2016 Democratic Convention

Bernie Sanders Delegates Are Furious and a DNC Floor Protest is Possible

In convention floor interviews with Reason, "Bernie or Bust" delegates call Clinton "untrustworthy" and are cagey about a possible DNC walk-out.

|

Takin it to the floor
Reason/Anthony L. Fisher

Bernie Sanders delegates are mad as hell (even booing their candidate today after he tried to convince them to vote for Hillary Clinton) and a convention floor revolt in some shape or form is possible.

According to the Los Angeles Times, earlier today Sanders supporters were "making the rounds at a hotel near the airport where state delegations from New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont and Maine, all strongholds of Sanders support, were staying" in the hopes of ensuring a roll call vote at the convention, despite the fact that Sanders has already endorsed Clinton. 

Reason spoke with a number of Bernie Sanders-supporting delegates on the floor of the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in the hour prior to the opening gavel today. These delegates represented states won by both Sanders and Hillary Clinton, but party unity was not on the mind of Sanders supporters, many of whom remain incensed over the information revealed by a Wikileaks dump of Democratic National Committee-related emails, which confirmed the long-suspected preference of the party leadership for Clinton over Sanders. 

Tim Butler of Pennsylvania confirmed he's heard various rumors of a "sit-in, walk-out, standing and turning our backs to Hillary during her speech," but that he couldn't confim any particular action will actually take place. Butler says he's undecided on whether or not he'll vote for Clinton in the general election, though he's worried that a vote for a third party will result in a Donald Trump presidency. He thinks "libertarians and progressives have a lot in common," but libertarians' "anti-government" philosophy makes voting for Gary Johnson an unlikely prospect for him to consider.

One Wisconsin delegate decked out in a substantial amount of Bernie swag, Joshua John Renner, told me his "Flip a Delegate" button referred to his efforts to convince superdelegates to switch their votes to Sanders. Renner would not comment on the rumored revolts, but added, "we'll see what happens." He completely ruled out voting for Clinton in the general election, calling her "untrustworthy" on too many issues to count, and said he would likely vote for Green Party candidate Jill Stein.

Mad as hell and not sold on Hillary
Anthony L. Fisher

Theresa Jacobs of Montana said she was "in a state of visceral disgust" over the entire Democratic primary process, which she says has had "corruption built in" from the start. Jacobs called Clinton "a cheater" and described her nomination "a sham." In Jacob's view Clinton is a "warhawk," adding that she couldn't fathom how Clinton—a mother and a grandmother—could be so "militaristically aggressive" throughout her political career, championing wars which have caused countless children to be orphaned.  

Jacobs would not confirm or deny any coordinated revolt by Sanders' delegates either before or after tomorrow's roll call vote, but she did say she was working to "convert superdelegates" by "tweaking their consciences…to prevent harm." She did not seem confident that her efforts were amounting to much due to the "cognitive dissonance" of the party elites.

Jenny Marshall of North Carolina told Reason that she is sure there are delegates who would like to walk out of the convention in protest, but that she "did not believe any reasonable delegate" would do so. Marshall said Clinton "has a lot of work to do" to get her vote and that the revelations of collusion between the DNC and Clinton's campaign mean "she's got a lot more to prove."

Jeff Marshall, also of North Carolina, suggested he might vote for the Libertarian or Green party candidates, but that if Clinton pivots sufficiently to the left, he'd leave the door open to voting for the Democrat.

A Massachusetts delegate who went by Elaine says that because "Bernie has not released us" yet, she is "still for Bernie all the way" until tomorrow's roll call vote at the bare minimum. She would consider voting for Clinton in the general election, but only if she demonstrates a sufficient commitment to the Democratic Party platform, which had a number of Sanders supporters among its authors.

According to Betsy Woodruff of the Daily Beast, Sanders delegates from California were in no mood to play nice once the convention actually got under way:

Check out Reason TV's video about how the very concept of superdelegates was created by the Democratic Party following the nominations of George McGovern and Jimmy Carter in the 1970s, precisely to prevent insurgent candidates such as Sanders from winning the nomination solely based on the will of Democratic primary voters.

Advertisement

NEXT: Utah Sen. Madsen on Defecting to the Libertarian Party: The GOP Has Abandoned Jeffersonian Principles

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. I watched it twice and still don’t understand

      1. I believe at the end he calls her “Emailary,” which is worthy of Mike M.

        1. I thought i heard “Shemalery”

          it was disturbing

        2. +1 Block Yomama

  1. One Wisconsin delegate decked out in a substantial amount of Bernie swag, Joshua John Renner, told me his “Flip a Delegate” button referred to his efforts to convince superdelegates to switch their votes to Sanders.

    That’s so cute.

  2. He thinks “libertarians and progressives have a lot in common,” but libertarians’ “anti-government” philosophy makes voting for Gary Johnson an unlikely prospect for him to consider.

    What happens when words don’t mean things.

