MSNBC admits: "We'll SUPPRESS VOTING to help CLINTON on June 7th" | Bernie Sanders

[leftcoastmountains]

[Trust Buster]

1. One word: Bullshit.

[GreatGazoo]

170. why would June 7th be any different than what the MSM has done EVERY day of this primary ?

eg. tell us all that Trump can't win (he did) and claim that superdelegates have already voted (they haven't).

[Cobalt Violet]

2. They just can't wait for president Trump.

[pmorlan1]

3. Pathetic

No wonder people have such a low opinion of the corporate media. They are supposed to cover the news not manufacture it.

[CorporatistNation]

9. The CORPORATISTS ARE TRULY IN CHARGE! IT'S CALLED FASCISM! PATHETIC TURN FOR AMERICA!

THE ONLY THING MISSING ARE THE JACK BOOTED THUGS AT YOUR DOOR... :THINK: ABOUT IT....

[merrily]

4. We've known all along where MSNBC stood. (Note how they captioned him.)

Confession is good for the soul only if accompanied by repentance.

I said I would stop watching MSNBC after this election, but I watch it very little anyway. So, I guess that's not much of a stand.

[bjo59]

131. And Comcast co-hosting the national convention... Remember dystopian movies like Bladerunner?

Now we don't have to imagine what it would be like anymore.

[delrem]

165. Hey, the MSM hosted the entire primary process.

It was a ratings and cash bonanza!

What a show.

[brooklynite]

5. And by "suppress voting" you mean "announce facts"?

[cherokeeprogressive]

11. So you believe people will be motivated to the polls even though they hear it's not necessary.

[WhiteTara]

20. You've seen those yuge Bernie rallies

of course each of them will vote.

[mythology]

46. To be fair, they aren't showing up for Sanders now either

But the race has been realistically over for months now. The media likes a "horserace" even though the race isn't and hasn't been close for a long time.

[amborin]

97. who's not showing up? the 20K at his Irvine, Ca rally? or this:

[SoCalMusicLover]

153. Don't Distort The Figures

There was not 20K at the Irvine rally. I was there, and I know that amphitheatre. It doesn't even hold that many when it's completely full. No more than 7 or 8,000, which is still mighty impressive, especially in conservative Orange County.

[brooklynite]

173. Once again, its the showing up to vote that counts...

[brooklynite]

77. I believe the people will already be on line and won't hear the announcement...

[nadinbrzezinski]

88. Here is this thing called a phone

you might have heard of them? Same stupid argument made for AZ.. when there were photos of people checking their damn phones

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. Ok third person I will never again beiieve when you spout GOTV

yes, this will depress voting in CA, and here is a huge, I mean HUUUGEEE news flash for you, We just do not have a presidential primary on the ballot, My minimum workers in this city, thank you advance for the help NOT, you will give them. THANKS.

Nest time you go GOTV, here it is me

[tazkcmo]

84. This right here

It's not about Clinton or Sanders as much as it is about local initiatives.

[bkkyosemite]

28. Anything including cheating to get your person the nomination..yes cheating. If the MSM

does that before the CA vote it is cheating those who have not voted.

[workinclasszero]

79. Bingo

Reality is RIGGED man!

[me b zola]

155. The fact is that the super delegates do not vote until the convention

Until they vote there is no nominee. That's the facts, Jack.

[delrem]

168. Since "the facts" are already being announced by our friend Chris,

I suppose some people would call that part of an active suppression of voting, since the aim is explicitly stated to be ensuring lower turnout.

What would you call it, brainiac?

[Mike Nelson]

6. Not to help Clinton...

...I agree with Jeff Weaver as it will depress both sides. Won't matter, anyway, as Hillary will have the delegates.

[nadinbrzezinski]

75. But it affects down ballot initiatives

upwards of 3 percentage points. I will blame the networks if Prop I does not pass, or it is close

[senz]

162. Hillary will not have the delegates before the convention.

Steve Kornacki of MSNBC explains why.

https://www.facebook.com/susan.sanders.35325/videos/636912853123585/

[jwirr]

192. Get the word out that they are going to do this and explain

that we need to vote regardless for the delegates. Our side in dedicated.

[cherokeeprogressive]

7. Why would MSNBC or any other network feel the NEED to announce the results before voting ends?

That just seems strange to me. Doing it for the "scoop" isn't valid in my opinion because they'll be describing and event that hasn't even happened yet since voting is still taking place. I think that makes the word "scoop" moot. How can you scoop something before it's even happened?

