Bernie wins Clark county NV convention vote

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://twitter.com/ClarkDems/status/716408177307168768

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If it were Hillary taking away delegates that Bernie rightfully won, the Sandernistas would be shrieking right now...

Bernie didn't take away anything. National delegates aren't determined until the final round of caucuses, which this is not.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If it were Hillary taking away delegates that Bernie rightfully won, the Sandernistas would be shrieking right now...

Bernie didn't take away anything. National delegates aren't determined until the final round of caucuses, which this is not.

And then thankfully the DNC credentials committee will take over and will restore a delegation that will reflect the will of the Nevadan people.

Sure, if they want 1968 all over again.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If it were Hillary taking away delegates that Bernie rightfully won, the Sandernistas would be shrieking right now...

Bernie didn't take away anything. National delegates aren't determined until the final round of caucuses, which this is not.

You can cling to your technicalities all you want when it's Bernie, but we all know that you would be the Ringleader of the Venom if the tables were turned.

Bernie lost ground in a lot of Iowa caucuses in the 2nd round, and you didn't hear a peep about them. Obama tended to do better in later rounds of caucuses, and all those delegates were seated at the convention.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If it were Hillary taking away delegates that Bernie rightfully won, the Sandernistas would be shrieking right now...

Bernie didn't take away anything. National delegates aren't determined until the final round of caucuses, which this is not.

And then thankfully the DNC credentials committee will take over and will restore a delegation that will reflect the will of the Nevadan people.

Sure, if they want 1968 all over again.

Oh yeah, I'm sure there will be thousands of people rioting for the right of the Sanders campaign to subvert the will of Nevada's voters.

Bernie didn't subvert anything. He got more votes and won. No one stopped Hillary delegates from voting for Hillary.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If it were Hillary taking away delegates that Bernie rightfully won, the Sandernistas would be shrieking right now...

Bernie didn't take away anything. National delegates aren't determined until the final round of caucuses, which this is not.

And then thankfully the DNC credentials committee will take over and will restore a delegation that will reflect the will of the Nevadan people.

Sure, if they want 1968 all over again.

Oh yeah, I'm sure there will be thousands of people rioting for the right of the Sanders campaign to subvert the will of Nevada's voters.

Bernie didn't subvert anything. He got more votes and won. No one stopped Hillary delegates from voting for Hillary.

Are you a real person or a bot programmed to post Sanders campaign talking points?

Speak for yourself.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If it were Hillary taking away delegates that Bernie rightfully won, the Sandernistas would be shrieking right now...

Bernie didn't take away anything. National delegates aren't determined until the final round of caucuses, which this is not.

And then thankfully the DNC credentials committee will take over and will restore a delegation that will reflect the will of the Nevadan people.

Sure, if they want 1968 all over again.

Doubt there are riots over a couple Nevada delegates when Hillary has at minimum a 200 delegate lead (not counting supers) at the convention.

There will be if it made a difference. This same thing happened 8 years ago with Obama gaining at Hillary's expense. All of Obama's delegates were seated.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Anyway, this is apparently pretty academic. According the Nevada Democratic party rules the district delegates won't change, no matter the results of county and CD conventions.
Only the apportionment of at-large delegates can change if more Sanders than Clinton people show up at the state convention.
Worst case scenario for her: a 18/17 split instead of the original 20/15.

District national delegates were clearly based upon the state convention delegates in 2008.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/NV-D.phtml

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/NV-D

So it does look like Bernie can pick up some district delegates, but it's not set in stone until the 3rd round next month.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Clark County includes all of CD1 and parts of CDs 3 and 4. How exactly the county delegates divide among the 3 CDs greatly influence whether Bernie wins Nevada by 19-16 or 18-17, or (at worst) lose by 18-17.

