she doesn't seem to catch this, makes it even more obvious.

I don't really quite understand why people think she stands a better chance against the Trump or who ever else wins the nomination. My father-in-law is very conservative, and he would likely vote for Bernie over Hillary.

i don't get that either. republicans (especially the older ones) HATE her. bernie appeals to folks across the board because he has actual plans that he's spelled out - trump? he's got nothing. seems like hillary is just running damage control.

[lostinblue 1,989]

The Dem's have super delagated that answer to the bosses. The voters in Dem primaries have virtually nothing to do with it

[Darnell 8,478]

It's a @*#(ing disgrace is what it is. What a scam. Sanders smokes the daylights out of Clinton and still can't beat her on delegates because she is the very definition of establishment. The only way Sanders can beat her now is not "fair and square" but overwhelmingly, with such a massively disproportionate amount of support that he either outnumbers the supers or gets these sycophants to change their vote.

eh - i'm a hoping the email server bits get her arrested. Lets see what happens after that.

[ExPatty 502]

what's crazy to me is how many 'older' female democrats are going absolutely insane with laying guilt trips on women who don't want to vote for a candidate simply because of gender and 'its time'. i could be wrong, but i don'tmany people voted for obama on such simple premises, he's black and 'it's time'. i mean i know a bunch of folks on the right think that, but that isn't what i saw or experienced with either election. he spoke to progressive ideals, i guess many who voted for him didn't realize how difficult it is to evoke change in a system that was outsourced years ago.

There was definitely some "it's a black person's turn", but I don't know to what degree. Blacks overwhelmingly supported Obama, but they also overwhelmingly supported Clinton in previous elections, so that argument isn't super compelling. Moreover, the fact that some people did support him simply because he's black must be considered in light of some who didn't simply because he was black. I have no idea if the two balance each other out. Honestly mccain/palin was a total joke and obama was the only real option. I was happy to see him win and it was still the right choice. Romney was better than mccain/palin, but an ultra rich who had in his own words thought little of the common person.

I don't care for Hillary as a person. I find her power hungry (like Trump) and I don't believe she cares except to be the one who finally puts a woman in the white house. And something obama never did, which many credit as extremely smart, was mention his own race in some victimized "Shouldn't you vote for me, let's prove we're not racist" way. Hillary feels if she loses it's because of sexism. She doesn't believe in the meritocracy of the presidency; she wants her private parts to give her some extra credence at the polls. I'm not a woman but I do believe most women who don't support clinton will find her spokespeople very offensive when they say there is a spot in hell for women who don't support hillary. You can't threaten people for your support. It's desperate and a huge turn off. It's a terrible tactical error.

Edited February 11, 2016 by ExPatty

[ready4ONE 5,400]

I don't see good choices on either side. I'm not sure if we have ever seen such a poor field of Presidential candidates in our history.