Sunday, May 22, 2016

Bernie Sanders claims that his supporters can do math, admits that Hillary Clinton can beat Donald Trump, and says if he is elected Debbie Wasserman Schultz would be out of a job.

Courtesy of Raw Story:

CNN host Jake Tapper asked the candidate over the weekend if he was misleading his supporters by downplaying the fact that Clinton has “roughly 54 percent” of the pledged delegates. 

“It seems unlikely that you’ll actually achieve the majority of the pledged delegates,” Tapper noted. 

“I assume that most of the people who come to my rallies can do arithmetic,” the candidate quipped. “If I have 46 percent, she has 54 percent. The point that I was making is there’s something absurd when I get 46 percent of the delegates that come from real contests — real elections, and 7 percent of the super delegates.” 

“I am the stronger candidate because we appeal to independents, people who are not in love with either the Democratic or the Republican Party,” Sanders insisted.

That argument about independent voters is a strong one, assuming of course that they would also be willing to vote for Democrats down ticket to give a President Sanders the support in the House and Senate that he would need to pass ANY of his very progressive policies.

Which by the way would have to be vast. Overwhelming even.

However independents are exactly that, independent. So if they are voting all up and down the ballot based on their own criteria for who they like, that does not build the kind of coalition that Sanders would need.

Hillary Clinton on the other hand has strong support from the Democrats, and is strongly identified as a Democrat, so a vote for her on a ballot is an almost certain vote for other Democrats on that voting form as well.

And if Hillary feels she really needs those independents, well I'm sure she knows who to call.

Later in the interview Sanders makes the case that he thinks super delegates who signed on with Hillary before he jumped into the race should reevaluate and consider supporting him.

But this is after weeks, and weeks where Sanders attacked Democratic leaders, suggested that the Democratic party was owned by Wall Street, and after his supporters disrupted the Nevada convention causing many in the party to express concern over what might happen in Philadelphia in July.

The idea that many super delegates would ignore all of that and abandon Hillary Clinton in favor of the self described Democratic Socialist seems fantastical at best.

Which brings us back to the question at the top of the page, CAN Bernie Sanders supporters actually do arithmetic?

Not entirely convinced.


  1. Anonymous2:06 PM

    The MSM, particularly CNN and MSNBC, are doing all they can to promote Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump.

    1. Anonymous2:37 PM

      MSNBC has become CNN with the exception of Rachel Maddow! She's all about education - watch her folks, she's a win, win!

      The others on MSNBC drive me bat shit crazy - hence, I no longer watch them. Specifically Chris Matthews, the nerdy numbers guy and Chris Hayes. Boring!!!

  2. Anonymous2:17 PM

    All Bernie is trolling for donations to his flailing campaign, he spent too much and he has nothing left to retire on.

    1. Anonymous2:20 PM

      He'll write a book and when he retires from the Senate, he can do the speaker circuit.

    2. Anonymous2:36 PM

      Anonymous2:20 PM,
      ...where he would gladly charge $250K if any one would pay him that.

    3. Anonymous2:36 PM

      @ anon 2:20pm
      He will never do the speaker circuit because he would have to be nice to people.

    4. Anonymous3:36 PM

      I noticed that Bernie asks me for money via email 2-3 times per day. I never got a request from HRC. I also get requests from other Dems from all over the country so I'm wondering what I put my email address on that makes them think this old retiree is parting with her pension.

    5. Anonymous4:16 PM

      3:36 PM - I have never given to a political candidate and never will. Money down the drain with little to no return on investment.

    6. Anonymous4:19 PM

      If he was going to make speeches he'd have to have something to say. All he's ever had is his same old rant. And I don't think my dinner would be digested better watching an old man spitting.

    7. Anonymous11:46 PM

  3. Anonymous2:32 PM

    Plus, Bernie is even more of an egomaniac than I thought! As POTUS (which he'll NEVER be!), he'd not be able to rid himself of the head of either party!

    I just wish Debbie would kick his ass out of the Democratic party! I didn't ask him to join it. He put himself there! He's a socialist and is doing nothing but divide the party to gain traction for Trump. He's an ass, plain and simple!

    He's going nowhere!!!

    1. Anonymous2:43 PM

      I'm a Clinton supporter, and I don't think anyone should be kicked out of the party.