    1. I actually try to give the Bernie supporters credit and (pre?) suppose they believe what they say.

      Assuming that premise, there’s no way they’d vote for GayJay/Libertarian because a smaller, less-intrusive government vision is the antithesis of everything they believe. You simply can’t provide free college, healthcare, get the Billionaires, stop the Kochs, and create a nationalized, collective labor movement without more government. A lot of government. Veritable armies of clipboard-wielding social workers.

      Those that can easily switch their vote to libertarian never believe or heard anything Bernie said, and as such, I’m not sure libertarianism wants them.

      1. Apparently, cheaper and higher quality health care isn’t good enough. It absolutely must be free, even when that results in wait lists and low quality, because otherwise the little fat children will go hungry in this country.

      2. I’ll take them. Numbers are important.

      3. Assuming that premise, there’s no way they’d vote for GayJay/Libertarian because a smaller, less-intrusive government vision is the antithesis of everything they believe.

        Yes and no. I’ve generally been inclined to agree with you, but I do know a Sanders voter and it’s a little more complex. They get the diagnosis kind of right, but completely botch the remedy.

        In no small part, the system is rigged. It’s rigged so many ways and even in contradictory directions that it makes it very difficult to even keep afloat. Different gangs of pressure groups use the government to secure advantages that wind up paid for by everybody else.

        What they don’t get is that its the government rigging the system. Expanding the government the way they’re trying to only rigs the system more.

        1. They get the diagnosis kind of right, but completely botch the remedy.

          Which is precisely the modus operandi of socialists of all stripes. Yes, starving grannies is a problem; no, wealth redistribution is not the answer.

          1. Well, the thing is, wealth redistribution is already happening. It’s why there’s enormous financial pressure on getting Hillary elected. She’ll keep the interest rates low, which is a de facto wealth transfer from the savers (lower and middle class) to the stock and asset owners (upper class).

            We should worry about ending stuff like that, not adding new layers of redistribution until property is barely a thing anymore.

        2. Yes and no. I’ve generally been inclined to agree with you, but I do know a Sanders voter and it’s a little more complex. They get the diagnosis kind of right, but completely botch the remedy.

          I too know a Sanders voter and in their case, they weren’t really listening to Sanders. Essentially, in my limited personal experience they hear “blah blah blah blah blah equitable”. Well, who can argue with equitable?

          The other problem is the diagnosis is in fact, wrong. Yes, you’re dying, but WHY are you dying. That’s still part of the diagnosis. The wrong diagnosis is what leads them to the wrong remedy.

      4. Bernie Sanders supporters are weak, stupid people. Deserving neither consideration nor respect.

  3. Well this is all an obtuse vortex of trilling socialism.

    1. I prefer vortexes of tribbing.

      1. I was trying to make a scissors joke, but writing “cut that out” probably wouldn’t get the point across.

    2. AC, your gift just keeps on giving. I am sure I will find an opportunity to use “obtuse vortex of’ something around the office this week. Thanks, bro.

  4. PUMA 2.0 are farther removed from reality than the first generation 8 years ago.

      1. That’s Cougars.

      2. Party Unity My Ass. How can I be the only one who remembers this from the Democrats’ 2008 primary season?

        1. The deep lurkers remember Fist. They also remember when you were first on comment threads….

  5. Is anyone else secretly hoping for a Berniebros #krystalnacht where they take to the streets smashing windows and looting stores and burning down cars and no one even notices because it’s Philadelphia?

    1. They might think it was the cops trying to dislodge some hippies.

      1. The cops are on the move.

    2. There are parts of Philadelphia I would advise against invading

      1. Built in Urban Defense System

    3. Is anyone else secretly hoping for a Berniebros #krystalnacht

      I see the attraction, but no. The less actual violence in our politics, however awful they are, the better.

      1. I confess, I hope the Berniebots turn the DNC into a disaster of epic proportions. Don’t want to see anyone hurt, I just want everyone to see the left at their absolute worst.

      2. Anyone here remember the 1968 Dem convention?

        1. Yep. It was the first year that I actually followed the conventions at all closely. It was also the first year that I was eligible to vote but I didn’t get registered in time.

    4. Well, it’s ok when leftist traitors do it. If a team party person accidentally littered, CNN and NBC would report it as a neo-Nazi riot.

  6. The DNC stole the election from their candidate. That is not something they are going to get over easily. And I don’t think calling them sexists or screaming about the great Russian plot to help Trump is going to make them any less angry.

    1. the message seems to be = “We really don’t have our shit together”

      oh, and the unifying force is supposed to be “hillary”. lol. uh oh.

      1. They seemed to be pretty together about calling Bernie a commie atheist Jew. They were pretty organized about that.

        1. I find it comforting that the DNC thinks that Jew is a pejorative.

          1. I can’t figure it out: was he supposed to look bad for being an atheist, or a Jew?

            Apparently, he’s atheist, but he was Jewish, but…
            They think that his atheism would play worse than his Jewishness to democrats in the primary, so…

            Can someone decipher the SJW roadmap for how awesome/horrible it is to be/not be Jewish/atheist and how that’s all totally OK, because we avoided mansplaining, or something?

