Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:13 PM
Bubzer (4,211 posts)
Sanders bumped off D.C. ballot
Source: Politico
As a result of a registration error committed by the District of Columbia Democratic Party, Sen. Bernie Sanders won't appear on the Washington D.C. ballot. The Vermont senator's name won't appear on the ballot because the party submitted the requisite paperwork one day too late, according to NBC's Washington affiliate, News4. Both the Sanders' campaign and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton's campaign paid the $2,500 fee to appear on the June 14 Democratic primary ballot on time but the district's Democratic Party failed to inform the Washington D.C. Board of Elections until March 17, one day after the deadline. There are still avenues for Sanders to make the ballot -- Anita Bonds, the chairwoman of the Democratic Party in D.C., told News4 that the problem could be resolved via an emergency vote of the D.C. City Council. Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/bernie-sanders-district-columbia-ballot-221398 I smell a rat
|
181 replies, 16203 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
Bubzer | Mar 2016 | OP |
2pooped2pop | Mar 2016 | #1 | |
kristopher | Mar 2016 | #54 | |
chknltl | Mar 2016 | #77 | |
AgerolanAmerican | Mar 2016 | #89 | |
cactusfractal | Mar 2016 | #152 | |
elleng | Mar 2016 | #2 | |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | #5 | |
elleng | Mar 2016 | #9 | |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | #12 | |
JonLeibowitz | Mar 2016 | #26 | |
1StrongBlackMan | Mar 2016 | #85 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #91 | |
elleng | Mar 2016 | #112 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #114 | |
elleng | Mar 2016 | #118 | |
DebbieCDC | Mar 2016 | #131 | |
elleng | Mar 2016 | #132 | |
tabasco | Mar 2016 | #145 | |
elleng | Mar 2016 | #149 | |
Pharaoh | Mar 2016 | #37 | |
Elmer S. E. Dump | Mar 2016 | #62 | |
anigbrowl | Mar 2016 | #153 | |
DamnYankeeInHouston | Mar 2016 | #171 | |
anigbrowl | Mar 2016 | #172 | |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | #175 | |
anigbrowl | Mar 2016 | #176 | |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | #177 | |
anigbrowl | Mar 2016 | #178 | |
Bubzer | Mar 2016 | #11 | |
elleng | Mar 2016 | #16 | |
Bubzer | Mar 2016 | #19 | |
snagglepuss | Mar 2016 | #3 | |
onehandle | Mar 2016 | #4 | |
retrowire | Mar 2016 | #14 | |
Chasstev365 | Mar 2016 | #29 | |
passiveporcupine | Mar 2016 | #38 | |
dchill | Mar 2016 | #110 | |
Raster | Mar 2016 | #173 | |
FailureToCommunicate | Mar 2016 | #126 | |
Betty Karlson | Mar 2016 | #144 | |
CrispyQ | Mar 2016 | #146 | |
rhett o rick | Mar 2016 | #150 | |
PFunk1 | Mar 2016 | #6 | |
SFnomad | Mar 2016 | #32 | |
passiveporcupine | Mar 2016 | #56 | |
Ed Suspicious | Mar 2016 | #64 | |
SFnomad | Mar 2016 | #68 | |
passiveporcupine | Mar 2016 | #72 | |
SFnomad | Mar 2016 | #74 | |
Dont call me Shirley | Mar 2016 | #169 | |
1StrongBlackMan | Mar 2016 | #86 | |
SFnomad | Mar 2016 | #108 | |
larrysanders | Mar 2016 | #135 | |
onecaliberal | Mar 2016 | #105 | |
Post removed | Mar 2016 | #109 | |
PFunk1 | Mar 2016 | #174 | |
stopbush | Mar 2016 | #35 | |
Fuddnik | Mar 2016 | #50 | |
stopbush | Mar 2016 | #116 | |
anigbrowl | Mar 2016 | #155 | |
passiveporcupine | Mar 2016 | #73 | |
treestar | Mar 2016 | #99 | |
1StrongBlackMan | Mar 2016 | #84 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #92 | |
1StrongBlackMan | Mar 2016 | #102 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #113 | |
1StrongBlackMan | Mar 2016 | #119 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #158 | |
1StrongBlackMan | Mar 2016 | #159 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #160 | |
1StrongBlackMan | Mar 2016 | #161 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #162 | |
1StrongBlackMan | Mar 2016 | #164 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #167 | |
1StrongBlackMan | Mar 2016 | #168 | |
stonecutter357 | Mar 2016 | #156 | |
Omaha Steve | Mar 2016 | #7 | |
elleng | Mar 2016 | #10 | |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | #15 | |
Cali_Democrat | Mar 2016 | #22 | |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | #31 | |
Cali_Democrat | Mar 2016 | #36 | |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | #59 | |
Cali_Democrat | Mar 2016 | #66 | |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | #67 | |
AllyCat | Mar 2016 | #79 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #94 | |
larrysanders | Mar 2016 | #136 | |
bahrbearian | Mar 2016 | #141 | |
stonecutter357 | Mar 2016 | #157 | |
LiberalLovinLug | Mar 2016 | #154 | |
kstewart33 | Mar 2016 | #47 | |
jeff47 | Mar 2016 | #55 | |
kstewart33 | Mar 2016 | #70 | |
passiveporcupine | Mar 2016 | #61 | |
hrmjustin | Mar 2016 | #8 | |
berni_mccoy | Mar 2016 | #13 | |
merrily | Mar 2016 | #17 | |
kstewart33 | Mar 2016 | #49 | |
merrily | Mar 2016 | #52 | |
AzDar | Mar 2016 | #83 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #96 | |
SoapBox | Mar 2016 | #18 | |
alittlelark | Mar 2016 | #20 | |
Bubzer | Mar 2016 | #24 | |
alittlelark | Mar 2016 | #28 | |
Bubzer | Mar 2016 | #41 | |
alittlelark | Mar 2016 | #71 | |
Bubzer | Mar 2016 | #107 | |
alittlelark | Mar 2016 | #121 | |
Bubzer | Mar 2016 | #122 | |
alittlelark | Mar 2016 | #124 | |
Eric J in MN | Mar 2016 | #21 | |
ananda | Mar 2016 | #23 | |
Old Codger | Mar 2016 | #25 | |
bvf | Mar 2016 | #27 | |
stopbush | Mar 2016 | #30 | |
NowSam | Mar 2016 | #33 | |
Baitball Blogger | Mar 2016 | #34 | |
ripcord | Mar 2016 | #39 | |
no_hypocrisy | Mar 2016 | #40 | |
Peace Patriot | Mar 2016 | #42 | |
JimDandy | Mar 2016 | #60 | |
Sophiegirl | Mar 2016 | #138 | |
klook | Mar 2016 | #69 | |
Safe as Milk | Mar 2016 | #165 | |
Fuddnik | Mar 2016 | #43 | |
GoneFishin | Mar 2016 | #44 | |
pnwmom | Mar 2016 | #45 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #97 | |
pnwmom | Mar 2016 | #100 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #111 | |
pnwmom | Mar 2016 | #115 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #117 | |
pnwmom | Mar 2016 | #120 | |
RichVRichV | Mar 2016 | #181 | |
Hotler | Mar 2016 | #46 | |
EndElectoral | Mar 2016 | #48 | |
blackspade | Mar 2016 | #51 | |
silverweb | Mar 2016 | #53 | |
