Bernie vows to take it to "Contested Contest" at Convention

[bballrox4717]

Also the Kennedy example should be irrelevant because Carter had clearly shown by the convention that he was a completely inept president facing a national crisis of confidence. Whether you like Hillary or not, there's certainly no doubt that she can do the job. It was also a different time, with the establishment much more powerful than it is today. Kennedy was easily much more in tune with the Democratic establishment than Carter was, and Sanders literally became a Democrat for political convenience.

It would seriously take some Nixonian level stuff to come out for Sanders to even justify taking it to the convention, and even then I'm not sure I would deny Hillary the nomination unless it was clear she would face conviction. And honestly, that's about as likely as Sanders coming back to lead the pledged delegate count. It's not going to happen. If a politically charged committee can't find anything that suggests criminal behavior, the FBI isn't going to either.

[IceSpear]

It's just bluster so his voters in the May/June states don't abandon him.

[Famous Mortimer]

Why do you think it's just bluster? Again, contesting the convention just means he's going to claim his 40% or whatever of the delegates and then lose. Rather than dropping out and not officially getting any votes. It's not really difficult. It's not really that huge of a statement. It's also certainly nothing to get upset over.

[Lyin' Steve]

Also the Kennedy example should be irrelevant because Carter had clearly shown by the convention that he was a completely inept president facing a national crisis of confidence. Whether you like Hillary or not, there's certainly no doubt that she can do the job. It was also a different time, with the establishment much more powerful than it is today. Kennedy was easily much more in tune with the Democratic establishment than Carter was, and Sanders literally became a Democrat for political convenience.

It would seriously take some Nixonian level stuff to come out for Sanders to even justify taking it to the convention, and even then I'm not sure I would deny Hillary the nomination unless it was clear she would face conviction. And honestly, that's about as likely as Sanders coming back to lead the pledged delegate count. It's not going to happen. If a politically charged committee can't find anything that suggests criminal behavior, the FBI isn't going to either.

Kennedy and all his buddies in congress hated Carter personally too.  Carter did what Sanders says he'll do -- rolled into Washington on a "moral mandate", after almost losing to Gerald Ford of all people, and started demanding that congress pass his agenda, which nobody in congress liked, without making any effort to compromise or even make friends and allies.  He saw Kennedy and the Democrats as pawns to implement his agenda, which they didn't even agree with.  They didn't take too kindly to that.  Iirc Kennedy even threatened a government shutdown just to try to open Carter's eyes.

[IceSpear]

Why do you think it's just bluster? Again, contesting the convention just means he's going to claim his 40% or whatever of the delegates and then lose. Rather than dropping out and not officially getting any votes. It's not really difficult. It's not really that huge of a statement. It's also certainly nothing to get upset over.

It depends on the interpretation. It's possible to concede without releasing your delegates. "Contested convention" seems to imply attempting to overturn the result.

[Famous Mortimer]

Why do you think it's just bluster? Again, contesting the convention just means he's going to claim his 40% or whatever of the delegates and then lose. Rather than dropping out and not officially getting any votes. It's not really difficult. It's not really that huge of a statement. It's also certainly nothing to get upset over.

It depends on the interpretation. It's possible to concede without releasing your delegates. "Contested convention" seems to imply attempting to overturn the result.

I guess you could interpret it that way but it seems silly to do so. Any race between two or more people is "contested" up until the point when someone wins. True, the loser can "contest" the results afterwards but the don't have to in order for it to have been a contest in the first place.

In the context of presidential conventions, "contest" has always meant "more than two people running" as opposed to the other meaning of "claim fraud".

Back when there actually were contested conventions every cycle, rarely did the loser ever try to overturn the results. The 1936 Democratic Convention was contested but no one tried to argue FDR's win was illegitimate.

[bballrox4717]

Why do you think it's just bluster? Again, contesting the convention just means he's going to claim his 40% or whatever of the delegates and then lose. Rather than dropping out and not officially getting any votes. It's not really difficult. It's not really that huge of a statement. It's also certainly nothing to get upset over.

Even if that was Sanders' plan, there is no way his supporters take it as that and will likely cause huge protests once the vote comes through.

I'd be fine if they take a vote, but anything less than a full endorsement with a Hillary 2008 style speech before the convention itself is a huge disservice to Hillary, causes the split in the party to continue, and helps Trump in a general election. Sanders needs to end his campaign with class if he wants Hillary and the Democrats to show him any sort of respect once the election is over.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Jane his wife says that the FBI should get on with the investigation. That's why Sanders isn't gonna suspend but Dems and Superdelegates don't care a out Benghazi.

This, except that the FBI investigation isn't Benghazi.

In 2008, Hillary said she was going to Denver and even used RFK's assassination as a reason for staying in.

[Famous Mortimer]

Why do you think it's just bluster? Again, contesting the convention just means he's going to claim his 40% or whatever of the delegates and then lose. Rather than dropping out and not officially getting any votes. It's not really difficult. It's not really that huge of a statement. It's also certainly nothing to get upset over.

