Fla Dem's Journal
Hometown: Boston Area
Home country: USA
Current location: NE Floriduh
Member since: Sun Nov 2, 2003, 11:45 AM
Number of posts: 5,391
Hometown: Boston Area
Home country: USA
Current location: NE Floriduh
Member since: Sun Nov 2, 2003, 11:45 AM
Number of posts: 5,391
"And most of the primaries going forward are open, which I think is much more democratic," she said. "
No Jane, there are only 5 OPEN primaries out of the 14 remaining and 3 of them are caucuses. All the remaining are closed or semi-closed.
Closed = You must be registered as a Democrat.
Semi-Closed = You must be registered as a Democrat/Independent /Undelared, but you must be registered.
In 4 states, the registration deadline has already passed.
Not sure about Guam. Couldn't determined if open or closed.
But in any case, if they haven't had a big "Get Registered" effort in the remaining states we will be hearing how the system once again screwed Bernie in the closed primary states.
"It's also a smarter move for the Democratic Party, because if you close the primary and you only have people that have been in the Democratic Party for years, what you are doing is effectively shutting the door on the millions of people that Bernie has brought into the political process during this election. So we're going to go forward.
Wrong again Jane, people who are really interested in the "Democratic Party" find out when to register and don't just jump on board at the last minute because someone promised them a "Revolution".
Posted by Fla Dem | Thu Apr 28, 2016, 11:22 AM (35 replies)
2383 is the total number of delegates needed to be the outright nominee.
Currently HRC has 1446 and BS has 1200 not counting Super Delegates.
HRC is short of the 2383 target by 937, BS is short by 1183.
There are 1,668 remaining delegates in the primaries thru June 14th.
HRC will have to win just 56% of those delegates to reach 2383
BS will have to win 71% of those delegates to reach 2383.
Hillary will do well in the upcoming primaries, Ct, De, Md Pa, & RI.
For each one of those that BS does not hit the 71% goal, the percentage he needs to win goes up for each successive election/caucus.
As I pointed out this calculation does not include Super Delegates.
If you include the Super Delegates:
HRC currently has 502 Super Delegates.
When added to her Pledged Delegates(1446) she has a total of 1948 delegates.
She only needs 435 Delegates to reach 2383 to clinch the nomination or just 26% of the remaining delegates..
But Bernie's people continue to delude their followers into thinking he can still pull this out.
This from a post in the Bernie Forum this morning:
It is an excerpt from an email one of his followers received last night:
We didn’t get the victory we had hoped for this evening, but what’s important is that it looks like we’re going to win a lot more delegates in New York than any state that voted or caucused before tonight.
So what does that mean? Five important states vote one week from tonight, with more delegates at stake than Hillary Clinton led by coming into tonight. And if we do well next Tuesday, we remain in a position to take the pledged delegate lead when almost 700 delegates are up for grabs on June 7.
As you read this, thousands of supporters are responding to tonight’s results with contributions because they believe we can win. I need to know if I can count on you to add yours.
Ted Devine and Jeff Weaver don't want to give up on their gravy train.
Posted by Fla Dem | Wed Apr 20, 2016, 10:39 AM (21 replies)
This is what she's basing her support on:
"I happen to think that Senator Sanders is 100 percent realistic about his goals for our nation."
Really! 100% realistic goals. Oh how I wish.
Yes, his lofty goal are wonderful and they are just that; GOALS!
We would all like to live in a land of milk and honey,
where there are no wars,
where the body of a 4 year old refugee boy doesn't wash up on the beach,
where there is a decent livable minimum wage of at least $15,
where parents can earn enough money to put food on the table and a roof over the heads of their kids,
where there is no racial, sexual orientation, or religious discrimination,
where the top 1% to 10% of the population doesn't have more wealth than the the bottom 90%
where kids can go to a state university to get a degree and graduate without a mountain of debt
where our infrastructure and transportation systems are as up to date, modern and efficient as those in other developed countries,
where our kids can go to school and we don't have to worry about some monster shooting them all to death,
where for that matter, you can go shopping in Walmart, or go to your workplace and not get shot by some crazy with a gun,
where everyone has access to good healthcare and not have to mortgage their home or spend all their retirement savings for that care,
where there are free and open elections, where everyone gets to vote, with no gerrymandering of districts, no voter id laws that disenfranchise a segment of our communities.