Elmer S. E. Dump | Mar 2016 | #57 | |
Ed Suspicious | Mar 2016 | #58 | |
dubyadiprecession | Mar 2016 | #63 | |
bluestateguy | Mar 2016 | #65 | |
zentrum | Mar 2016 | #75 | |
OnlinePoker | Mar 2016 | #76 | |
pnwmom | Mar 2016 | #78 | |
Sunlei | Mar 2016 | #80 | |
BlandGrenade | Mar 2016 | #81 | |
Skittles | Mar 2016 | #101 | |
n2doc | Mar 2016 | #82 | |
TexasBushwhacker | Mar 2016 | #87 | |
Ford_Prefect | Mar 2016 | #88 | |
JustABozoOnThisBus | Mar 2016 | #142 | |
MrMickeysMom | Mar 2016 | #90 | |
treestar | Mar 2016 | #93 | |
billhicks76 | Mar 2016 | #98 | |
mishi48.59 | Mar 2016 | #95 | |
AgerolanAmerican | Mar 2016 | #133 | |
WhiteTara | Mar 2016 | #103 | |
Kittycat | Mar 2016 | #128 | |
Beartracks | Mar 2016 | #104 | |
tartan2 | Mar 2016 | #106 | |
Zira | Mar 2016 | #123 | |
alittlelark | Mar 2016 | #125 | |
bbgrunt | Mar 2016 | #127 | |
kadaholo | Mar 2016 | #129 | |
Marrah_G | Mar 2016 | #130 | |
CountAllVotes | Mar 2016 | #134 | |
larrysanders | Mar 2016 | #137 | |
Sophiegirl | Mar 2016 | #139 | |
classykaren | Mar 2016 | #140 | |
mariawr | Mar 2016 | #143 | |
MisterP | Mar 2016 | #163 | |
valerief | Mar 2016 | #147 | |
saidsimplesimon | Mar 2016 | #148 | |
PatrynXX | Mar 2016 | #151 | |
Safe as Milk | Mar 2016 | #166 | |
StevieM | Mar 2016 | #180 | |
Dont call me Shirley | Mar 2016 | #170 | |
StevieM | Mar 2016 | #179 |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:15 PM
2pooped2pop (5,420 posts)
1. there have been lots of rats
we are not a democracy.
|
Response to 2pooped2pop (Reply #1)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:23 PM
kristopher (29,797 posts)
54. Rats that all run in the same direction...
Response to 2pooped2pop (Reply #1)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:59 PM
chknltl (10,558 posts)
77. Arithmetic
My grade school teacher taught us to spell it: A Rat In The House May Eat The Ice Cream. It seams soooo fitting given all the ice cream that's up for grabs and all those rats salivating over it.
|
Response to chknltl (Reply #77)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:33 PM
AgerolanAmerican (1,000 posts)
89. nom nom nom
I'll have the spam without so much rat in it
|
Response to AgerolanAmerican (Reply #89)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:44 PM
cactusfractal (331 posts)
152. BING!
One slice of strawberry tart without so much rat in it later...
Appalling! ![]() |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:16 PM
elleng (104,530 posts)
2. A dumb bureaucratic snafu,
fairly typical in DC, likely to be remedied easily.
Chewed over here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511611471 |
Response to elleng (Reply #2)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:19 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
5. And it's purely coincidental that such bureaucratic snafus never affect the Clinton campaign.
![]() |
Response to jeff47 (Reply #5)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:21 PM
elleng (104,530 posts)
9. I think I read, somewhere among the 'stuff,'
that Sanders campaign submitted some docs 30 or so minutes late.
|
Response to elleng (Reply #9)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:22 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
12. Nope. Both campaigns submitted their documents before the party's deadline.
The party was then supposed to submit the candidates to the DC board of elections.
Some stories say Clinton's was submitted on time, Sanders was submitted late. Now there's a story claiming both candidates were submitted late, but only Sanders was challenged. |
Response to jeff47 (Reply #12)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:39 PM
JonLeibowitz (6,282 posts)
26. There is some confusion because
while both candidates (apparently) submitted their docs on time to the party, the party didn't deliver the docs on time. But only Sanders is challenged. There is some confusion in the news stories out there now due to the two deadlines. Sanders' campaign didn't screw anything up though, from what I can read.
|
Response to jeff47 (Reply #12)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:24 PM
1StrongBlackMan (31,849 posts)
85. Do you have a link to ...
the "stories"?
|
Response to elleng (Reply #9)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:35 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
91. Wrong!!! Think You Read?
Nice one
|
Response to billhicks76 (Reply #91)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:25 PM
elleng (104,530 posts)
112. There really is no need for nastiness, hicks.
A lot was posted and 'announced.'
|
Response to elleng (Reply #112)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:31 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
114. Well The People's Anger Is Rising
It's amazing that it's becoming equally directed at democrats...BY DEMOCRATS. Internecine warfare happens when corruption and sell-outs become too much for average people to bear. Hillary is 100% the "Let Them Eat Cake" candidate.
|
Response to billhicks76 (Reply #114)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:40 PM
elleng (104,530 posts)
118. I agree, and I understand.
I found what I'd seen and referred to:
'Confusion appeared to reign late Wednesday over just what happened and whether it could be fixed. D.C. Democratic Party Chairwoman Anita Bonds told The Washington Times that the party’s primary plan, which included the paperwork for all candidates, was submitted by 7 p.m. on the 16th. The D.C. Board of Elections offices closes at 4:45 p.m.' http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/30/bernie-sanders-left-dc-primary-ballot-after-democr/ As a former DC resident for 20+ years, I'm all too familiar with bureaucratic 'snafus' like this; they occur in many facets of life and business in DC, so I'm not surprised, but I am dismayed. I expect this will be corrected. |
Response to elleng (Reply #118)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:11 AM
DebbieCDC (2,538 posts)
131. Former 20 yr DC resident here too
I saw it time and time and time again. The DC bureaucracy is eff'ed to the max.
|
Response to DebbieCDC (Reply #131)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:19 AM
elleng (104,530 posts)
132. Hi, neighbor!
(In southern MD now.)
