Latest Breaking News

BlueMTexpat

(15,652 posts)

68. That is a good beginning!

Fri Jun 8, 2018, 11:57 PM

Jun 2018

Now -

- primaries, NOT caucuses (I realize that this may need to happen at the state, rather than the national, level. But primaries are far MORE democratic than caucuses.)
- no open primaries (Again, this probably requires state action. If primaries are "open," they are effectively "general" elections, not primaries and results can thus be skewed.)
- a minimum of five years of income tax returns (10 would be better)

If, and only if, the first two are adopted and implemented, they could supersede the need for SDs - who ultimately have NEVER disregarded the final results in the primary season. I am getting SO sick and tired of all the mostly ignorant malarkey about them.

I also remember "Dem" electors from 2016 who actually voted against HRC at the EC. Something also needs doing there perhaps.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

216 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

DNC panel adopts rule requiring candidates to run, serve as a Democrat [View all] musette_sf Jun 2018 OP

K&R ! stonecutter357 Jun 2018 #1

Yours, X another 10000000000 COLGATE4 Jun 2018 #128

Good. Lil Missy Jun 2018 #2

Can they extend that to the Vermont Democratic Party? George II Jun 2018 #3

Would you extend that to Maine as well? rpannier Jun 2018 #122

That was my question also Gothmog Jun 2018 #130

And Mine n/t corbettkroehler Jun 2018 #173

Clarity keeps carpet baggers gets out...about time beachbum bob Jun 2018 #4

Independent candidates from Northeastern States need not apply SkatmanRoth Jun 2018 #5

Isn't that just what they did in 2016? louis c Jun 2018 #23

None of the Sanders supporters I knew were temporary Democrats. PoindexterOglethorpe Jun 2018 #52

Ahhh...Sanders did though. brush Jun 2018 #97

Susan Sarandon, for starters. n/t ChiTownDenny Jun 2018 #132

Sarandon was Green in 2000, and so was Michael Moore, and they both supported Nader, and still_one Jun 2018 #178

They didn't just boo Hillary Clinton, they booed the great American John Lewis. Very sad. George II Jun 2018 #53

"THEY" booed John Lewis? How many did? democrank Jun 2018 #57

Many. George II Jun 2018 #59

They certainly weren't Hillary supporters, were they? (nt) ehrnst Jun 2018 #182

Judge for yourself. ehrnst Jun 2018 #189

A higher percentage of Bernie supporters voted for Hillary in the general shanny Jun 2018 #54

How do you know that? George II Jun 2018 #60

Here is a related article from the WAPO CentralMass Jun 2018 #89

Yes, but it was Sanders to Trump voters who gave Trump his margin of victory lapucelle Jun 2018 #116

I thought it was Jill Stein's 1,457,226 votes that gave Trump his margin Tom Rinaldo Jun 2018 #120

And the Bernie supporters were in every one of those camps louis c Jun 2018 #206

T there has been much analysis on why Hillary lost in those states. CentralMass Jun 2018 #134

If you read the article more carefully you will notice louis c Jun 2018 #180

Where in the world BlueMTexpat Jun 2018 #66

well oh my goodness it was common knowledge at the time (PUMAs anyone?) shanny Jun 2018 #75

Well, I knew about the PUMAs, of course. BlueMTexpat Jun 2018 #88

Notice that the actual poll numbers strongly suggest PoindexterOglethorpe Jun 2018 #114

That article has been cited several times this week. lapucelle Jun 2018 #117

Good points! BlueMTexpat Jun 2018 #121

It Wasn't Just That They Voted for Trump LeFleur1 Jun 2018 #135

I hope that they learned a lesson. BlueMTexpat Jun 2018 #202

Well then that would indicate to me that Obama was a far stronger candidate than Clinton shanny Jun 2018 #139

The data shows that the Sanders to Trump voter lapucelle Jun 2018 #140

Part of the picture? Sure. All of it? Not by a mile. shanny Jun 2018 #160

Obama had Clinton campaigning for him. joshcryer Jun 2018 #191

And yet, a lower percentage Bernie voters supported the other party on election day. shanny Jun 2018 #192

That is because Obama was able to excite more people to come out to vote. LostOne4Ever Jun 2018 #145

I can answer that... radical noodle Jun 2018 #74

No true Scotsman, eh? shanny Jun 2018 #86

Except that I knew some who were Tom Rinaldo Jun 2018 #96

Anyone who could have voted for Palin radical noodle Jun 2018 #141

I understand your logic, it revolves around the word "really" Tom Rinaldo Jun 2018 #153