Yes, those are my goals, but what are goals and what can be accomplished in hopefully a 8 year term are two totally different aspirations. Hillary knows what she can get accomplished, she knows how to work and collaborate to get effective change. Will all the goals be met, hell no, but she will put us on a path so that maybe someday, in my life time those goals will be reached.
I do not have the same confidence that Bernie Sanders has the patience, finesse, political skills or experience to accomplish his promises.
Posted by Fla Dem | Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:53 PM (1 replies)
plural noun: super-delegates
(in the Democratic Party) an unelected delegate who is free to support any candidate for the presidential nomination at the party's national convention.
Kim Metcalfe is not an elected official.
The Role of Superdelegates in the Democratic Race
April 4, 2008 6:00 AM ET
It's widely viewed that the Democratic presidential nominee may be decided by the party's superdelegates.
Steve Inskeep talks to Democratic strategist Tad Devine about the origins of superdelegates. They also discuss how a protracted Democratic presidential nomination contest could affect the party's chances in the general election.
Superdelegates Primer: What You Need to Know
What's a superdelegate?
As much of America must know by now, superdelegates are those Democratic Party leaders and elected officials who are automatically delegates to the national convention. In order to win the Democratic presidential nomination, a candidate must win not only the pledged delegates who are apportioned according to the results of the primaries or caucuses, but enough of the superdelegates, who can choose to endorse whichever candidate they wish, regardless of the results of primaries in their state or district.
Who gets to be a superdelegate?
Every Democratic member of the House and Senate, every Democratic governor and members of the Democratic National Committee (such as state party chairs, vice chairs and national committeemen and women) automatically get to be superdelegates. Also included: former Democratic presidents and vice presidents, former Democratic House and Senate leaders, and ex-DNC chairs.
How do superdelegates decide which candidate to support?
Though they aren't bound by the results of primaries or caucuses, superdelegates will often throw their support to whomever they think will make the stronger presidential nominee in the general election. Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar says that's one of the reasons why she decided to endorse Obama on Monday.
Sometimes, pressure back home makes a difference. Georgia Rep. John Lewis, an influential member of Congress, initially endorsed Clinton last year. But his district went overwhelmingly for Obama in the February primary, so Lewis made the unusual decision to switch his support to the Illinois senator.
More at link:
Posted by Fla Dem | Wed Mar 30, 2016, 02:38 PM (0 replies)
Sarandon appeared on Chris Hayes’s MSNBC show Tuesday night, where she made her case for Sanders, citing his record on free trade, prisons, genetically modified foods, and more. Hayes pointed out that elections are choices, and asked whether she would vote for Clinton in a general election matchup against Donald Trump.
“I think Bernie would probably encourage people , because he doesn’t have a lot of ego in this,” she said. “But I think a lot of people are, ‘Sorry, I just can’t bring myself to do that.’” As for herself, “I don’t know. I’m going to see what happens.”
“Really?” an incredulous Hayes asked.
“Some people feel Donald Trump will bring the revolution immediately,” she replied.
Hayes accused her of adopting “the Leninist model of ‘heighten the contradictions,’” and she happily agreed. Isn’t that dangerous, he wondered?
“If you think it’s pragmatic to shore up the status quo right now, then you’re not in touch with the status quo,” she said.
This approach worked so well for Ralph Nader. What did he ever accomplish except to help Bush be appointed President in 2000, So we ended up with 9/11, the Iraq War, and so many anti-progressive Supreme Court decisions. Elections have consequences. Where was the Great Revolution? Oh sure we had Occupy Wall Street, to what end? What did they accomplish?
Where are all these lefties during the mid-terms. Change starts from the bottom up. OWS would have been better off supporting progressives and getting them elected to local and state positions as assembly people, mayors, state reps, senators and congressmen and governors. That's where you effect change. But that's hard work. If and that's a big if, Bernie gets elected, without the senate and congress working with him NOTHING WILL CHANGE. He'll get the same stonewalling Obama faced for his 8 years.
Bernie is not a compromiser, as evidenced by all the bills he voted against that were 90% laws to help "We the People" but may have had an amendment he didn't like so he voted against.
Also in all his years in congress and the senate, he's introduced a ton of legislation, but only 3 bills were ever passed, 2 were for the naming of Post offices in Vt. So he hasn't really shown an ability to build consensus.
So Susan Sarandon can call for Revolution all she wants. Didn't happen in 2000 and won't happen in 2016.
