Type to search

Sanders Issues Defiant Statement On Tumultuous Nevada Convention

Campaign 2016 Featured Post Politics Top News

Sanders Issues Defiant Statement On Tumultuous Nevada Convention

Share
A Sanders supporter holds up a campaign sign after police and hotel security were brought in to break up the Nevada Democratic convention in Las Vegas early Sunday. Griffin de Luce via Medium user Yvonne C. Claes.

Following a rowdy Nevada state Democratic convention on Saturday, in which supporters of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders shouted down state chair Roberta Lange and a variety of other speakers including California Sen. Barbara Boxer, Bernie Sanders issued a statement that blamed Nevada Democratic officials for skewing the convention against his campaign.

The convention meltdown took place after the convention’s delegate credentials committee ruled that dozens of Sanders delegates were ineligible to vote in the convention — their votes would have given Sanders two more delegates at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia this summer.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz had previously urged both campaigns to denounce the disruptions that took place on Saturday.

Read also: What They Heck Happened At Nevada’s Democratic Convention On Saturday?

Sanders, who released his statement earlier today, remained defiant about the conduct some of his supporters. “It is imperative that the Democratic leadership, both nationally and in the states, understand that the political world is changing and that millions of Americans are outraged at establishment politics and establishment economics,” he said in an official statement posted on his campaign site.

“Within the last few days there have been a number of criticisms made against my campaign organization. Party leaders in Nevada, for example, claim that the Sanders campaign has a ‘penchant for violence.’ That is nonsense. Our campaign has held giant rallies all across this country, including in high-crime areas, and there have been zero reports of violence. Our campaign of course believes in non-violent change and it goes without saying that I condemn any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals,” he said.

He went on to mention the forms of violence his own supporters had suffered, which included shots being fired at his campaign office and the ransacking of an apartment complex campaign staff were living in.

“If the Democratic Party is to be successful in November, it is imperative that all state parties treat our campaign supporters with fairness and the respect that they have earned. I am happy to say that has been the case at state conventions in Maine, Alaska, Colorado and Hawaii where good discussions were held and democratic decisions were reached. Unfortunately, that was not the case at the Nevada convention. At that convention the Democratic leadership used its power to prevent a fair and transparent process from taking place.”

Supporters of the Vermont senator erupted in anger when dozens of potential delegates at the state convention were deemed ineligible. Those delegates could have allowed Sanders to send two more voting delegates (a net of four relative to rival Hillary Clinton) to the Democratic National Convention, hardly decreasing the delegate lead Clinton continues to have over him, but symbolically decreasing Clinton’s Nevada delegate lead after the state’s caucus in February.

According to a post on Medium by the Nevada Democratic Party, the Clinton campaign managed to get more of its state delegates to the convention. “On Saturday at the State Convention, after all of the alternates were seated, Hillary Clinton filled 1,695 of her delegate slots and Bernie Sanders only filled 1,662 at the State Convention — giving Clinton a 33-delegate margin of victory,” explained the post.

That slim margin gave Clinton a two delegate advantage across two separate votes: She won three of five PLEO delegates (Party Leader and Elected Officials), and four of seven at-large delegates.

Sanders’ statement came following calls by senior Democrats to defuse the growing tension between his and Clinton’s supporters, while avoiding placing blame on either group. “I laid out to him what happened in Las Vegas. I wanted to make sure he understands what went on there. The violence and all the other bad things that has happened there,” said Reid, who spoke with Sanders about the incident prior to the release of the Vermont senator’s statement. “I’m hopeful and very confident that Sen. Sanders will do the right thing.”

DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz similarly denounced the course of events in Las Vegas. “We are deeply concerned about the troubling details laid out in the letter from the Nevada Democratic Party. We will be reaching out to the leadership of both of our campaigns to ask them to stand with the Democratic Party in denouncing and taking steps to prevent the type of behavior on display over the weekend in Las Vegas,” she said. “Our democracy is undermined any time threats, intimidation, physical violence or damage to property are present. If there are legitimate concerns, they must be addressed in an orderly, civil and peaceful manner.”

Tags:

155 Comments

  1. A_Real_Einstein May 18, 2016

    The DNC are idiots. Snatching defeat from the arms of victory. If they work hard maybe they can arrange for riots in Philly. How much more can the party do to make sure as many Bernie supporters as possible hate them and Hillary? If DWS had any brains she would denounce the behavior and the threats and then also speak to the frustration of the Bernie delegates and announce an investigation to see what exactly happened in NV. But no, she pours gas on the fire and further angers the very voters she will need on November to get her boss elected. What a dumb ass. Where is the democratic leadership? If we want to unify this party she needs to be relieved immediately. She has a difficult primary to worry about.

    Reply
    1. Patricia Boyd May 18, 2016

      “my room mate Mary Is getting paid on the internet 98$/hr”…..!jk436etwo days ago grey MacLaren P1 I bought after earning 18,512 Dollars..it was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k Dollars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly payouts..it’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over. hourly 87 Dollars…Learn. More right Here !jk436e:➽:➽:➽➽➽➽ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsGreenGetPay-Hour$98…. .✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸✸::::::!jk436e….,….

      Reply
    2. King of America May 18, 2016

      How dare Clinton go back in time and make the delegate rules!

      Reply
      1. The lucky one May 18, 2016

        Hilary doesn’t have to do anything. The DNC had chosen her as their candidate before the primaries even started.

        Reply
        1. pisces63 May 18, 2016

          Who was it they had chosen in 2008? Uh, Hillary Clinton!! AND…………what happened, I forget!!

          Reply
          1. The lucky one May 18, 2016

            We can only hope it happens again but it doesn’t seem likely at this point.

            Reply
        2. King of America May 18, 2016

          So what?

          Reply
          1. The lucky one May 18, 2016

            So why even have primaries then?

            Reply
          2. King of America May 18, 2016

            I don’t think you understand what you’re saying. In fact, I know that you don’t understand what you’re saying, as you have spectacularly failed to understand so many things in the past.

            Reply
          3. The lucky one May 19, 2016

            Of course not. I don’t agree with you so how could I possibly know what I’m saying, right?

            If the DNC had already chosen HRC as their candidate before the primaries began as I alleged and to which you offhandedly replied “so what” then what purpose do the primaries serve other than to display the hypocrisy of the DNC. No need for that. It’s been pretty obvious for quite a while.

            I’ll admit I have often failed to understand you. I often struggle to understand 2 year olds.

            Reply
          4. King of America May 19, 2016

            I’m sorry, you seem to believe I care about your conspiracy theories. I cannot understand how you concluded this.

            Reply
          5. The lucky one May 19, 2016

            No I didn’t think that. It’s obvious that you don’t care what anyone else thinks, imbeciles seldom do. All you have to do to end this thread is not reply.

            Reply
          6. King of America May 19, 2016

            Ah yes, personal insults in lieu of the arguments supporting your position that you cannot actually make. Not really surprising.

            Reply
          7. The lucky one May 19, 2016

            LOL, when have you EVER posted a substantive argument? The next time will be the first. Apparently you consider yourself so above us all that you can insult with impunity but when someone turns it on you call foul and whine. OK here you go for all the good it will do.

            “what we’ve seen is the Sanders campaign has been largely neglected — all the data shows this — barely covered. And the coverage and the framing of it has been largely through the eyes of the establishment for the Hillary Clinton campaign”

            “We had all this reporting about purported threats and violence in Nevada, but it was all based on basically taking at face value the words of one side and dismissing the words of the other side.”

