Let's Start Bernie's Political Revolution........With The Democratic Super Delegates

After watching last night's Wisconsin primary results where Bernie Sanders beat out Hillary Clinton by 14 percentage points and waking up this morning to hear MSM news sources reporting that the state's 10 super delegates are still committing their support to Hillary, I came to realize that for the "Political Revolution" that Bernie Sanders is promoting to have any chance of success, it must start NOW and it must start with the super delegates. More specifically, I'm talking about the super delegates who currently hold political office and who are subject to future re-election campaigns.

We've all heard Hillary boast, on numerous occasions, about the vast amount of money she and her campaign raises for the DNC while she shuns Bernie's reluctance to do the same. She's talking about her commitment to contribute a substantial portion of all her fundraising to support the DNC and Democratic candidates running for election and/or re-election. Keep in mind that every Democratic politician who currently holds office in the House and Senate are super delegates who will be seeking monetary support from the DNC as they come up for re-election. Kinda explains why Hillary is contributing money, now doesn't it?

Hillary contributes large sums of money to the DNC. The same DNC currently headed up by Debbie Wasserman Schultz that has done everything in her power to limit debates while constantly portraying Hillary as the inevitable nominee. The DNC then has sole discretion on which Democratic candidates actually receive future campaign funding from the committee and how much.

Now, does anyone here actually think that a Democratic politician/super delegate who's facing re-election wouldn't be influenced by the threat of losing their DNC funding & support?

So, when a state like Wisconsin, (or any of the other states Bernie has won) has it's elected super delegates openly committing to continue supporting Hillary despite their state's election results, what does that say?

The time has come for those of us who support Bernie Sanders campaign to contact our respective super delegates and inform them that they have a choice to make. They can either choose to maintain their current role as puppets of "DNC Establishment Politics" by backing Hillary against the will of their constituency, or they can be part of the "revolution" to get big money and it's influence out of politics.

They need to know that going against the will of the voters in exchange for future campaign contributions and support from the DNC, will only serve to verify their identity as "establishment politicians" and result in their names being placed on the "revolution's" target list of politicians who need to be replaced ASAP.

Here's a link to a Wiki page that has the current Democratic super delegates listed by state, including who they are currently supporting in the presidential primaries. en.wikipedia.org...

I'm hoping that voters will use this list to identify and contact their respective super delegates to inform them that rejecting the will of their constituency and voting for Hillary will NOT go unnoticed and that they will lose voter support by doing so. They need to know that they will NOT win re-election in the future if they continue to be puppets for the "Establishment." This is how a "Political Revolution" takes place.

Everyone knows that regardless of who gets elected POTUS, none of them can accomplish their goals alone. They're going to need either the "establishment" on their side, or the continued outspoken voice of the electorate backing them up.

In order to orchestrate a "Political Revolution" where the goal is to eliminate big money establishment politics, it's going to take the "people" standing up and putting their representatives on notice and it's going to have to be done time and time again, on issue after issue. Those who choose to continue supporting establishment politics must be put on notice and/or voted out of office at the earliest opportunity. It's not a speedy process, but few things really worth having come easy.

This is what a "Political Revolution" is all about folks and it starts here & now!! Step one is getting Bernie Sanders elected and if the "DNC Establishment" gets their way, it ain't gonna happen.

Look up your super delegates and make your voice heard!! Let them know that we know who they are, we're watching what they're doing and that they'll pay a price for voting in a manner that is contrary to the will of their constituencies.

I've heard Bernie's campaign manager talk about how the campaign is actively reaching out to the super delegates in an attempt to get them to be reflective of the will of their voters, but I would just imagine that this is one of those things that no man or woman can do alone. This is going to be one of those times when Bernie needs our voices to be heard, loud & clear. Our super delegates need to know that it's NOT the DNC establishment they need to fear, it's us the "people."

Let's start this "Political Revolution" now and let's start with our super delegates!

The super delegates support whomever is in the lead. If Sanders pulls ahead they will switch over. Not that their are really enough of them to change the results. When you look at the polling in the states ahead Clinton has a clear path to magic number even if every Super Delegate voted for Sanders. The only time they would matter is if things were very close at which point they would be splitting up and supporting whom they thought should win. So long as Clinton is winning the popular vote that is the way the delegates will go.

a reply to: Flatfish

Let's start this "Political Revolution" now and let's start with our super delegates!

I would love to support Sanders in some respects. He has some good ideas about taking our country back from corporations and elites. The problem is he comes with his Socialist baggage. If he wasn't a Socialist I might have supported him. If I am looking for a mainstream candidate for change it will have to be Trump.

I actually like Bernie better as a human being, but I am not going to support his Socialist baggage. I will likely end up 'wasting' my vote for a 3rd party candidate anyway, but I don't think Bernie is the right guy. It is a shame he had to bring his personal agenda with him.

I'm not a Bernie supporter, but this is a good plan.