    2. Anonymous3:01 PM

      2:43 PM Sanders put himself into the Democratic party when he is a self-admitted Socialist. He SHOULD be kicked out is the feeling of many Democrats!

      He's calling for division and no POTUS can fire the head of either party. He's a dumb ass for even thinking he could get rid of Debbie.

      Plus, he'll never be the nominee of the Democratic party much less POTUS!

      What an ego!!! Sounds like Trump!

    3. Anonymous6:05 PM

      DWS is the chairman of the DNC, not the head of the Democratic party. Four leaders rank ahead of DWS in the Democratic party;
      1. Pres Obama
      2. VP Biden
      3. Senate Minority leader Harry Reid
      4. House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi

      A Democratic president is the head of the Democratic party and could most certainly ask for the resignation of the DNC chairman.

    4. Anonymous6:16 PM

      Forgot the link to the Dem Party webpage "Our Leaders"

  4. Anonymous2:36 PM

    Teachers and engineers are two of the top three occupations contributing to Sanders: people who can do arithmetric. And algebra, geometry, trigonometry and calculus.

    1. Anonymous3:22 PM

      He doesn't really care if people who support Bernie can do math or not, he's just out to insult.

    2. Anonymous4:23 PM

      Anonymous3:22 PM,

      Ahhh, but can they do political math?

  5. Anonymous2:38 PM

    Which brings us back to the question at the top of the page, CAN Bernie Sanders supporters actually do arithmetic?

    Well they certainly can read a decibel meter and tell time. The vote to change the rules was taken at 9:30am. The convention start time was set for 10am. Pretty slick!

    1. Anonymous3:02 PM

      And not a chair was thrown.
      And Boxer looks scared,huh?
      More like taunting on her part blowing kisses...

    2. Anonymous3:29 PM

      The convention was supposed to start at 9:00.

      Delegates could sign in by 10:00 and still participate in the convention.

      "The first major fight happened in the morning, with the convention being gaveled in nearly 40 minutes after the scheduled 9 a.m. start time."

      And, in case you don't believe politifact, here's the official statement of the rules:

      "The State Convention shall be called to order at 9:00 a.m. on Saturday, May 14, 2016."

      Note: this is a pdf file, but you can find a link to it and the "2016 Convention Call" which has the same information on the official webpage of the Nevada Dem Convention:

    3. Anonymous4:22 PM

      Anonymous3:02 PM,

      How do you even hold down a job living in an alternate reality as you do?

    4. Anonymous4:33 PM

      Faux Fracas in Nevada: How a Reporter manufactured a Riot.

      Jon Ralston wasn't there to witness any chair throwing or security police. He had already left.

      "Jon Ralston, the dean of political reporting in Nevada, has spread nothing less than a pack of lies about what went down at the state’s Democratic convention on Saturday. And the fact averse oligarchic national media has run completely riot with the provable falsehoods. No chairs were thrown at the convention Saturday. No death threats were made against the chair of the convention Roberta Lange. And Bernie Sanders delegates were not simply mad because their louder shouting was ignored.

      Ralston has been the culprit behind each of these falsehoods; and the New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, and a dizzying array of other outlets have swallowed them whole then regurgitated them for their much more massive audiences."

      " one has any images or video of even a single chair, let alone chairs plural, being thrown."

      "Sanders supporters are being flipped off the Democratic voting rolls against their will in order to disenfranchise their participation in closed primaries, caucuses, and conventions. Fifty-eight Sanders supporters were denied entry to the Nevada Convention and were told they weren’t Democrats. Other than the one guy who acknowledged he switched his registration on his own, this is ludicrous. Nevada had onsite registration for the original caucuses in February, and no one could participate in them unless they were registered as a Democrat.

      Clinton had just thirty more delegates than Sanders in the final count. And while establishment Dems were challenging Sanders’ delegates credentials, Roberta Lange passed rules cutting out the county level convention results which were more favorable to Sanders."

      "Rachel Maddow ran a deceptive clip on MSNBC saying chairs were thrown while reportedly showing footage of chairs thrown at a wrestling production. (I cannot find the original Maddow clip with this as of yet). People on social media then insisted that networks had shown actual footage of chairs thrown at the convention. Maddow retreated only a bit by having Ralston on to say that even though he had not seen the chairs thrown, other eyewitnesses have told him the video is wrong. CNN had Debbie Wasserman-Schultz on to denounce Bernie Bros throwing chairs at the stage."