            That Sanders is acting as a spoiler “has been the meme now in the corporate news media in virtually every story for the last month. They sort of got their marching orders from the Hillary campaign. You know, it’s an outrageous and absurd charge, if you think about it. And all it takes for journalists is to look at 2008, when Hillary Clinton was running and was in a similar position vis-à-vis Barack Obama the last two months of the campaign. In that period, she refused to get out, said, “I’m taking it right to the convention.” And in fact, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, one of her main supporters, currently the chair of the Democratic National Committee, argued, even if she didn’t win the most elected delegates, the superdelegates should pick Hillary because she’d do better in November. She was making that argument then: So she should stay in and not worry about maybe hurting Obama’s chances. And there was more evidence then, or as much evidence, that Hillary Clinton was doing damage theoretically to Obama’s November chances than there is today that Sanders is doing damage to Hillary Clinton’s November chances.” Robert McChesney

            http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/36109-robert-mcchesney-corporate-media-covering-2016-election-through-eyes-of-clinton-campaign

            Substantive enough for you king. It’s a rhetorical question.

            Reply
          8. King of America May 19, 2016

            I love that you never, ever come up with more than “I know you are but what am I?”
            Sorry that Sanders lost the candidacy through his own ineptness, but that doesn’t excuse your Trump support.

            Reply
          9. The lucky one May 20, 2016

            I know your attention span is pretty short but my last post provided good support for my contention that NO, if Sanders in fact does lose the candidacy it will not be through his “ineptness” but rather by design of a corrupt DNC led by HRC’s crony DWS.

            You’re right, nothing excuses Trump support and if you can find a single comment I have ever made that is in support of Trump post it. Seeing the corruption in Clinton and the pigheadedness of many of her followers does not equate to trump support despite what single digit IQ people may think. But I’ve wasted enough time with dolts today.

            Reply
          10. King of America May 20, 2016

            See previous post. Sorry that you are too dim-witted to understand that you’re aiding Trump; obviously that’s not really an excuse for being as awful as you are.

            Reply
          11. The lucky one May 21, 2016

            It’s your mindless blind devotion to HRC that is aiding Trump. LOL, you’re someone who NEVER offers anything of substance or any evidence or support for your beliefs and opinions, insults people who disagree with you and then acts like the offended party. In all of your posts i have yet to see you offer a single verifiable argument for HRC. I’ve seen others do so but never you.

            “Hillary has the classic resume of someone who has failed upward: a series of every-splashier job titles, but with no or negative accomplishments.”

            Reply
          12. King of America May 21, 2016

            OK sorry that you think you can FOR ONE SECOND insist that supporting the legitimate winner of the Democratic primary is the same as supporting Trump; you’re, of course, entirely wrong. The only person supporting Trump here is you, and it’s gross as hell.

            Reply
          13. Paul Norman May 23, 2016

            So it doesn’t count that, every time she takes on a job, she does it well and works her heart out for her constituents and her President.

            Reply
          14. The lucky one May 23, 2016

            It’s not my observation that that she does jobs well or serves her constituents unless you mean her donors.

            Reply
          15. Paul Norman May 23, 2016

            Then do a little more research.

            Reply
          16. The lucky one May 23, 2016

            I’ve done enough to know that choosing between her and Trump is a rock and a hard place. I’m from NYS so I know her record as a senator which is nothing memorable in 8 years except that she did vote to invade Iraq, or rather gave the OK for Bush to do what he wanted which amounted to the same thing.

            Reply
          17. Paul Norman May 21, 2016

            I suppose the larger number of super delegates are for Hillary because she is a real Democrat. Bernie just doesn’t understand how to be a Democrat. He is running a campaign that is more against the DNC than against Trump.

            Reply
          18. The lucky one May 22, 2016

            “He is running a campaign that is more against the DNC than against Trump.” To the degree that is true it is because the DNC is doing everything they can to hand the nomination to HRC. If he can’t get by that he won’t be facing Trump.

            Personally I don’t care who is the better Democrat. I want the best candidate, to me that is Sanders.

            Reply
          19. Paul Norman May 23, 2016

            He became a Democrat because he knew he needed the backing of the party and could not have run as an independent. Everyone wants to see things get better for the poor but Bernie has been wooing them with false promises of a sugar mountain where everyone can have free stuff. He doesn’t even exclude the rich from free college. He makes blanket statements about policies the US cannot afford – even if we took every penny from the rich.

            Reply
          20. The lucky one May 23, 2016

            Of course he could have run as an independent. He wouldn’t have won but then neither would Hilary. Could he fulfill his promises, certainly not all, maybe not many. How many did Obama fulfill? What concrete promises has Hilary made?

            Reply
          21. Paul Norman May 23, 2016

            Here are the promises that Obama accomplished:
            http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/

            All of this against a racist Republican majority handed to the Republicans by lazy non-voting Democrats in the mid-terms.

            Hillary’s plans are all detailed on her Web site.

            Reply
          22. The lucky one May 23, 2016

            Funny how you accept Politifact when it supports your position but reject it when it is contrary to your view. I hear you on republican obstructionism, that’s been obvious from day 1. BTW I always vote, seldom for a Republican and never have at the national level but I’m not a democrat.

            I read the issues statements on her website. it’s clear she’s been influenced by Sanders in her words but the fact that the banksters have made her rich and big oil contributes heavily to her campaign makes me doubt her veracity.

            Reply
          23. Paul Norman May 21, 2016

            Then why does she have so many more votes and regular delegates? She will win without super delegates.

            Reply
          24. The lucky one May 22, 2016

            The DNC has been promoting her from the beginning is one reason. Others include those who won’t vote for a socialist even though Sanders socialism is the lite version, some vote for her because she is female, she is much more connected to the power brokers than is Sanders, some look at her titles without looking too close at her real accomplishments, some are taken in by the Clinton Foundation propaganda but again I think most of it comes back to the fact that she has been the DNC establishment candidate from the start.

            Reply
          25. Paul Norman May 22, 2016

            Hillary of course started out as the party favorite. She has been a real Democrat for a very long time. People have very short memories. Sanders was a complete unknown in the beginning and not a true Democrat. He decided to change his party status at the last minute so he could take advantage of the Democratic party backing. As we have seen, as a newly minted Democrat, he was a little foggy on party rules that had been in place for years.

            Reply
          26. The lucky one May 22, 2016

            Not sure what you mean by a “real Democrat”. Sanders is far from a complete unknown. Clinton is more renowned but much of what she is renowned for is not to her credit in my opinion. Maybe he changed his party because he didn’t want to do the damage to Democrats that his running as an independent would do and thought that maybe finally the Dems were ready to become a people’s party instead of just maintaining the status quo as they have with Obama and will continue with Clinton.

            You may not consider Sanders a “real” Dem but HRC will be begging for those following Sanders to vote for her.

            Reply
          27. pisces63 May 23, 2016

            Forgive me but I am wondering about that, too. Why play nice until you get the hoodwinked to follow you and then go viral and nasty, causing problems instead of keeping the party on an even keel. I am starting not to trust this man, with good reason. What is he really up to?

            Reply
    3. Leftout May 18, 2016

      DWS is a shill for hillarynof course , and she stated there are no disrupters at Hilary’s gatherings , of course, there are not many people at Hillary rallies except some mature feminists who are angry that they missed out on life’s better pleasures ….. Associations with males .

      Reply
      1. pisces63 May 18, 2016

        I am a black feminist. My dad and mom raised their five daughters to be so. To NOT be dependent on any one person. Put yourself in a position to be able to take care of ourselves. We all have degrees and two have masters. Even when we first dated, before cell phones, we kept enough money for cab fair+. I married 44 years ago this December. I love my husband to death and he me. We enjoy football, together. Vacations. Family outings, etc. I missed out on nothing from senior prom to college to three wonderful college educated children and that includes our oldest, a son. I had it all. STILL loving it, too. You were saying? I have been for Hillary since the village idiots decided they did not like her for NOT carrying the name Clinton. THAT’s when I realized how stupid people are over nothing.