Yes, eff'ed to the max. |
Response to elleng (Reply #9)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 09:52 AM
tabasco (22,974 posts)
145. I think I read somewhere that my farts smell like eau de cologne. n/t
Response to tabasco (Reply #145)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:32 AM
elleng (104,530 posts)
149. That IS a lie.
THIS is what I read:
'Confusion appeared to reign late Wednesday over just what happened and whether it could be fixed. D.C. Democratic Party Chairwoman Anita Bonds told The Washington Times that the party’s primary plan, which included the paperwork for all candidates, was submitted by 7 p.m. on the 16th. The D.C. Board of Elections offices closes at 4:45 p.m.' http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/30/bernie-sanders-left-dc-primary-ballot-after-democr/ |
Response to Pharaoh (Reply #37)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:28 PM
Elmer S. E. Dump (5,751 posts)
62. BBBBBRRRRRRAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
![]() |
Response to jeff47 (Reply #5)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 01:06 PM
anigbrowl (13,889 posts)
153. That could simply mean the Clinton campaign is a bit better organized
I hate bureaucracy myself, so when I have to deal with it I tend to over-prepare so as not to have to put up with snafus. In this case that might as simple as a follow-up call every day to make sure the paperwork has been submitted on time. If you see bogeymen behind every problem then maybe the problem actually lies with you.
|
Response to anigbrowl (Reply #153)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 04:38 PM
DamnYankeeInHouston (1,365 posts)
171. Both Bernie and Hillary submitted docs and dollars on time.
The Democratic Party turned the paperwork in late for both candidates. Only Bernie's paperwork was challenged. There has been no reason given. It shows the Democratic Party to be both inept and working for one candidate.
|
Response to DamnYankeeInHouston (Reply #171)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 05:17 PM
anigbrowl (13,889 posts)
172. Try reading past the headline next time. nt
Response to anigbrowl (Reply #172)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:00 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
175. THAT is what your argument is?
You post your "call every day" bullshit and then demand the other poster read past the headline?
Both campaigns were submitted to the DC Board of Elections by the DC Democratic party on the same day. And that day was one day late. But the Clinton campaign was organized enough to get a false submission date entered on their form! http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511619539 |
Response to jeff47 (Reply #175)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:04 PM
anigbrowl (13,889 posts)
176. Yawn
Allegations are not facts, and I have better things to do than respond to rude, aggressive people. It is plain you are looking for a fight rather than a discussion, but you will have to look elsewhere.
|
Response to anigbrowl (Reply #176)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:05 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
177. Yeah, election fraud. Who cares?
It will be lots of fun linking to this when you get angry at Republicans committing election fraud.
|
Response to jeff47 (Reply #177)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:13 PM
anigbrowl (13,889 posts)
178. Enjoy yourself, as I'm unlikely to see it
Frankly I rarely found your posts worth reading in the past and I'm sure you feel the same about mine, so I'm not going to bother doing so from now on.
|
Response to elleng (Reply #2)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:22 PM
Bubzer (4,211 posts)
11. Accompanied with a lot of other dumb bureaucratic snafus... awfully convienient
Response to Bubzer (Reply #11)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:23 PM
elleng (104,530 posts)
16. Happens often in DC, unfortunately.
I lived there for 20 years, and am very aware.
|
Response to elleng (Reply #16)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:25 PM
Bubzer (4,211 posts)
19. It's made to happen in DC, quite often.
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:16 PM
snagglepuss (12,704 posts)
3. Talk about slime. This is disgusting.
![]() |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:18 PM
onehandle (51,122 posts)
4. It's A CONSPIRACY! nt
Response to onehandle (Reply #4)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:22 PM
retrowire (10,345 posts)
14. Looks like a fact to me. nt
Response to onehandle (Reply #4)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:44 PM
Chasstev365 (5,191 posts)
29. How times will you dismiss or rationalize Bernie being screwed?
Everytime it's just a coincidence!
|
Response to onehandle (Reply #4)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:02 PM
passiveporcupine (8,175 posts)
38. If Sander's campaign turned it in on time and the DNC screwed it up for him but not Clinton
You can bet your bippy they screwed up. But then, that was to be expected, wasn't it?
And if it happened to Clinton and not Sanders, you'd be screaming holy hell! |
Response to passiveporcupine (Reply #38)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:16 PM
dchill (26,871 posts)
110. The DNC is there for Clinton.
Response to onehandle (Reply #4)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 10:28 PM
FailureToCommunicate (11,974 posts)
126. Posting the same comment in every thread about Bernie merely shows
your lack of seriousness on this site dedicated to political discussion.
You must think it make you sound clever. In fact it has the opposite effect. |
Response to onehandle (Reply #4)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 09:46 AM
Betty Karlson (7,231 posts)
144. Yes, someone very close to your candidate is conspiring.
And your candidate seems happy about it. Shame.
|
Response to onehandle (Reply #4)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 10:13 AM
CrispyQ (29,293 posts)
146. It could be simple incompetence.
But the level of incompetence we've seen in the democratic party's process this election is staggering & it leaves one questioning the democratic process. Nothing squashes enthusiasm like thinking your vote doesn't count. I haven't decided if dem leadership thinks they can win without the left or if they are just so damned confident we will fall in line like we always have.
|
Response to onehandle (Reply #4)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:05 PM
rhett o rick (55,981 posts)
150. Glad you admit you recognize it. Some live in bubbles pretending that there are no
conspiracies and when someone suggests such, they stick fingers in ears, and close eyes and say "Clinton is honest, Clinton is honest."
All of the shenanigans have been against Sanders. Some say coincidence and, like you others say bullshit, it's a conspiracy to keep a Progressive out of the WH. Those with money think they are entitled to get their way and sadly some, so-called, Democrats seem to believe them. Politics is all about conspiracies. Think Tanks are really Conspiracy Tanks. Karl Rove makes a living conspiring and it wouldn't surprise me if he wasn't on loan from the Bush Crime Family to help friend Clinton out. |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:19 PM
PFunk1 (185 posts)
6. And they wonder why Sander's folks wont vote for Clinton if she wins the GE.
Crap like this wont help matters any.
|
Response to PFunk1 (Reply #6)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:45 PM
SFnomad (3,473 posts)
32. If Clinton wins the GE ... she is the President, we won't care if you voted for her or not
Of course, it doesn't matter than this isn't Clinton or her campaign's fault. You need to have your outrage and it doesn't matter what the facts are.
|
Response to SFnomad (Reply #32)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:25 PM
passiveporcupine (8,175 posts)
56. Of course it's not Clinton's fault. Did anyone say it was?
It was the DNC's fault, and ooops...they support Clinton. Big woopsie!
And again, if this happened to Clinton, do you really think you Hill supporters wouldn't be going apeshit over this? |
Response to passiveporcupine (Reply #56)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:28 PM
Ed Suspicious (8,879 posts)
64. They would, and if it went the same way for her I'd call dirty pool on it even though
I don't want her to win. Principles, man.
|
Response to passiveporcupine (Reply #56)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:34 PM
SFnomad (3,473 posts)
68. Re: Did anyone say it was [Clinton's fault]?
Well, let's put it this way ... the poster I replied to said:
And they wonder why Sander's folks wont vote for Clinton if she wins the GE. Either the poster is blaming Clinton for it and taking it out on her because of it, even though she had nothing to do with it ... or ... the poster is taking it out on Clinton even though they know she doesn't have anything to do with it, like the way the Bush administration invaded a country even though they had nothing to do with the terrorism that was used as an excuse, to invade the country. Neither option is really a good one, is it? |
Response to SFnomad (Reply #68)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:51 PM
passiveporcupine (8,175 posts)
72. No, they are taking it out on Hillary because the DNC is working for her
And this is the kind of shit they pull to make certain she is the favorite.
