Bernie Sanders indicated in early May that his campaign was “going to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia with as many delegates as possible to fight for a progressive party platform that calls for a $15 an hour minimum wage, an end to our disastrous trade policies, a Medicare-for-all health care system, breaking up Wall Street financial institutions, ending fracking in our country, making public colleges and universities tuition free, and passing a carbon tax so we can effectively address the planetary crisis of climate change.”

Win or lose in the fight for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sanders said, “we intend to win every delegate that we can so that when we go to Philadelphia in July, we are going to have the votes to put together the strongest progressive agenda that any political party has ever seen.”

Sanders has won a sufficient number of delegates—and a sufficient opening in the debate—to influence the shaping of that agenda. And his representatives on the convention’s newly selected platform-writing committee share a commitment to make it profoundly progressive.

Take the issue of climate change, as an example. Sanders has secured a place for author, activist, and 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben, on the 15-person Platform Drafting Committee—which is responsible for outlining the platform that will eventually be approved at the party’s late-July convention in Philadelphia.

McKibben will have plenty of allies—among the Sanders-aligned members of the drafting committee, among members who are aligned with Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, and among members who are seeking to strike a balance between the two campaigns. It is fair to say that the drafting committee has a progressive majority.

http://www.thenation.com/article/sanders-picks-and-allies-could-write-a-boldly-progressive-platform/

Join in agreement. Add your own. Poo-poo mine.

Many of the nomination issues have been laid bare this cycle. Problems have come to the fore and to a head. To me the greatest problems center around the undemocratic aspects or quasi-democratic aspects. I tend towards greater democracy, more power directly to the voter.

If it were up to me (and rightfully no one has ever asked me) I would propose the following changes:

1. No caucuses. Caucuses are undemocratic, antithetical to the concepts of one person one vote and private vote. Caucuses would be better left to history.

2. No super delegates. 15 per cent of the nominating power rests in the unbridled discretion of 714 individuals. Over 23 million people have voted, more will next month, yet collectively their votes carry only 85 per cent compared to the 714 individuals.

3. Semi open primaries and same day voter registration. We should not be afraid to allow and welcome unaffiliated voters to join in our nomination process. The number who would go through the effort to sow discord is negligible. What it does is indicates to the unaffiliated or new voter that we hear them and are with them. It's a down payment on the general election.

4. Allocate delegates equally. However it is done must be fairer than the metric used now. Now, some states and votes within that stars are more heavily weighted or diluted than others.

Those are my main four.

He has had an impressive run and made the race competitive against the most monied and party-supported non-incumbent ever.

It is no small feat what he has done, considering he started polling at around 5% and was virtually unknown.

He deserves the respect of the Democratic Party, whose voters have been supporting him in large measure.

He isn't winning the race and won't win, unless something siesmic happens. But he is not Ron Paul, he is not Ralph Nader. Howard Dean even came no where near as close as Bernie has.

Respect it. Respect his supporters. Engage them and encourage them to stay involved. You will need them and you will need Bernie Sanders.

This year there are 714 super delegates,who can vote for any or no reason. As a super delegate, it's their second vote. First, they vote as a common citizen in their respective state primary. Then, as a super weighted, undemocratic check on the people.

714 super delegates. If they were a state, Superdelia is larger than any other state,by far. CA, the most delegate rich real state, carries 475 pledged delegates. NY, the next largest, has 247. Combined they have roughly the same voting power as the 714 individuals, at 722.

In other words, 714 individual people's votes count as much as the entire population of democratic voters in the two largest states.

It should not come as a surprise to anyone that such unfettered undemocratic prower will be challenged. It should not come as a surprise that people will use, and in some unfortunate cases, abuse the access of these public persons to sway them.

Of course, threats of violence are always wrong and come from unbalanced people. But, aggressive lobbying, even incessant lobbying is simply a product of the ill conceived concept of putting so much nominating power in the hands of a few.

She said "I'm going to put [my husband] in charge of revitalizing the economy because you know, he knows how to do it."

How would Bill be in charge? What role? What position?

Aside from this announcement being a horrible campaign tactic, a bad idea based on Bill's record and just bad optics from her supposed feminist mantle, what does she specifically have in mind? How would Bill be in charge?