Even if that was Sanders' plan, there is no way his supporters take it as that and will likely cause huge protests once the vote comes through.

Sanders can't be blamed for his dumb supporters. Even if he did drop out right now and enthusiastically campaign for her in Indiana and California, most of his hardcore supporters would probably still think it was a coded message that he's running as a write in in the general election.

[IceSpear]

Jane his wife says that the FBI should get on with the investigation. That's why Sanders isn't gonna suspend but Dems and Superdelegates don't care a out Benghazi.

This, except that the FBI investigation isn't Benghazi.

In 2008, Hillary said she was going to Denver and even used RFK's assassination as a reason for staying in.

Are you really still peddling this old lie? She named several examples of Democratic primaries stretching into June, one of which was in 1968. She also named 1992 in the same sentence. The fact that people took this out of context to imply she wanted Obama to be assassinated just shows there's no depths to which the media and anti-Hillary hacks won't sink to smear her.

[Lief 🗽]

Uh, it's literally impossible for a convention with only two candidates to be contested. Is Cheatin' Bernie going senile??

Your understanding of what a contested convention is is incorrect. So you shouldn't be accusing other people of mental illness for actually knowing what it means.

A contested convention just means Sanders won't drop out. He will not release his delegates. They will vote for him on the first ballot. The first ballot will be contested. Then of course Hillary will win but that doesn't change the fact that the first ballot was contested. The Republican convention in 2012 was contested too, because Ron Paul didn't drop out.

No, a convention that ends after the first ballot is not a contested convention.

[Mr. Morden]

Uh, it's literally impossible for a convention with only two candidates to be contested. Is Cheatin' Bernie going senile??

Your understanding of what a contested convention is is incorrect. So you shouldn't be accusing other people of mental illness for actually knowing what it means.

A contested convention just means Sanders won't drop out. He will not release his delegates. They will vote for him on the first ballot. The first ballot will be contested. Then of course Hillary will win but that doesn't change the fact that the first ballot was contested. The Republican convention in 2012 was contested too, because Ron Paul didn't drop out.

No, a convention that ends after the first ballot is not a contested convention.

Different people seem to use different definitions.  It's possible to have a convention with only two candidates, for which the outcome isn't known in advance, if a sufficient number of the superdelegates haven't indicated their allegiance prior to the convention.  Not that that'll happen this time, since Clinton will presumably have the backing of a majority of the supers, well before the convention starts.

In any case, as I've said before, whether Sanders concedes defeat in June or not isn't really important, since everyone will know that Clinton's won, and there won't be any real suspense on who's going to be nominated.  The real problem he could create if he wanted to is if he tried to interfere with the DNC turning all the convention planning over to the Clinton campaign to decide speakers and the like.  Does he attempt to prevent her from using the convention as a big commercial for her candidacy, as is normally done in the modern era?

[Famous Mortimer]

Uh, it's literally impossible for a convention with only two candidates to be contested. Is Cheatin' Bernie going senile??

Your understanding of what a contested convention is is incorrect. So you shouldn't be accusing other people of mental illness for actually knowing what it means.

A contested convention just means Sanders won't drop out. He will not release his delegates. They will vote for him on the first ballot. The first ballot will be contested. Then of course Hillary will win but that doesn't change the fact that the first ballot was contested. The Republican convention in 2012 was contested too, because Ron Paul didn't drop out.

No, a convention that ends after the first ballot is not a contested convention.

No. You are wrong and the confidence with which you assert you are right in the face of the actual definition of the word is not flattering.

Uh, it's literally impossible for a convention with only two candidates to be contested. Is Cheatin' Bernie going senile??

Your understanding of what a contested convention is is incorrect. So you shouldn't be accusing other people of mental illness for actually knowing what it means.

A contested convention just means Sanders won't drop out. He will not release his delegates. They will vote for him on the first ballot. The first ballot will be contested. Then of course Hillary will win but that doesn't change the fact that the first ballot was contested. The Republican convention in 2012 was contested too, because Ron Paul didn't drop out.

No, a convention that ends after the first ballot is not a contested convention.

Different people seem to use different definitions.  It's possible to have a convention with only two candidates, for which the outcome isn't known in advance, if a sufficient number of the superdelegates haven't indicated their allegiance prior to the convention.  Not that that'll happen this time, since Clinton will presumably have the backing of a majority of the supers, well before the convention starts.

In any case, as I've said before, whether Sanders concedes defeat in June or not isn't really important, since everyone will know that Clinton's won, and there won't be any real suspense on who's going to be nominated.  The real problem he could create if he wanted to is if he tried to interfere with the DNC turning all the convention planning over to the Clinton campaign to decide speakers and the like.  Does he attempt to prevent her from using the convention as a big commercial for her candidacy, as is normally done in the modern era?

It has nothing to do with super delegates technically being unpledged. Even if there were no super delegates and Hillary had a majority of the delegates,  if Sanders wouldn't drop out and wouldn't release his delegates, it would be a contested convention.