Bernie wins Clark county NV convention vote

[Minnesota Mike]

Regardless if you are Clinton or Sanders supporter this is a f*^ked up way to pick a Presidential candidate.  

[The Other Castro]

Now imagine all of this where such conspiracies are actually happening, it changes the results of the race, and everybody has a gun. Get ready for the GOP convention guys.

[dax00]

Regardless if you are Clinton or Sanders supporter this is a f*^ked up way to pick a Presidential candidate.  

Amen.

At one point a man was running up and down the aisle screaming that two Bernie supporters had been arrested for catching some Hillary operatives apparently reallocating Bernie delegates as Hillary delegates.  His evidence for this came from a YouTube video that he had not himself seen.

Can anybody explain to me how it makes sense to arrest Bernie supporters for catching Hillary supporters committing voter fraud?

[Landslide Lyndon]

Just got home.  I left early because... ugh, what a mess.  Seven straight hours of standing and sitting around will test anybody's patience.

Both campaigns were enthusiastic, but my god the Bernie supporters are intense.  To the point of borderline terrifying.

At one point a man was running up and down the aisle screaming that two Bernie supporters had been arrested for catching some Hillary operatives apparently reallocating Bernie delegates as Hillary delegates.  His evidence for this came from a YouTube video that he had not himself seen.

Then as I was leaving, along with hundreds of other tired delegates from both sides, a teenager with a megaphone was begging the Bernie supporters to turn around and go back inside, because the remaining Hillary delegates were going to overturn the results and declare a Hillary victory.

I sympathize with you Joe. I can only imagine how Torie would've felt if he was forced to spend 7 hours commingling with a bunch of teabaggers.

[Joe Republic]

At one point a man was running up and down the aisle screaming that two Bernie supporters had been arrested for catching some Hillary operatives apparently reallocating Bernie delegates as Hillary delegates.  His evidence for this came from a YouTube video that he had not himself seen.

Can anybody explain to me how it makes sense to arrest Bernie supporters for catching Hillary supporters committing voter fraud?

Exactly.  The paranoid crazy was out in force.

[○∙◄☻¥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.

[Ogre Mage]

Just got home.  I left early because... ugh, what a mess.  Seven straight hours of standing and sitting around will test anybody's patience.

Both campaigns were enthusiastic, but my god the Bernie supporters are intense.  To the point of borderline terrifying.

At one point a man was running up and down the aisle screaming that two Bernie supporters had been arrested for catching some Hillary operatives apparently reallocating Bernie delegates as Hillary delegates.  His evidence for this came from a YouTube video that he had not himself seen.

Then as I was leaving, along with hundreds of other tired delegates from both sides, a teenager with a megaphone was begging the Bernie supporters to turn around and go back inside, because the remaining Hillary delegates were going to overturn the results and declare a Hillary victory.

Thank you for being a non-crazy participant.  Our democratic system is messy, that's for sure.

[Ebsy]

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.

[Wells]

It's good to hear that Hillary Clinton still won Nevada and Sanders didn't steal the election from her. Caucuses are terrible.

[IceSpear]

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.

[○∙◄☻¥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?

[Joe Republic]

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.

[The Other Castro]

Let's be clear on this: How exactly did a Clinton win turn into a Sanders win here? My understanding is that of the many delegates chosen at the initial caucuses, a lot failed to come out to the county conventions. Then, because more Sanders delegates (and alternates) showed up than Clinton delegates, Sanders was able to take the lead. Now, how is it that Clinton delegates failing to show up for the event they were chosen to attend represents anything other than a failure on the part of the Clinton campaign in turning out responsible delegates? Please correct me if I'm wrong (I may very well be since I'm not too familiar with caucus rules), but isn't this a Sanders win simply because more of his delegates actually showed 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.

[IceSpear]

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.

[Joe Republic]

Let's be clear on this: How exactly did a Clinton win turn into a Sanders win here? My understanding is that of the many delegates chosen at the initial caucuses, a lot failed to come out to the county conventions. Then, because more Sanders delegates (and alternates) showed up than Clinton delegates, Sanders was able to take the lead. Now, how is it that Clinton delegates failing to show up for the event they were chosen to attend represents anything other than a failure on the part of the Clinton campaign in turning out responsible delegates? Please correct me if I'm wrong (I may very well be since I'm not too familiar with caucus rules), but isn't this a Sanders win simply because more of his delegates actually showed up?

This shouldn't have to be a test of endurance, to see how many days of events taking up several hours (half of which spent standing outside in the sun) each candidate's supporters can survive.

[○∙◄☻¥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?

[The Other Castro]

Let's be clear on this: How exactly did a Clinton win turn into a Sanders win here? My understanding is that of the many delegates chosen at the initial caucuses, a lot failed to come out to the county conventions. Then, because more Sanders delegates (and alternates) showed up than Clinton delegates, Sanders was able to take the lead. Now, how is it that Clinton delegates failing to show up for the event they were chosen to attend represents anything other than a failure on the part of the Clinton campaign in turning out responsible delegates? Please correct me if I'm wrong (I may very well be since I'm not too familiar with caucus rules), but isn't this a Sanders win simply because more of his delegates actually showed up?

This shouldn't have to be a test of endurance, to see how many days of events taking up several hours (half of which spent standing outside in the sun) each candidate's supporters can survive.

Oh I completely agree that these caucus rules are horrible, I'm just trying to figure out what people are talking about with Sanders shenanigans when it seems the only fault comes from the rules of the caucus itself and the lack in number of Clinton delegates.

[Minnesota Mike]

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

[IceSpear]

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?

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.

[○∙◄☻¥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.

[Joe Republic]

Oh I completely agree that these caucus rules are horrible, I'm just trying to figure out what people are talking about with Sanders shenanigans when it seems the only fault comes from the rules of the caucus itself and the lack in number of Clinton delegates.

I'm not calling shenanigans.  The Sanders people won today's vote fair and square; my complaint is this system that allowed for it in the first place.

[○∙◄☻¥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.

[catographer]

Atlas's dream world would be one in which the primaries were conducted just like general elections, all popular vote proportional binding delegate representation.