            1. It os an old and deep thing. A article of faith among Progs is that they were victims of McArthism. And a big part of that was playing on the public’s anti semitism. So even truthfully calling a Godless comie Jew a godless commie Jew is something only the racist evil right does.

              It is some real neurotic shit.

              1. So, it’s both? He’s a godless Jew, and that’s horrible?

                OK.

                So, apparently feminist support for Hilary trumps anti-semitism and bias against atheists in SJW town.

                Got it.

                * writes down in SJW handbook for how to think goodly *

          2. Its a two-fer smear. Why not, if you’re soulless partisan hack?

          3. I find it comforting that the DNC thinks that Jew is a pejorative.

            Well, in a group with Hank Johnson, James Zogby, Keith Ellison, and Cornell West, and that honors Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, this is not exactly a surprise.

          4. They certainly hate Israel enough, and pursue policies that will ultimately lead to a second holocaust. Just like our own self-hating Jew, Sheldon Richman.

        2. They seemed to be pretty together about calling Bernie a commie atheist Jew. They were pretty organized about that.

          Links?

          1. Use google. It is all over the net about the DNC staffer who wanted to have the media ask sanders about his religion thinking he was an atheist and thT would turn voters against him.

            1. I found just enough to get a sense that dirty politicking was being practiced.

              1. Yes. You have to remember Progs have convinced themselves only racist Republicans do that. To normal people it would just be politics. But you have to remember Progs are not normal people

                1. You have to remember Progs have convinced themselves only racist Republicans do that.

                  There seems to me that there is an ongoing narrative in this regard.

                  But you have to remember Progs are not normal people.

                  People are people, whether I agree with them or not.

                  1. Yes they are Charles. But they also are different. If you think Progs are incapable of believing self serving and silly things, I don’t know what to tell you other than they are not as wonderful as you think they are.

                2. They’re not even really people at all. Just things. Useless things.

              2. If the Hillary campaign were the ones doing it it would be dirty politicking. The fact that it was the DNC, which is supposed to be neutral on primary candidates, makes it a breach of ethics.

    2. They will fall into line. Trump can be made to look quite frightening. (Most of the time by Trump.)

      1. I don’t think so. Trump is no less freightening than Hillary to those people.

      2. They will fall into line. Trump can be made to look quite frightening. (Most of the time by Trump.)

        They will fall into line. Hillary can be made to look quite frightening. (Most of the time by Hillary.)

        Then we are in agreement.

      3. This. This is all much sound and fury signifying nothing.

        1. Speaking of voting, how are you feeling about your recent Trudeau vote?

    3. Even without the email scandal, the difference between Hillary and Bernie in the delegate count is the superdelegates.

      300 some regular delegates separating Bernie and Hillary and 600 superdelegates pledged to Hillary.

      Meanwhile, the swing voters are watching this on television, and Trump’s words in his speech on Thursday about how the DNC has rigged the system against Bernie (and by extension, the little guy) is still ringing in their ears.

      This is playing right into Trump’s hands.

      Trump doesn’t need the support of the kind of people who go to conventions to win. He needs the support of average Joes in Ohio, Michigan, and Pittsburgh–who would usually vote for Democrats.

      Meanwhile, the Dems on TV are blasting Trump for wanting to keep rapey boom boom refugees away.

      It’s gonna take a miracle for Trump to win, but miracles happen every day.

      1. The Rapey Boom Boom Refugees would be a great name for a band, assuming it isn’t already.

      2. It doesn’t look like much of a miricle to me. He is ahead and HillRy has been dropping like a rock since the FBI declined not to indict her

        1. Plus, Hillary is an awful campaigner. And events are unlikely to boost her campaign.

          Seriously, what kind of news stories are we likely to get in the next few months that support her narrative rather than Trump’s?

          1. They have to hope Trump says worse things than he already has, but I think his negative ratings may have already bottomed out.

            If she completely outperforms Trump in a debate, that might help her. But I don’t see her doing well against him in that setting. She’s so vulnerable on so many scandals–and he’s gonna rip into every one of them.

            1. I don’t think she will debate except as a desperation play if her polling is truly awful.

              If she doesn’t, I think a Trump v Johnson debate would be most excellent.

              1. Not debating looks bad. Really bad. Especially if you have a reputation as an imperious elitist.

                1. Especially if you have a reputation as an imperious elitist.

                  Imperious elitism is her selling point.

            2. She’ll both completely outperform Trump and lose to him in the debates, because they will be “debating” in two totally different styles, with two different goals and, really, two different audiences.

              1. The media will tell us how amazing she did, against the evidence of our lying eyes and ears.

              2. She’ll both completely outperform Trump and lose to him in the debates, because they will be “debating” in two totally different styles, with two different goals and, really, two different audiences.

