In 2008, there were two candidates in the Democratic primaries. (EDITED)

[guillaumeb]

Last edited Wed Mar 11, 2020, 06:55 PM - Edit history (2)

And each candidate went to the Convention. Neither dropped out prior to JUne of 2008 before the Convention.

In my view, the process should continue as it did in 2008.

Others might disagree.

Note also that HRC dropped out in June of 2008 after all of the primaries were tabulated.

The bolded portion was added in at 6.49 CST.

[Faux pas]

1. Kicketty Kickin'

[guillaumeb]

3. Thank you.

After the Convention is the time for marching together. Prior to that, the process is in place.

In Illinois, we vote March 17th, and most of the initial candidates are already eliminated. Most of the country has had no say whatsoever.

[Faux pas]

5. Yeah

the late voting states do get screwed, that ain't democracy to me.

[HarlanPepper]

2. Revisionist nonsense.

Hillary got out before the convention. She and Obama held and event in Unity, New Hampshire in June, more than a month before Denver.

Try learning some history.

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91975550

[guillaumeb]

6. She withdrew in June of 2008.

So should Sanders, if he is still trailing, withdraw in June of 2020?

[HarlanPepper]

8. ...

?itemid=9264828

[guillaumeb]

9. You did invite the question.

Moving the goalposts for Sanders is what I am seeing here.

[HarlanPepper]

12. Hillary got out before the convention.

You were wrong in the OP. Gaslighting is not my thing so give someone else a try.

[guillaumeb]

15. The process is partly to blame. And history is history.

Most of the country has not actually voted at this time. Perhaps the solution is to limit the primary/voting process to 6 weeks as is done in Canada. That way voters in every single state might feel as if they have some input.

[William769]

60. ROFLMGAO!

[zackymilly]

62. That gif never gets old!

[William769]

63. And this campaign we seem to need it a lot.

[Codeine]

90. . . .

Oh my goodness that is fantastic.

[pampango]

82. She withdrew 2 1/2 months before the convention. I hope Sanders does so 4 months

before this year’s convention. Doesn’t seem unreasonable.

[mcar]

86. You said

Neither dropped out prior to the Convention.

You have been shown to be wrong.

[ThisIsNotPossible]

24. Yep. Endorsed three days after Obama secured the nomination.

And that was in a close primary with a convention taking place in late-August. Sanders went out all guns blazing for a more than a month after Clinton secured a majority, despite knowing that the convention was much earlier that year.

[Dem4Life1102]

4. Actually Clinton dropped out in June 2 months be the Convention.

[guillaumeb]

7. Should that be the pattern?

In June?

[msongs]

11. only one pattern matters - bernie hasnt gained anything vote wise in 4 yrs of planning nt

[LizBeth]

13. HRC was still in the race. Sanders is not this time, and wasn't in the 2016 race. Spoiler.

[guillaumeb]

19. Why limit the rights of voters to actually vote?

Most of the country has not actually voted at this time. Perhaps the solution is to limit the primary/voting process to 6 weeks as is done in Canada. That way voters in every single state might feel as if they have some input.

[LizBeth]

23. Party unity and beat Trump. Sanders is about donations and causing problems.

[guillaumeb]

26. I disagree on the second.

As to the first, that should come after the Convention.

[LizBeth]

29. Sanders and his supporters already showed us who they were when it comes to the convention.

[guillaumeb]

33. Sanders already said he would support the eventual nominee.

Part of the problem is the ridiculous, never-ending, nature of this process.

I too would like to vote, and have a choice.

[LizBeth]

36. I vote in May, I want to vote Warren, not all about me. That would be the difference

between supporters. I get it is about getting Trump out and not damaging our nominee. It is not all about me.

[guillaumeb]

39. Every vote counts, and every voter should have an opportunity.

The process needs to be shorter.

[LizBeth]

49. I am good with a shorter process being in May. The race is over. We need to get behind Biden,

regardless.

[guillaumeb]

53. I hope, and feel, that we will support the nominee.

Are there those who will not, for one reason or another? Sadly, yes.

[LizBeth]

56. Sanders said this morning, old people, black people, middle age women, your vote is wrong.

Sanders plays at divisive. I am sorry you do not get that and why so many of us are angry. Sanders telling me I am what? Too selfish? Too stupid? to vote? Yes. I am angry. I do not let people in my own world talk to me like that. Why the hell would I have no problem with Sanders making claims about my vote. You have the audacity to lecture me on respecting the voter. Yes. Lets.

[guillaumeb]

64. Sometmes Sanders lacks nuance.

One reason I supported Warren.

[LizBeth]

66. I was thinking about this, put it out on Fb. Biden is addressing the crisis at hand.

He is assembling a team to address this crisis. He needs to be President, now. Today. Sanders needs to get out of the way. I am done. No more playing around. It is lives.