      I'm surprised Rachel Maddow would get sucked into this questionable reporting. She is usually more meticulous.

      Sanders supporters have offered to vote for Hillary in California if anyone can produce a video of chairs being thrown in Nevada. (Apparently the video used on Maddow's show was from a wrestling match.)

      So far, no video.

      So let's put this riot to rest, shall we? Enough of the Bernie bashing. You think Hillary will win, fine. But there is no need to bash Bernie or rub the noses of his supporters in it. That won't get you allies and it won't convince them to vote for Hillary in November. Neither will chastising, insults or condescension. If you want to get Bernie's supporters votes, time to make nice, wait it out and let nature take it's course. You'll get a much better outcome than calling them fucking children, telling them to grow up or saying they're too stupid to do math.

    5. Anonymous5:10 PM

      4:33, the original comment above was talking about how the chair started the convention a half hour early. I provided links to show that was not the case. Yet, many Sanders supporters still spread the untruth.

    6. Anonymous9:19 PM

      OK 5:10. I'll give you the 9am start.

      VII. Call to order,Agenda,and Rules
      a.The State Convention shall be called to order at 9:00a.m. on Saturday, May 14,2016.

      But maybe you can answer why do they need to hold such an important vote before the 10am sign-in deadline?

      And watching the video, even at 9:30am, the NAYs have it.

      If Hillary is such a winner, why cheat? Why not just let Bernie and his supporters have a literal 'couple of delegates'? If for nothing else but party/Hillary unity in the long run? Blatantly cheating doesn't bode well in the long run. Especially because Trump can use it as an example of 'Corrupt Hillary' in the general.

    7. Anonymous11:14 PM

      9:19 lies

    8. Anonymous8:11 AM

      A voice vote doesn't mean who can yell the loudest. This isn't a school talent show. It's one person, one vote. There were more Clinton delegates, so they had more voices. The chair could have called for a head count, but it really wasn't necessary. Perhaps if she had done so, it would have satisfied the Sanders delegates who got so upset. But, were they going to call for a head count after every single voice vote?

      I don't know why they started at 9:40, only 40 minutes after the official convention kick off time. Probably because they didn't want to wait any longer to get started. Again, they could have waited until 10, but they didn't have to. Not doing so isn't "cheating."

      Let me ask you a question. Do you think it's fair that the Sanders delegates tried to undermine the will of the people by flipping the caucus to their side in the first place? There was some bad information sent out to delegates in Clark county that caused many of them not to show up, more on the Clinton side. But that doesn't change the fact that Clinton had more people caucusing for her in Clark county. Sanders people took advantage of that and substituted in their own delegates. They were in their rights to do so, but the reason for so many empty Clinton slots was due to something that wasn't fair and also didn't reflect the will of the voters.

      You can say "all's fair," but then don't come back and complain about how it wasn't fair that they started 40 minutes late instead of an hour late.

    9. Anonymous8:11 AM

      There wasn't any cheating and certainly not "blatant" cheating.

  6. Anonymous2:38 PM

    I'd respect Sanders a lot more if he came out and said that he knows he can't win, but voting for him will still send a message about his vision and why it should be included in the Dem platform at the convention. It would serve his supporters a lot better if he took that approach rather than looking like a sore loser who is feeding their fantasies.

    1. Anonymous3:37 PM

      If BS wanted to change the Democratic party he needed to start long ago and be a member. What we do know is that he takes the "easy" route of trying to get others to do his work. He just prattles. Here he is again trying to get Hillary Clinton to do his work with HER party.

      If honesty were a strong attribute of BS's he would have run as an Independent which he has always been. He was a hippie and a commune builder until the commune folks kicked him out because he sat on his ass and got everyone else to do his work.

      And BS's essays on having the very young girls get in a lot of sex because it will prevent them from having breast cancer later in life is as far out there as Drumpfs shit he spews.

      Sheesh - there is no way there is money enough or enough Democratic/Socialist legislators to implement his crazy ideas. Doesn't mean some people wouldn't like those perks, or that college should be more affordable, however, if the teachers and engineers are behind BS and can do math then they are missing something else in their gray matter. Hard to believe that teachers are promoting someone who is inciting riots and danger in public gatherings.

  7. Anonymous2:44 PM

    The 3 r's.
    readin','ritin and 'rithmetic.
    Did Hillary fully read her NDA Agreement before she signed it?

