Feel the #extortion Bernie has planned

[SlackerInc]

@Biffy_the_Elephant_Shrew

So if you’re a Republican and opposed to Trump, and think he would be a disaster for the party and the country, you are thereby obliged to sit out the primary and by that very inaction help his candidacy? Are you seriously saying this?

Sure I am, because in that instance, you should vote for the Democratic nominee, which is still a very good way to stop him (my favorite, in fact).

@Evil_Captor

Yes, and now we must teach centrists to know our strength.

Thanks to the browning of the country, your strength is actually waning.

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

I expect that everyone will vote for the candidate in the general whom they believe will result in the best government, according to their standards. I don’t expect them to follow some sort of Miss Manners Guide to pint-swapping or whatever you’re expecting them to do.

Of course, you only seem to expect this behavior when it benefits your candidate. Purely coincidental, I’m sure.

Only seem, based on what? I have never failed to vote for a Democratic nominee, and you can be sure that if Bernie were the nominee, that trend would continue. (In fact, recognition of this fact, and the general Democratic loyalty of the Hillary fanbase, was what really galled me when my Bernhead friend called me and said “you and the other Hillary supporters will still reliably vote for any Democrat in the fall, whereas the Bernie supporters won’t, so you should just vote for Bernie in the primary if you want to make sure the Republicans don’t win.” Grrr.)

@BrainGlutton

Look, whatever Sanders is, he is not naive. He has been in the Senate for decades. He knows all about, and far better than most people – possibly even better than most senators with less seniority – how things get done and how things do not get done in Washington.

You read the Barney Frank thread, right? According to him, what you are saying…well, it ain’t necessarily so. And he oughtta know.

@BrainGlutton

Contracts impose obligations on all parties to the contract, and voting in a primary – or in a general election – imposes none whatsoever, legal or ethical.

Sez you.

I notice today that others are starting to focus on this general topic, and beyond just what Bernie said in the Cenk interview. For instance, I heard this just a few hours ago from Hillary Clinton:

“I am also a Democrat and have been a proud Democrat all my adult life,” Clinton said. “And I think that is kind of important if we are selecting someone to be the Democratic nominee of the Democratic Party.”

Whether you agree with this or not (and we already know you don’t), we all know the Clintons wouldn’t break out a talking point like this if they hadn’t focus-group tested it. So I think it’s safe to say that a lot of the Democratic primary electorate sees it the same as I do.

In looking for the origin of a quote in that article, I came across this, which I find very interesting. It initially made me roll my eyes in frustration that the DNC doesn’t even require someone to be a registered Democrat to run for the Democratic nomination. But there might just be something even more important in their bylaws, emphases mine:

According to a Democratic National Committee aide, Sanders would not have a problem getting on Democratic primary and caucus ballots because the current party rules do not call for presidential candidates to be registered members of the party.
The DNC defines a presidential candidate as someone who “has accrued delegates in the nominating process and plans to seek the nomination, has established substantial support for his or her nomination as the Democratic candidate for the Office of the President of the United States, is a bona fide Democrat whose record of public service, accomplishment, public writings and/or public statements affirmatively demonstrates that he or she is faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States, and will participate in the Convention in good faith.”

:dubious:

Yes indeedy, verrry interesting. If I went back to some of the early posts in this thread, from what I recall I think I would find several people arguing something just about the opposite of what I bolded. Does this change anyone’s thinking?

The other thing I heard today on this topic was on the Meet the Press roundtable (one of my favorite parts of the week):

DAVID BROOKS:

What strikes me is there are two motivations for voters. There’s philosophy, and Sanders sort of has that. But there’s also party loyalty. I was watching your interview with her earlier. And I was thinking, “If Ed Muskie or Hubert Humphrey came back and they saw her, they’d think, ‘That’s what a Democratic candidate looks like.’”

CHUCK TODD:

Or-- and sounds like.

DAVID BROOKS:

Yeah. And so she’s part of the party, the embodied history of the party. And so there’s a machine-like quality, it’s hard to get super excited by her, but there’s a comfort level for Democratic voters. And that’s carrying her, but it doesn’t inspire.