        Reply
        1. Leftout May 18, 2016

          You have my highest respect, my dislike of hillarybis she is manipulative and shallow, having done very little foe anyone and considering that she has a lot ??? Of forging affairs and domestic??? Experimence as well as other experienced ???politicians . We have not done well . I prefer a combination of Bernie and Trump . Trump can move the economy and all of Bernies ideas could be implemented . We have spent 10 trillion $ over 8 years . Where is any of it and what did it produce ?……anyone ??? Who will account for this loss . Where is it?…. Anyone out there????? Orin Hatch , Congress ? get out of bed .

          Reply
          1. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            We have NOT spent that over 8 years!!! The interest grows the debt. The actual debt spending is shrinking because congress hasn’t approved ANYTHING for the black man. Get real. The debt started to grow under Bush and an unfunded, unwarranted, illegal war in Iraq. STOP trying to blame the black man for what the white man has done and Trump is full of it. It is simply amazing how people blame this president for things not done but will willingly credit a white man for doing nothing. HE admitted the economy is better under a democrat. HE said we do not fair well under republicans. Look it up. He took a lie and ran with it with his , now, I don’t want to talk about it, birther movement and for that, ALONE, I would not vote him for dog catcher. IN fact if I saw that head on fire, I would throw a barbecue.

            Reply
          2. Dominick Vila May 18, 2016

            I hate to say it, but you are wasting your time. I have made the same argument, provided the same facts, and it makes no difference whatsoever. A lot of people believe whatever they hear, without bothering to do a little research, and make an effort to understand the topics they are discussing or the claims they make.
            You are 100% correct. The increase in the national debt in recent years is the result of money borrowed in previous years, government obligations, interest on the debt, and deficit spending. Since deficit spending has declined by 2/3 since President Obama was first inaugurated, that is not the reason for the debt going up so dramatically.
            Last, but not least, people must make an effort to understand the negative effects of our refusal to pay for what we need and benefit from.

            Reply
    4. pisces63 May 18, 2016

      They’re being shouted down. Did you not read that? I am a staunch democrat. I am also a black woman. We fought long and hard to get simple rights like voting, yet in a peaceful manner. IF we had gone at whites with this type of stupidity and rudeness, there would be no Civil Rights or voting rights of ’64/’65. Bernie is starting to turn my stomach. It makes me wonder, since he IS an independent, what is REALLY going on. I’ve watched the machinations of politics since I was 14 during the Civil Rights movement. Something is rotten in in the state of Denmark.

      Reply
      1. A_Real_Einstein May 18, 2016

        Then you if anybody should be able empathize with people who feel like they have been wronged, that they have been alienated and feel they are inside a rigged system. Maybe someone should ask what would make these very pacifist people so upset? Does the DNC really beleive they can win in November without 25% of the Bernie. Where are the adults in the room? We better wake up or be ready for President Trump.

        Reply
        1. pisces63 May 18, 2016

          I do get it but I am a 60’s person. Anti-establishment in every way. I just know rudeness, intolerance will not win the day. It didn’t then. Instead of coalescing in 1968, they lost to Nixon. What did those kids get who were eaten by the Daley machine while the whole world watched in the 1968 democratic convention in Chicago? PLUS 4 more years of Vietnam and 4 dead here in Ohio. One good thing, they lowered the voting age to18 and stopped the draft. To me they are acting like the hard hats at that time. Maybe not as bad as Tiananmen Square but close. Where have they been all these other years? Why did they sit on their collective behinds and not vote during midterms. The one truism, with all their yelling and rudeness, they do not vote. Period.!!

          Reply
          1. A_Real_Einstein May 18, 2016

            Well they are voting now and we are doing a great job of turning them away. It is time to start listening to them a and earn their vote as opposed to expect it. The race is over so now is the time to come together rise above the fray and praise them for the success they have had, ask them what we can do to help them vote for Hillary and win big in November. Win the primary with grace and allow them to lose with dignity. With arms wide open.

            Reply
          2. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            EXACTLY which is why I am getting frustrated with what is going on. Hillary did it in 2008 and yes, I voted for her in the Ohio primary.

            Reply
          3. A_Real_Einstein May 18, 2016

            Hillary did what in 2008?

            Reply
          4. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            SHE was the choice. She was mine in the Ohio primary.

            Reply
          5. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            NOW, yes!! Where were they at mid terms, those that could vote and didn’t? We make the case at the state and local levels. They shirked that duty. I voted. since 1970 I have not missed once. They did not vote at mid terms and look at the house and senate and look what they have not done. A president is limited. Congress passes laws and pays bills, borrow money from china to pay bills. Not the president. he cannot make a law nor pay a bill. Who is put into the Legislative Branch means more than a president or the Supreme court. They sat on their collective asses and twiddled their thumbs, Now, they whine. I’m out of cheese.

            Reply
          6. A_Real_Einstein May 18, 2016

            So you do not want their votes?

            Reply
          7. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            I want democrats to win across the board. No matter who’s vote. Yet, I will not question their vote, either. I do not question my family. It’s ours, theirs. Secret and so fundamentally sacred to me. I understand holding back a vote. I voted in our governor’s election after which the idiot decided he wanted to be president. The democrat was FitzGerald. No I did not vote for him because he is an idiot. He definitely was not right but I did not vote for Kasich, either. So, they have to vote or not vote their conscious.

            Reply
          8. A_Real_Einstein May 18, 2016

            So you want their votes and expect them to do so by brow beating them. Hillary needs to show some Obama like leadership, act with class, listen to the millions and do what she has to do to EARN their respect. She can start by praising them, acknowledge that the primary process needs to change and act like President of all the people. No more bad mouthing Bernie or his supporters and tell her surrogates that is time to stop talking and start listening and embrace the movement. Or we can watch 20,000,000 people lose their health care, women lose their right to choose, more voter suppression, more income inequality. Now we are going to see if she has the leadership skills to unite the party and win the presidency. This is good time for some concessions and humility. We will see if she has what it takes.

            Reply
          9. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            Who is brow beating whom? THEY are!! Sit and talk. Air out differences. Do NOT blame her for rules written down in the 70’s. SHE cannot change them. It is too late to change them, now. THSI should have been done before hand which, again brings us to they should have voted before, those that could. My one great regret and resentment was 1968. I could not vote. I had no voice. I was only 19. By 1970, it was too late. Nixon was in. Not to say my one vote would have made a difference but I would have tried. Too many today, never tried. Now, they act like my 14 month old grandson when he doesn’t get his way. We’re having a discussion. If we were face to face over coffee or a drink, me a Manhattan, we would discuss. I would not shout you down or talk over you. That is just too rude to me. Talk to me. NOT at me. Of course I do not want ACA voted out and a right wing Supreme court who might even repeal the civil rights act. They are already hurting the voting rights act.

            Reply
          10. Paul Norman May 23, 2016

            You didn’t miss much in 1968. I had to hold my nose and vote for Hubert Humphrey.

            Reply
          11. leoasc May 18, 2016

            It isn’t over till it’s over. And although we’re not violent, we are firm. A great many of us will never vote for Hillary. A vote for Hillary is a vote for Trump. #BoomersforBernie #BernieorBust

            Reply
          12. A_Real_Einstein May 18, 2016

            A vote not for Hillary is a vote to throw 20 million people of off health insurance. A vote to eliminate woman’s right to chose. A vote to round up 11,000,000 hard working , God fearing individuals, incarcerating and deporting them. A vote not for Hillary will lead to even more income inequality and misery for the middle class. It stinks. I agree but we must be realistic and act responsibily. So please do the right thing and help me build upon this movement and we will have our revolution. See brand new congress. We can primary Hillary in 2020 but their needs to be country to save. Trump is Hitler. Hillary is awful but our only option in November.

            Reply
          13. leoasc May 18, 2016

            I am all for Brand New Congress, but I will not vote for Hillary. I don’t like Trump, but I truly believe that Hillary would be worse.