There you go... radical noodle Jun 2018 #161

Never let facts get in the way of a good Bernie bashing!! InAbLuEsTaTe Jun 2018 #76

+1 shanny Jun 2018 #77

+2 LiberalLovinLug Jun 2018 #83

Really? Gothmog Jun 2018 #131

Yeah really. shanny Jun 2018 #133

Sanders voters were the margin of victory for trump in the real world Gothmog Jun 2018 #198

The provision isn't about supporters. It's about candidates. Honeycombe8 Jun 2018 #167

Yes, but remembering 90% of Sanders voters were LOYAL Democrats Hortensis Jun 2018 #203

Join the independent candidates party Progressive dog Jun 2018 #179

So if Jill Stein decides to hop on board for the money and the marketing resources ehrnst Jun 2018 #184

I wonder what prompted them to move on this now? sheshe2 Jun 2018 #6

Maybe Mr Perez got the hint? N/T MrPool Jun 2018 #11

To head off another divisive campaign like in 2016 brush Jun 2018 #99

Perhaps a majority of Democrats? ehrnst Jun 2018 #185

Yup. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #190

Good move and no valid reason to not support this rules change Devil Child Jun 2018 #7

What a concept!! aeromanKC Jun 2018 #8

Meanwhile John Zogby has gone MrPool Jun 2018 #9

I am I am I am sheshe2 Jun 2018 #46

James Zogby. I just checked his twitter feed... Kahuna7 Jun 2018 #110

Probably having a rage in with Knomi Knonst or whatever MrPool Jun 2018 #168

Yep. LOL...... Kahuna7 Jun 2018 #186

Howdy Mr. Pool Me. Jun 2018 #138

Cheers! n/t MrPool Jun 2018 #164

Not enough. They should require the release of 5 years of tax returns. n/t pnwmom Jun 2018 #10

agreed n/t musette_sf Jun 2018 #14

Nah 15 years only seems fair MrPool Jun 2018 #15

+1. Personally, I think 10 years should be the minimum requirement. n/t Tarheel_Dem Jun 2018 #16

Yes, Full Tax Returns and No Caucuses! Cha Jun 2018 #17

No caucuses! deurbano Jun 2018 #28

No Open Primaries! Cha Jun 2018 #32

Great minds, LOL ...! eom BlueMTexpat Jun 2018 #70

Cheers to that, BlueMT! Cha Jun 2018 #72

Yes. No open primaries. Now we're getting somewhere. No more divisive interlopers. brush Jun 2018 #100

Yes, that lesson was a Global Cha Jun 2018 #175

This Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jun 2018 #51

K&R!! Tarheel_Dem Jun 2018 #12

Thank you Dems. Another reason to support the Party that looks out for the security of all Wwcd Jun 2018 #13

How is this different than what occurred in2015-16? shanny Jun 2018 #87

Are you saying in 2016 you were rejected and ignored and stuff? Is that what you mean? Squinch Jun 2018 #102

lol shanny Jun 2018 #112

A bit of wild projection at the end there. You might want to watch that. I think it reveals Squinch Jun 2018 #123

"more than I want to reveal"? that's a laugh--it was friendly advice; take it, or don't shanny Jun 2018 #136

I care deeply to know what you find pathetic, and tedious. Squinch Jun 2018 #143

They're not kicking out non-Dems. This is ONLY about Presidential candidates. Very narrow. Honeycombe8 Jun 2018 #169

K&R!!! Maven Jun 2018 #18

I have to agree with the DNC this is fundamental FloridaBlues Jun 2018 #19

This is cause for celebration -- by Jill Stein and the Greens. Jim Lane Jun 2018 #20

Gee, imagine the Democratic Party requiring... louis c Jun 2018 #21

You make two important mistakes. Jim Lane Jun 2018 #35

+1 shanny Jun 2018 #55

Interesting post. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #63

+ Sparkly Jun 2018 #67

Hey! sheshe2 Jun 2018 #71

Apparently, though, not interesting enough for you to read it with any care. Jim Lane Jun 2018 #73

"Your whole first paragraph, hectoring me about the 2016 general election, ignores the distinction t sheshe2 Jun 2018 #78

Your comment about "refighting a primary" obviously referred to 2016. Jim Lane Jun 2018 #165