    1. Anonymous3:31 PM

      So much for not being a douche.

    2. Anonymous4:00 PM

      your apology lasted all of 5 seconds.

  8. Anonymous3:05 PM

    They may be be able to do math, but a bunch of them aren't so good with logic problems.

  9. Anonymous3:07 PM

    OT, no postings from Sarah or Bristol for a long time. Are they packing to move to Washington when Trump picks her for his vp?

  10. 66gardeners3:09 PM

    Sanders has been in congress 25 years. The super delegates are full aware of who is more qualified, and that is Hillary.

    1. Anonymous4:35 PM

      Don't forget too, 3:09 PM, Hillary Clinton also served in the United States Congress - as Senator Clinton from New York!

      So, she is known there too and it's obvious more respect her than they do Bernie! He's been in there for eons and has accomplished nothing of spectacular credit. I suspect he's pretty lazy - probably from smoking too much dope!

    2. Anonymous5:13 PM

      Don't be an ass 4:35. I'm a Clinton supporter who voted to legalize weed in Colorado.

      I'm not disagreeing that Sanders could have done more during his tenure, but calling him a lazy dope-smoker only shows how lazy YOU are.

  11. Anonymous3:12 PM

    Why do you hate Bernie so much? Your hate on Bernie is more than any of the Republicans, including Palins. Seriously, you need to deal with your issues.

    1. Understanding the math, and recognition of the facts on hand, is not hate.

      I have no hate toward Bernie I just think he is doing more harm than good at this point and I express that opinion here on my blog.

      Which I created for just such a purpose.

      Only children boil every disagreement down to good vs evil, hatred vs love, and absolute right vs absolute wrong.

      In other words, grow up.

    2. Anonymous3:25 PM

      I agree.

    3. Anonymous3:30 PM

      If you think Gryphen hates Bernie, you need to get your emotion meter serviced.

    4. Anonymous3:40 PM

      Exactly Gryph. It's the Kardashianization of America. Or maybe Swiftization? I'm not so up on my current icons/lingo.

    5. Anonymous3:53 PM

      3:12 pm - you need to acquaint yourself with BS's history clear back to when he was drifting from job to job and relying on others to house him and take care of his needs.

      Ignorance is not a sign of being informed and it appears you are not even slightly familiar with this man's behaviors and his present wife's shenanigans. Cost so many young people their college money and the Catholic church apparently took a big hit for dealing with Jane Sanders.

    6. Anonymous3:59 PM

      It seems you're the one with issues. Your knee-jerk emotional reaction in perceiving facts as hate just demonstrates it.

    7. Anonymous4:10 PM

      But Gryphen, you've been against Bernie from the start, before any votes were taken so you can't use anything as an excuse for your bias. And you have not been very kind in your attacks and insults on both Bernie and those that support him. Your writing has provided a model to the Anonymous posters on this board that it is open season on Bernie and anyone that supports him. More so, anyone that disagrees with them.

      You have also blinded yourself in support of Hillary and by association Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

      It's your blog and you can do what you want. But don't lie to yourself that you are being impartial, fair or unbiased.

      This post is an example of it. "Grow up"? Don't you mean believe what I believe or you are a poopy head? (Or should I say fucking child?)

    8. Anonymous4:41 PM

      I feel that if Gryphen didn't expose the blatant hypocrisy of the right, of the palins, of the bernie, then people should just lay down and die. Jon Stewart did his fair share of exposing those buttheads for years. I am sure it gets tiring when people's brains are so hardwired to mindlessly folloow idiots who are trying to be leaders. It's not hate. It's tellin it like it is. And most of us on the blog like it. It makes us feel like we are not alone when we start to think, is Trump acting like Hitler? Did Sarah spew off all this thou shalt not when her daughter did? You know, it's called keepin it real.

    9. Anonymous5:16 PM

      Gryphen is allowed to prefer one candidate over another, just as you are. To say that Gryphen "hates" Sanders is an immature attack that has no basis in reality.

    10. Anonymous7:15 PM

      So where's the Hillary opposition? The Devil's advocate? Gryphen makes her sound so lily white, like she has not problems at all.

      What about the financial hanky panky DWS arranged to buy superdelegates by bypassing campaign finance donation limits?

      That isn't all.

      This isn't just about debunking the e-mail server or Benghazi hearings. There is much more dirt on Hillary's plate that can be used against her. The server and Benghazi are distractions, making it seem that if those are debunked Hillary is home free.