By the way, I will vote for Bernie if he is the nominee. Hopefully he'll make good decisions in nominating Supreme Court Justices.
Posted by Fla Dem | Wed Mar 30, 2016, 10:11 AM (1 replies)
In the above referenced post an excerpt from usuncut, a BS blog said the following:
At the end of the night, Hillary Clinton only increased her delegate lead by 57, leaving Sanders plenty of room to eliminate her advantage in the 24 remaining states. A candidate needs 2,383 delegates to clinch the Democratic nomination, and as of March 16, Clinton only has 1,094 delegates to Sanders’ 774. All of the states most favorable to Clinton have already voted, and the states most favorable to Sanders are still on the calendar. If anyone should be worried about their chances at the nomination waning over time, it’s Hillary Clinton.
Guess math is not their strong suit.
Going into last night's elections the delegate count was HRC/767, BS/553; a 214 delegate advantage for HRC.
After the elections, HRC's delegate count is 1132 to BS's delegate count of 818; a 314 delegate advantage for HRC. She increaed her delegate count by 100, not 57. With 2383 delegates needed to win, HRC is more than halfway there. With Super Delegates she only needs 784 more delegates; while he needs 1539.
TOTAL PLEDGE DELEGATES...........1132......818
Super Delegates......................... 467........26
Total Including Super Delegates.....1,599.....844
Posted by Fla Dem | Wed Mar 16, 2016, 12:34 PM (21 replies)
DU will lose many, many Bernie bugs and trolls. Their work will be done here and they will have failed.
Monday, February 1
Iowa caucus (results) 52 D, 30 R Closed
Tuesday, February 9
New Hampshire (results) 32 D, 23 R Mixed
Saturday, February 20
Nevada caucus (D) 43 Closed
South Carolina (R) 50 Open
Tuesday, February 23
Nevada caucus (R) 30 Closed
Saturday, February 27
South Carolina (D) 59 Open
Tuesday, March 1
Alabama 60 D, 50 R Open
Alaska caucus (R) 28 Closed
American Samoa caucus (D) 10 Open
Arkansas 37 D, 40 R Open
Colorado caucus 79 D, 37 R Closed
Democrats Abroad (Vote March 1 - 8) 17
Georgia 116 D, 76 R Open
Massachusetts 116 D, 42 R Mixed
Minnesota caucus 93 D, 38 R Open
North Dakota caucus (R) 28 Closed
Oklahoma 42 D, 43 R Closed
Tennessee 76 D, 58 R Open
Texas 252 D, 155 R Open
Vermont 26 D, 16 R Open
Virginia 110 D, 49 R Open
Wyoming caucus (R) 29 Closed
Saturday, March 5
Kansas caucus 37 D, 40 R Closed
Kentucky caucus (R) 45 Closed
Louisiana 58 D, 47 R Closed
Maine caucus (R) 23 Closed
Nebraska caucus (D) 30 Closed
Sunday, March 6 Maine caucus (D) 30 Closed
Puerto Rico (R) 23 Open
Tuesday, March 8
Hawaii caucus (R) 19 Closed
Idaho (R) 32 Closed
Michigan 148 D, 59 R Open
Mississippi 41 D, 40 R Open
Democrats Abroad 17 N/A
Saturday, March 12
Guam (R convention) 9 Closed
Northern Marianas caucus (D) 11 Closed
District of Columbia caucus (R) 19 Closed
Tuesday, March 15
Florida 246 D, 99 R Closed
Illinois 182 D, 69 R Open
Missouri 84 D, 52 R Open
North Carolina 121 D, 72 R Mixed
Northern Mariana Islands caucus (R) 9 Closed
Ohio 159 D, 66 R Mixed
Posted by Fla Dem | Wed Feb 17, 2016, 03:24 PM (17 replies)
America needs comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to citizenship.
Enact comprehensive immigration reform to create a pathway to citizenship, keep families together, and enable millions of workers to come out of the shadows.
End family detention and close private immigrant detention centers.
Defend President Obama’s executive actions to provide deportation relief for DREAMers and parents of Americans and lawful residents, and extend those actions to additional persons with sympathetic cases if Congress refuses to act.
“We have to finally and once and for all fix our immigration system – this is a family issue, it’s an economic issue too, but it is at heart a family issue. If we claim we are for family then we have to pull together and resolve the outstanding issues around our broken immigration system. The American people support comprehensive immigration reform not just because it’s the right thing to do—and it is—but because it will strengthen families, strengthen our economy, and strengthen our country. That’s why we can’t wait any longer, we can’t wait any longer for a path to full and equal citizenship.”