It's ALWAYS threats, She. Usually threatening actions that hurt them as much as everyone else, but Squinch Jun 2018 #104

Yes sheshe2 Jun 2018 #147

You make the mistake that Democrats and Liberals MrPool Jun 2018 #64

Some care. Some don't. I'm among those who do. Jim Lane Jun 2018 #81

Hmmm sheshe2 Jun 2018 #85

Not having the rule didn't stop idiots from voting for Stein in 2016. SunSeeker Jun 2018 #25

Mahalo, SunSeeker! Cha Jun 2018 #34

+++ sheshe2 Jun 2018 #150

Exactly! I've always felt that Democrats should just leave the immature.. Kahuna7 Jun 2018 #187

People who support Jill Stein are not Progressives. JI7 Jun 2018 #27

They're anarchists. nt Kahuna7 Jun 2018 #188

Oh FUCK OFF 3rd Party Jill Stein LIES.. that's all she Cha Jun 2018 #33

No, the point is that Stein wouldn't have to lie more. This time she could just tell the truth. Jim Lane Jun 2018 #37

Jill Stein wouldn't know the truth if she bumped into it. Cha Jun 2018 #40

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. brush Jun 2018 #105

It's not a question of "progressives", it's a question of DEMOCRATS! If you are a.... George II Jun 2018 #41

++++exactly! lunasun Jun 2018 #79

To be honest, in today's situation KitSileya Jun 2018 #92

Well said and to the point. brush Jun 2018 #108

Truth! sheshe2 Jun 2018 #151

Indeed. nt SunSeeker Jun 2018 #155

So selfish mcar Jun 2018 #193

How is it a loss for Dems? If they were Dems they'll already be registered as Dems. brush Jun 2018 #101

+1 and I add as I did to the person rpannier Jun 2018 #125

You have to reconsider your prediction????!!!!! The horrors!!!!! Squinch Jun 2018 #103

Not sure why, as it only refers to the person running for President rpannier Jun 2018 #124

Yes, that's its scope, and I'm talking primarily about the race for President. Jim Lane Jun 2018 #127

This is elementary and something that is a given. Honeycombe8 Jun 2018 #170

Then there's no longer any excuse to have superdelegates pecosbob Jun 2018 #22

What does that have to do with this rule? George II Jun 2018 #30

I understood superdelegates were set up to block undesirable candidates from winning. nt Lucky Luciano Jun 2018 #48

You raise a good question. We'll have to see how this develops. brush Jun 2018 #109

I can't believe this wasn't a rule already trixie2 Jun 2018 #24

IKR? workinclasszero Jun 2018 #95

K & R SunSeeker Jun 2018 #26

can they also add that tax returns are to be provided if they are to get funding from the DNC.. samnsara Jun 2018 #29

That will probably be dealt with either via state Democratic Parties or legislatures.... George II Jun 2018 #31

Question is, will this stop repukes running as Democrats from running and switching parties? meow2u3 Jun 2018 #36

That is determined by state laws. LiberalFighter Jun 2018 #45

RW Larouche followers won as IL Dems, 1986 JaneQPublic Jun 2018 #38

I remember this. murielm99 Jun 2018 #61

Will Bernie join or run on the Ralph Nader "Give the Election to Trump 2020" Independent ticket? TheBlackAdder Jun 2018 #39

I bet I know. Squinch Jun 2018 #106

amen! chillfactor Jun 2018 #42

too little too late; watch bernie launcing indepenent run AlexSFCA Jun 2018 #43

... BlueMTexpat Jun 2018 #69

I say let him run as an independent, see how far he gets. brush Jun 2018 #111

If Bernie wanted to run as an I for president he would have done so in '16 after the primary LostOne4Ever Jun 2018 #149

Good. Snackshack Jun 2018 #44

Good Tribalceltic Jun 2018 #47

Certainly seems reasonable to me. LudwigPastorius Jun 2018 #49

Absolutely Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jun 2018 #50

I'll withhold my more *$!&emphatic%#* comments, and leave it at, "This sounds like a fine idea." NBachers Jun 2018 #56

DNC panel adopts rule requiring candidates to run, serve as a Democrat. LenaBaby61 Jun 2018 #58

It's about damn time. murielm99 Jun 2018 #62

Amen,,,,,,,,! Cryptoad Jun 2018 #65

That is a good beginning! BlueMTexpat Jun 2018 #68

I am glad to see Democrats doing this but unfortunate there was the need to state an obvious. ChrisTee Jun 2018 #80