            Reply
          14. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

            Then enjoy the Drumpf presidency and the conservative SCOTUS for the next generation. When the ACA is repealed and Roe v Wade overturned, when gay rights are taken away and we wind up mired in useless wars (if you like the War of Jenkin’s Ear, you’re just going to LOBE the War of Engels’a Tweet)you can enjoy that feeling of accomplishment that comes with Berning down the house just to show THEM!

            Reply
          15. RED May 18, 2016

            Does the same apply to Black Lives Matter protesters? Or really the Civil Rights movement of the 60’s was based on civil disobedience. So, not trying to offend you, but I’m afraid you are remembering the civil rights movement incorrectly,as often happens with age, myself included. Please read any newspaper from that time and you will see civil rights protesters called “outside agitators,” lawbreakers, stirring up trouble, heck King was arrested as were many civil rights era protesters. So, rudeness and offensive behavior is always based on one’s perspective.

            Reply
          16. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            YES IT DOES!!!! They were arrested for marching. Peaceful protests. Excuse me. Covered under the constitution. Right to vote? Right to live? Right to ride a bus? Right to live!! Blow up 4 little girls in church because they spoke of civil rights IN their church? Murder and bury 3 civil rights workers? Shoot a white priest who was set to march to Selma. The beatings and near murders of said marchers, including a future representative and THEN having that said representative spat upon by white bigots in chambers. Viola Liuzzo murdered in a hate driven head on collision? When they found the burned out station wagon of the civil rights workers in the swamp, 11 bodies of murdered black men were also found. Freedom summer, whites and blacks beaten a murdered just for teaching black kids to read. It was still against the law to teach them or to give them as little to learn with as possible. Separate and unequal. Try again. I was born here. So were my people back to before the civil war. How does marching and singing warrant jail time, explain that to me. PLEASE!!!! We hurt no one. We did not put dogs on white people. Put fire hoses on their children. spit on them. Deny them anything, did we? I put Black lives matter in the same boat as the rude Bernie people. They had no right to prevent trump from his speech but he was more chicken sh** than anything else. Also, when they care about ALL black lives, dead by anyone, including our own, I will give credence to them. Other wise? HAH!! Another thing, peaceful demonstrations got us on the front of the bus. Got us into stores to try on clothing instead of measuring outside and deliberately issuing the wrong size, including children’s shoes and black people found away around that, too. They pooled the clothing and gave them to the ones they fit. One jackass doesn’t stop a show. Sit at a soda fountain. We did not shed any blood. White folks did. Those people, whom we boycotted sued the black organizations for refunds of monies lost. THEY LOST or they were thrown out of court. WE did nothing wrong, did we??

            Reply
          17. RED May 18, 2016

            Ma’am, you have missed my point most completely. Please read carefully where I explained that I abhor racism. So I fully support and understand the Civil Rights movement and it is quite unnecessary for you to attempt to defend it with me. The point, ma’am, was that during that time those protesters too were referred to as rude and offensive and lawbreakers, just as you have referred to supposed Sanders supporters. Those who defy the power structure and the establishment in the pursuit of social justice are always called rude, law breakers, agitators, etc. As I pointed out that even today Black Lives Matter protesters are constantly denigrated on Fox as rude, offensive. And I didn’t say I agreed with that characterization, ma’am, what I said is that you have apparently agreed with it, except instead of Black Lives Matter protesters or Civil Rights protesters, it’s people who feel their rights were denied and are supposed Sanders supporters.

            Reply
          18. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            Sorry, not t same. We would Never have raised voices on threat of death. How old are you? I am 67 and WATCHED peaceful marchers, not even fighting back when dragged to the ground, kicked and beaten. They were not rude and said yes sir to officials and the white man/woman/child kicking and stomping them. Black Lives Matter WERE rude. I feel the same. As a black person who understand the ramifications of having their voice stomped down, I will defend to the death that same right even to a trump. They laid in the highway preventing us from getting home from work in a timely matter, rude. We never obstructed anything like that. Even when they first tried to march to Selma on the Edmund Pettis Bridge, they were on the sidewalk. I do not need a magazine. I have my very young memory. I can still see the FBI agents at the dam with masks on, looking for the civil rights victims. WHEN black people include that mantra for all blacks murdered, including by our own, I will listen. Until then, not in this world. They honestly think they are different dichotomies. I think they are one and the same.

            Reply
          19. RED May 18, 2016

            Ma’am, I’m truly not trying to offend you. But you still very much miss the point. You say the Civil Rights protesters were polite and non-violent, and I certainly agree with you. But is that what Bull Conner here in Birmingham said? Is that what the Jefferson County Sheriffs said about Civil Rights marchers? Is that what the white populace of Birmingham and Alabama said? No, they proclaimed that these Civil Rights marchers were rude, outside agitators, law breakers. As I said we agree that n that case it was an unfair characterization, but that is because we both agree with the movement and their motives and intentions. But now, you apply the same labels that were applied to new groups fighting for justice. And we both understand that the Civil Right marchers and movement was based on non-violence and most definitely did encounter much violence and turn the other cheek but the entire purpose and point was to disrupt a system, a system of injustice and racism, that was the purpose. So again, please don’t misunderstand me or think that I am denigrating the Civil Rights movement in any, I certainly am not. I’m simply trying to point out to you that perceptions of “rude” or “offensive” generally depend on your perspective & whether you are part of the system being disrupted or not.

            Reply
          20. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            No, you miss MY point. I whole heartedly agree with the Sanders followers, not how they are showing their frustration!! Civil discussion like we are having. Make it part of the platform. The democratic agenda. They have that ace, now with his wins. Use it. Black Lives Matter is hypocrisy personified. Wen They rant at a black on black murder scene, I will listen.

            Reply
          21. leoasc May 18, 2016

            What do you think was wrong with the way they showed their frustration? All they did was shout and demand fairness! The DNC is lying about it and saying they were violent, but they weren’t! If their civil requests for discussion had been honored, they would have had no cause even to shout.

            Reply
          22. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            Yelling over people? Really?? I don’t allow my grandchildren to do it. In a debate, you’d lose. I heard of chairs being thrown. Not true?? Were you there as proof?? Yelling is NOT civil discourse.

            Reply
          23. leoasc May 18, 2016

            No, no thrown chairs, and no yelling until normal speech was ignored and participation rudely shut out by the chairman. This was a situation where it was appropriate for offended people to stand up for their rights. There are several videos that show the whole thing.

            Reply
          24. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

            Yes. I’ve looked at them. The Berniebots came spoiling for a fight.

            Reply
          25. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            It’s never an appropriate time for violence unless you are defending ones self. Sorry, I watched my people get pummeled, kicked, beaten, murdered and we still remained civil. Sorry, no sympathy here at 67, also. I’ll get the whole story someplace. My disgust? I expect it of trump’s, never Bernie,s followers.

            Reply
          26. leoasc May 18, 2016

            I don’t think any of us (except maybe Trump) condones violence. Violence is right out. Maybe you equate speaking up for one’s rights and fair treatment with violence? I don’t. I would have been ashamed of those Berners if they’d done physical violence, but that they spoke up in defense of their rights I am proud.

            Reply
          27. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            I’ll argue the moon is blue. I have no problems with that at all. In fact, I only get good conversations, as I call it on places like this. No one wants to talk politics or religion it seems. As a 60’s person I ask why??

            Reply
          28. leoasc May 18, 2016

            Beats me! But thank you for a good, civil discussion. 🙂

            Reply
          29. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            There has been over 10 black/black murders recently here in Cleveland, if not more. They were silent. Why did not those lives matter? A couple of them young. A 12 year old boy in his home during a drive by. Another a 14 year old minding his business. My grandson is 13. I feel those parents pain as a mother/grandmother.