      She's not.

      So let's not paint Bernie as the Anti-Christ and put a halo on Hillary. She has just as many negatives. In fact more since her unfavorables are so much higher than Bernie's.

    11. Anonymous11:16 PM

      7:15 - she is home free. Keep watching.

    12. Anonymous7:46 AM

      Bernie is a pipe dream and a negative when it comes to dems and the general election. Gryph isn't the only one here seeing critical voters with their heads buried in the sand. The dems wont support a socialist and the loss of this election could be disasterous.

    13. Anonymous5:44 PM

      Once again, things aren't black and (lily) white. Just because Gryphen strongly supports Clinton over Sanders doesn't mean he thinks Clinton is perfect. It's not his job to present both sides to satisfy you.

  12. Anonymous3:48 PM

    gryff you are wrong about the independents. there are no more independents or very few up for grabs. there are lots of recent articles and studies on this.

    so no....bernie attracting "independent" voters is not something anyone is wondering about or trying to get control of. the polls have shown for the last 5 weeks the bernie voters....people bernie wants to call independent....are already lining up behnd hillary. there is this very small vocal abomination of bernie or bust people...i wont even call them voters because most of the time they dont even show up to vote at all. certainly not in the mid terms when we really needed them. hillary is stronger than the msm (who need the ratings a horse race will bring) and the sandernistas (sanders fundraising machine that needs more money and the followers who are evidently illiterate and math challenged) are leading people to believe.

  13. So let me get this straight, BS hates the super delegates but if they could be convinced to vote for him he would be ok with them?
    Stop acting like super delegates are new to this election cycle Bernie. You knew what you were up against before joining the race. If you didn't, well shame on you for not knowing the rules. You can't change the rules in the middle of the game just because you are losing.

    1. Anonymous4:19 PM

      Yup. That about sums it up. Super delegates are not OK for the woman because the man is entitled to the nomination even if he doesn't have the votes. /s

    2. Anonymous7:16 PM

      Bull fucking shit.

      Debbie Wasserman Schultz had those superdelegates bought and paid for for Hillary before the first primary.

    3. Anonymous11:17 PM

      Here we go with the redundant "bought and paid for."

    4. 7:16, Very little room for any ‘rigging’ here. Please read Rule 9, pages 9 and 10:

      Of the 715 Superdelegates, 261 are governors or in congress, so they would automatically be Superdelegates.

      The 20 DPL are all, to my knowledge, current or ex-presidents, current or ex. vice presidents, current or ex DNC chairs, etc. you get the idea, i.e. would automatically be Superdelegates.

      Of the 434 voting member delegates from within the DNC, about 100 of them have to be the current state chairs and vice-chairs.

      715-261-20-100 = 333

      Now, the remaining 333 have to come from all of the states that have any ‘slots’ left open after the above is taken into consideration (CA gets more Supers than Alaska, based on population). And there is a formula that needs to be followed - Page 10 of first link above “1. Persons shall be considered for pledged party leader and elected official delegates and alternates according to the following priority: big city mayors and state-wide elected officials to be given equal consideration; state legislative leaders, state legislators, and other state, county and local elected officials and party leaders”.

      The Supers are made up of Democratic party members, many of them long-time party members. Sanders has spent his life in politics until last year being an Independent. To suggest Hillary’s large early lead among the Supers must be a result of them being ‘paid off’ is ludicrous. Please show us some evidence of their vote being ‘bought’.

  14. Anita Winecooler3:56 PM

    I have nothing against Bernie, what I don't understand is why he calls himself a socialist democrat, and what does he mean by that?
    He was on television all day railing against the system, with what looks like a kindergarten or daycare backdrop. I'm sure they teach math there, among other things.

    Nobody gave Hillary a "coronation", she's earned every vote she got, just like Bernie did. Have a beef with DWS? Take it up with her, from what I've seen and the talking heads have said was she's remained neutral as head of the DNC. As for his campaign, he has every right to keep on campaigning till the end.

    1. Anonymous4:27 PM

      Sanders is a Democratic Socialist. It has a specific political meaning:

      "Democratic socialism is a political ideology that advocates political democracy alongside social ownership of the means of production."

    2. Anonymous4:50 PM

      She bought them.

    3. Anonymous5:50 PM

      She bought millions and millions of votes?