There's also the other county conventions. Any word from them?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

http://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/apr/02/sanders-wins-most-delegates-at-clark-county-conven/

Because of the way delegate selection works in Nevada, 23 delegates to the Democratic National Committee are selected on the district level, based proportionally on the Feb. 20 caucus results. Only five pledged party leaders and elected official delegates and seven at-large delegates will be selected proportionally based on party preference of the state convention.

That's not what Green Papers says or how it worked in 2008.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

http://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/apr/02/sanders-wins-most-delegates-at-clark-county-conven/

Because of the way delegate selection works in Nevada, 23 delegates to the Democratic National Committee are selected on the district level, based proportionally on the Feb. 20 caucus results. Only five pledged party leaders and elected official delegates and seven at-large delegates will be selected proportionally based on party preference of the state convention.

That's not what Green Papers says or how it worked in 2008.

The rules were changed to specifically prevent what happened in 2008 from occurring again.

Nope. It's pretty clear if you read the document rather than assuming that Ralston has any idea what he's talking about.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://nvdems.3cdn.net/efafb4788ed845d0d3_08m6i2zsp.pdf

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Why do Clinton supporters criticize caucuses as anti-democratic but not superdelegates seems like more a sore loser thing than a worry for democracy

Because the super-delegates aren't going to overturn the majority of pledged delegates.

I mean, if caucus shenanigans like these were enough to alter the outcome, I'm sure they'd have no problem doing so. Luckily it won't be that close.

Good to see jfern doesn't care about subverting the will of the voters. Somehow, I'm not surprised.

The will of the voters who didn't bother to show up?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The will of the voters who didn't bother to show up?

The voters showed up on February 20th, which they had understood would be the day on which Nevadans would decide on the presidential nominee.  The arcane procedures that followed are hardly the hallmark of a free, fair and open democracy, as evidenced today.

They are kind of strange, but the same thing happened in Nevada 8 years ago.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Why do Clinton supporters criticize caucuses as anti-democratic but not superdelegates seems like more a sore loser thing than a worry for democracy

Because the super-delegates aren't going to overturn the majority of pledged delegates.

I mean, if caucus shenanigans like these were enough to alter the outcome, I'm sure they'd have no problem doing so. Luckily it won't be that close.

Good to see jfern doesn't care about subverting the will of the voters. Somehow, I'm not surprised.

The will of the voters who didn't bother to show up?

They showed up to vote on election day. Nobody cares about the technicalities of some archaic and outdated caucus procedure. It's about as democratic as faithless electors and superdelegates.

Were people this outraged when the same thing happened 8 years ago in Nevada?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

http://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/apr/02/sanders-wins-most-delegates-at-clark-county-conven/

Because of the way delegate selection works in Nevada, 23 delegates to the Democratic National Committee are selected on the district level, based proportionally on the Feb. 20 caucus results. Only five pledged party leaders and elected official delegates and seven at-large delegates will be selected proportionally based on party preference of the state convention.

That's not what Green Papers says or how it worked in 2008.

The rules were changed to specifically prevent what happened in 2008 from occurring again.

Nope. It's pretty clear if you read the document rather than assuming that Ralston has any idea what he's talking about.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://nvdems.3cdn.net/efafb4788ed845d0d3_08m6i2zsp.pdf

I agree the rules are as clear as mud but the key section is at the bottom of page 8, top of page 9.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Determining step is the the key phrase.  The district delegates are determind by the Feb 20 precinct caucuses

The word determining probably shouldn't be there. Right before that there's this. The second and third tiers clearly matter.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I'd imagine so, yes. I didn't pay close enough attention back then to know for sure. At the end of the day it wasn't determinative, just like this won't be, but I can only imagine the chaos that would ensue if it was.

Hillary was still running for President when she lost Nevada.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Based on the fact that the Nevada Delegate Selection Plan calls the Feb 20 vote non-binding, and Section 7.a. therein, I'm led to believe that the May 14 vote is independent of today's vote, as today's vote was independent of the Feb 20 vote.