            Reply
          30. Paul Norman May 23, 2016

            I just returned to my native Cleveland recently and saw a hopeful city. The steel mills are gone and the river cleaned up by the pollution from the oil processing plants. There were parks along the old river. that splits Cleveland in 2 in more ways than 1. I saw black folks moving to Shaker Heights. I saw a city really trying to be an example of proper urban living and working. Playhouse Square alone has NINE legitimate theaters. I’m proud of my original home and the way real Democrats are fixing things even with Kasich as governor.

            Reply
          31. pisces63 May 23, 2016

            Where were you and for how long? My son lives in Richmond Heights with his family. My best friend’s sisters and brother graduated from Shaker in starting in the 60’s after her parents bought their home. My friend chose to finish school at East High with our class of ’67. Her sister received a 4 year ride to CWRU as did one of my sisters. Yep, Kasich has screwed the state when it comes to profit sharing. Now our mayor is trying to get a tax raise and of course they blame the HIM for it and wanting taxes, when in fact Voinovich got this city tax when he was mayor. School systems like Orange, etc., have had to ask for levies because he has taken their money for the rainy day fund. These are systems that never needed one. Yet, he thought he could run for president on his lies. He brags about balancing the budget but it was done on the municipalities back!! welcome home.

            Reply
          32. Paul Norman May 23, 2016

            Now we are defending the southern bigots of the time?

            Reply
          33. RED May 23, 2016

            Uh, no! Try reading again. This time remember that presentation of what actually occurred & explaining others view, ignorant as they may be, is not an endorsement.

            Reply
          34. leoasc May 18, 2016

            Right to participate equally in a fair political process. Bernie supporters had every right to object to arbitrary instant rule changes designed to exclude them. THERE WAS NO VIOLENCE.

            Reply
          35. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            There was rudeness. I haven’t a clue what they’re speaking of in Nevada. I could not get it listening to Diane Rehm or any place. It still does not warrant rudeness. No one can hear if everyone yells. Did YOU vote during midterms, if possible, age?? I did!!

            Reply
          36. leoasc May 18, 2016

            There was no yelling until the Bernie people had been repeatedly ignored and shut out. The Berners started out cooperating nicely per Roberts Rules of Order. The chair refused to hear them in their turn, proceeded to quickly execute all decisions herself with no discussion allowed, and then whacked her gavel and left the podium. Noisy speakers were turned up loud to drown out objections. That was rudeness completely uncalled for, and it was beyond unacceptable.

            Yes, I did vote during midterms, and I’m 67.

            Reply
          37. RED May 18, 2016

            Being a white man from Alabama, who abhors racism by the way, I still hear people refer to Rosa Parks as a law breaker. They generally don’t dare question her motivations in public as it’s not socially acceptable in public. But they still act as if Rosa Parks should have found some other legal way to protest segregation.

            Reply
          38. Paul Norman May 21, 2016

            I completely agree about the mid terms. I voted because it’s aa reflex action. What’s the matter with us? We blew the end of Obama’s term and muddied his legacy. We crippled him by staying home. People in the middle east would love a chance to vote. It’s our duty to vote in every local, state and national election. The vote is power!

            Reply
      2. RED May 18, 2016

        Just a small point, Denmark has universal healthcare, a functioning government, and concern for both their citizens and the environment. They work less hours, live longer and have a better standard of living, more vacation time and countless other benefits we lack. So there is definitely something rotten but it ain’t in Denmark, it’s right here in the USA. Just playing, of course, although every bit is true.

        Reply
        1. pisces63 May 18, 2016

          I just love Hamlet and Shakespeare!!! 🙂

          Reply
        2. pisces63 May 18, 2016

          Wives. My grammar!! Ssssshhhhhhh!! Secret. Ours!!????. Yep and a drunken one, too!!

          Reply
      3. leoasc May 18, 2016

        Why is Bernie turning your stomach? Did you not see the videos? It was the Bernie supporters whose legitimate input was ignored and who were rudely shut out of proceedings. They had every right to be angry about that. And sure, their protests were loud, but there was NO VIOLENCE. Please don’t spread lies.

        Reply
        1. pisces63 May 18, 2016

          I have 4 sisters. No matter what, we will circle the wagons. Same for my grandchildren. He isn’t. I remember 1968 and this same crap after Bobby was murdered. Nixon won. He has gone from stating his case to denigrating a fellow democrat and it is nauseating. Adults sit and talk, not rant and rave and shout people down like infants. Trump style.

          Reply
          1. leoasc May 18, 2016

            There are times, probably most, when circling the wagons is the right thing to do. Sadly, this isn’t one of them. The Democratic Party used to be the party of the people before it was hijacked by Bill Clinton and the NeoLiberals and their “trickle-down” economics that redistributes wealth from the poor and middle class to the already rich. The “Democrats” have been on the wrong road ever since, and that road is leading over a cliff. Circling the wagons won’t help when the wagon master is addicted to corporate money. We’ve got to have a corporate-free wagon master who will get the wagon train back on the right road.

            Reply
          2. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            Firs of all trickle down started under Reagan. HIS theory when he cut taxes across the board and had to raise them almost immediately because of a rapid growth in the debt. No democrat that I know of did, either. There was more job growth and less unemployment until Bush trashed it with a bogus unpaid war. Cut taxes for the wealthy for only 10 years BUT since the black man won and lack of voter turn out in the midterms, said republicans got the house and Senate. Did you voye?? Don’t even try this revised history. I lived it and spare me the banks this the banks that. Bush bailed them out and when they DID start hiring again, they paid less for the same jobs and benefits where cut BUT raised for their executives big time. Try again.

            Reply
          3. leoasc May 18, 2016

            I’m not revising. I lived it too. Yes, Reagan started trickle down, but Clinton ran with it. BOTH Democrats and Republicans have continued it ever since — ALL of them. It wasn’t just tax breaks, it was rampant deregulation and bailouts. It’s all been everything for the rich and the rest of us having to pay for it. The excuse has been that the rich are the “job creators” and if they had more money it would trickle down to the working class. It didn’t work. The “job creators” created lots of jobs overseas, took American jobs away, and hoarded the extra money in tax shelters like the Cayman Islands. It used to be just the Republicans who had sold out to the banks and corporations; since Clinton it’s Democrats too. Now the banks and corporations are running our country, and Hillary is well known to be a shill for them the same as, if not worse than, the others.

            I think we basically agree about what is wrong, but it looks to me like you believe that it’s all the Republicans’ fault and the Democrats are the good guys. I wish they WERE the good guys. If they were, the simple solution would be to fight for the Democratic Party. The reality is that both parties are heavily corrupted and the REAL enemy that bribes and controls them BOTH is the UBER-WEALTHY 1%. It’s foolish to fight for either the red team or the blue team, because no matter the outcome the 1% always wins. The only way out of this hellish pattern is to look beyond parties and replace each corrupted politician with one who is not bought and paid for. Not at all simple or quick, but necessary.

            Reply
          4. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            Sorry, considering job creation was at its height under Clinton, doesn’t ring true. Even the donald said the economy and job growth is better under democrats. As a black woman, I look at politics and everything else. I used to vote Republican for certain races. Like Voinovich here in Ohio. Yet these past few years have soured me to them. The lies, vitriolic hatred against this president. Lies during campaigns about me and mine, I’ll never vote for another, again. They have proven their intolerance, racism and bigotry and wallow in it under Trump. Can’t never again. For the record, politics is just another word for lie about any and everything. Yet, I’ll take a democrat with three wife’s over a Republican anything.

            Reply
          5. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

            . . . There’s a Mormon running on the dem ticket?

            Reply
          6. leoasc May 18, 2016

            I will admit that the job situation has been worse since Bush was appointed, but knowing what I do about Bill Clinton’s economic policies I can’t give him credit for jobs. The destructive job-killing policies were in place during the Clinton administration, but the effects weren’t noticeable until after Clinton had gone. It’s like the destructive, wasteful wars and tax cuts W did that weren’t terribly apparent until after HE was gone (and then Obama got blamed for them).

