Yet the only person ever to demand those delegates change the outcome of a primary was Bernie Sanders. In fact, his fans threatened those delegates with violence. BTW, Bernie's $10million dollar advisor Tad Devine invented the super Ds in 1980s. Did he forget to tell Sanders?
The bottom line is this: Superdelegates are undemocratic, and unfairly place the power into the hands of the very few. One person, one vote. #EndSuperdelegateshttp://bit.ly/2BEnVBp
-
-
-
actually Hillary did that in 2008 because she said she was experienced and Obama wasn't so she argued for the superdelegates to change their votes to support her. It helps if you know history
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Classic demagogy. The reason Bernie lost is that he only received some 43% of the primary votes. And, only 23 out of 57 contests. It had nothing to do with Superdels. dem•a•gog; a leader who makes use of popular prejudices/false claims and promises in order to gain power.pic.twitter.com/PNBKLxRiTY
-
I wish Bernie would just go. GO!
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
“One person, one vote.” Sure. Then eliminate the fact that Iowa and New Hampshire have an enormous and disproportionate impact on the Democratic nomination. Minority voters in those states are nearly non-existent.
-
Also —> “A long-term problem for Democrats: a majority of the Senate now represents 18% of the country’s population.”
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What would happen if Democrats changed how a nominee is selected? NOTHING. The superdelegates voted w/ the will of the people which is democratic. The superdelegates were elected by the people, w/ rare exception, which is democratic. Superdelegates aren't the reason Sanders lostpic.twitter.com/mWGslvknGA
-
Not true. The Corporate Media gave Hillary a huge lead by placing Superdelegates in her column several months before they voted. This mislead the uninformed public and many people said why bother voting? If they were even from day one the outcome just might have been different.pic.twitter.com/UiSai9DM9J
- 16 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Nobody in the Democratic party gives a damn what you think.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Run for President so I can give you my one vote!
-
Seriously... Tulsi Gabbard needs to run!
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and ignore what supporters of Bashar al-Assad have to say about democracy.
-
The choice was never Assad vs. mother Teresa. It is Assad vs. ISIS. Same story in Iraq and Libya, and the toppling of those regimes was disasterous. Thankfully, Tulsi, perhaps because she's a vet, understands this.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
One superdelegate equals 10,000 votes. - Looked at the other way, regular people have 1/10,000th or .0001 of a vote in the Democratic primary. - One person, one vote.
-
Because democracy.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Do you ever talk about how undemocratic caucuses are?
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
And the only person ever to actually try to use superdelegates to overturn the majority will is sitting on the right.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@TomPerez What we need to do is to stop none Democrat to run as a democrat use our resources then have the audacity to tel us how to run our party, Do all Bernie’s communist party members remember we are DEMOCRATS and#VoteBlue#NeverBernie -
When you've done crying over 2016, you might want to take a chill pill.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.