That's what I've been saying. It's a 3 tier process. This was the 2nd tier. The 3rd tier is the one who actually choose the national convention delegates. So while it's looking good for Bernie, things aren't set in stone until the state convention.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

FWIW Clinton campaign claims they still have a majority of delegates in Nevada.

https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/716445269861093377

They can believe that they have a majority of the delegates of 80% white Nevada, but for those of us living in the real world....

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Based on the fact that the Nevada Delegate Selection Plan calls the Feb 20 vote non-binding, and Section 7.a. therein, I'm led to believe that the May 14 vote is independent of today's vote, as today's vote was independent of the Feb 20 vote.

That's what I've been saying. It's a 3 tier process. This was the 2nd tier. The 3rd tier is the one who actually choose the national convention delegates. So while it's looking good for Bernie, things aren't set in stone until the state convention.

So you're ok with Bernie potentially coming away with more national delegates, even though more voters showed up to vote for Hillary in the first stage?

(Don't sidetrack this by bringing up superdelegate skewing in other states; I agree they need to go.)

The caucus system does have some issues, but  I don't remember people caring about this when the same exact thing happened 8 years ago.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

BTW question for the Nevadans who attended today's Clark county convention, did they break delegates  down by congressional district or just county wide?

The entire convention hall remained as one group of county-wide delegates.

Hard to see how they can change the District delegate allocation if they did not vote by district.

Might be something we won't know until the State Convention, though with those figures for Clark it does appear likely that Sanders gains a delegate and Clinton loses 1 in at least CD-4 considering that she barely made it 4-2 instead of 3-3 on Caucus night.

There's a good chance Bernie also wins CD1, which gives him a 19-16 delegate split.

Again, most reports are that the congressional district delegates were set by the results of the Feb precinct caucuses, only the at large delegates can change at the state convention. Unless of course the media are all wrong (not impossible).  

By most reports, you mean where Ralston failed to read the full context of what he was quoting?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Green Papers often has incorrect information. The speculation about the district delegates is coming directly from interpretation of the official rules.

I quoted the official rules.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It seems there's a lot of conflicting information on whether the congressional district delegates can change. If they don't, Hillary would win the delegates 18-17, which is the closest proportion to the original vote.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It shouldn't surprise anyone that Sanders, with his big money campaign and his thuggish supporters, will use any means necessary to steal the election from the People's Candidate. Thankfully, no matter how many smoke-filled conventions and caucuses Sanders' shady supporters slither around in the huge grassroots movement to elect an honest outsider like Hillary Clinton has simply delivered too many landslide victories in actual democratic elections.

Do you actually believe any of what you wrote?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It shouldn't surprise anyone that Sanders, with his big money campaign and his thuggish supporters, will use any means necessary to steal the election from the People's Candidate. Thankfully, no matter how many smoke-filled conventions and caucuses Sanders' shady supporters slither around in the huge grassroots movement to elect an honest outsider like Hillary Clinton has simply delivered too many landslide victories in actual democratic elections.

Do you actually believe any of what you wrote?

All of it. Sanders' campaign has more money, that's a simple fact, and there were plenty of instances of his supporters acting intimidating and thuggish at caucus sites. He does stronger in caucuses in primaries, but Clinton's landslides in major primary states like Florida and Texas make that irrelevant. Those are all just facts.

Obviously, whether Hillary Clinton is "honest" or an "outsider" depends on a). your totally subjective opinion of what defines an outsider, although I'd note she's been out of office for several years and Sanders is a creature of the Senate, and b). whether you think she's "honest" person, which none of us actually know. And I guess whether her support is "huge" or "grassroots" could also be called subjective.

Did you want to actually dispute any of that?

I've heard of intimidation of Bernie being by Hillary people, and not the other way around.

Hillary's SuperPACs give her a monetary advantage.

Hillary has proven herself to be very dishonest with her attacks on Bernie. And 67% of Americans say she's not honest and trustworthy.