[oberliner]

12. They don't announce results before voting ends

They will announce the NJ votes, though, before the CA voting ends because of the time difference. The argument here is that those results might depress turnout for the last few hours in CA but that seems like a stretch.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. It is called the BANDWAGON EFFECT

look for it

[bkkyosemite]

31. It's not a stretch many will go to the polls after work! It's wrong!

[oberliner]

40. Then they probably won't be watching TV

And can avoid watching any of the coverage.

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. Look for your phone

same stupid argument was made with AZ.

Really, this is not 2000. I have a full news production capability on my Iphone 6, and you have the ability to see it ten seconds after I post it. I am assuming you are on the east coast, hence your ignorance of this, and it takes that long to populate from the west coast.

[oberliner]

49. The results will be available whether CNN does a special about them or not

This information will be released and people can get it on their phone.

Again, if you don't want to know what happened in NJ, don't look up the news on your iPhone?

I have an iPhone and all it tells me when I look at it is what time it is.

[nadinbrzezinski]

52. Here you go

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19810708&id=1d8hAAAAIBAJ&sjid=OaIFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5204,4461559&hl=en

Check that old story, this is not new. It might be new to you, but trust me, this is not new to Chris Mathews.

And my minimum wage workers truly thank you.

And when you go GOTV, that is me in the corner having a raucous laugh.

[bkkyosemite]

105. Smart phones...yes...

[oberliner]

107. Smart phones don't provide you with election news against your will

At least as far as I know.

[progressoid]

185. The average person looks at his or her phone 46 times every day.

And if politics are important to you, you would likely keep up on it during the day.

[oberliner]

186. But if you specifically want to vote without knowing what happened in NJ

You can probably make that happen.

[vintx]

13. Same reason they took the unprecedented step of counting superdelegate votes so early this time

(hint: coronation)

[CorporatistNation]

14. C'MON... TO SKEW THE RESULTS... DECREASE THE IMPETUS FOR PEOPLE TO VOTE!

IT'S JUST ANOTHER VERSION OF "THE FIX!"

[COLGATE4]

117. Your computer seems to be broken - it's stuck on Cap Lock all the time.

[Retrograde]

62. Ratings: which ever network promises to announce first gets the viewers

and early announcements have historically had an effect on West Coast races - in 1976 Carter conceded before the West Coast polls closed, and while it may not have swayed the presidency it did make some voters stay home.

[nadinbrzezinski]

66. You mean 1980

and here is an article from the Seattle Intelligencer

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19810708&id=1d8hAAAAIBAJ&sjid=OaIFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5204,4461559&hl=en

[Retrograde]

140. Yeah, senior moment

I was thinking about Carter today, and how he was touted as not being a Washington insider, and how he was a ray of hope after the Nixon/Ford years.

1980 was the only time I didn't vote for the Democratic presidential nominee, because Carter had conceded before I left work. Voted for John Anderson instead (after all, he did a whistle-stop tour of the Peninsula, which gets points for style).

[nadinbrzezinski]

141. And is a perfect example of what I am pointing out with this point

Thanks, textbook.

It can change outcomes by as much as 3 percent

[jillan]

111. It's not about the vote in California, it's called announcing the primary is over & she is the

nominee - even tho she will not be at 2383.

[oberliner]

8. This OP is a lie

MSNBC does not admit anything of the kind in this video.

[Dem2]

36. Way too many OPs here are lies

[JimDandy]

74. Jury Results

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
On Tue May 24, 2016, 10:25 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

MSNBC admits: "We'll SUPPRESS VOTING to help CLINTON on June 7th" | Bernie Sanders
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512046050

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Outright lie

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue May 24, 2016, 10:33 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Seen so many posts that were lies. Clearly lies. Alerted on them. Jury always said the alerter should argue their reason in the thread, so, right now I'm on board with that.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. So they will manufacture news

and will depress the vote. THANKS GUYS. My minimum wage workers in San Diego, about 35 percent of the workers, thank you in advance.

[oberliner]

16. No they won't

They will say that Hillary won NJ, after she does so. This is before CA is finished voting. CA voters can handle hearing the news about NJ and still cast a vote.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. YOu realize that we go over this shit every four years right?

and that there are studies done on how this actually depresses the vote on the west coast. You are the fourth person that I will never again believe when you GOTV
'
That is me in the corner.