This is not a good way to start her general election campaign.

She has 1,717 pledged delegates. She needs 309 more to secure the pledged delegate majority of 2,026.

Mathematically, it is impossible for her to do it before June 7, which is essentially the last day of voting.* There are at least 25 more days of this Primary. Unless and until one of the candidates secures 2,026 pledged delegates or one concedes, there is no presumptive nominee.

All you itching and moaning for Bernie to drop out, just relax. In 25 days one of them will secure a majority of the pledged delegates and become the presumptive nominee.













*After June 7, only DC is left, on June 14 with 20 pledged delegates in play.

Michael Fucking Hayden.

FISA shredding, droning, abuser of civil liberties Hayden.

That war criminal should be in prison for the rest of his life. His is among the last persons on the face of the earth whose opinion I am interested in. Included with him is Rumsfeld, Rove, Cheney, Gonzales, Rice and Bush. Those are his fucking cohorts.

That's all.

We're getting to the home stretch. The Magic Number represents the number of pledged delegates needed to clinch a majority of the pledged delegates. It is widely understood that the pledged delegate winner will be the nominee, with the super delegates covering any short fall between the pledged delegate count and 2,383 total delegates needed to be the nominee.

It is a race to get to 2,026 pledged delegates. Hillary needs 309 and Bernie needs 589.

There are 183 pledged delegates available between now and June 7. Obviously, this race will not be decided before June 7.

On June 7, 694 pledged delegates are at stake.

The only east coast state on June 7 is NJ, with 126. In other words, the race will not be over until the polls close in California, at 11:00 pm EST.

Hillary has 1,706 pledged delegates as of right now. She needs 320 more to reach a majority of pledged delegates (2,026).

WV votes today (29 PDs). Next week Ky (55) and OR (61) vote. June 4 and 5 bring Virgin Islands (7) and Puerto Rico (60), respectively. In other words, between now and June 7, 212 pledged delegates will be allocated based on voting results.

Bernie is favored in most of those contests, so even a 50/50 split would leave Hillary's magic number going into June 7 at about 214.

On June 7, a whopping 694 pledged delegates are up for grabs, with the majority coming from California (475). She would need only about 30% of the June 7 total to hit her magic number, the pledged delegate majority and the secure nomination for all intents and purposes.

All but NJ are west coast contests. NJ has 126 PDs up for grabs. Hillary will likely to take NJ, but not by huge margins.

Out west, Bernie is favored in Montana (21), ND (18) and SD (20). NM (34) and CA could be close.

It is unlikely HIllary will reach the pledged delegate majority until the polls close in California at 11:00 pm. At that point, it is almost certain that even a loss in every other state and even a loss in CA will give her enough PDs to his 2,026 and secure a majority of PDs. Only a MASSIVE California upset, an earthquake, would be enough to flip the entire race and nomination to Bernie.

At about 11:00 p.m. on June 7, Hillary Clinton will likely be declared the presumptive presidential nominee for the Democratic Party.

We have less than a month to go folks. Sit down, relax and enjoy the show. Quit calling for Bernie to drop out. He isn't. It will get nasty as hell on the morning of June 8.

I think the most glaring display of the sexist double standard in our politics and society is not how Hillary is treated because she is a woman, but how trump is treated because he's a man.

If a woman proudly flaunted her absolute ignorance of the function of government, policy positions, and current events all while running a campaign solely on petulance, arrogance and insults, she would be nothing more than a joke. Sarah Palin is a good example. Like trump, she wholly lacked the intellect or chops to be taken seriously. Like trump, she spoke in rambling incohernce with a few trigger words tossed in the word salad. Like trump she was incurious and defaulted to personal insults.

Unlike trump, she was not taken seriously. She was ridiculed, she challenged by the press, her star quickly buried. Her aspirations in 2013 went no where.

Yet, here we have trump, the newest standard bearer for the GOP, sort of, the presumptive nominee. As an exercise, take everything and anything trump has said and imagine a woman candidate saying the same thing. And then consider how it would play in the press, to competitors and society.

If trump were a woman, he would not have gotten even 1% support. If trump were a woman, he would be appropriately seen and covered as a blathering idiot and dangerously uninformed. He would not be taken seriously. He's the one playing a gender card.