WHO Should DFA ENDORSE For President?

[Segami]

VOTING HAS ENDED. COME BACK ON THURSDAY, DEC. 17 FOR THE RESULTS!

DFA'S ENDORSEMENT PROCESS

Democracy for America was founded out of the presidential primary in 2004. Our goal is to empower our members to vote — and to get out the votes of their friends and family — to decide which presidential candidate DFA should endorse in the 2016 Democratic Party presidential primary process.

Here's how DFA's presidential endorsement process works:

- The endorsement vote ended at 11:59pm Eastern Time on Tuesday, December 15.

- Just like in a real election, you will need to work hard to maximize support for your candidate if you want them to win this endorsement. That means getting your friends, family and other like-minded progressives to cast their votes for your candidate as well — on Facebook, Twitter, over email, on the phone, or however you want to spread the word!

- DFA will only endorse in this presidential primary if there is overwhelming support for one candidate. That means that, just like in 2007 when we last conducted an official presidential endorsement vote, we will only endorse if one candidate reaches DFA's super-majority threshold of 67% (two-thirds of votes cast, or 66.67% to be technical about it).

On Thursday, December 17th — after a complete security review of the votes — we will announce the results.


http://2016.democracyforamerica.com/?source=hp

[Renew Deal]

1. They don't have the guts to endorse who they want

So they did this online poll to cover themselves. "We didn't endorse anyone, our members did".

The results will be a farce.

[Live and Learn]

4. Of course, endorsing the candidate the people want. How silly of them! nt

[joshcryer]

5. That's so silly.

The fact that they're doing a poll means that they've decided how they want to pick someone. If they wanted to, they could go by their internal leadership (such as choosing who their founder wants, Clinton), but to say they don't want to do it this way is a farce unless you have some kind of evidence that the leadership has an issue with going about it this way.

Hey, it's quite possible that happens after they endorse Sanders (likely given the make up of their supporters), one of the leaders comes out and complains about how it went down. But I think DFA and their leadership is above that, they made the decision by consensus and they're doing it this way because they want to.

If anything the leadership choosing Clinton and ignoring their members could be seen as that organization wanting favors from her if she wins.

[Scuba]

12. Perhaps you'd prefer is one of our candidates promised them fat cat jobs for an endorsement?

I prefer a democratic process, but that's only me.

[Gman]

2. This is a bad idea

if they endorse Sanders they're dead in the water politically.

They could have accomplished so much.

[Bread and Circus]

3. If they endorse Sanders they are dead? Why?

[joshcryer]

7. I think the idea is that Clinton would snub them for future events.

Which is preposterous, this is party politics at its core. That kind of recrimination hurts the party and no one wants that and it doesn't happen that often.

[joshcryer]

6. No they won't be.

And I think it'd be a joke if they endorsed Clinton for political pull. It's likely the poll will lean Sanders, so what. If Clinton gets the nomination you know that 1) Sanders will bow out gracefully and stump his butt off for Clinton (and most of his supporters will as well) and 2) DFA will do the same.

I think this is an excellent and smart move.

[daybranch]

9. Bernie supporters are committed to getting rid of the oligarchy

Many who started out withthe belief they should support Hillary strongly if she is nominated are questioning whether this is in the best long term interests of the country. Others are starting to believe Hillary cannot win because if she cannot beat an opponent running a campaign where she is not being attacked, she cannot possibly when the gloves are removed. We could sat the gloves are off now between Hillary and the republican candidates but at this point that only increases Hillary support, whereas in a general everyone watches and Hillary will be under real scrutiny from democrats as well as republicans.
We progressives supported and worked hard to elect a moderate, a Rockerfeller republican, according to his own words in the last 2 Today we support Bernie, but more than that we know we have to change the leadership and control of the democratic party to achieve the democracy and the country we all need. So will we support Hillary? It depends on how we see continuing a leadership that works in too many cases against the people to serve their rich donors in the oligarchy. I personally believe that if Hillary is nominated that will break up the democratic party and she cannot hope to win the general election.

[joshcryer]

10. If Sanders loses he'd turn the disenchanted around.

Because he knows that if he busts his ass for the party there are a lot of rewards politically (gaining serious cred within the party, being sought for new policy, he's the freaking ranking member of the Budget Committee, and his power would only increase).

Those who he couldn't turn around were probably only halfhearted "supporters" to begin with.

There would of course be Draft Sanders type things but that's all to be expected and there's nothing wrong with it.

[DFW]

8. In their poll, there was one option I selected

That was "DFA should not make an endorsement.

Howard supports Hillary, Jim supports Bernie. There is no acrimony between the two brothers (I know them both). DFA is not DU. But I agree with another poster above that it would diminish DFA's clout seriously if they were to endorse one or the other, especially if the one hey endorse ends up not being the nominee.

[NCTraveler]

11. The person who gets 67% of the vote.

No one if that doesn't happen. I like that.