[oberliner]

18. West Coast voters are not morons

If they are passionate about voting for Bernie Sanders in the morning, they ought to still be passionate about voting for Bernie Sanders in the late afternoon, regardless of what happens in New Jersey.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. WHOOSH

there are actual studies that show that down ballot measures are affected

Me will laugh at you now. And yes this is personal to me. I WANT MY MIMUM WAGE WORKERS TO GET A RAISE THE NEXT MORNING Prop I does not pass, and I will partially blame the networks. It can have an effect of up to 3 points.

[oberliner]

23. OK

So the networks should not report on the NJ results when they come in?

[SusanCalvin]

27. That would be ideal. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. That would best, and that goes for November as well

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. And here is one of those

not even with the US elections, this is basic psychology and we go though this same exact shit every four years and the networs promise to fix it next time, every four years.

http://www.politics.as.nyu.edu/docs/IO/2797/FrenchVoting_13.pdf

[Eko]

42. Wow oberliner,

you have two people who commented to you who think we should suppress the news, crazy world.

[oberliner]

47. It's very bizarre

Hard to tell the genuine opinions from the sarcastic ones.

[SusanCalvin]

51. Sigh.....

Waiting until all polls are closed to report is not "suppressing the news."

But I'm sure you knew that.

[Eko]

61. Sure it is.

Suppress-prevent the dissemination of (information).
If you want it prevented from being reported until a time that is later to create a situation favorable to you you are suppressing the news.

[SusanCalvin]

68. Good grief.

So it's OK for one group to vote uninfluenced by results on the same day but another group not. Oooookaaaaay.....

[Eko]

71. Only one group

gets to vote uninfluenced by previous votes.

[SusanCalvin]

171. True if you carry it that far.

But I still think it unnecessary to deliberately influence on the same day by not simply waiting until all polls are closed.

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. Here you go, this is not new

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19810708&id=1d8hAAAAIBAJ&sjid=OaIFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5204,4461559&hl=en

[SusanCalvin]

26. .

I would not trust the Golux overfar. He cannot tell what can be from what can't. He seldom knows what should be from what is.

James Thurber

[Hoyt]

34. Rain "depresses" the vote. I guess that's a conspiracy too.

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. As usual I expect you to laugh at actual statistical analysis

but you are the fifth person I will laugh when you claim GOTV

[Hoyt]

43. So you think news should be surpressed?

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. We go though this same shitty discussion every four years

the networks have been asked by multiple Secretaries of State on the west coast to delay results until the polls are closed. It is called the bandwagon effect.

Yes, it has depressed turnout in Western States. this is not new.

[Hoyt]

50. Don't care what it's called, should news be surpressed who/whomever it favors?

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. It is not supressing anything to hold off until it will not affect

or suppress turnout in another states. I know I know you really hate democracy, really.

Here, enjoy this old story

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19810708&id=1d8hAAAAIBAJ&sjid=OaIFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5204,4461559&hl=en

[SusanCalvin]

54. Waiting until all polls are closed is not suppressing. nt

[Eko]

119. What if I knew something very damaging about a candidate

and told MSNBC and they decided to wait until all the polls closed to inform on it, would that be ok? Wouldn't that be suppressing the news?

[nadinbrzezinski]

124. Given US History... when at tmes took WEEKS for votes to be known

you could wait 3 hours, amirite?

[Eko]

126. You do realize it would get out anyways right?

Some county clerk somewhere would release the count and then you would have a flood of them doing it. Amirite?

[nadinbrzezinski]

129. Germany has dealt with this by making those leaks a federal crime

There are ways to deal with this. But the EAST COAST overall, could care less. If we somehow voted West to East you guys would be screaming. I do not know how many ways this has to be explained. The effect is well known. You would think, not really, we know better, that the United States would be a mature democracy and wait for a few hours.

That is what mature countries do. We are not

[Eko]

135. That would go over real well.

(me on the phone) "Hey little brother, the candidate we fought for and admire won my state, isnt that awesome!!!"
(Feds) You have committed a federal crime, get on the floor with your hands behind your back!!!!!

And I'm the enemy of democracy.

[nadinbrzezinski]

142. Hey little brother I got that ilegally

how would you get the totals, if they are not released?

In Germany for example they are not released. The only time they were, and it was a felony, they had the same exact effect.

[Eko]

144. If I was the one counting them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

146. Ok you want to risk time in the pokey, go for it

Definitely no matter how many ways to Sunday this is explained to you, in fact you give two shits about mucking up with elections in another state This is beyond sad, and yes, ME, I, I don't care about the we.