                This is actually a pretty good analysis.

                1. Don’t act so surprised

                2. I agree It really is spot on

            3. I’ve been trying not to pay too much attention, but I get the sense that Trump has made some effort to change his tone a bit. I suspect he will do his best to avoid saying many more outrageous things before the election.

            4. “She’s so vulnerable on so many scandals–and he’s gonna rip into every one of them.”

              LOLWUT? So far he’s studiously avoided doing just that. He’d rather hassle Cruz.

              “Seriously, what kind of news stories are we likely to get in the next few months that support her narrative rather than Trump’s?”

              Improving economy and defeating ISIS.

              1. Neither of those things is happening.

          2. That’s entirely up to Trump, and if I’m right about my theory, he’s keeping his negatives in the media spotlight on a consistent enough basis to keep Hillary’s out of the news cycle entirely.

            1. Makes more sense than almost anything else in this thread.

    4. Why the DNC thinks the Bernies might be offended that the Russians are conspiring against a candidate they hate is something of a mystery to me.

      1. Well they had to try blaming the Russians.

        What else are they gonna do?

        I still can’t believe Hillary hired Wasserman Schultz so blatantly.

        They had Schultz still on the schedule to speak as of this morning. They’ve only started to figure it out in the last few hours.

        The progressives are premier elitists, and they’re absolutely shocked that the Bernie supporters didn’t just bow to Hillary’s eliteness.

        Don’t they know their role?

    5. “The DNC stole the election from their candidate.”

      BAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHA

      1. They did. Bernie should have won. It is what it is. You love Hillary so you think it is okay. But it is what it is.

        1. Stop lying. There’s no evidence they stole an election. The DNC played dirty politics (what’s new?) but there is evidence of a ‘stolen’ election.

          1. Like the way your boy stole the Canadian election?

          2. No, the problem is not that the DNC played dirty politics, it’s that the DNC acted to aid the Clinton campaign when it was supposed to neutral on primary candidates.

            Hillary calling Bernie an atheist may be dirty politics or it may be legitimate voter information. The DNC is not supposed to be aiding any primary candidates campaign.

  7. “He thinks “libertarians and progressives have a lot in common,” but libertarians’ “anti-government” philosophy makes voting for Gary Johnson an unlikely prospect for him to consider.

    LOL

    Low information delegate.

    1. Maybe. Maybe even probably. But he could mean that he’s down with popular portrayals of libertarian values (pot, Mexicans…you know) but thinks we need government to do all those things for us.

  8. You know, without knowing the particulars and knowing how left-wing these people are, I have to give them credit to the extent they too are fed up with the bull shit and are fighting tooth and nail.

    It’s impressive.

    1. Whenever I start to think that what they’re doing is pretty cool and consider cheering them on, I remember that they’re goddamned socialists who think “free college” is a serious and important proposal.

      1. And they are more than willing to take your money at gun point for any reason that catches their fancy.
        I’d sentence them to have sex with Shrill except I’m not that cruel.

        1. I know. That’s the problem.

          It took me multiple retypes to get this through after three bourbons.

          1. “You know, without knowing the particulars and knowing how left-wing these people are, I have to give them credit to the extent they too are fed up with the bull shit and are fighting tooth and nail.

            It’s impressive.”

            I agree, Rufus. It is almost as if they are taking a principled stand, and if they are taking a principled stand (regardless of whether or not I agree with their political viewpoints), then I can appreciate their fighting against an establishment which they perceive has betrayed them.

            1. Fucken-A.

            2. That’s why they’re demanding more establishment.

              1. Paul,

                Think again about the nuance.

                What if you believed that “the greater good” is best served/achieved by benevolent individuals in government? What if you also believed that your candidate is the type of individual who can improve (revolutionize) government to serve/acheive the greater good, and then learned that the establishment is against him?

                1. Chuck E.

                  Yes, you are describing the vaunted “youth” voter since the early 90s.

                  This time.

                  1. Paul,

                    Do you think that the disillusionment of “youth voters” or “newly opened eyed” voters eventually causes many of these persons to reluctantly vote for the party which speaks* more to their viewpoints?

                    In different words, do you think that many of our fellow voters will “give up” and join/vote with one of the two major parties as opposed to “wasting their votes” on alternate candidates after their disillusionment?

                    party which speaks* yet not necessarily acts/has proven not to act in accordance to their viewpoints

  9. Whoever posted the EverydayFeminism link in the PM thread, I hate you, because now I’ve descended into a realm of madness.

    White privilege as explained by a cartoon.

    The first two examples based on how many people end up in prison and how many people fail to get employed with a criminal record, shockingly omit any mention of things such as comparative crime rates between white and black populations, actual crimes committed, and skill sets prisoners had both before prison and after.

    1. “in One simple comic”

      …which involves like 500 words…

      …..and ends with “And Fucking Educate Yourself!!” ….

