Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by aaronvan, Jun 8, 2016.
Or run as an independent. In any case, no Bernie supporters should ever vote for Hillary.
You didn't read to petition. It calls for Sanders to support Jill Stein, not run for office under the party.
Support Jill Stein and the Green Party if You Lose the Democratic Nomination
Sanders will not run as an independent or third party. He understands our electoral system - that election to president is designed to be a contest between the two dominant parties in the legislature.
Also, Green Party USA is a freaking disorganized JOKE of a political party.
actually the JOKE is that we are ruled by 2 POS worthless parties.
Continuing @aaronvan's almost perfect record - BOTH clauses of that title sentence are false and unsupported by the link in the OP.
Hillary Clinton won the nomination fair and square—despite skullduggery on her behalf by DWS and the rest of the DNC leadership.
As FiveThirtyEight noted two days ago:
Hillary has won 3 million more votes than Sanders, and has seized 77 of the pledged delegates in state contests over the past seven weeks. She has more delegates, not including the so-called "superdelegates."
As the NY Times notes, this race isn't as tight as the 2008 election, when Clinton and Obama were wrestling for the nomination. Currently, Clinton has 50 percent of the delegates and simply blows Sanders out of the water when it comes to superdelegates.
For better or worse—I voted for Bernie—Clinton is the presumptive candidate.
We live in a democracy. We elect representatives, we are not ruled by kings and queens. You tend to get out of things what you put into them. People in the U.S. tend to be politically ignorant, and this is the result. I call it apolitical Baby Boomer trickle-down. There is a reason why someone like Sanders has come along in 2016 - Gen X and Millennials are coming into their own, and 'Boomers are dying off.
She did but that doesn't make her any less contemptible nor excuse DWS.
It's not polite to interrupt a circle jerk.
Congrats @aaronvan, you've done it again.
Oh, I agree. That the DNC's leadership tried to rig the game is problematic, but Hillary Clinton has managed to get a real win without it. And, that's important and cannot be dismissed because DWS tried to pickpocket Sanders' votes.
Of course, parties always try to rig the game in favor of leadership and this election has shown how insurgent politics can make steering a party's course almost impossible.
The RNC has found itself in similar tides and has run aground on a reef of Trump-mania.
I'm hoping this election gives both parties pause if it doesn't I'll just take the @jkcerda route and vote for the next hand grenade that promises to burn the entire place down.
The only way either party is going to learn is if they take a horrible, terrible no-good beating in November. I nominate the Republicans, if for nothing else, sending more than a dozen jack-water candidates into a charlie foxtrot so awful that the winner is a blowhard realty-TV star.
Barring that, vote for the Greens so at least they might get enough funding and coverage that we might get an actual third-party in local and state elections. (The Libertarians have proven, to my mind, that they are ultimately a deeply unserious band after their convention.)
Greens? Holy crap... next thing you'll want is for me to vote for crazy old Ralph Nader.
Well, if it's a choice between throwing yourself on one hand grenade or another, you might as well. Your guts will be pulverized either way.
It does show the myopic idiocy of the Green Party that they think the person who got 1.5 million votes in California should endorse someone who could barely muster a whopping 7,444 votes in the same election.
every little bit helps
If Hillary is smart, her first move after accepting the nomination at the DNC should be firing DWS.
Agreed. And get rid of superdelegates. The irony of the SDs is they actually delegitimize the winner of the primaries.
Maybe a petition and forming a movement to change the voting system might be a better idea.
No more winner-takes-it-all on a state by state basis, no more primaries a that aren't proper elections but just a private beauty contest.
Just let everbody run, after getting x voters to sign support and if noone get an absolute majority of votes, have a 2nd round.
Both current parties would either be forgotten or unrecognizeable after 2 election seasons.
As much as "lesser of 2 evil" sounds wrong, the reality is that a vote for anybody left of Clinton is in fact a vote for Trump.
we agree on something, OMG how horrible...................
Presidential elections are governed y the U.S Constitution. That is not changing any time soon.
Political parties design their own primaries. They can be influenced by a petition, but there is no legal way they could be bound by it.
no Republican supporters should ever vote for Trump.
So there is movement for Bernie to go independent.
Where is the Republican independent candidate?
their party/their rules, sadly people still stay regardless of how corrupt they seem.
I'm sure her resignation to focus more on her constituents has already been drafted.
I believe that states can require primaries in the presidential election, while other states have chosen the caucus system. So, this would require a state by state change to require all elections to be primaries and for those delegates to be "locked."
I'm trying to find a good source that explains how state law influences the primary/caucus structure, however.