    4. Anonymous6:00 PM

      @ anon 4:50pm
      You are an idiot.

    5. Anonymous11:19 PM

      At this point, anyone who thinks HRC did not earn her win is nuttier than a fruitcake.

  15. Anonymous4:18 PM

    So, how did Hillary get all of those superdelegates before the first primary?

    She bought them with the help of Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

    "Collusion between the Clinton campaign and the DNC allowed Hillary Clinton to buy the loyalty of 33 state Democratic parties last summer. Montana was one of those states. It sold itself for $64,100.

    The Super Delegates now defying democracy with their insistent refusal to change their votes to Sanders in spite of a handful of overwhelming Clinton primary losses in their own states, were arguably part of that deal.

    In August 2015, at the Democratic Party convention in Minneapolis, 33 democratic state parties made deals with the Hillary Clinton campaign and a joint fundraising entity called The Hillary Victory Fund. The deal allowed many of her core billionaire and inner circle individual donors to run the maximum amounts of money allowed through those state parties to the Hillary Victory Fund in New York and the DNC in Washington.

    The idea was to increase how much one could personally donate to Hillary by taking advantage of the Supreme Court ruling 2014, McCutcheon v FEC, that knocked down a cap on aggregate limits as to how much a donor could give to a federal campaign in a year. It thus eliminated the ceiling on amounts spent by a single donor to a presidential candidate.

    There's more.

    But essentially Debbie Wasserman Schultz has blurred the lines between the right and left and turned the DNC into nothing more than the RNC. Sure a few positions like abortion might be different. But as far as big money in politics and the corruption it engenders are concerned, there is no difference between the parties.

    The fund is administered by treasurer Elizabeth Jones, the Clinton Campaign’s chief operating officer. Ms. Jones has the exclusive right to decide when transfers of money to and from the Hillary Victory Fund would be made to the state parties.

    One could reasonably infer that the tacit agreement between the signatories was that the state parties and the Hillary Clinton Campaign would act in unity and mutual support. And that the Super Delegates of these various partner states would either pledge loyalty to Clinton, or, at the least, not endorse Senator Sanders. Not only did Hillary’s multi-millionaire and billionaire supporters get to bypass individual campaign donation limits to state parties by using several state parties apparatus, but the Clinton campaign got the added bonus of buying that state’s Super Delegates with the promise of contributions to that Democratic organization’s re-election fund.

    “It just becomes a way to funnel more to the DNC to support the Clinton Campaign”, said Paul S. Ryan, deputy executive director of the Campaign Legal Centre, which advocates for campaign finance reform. “It’s effectively Hillary Clinton’s team soliciting Hillary Clinton’s supporters for much bigger checks than they can give to the campaign.”"

    That is what Bernie is fighting against (and what Elizabeth Warren is against so she will never agree to be Hillary's VP) and it is what is attracting so many supporters to Bernie. They don't like the corruption that kind of money buys.

    1. Anonymous5:50 PM


    2. Anonymous11:22 PM

      LOL - that's an April Fool's post by Margot Kidder! How dumb are you to not know that? LOL

    3. Anonymous4:48 AM

      I am struck by how the intelligent, coherent and thoughtful posters who dare point out positives about the Sanders campaign are so outnumbered by the adolescent parroting name calling ones.The silly so-called Bernie Bros have nothing on them.

    4. Anonymous5:42 PM

      That's not an intelligent, coherent, thoughtful post. That's a cut and paste job that starts with an outrageous, ridiculous claim.

  16. Anonymous4:22 PM

    Gryphen, i must have missed why you are so dead set against Bernie. Your blog seems devoted this now instead of the Palins. Personally I see pluses fir both candidates and recognize either is preferable to Trump.and Hilkary certainly didn't concede early. So what gives? Why are you so anti-Bernie sanders?

    1. Anonymous5:59 PM

      Because Bernie is a loser.

    2. Anonymous7:18 PM

      Because Bernie had the chutzpah to challenge Hillary and isn't letting her off easy. He's also trying to keep the DNC honest and bring them back to the core values they used to have before DWS introduced big money and started to manipulate the process.

    3. Anonymous11:23 PM

      Bernie is a grifter. Only idiots can't see it.

    4. Anonymous3:16 AM

      I knowBernie is doing that and I think can all agree that's a good thing. Why are you so against him Gryphen? I'm curious.