Tomorrow I go back to work, in a full house, fluids galore, while I sit at 60. A concert. The state above me declared no gathering of over 200. One state away, with many from Washington will be in house. So, we can have all kinds of conversations but nah. I am looking at my today and figuring our how I can survive while poor. And old.

[guillaumeb]

68. Understood.

Trump needs to go. In my view, and I would argue the only sane view, is that any of our current and former candidates would have been far superior.

Good luck at work.

[LizBeth]

70. Biden is doing it today. Thank you Biden. Biden has won the primary.

[guillaumeb]

72. My wife and I both feel he will win Illinois.

And if Biden does as well March 17 as he did prior to this, I will say it is inevitable and right that he is the nominee.

[LizBeth]

74. "Good luck at work." I know, I hear you. Luck. I have been thinking it a lot this morning.

Reading about Italy, we have all kinds of events including the Olympic trials. Lots of bodies world wide.

I do have PTO and I do have savings. I am looking to reduce hours, exposier. Changes hours so not in the full force. Do what I can do. This is why today is so important to so many of us.

[LizBeth]

67. Btw, hands down I felt Warren was the most solid candidate. She is no longer in the race.

[guillaumeb]

69. I hope she is the VP pick. eom

[LizBeth]

71. It would be awesome; I think everyone decided she is needed in Senate. I like her taking Schumers

place and I think that would be very awesome strong. Pelosi in the House and Warren in McConnell's position.

[guillaumeb]

73. That would be incredible.

At this point, I am working for Marie Newman in her attempt to win the IL 3rd. She is running against Dan Lipinski, a Democrat who opposes Roe v Wade, oppose the ACA, and opposed a Bill to require companies to offer paid sick leave.

And, he is s member of the GOP dominated Problem Solvers caucus.

[LizBeth]

75. See? This is how we can get on board. I think Obama showed us how to untie. Get our good people

that were in the race, in vital positions. And it is the right call, too.

[LizBeth]

31. And since you like to put 2008 as an example, HRC made sure it was well before the convention so

she could clearly show support to Obama. A woman with integrity. And smart. And not driven by ego.

[MarcA]

17. Either the Convention or when a Candidate gets a Majority.

Whichever comes first.

[guillaumeb]

21. That is not a rule.

It is changing the rules.

[HarlanPepper]

18. That won't matter to those who are fact averse.

[LizBeth]

10. They were both still in the race and when HRC no longer was in the race, she dropped, back Obama

and worked hard for him.

[guillaumeb]

14. But she did not exit in March of 2008.

Most of the country has not actually voted at this time. Perhaps the solution is to limit the primary/voting process to 6 weeks as is done in Canada. That way voters in every single state might feel as if they have some input.

[LizBeth]

16. Clinton had a path to win, Sanders does not. Not rocket science.

[bobbieinok]

20. iIRC 2 were closer. Hillary long--time dem, Pretty clear she would support dem

Some supporters didn't. She was a real dem

[W_HAMILTON]

22. You are full of it. Get your facts straight.

Hillary conceded the nomination on June 7th. The convention was in late August.

And Hillary was a HELLUVA lot closer to winning the nomination (~50 pledged delegate vote difference after all the voting was done) than Sanders ever was or ever will be.

[whopis01]

25. The way you describe 2008 is not what actually happened

So when you say "In my view, the process should continue as it did in 2008." do you mean how it actually happened in 2008, or how you claim it happened in 2008?

[guillaumeb]

28. HRC did not exit in march of 2008.

We know that. So why the call for Sanders to exit now?

Most of the country has not actually voted at this time. Perhaps the solution is to limit the primary/voting process to 6 weeks as is done in Canada. That way voters in every single state might feel as if they have some input.

[whopis01]

50. What I said was "The way you describe 2008 is not what actually happened"

and asked if you are referring to what actually happened or what you claim happened when you say "In my view, the process should continue as it did in 2008."

At no point did I say that Clinton exited in March of 2008.

At no point did I call for Sanders to exit now.

I asked about your false statement and for clarification on your meaning.

I suspect that I will not get an answer to that at this point. But I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt that you merely misunderstood my question and weren't just making false statements and refusing to admit it.

[Clash City Rocker]

58. I doubt you'll get a straight answer

This person has been evading questions like this throughout the thread.

I’m not saying they’re a troll, but this is how a troll acts. Answer questions with other questions, etc.

[whopis01]

59. I'll say - they are a troll. n/t

[Drunken Irishman]

27. At this point, Hillary had won 12 states...

Including California, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York. She had amassed 1,427 delegates to Obama's 1,533 - or 47% of the delegates rewarded at that point.