It is and isn't Hillary's fault. She knows what Debbie is doing. She is not blind to the favoritism. |
Response to passiveporcupine (Reply #72)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:58 PM
SFnomad (3,473 posts)
74. What a load of garbage n/t
Response to SFnomad (Reply #74)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 04:30 PM
Dont call me Shirley (10,998 posts)
169. Debbie's words and actions have been loud in terms of her support for Hillary,
Response to passiveporcupine (Reply #56)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:28 PM
1StrongBlackMan (31,849 posts)
86. What does the DNC has to do with this?
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #86)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:12 PM
SFnomad (3,473 posts)
108. The DNC has nothing to do with this, as far as I can tell, though there isn't much information here
It sounds like it was a royal screw-up by the DC Democratic Party. And there are perpetually outraged Sanders supporters that now have another reason to take it out on Hillary, even though she apparently didn't have anything to do with it either.
|
Response to SFnomad (Reply #108)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 05:23 AM
larrysanders (19 posts)
135. …not every Sanders supporter
It's a BIG screwup.
NON-constructive criticism doesn't help Dems in the long run. |
Response to SFnomad (Reply #32)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:02 PM
onecaliberal (19,560 posts)
105. She CANT win without us; but you proceed please....
Especially when 67% say she's a liar
|
Response to onecaliberal (Reply #105)
Post removed
Response to SFnomad (Reply #32)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 07:27 PM
PFunk1 (185 posts)
174. Bad choice of words, I ment the primary.
But with that correction my original post still stands
|
Response to PFunk1 (Reply #6)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:47 PM
stopbush (23,535 posts)
35. Why would you assume Clinton had anything to do with this snafu?
There's no upside for her campaign to screw around with something like this.
A stupid mistake by the D Dem Party that will be fixed before the ink is dry. This is the DU member formerly known as stopbush.
|
Response to stopbush (Reply #35)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:19 PM
Fuddnik (8,846 posts)
50. Occams Razor.
The simplest explanation is usually correct.
And with the history of this campaign and that candidate, it's pretty simple. |
Response to Fuddnik (Reply #50)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:33 PM
stopbush (23,535 posts)
116. Considering that Bernie's campaign has been flagged
for campaign donation irregularities, and that they didn't bother building a ground game in many of the statES they've lost, and the fact that they ended up losing half the states they predicted they'd win, Occam's Razor points to the gross incompetence of the Sanders campaign as being the likely reason they missed the ballot in DC.
This is the DU member formerly known as stopbush.
|
Response to Fuddnik (Reply #50)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 01:14 PM
anigbrowl (13,889 posts)
155. This doesn't strike me as the simplest explanation, which is why also like Hanlon's razor:
'Never ascribe to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.'
As I've gotten older I've found that speculating about people's motivations is a complete waste of time in most cases, for the same reason that people jumping to conclusions about why you or I might do something are usually incorrect. Instead I focus on the origin of the problem and whether and how it could be corrected, as well as developing a strategy to ensure it doesn't recur in the future. It is not a good use of my time, nor yours, to do work on imagining hypothetical motivations that can never be tested or proved. |
Response to stopbush (Reply #35)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:52 PM
passiveporcupine (8,175 posts)
73. I guess we will have to see how it turns out. n/t
Response to stopbush (Reply #35)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:52 PM
treestar (78,302 posts)
99. It's to be expected.
Anything that goes wrong for Bernie must be a Clintonian Conspiracy!!!
![]() |
Response to PFunk1 (Reply #6)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:22 PM
1StrongBlackMan (31,849 posts)
84. What does HRC have to do with this?
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #84)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:39 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
92. Sounding More Like A Republican Excusing Every Election Fraud Example
Seriously do you live in a bubble? How do you expect anyone to take you seriously. A complaint was made against Sanders and not Clinton. Is this the rethuglicans fault again? You have lost every shred of credibility you hoped you ever had.
|
Response to billhicks76 (Reply #92)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:58 PM
1StrongBlackMan (31,849 posts)
102. Bullshit, my question is not an excuse ...
Seriously do you live in a bubble?
Yes ... It's commonly called, the real world. How do you expect anyone to take you seriously.
I really don't care if people that default to some, and any, conspiracy take me seriously, or not. Is this the rethuglicans fault again?
I don't know; but, that wasn't my question ... was it? You have lost every shred of credibility you hoped you ever had.
Again, I will have no problem sleeping tonight. |
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #102)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:28 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
113. Avoided Point Again
DWS and party filed paperwork late and someone complained about Sanders and not Clinton. You don't know if it was a republican? Really? In DC? There are no republican residents for the most part and only someone with inside knowledge could do this as evident by a 1-0 vote. It only took one complaint as Clinton campaign surely knew. 20 delegates at stake. You must think the tooth fairy did this. You may not care about your credibility and that is good because you have none.
|
Response to billhicks76 (Reply #113)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:40 PM
1StrongBlackMan (31,849 posts)
119. Uh ...
DWS and party filed paperwork late
No, she didn't. DWS had nothing to do with this. You talk about "credibility" and don't know the basics of how local Parties work and that lead you to ignorant outrage. |
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #119)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 02:01 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
158. Yeah I'm Sure DWS Doesn't Coordinate Locally
Last edited Thu Mar 31, 2016, 02:41 PM - Edit history (1) Especially in DC during a heated election. Just like Karl Rove didn't coordinate in state house elections because he ran a national organization.
|
Response to billhicks76 (Reply #158)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 02:13 PM
1StrongBlackMan (31,849 posts)
159. OkAY.
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #159)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 02:44 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
160. Karl Rove Has Slipped Up And Supported Hillary Tactics Before Too
But then again the Bush family is close intimate friends with the Clintons. The opposition is just a charade for the commoners.
|
Response to billhicks76 (Reply #160)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 02:46 PM
1StrongBlackMan (31,849 posts)
161. Well, Alrighty! ...
We're getting our full tinfoil on!
Shhh ... Illuminati!!! |
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #161)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 02:53 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
162. Wow. That's Extreme
I thought you were at least slightly informed. I guess it's your credibility problem getting to you. The Clintons became close with the Bush family in '81. That's a fact. And beyond DC cocktail parties. Any informed democrat knows this. IranContra was pivotal.
I watched every one of those IranContra hearings in 1987. Did you? I spoke with congressman on that committee who told me what happened when they went to executive session behind closed doors. You have no idea what you're talking about. I also was raised in an elitist republican family in NY and Maine and I assure you these are not fairy tales. Alliances with the Clintons were made in 1981 after he ran for governor again. I can find photos for you since you obviously can't do your own homework. An easy one for you is the photo at Bush's PRIVATE retreat in Maine in '83 sitting Bill, Bush Sr and the racist George Wallace. Clinton pretended to barely know Bush in 92. He was "allowed" to be the nominee after Perot decided to be a spoiler in 92. It's not a surprise that after 2000 Bush Sr referred to him and Hillary as honorary members of the Bush family. Keep spreading naivite. You are for real right? |
Response to billhicks76 (Reply #162)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 03:00 PM
1StrongBlackMan (31,849 posts)
164. Alex Jones considers himself, "Informed", too ...
and can spin all sorts of connections.