            I’ll admit, too, that as parties go the Republicans are more corrupt than the Democrats. But the difference is no longer enough that I can trust anyone merely for being a Democrat. The Democrats are all right on most social issues, but on economic ones they are stinking rotten and SNEAKY besides. I don’t look for party anymore. I look for who is being paid off by multiplajillionaires to work for them instead of for We the People, and who is not. Thankfully there are some, and I think more will emerge.

            Reply
          7. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            What a lot of people do not realize is Clinton’said signing of the Republican passed none disclosure of toxic bonds led to the foreclosure and economic meltdowns. I’m not blind of faults. I’m more wary of them, Republicans destroying what we have gained. Not when you see them deliberately eroding our voting rights.z

            Reply
        2. pisces63 May 18, 2016

          Did not mention violence. Shouting down instead of communicating. I wrote if we had yelled and shouted out during civil rights, there would be noneeded. Not violence.

          Reply
          1. leoasc May 18, 2016

            Communication was tried and flatly rejected by the chair. Too bad they couldn’t at least have been fair.

            Reply
          2. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

            They did. This is a long read, but if you want the skinny, here it is. https://medium.com/@mamajeanab/the-nevada-state-democratic-convention-c55076db43a#.mdsspuko8

            Reply
    5. leoasc May 18, 2016

      Get Debbie Wasserman-Schultz out of office. SUPPORT HER OPPONENT, Tim Canova. https://timcanova.com/

      Reply
      1. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

        Actually, there I’ll agree with you. She’s been a terrible legislator and a terrible DNC chair. I hold her personally responsible for the anemic, cringing, weak kneed dem campaigns back in ’14. Her primary function is as an agent for Israel to keep the party properly subservient to their interests.

        Reply
    6. Paul Norman May 18, 2016

      They should just give the cry baby his 2 votes and have an end to this. Hillary has more than enough votes right now. We have better things to worry about. I’m a Jew and I’ll be really upset if we can’t get together and elect Hillary over that fascist who shall remain nameless here.

      Reply
      1. A_Real_Einstein May 18, 2016

        Exactly. Hillary needs a dose of reality and rise to the occasion and demonstrate some leadership, humility and to represent the entire party and open her arms wide open to the movement. Otherwise we get Hitler. Shalom.

        Reply
        1. Paul Norman May 21, 2016

          Shalom shalom!

          Reply
  2. Moose Man May 18, 2016

    Rachel M interviewed a Bernie delegate worker who presented an explanation. It was the refusal by Nevada officials to allow petitions which resulted in the ensuing protest. She alluded to the bars setup to provide beverages during the 15 hours . Draw your own conclusion.
    The real news tonight is Bernie finally won his first closed primary. Onward and upward.

    Reply
  3. King of America May 18, 2016

    This was when it officially stopped being possible to pretend that Sanders just had dubious advisors; he’s fully embracing conspiracy theories and outright lies, and hand-waving away shocking behaviour by his supporters with the exact same excuse used by Trump. Extremely disappointing to watch him lose what was left of his dignity in this way.

    Reply
    1. The lucky one May 18, 2016

      I’d say the same about HRC but she lost any dignity she had long ago.

      Reply
      1. pisces63 May 18, 2016

        No, the village idiots decided to fraudulently snatch it from her. Trump lost any with his many video taped lies and flip flops but you do not see this type of castigation against the MAN, do you?

        Reply
        1. The lucky one May 18, 2016

          No one can “snatch” your dignity. You have to give that up yourself. As for Trump, well he’s never had any dignity to lose. He’s been a dirtbag from the start. But are you kidding? There have been many who have pointed out that Trump is utterly without ethics.

          Reply
          1. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            Yes, they can. Ask just about any black person during the civil rights movement. Ask my son, a college graduate, computer graphic engineer how he feels when a cop stops him walking into his house, he owns and has for over ten years to ID him,

            Reply
          2. The lucky one May 18, 2016

            I’m using the definition of dignity as “a sense of pride in oneself; self-respect”. No one can take that from you. You have to surrender it although anyone certainly can be bullied, disrespected and/or abused as many black people have been. Mandela spent many unjustified years in prisons but he never lost his dignity.

            Your post has made me reconsider my post though. The better word for what HRC lacks is integrity rather than dignity because she certainly does have a “sense of pride in oneself”. My mistake for responding to king of america’s nonsensical statement about Sanders.

            Reply
          3. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            I love this board. You meet great people. How about we get our own ticket and run?? Most of our intellect surpasses a lot of theirs. Lollol!!

            Reply
      2. Jinmichigan May 18, 2016

        Yours is a complete BULLSHIT statement.

        Reply
        1. The lucky one May 18, 2016

          You’re right, I meant to say integrity.

          Reply
      3. King of America May 18, 2016

        Sure. That’s definitely true and not just a childish reaction on your part.

        Reply
    2. leoasc May 18, 2016

      You didn’t see the videos, did you? Just taking the word of mainstream corporate media who want you to believe the worst of Sanders. The lies are on Hillary and the DNC — no “theory” about it, that’s fact.

      Reply
      1. King of America May 18, 2016

        yes yes it’s all a conspiracy, the videos were faked, there IS no “Hillary” “Clinton” & etc.

        The Sanders campaign has been disgraceful from the start, and it’s no longer possible to say he doesn’t know that and support it.

        Reply
        1. leoasc May 18, 2016

          NO. THE VIDEOS ARE REAL. WHAT HAPPENED CAN BE SEEN FROM SEVERAL ANGLES. THERE WAS NO VIOLENCE WHATSOEVER. BERNERS DID NOTHING WRONG THERE. If you believe otherwise, it’s you who are buying into fantasies. Do some real research.

          Reply
  4. Dominick Vila May 18, 2016

    Sen. Sanders should make an unambiguous statement condemning uncivil behavior and, especially, personal threats against people his supporters disagree with. That behavior is unbecoming of citizens in a country that prides itself of being a bastion of freedom and democracy, and considers itself a model for other nations to emulate.
    Having said that, it is not too hard to understand the frustration that so many Democrats, not only Bernie’s supporters, feel in the face of a primary system controlled by those who pull the strings from behind the scenes, instead of the people who purportedly decide who our nominees are going to be.
    At this late juncture in the primary campaign, the most important thing to keep in mind is what is at stake in November. If Hillary and Bernie continue in the path they are in, Donald Trump will win in November. Tens of thousands of blue collar workers are defecting the Democratic party and plan to vote for Trump. The last thing we need is a fragmented Democratic party with millions of disaffected voters not going to the polls. Clinton-Sanders or Sanders-Clinton.

    Reply
    1. charleo1 May 18, 2016

      I totally agree! After hearing Sander’s tepid, almost non-response to the actions, and threats of some of his supporters in NV, (unless he’s made a stronger one later I’ve yet to hear.) I’m fearing the rift in the Democratic Party might be much deeper, and more profound than I had realized. And maybe Sanders not the candidate, win or lose, with the best interest of the Country in general in his heart. As I had previously considered him. And yes, if the Dems want to elect Donald L.Trump as Pres. this fall, they are going about it in just the right way!

      Reply
      1. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

        Remember Chicago in ’68? The radicals are, once again, trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. The last time they did it gave us Bush. The time before that, they gave us Nixon. The perfect is ever the enemy of the good.

        Reply
        1. leoasc May 18, 2016

          Hillary isn’t good. She is owned by the banks and multinational corporations and if elected she will only bring more of the economic trouble we already have. And she’s a weak candidate, weakening daily. She will not be able to beat Trump in November.

          Reply
          1. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

            So . . . are you a Berniebot or a Drumpfdroid? It’s impossible to tell you apart any longer.

            Reply
          2. leoasc May 18, 2016

            That’s rude. I am not any kind of “bot”, nor am I young and uninformed. I’m a senior who is sick and tired of the destructive economic system we’ve suffered under for the past 30 years. Hillary wants to perpetuate that. Bernie called it out for what it is.