      ….which, if the One Simple Comic had actually done its job , is exactly what would have already been accomplished.

      It actually manages to insult the reader for just having tried to do just that.

      Like most prog arguments/methods, its not really meant to convince ‘nonbelievers’ so much as reinforce the sense of self-righteousness of the already-converted.

      1. /nods in approval.

    2. Honestly, this is a handy thing to have around, because it pegs these idiots down on what they mean by privilege. Usually they leave it airy and undefined since it’s handy having a nebulous epithet to shut people down. And that, after all, is the sole purpose of the “white privilege” canard, to shut down sensitive topics over which informed opponents will steamroll them. With a convenient enumeration of the various ways whites are “privileged,” you can easily crush them point by point.

      You know, I started typing this out before I scrolled down half a page to find that the sum total of the poor dear’s argument is 1) that blacks are arrested proportionately with their rates of crime, 2) that white male convicts are 5% likelier to land a job than black male convicts (odd that she breaks down the statistic this way… and of course, give no indication that the types of crime are factored), and blames the media for emphasizing interracial homicides (except that it’s predictably going to be the case, since intraracial crimes will generally be family affairs or disagreements between people who know each other, which isn’t an exciting lede like “White man guns down four blacks in broad daylight”. Besides which, given that the majority of black victims are murdered by other blacks, I’d imagine our darling dear illustrator here would castigate the media for focusing too much on interracial violence if they reported it in proportion to its occurrences).

      1. The problem is that they’re still deliberately being vague. The statistics are just there to support a pre-determined conclusion. Note how just after the statistics are thrown out they declare “therefore white privilege exists, and you’ll believe in it too if you see *insert anecdotal experience that may or may not have anything to do with legitimate racism*.”

        Black guy getting beat up by skinheads? Actual racism.

        Black guy who applied to the same job as you doesn’t get it? Not exactly easy to validate as racist.

        Both cases would be used to prop up a ‘white privilege’ argument as an anecdotal experience.

      2. You misread the 5% hiring difference. That was between a white guy with a criminal record versus a non-white without a criminal record.

        1. Fair point. I’m still willing to bet it’s an apples to grapenuts comparison.

      3. Did you not see who created this “explainer”?

        “‘Jamie Kapp is a 19-year old artist.””

        Do you really expect some teenage dipshit to have a better grasp on socio-politics than you already do?

        1. And an artist to boot. Most of them tend to be soft headed idiots.

      4. What they are talking about isn’t privilege. It’s not getting fucked over.

      5. Is it just me or are most of their statistics, without Googling to confirm, completely wrong? At the least they start off with wrong stats. Half of “POC’s” are going to end up in jail? 90% of inmates are POC’s? That’s horseshit.

    3. Wow, that site. I just read an article that explained how cismen are violent assholes of the patriarchy because the author is a borderline sociopath. No, but seriously, it’s how all men are raised in our culture. You just have to understand the intersectionality of your positionality without being heterosexist to understand, or something. I notice there is no comment section, that I could find. It must be a safe place for the authors to express their stupid ideas and congratulate each other on being so progressive.

      1. Tis a dark and terrible place. When I was nineteen we just wrote shitty poetry.

  10. The leak itself was so great. Deep down inside it’s always great to realize every politician is a narcissistic, self-serving criminal, but when all physical evidence proves it it makes it that much sweeter. My favorite turn on Twitter are those suggesting that this information has no public value and that we really should be concerned about Russian hackers. I just wish the Russians would hack all political operative emails so that we could dispel our ignorance about these people forever.

    1. I just wish the Russians would hack all political operative emails so that we could dispel our ignorance about these people forever.

      Seriously.

      We should thank the russians for helping us see how shitty our pols really are. Maybe hillary should get the french to hack Trumps’ email. Oh wait, his twitter is already the worst.

      1. Trump has lived his entire adult life in the public eye, as tabloid bait.

        There isn’t a skeleton in his closet that he hasn’t already had gold-plated and used to decorate one of his casinos.

        I’m sure the Dems are planning some kind of October surprise, but its gotta be slim pickings for them, and they have to know Trump will just feed it back to them as a dirty trick.

        1. THEY’RE GOING TO EXPOSE UNIVERSIDAD TRUMP!

          1. But they’ve got the Laureate Education scandal on their side.

        2. Trump will just feed it back to them as a dirty trick.

          Or, better yet he’ll just own it with pride and more voters will think its just cool. In the end Clinton got more “attaboys” from the unwashed for boinking Monica than he did condemnation. Without the Twenty-second Amendment Clinton would have been FDR without the polio, the high blood pressure and the congestive heart failure.

          Neglected always is the “bad boy” factor. Clinton benefited from it and I think Trump does to.

          The voters who this appeals to know that the guy is looting the treasury but, hey, it isn’t “their” money he’s stealing and besides they’re pretty sure he’ll spread the pelf around and some of it is bound to come their way.