It's sad/crazy the games that both parties are playing this cycle.

a reply to: Flatfish

Great OP, thanks for the education

I think there may be a bit more of a problem than just money however. For one thing, looking at the SD's from my state, I observe that at least one harbors presidential ambitions of his own for the future. (he's too young now). So, there's very little hope that he would torque off the DNC by voting Sanders if Hilary has the greater number primary delegates.

Then there's another sad but true fact. Both of these "parties" are run like crime syndicates; the "elected" all have dirt on them and they've proven their creds by raising buckets of bucks which is paid like bribes to the "insiders" to keep that dirt under wraps. Bill Clinton, having been President knows where all the skeletons are buried. As a result, any SD that's pledged to Hilary is afraid to buck the Clinton's for fear of a skeleton being dug up and delivered to CNN, the "Clinton News Network".

originally posted by: MrSpad
The super delegates support whomever is in the lead. If Sanders pulls ahead they will switch over. Not that their are really enough of them to change the results. When you look at the polling in the states ahead Clinton has a clear path to magic number even if every Super Delegate voted for Sanders. The only time they would matter is if things were very close at which point they would be splitting up and supporting whom they thought should win. So long as Clinton is winning the popular vote that is the way the delegates will go.

I believe there are 712 democratic super delegates, so yeah there are enough of them to make a difference.

Right now, I think Hillary has 485 saying they'll support her. Take that 485 away from her delegate lead and the race is closer than you think.

And when it comes to Hillary's lead with the popular vote, first you have to take into consideration that many of the states that Bernie's won are caucus states where popular vote isn't really measurable and secondly, you have to consider that fact that most of the states where Hillary has won are red states in the Deep South that neither her or Bernie will win in a national election for POTUS.

This is far from over.

a reply to: Flatfish

I like Bernie which is why I won't vote for him. Being president will kill him.

a reply to: TonyS

I'm sure you're right about there being others factors involved.

I'm just waiting for the Clinton name to appear in the Panama Papers to see what if any, affect it has on their fearability.

On top of that, if a politician has secrets that they're afraid of having the Clintons reveal, they're probably one of those politicians who's name belongs on the top of the "Remove From Office ASAP" list.

doesn't this happen every election cycle? especially in this internet age.
backing the underdog.
last time around all the paulbots were doing bad math even after he dropped out.

a reply to: Flatfish

Just for clarification, it appears HRC has 483 SDs to Bernie's 31. In terms of total delegates, HRC has 1780 and Bernie has 1099 (This is all from CNN website www.cnn.com...).

So, if HRC's 483 Super D's were to flip to Bernie, there would actually be a 966 delegate swing because she would go down 483 and he would go up by the same amount. Assuming all 483 flipped (more than unlikely event), the new total would be HRC 1297 and Bernie 1582.

The point is that there DEFINITELY is enough superdelegates to make a huge difference in the democratic race.

This YT video might interest you as well OP.

It basically explains how the DNC funneled millions into Hillary's campaign by means of state party loopholes. I believe 33 states were involved, and this was back in August.

originally posted by: Flatfish

And when it comes to Hillary's lead with the popular vote, first you have to take into consideration that many of the states that Bernie's won are caucus states where popular vote isn't really measurable

That's a pretty telling statement right there. In other words, in the caucus states it is NOT the case that Bernie "won the popular vote" because there was no popular vote, so, as you say, it "isn't really measurable." What happened in those states is that Bernie's supporters were more organized and enthused and were willing to attend the caucus meetings. It was the same with Ron Paul. Ron Paul supporters didn't really care if he won the popular vote, they were going to get Ron Paul nominated IN SPITE of the popular vote. You could see this in the state conventions where the Ron Paul supporters goal was to take them over by any means necessary. Nevada was a good example.

Now you want to pressure the super delegates to parrot the popular vote. This is fundamentally hypocritical. Where you can circumvent the people, such as in caucus states, simply by being better organized, you'll do it in a heart beat because it's to your advantage. It doesn't matter to you what the popular will is in caucus states. The whole idea is to get Bernie supporters to the caucuses in greater numbers than Clinton supporters.

But this is NOT a national election. It is a method for the parties, which are private organizations, to select a nominee for that party. They get to do this any damn way they want to. They don't even need to hold primaries. They could just as well nominate a person directly at the national convention floor. Indeed, that's how small parties do it all the time. But instead of doing it that way both major parties have CHOSEN the primary route to give voters a chance to be heard, and the result is that delegates ARE awarded based on those votes.

Just not all of them AND just for the first ballot, after which most delegates are "released" from their pledges to vote for a given candidate. And although the GOP doesn't even have super delegates, that's why you are hearing people like Priebus say to Trump supporters that it is the PARTY that is choosing the nominee, much to the consternation of Trump's supporters, who seem shocked at that pronouncement. EACH party will abide by its own rules. These rules were made up by party regulars who actually active dues-paying members of the party--not just voters who show up.