So far, Bernie has won only 7 states and has 710 delegates - or 40% of the delegates rewarded so far.

Hillary continued on because at this point in the race, she had some very big wins.

Sanders' biggest win is California and that's it.

Hillary also had a big early March, where she picked up wins in Ohio and PA. Sanders had a similar big win four years ago in Michigan. No such victory came this time around.

[guillaumeb]

30. Most of the country has not actually voted.

Plus, as I wrote elsewhere,
.

Most of the country has not actually voted at this time. Perhaps the solution is to limit the primary/voting process to 6 weeks as is done in Canada. That way voters in every single state might feel as if they have some input.

[Drunken Irishman]

38. Maybe but we're going off what we have right now.

Hillary's circumstance was very similar to Bernie's last go around - they had strong spurts that allowed for their campaign to sustain momentum. Hillary saw it in Pennsylvania and Ohio. Bernie saw it in Michigan. Those turns came in early March for both candidates and allowed for them to stay in the race as the math still worked out, even if barely.

However, this go around, Bernie is getting clobbered in a lot of states and losing states he won four years ago. John Edwards also saw the writing on the wall and dropped out on March 2nd, 2004.

If Bernie had had a better night, maybe even if he still didn't win Michigan, but came in a closer second, then I could understand staying in. But if he's staying in to continue to attack Biden? No.

[guillaumeb]

42. Every voter should be able to cast a meaningful vote.

Shorten the process.

[Drunken Irishman]

44. Yeah. That's irrelevant to RIGHT NOW.

We're not debating if every voter should have a meaningful vote. That ship sailed and isn't coming back now that 90% of the field has dropped out. We're talking about whether it's smart for Bernie to stay in. I didn't think it was for Hillary and I don't think it is for him. Even then, Hillary at least had a stronger case and Bernie had a stronger case four years ago. His case right now is very thin and if he's staying in just to attack Biden, it will only further splinter the party.

[guillaumeb]

46. Sanders is trying to expand the limits of the conversation.

And he has that right.

But I do understand your point.

[Drunken Irishman]

48. Never claimed he didn't.

And I have the right to believe his staying in to harm what is likely our nominee is trash and I hope that's not what he anticipates doing Sunday night during the debate. Sanders knows he isn't likely to win at this point. If he's going to scorched earth, which frankly, I wouldn't be shocked if he did, then he can piss off. No one wins from that. If he stays in, but wants to advance his causes in a respecful manner, without lobbing bombs about how the DNC is corrupt or Biden is too, then sure. But I suspect Sunday he's going to go all in on attacking Biden.

No one wins there.

[guillaumeb]

51. I hope, and feel, that Sanders will work for the eventual nominee.

And for the record, while I supported him in 2016, for a few reasons I supported Warren this year.

[Drunken Irishman]

57. It's whether he works for them after all but kneecapping the person for no reason or doing it now.

I think Bernie will end up supporting Biden but his attacks in 2016 had a lasting impact on Hillary that couldn't be undone by the time he dropped out. I really hope that doesn't happen this go around.

[guillaumeb]

65. Understood.

But debates can be rough. As to 2016, that has been exhaustively analyzed.

[Demsrule86]

94. He won't. We don't need him.

[Demsrule86]

95. And if we didnt have caged babies and a GOP incumbent, i would not worry so much.

[TwilightZone]

54. Everyone knows where he stands.

The "I just need one more chance to tell my story" argument is ludicrous. Most of us could recite his stump speech in our sleep.

[MFM008]

32. Sanders

Apparantly doesnt realize after 2 super Tuesdays
His "revolution" is swirling the bowl.
I thought he would be honorable and step
Aside.

[guillaumeb]

34. HRC did not exit in March of 2008.

Most of the country has not actually voted at this time. Perhaps the solution is to limit the primary/voting process to 6 weeks as is done in Canada. That way voters in every single state might feel as if they have some input.

[MFM008]

43. Now that

I can agree on.

[guillaumeb]

45. We might even agree on who the nominee will be.

And how important it will be to support that nominee.

[bluescribbler]

35. The difference is

Clinton supporters didn't try to disrupt the proceedings the way Sanders supporters did in 2016, and are likely to do again this year.

[guillaumeb]

37. In my view, the difference is that (I) behind Sanders' name.

Plus, dropping out now would mean most of the country never had a chance to vote.

[Demsrule86]

96. A big who cares. Beating Trump is what matters. And you all are just hoping he wins somehow.

He won't, but Trump might because our nominee will be attacked from the right and the left. This is disastrous. Sanders decision to run in the primary has caused nothing but anger and division.