  11. It is so depressing that things have come to this. They were never going to allow Bernie, or anyone else, a fair chance at nomination. It is no wonder that HRC displays so much arrogance. Her nomination has been bought and paid for already. I wonder if the general election has already been fixed. Of course, once the majority of people lose faith that their vote matters at all, they will likely make themselves heard through other means.

    1. I wonder if the general election has already been fixed.

      Absent truly comprehensive hacking of electronic voting machines, it comes down, as it always does, to the margin of fraud. If its within the margin of fraud, the Dems will eke out another victory. If not, well . . .

      1. Dean,

        Given the time consuming task that is inherent in the counting of paper ballots, and considering the opportunities of an able-minded group of unethical individuals to electronically “switch votes” in the format which many of our fellow countrypersons are allowed to vote (such as scanned ballots), could you suggest methods which are more prone to cost-effective objective veracity?

        1. … could you suggest methods which are more prone to cost-effective objective veracity?

          What about blockchain?

      2. Sounds like the Republicans need to get with the program.

  12. At this point, it would be smartest for Clinton to let the Sanders camp get their protest on. Protesting is what progressives do, and once the protest is done they’ll feel like they’ve accomplished something and, conscience satisfied, will go back to their routine. By trying to silence them she’ll only give them something to keep protesting about.

  13. Lemme guess:
    They thought Shrill was acting in good faith, right?
    How cute!

  14. How long before all the people who called Ted Cruz brave and principled for dissing Trump at the RNC convention start ranting about how Bernie Delegates are a shocking display of bad taste and vice versa?

    1. Really, I mean, I’m no newsie, but most of what I caught in the Serious News was people– including republicans complaining that Cruz was “unprofessional” and “ungracious”. I think I heard “sore loser” more than once.

      1. I think Cruz was right to give Trump the finger. As a Republican he should have passed on speaking at the convention if that is what he wanted to do though. Would have been better off just not going at all and saying fuck that guy when asked why.

        1. No, he did the wrong thing. They all made a big deal about that pledge to support the eventual nominee when it looked like Trump would lose, and then when he won, Cruz didn’t honor it.

          1. Can one do something “right” and simultaneously “wrong”, PayayaSF?

          2. Trump totally dissed his wife. American people aren’t going to keep you warm at night.

            1. And Cruz’s father too. Definitely fighting words. In the old days, when things were correct, Cruz would have shot Trump in a duel.

          3. Trump tore that pledge up eons ago.

            Party pledges take a back seat to principle.

    2. Tonight if they are not already doing so

  15. The liberaltarian moment has arrived. The Bernie Bros will join up and get Johnson to 15%. There will be much rejoicing. The. The reason staff will realize they just helped Hillary lose and many Lamentations will follow

    1. More likely most will go for Stein but same potential result.

    2. Berniebots are not going to vote for Johnson. He’s an icky capitalist.

      1. You are right about some. But I think there is a contingent of Bernie supporters, particularly the younger ones, who glommed onto him because he was “genuine”. I don’t *think* these types were all that concerned with his policies beyond making them feel sufficiently righteous and allowing them to lash out at the establishment. Johnson could appeal to some of them, but to motivate them to vote there will have to be a critical mass so they can all pat each other on the back.

        Of course the size of that particular contingent could be vanishingly small. I really don’t have a good sense for the proportion of groups who supported Sanders for different reasons.

        1. Sanders got a hell of a lot of votes. It looks like both the GOP and the Dems received a total of around 28 million votes each. Sanders was more than 12 million of those on the Democratic side. I don’t think Hillary can win without a good percentage of those. It could come down to how many GOP voters vs DEM voters will refuse to vote for their party nominee. I don’t look for Johnson/Stein to make much difference.

      2. Anecdotally, my Facebook Bernie guy went from reposting Bernie memes each day to Johnson memes and criticizing Hillary. There are some.

        1. A +1, then?

    3. Chapman would be devastated.

  16. Mass stabbing in Japan

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/25/…..l?adkey=bn

    1. Does not fit the narrative -> IGNORE.

      1. I’m not sure how this could have happened

        http://www.stripes.com/news/bl…..aw-1.86932

        1. I never understood (and never will) why ‘for protection’ is not a valid reason to carry.

          1. Ohio’s knife laws are very vague when it comes to pocket knives. You cannot carry a concealed “weapon” without a permit but weapon is not really defined for a knife. So it’s basically at the discretion of the cop what that means.

            1. You can carry pretty much any blade in NH now for several years. There have been no massive rapier stabbing outbreaks.

      2. Mass stabbing in Japan

        Does not fit the narrative -> IGNORE.

        these have happened (and been ignored) before in Japan.

  17. One Wisconsin delegate decked out in a substantial amount of Bernie swag

    No one needs more than one kind of swag.

    1. All of it union made in the USA.

    1. It’s bad enough they put their little girls in tights with “Juicy” printed on their butt. We have to deal with little boys wearing that shit now?