You have every right to attempt to pressure the super-delegates to vote the way you want them to, but the fact is that not all of them are office holders that might fear your lack of support, and none of them are required to do so. Further, it's not going to happen as a result of ATS postings. If you really want this to happen the way you've sketched it out, you're wasting your time on ATS. You need a much larger venue. And you need to do the math to get Sanders victories in the remaining primaries such as New York, Pennsylvania, and California. Because if Clinton wins, your own power to be influential will drift away into nothingness.

I don't want a Clinton presidency. I would prefer Bernie to get the nomination. But it is never going to happen is you continue to insist to be ineffectual.

a reply to: Flatfish

I agree with everything you said! A true political revolution needs to be supported by both parties. The GOP establishment are doing their own manipulation behind the scenes. I think there's going to be a lot of angry voters during and after both conventions.

It's time to pack up some tents and sleeping bags, and head to Washington, DC! The list of these delegates need to be exposed, and the people need to be calling their office to voice their concerns. I plan on doing my part. Voters from both parties need to demand a fair and transparent election process and the removal of delegates and money influence.

Forget contacting them.

Just vote against them during the next election. Period.

The message should be sent more en-masse.

However, MrSpad is correct. They can change their votes, and may do so if Bernie is in the lead. However, the math is NOT in his favor, so all of this is really for naught.

At this point, we're really just going through the motions until Hillary is sworn in, because this is who the establishment has picked for us.

It's why I'm more for Trump, even though I know he won't win. Even with all of the craziness, I still like his actual ideas, and could really care less about press soundbites. I also have a good idea that he'd never pass these ideas through, but eh...I'll roll the dice.

If the GOP pulls something, and pulls the rug out from him, and he doesn't run independent, THEN I'll switch to Bernie's camp. Not because I like him (on the contrary, it's like voting for your own pay cut), but the thought of voting Hillary makes me ill, and I'm certainly not going to support a GOP who doesn't follow the will of the voters.

a reply to: Slave2theTruth

Exactly! That was my point in an earlier post.

I think our MSM news sources, being controlled by the same "establishment" we're revolting against, are constantly including super delegates in their totals in order to maintain the idea that it's all but over for Bernie.

As noted, the majority of the superdelegates will go with the pledged delegate leader. If Sanders manages to become that person (unlikely at this point) they will rally to his side. The popular vote doesn't matter.

This occurred in 2008. Clinton began the contest with more supers. But when Obama took and held the lead in pledged delegates, the supers moved to his side. And, in fact, he would have been unable to reach the magic number without them.

But if Sanders remains hundreds of pledged delegates behind Clinton after all the primaries and caucuses have been held. (The most likely outcome at this point.) He will not be nominee. He and his followers can screech and squawk as much as they like. They can attempt to sway superdelegates. But they won't get enough to effect the outcome.

Clinton had a much better case in '08. She had more of the popular vote than Obama. And she had the disputed Michigan and Florida delegations which would have put her ahead in pledged delegates. But the supers were unmoved.

The official pledged delegate count was all that mattered.

originally posted by: Chickensalad
This YT video might interest you as well OP.

It basically explains how the DNC funneled millions into Hillary's campaign by means of state party loopholes. I believe 33 states were involved, and this was back in August.

Thanks for the link, it's no secret that the DNC establishment is all in for Hillary.

a reply to: Flatfish

We need to break the delegate system. We should not be a representative democracy.

Our leaders keep us willfully dumbed down so our democracy wont work.

Its BS. We deserve direct democracy and more than two parties.

All else wont change a damned thing.

You want a revolution? Get everyone in well off technocratic heaven to stop defending the establishment during election season and hypocritically condemning it between elections.

Unless you guys like things the way they are. Some do. Then again they like anything they are born to. Could be a monarchy, dictatorship, whatever.

They dont rock the boat, they defend the ship tooth and nail like good little serfs.

Few are free. Most are COMFORTABLE. (So they think, they are told what is good)

Big difference.

The curse of freemen is the mediocrity of everyone else.

a reply to: tadaman

Its BS. We deserve direct democracy and more than two parties.

We have a lot more than 2 parties....take your pick.

www.thegreenpapers.com...



The illusion of choice is what's BS....We live in a corporate oligarchy that the electorate apparently supports. It's crony capitalism!

Who's fault is that?

a reply to: olaru12

We don't have more than two. We have one divided into two that hold an unfair control over the system.

Any other party is a lost cause thanks to this lack of checks and balances.

Its everyones fault for looking to comfort instead of honesty and integrity.

Most people would turn traitor and kill those who tried to upset things for a greater good. If it is a threat to comfort, they turn savage.

The American revolution started with less than a third of the population in favor.

Most wanted to be bitches and for their kids to be bitches eternally. They really thought they had it good.

Like now