While I 100% agree with this, and am on record during 2016 OnDoutside Jun 2018 #82

Great! Let's shrink the tent! LiberalLovinLug Jun 2018 #84

I share your thoughts Sienna86 Jun 2018 #98

Any Independent who would decline to vote for a Democrat mcar Jun 2018 #119

Unpacking what you said LiberalLovinLug Jun 2018 #158

Not our supportive voters. Potentially subversive voters Hortensis Jun 2018 #207

Exactly LiberalLovinLug Jun 2018 #146

LOL! Squinch Jun 2018 #107

FOR FUCK'S SAKE Adrahil Jun 2018 #144

Nope. No good. That's just us being elitist, doncha know. Squinch Jun 2018 #148

Honey I Shrunk the Tent sheshe2 Jun 2018 #154

Blahahahaha! Squinch Jun 2018 #162

K&R! MrsCoffee Jun 2018 #90

Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2018 #91

GREAT! No Potemkin Democrats bucolic_frolic Jun 2018 #93

Didn't Sanders change his affiliation for the purpose of running in the primary? Calista241 Jun 2018 #94

We'll see. If he tries that again he'll really reveal his agenda of just... brush Jun 2018 #113

No. Another urban myth on DU. Jim Lane Jun 2018 #126

Wrong, Jim Lane. Bernie insists on being labeled an Independent. SunSeeker Jun 2018 #159

What I wrote is 100% correct. Please read more carefully. Jim Lane Jun 2018 #163

I know what you wrote, and what you were implying. And you're wrong. SunSeeker Jun 2018 #171

The context makes clear what he meant. Jim Lane Jun 2018 #172

His WORDS make clear what he meant: "I am a Democrat." SunSeeker Jun 2018 #174

You need to look in the mirror. Cha Jun 2018 #176

The requirement that the candidate "serve as a Democrat" is the clincher. SunSeeker Jun 2018 #157

Not sure if that was official? Bradical79 Jun 2018 #208

Good. About damned time for this. (nt) Paladin Jun 2018 #115

Amen to that! My only complaint is that it took too long to do it. NT Bleacher Creature Jun 2018 #118

A DNC committee has adopted a rule that presidential candidates must be party members. Gothmog Jun 2018 #129

will they enforce this for lower posts? dembotoz Jun 2018 #137

I support this. A lot. EricMaundry Jun 2018 #142

Seems like the DNC is trying to mend fences on both sides LostOne4Ever Jun 2018 #152

Excellent sheshe2 Jun 2018 #156

Of course. Hard to believe this provision wasn't already in the rules. nt Honeycombe8 Jun 2018 #166

This rule has been on the books since 2016 and was not aimed directly at Sanders pecosbob Jun 2018 #177

Makes sense for a Democratic nominee. ehrnst Jun 2018 #181

I would like to see a rule... Skid Rogue Jun 2018 #183

Or a rule that says they have to remain a Democrat even if they lose after using the party. MrsCoffee Jun 2018 #194

It Is About Time! Stop Ignoring Long Time Democrats in Favor of Social Media... TomCADem Jun 2018 #195

They're talking to/about YOU, BERNIE. . . DinahMoeHum Jun 2018 #196

From my twitter feed Gothmog Jun 2018 #197

Thank Gawd for this! Enough is enough. R B Garr Jun 2018 #200

Politico- DNC rule change angers Sanders supporters Gothmog Jun 2018 #199

Great news! It goes to character, too. To use resources R B Garr Jun 2018 #201

*yawn*, means nothing. harun Jun 2018 #204

now they just need a rule that says Democrats actually have to support DEMOCRATIC policies not yurbud Jun 2018 #205

Good grief! NurseJackie Jun 2018 #209

but you faint when someone who supports Democratic policies more faithfully than our "leaders" wants yurbud Jun 2018 #210

I only support real Democrats... NurseJackie Jun 2018 #213

how do you define a "genuine" Democrat? What's the "litmus test" centrists that are ok? yurbud Jun 2018 #214

"how do you define a "genuine" Democrat?" --- ROFL! NurseJackie Jun 2018 #216

some miss now opportunity to smear the party base. How many times can a big donor vote for you? yurbud Jun 2018 #211

Nobody is doing that. NurseJackie Jun 2018 #212

The fact that a rule like this wasn't already in place is a travesty.... Blue_Tires Jun 2018 #215