[LexVegas]

40. So this OP is a lie. nt

[frazzled]

41. They were very close in pledged delegates

throughout the primary season:Obama ended up with 1794 1/2; Clinton had 1731 1/2. Early superdelegate endorsements (they could vote in the first round back then) put him over the top. Obama got 478 of the superdelegates, and Clinton 246 1/2.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries

Clinton conceded on June 3 after the majority of the superdelegates announced their intention to vote for Obama. The convention wasn't until Aug 25, 2008 – Aug 28, 2008.

[oasis]

47. We know that never happened. Bernie should drop out now.

ZERO chance of winning, no point in wasting time and resources.

[TwilightZone]

52. "Neither dropped out prior to the Convention."

30 seconds on Google would have told you this was false.

[Skidmore]

55. Sanders is not hoping for a repeat of 2008.

He wants to repeat 2016.

Bargaining when you lose doesn't change the fact you lost.

[StarfishSaver]

61. That's not true.

[guillaumeb]

92. I edited the post.

But you might still not like it.

[Squinch]

76. You guys are just messing now. Which says you know how ridiculous these arguments are.

[BidenBacker]

77. 2008 Dem Primary Popular Vote

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

Obama: 17,535,458

Clinton: 17,493,836

2020 is not 2008. Not by a long shot.

[BidenBacker]

78. Amazing

How every time I make a post that is positive about Hillary it stays up for eternity but every time I point out some actual negative facts about her it disappears in a matter of minutes like one did a couple days ago and just now on another thread.

I'm about done with this forum if this is how they're gonna enforce "fairness".

[Squinch]

79. Poor dear.

[BidenBacker]

80. Perhaps you can tell me

How does one go about getting posts dusted that one doesn't like to read?

That would sure be a helluva lot easier than taking the time to actually make a thoughtful response to a post I don't agree with.

[Squinch]

81. Read the Terms of Service.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

By posting here, you agree to follow those terms. If you don't follow them, people can alert on you and a jury decides whether to hide your post based on the terms of service.

If you've gotten two hides, that means that two random juries found you in violation of the terms of service.

[BidenBacker]

83. Thank you

Hooboy, I'll bet this place was a real hoot back in 2008 and 2016. During the former I was participating on WaPo's political forum and I know all hell broke loose back then. Pretty sure I woulda lasted 10 minutes here, if that. Apparently there's still a lot of old wounds that still haven't healed.

Oh, well...baseball starts soon and then I'll have another welcome diversion available other than typing reasonable posts that get deleted that shouldn't. Better for me and better for the overly sensitive folks who are clicking hide. A win-win for everybody involved.

[Squinch]

84. There are better ways to enter a community than by calling its members overly

sensitive when you fail to adhere to that community's rules.

[BidenBacker]

87. Listen

I'm an intelligent guy...even if I have to say so myself because nobody else agrees. I assure you that I can turn the flame dial up as high as anyone else when I want to.

On WaPo, the moderators would give you a temporary time-out when in their judgment you crossed the line. I got a few of those myself over the years and fully expected it when I made the offending post...and I agreed with their decision and abided by it without complaint or a peep of protest. I knowingly asked for it and I justifiably got it and since that was my choice I could easily live with it. Despite getting some time on the bench there they still thought enough of my input to ask me to become a moderator myself which I declined because I would much rather respond to a person than decide if they needed to be shut up.

I know that in polarized and overheated political times like we are in that it's tough for any forum to maintain civility and not let things degenerate into flame wars. Every forum has to try to enforce some kind of standards, but that doesn't mean that the system they adopt is truly fair or objective...it just is what it is because you have to do something or you'll have nothing. What I wrote today didn't even come close to violating the spirit of an honest exchange of ideas, opinions or information...and I have read 100s if not 1000s of posts here that were two orders of magnitude worse than mine was and they are still up for all to see. I am perceptive and objective enough to know what is over the top and what is not. If you believe that DU judges are infallible then I suggest we get them appointed to the Supreme Court ASAP because several of those SC guys aren't even qualified to be forum moderators let alone justices on the highest court in the land.

There appears to be one common denominator with my posts in question...so the choices I have at the moment seem to be to either stop participating altogether or simply accept selective censorship. I enjoy posting but I'm not a big fan of censorship either. But I do love watching a good ball game so at least I'll have that option soon. Sure beats watching the stock market plunge 2000 points.

[Squinch]

88. TLDR. Just read the TOS.

[BidenBacker]

93. I will

But this was in the email I received...

Don't bash Democratic public figures

Apparently Sanders doesn't qualify.

Hope this one was short enough for you.

[mcar]

85. That is not true

Hillary withdrew in June and threw her full support to Obama. You may want to self delete.

[guillaumeb]

91. I did edit the post. eom