    2. you are implying there are only two! Bigot alert, don’t you know this is CURRENT YEAR???

      I can’t even

      1. Wait, I thought there were zero genders? Isn’t gender supposed to be just a social construct?

        1. There’s either zero or eleventy, no compromise.

    3. I was thinking that by then everyone will be in a pantsuit, one style, gray.

  18. Jeff Marshall, also of North Carolina, suggested he might vote for the Libertarian or Green party candidates, but that if Clinton pivots sufficiently to the left, he’d leave the door open to voting for the Democrat.

    Translation from progspeak: “I’ll overlook her sociopathic thievery, corruption, and escalation of foreign wars if she throws more freebies my way!”

  19. George McGovern put back that tip!

  20. I watched not a single moment of the RNC convention, but I’m ALMOST tempted to pop some corn and tune in to the DNC con just for the lulz. The right drinking game might just tip the scales. (Most of the head honchos are on vacation this week, so I only have to be briefly semi-functional at the day job tomorrow.)

    1. I’m tempted as well but I think I’ll read instead.

    2. I think I’ll just watch the highlights, but drinking game maybe to some Nick/Matt live coverage of the event.

  21. I love the way the Dems created superdelegates to insure that any insurgent candidate was thwarted.

    Without realizing that, if it was needed and actually worked (as it has here), they would have a thwarted insurgency on their hands.

    That’s not even an unintended consequence. That was the whole point. And they are standing there like deer in the headlights.

    1. It was very effective. The Dems kept an insane moron out of the nomination. Their opponents did not.

      1. You say these things, yet have professed to voting for Justin fucking Trudeau.

  22. Ohio wouldbe huuuuge for Trump

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/18/…..dmore_pool

    1. You have the steelworkers in Youngstown, the UAW in Toledo, and the coal miners on the WV border.

    2. Hillary’s lead in OH and FL is gone. She still has about a 3 pt lead in PA though. Leave it to PA to tip the election to the Pantsuit.

    3. Here’s one of the best takes I’ve read on Hillary and the Democrat party recently. Not that most of us have not seen this for years now.

      Dems descent into crass identity politics

      1. Oh yeah. I do think some of the people they are claiming to be “fighting” for are starting to see through the bullshit. I see signs of that happening. It’s the white liberal college students and their peers that will never see the forest through the trees. Because it takes a college education to get that stupid. Plus to them it’s more about the sanctimony than actually helping anyone.

        1. “Politics is the mind-killer.”

        2. They’ll believe their PhD in Progressive Grievance Studies is a waste of money around the same time that a level 10 Scientologist will think their certificate of advanced mastery of thetans is a waste of money, and for similar reasons.

  23. If I had to talk to as many retards as Anthony did today, I’d be in a worse mood.

  24. Establishment lefty-tools are really trying:

    http://www.slate.com/articles/….._snit.html

    “Democrats Aren’t in Disarray. A Minority of Bernie Supporters Are in a Snit.”

    1. The chick holding the ‘Bernie, not for sale’ sign, is suffering from a massive delusion.

  25. You know, for those people who think Trump has no shot. I’m not so sure. Berlusconi – who is in the same category as Trump – got elected. Plus he owns one of the most trophied teams on the planet in AC Milan!

    So it’s not impossible. Now what team would befit Trump?

    1. The parallels between Berlusconi and Trump are remarkable. In fact, has anyone seen them in the same room together?

      1. I’m guessing you’re discounting they both have bad hair in your comment?

      2. Berlusconi went back in time, and regenerated into Trump. Or maybe it’s the other way around. Wibbly-wobbly, time-wimey.

    2. Everyone either loves the Yankees, or loves to hate the Yankees. Plus NYC. So Yankees.

    3. Only the Brooklyn Nets would suffice. Fix them and my confidence in Trump’s abilities would go way, way up.

    4. I’ll go with the Dallas Cowboys. Over the top, larger than life media image, once did great things but haven’t done shit worthwhile in 20 years, completely overrated.

      1. Will I have to wait all night for someone to say the Raiders?

        1. The Raiders will make the playoffs this year.

      2. Come to think of it, Trump should’ve asked Jerry Jones to be his running mate…

        What?

    5. He already had one, the New Jersey generals. They had Herschel Walker.

    6. The Browns. He would make them Great Again. It would be the greatest team of all time. The Cleveland fans would be so sick of winning, they’d beg him to not win so much.

    7. The Bakersfield Natives.

  26. Imagine if Bernie had told them to vote their conscience.

  27. What’s better for my conscience? Gary or abstaining? And I don’t care about the actual practical application of either. Facebook has been a diligent informant in that manner.

    1. Choose on you own?

      1. 🙁

        Wish you were William Easterly instead.

        1. Vote for Johnson. He won’t win but if he gets enough votes, there is a chance that the common guy will start to look at the LP as a viable option and feel less bad about “throwing his vote away”. You have to build a critical mass, though — voting is a group activity, and no one wants to be in a tiny group all by themselves.