But I guess you are slightly better ... none of your connections (thus far) involve reptilians or chem-trails. |
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #164)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 04:18 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
167. Ah Yes...Deflection and Obfuscation
So typical. Invoking the racist, sexist xenophobic Alex Jones when you can't respond to facts? That's like a child. That's what sock-puppets or people with no argument do. No we aren't talking about Alex Jones. What's next calling anyone who disagrees with you a Ron Paul supporter? What's nests comparing us all to Bill Cosby? Conspiracy? So pathetic. You do know tens of thousands of people are locked up in federal prison on conspiracy charges alone right? My guess is you don't care one bit and are quite alright with the drug war destroying families and eroding our rights. I think it's you who needs to take off the tin foil hat and get out of your moms basement.
|
Response to billhicks76 (Reply #167)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 04:20 PM
1StrongBlackMan (31,849 posts)
168. Yeah ... Okay.
Response to billhicks76 (Reply #113)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 01:17 PM
stonecutter357 (12,119 posts)
156. "credibility" from you....
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:19 PM
Omaha Steve (78,626 posts)
7. At the end of the article
There are still avenues for Sanders to make the ballot -- Anita Bonds, the chairwoman of the Democratic Party in D.C., told News4 that the problem could be resolved via an emergency vote of the D.C. City Council. In a statement, the Sanders campaign said it expected to get on the ballot. |
Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #7)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:21 PM
elleng (104,530 posts)
10. Yes. This surely will happen, Steve.
Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #7)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:23 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
15. The fact that it can be fixed does not change that it should not need to be fixed. (nt)
Response to jeff47 (Reply #15)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:31 PM
Cali_Democrat (30,439 posts)
22. Mistakes happen.
This one will be resolved and Bernie will appear on the ballot.
|
Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #22)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:45 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
31. When all of those mistakes by the party apparatus happen to only affect one candidate
are we not supposed to notice the pattern?
|
Response to jeff47 (Reply #31)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:49 PM
Cali_Democrat (30,439 posts)
36. What other mistakes by the party are you referring to? nt
Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #36)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:26 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
59. There's been several.
How bout the erroneous delegate counts in IA that all favored Clinton? Must've just been an honest mistake!!!
|
Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #66)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:34 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
67. What sane, logical explanation do you have for all of those counting errors going one way?
How 'bout your sane, logical explanation for only Sanders getting left off the DC ballot?
Mistakes are random. When these problems all go one way, they aren't random. |
Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #66)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:11 PM
AllyCat (12,206 posts)
79. Sane and logical would have shown Clinton's name off the ballot too.
Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #66)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:41 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
94. Should Be A Photo Of A Coincidence Theorist
Sorry but facts ruin your petty analysis. Just like they always did to Bush.
|
Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #66)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 05:27 AM
larrysanders (19 posts)
136. wish the site had cat smilies :laughing:
![]() |
Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #66)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 07:19 AM
bahrbearian (13,464 posts)
141. Mistakes happen, like the Iraq War
![]() |
Response to bahrbearian (Reply #141)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 01:19 PM
stonecutter357 (12,119 posts)
157. this one is even more disgusting .
![]() |
Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #66)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 01:10 PM
LiberalLovinLug (12,363 posts)
154. Because the word "conspiracy" in the dictionary is a misprint?
And the term "theory" is also added. Can't even accept the possibility of any authoritarian entity pulling one over on you? Why is this so difficult to comprehend?
Its as if you refuse to believe the Dictionary. News Flash: Its all true! There is actually a term that defines when two or more people conspire together for power or money or some other advantage over others. Furthermore, there are examples in US historical fact when conspiracies happened! Project MKUltra Operation Northwoods Operation Mockingbird COINTELPRO and others. Bush Sr. and the false flag of babies dying on the floor of hospitals in Kuwait to start the first Gulf War. NSA threatening service providers to allow them to eavesdrop unconstitutionally. ![]() |
Response to jeff47 (Reply #31)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:16 PM
kstewart33 (6,551 posts)
47. Jeff, I think the Bernie supporters see a pattern in everything.
Corruption wherever Bernie doesn't do particularly well in a state primary, corruption at the ballot box, corruption whenever the media does a story about Bernie that isn't worshipping enough.
And corruption in the DC situation. Ah, the humanity! |
Response to kstewart33 (Reply #47)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:24 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
55. Again, when the problems
from the party apparatus all go one way, that's a pretty obvious pattern.
Don't win an election? That's not the party apparatus. Erroneous delegate counts get entered in IA that just happen to favor Clinton? DC Party happens to file late? Those are the party apparatus. |
Response to jeff47 (Reply #55)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:49 PM
kstewart33 (6,551 posts)
70. Jeff, Bernie will be on the ballot.
Check the thread I just posted on the Primaries forum (WP: Bernie will be on the ballot).
|
Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #22)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:27 PM
passiveporcupine (8,175 posts)
61. Yeah, especially when they are in Hillary's favor.
I'm not going to hold my breath until Sanders is back on the ticket.
And no I don't blame Hillary for this. I blame Debbie. |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:20 PM
hrmjustin (71,265 posts)
8. Hopefully they fix this.
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:22 PM
berni_mccoy (22,175 posts)
13. The DNC stinks to high Hell
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:24 PM
merrily (45,251 posts)
17. Two candidates in the running and left one off--and lo and behold, that one was not Hillary.
Lo and behold, it was the same candidate who's been getting screwed by state party officials in one primary and caucus after another, starting with Iowa, the same candidate that has been shafted by the DNC's debate schedule, who's been spoken about poorly by a DNC official who is supposed to be neutral, etc.
But no one is supposed to put two and two together and see a pattern, just as no one was supposed to do that with media until the Tyndall Report did it. Anyone who countenances this corruption in the primary process, regardless of whom they support, should never again complain about stolen elections--and should be deeply ashamed of themselves. Once again, the Des Moines Register's editorial board, which had endorsed Hillary, nailed it: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/editorials/caucus/2016/02/03/editorial-something-smells-democratic-party/79777580/ Fsck corrupting any part of the process, no matter wich candidate it benefits or harms; and fsck anyone who doesn't condemn it, no matter whose candidate it benefits or harms. If you are among those who fail to condemn this or, worse, who deny it's been happened, please take this paragraph very personally. |
Response to merrily (Reply #17)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:18 PM
kstewart33 (6,551 posts)
49. Yep, corruption under every rock, behind every tree, and in every word that Hillary has ever stated.
Ah, the humanity!
|
Response to kstewart33 (Reply #49)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:20 PM
merrily (45,251 posts)
52. .
Two candidates in the running and left one off--and lo and behold, that one was not Hillary. Lo and behold, it was the same candidate who's been getting screwed by state party officials in one primary and caucus after another, starting with Iowa, the same candidate that has been shafted by the DNC's debate schedule, who's been spoken about poorly by a DNC official who is supposed to be neutral, etc. ![]() |
Response to kstewart33 (Reply #49)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:20 PM
AzDar (14,023 posts)
83. Don't know about the rock and the tree... but you are certainly right about Hillary being corrupt.
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to kstewart33 (Reply #49)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:42 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
96. Pretty Much
Sorry facts get in your way. Go cry to the Bush family as they understand your pain.
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:24 PM
SoapBox (18,791 posts)
18. My first thought...WTF???
Then I read OS's post...