I will blame you EKO personally if Prop does not pass by a narrow margin. It is your fucking attitude that is not helping. Oh and spare me your GOTV and party activism ok

[Eko]

148. Personally?

Really? That is so ridiculous. I think I gave a reasonable fix for the problem you are talking about but you said why should the west coast have to fix the problem? That was your answer for what I proposed, not that it wouldn't work for so and so reason or it would create a legal problem, nothing, just why should the west coast have to fix the problem that it is experiencing. Changing the schedules for elections seems such a way better solution rather than making what is now free speech a federal crime.

[nadinbrzezinski]

149. Yes, you and people like you

Who do not care if they muck up other state's elections.

[HarmonyRockets]

161. LOL

I will blame you EKO personally if Prop does not pass

This made me laugh out loud.

[SusanCalvin]

172. Of course that wouldn't be OK.

But a) it's not the same thing and b) it's done all the time.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

127. I thought you were a journalist......

[nadinbrzezinski]

128. I am

and there were hearings in 1981. The reagan election was the first one where it became that obvious. The Bandwagon effect is a poli sci finding of this. Bandwagon effect is the name given to it.

First hearings were done in 1981 in the United States Congress

[oberliner]

44. Statistical analysis shows that voter turnout is generally lower when the weather is bad

However, the weather is sometimes bad.

Similarly, one sometimes finds out the results of other contests before one gets to vote.

That's life.

A person can still vote even if they weather is bad and a person can still vote even if they know what happened in NJ.

[Hoyt]

58. So true, not to mention folks could vote early, even by mail. I'm never standing

in line again. Learned my lesson in 2004 standing for hours among a bunch of loud-mouthed white wing bush supporters.

[nadinbrzezinski]

64. Oh poor you, but in CA those who stand at the polls tend to be the working poor

but I really feel for you, We already have a lower turnout from them And I still go and physically vote... I like it that way.

[Hoyt]

78. Peace.

[SusanCalvin]

63. We currently have no control over the weather. nt

[SusanCalvin]

60. We currently have no control over the rain. nt

[Hoyt]

177. Or the news, or we shouldn't.

[SusanCalvin]

187. You call asking that results not be reported until all polls are closed "control"?

I call the way the M$M decides what is and isn't news "control."

[Hoyt]

189. I can assure you that the MSM puts up what people want to hear. That's the way they make money.

Last edited Wed May 25, 2016, 08:56 PM - Edit history (1)

If viewers/consumers wanted to hear Sanders yelling at the sky 24/7, there'd be a channel for it.

[SusanCalvin]

190. This is sort of true.

They put up what makes them money. Even when they call it "news."

[Corporate666]

19. If your point is legitimate, why lie about it?

MSNBC never said "We'll SUPPRESS VOTING to help CLINTON on June 7th"

But you put in quotes, which means it's actually a quoted statement from someone.

Except it isn't.

It isn't even an implication. The question was asked and the response was it would depress turnout for BOTH candidates. And never was "to help Clinton" said by anyone.

In other news...

From the Sanders camp today -> "Bernie has dropped out of the race and pledged support to Clinton".

Legit, right?

[LuvLoogie]

30. Some are so hooked on rage endorphins that they're self-medicating.

When your notion of reality crumbles because it isn't reality, the fix is in, your opposition is corrupt and cheats you of your righteous due.

So when Bernie loses California, it will be because the corporate, in-the-bag-for-Hillary media announced the results in New Jersey.

Oh, and they didn't give The Revolution an extra week to register as "unaffiliated."

[Gothmog]

24. Reporting facts is voter suppression??

The facts and the math are the facts and the math. Sanders has no chance of being the nominee now and that will not change after the New Jersey results are announced

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. Seven person I will laugh when they go GOTV

this is called the Bandwagon effect. It is real

[oasis]

25. Bernie says he's in until the convention, so no big deal. How

about the race for Boxer's seat in the senate? Lazy voters get no sympathy from me. Never have, never will.

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. You know you sound like very republican posters on AOL message boards circa 2001

chew on that one

[oasis]

112. At least you know I'm not paid to recruit in this joint.

[nadinbrzezinski]

114. I am just pointing that you do sound that way

but since you are a conservadem, that does not surprise me in the least.

[oasis]

118. If by "conservadem" you mean "Democrats dedicated to saving

THEIR party" then you would be correct.