          And besides, Johnson’s policies would move us in a direction of greater liberty on most issues. Not all libertarians are going to be excited about Johnson, but you shouldn’t feel bad voting for him.

          1. This.

          2. Works for me.

    2. I would say that it depends how quickly you want to get to the bar after work on election day. If you’re not in any rush then stop and vote for Gary first.

    3. Vote if it makes you feel better. It seems pretty simple to me.

  28. What’s better for my conscience? Gary or abstaining? And I don’t care about the actual practical application of either. Facebook has been a diligent informant in that manner.

  29. Holy batshit! Go to Drudge and look at that photo of DNC Debbie, lololol!!!

      1. That Vogue spread is incredible. Not even her own mother would recognize her.

        1. She is massively dolled up for that. It looks like they filled in her pores and sanded her face.

          1. Nah, they just killed and skinned the face off a pretty girl. Think Jim Pembry in ‘Silence of the Lambs’.

  30. Has anyone posted this yet? From a new PPP poll:

    Do you think Hillary Clinton has ties to Lucifer, or not?
    Clinton has ties to Lucifer……………………..19%
    Clinton does not have ties to Lucifer……….63%
    Not sure ……………….. ………………………….18%

    1. I love the “not sure”.

      1. I know, I’m still chuckling. When 37% of the public thinks you possibly or certainly have ties to Lucifer, I don’t think your election is as much of a “lock” as some people say.

        1. Not sure =/= possibly

          Still a lock.

    2. That’s not a parody?

      1. It’s real. At the link, there’s a link to the full PPP PDF of results.

    3. I’d have to vote No, only because I’m sure that if the devil existed, Clinton would have sold her soul and become president 8 years ago.

      1. You think her soul is that valuable? Besides, its well know that PROGRESSIVES HAVE NO SOULS.

    4. More like ties to Glasya-Labolas.

  31. Normal Philly residents can’t stay at a bar until 4AM or use an Uber, but now for the DNC, all the elites can!

    https://goo.gl/fx8VTc

    Want a Coke though? You still need to pay up.

    1. Is there some sort of regulation against buying coke (not that kind of coke) after hours?

  32. So is the DNC in danger of fracturing too or nah?

  33. Most excellent pic of DWS on Drudge right now. I think its what the word “gobsmacked” is meant to describe.

  34. RE: Bernie Sanders Delegates Are Furious and a DNC Floor Protest is Possible

    Oh no!
    Not a protest.
    Anything but a protest!

    1. If they do, I’m feeling nostalgic for some real 1960’s style riot policing to kick the shit out of those faggot cookie hippies.

  35. He thinks “libertarians and progressives have a lot in common,” but libertarians’ “anti-government” philosophy makes voting for Gary Johnson an unlikely prospect for him to consider.

    Yeah, because ignoring history, economics, and favoring big gov’t to use violence against others for what you want is so cool. Progs are gonna prog because they don’t face consequences for their advocacy of violence.

  36. I believe Mr. Kaine has laid the foundation for the “libertarian case for Hillary” articles:

    A new Clinton administration would pursue a bill to legalize illegal immigrants in “the first 100 days” of her tenure, vice presidential candidate Tim Kaine told Spanish-language network Telemundo in an interview Monday, presenting a deep contrast with Republicans.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com…..immigrant/

      1. I thought it was “ass, grass and amnesty.”

        Or maybe it was “gas, ass, or grass, nobody rides for free.”

    1. That is actually really excellent. It’s rare to see good policy and good politics come together in confluence.

  37. Don’t kid yourselves: the BernieBros will back Hillary. There’s really no reason to believe the Dem coalition that elected Obama won’t come out for Hillary.

    1. Plenty of reasons:

      She’s not black.

      She’s a more known quantity, not a blank slate for hopey-changey fantasies.

      She has negative charisma.

      She’s a poor campaigner.

      Widely perceived as dishonest, even criminal.

      The same party rarely takes the White House three terms in a row.

      Sure, the yellow-dog Democrats will come out for her, but conservative Dems and moderates? Not so much.

      1. Against a normal, sane opponent maybe (although her not being black didn’t stop black people from flocking to her in primaries). IRL, the alternative of a mentally ill fascist will drive those people right into her arms and give her the senate too.

        1. Why do you think you get an option on any of this? Your flapping headed Canadian ass VOTED FOR JUSTIN TRUDEAU.


  38. I quit my nine to five work and now I am making85 dollars hourly. …How? I am freelancing online from my home! My old workwas bad for me ,so I was forced to try something new? Two yrs have passed sinceAnd I say it was the wisest decision i ever made! Here is what i do?

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.Reportmax90.com

  39. just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here…….
    Clik This Link inYour Browser.
    ???????? http://www.factoryofincome.com

  40. You have to regarding the myhr CVS health and also minuteclinic coworkers site. MyHR CVS Please share your experiences with, or problems around.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.