Let's hope. |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:26 PM
alittlelark (17,976 posts)
20. WATCH this vid.... Very Nessesary for any REAL Dem.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1608898
Funny thing is that The You Tube, therefore DU version has had an error message for over 2 hours. If you click the link you MAY get audio.... It is documenting Clinton operatives in top positions in the Sanders campaign.... it is deeply disturbing |
Response to alittlelark (Reply #20)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:34 PM
Bubzer (4,211 posts)
24. I agree...it's a very important and revealing video. I did some research after watching it.
Response to Bubzer (Reply #24)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:41 PM
alittlelark (17,976 posts)
28. Yours has an 'ERROR' message as well....
Funny that - I stream YouTube regularly and have only seen that message twice before, it is always fine the next time I click on it.
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to alittlelark (Reply #28)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:06 PM
Bubzer (4,211 posts)
41. Huh....I can watch it just fine.
Response to Bubzer (Reply #41)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:50 PM
alittlelark (17,976 posts)
71. Doesn't work for me on either DU or YouTube
I sent it out earlier to ppl and it was fine - tried many times since and I get an error message.
|
Response to alittlelark (Reply #71)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:11 PM
Bubzer (4,211 posts)
107. You may have an issue going on with either flash or Java. Are they bugging you for an update?
There's also the possibility of spyware/adware or malware in general interfering with your internet...eating up your bandwidth.
|
Response to Bubzer (Reply #107)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:52 PM
alittlelark (17,976 posts)
121. Nope... all current. Been on them all day....
...just cannot access the Mass. link. Cute kitties are fine.
The YouTube vid is still blocked for me. |
Response to alittlelark (Reply #121)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:55 PM
Bubzer (4,211 posts)
122. Huh. Thats a strange one. Who's your internet provider?
Response to Bubzer (Reply #122)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:59 PM
alittlelark (17,976 posts)
124. Windstream - but the vid suddenly stated working!!
at 8:44 MST.
![]() |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:28 PM
Eric J in MN (35,604 posts)
21. It's not an 'error' to submit only one of two names on time.
This is sabotage by the DC Democratic Party.
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:32 PM
ananda (23,761 posts)
23. And a really stinky rat too!
...
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:37 PM
Old Codger (4,205 posts)
25. WOW
More and more blatant shit. Not too surprising really when you look at the DNC and all the rest of the party...
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:44 PM
stopbush (23,535 posts)
30. As a Hillary supporter, this is entirely unacceptable.
I assume Sanders will appear on the ballot, but what a black eye for the DC Dem party.
This is the DU member formerly known as stopbush.
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:46 PM
NowSam (1,252 posts)
33. This is a joke right?
Won't stand.
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:47 PM
Baitball Blogger (37,677 posts)
34. This stinks to high heaven.
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:04 PM
ripcord (1,660 posts)
39. Something just isn't right here
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:04 PM
no_hypocrisy (37,847 posts)
40. WRITE IN BALLOTS?
![]() |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:07 PM
Peace Patriot (24,010 posts)
42. How did Clinton get ON the ballot?
Article says:
Both the Sanders' campaign and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton's campaign paid the $2,500 fee to appear on the June 14 Democratic primary ballot on time but the district's Democratic Party failed to inform the Washington D.C. Board of Elections until March 17, one day after the deadline. --from the OP If both paid the fee, and both were submitted a day after the deadline, HOW did Clinton get ON the ballot? The article wording is a little unclear. It appears to say that BOTH were late. If true, WHY is only Clinton on the ballot? Does it work, being late and being a Clinton? You just get presumed to be a candidate for whatever? They put Clinton on the ballot, forgiving her highness for her lateness, and just tossed that other piece of paper into the trash on the way to a power lunch? It's probably that they WEREN'T late with hers, ONLY with his. The alleged Democratic Party did NOT fail to inform them that Clinton was on the ballot, apparently. So what did they do with Sanders' papers? Dog ate them on the way to the Board of Elections, or, in too big of a hurry to that donor lunch? WHY, if they both paid on time, did ONLY ONE of them get on the ballot? WHY was only THAT one LATE? |
Response to Peace Patriot (Reply #42)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:27 PM
JimDandy (7,318 posts)
60. Papers for both candidates were late, but someone challenged only Sanders' ballot access.
Probably a Clinton supporter. AFAIK, there is nothing to stop anyone from legally challenging the presence of Clinton's name on the ballot either.
|
Response to JimDandy (Reply #60)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 07:06 AM
Sophiegirl (2,313 posts)
138. THIS IS THE REASON^^^^^^^
I live in No VA and have been listening to this all morning on the local news. An unnamed "activist" challenged Sanders. Both candidates filed on time. Both names were forwarded late. This "activist" issued the legal challenge against Bernie? Clinton could technically be challenged as well.
IIRC, this happened on the day the Metro was shut down for over 24 hours in an unprecedented move for safety inspections. It caused a commuting nightmare. Many people telecommuted or simply took the day off. Sloppy work, no doubt, but not at all a surprise from what I know of the DC bureaucracy. This will be fixed. |
Response to Peace Patriot (Reply #42)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:36 PM
klook (9,997 posts)
69. Unprofessional and sloppy, at BEST. (n/t)
Response to Peace Patriot (Reply #42)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 03:02 PM
Safe as Milk (51 posts)
165. Nine months?
It took the DC Dems 9 months to notify the DNC, and even that was a day after the deadline. So what was the problem with the DC Dem Committee on March 17. Was there only one phone in the office and the call was made at 4:59pm so there wasn't time to mention that the Sanders campaign also paid for the registration?
This decision won't stand. It might stand if Sanders were a local fringe candidate. But he's tied nationally with Clinton. He's big time. And he's being subjected to high school shenanigans. It's embarrassing to Democratic voters in DC. Their local party is NOT serving them well. |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:07 PM
Fuddnik (8,846 posts)
43. Fuck yeah there's a rat!
Went through similar bullshit with Disaster Debbies minions in Florida, when our county DEC's conveniently "forgot" to form a Federal PAC to help fund our campaign.
We explained other ways they could support us without the PAC, and no, they had to "check on it". After we beat their hand picked candidate by 10 points in the primary. Debbie Disaster went on to endorse her Republican "friend". There's rats alright. Lots of them. |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:12 PM
GoneFishin (5,217 posts)
44. What assholes.
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:15 PM
pnwmom (104,009 posts)
45. He should OF COURSE be put on the ballot. But why should the other team conspire
in an election in June that Hillary will carry in a landslide?
|
Response to pnwmom (Reply #45)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:43 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
97. Because Clinton Campaign Losing Confidence
You may have it still...they do not.
|
Response to billhicks76 (Reply #97)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:54 PM
pnwmom (104,009 posts)
100. This is so ridiculous. If they were going to pull a trick, they would have
filed Hillary's stuff weeks ago and only filed Bernie's at the last minute -- not file them both at the same time, only challenge Bernie, and wait for Bernie's people to kick up a storm of righteous indignation.