[nadinbrzezinski]

120. Nope CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRAT

[vintx]

178. Most on this site used to be firmly against the continuing slide to the right

Sad to see that's changed, all because Clinton II

[oasis]

183. If by not fully embracing Che and Hugo Chavez signals a DU slide

to the right, so be it. I, for one, am for the survival of the American way of governance in America for Americans. Presently, the Democratic Party offers the best hope for peace and the well being of its citizens.

[vintx]

184. Thanks for the demonstration nt

[Eko]

33. God forbid they should report things.

Like election results.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. Sixth person I will laugh when they go over how important it is to do GOTV

and report is one thing, create news is another

[Eko]

55. I understand where you are coming from.

There are other things on the ballot in Ca that are important, I get that. What if Sanders wins NJ, should they not give that news out before the voting in CA is over?

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. Yes, because if they do not, like it does every fucking four years

it will suppress the turnout.

It can do up to three points. This is not a new discussion. So if Prop I is at a 51-49, that can flip it

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19810708&id=1d8hAAAAIBAJ&sjid=OaIFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5204,4461559&hl=en

[Eko]

67. I see what you are saying

and I share your concerns, but I think the news should be reported in a timely fashion also.

[nadinbrzezinski]

69. IMO, when states on the east and west coast are concerned

BY FUCKING LAW, becuase the networks will not do it otherwise, they have to sit on the results until all polls close.

In fact, this should extend to Hawaii, which means you get the results next fucking day. It is called democracy. and I am no longer amazed how tone deaf people are.

[Eko]

76. Really really really

not in favor of the government keeping the news from being announced as it happens,,

[nadinbrzezinski]

81. Yes, really and hearings are held in Congress every so often

and committees of experts recommend exactly this. You know how long it used to take people to learn who the President was oh 100 years ago? When things used to go by telegraph? This effect became this clear with the rise of TV. They still did not affect things with radio

[Eko]

87. Tell you what,

Why don't you just get California to control the news broadcasts in your state and they can suppress the results for you guys because I don't want that for my State or my government at all. Problem solved.

[nadinbrzezinski]

89. Tell you what, I am going to propose to my US Congressman that he introduces

legislation regarding this.

[Eko]

93. Cool,

And if he brings up legislation on it I will propose to my US Congressman that we just shut off all communication and news information to California during elections so we don't all have to bear that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

95. Poor, poor you, you will need to lock out every time zone

The BANDWAGON effect, it is real, is just more noticeable on the West Coast.

[Eko]

99. Easier to block off one state

than 49 others. Like I said, I get what you are saying and it is concerning, but I would hope and think that there are other ways than having the government suppressing the news.

[nadinbrzezinski]

102. You are missing this, and you are an enemy of democracy by the way,

but this is the West COAST. Last time I checked, AZ, NV, WA, OR and CA and Idaho are in the west coast. They all get the same fucking bandwagon effect. It is a political science well known fact. As usual, posters here are proving not just bias, but lack of knowledge of actual political science.

Teh effect I gave you came from the SEATTLE INTELLIGENCER in 1981. There were hearings held back then, the effect was on the whole Pacific Coast Time ZONE.

[Eko]

109. an enemy of democracy?

Wow, if I am indeed an enemy of democracy then you are the enemy of freedom,,,, nah I dont think that at all, just was being as hyperbolic as you. I lived in two of those states, so I know where the west coast is thanks. Wouldn't it be easier for states having this problem to maybe have all the other elections besides the presidential one on different years and the presidential one earlier?

[nadinbrzezinski]

113. Anybody who wants to suppress turnout is

This which you defend are exactly what they do.

[Eko]

116. Care to show me where

I said I wanted to suppress turnout? Cause I can without a doubt show you where you want to suppress the free flow of information with the government no less.

[nadinbrzezinski]

122. You want that released when precints are still open

this has been explained to you, and you still don't care. So that is my conclusion, You really do not give two shits about it

For me it is personal I want my low wage workers to get a fifty cent wage increase in the morning. I cover poverty issues. Personally I could give two figs about it if Sanders or Clinton win. But that will suppress that vote and will risk my low wage workers getting their wage increase and five days of PAID sick leave a year.

There you have it. You will have the BREATHLESS reporting and I will have the suppression of the vote.

[Eko]

125. You cant just

take all the other elections besides the presidential and have them on the previous year or something?