    5. Anonymous5:45 AM

      Anonymous3:16 AM,

      If you still don't know why he prefers Clinton, you haven't read his posts. He has laid his reasons many times, whether you agree with them or not. So go and read them and stop with this tired question.

  17. Anonymous4:50 PM

    Why were there no reports about the ransacking of Sander's campaign staff office in Nevada or the shots fired into his state campaign office?

    Could it be because Sanders didn't accuse Clinton supporters of doing it?

    Instead, he "released a statement saying that he “[condemns] any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals,”

    Too bad that shoe doesn't fit the other foot. I guess because it isn't a stiletto heel.

    1. Anonymous5:58 PM

      Neither Hillary, who is now campaigning only against tRump, nor her supporters give a darn about Bernie. And I suppose next someone will have carved Bernie into some Bernie Bros forehead.

    2. Anonymous6:10 PM


    3. Anonymous9:27 PM

      Hillary does not wear stilettos.


    4. Anonymous11:24 PM

      Why are there no police reports that confirm this supposed shooting? There's no evidence it really happened.

  18. Crystal Sage6:27 PM

    Personally, I'm already thinking ahead to whom Hillary will pick as her running mate. It will not be Sanders or Warren. They will remain in the Senate. The goal is to get back the Senate and possibly the House (a heavy lift.) I think she will pick a governor from the West, possibly Hickenlooper from Colorado. (I had hoped for Julian Castro, but he seems to be off the short list.)

    1. Anonymous11:25 PM

      Love Hicklenhooper!

  19. "Hillary Clinton on the other hand has strong support from the Democrats, and is strongly identified as a Democrat, so a vote for her on a ballot is an almost certain vote for other Democrats on that voting form as well."

    I'm perfectly at ease not voting for Pres. and still voting for Dems down ticket. I'm also fine leaving any of the choices blank. I think she might be a problem for straight ticket voters though.

    1. Anonymous7:02 PM

      I don't know how any Democrat or left-leaning independent can leave the choice for president blank, especially this year.

    2. Anonymous11:26 PM

      At this point, it's an IQ test. Either you understand what's at stake or not.

    3. Anonymous3:17 AM

      Agreed. Leaving it blank is how Trump could win

  20. Anonymous7:30 PM

    What is important is that Sanders represents policies and voters that are 180 degrees opposite of Democrats like Hilary. He may go away but the voters backing him will not. Many, many of Sanders’ voters are young and will be voters for a long time. Calling Sanders names and rigging things against him will not remove the essential problem that both parties face: they are controlled by big money and special interests.

    If the parties fail to reform, more and more independent and third party candidates will run. This is not due to a Sanders or a Nader or a Trump, but because both parties have been shown to serve the wealthy and corporate powers while unresponsive to the needs and problems of the rest of the country.

    Bernie Sanders is where he is because of the failure of the Democratic party to serve its base. This problem will not end with this election cycle. Millions of people voted for him, including first time voters, voting in future election cycles they will not endorse the status quo of the current Democratic party.

    The “New” Democratic Party lost much of its base in the 1980s and onward as its embraced Republican-lite, or what they called centrist positions. Again, Sanders represents millions: some are older voters who never endorsed the party's move to the right and others are new voters all of whom want to get big money out of politics and return to more progressive policies.

    Anyone who wants to understand what’s going on in the party now and is concerned for its future should read the history of the "New Democrats" and their takeover of the party. The rift in the party is long-standing and now there's a chance to heal it--if the Democratic leadership wants to. Otherwise more challenges to the current party leadership and more third party candidates will arise, with or without Sanders, because voters--especially young and first-time voters-- are activated and they see through the sham of Wall St. and corporate-backed politicians and the wealthy running the country and they want to change that.

    If the Democrats want to win in November, they had better stop attacking Sanders and his voters. The stupidity and arrogance of the party leadership is stunning at present and they certainly are not looking to the future. The enthusiasm for Sanders is not just for the man himself but for crucial changes he envisions away from politics as usual with the prospect of undoing policies that are injuring working class and middle class Americans. By disrespecting the voters that Sanders policies’ attract, the party stands to lose millions of potential voters who will look to form a third party if the Democratic establishment drives them out of the party. If that happens, and the Democrats once again betray their traditional base of working class Americans the current leadership will only have themselves to blame, and they will face a very real possibility that the Democratic party will become a remnant of what it was, because the base will have moved out.