The head of the Dems there says their standard procedure is to process the paperwork on the last day and to file it on the next day. This time someone crawled up out of some hole and challenged Bernie but not Hillary. It's obviously unfair and the DC Chair says it will be fixed. |
Response to pnwmom (Reply #100)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:22 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
111. Wrong
There were no complaints about Clinton. Bernie had one and that was enough to keep him off ballot where there are 20 delegates at stake. DWS and the party filed the paperwork knowing this discrepancy. Your faith in coincidance amazes me. Too bad you're not a judge...with 500,000 people in prison over the past decade on conspiracy charges you're attitude would've surely helped.
|
Response to billhicks76 (Reply #111)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:33 PM
pnwmom (104,009 posts)
115. Try reading again but this time pay attention.
I never said there were any complaints about Clinton. I said:
If they were going to pull a trick, they would have
filed Hillary's stuff weeks ago and only filed Bernie's at the last minute -- not file them both at the same time, only challenge Bernie, and wait for Bernie's people to kick up a storm of righteous indignation. The head of the Dems there says their standard procedure is to process the paperwork on the last day and to file it on the next day. This time someone crawled up out of some hole and challenged Bernie but not Hillary. It's obviously unfair and the DC Chair says it will be fixed. |
Response to pnwmom (Reply #115)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:37 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
117. "Let Them Eat Cake" Is A Losing Strategy
Response to billhicks76 (Reply #117)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:41 PM
pnwmom (104,009 posts)
120. Changing the subject because you were wrong is a losing strategy.
Here is an article about Bernie's "miracle path" by a much more objective observer.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-really-hard-to-get-bernie-sanders-988-more-delegates/ To reach a pledged delegate majority, Sanders will have to win most of the delegates from those big states. A major loss in any of them could be fatal to his chances. He could afford to lose one or two of them narrowly, but then he’d need to make up ground elsewhere — he’d probably have to win California by double digits, for example. Sanders will also need to gain ground on Clinton in a series of medium-sized states such as Wisconsin, Indiana, Kentucky and New Mexico. Demographics suggest that these states could be close, but close won’t be enough for Sanders. He’ll need to win several of them easily. None of this is all that likely. Frankly, none of it is at all likely. If the remaining states vote based on the same demographic patterns established by the previous ones, Clinton will probably gain further ground on Sanders. If they vote as state-by-state polling suggests they will, Clinton could roughly double her current advantage over Sanders and wind up winning the nomination by 400 to 500 pledged delegates. But things can change, and polls can be wrong — and so it’s worth doing the math to see what winning 988 more delegates would look like for Sanders. Call it a path-of-least-implausibility. If you think Sanders can meet or exceed these targets, then you can say with a straight face that you think he’ll win the nomination. If you think they’re too good to be true, then you can’t. Here’s the Bernie-miracle path I came up with: SNIP |
Response to pnwmom (Reply #45)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:34 PM
RichVRichV (885 posts)
181. If this race tightens as expected then not being on the DC ballot could be killer.
If Hillary won 70% of the vote in DC and got 14 delegates vs Bernie's 6 delegates. That's a net of 8 delegates for Hillary.
If Bernie weren't on the ballot at all, that's 20 delegates to Hillary verses 0 for Bernie. That's a net of 20 delegates for Hillary. Bernie winning just 30% of the vote would be a 12 delegate swing versus him not being on the ballot at all. If this race tightens up (and Bernie takes a slight lead after June 7th) that could be the deciding factor in the outcome. Whether Bernie closes the gap or Hillary expands her lead, every Democrat should have the right to have their vote counted. |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:16 PM
Hotler (8,066 posts)
46. I have no hope. I see no future. n/t
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:17 PM
EndElectoral (4,213 posts)
48. Here we go again.
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:20 PM
blackspade (10,056 posts)
51. So if they both paid on time....
Why was Clinton the only one that the Party 'informed' the board of elections about?
What was the timeline? This is shady as shit. |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:21 PM
silverweb (16,359 posts)
53. An "error." Right.
![]() [font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Remember that old line that goes something like, "It's easier to apologize afterwards than ask permission ahead of time"? Some overly zealous and deceitful people live by it. ![]() |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:26 PM
Elmer S. E. Dump (5,751 posts)
57. I smell a RepublicRAT.
![]() |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:26 PM
Ed Suspicious (8,879 posts)
58. Fuckers at the DNC.
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:28 PM
dubyadiprecession (3,906 posts)
63. Hey, at least his $2,500 check cleared or did it...
bounce.
![]() This is the DU member formerly known as dubyadiprecession.
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:30 PM
bluestateguy (44,173 posts)
65. Put him on the ballot and end the drama
I don't like technicalities in ballot access stuff.
That's Theresa LaPore/Kathryn Harris crap. |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:58 PM
zentrum (9,642 posts)
75. Rat stench.
Really, the party should be ashamed.
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:58 PM
OnlinePoker (4,594 posts)
76. DC has 20 delegates
If Sanders isn't on the ballot (especially if things tighten up before then), then those delegates should not be included in Clinton's count.
|
Response to OnlinePoker (Reply #76)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:05 PM
pnwmom (104,009 posts)
78. If the Chair of the Dem party in D.C. says he'll be on the ballot
then he'll be on the ballot.
This was a stupid screw-up but it will be easily fixed. |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:11 PM
Sunlei (22,647 posts)
80. "problem could be resolved via an emergency vote of the D.C. City Council" So have the meeting.
Americas election & voting system is way more complicated then it has to be.
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:14 PM
BlandGrenade (29 posts)
81. If Hillary and her supporters expect the backing of Bernie's voters in November
Then "SHIT HAPPENS" IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE FUCKING RESPONSE. If she wins the nominations, SHE WILL INDEED have to answer for these "anomalies", either to those of us now feeling the Bern, or in november to the entire nation in a concession speech TO DONALD TRUMP.
![]() |
Response to BlandGrenade (Reply #81)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:56 PM
Skittles (133,646 posts)
101. you are not fooling anyone
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:17 PM
n2doc (47,953 posts)
82. DC party chair: Sanders will appear on ballot
Getty
Sen. Bernie Sanders is likely to be on the D.C. presidential ballot despite a registration error by the local Democratic Party, CNN reports. Anita Bonds, chairwoman of the Washington, D.C. Democratic Party told CNN she was confident he would appear on the primary ballot despite a challenge filed with the city’s Board of Elections. “Bernie will be on the ballot,” she told CNN. The D.C. Democratic Party was required to file to the D.C. Board of Elections by March 16 but submitted the registration paperwork for Sanders a day late, and a challenge was filed against him. Bonds said the party’s deadline is a few hours after the Board of Elections closes, so the staff usually delivers the filings the next day, which has been the standard in the past, but this time, someone challenged Sanders. more http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/274752-dc-party-chair-sanders-will-appear-on-ballot Hmmmmm.... |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:30 PM
TexasBushwhacker (16,520 posts)
87. Oh for Pete's sake
First all the coin flips go in favor of Clinton in Iowa.
Long lines in NV. Bill Clinton showing up at a polling place in MA. Then the AZ fiasco. Now this. I'm probably forgetting something. I'm not saying HRC had anything personally to do with it, but I wouldn't put it past her minions. |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:31 PM
Ford_Prefect (4,186 posts)
88. It seems someone in the DC Democratic Party has a sense of perspective:
Anita Bonds (chairwoman of the Democratic Party in D.C.) said she would submit a “clarification” in the city rules that would allow a 24-hour grace period after the filing deadline, putting Sanders on the ballot, according to CNN.