[nadinbrzezinski]

132. Again, why should CA, the 8th largest economy, do that to pelase the East Cosast

There are solutions that mature democracies have imprelemted to deal with this, we are not one.

[Eko]

134. Why should the worlds largest economy

please the 8th by suppressing the free flow of information? Seems like this could be fixed pretty easily by the west coast states by just adjusting some election dates to solve their own problem without having to go all big brother.

[nadinbrzezinski]

143. What the fuck are you talking about? YOU can't wait for three hours and prevent a real world

effect in voting? I mean, we already have a twisted system that favors a few states over otehrs when choosing nominees, but NNNNOOOOOO, we also want to continue to muck up in CALIFORNIA elections? Look, if it had zero effect on my local issues, I would not care. But this VERY REAL EFFECT, might cost workers a very real rise in the minimum wage. You might not care, but 50 cents, for people making minimum, is very important.

You might not care, but for some of us this is fucking personal, and yes, you continue to muck up my elections.

[Eko]

145. So why not just

move the local elections to a different time? As far as the 50 cents goes I am all about that, shoot it should be more. I say $5 more would be more like it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

147. To please you? Why should we do that?

The solution is one you do not like, because all you care is about yourself.

And in edit. You realize this bandwagon effects also affects the GE? By your logic the pacific time zone, let alone AK and HI, should probably not vote in the general election. Yup, that is the ticket

[Eko]

121. So changing the states election

calendars would not work?

[nadinbrzezinski]

123. Why would CA want to change it's traditional June election to suit you?

We just happen to have a primary avery four years.

[Eko]

150. To fix a problem you are having.

[nadinbrzezinski]

151. Alas we also have it every four years during the General Eleciton

same problem... so should we just not vote? I suspect that would be the preferred end. You were told the problem, the solution by expects, and you could give two shits about it. So should we cancel the presidential election in the PST zone, as well as AK and HI where the effect is actually worst. You see here is the problem. You are showing why we are not a mature democracy. ME, I, I don't give a fuck about the rest of the country. That is what you are doing. I wish our communications technology went back to mules, and horses, when people did not know the results for literally MONTHS! Did I mention the country did not go to hell? Apparently 3 hours, let alone the suggested number of 12, again by experts, is too much for you.

And you now cannot say you are not aware of the effect. It has been explained to you ten ways to Sunday. So at this point I must assume this is willful and not mature, and actual hate of democracy, with a small d. So spare me when you speak of GOTV and party activism. I will be the one in the corner laughing, not with you, at you.

[Eko]

152. Its been fun, but its over.

I have been nice, you have not. I offered what seem like reasonable solutions to the problem you are having now with the primaries, I realize it does not change the GE and I agree with that. I have agreed with you from the start that it is a valid concern and one that I share with you. I also have voiced my support for the min wage and said it should be more. In seriousness you have said I am the enemy of democracy, have misstated my positions and given me positions I never taken. I make it a point to never put anyone on ignore but you are making that a hard thing to not do right now. I want to thank you for helping to educate me on something I never really thought about before. But, my patience is at an end. I hope you can figure out who your real adversary is and learn when you are discussing with people that share some of your concerns and when you are not.
Later,

[nadinbrzezinski]

154. Oh please do put me on ignore

I beg of you

[Eko]

159. No, I cant do that.

But what I will do is hope that the min wage increase passes, and I will keep track of it in the Ca elections and bring it up to anyone when I can and reiterate my support for it.

[d_legendary1]

41. Announcing that HRC has won should she get New Jersey is the voter suppression tactic

A lot of people will be discouraged and will stay home for the remaining races. This is the power play. There is a reason why a lot of HRC supporters are pushing this meme so hard.

[SusanCalvin]

59. Yep.

If it doesn't make any difference, why the vehemence? If it does, then yes it is vote suppression, whether intentional or not.

[jillan]

115. This is not about NJ or CA it's about announcing the primaries are over, Hill is the nominee.

But she will not have 2383 superdelegates on the 7th.

She is 633 short.

[d_legendary1]

174. Exactly my point!

Delegates stay home and Hill becomes the nominee.

[seabeyond]

65. Damn, just every one picking on Sanders right?

[nadinbrzezinski]

72. This is much older than Sanders and you are person number eight that I will laugh

when you go GOTV... here you go, effect in 1980. This discussion has been going at least that long

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19810708&id=1d8hAAAAIBAJ&sjid=OaIFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5204,4461559&hl=en

[seabeyond]

80. Lordy Nadin, starting another list?

[nadinbrzezinski]

83. If you are an enemy of democracy you are not a friend of mine

you are not for other reasons, but definitely not on this account.