            Reply
          3. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

            OK, so you’re a Berniebot. Well, at least that’s clear.

            Reply
          4. pisces63 May 18, 2016

            Wanna bet!!!

            Reply
    2. leoasc May 18, 2016

      If the Dems want to win in November they should be nominating Bernie. Polls show he is clearly the stronger candidate against Trump. His supporters have every right to be angry at bullying tactics by Hillary supporters. There was no violence at that convention, so nothing to apologize for.

      Reply
  5. FireBaron May 18, 2016

    If I were Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, I would do everything in my power to keep my mouth shut at this point. Pretty much every utterance out of her mouth since the start of this primary season had the effect of, “We want Hillary as our nominee. The rest of you can go home because I have decided this.”

    Reply
    1. A_Real_Einstein May 18, 2016

      Bingo

      Reply
  6. FT66 May 18, 2016

    Sanders has lost control of his campaign, and he is the man who wants to lead the nation. Ever since, his campaign has been pushing him to do what he was not eager to. A good example was when they pushed him to attack Hillary on her emails. Sanders refused completely and without hiding he said openly he was not ready to do so. They are now putting out bogus statement on Neveda issue without consulting him first. His Campaign Manager was horrible last night when he was interviewed by CNN. If Sanders is not able to control his campaign, how can he manage to even implement what he is campaigning for? It is unfortunate, the man talks tough but his actions are very minimal.

    Reply
    1. A_Real_Einstein May 18, 2016

      The race is over and it is time for Hillary to show some leadership. She needs to show some leadership by empathizing with the Bernie crowd make some concessions and allow these people to vote for her in the general. Enough with the Bernie bashing it is detrimental to us winning the WH in November. It is her responsibility to to unite the party and give the Bernie crowd a reason to show up in November.

      Reply
      1. FT66 May 18, 2016

        Now you are talking Einstein. Thats what we have expected long time ago. We must win. And we will.

        Reply
    2. leoasc May 18, 2016

      The Sanders supporters at that convention did nothing wrong. They were the ones who were mistreated by the officials, and there was no violence at all. The DNC has been, and still is, trying to push Sanders out of the race so they can crown Queen Hillary ASAP. Now they are lying about him and his supporters. There are several videos showing exactly what happened: plenty of rudeness and unfairness toward Sanders supporters and plenty of anger over that, but no violence whatsoever. This smear effort is going to backfire on the DNC. They should have treated everyone fairly.

      Reply
      1. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

        Were they members of the democratic party? If so, you’re right. If not, you’re wrong.

        Reply
        1. leoasc May 18, 2016

          They did not come out of a vacuum. Yes, they were Democrats. They had been following procedures and would not have even been there had they not done everything properly up to that point. There was no reason for them to expect the abrupt arbitrary rule changes and exclusion from discussion they were treated to. They did what they were supposed to do, but somehow suddenly they had “failed” to so so. They were not treated fairly and not even given a chance to speak. It was unquestionably a naked power move to deprive Sanders of delegates and gift more delegates to Clinton. That is excellent reason for objection and anger.

          Reply
          1. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

            Were. They. Registered. Democrats? Because it sounds very much to me like they weren’t.

            Reply
    3. plc97477 May 19, 2016

      He is being seen as someone who can not lead. He can’t even control a few berniebots.

      Reply
      1. FT66 May 19, 2016

        Agreed. Sanders is lacking leadership skills in a big way.

        Reply
  7. Blueberry Hill May 18, 2016

    Sanders is promoting this behavior. Just listen to his speeches. Telling that there will be “mayhem at the Convention if he doesn’t get his way”, and mayhem where he doesn’t like the rules, etc., etc. He is brainwashing these kids. The Dems should kick him out before he causes any more trouble. To have his people using the vulgar language and to fight with other Dems and to throw chairs at them is entirely uncalled for. If he doesn’t like the rules, he can drop out. These rules have been in place for many generations and he knew that, or should have, before he decided to push himself into the Democratic party when he wasn’t even a democrat. At one interview he admitted he wasn’t a member of the democratic party and asked why doesn’t he join, he said he didn’t want to. So how is a non-registered democrat even getting away with being involved in the elections in the first place? He recently “claimed” to be a democrat, I would like to see his registration; as he has made that claim only a few weeks ago. He has lied all the way thru his campaign about Hillary, and she is not where the lies end, he even lies about the Democratic Party itself. Say, bye bye to us, Bernie.

    ..

    Reply
    1. plc97477 May 19, 2016

      He has also lied repeatedly about his taxes.

      Reply
  8. Bill Thompson May 18, 2016

    This is a recording of exactly what happened. I don’t think it shows anything more than people wanting the voices heard.https://www.facebook.com/shaunking/videos/1051772671528317/

    Reply
    1. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

      Were they members of the democratic party? If they were, they had a right to be heard. If they weren’t, then they were just troublemakers. And BTW, bad link.

      Reply
  9. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

    “The Clinton victory came down to a decision by the rules committee not to recognize 58 Sanders supporters — and eight Clinton supporters — as delegates, due their failure to produce proper identifying documents, or because they weren’t registered Democrats as of May 1, or because, again, they simply didn’t show up.”

    OK, then . . . My question is this – were the ‘delegates’ who were disqualified registered democrats or not? If they were, then Bernie has a case to make. If they weren’t, then this was a case of him bringing in outside bullies in an attempt to intimidate a party meeting. If you’re not a member of a club, you have no right to vote in that club’s elections, or to attempt to force that club to do something you want.

    The democratic party in that state has a closed primary. If the Bernie supporters really wanted to support him, they should have registered as democrats so they could actually do so. If they were too ignorant and uneducated to know how the system works, that’s THEIR problem. This is a problem I keep seeing over and over – they WANT something, but refuse to to follow the actually process to accomplish what they want.

    Look, all the tweets, likes, and posts in the world don’t mean a thing if you’re not part of the process. Demonstrations may make you feel good, but so does mink underwear. And is about as relevant. If you don’t know the rules and how the game is played, then you’re going to lose every time. You can get angry, huffy, and pouty about it, Standing around outside the system denouncing it is juvenile.

    A lot of this sounds very much to me like extortion . . . “Hey, nice party you have here . . .be a shame if something were to happen to it. But look at it like this . . . you put our guys on the board and do what we want you to, we can guarantee your place won’t Bern down . . .”. I like Bernie, but seriously, now he’s just coming across as angry and bitter. And his followers are becoming indistinguishable from Drumpf supporters in their tone, rhetoric, and tactics.

    Reply
    1. esmensetoo May 18, 2016

      Only 8 of the 64 delegates the Sanders people claim were denied access to the convention actually just didn’t bothered to show up, A not unusual occurrence in caucus states (my state is a caucus state, I’ve had some experience with this.) Usually as the different levels of conventions occur, participation drops off.

      It appears that at the previous convention, held before this final one, the Sanders campaign had done a very good job of recruiting people and getting them to the convention — providing them with a significantly larger number of Sanders attendees compared to the Clinton side. This made them hopeful, even expectant, that they would have greater numbers than Clinton at this final convention round.

      But that didn’t happen. Having learned their lesson, the Clinton people did a better job of getting their people to show up — while a significant number of Bernie’s people (perhaps having thought they had already did their job and weren’t needed?) dropped out. So it ended up that the Clinton folks had a slight edge on the Bernie folks in terms of attendance, and the 64 potential delegates that could have made a difference, mostly isn’t show up.

      This was frustrating enough for the Sanders supporters. But the Sanders campaign didn’t just want them frustrated, it wanted them enraged; campaign officials, there on the spot, wrote and distributed a “minority report” that simply lied. It told Bernie’s supporters that these people had been “denied entry” by Democratic convention officials. According too the reporting of a respected Nevada reporter who has been reporting on Nevada politics for a long time, and has no partisan irons in this fire, that report is what set off the Sanders crowd.