I guess we'll see if that's enough to solve the problem. As far as the degree of frequency of this and other "errors" and whether Hillary knew about it all, I find it hard to believe she does not know of it given her well documented obsession with details and control. As to whether she planned this kind of thing I believe she would have delegated most if not all of this activity to others in the campaign or the DNC so as to maintain a degree of Plausible Deniability, and to be able to keep her focus on the presentation of herself as candidate. I also believe there is more than enough evidence which points to Debbie Wasserman Schultz and David Brock as both are well known for slimy underhanded politics. This view gives less than fair credit to the local and state level Democrats who view themselves as gate keepers against any aspirations of progressive Democrats. I have personally seen this last group in action in NH, WA, and NC. They see progressives as a threat to the party, as dreamers who have no sense of compromise or gravitas, as the demons who undid the party in 1968. They also never saw a crooked voting machine or ballot count server, or a tainted ballot, or a party system at odds with everyday people. They remind me of those people who looked down their noses at the Peace movement as misguided and unpatriotic. Who sat safely in their suburban living rooms while the rest of us marched at Selma, and the Pentagon, and the Capitol, and The White House. They do not know what it takes to really change things and are not afraid to make sure the rest of you do not find out. |
Response to Ford_Prefect (Reply #88)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 07:48 AM
JustABozoOnThisBus (20,722 posts)
142. I wish Anita Bonds success in her clarification.
Ms Bonds is a superdelegate currently committed to Clinton. Hopefully she can still do her duty for the Democratic Party.
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:34 PM
MrMickeysMom (20,453 posts)
90. PLEASE somebody - get an emergency meeting for this vote!
For crying out loud!!!
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:40 PM
treestar (78,302 posts)
93. Of course there are going to be claims it is on purpose
Even though if Hillary were really going to cheat, there'd be much better places to do it in than a place she is likely to win in a landslide.
Just sound like a bureaucratic snafu. Those happen. |
Response to treestar (Reply #93)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:44 PM
billhicks76 (5,082 posts)
98. Did You Read???
Clinton supporter complained...Bernies did not...thats why shes on and hes not when DWS filed late.
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:41 PM
mishi48.59 (12 posts)
95. If it's not on purpose
Then someone is seriously incompetent
|
Response to mishi48.59 (Reply #95)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:51 AM
AgerolanAmerican (1,000 posts)
133. It's on purpose
nothing in politics happens by accident, especially when everyone's standing around acting like it was an accident
Track down that "DC voter" who objected to Sanders' ballot status and not HRC's and you'll have the source. I'd wager 20-1 that said objector is a HRC partisan and had inside knowledge that the filing was a day late. |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:00 PM
WhiteTara (27,001 posts)
103. Washington Post: Bernie will be on the ballot.
Response to WhiteTara (Reply #103)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 11:29 PM
Kittycat (10,493 posts)
128. Great, let us know when the challenge has been thrown out.
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:01 PM
Beartracks (10,772 posts)
104. "Failed to inform"? I should think the PAYMENT would have informed.
![]() ============================== |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:05 PM
tartan2 (314 posts)
106. Then someone needs to call a vote and fix this!
NOW! I'm calling Anita Bonds now.
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:58 PM
Zira (1,054 posts)
123. I feel like throwing something...
Response to Zira (Reply #123)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 10:04 PM
alittlelark (17,976 posts)
125. I did... piece of firewood against a tree.
![]() |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 10:56 PM
bbgrunt (5,273 posts)
127. K and R for visibility
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 11:38 PM
kadaholo (296 posts)
129. OUR REGISTRATIONS HIJACKED IN PENNSYLVANIA
This is UNBELIEVABLE! After reading an article at Anonymous on the antics in Arizona, I noticed a comment attached to the article that stated there are widespread reports of voter registration manipulation in PA and NY.
See article: Anonymous Investigate Arizona Election Fraud, “Sanders Was Hacked” Link: http://www.anonews.co/anonymous-sanders-hack/ Since I live in PA and am a Bernie supporter, I decided to confirm my registration immediately. I checked the VotesPA website and, sure enough, voter registration information on both my husband and me is not available!!! We have been registered Democrats and voting at this location since 1987 and 1994 respectively. This is the message that came up for both of us: "No Voter Registration information could be found for the data provided. Either search again using different data or contact your County Voter Registration Office." Calling tomorrow and surprise (not), we are Bernie supporters!!! INCREDIBLE!!! Just coincidence in state after state???? I think not!!! Seems like those two lapses in the firewall (both reported by the Sanders Campaign) are benefitting only one of our two Democratic candidates... HIGHEST PRIORITY!!! PLEASE TELL EVERYONE WHO IS STILL WAITING TO VOTE IN PRIMARIES TO CHECK THEIR REGISTRATION...ESPECIALLY FRIENDS IN NY AND PA!!! |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 11:49 PM
Marrah_G (28,581 posts)
130. They need to fix this right away
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 02:58 AM
CountAllVotes (19,317 posts)
134. I smell a BIG RAT
Gee and in Washington, D.C. of all places. Who would have thunk?
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 05:30 AM
larrysanders (19 posts)
137. per NBC4 News a voter in D.C. filed a challenge against the Vermont senator's registration
NBC4 News reported that a voter in D.C. filed a challenge against the Vermont senator's registration, which will be heard in April.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/274738-dem-mistake-leaves-sanders-off-ballot-in-dc |
Response to larrysanders (Reply #137)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 07:08 AM
Sophiegirl (2,313 posts)
139. Yes. See my post #138. eom
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 07:11 AM
classykaren (769 posts)
140. We need to demand he is put on the ballot is there a petition?
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 07:52 AM
mariawr (348 posts)
143. Stay tuned. As this race gets closer.....
...DWS, Brock and the rest of the DLC minions will totally jump the shark into uncharted waters
|
Response to mariawr (Reply #143)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 02:55 PM
MisterP (23,730 posts)
163. revoking citizenship, having Congress undo California's 1850 statehood, or just trying to physically
keep him out of buildings because men are a threat or something
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 10:31 AM
valerief (53,235 posts)
147. Thieves. Fuckin' thieves. nt
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:21 AM
saidsimplesimon (7,688 posts)
148. k&rats
Bubzer, do you have a link to Senator Sanders official recommended action for his supporters? Since I'm not a resident of DC, I don't have any legal standing to take action, or do I?
This is the DU member formerly known as saidsimplesimon.
|
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:20 PM
PatrynXX (5,668 posts)
151. I smell DWS not doing her job
do'h..... DNC on self destruct
![]() |
Response to PatrynXX (Reply #151)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 03:07 PM
Safe as Milk (51 posts)
166. She IS doing her job.
She's widening the path for Hillary. That was her job in 2008, when she was Hillary's campaign manager, and lost, so she's being HRC's agent with a vengeance this time around. For DWS, the end justifies the means.
|
Response to Safe as Milk (Reply #166)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:19 PM
StevieM (10,068 posts)
180. DWS was not Hillary's campaign manager in 2008, Maggie Williams was.
Also, DWS was made DNC chair by Barack Obama. Nobody pressured him into it. He appointed her because he wanted to.
Welcome to DU!! |
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 04:31 PM
Dont call me Shirley (10,998 posts)
170. Debbie Dumper.
Response to Bubzer (Original post)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:15 PM
StevieM (10,068 posts)