[seabeyond]

90. Regardless of your enemy of whatever, no, we aren't friends.

[nadinbrzezinski]

91. Good,

[Dem2]

70. Every network will. About half of the logical fallacies that exist are violated in this silly thread

false cause, slippery slope, black or white, gambler's fantasy to name a few.

[nadinbrzezinski]

73. Really? tell that to Jimmy Carter

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19810708&id=1d8hAAAAIBAJ&sjid=OaIFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5204,4461559&hl=en

you are person number 9 that I will laugh when you go GOTV

[Dem2]

85. I waited patiently for your silly post. You didn't read my post and now you look silly.

I see you've adopted this thread as your personal playground. I was surprised it took you almost what? 2 minutes to toss your silly spammy post at me?

Now read mine - my only contention was that "every network will do it" and that the style of this post violates many logical fallacy rules.

I'll wait for 3 minutes for a ridiculous rationalization for the mistake you made when you spammed with with the generic answer to a post I didn't make and then distract and divert from the undeniable facts posted herein.

[nadinbrzezinski]

86. Whatever, I did read it

and the generic answer if FUCKNG HISTORY

[oberliner]

92. The media can't withhold football scores anymore

It isn't 1980.

[nadinbrzezinski]

94. They could, BY LAW do that for elections

[lakeguy]

181. same exact thing is done in criminal investigations too..

or maybe all these other posters think law enforcement agencies should be forced to report all facts, as they come in, no matter the effect on the investigation. we wouldn't want to withhold news, right?

[nadinbrzezinski]

182. I know, I know

the part that is amazing is that once you explain this, they should get it. All to win, my team, your team, not a football game though

[pacalo]

82. Like MSNBC can afford to alienate viewers even further ... how foolish is this.

[jillan]

96. Hillary is 633 Pledged Delegates SHORT of being the nominee. Why would they do this?

She has 1750 PLEDGED delegates. You need 2383 to become the nominee.

[nadinbrzezinski]

98. All these fools are adding the supers

never mind the media was told not to.. but not just that, this is a proven effect. It will suppress turnout in CA. and this is personal to me.

[jillan]

101. How do we combat this, that is the question? This is interfering with Democracy.

Ya - she will be a lot closer to 2383 but she will not be there.

You know what? I am going to ask DWS to do something about this. Yes, seriously.

This needs to stop.

[nadinbrzezinski]

103. People have been trying since at least the Reagan election

this is a discussion that is held every four years. The East Coast does not care. And since the networks are in the East Coast, this has to be done by FEDERAL LAW, Good luck with that one.

[jillan]

108. I think our only chance is to contact DWS, seriously.

This is UNdemocratic and will hurt the chances of unity ever more.

They prematurely call Hillary the nominee and good luck at the convention.
There is too much passion on the Bernie side to put up with a blatant lie.

[nadinbrzezinski]

110. I am to the point that I do not care what happens

yes it will hurt unity, since most people are not aware of the long history of this. So it is the new-old outrage. But read this thread, You will get the same from the party. and to be fair, she told them to stop using supers. They did not listen. They will do whatever they want to do. My only thing is to write a story... with these facts, including that old PI article, and beg people to go vote... regardless of what the media does. It might be 10 or 20, or a 100 or whatever that I reach, but that might make a drop in the statistical bucket difference, and enough to save some of those progressive down ballot initiatives.

but seriously, we are pretty much into I got mine even with elections.

[amborin]

100. fascist M$M, and in the case of MSNBC/Comcast, headed by a HRC donor

[nadinbrzezinski]

104. This goes back to 1980

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19810708&id=1d8hAAAAIBAJ&sjid=OaIFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5204,4461559&hl=en

This is not new, we just have this discussion every four years, and people on the East Coast could care less.

[PATRICK]

163. This East Coaster

recognizes you have won this argument easily over a hundred replies ago. The POTUS GE is the most deadly of course because all the low information voters and not so thrilling choices fall like autumn leaves in a wind. There goes the state races and the propositions because the winning side is enthused. In a primary enthusiasm or grudging anger may be offsetting with a different subclass of voters but I presume the effect will still be very real. As for reporting news, the conduct of our balloting versus the speed of communications has created an extremely bad election "weather" effect. Different or mistaken reactions to current news may influence the vote, mainly repressing, creating a very destructive overall effect out West. Democrats count too heavily on POTUS years for downticket races as it is and that is exactly when this happens.