HILLARY CLINTON, MAY 5, 2015
Supporting the DREAM Act. Hillary Clinton has called passage of DREAM Act “long overdue.” This legislation, which would allow immigrant children who “have demonstrated good moral character, and are pursuing a college education or have enlisted in the military, the… opportunity to earn legal status in this country,” was cosponsored by Clinton in 2003, 2005, and 2007.
Fighting for comprehensive immigration reform. Hillary Clinton has long been an advocate for comprehensive immigration reform. She was one of the two cosponsors of Senator Ted Kennedy’s 2004 bill, the S.O.L.V.E. Act, and during her time in the Senate she continued to cosponsor and vote for comprehensive immigration reform legislation. As a presidential candidate in 2008, Hillary called for “a path to legalization” to bring people “out of the shadows,” and she pledged that, if elected, she would introduce a plan for immigration reform “in the first 100 days” of her presidency. As Sec. Clinton recently told a tearful young undocumented immigrant, “I’m a huge supporter of immigration reform and a path to citizenship and will continue to advocate for that.”
Posted by Fla Dem | Thu Feb 11, 2016, 05:50 PM (0 replies)
The Case for Hillary
02/10/2016 11:13 am ET
The case for Hillary Clinton is mostly a matter of rebutting the case against her. Once that's done, you're simply left with the most qualified candidate, and someone who is, by all reality-based measures, progressive (ranked the tenth most liberal senator). And just as important, someone who is capable of achieving results (I'll conclude with the case against Sanders, and there's a very, very strong case to make against him).
We'll start with this specific example, which I think is illustrative of the sorts of attacks we see made on Hillary. It begins with this video of an interview with Elizabeth Warren that's been making its rounds on the internet, you may have seen it:
t's worth watching, but I'll summarize. Warren tells a story about the bankruptcy bill initially supported by the Clinton administration in the 1990s. Warren wrote an op-ed opposing the bill on the grounds that it offered deadbeat dads a mechanism for cheating their ex-wives out of child support, along with a few other issues.
After the op-ed was published, Hillary phoned Warren requesting a meeting. They met in private, and Warren proceeded to educate Hillary on this issue. She said that Hillary was a "quick study" and really "got it." Hillary returned to Washington, and by all accounts, single-handedly turned around the administration's support of this legislation. When the bill reached Clinton's desk, he vetoed it.
"The case for Hillary Clinton is mostly a matter of rebutting the case against her. Once that's done, you're simply left with the most qualified candidate..."
So far, this is a glowing account -- everything you would want in a leader. She's engaged, she cares deeply about protecting people, she listens, she's smart, she takes action, and gets results. It's hard to imagine a Republican doing anything like this -- actually reading a newspaper, caring what other smart people have to say, listening to those people honestly and seriously, and then taking action out of compassion and empathy for those in need of help.
The second part of the interview is where it gets quite damning. According to Warren, First Lady Clinton became Senator Clinton of New York, and then things changed. The same bankruptcy bill came through congress, and this time Hillary voted for it. When Warren is asked what changed, she replies (paraphrasing), "Hillary started receiving all this money from Wall Street, and they became her constituency." Well, that would be a very dramatic transformation, indeed.
Now if you loathe Hillary Clinton, and are mostly interested in validating that worldview, then you can stop reading. You have what you need. You can go and post that video to Facebook and talk about how corrupt and horrible she is. But if you'd like to gain a broader understanding of things, continue on.
So what happened? Did Hillary vote for this bill because she became beholden to special interests on Wall Street? What excuse does she have? Here's her explanation in her own words:
Read More at link, long but excellent OP.
Posted by Fla Dem | Thu Feb 11, 2016, 04:39 PM (6 replies)
But as a 25 year member of congress and the senate, he knows deep down in his heart how difficult or impossible it will be for him to get even a fraction of what he is promising accomplished. However, if he is lighting a fire under all these young people who have jumped on his bandwagon so that they will carry forward and vote for Democrats in the mid terms, and work for reforms in the years ahead, then mazel tov ! He has performed a great service to the progressive cause even if he's not the nominee.
Posted by Fla Dem | Thu Feb 11, 2016, 12:44 PM (0 replies)