      Given that, and Bernie’s recent statements and speeches, it is hard to deny the reality that the Sanders campaign is inciting rage as a political strategy. Probably believing the threat of violence at the national convention will lead to greater concessions, or believing that an ugly disturbance at the convention that weakens Clinton and the party, will only strengthen him and his revolutionary “movement.”

      The weakness in his assumptions is that this rage has been very gendered. It is women, and the strong representation they have achieved in the party that is the real source of rage at the the “bitch” the “witch” and the “monster.”

      Bernie’s supporters aren’t working class. And this isn’t economic rage. Clinton wins among those making less than $50,000 a year, and Sanders supporters overall enjoy a higher average income than Clinton supporters. Not surprising since they are also more heavily male. It’s true that Clinton enjoys support among voters making $100, 000 — but Bernie does too. There is little difference between them , in terms of support, in the upper income brackets.

      So why the incredible anger? It’s real source is cultural anxiety and hysteria. The first female presidential nominee and potential president upsets traditional ideas of power — and who can have it — in radical ways. In ways that make many people — women as well as men — uneasy.

      Bernie is, in part, riding this wave of hysteria and rage. But I think he may believe that his campaign’s success, and that rage, is based more in support for him, and frustration with the thwarting of policies like those he’s proposing, than in a rabid desire to defeat Clinton and fear of the massive cultural change a woman president would represent. (As Trump’s campaign success definitely is.)

      Because of that, I don’t think he understands how uncontrollable the fire he is encouraging may prove to be.

      He is telling the most open and inclusive party there is “allow” more people in — but who is it he thinks hasn’t been “allowed in?”

      Middle class white males. The people who have been supporting the Republicans. Or, calling themselves “Independents” and complaining that while the Republicans don’t represent their economic interests, the Democrats have let them down by giving too much support and power “others” — women and minorities.

      The Democrats haven’t been rejecting them. They’ve been rejecting a more inclusive Democratic party.

      They also have been the biggest obstacle to achieving progressive goals.

      Reply
      1. pisces63 May 18, 2016

        Thank you!!

        Reply
      2. Siegfried Heydrich May 18, 2016

        Well said.

        Reply
      3. pippas May 18, 2016

        Is this nasty curmodgeon who the young people want as our president? God help us.

        Reply
    2. pisces63 May 18, 2016

      That’s what happened or maybe happened. Thank you.

      Reply
    3. leoasc May 18, 2016

      I have no way of proving whether they were registered or not. But registration tampering has been part of the election fraud that’s apparently gone on throughout this primary season, so that is not NECESSARILY meaningful. Those Berners believed that they were registered and that they had followed all the rules. They were there for the second stage of a process, the first of which they’d already been through. They weren’t just some interlopers off the street; they were supposed to be there and to participate, and they had every reason to expect fair treatment.

      They were trying to follow the rules they’d been given, but those rules were switched on them in such a way as to distort the vote in Clinton’s favor. I believe there were several unfair actions by the officials, but here is an example:

      There were two “tiers” of voting in that system. Clinton had won the first tier and Sanders the second, and the two sets of results were to be somehow combined for the final result. The Clinton-supporting chairman didn’t like that result because it showed Sanders coming out ahead. So she arbitrarily decided that only the first tier of votes would be counted and the second discarded to produce a Clinton victory. She asked for voice agreement to that from the floor but ignored the obvious dissent, immediately gave it to the ayes with a smack of her gavel, and stalked off the stage. Requests for a recount and for discussion, which should have been honored per Roberts Rules of Order, were totally stonewalled. Does that sound fair to you? Would you not have protested?

      Reply
    4. The lucky one May 23, 2016

      ” his followers are becoming indistinguishable from Drumpf supporters in their tone, rhetoric, and tactics.” As are many of Clinton’s supporters. it is indeed a sad state of affairs with no viable options in sight.

      Reply
      1. Siegfried Heydrich May 23, 2016

        Sorry, but what I see is that the Hillary supporters are generally pretty civil, though getting exasperated by Bernie’s escalating dead-ender mentality and incendarism. The impression I’m getting is that the OWS people all have thrown in for Bernie, and if they can’t have their way, they’re going to burn the place down.

        Reply
        1. The lucky one May 24, 2016

          We each see through our own lens I guess. My experience is that many HRC fans’ first post is often, though not always civil. But when they are challenged or their target doesn’t come around to their view they then become abusive or dismissive.

          I don’t believe that is wise on their part. It is HRC that will need the support of Sanders’ supporters in the general as she is the likely nominee. She will need to convince them that she is at least somewhat progressive. The alienation being created by HRC fanatics isn’t going to help that cause.

          Reply
          1. Siegfried Heydrich May 24, 2016

            Being abusive is never wise on anyone’s part, except for when the object of your abuse well and truly deserves it (hi, Otto!). And even then, one should abuse with elegance, panache and wit. I prefer a rapier to a machete . . .

            A lot of what I’m seeing, though, I suspect are false flag operators who are showing up just to stir schtick. And seriously, it’s getting to be damn near impossible to differentiate the Berniebots from the Drumpfdroids any longer. Both Bernie and Drumpf supporters regard the objects of their
            adulation as outsiders taking on insiders, so that casts them in an
            attack role from the git-go. The very first rule of the angry
            revolutionary is that you’re always attacking, never defending.

            But for the most part, I find that the Hillary supporters generally don’t initiate nasty exchanges, but will respond when provoked. I don’t have a problem with Bernie fighting to the end. However, as a loser, he’s in no position to dictate much of anything.

            And to be honest, as far as I can tell, most of his supporters aren’t registered to vote, and never have been. They see the electoral process as corrupt, and they’re too ‘pure’ to get involved. This being the case, their threats not to support Hillary is an empty one. Based on a lot of the behavior and rhetoric of his supporters, my guess is that the core of them are the OWS crowd that the democrats are better off without.

            Both parties have their own set of zanies they try to avoid; the GOP has libertarians, and the dems have OWS. Both are better off distancing themselves from them, as they bring nothing to the table whatsoever other than bad manners and disruptive behavior.

            Reply
          2. The lucky one May 25, 2016

            “I find that the Hillary supporters generally don’t initiate nasty exchanges, but will respond when provoked.”

            For many on this site being disagreed with is all the provocation they need.

            Reply
          3. Siegfried Heydrich May 25, 2016

            Pffft. This is nothing. Pop on over to The Hill if you want to see nasty. One of the tings I like about this site is it’s civility. And, of course, Otto is the best punching bag I’ve ever found.

            Reply
          4. The lucky one May 25, 2016

            Yah Otto is the one who brings us all together. I think even the trolls on this site would agree that he’s a POS.

            Reply
  10. momjones May 18, 2016

    There were one thousand reservations for Sander’s group and only 500 showed up. They knew the rules before going in. They were not organized and had rallied two days prior with a battle cry to storm the stage if they didn’t get their way. This is no way to run a campaign. Sanders kids came fully prepared for battle. The buck stops at the top Bernie. Do you want a revolution for the nation or just for yourself? Control your mob.

    Reply
  11. Aaron_of_Portsmouth May 19, 2016

    These recent developments in the Party that is in a constant conflict with the GOP sheds further light on the general affliction of America’s partisan-political rules, regulations and generally flawed structure.
    Even with the best of intentions at the start, the ground-rules of behavior for the current system of governance encourages this type of dog-fight—its a “genetic” feature.
    At least all factions should try to maintain some level of civility, but so far, Bernie fails to provide the guidance that promotes civil discourse.

    Reply
  12. Marv Nochowitz May 19, 2016

    Shame on Sanders for encouraging this type of behavior. Sanders is becoming the Donald Trump of the democratic party by encouraging unruly conduct

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.