The MSM knows what it is doing, finally releasing information in as destructive a way as possible to scoop up the money in prime time. They have been traitors before and Germany knows from sad experience how to recognize dereliction of civic duty.

Yeah and the long deceased, never fought for Fairness Doctrine, a scrap of regulation of endless corporate propaganda. And the skewed or ignored exit polls and the idiotic post mortems and Democratic breast beating. I will not be listening to any of it on election night. Not one second or screen shot.

[nadinbrzezinski]

175. I have no choice, working media

we were there in 2012 when Fox gave it to Obama were the GOP held it's party. The good news. they waited until 8:00 PM, right as the polls closed. This is Fox, so predictably that was on the air at GOP return headquarters.

[creeksneakers2]

130. If you count it that way

how many short is Bernie?

[nadinbrzezinski]

133. Process, neither will reach PDs

so unless once concedes before the convention, this is going to the floor, This is process, purely

[vintx]

179. I admire your constitution

Your efforts may be wasted on your interlocutors, but plenty of those silently reading are not so blind.

[LuvLoogie]

136. Hillary has 1771 pledged delegates. She needs 255 to clinch the majority of pledged delegates.

A majority of the 4051 pledged delegates allocated is 2026 delegates.

All she needs is 40% in three primaries.

25 of 60 delegates in Puerto Rico
51 of 126 delegates in New Jersey
190 of 475 delegates in California

That's 266 pledged delegates. 11 more than she needs.

she could get

ZERO delegates in the Virgin Islands
ZERO delegates in Montana
ZERO delegates in New Mexico
ZERO delegates in North Dakota
ZERO delegates in South Dakota
ZERO delegates in the District of Columbia


EVERY TIME Bernie gets less than 67% of the delegates in a contest going forward, HE LOSES that contest. Why? Because it is not a winner take all, because Hillary gains delegates as well, because people WANT TO vote for Hillary--more than want to vote for Bernie.

The Super Delegates will not be persuaded to Bernie.

[jillan]

139. She needs 633 pledged delegates to cinch the nomination. AP showing her with 1750

2383 is the magic number of PLEDGED delegates.



Pledged delegates Clinton- 1,750
Bernie - 1,448

Delegate results
2,383 needed for nomination · 988 still available

Presidential primaries
Last updated May 24, 2016 at 10:00 PM MT

Your numbers are off by 378!
Is that Hillary math?

[Jack Bone]

156. ^^^ POST OF THE DAY ^^^

Hillary Math?!? LOL

[stevenleser]

169. Sure, if straw men are your thing. nt

[stevenleser]

164. You know you're not responding to that persons contention and making up your own, right?

That persons point stands. Hillary will clinch a majority of pledged delegates.

[underthematrix]

157. DEM nominee must have at least 2383 delegates

It does not specify whether pledged or super. It says delegates, just like in 2008 when the black guy was running.

[stevenleser]

167. I love how that person didn't respond to your actual point.

Oh well. Good stuff anyway.

[LuvLoogie]

188. That's okay. Maybe I forgot to add anti-Hillary Dark Matter Delegates.

Or take away delegates for rally size.

[AzDar]

106. K & R

[silvershadow]

137. K&R nt

[JoePhilly]

138. Lie.

[mhatrw]

158. LOL. What happens when WE decide the race, as we have for the last year? Will that have any effect?

[lovemydog]

160. At what minute mark does 'MSNBC admit'

"We'll SUPPRESS VOTING to help CLINTON on June 7th"?

[stevenleser]

166. Is this the Weaver provided spin of the week? All of a sudden with multiple primaries

on the same day networks aren't allowed to report the earlier ones until all are complete? I didn't see any of you in this thread complaining about this on Super Tuesday or on any other primary day with multiple primaries where one completed before others were done voting.

[Dem2]

191. You know something, you're correct

It seems like Bernie's little weasel, Weaver, is attempting to change the rules to help his candidate.

Hmmmm, why does this sound familiar?

[underthematrix]

176. Bernie supporters again collecting grievances regarding the process

and if he were to win the nomination then what? the process would be legitimate? You can't have it both ways.

[firebrand80]

180. Man, June 7 is going to be funner than I thought nt

[Dem2]

193. This thread is propaganda and not true at all - if anything Weaver is sleazing on the rules

I'd self delete this embarrassment if I were you.