    Some insight into the real differences:

    1. Anonymous11:27 PM

      BS - no movement is going on. The sanders peeps are so dumb they can't even register to vote! Look at the lawsuit they just filed against the state of CA! What idiots!

    2. I have almost totally stopped coming to IM because its very talented father has turned it into a Hillary lovefest. You, anonymous, have summed up the reality that exists brilliantly without being vicious, dismissive or in denial about the reality of what's going on. Of COURSE there's a movement. And if COURSE people are tired of politics as usual. C IS politics as usual. I have read much about the " Nero_ liberal takeover of the Democratic party that began writing the Clintons. I look forward to reading the book you suggest. What concerns me is that if DWS and HER DNC ignore Sanders and his followers (me) , the energy generated by them will dissipate into helplessness. But then I'm comforted by the understanding that revolutions never die, they just change energy levels.

    3. Anonymous12:21 PM

      @ Susan Eason, Thanks.

      The term New Democrats refers to a movement that was started by mainly Southern Dems like the Clintons and Gore to move the party to the right, favoring big business, deregulation and other neoliberal economic and social policies that had been adopted by Reagan Republicans. This led to a massive transfer of wealth upward away from the middle and working class, and the eventual economic collapse in 2008. (Also see the Democratic Leadership Council)

      Things change when enough people get involved. It took the Labor movement that gave us laws protecting workers and doing away with child labor upwards of fifty years to enact change. Same for the abolition of slavery, the vote for women, the civil rights act--all were the fruit of many years of work by many people.

      Teddy Roosevelt formed a third party that had a great impact on the country--though he didn't win. The Dems can't continue business as usual when millions of Dem. voters have rejected their main policies.
      We have made progress in this country on many fronts; I like to remember that. The temptation to give in to despair and hopelessness is not a viable option if we want a better future for our children and our country.

  21. Anonymous8:11 PM

  22. Anonymous9:05 PM

    The roof
    The roof
    The roof is on fire
    Sen Bernie Sanders (I-Vt) doesn't care about the Democratic Party Let the motherfuc_er burn
    Burn motherfuc_er burn

    1. Anonymous11:28 PM

      I hate Bernie and his little Devine, too.

  23. Anonymous9:09 PM

    “I am the stronger candidate because we appeal to independents, people who are not in love with either the Democratic or the Republican Party,” Sanders insisted.


    1. Anonymous9:16 PM

      Because I can't win as a 75 year old Independent Socialist. So I conned the Democratic Party into thinking I wanted to be one of them and after they took me in I shoved a red hot poker up their asses.

    2. Anonymous9:35 PM

      I GOT YA

  24. Anonymous9:28 PM

    Old Bernie Sanders you don't care about your legacy and destroying the Democratic Party and handing over the presidency to Donald Trump because you will be dying of old age pretty soon and can't hear America damning you. But your second wife, kids and grandchildren will be around listening to how America wished you had died a year ago.

  25. Anonymous9:49 PM

    Bernie Sanders's marriage to the Democratic Party is a MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE

    A marriage of convenience (plural marriages of convenience) is a marriage contracted for reasons other than that of relationship, family, or love. Instead, such a marriage is orchestrated for personal gain or some other sort of strategic purpose, such as political marriage.

    Bernie Sanders did to the Democrats what he did to his first wife and to his other multiple political parties he joined.


  26. Anonymous9:57 PM

    "Bernie Sanders shouldn't go scorched-earth on Democratic Party"

    But the Sanders campaign doesn't seem to care. "While Mr. Sanders says he does not want Mr. Trump to win in November, his advisers and allies say he is willing to do some harm to Mrs. Clinton in the shorter term if it means he can capture a majority of the 475 pledged delegates at stake in California and arrive at the Philadelphia convention with maximum political power," reports the New York Times on the campaign's newest strategy — a scorched-earth run to the finish.

  27. Anonymous10:02 PM

    There's no "Team" in Bern"I"e,
    just "I"

  28. Anonymous11:33 PM

    Hillary will protect President Obama's legacy and continue fighting for all Americans... she and PO have devoted their lives as public servants. (For Bernie, politics is a paycheck.)

  29. Anonymous4:43 AM

    And at 250k a pop for speeches politics ain't a paycheck for Hillary?

    1. Anonymous5:40 PM

      She was a private citizen at the time. Sanders is a public servant.


Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.