Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Circling the wagons at the convention

Seth Abramson at the Huffington Post has made some interesting observations of the planning process for the Democratic National convention:
1. The press is counting the superdelegates, despite being told numerous times by Debbie Wasserman Schultz and other DNC officials, they don't count until the convention in July.
2. Clinton courted hundreds of superdelegates long before even the first primary was held to secure their loyalty.
3. The press is calling Sanders' determination to stay in the race until the end of the convention, until the last vote is cast, "awkward". As if somehow, he should bow out now, before the biggest prize is awarded, California.
4. Clinton and Wasserman Schultz are already stacking committees to keep Sanders and his delegates silent on the Democratic Party platform. Remember, they want to keep the changes incremental so as not to upset the relevant funders.
The Clinton team can hardly wait to declare Clinton the winner of the Democratic primary race, winning in a fairly undemocratic way, despite a few notable facts:
1. It is now very unlikely for either Clinton or Sanders to come up with the majority of pledged delegates before the convention.
2. It is now a near certainty that the convention will be contested.
3. It is estimated that 33% of Sanders supporters will not vote for Hillary Clinton under any circumstances.
4. 45% of American voters are independent and they support Sanders in the polling by clear majorities.

The press is now openly gloating about how much fun it will be to witness the coronation of Clinton. They are telling us that it's OK to declare the winner a month and a half before the convention. They are telling us that it's OK stack the committees to exclude Sanders delegates from the rules making process.

I know, most of us haven't figured out that the convention isn't just for electing nominees for president, it's also for modifying the rules of the Democratic National Party. Apparently, there are some big changes in store for us, and the Sanders crowd probably isn't going to like being shut out of the process.

See, the Hillary camp and their supporters have displayed vitriolic anger at the Sanders campaign. They would really, really like us to sit down and shut up. I guess they want us to stay home in November. Is that what you want? Are you sure about that?

Many of us can write in Sanders. if not, we can vote for Jill Stein in the Green Party. Clinton supporters keep telling us a vote for anyone but Clinton is a vote for Trump. No, it's not. If I vote for someone besides Clinton, and I don't vote for Trump, my vote is not for Trump. I will cast my for vote for someone I want. Believe me, I don't think my vote will be wasted. Besides, there are many in the Clinton camp who really don't think they need me. You know, like Hillary Clinton.

Given the way Clinton is now 'pivoting" towards the general election, she doesn't seem to think she needs voters that support Sanders. She's going to woo Republicans and accept money from big GOP donors, Republicans who want to stop Trump. A million here and a million there, pretty soon, you're talking about real money. But not a word about Sanders, mind you. She's courting Republicans who don't want Trump, independent voters be damned.

The press has played a big part in this. They gave Trump 10 times the coverage that they gave Sanders. They gave Clinton far more coverage than Sanders, too. But now, finally, he's showing up on the Sunday morning talk shows. So sorry, we had to cover Trump and Clinton first. But now you can't say we didn't give you free press time like we did with the others. At least now we can work with the Clinton camp to say that she won already. Now go be quiet and paint.

Even RealClearPolitics is so certain that Clinton will win the nomination, they have an electoral map showing how she will beat Trump. So far, it's 227 for Clinton, 143 for Trump with 168 toss ups. Hillary doesn't fare well in battlehground states or with independents, so it's still theoretically possible for Trump to win. 143 plus 168 is 311. 168 electoral delegates is a big chunk of uncertainty for Clinton. I wonder why Politico didn't put up a map for Sanders against Trump.

Oh, I think I know why. In national polling, Sanders is polling on average, 13 points ahead of Trump. Clinton is polling only 6 points ahead of Trump. Isn't that getting down close to to the margin of error? This trend has been going on for months, but that doesn't fit the narrative the press wants to give us. I guess we're not supposed to notice that.

I've seen bullies on the internet with regard to my support for Sanders. They tell me I haven't done my research. They tell me that Clinton has already won. They tell me that they'd vote for Sanders if he won. That's not the point for me.

The point is, Clinton represents a brand of politics I no longer want in America. I'm tired of the pay-for-play. I'm tired of living under one set of rules while people like Clinton live under another. I'm tired of playing find the ball with you guys. If can still support her after all the research, be my guest. I won't have it. Any of it. I want Sanders for president.

If Trump wins the White House because millions of Sanders supporters voted for someone else, it's not on us. It will be because the DNC was not listening to us. We were listening. We did our research. We came to the conclusion that Sanders is the better candidate. The single biggest reason why? He defied the money primary. While other members of Congress were spending up to two thirds of their time dialing for dollars, Sanders was working for us. All of us.

That is why I want him in the White House. Go on, circle your wagons, Clinton fans. Just remember that Clinton is part of that dialing for dollars club. You know who's got her ear and it's not you.
Post a Comment