Kos claims that Bernie betrays “white privilege” if he dares to use superdelegates, because Hillary has the African-American vote, and using superdelegates would disenfranchise them.
However, Hillary courted HUNDREDS of superdelegates, beginning long before Bernie ever started talking about it. Given Bernie’s smashing results among most of the US’s Native American populations, not to mention his also-smashing showing in the state with the biggest Asian-American percentage in the union (Hawaii, which he won by 70%), it seems clear that Kos is OK, then, with disenfranchising Native Americans and Asian-Americans? Gracious me, what white privilege that would show on Hillary’s part.
Er, except that that’s ridiculous, because neither is her courting of superdelegates some kind of expression of disdain for Bernie’s Native American and Asian voters, nor is Bernie’s courting of superdelegates some kind of expression of disdain for Hillary’s African-American voters.
Because that’s fucking ridiculous.
Their courting of superdelegates is an attempt to get the most votes, out of a group of people who for some reason have been granted 10,000 times your or my ordinary vote, whether you’re Native American, African-American, Asian-American, or white. It IS true, of course, that superdelegates never should have been allowed to exist in the first place, because that’s inherently undemocratic. But if one person has been courting them all along, to have in her back pocket to use during the convention vote if she likes (for there is NO other reason to court them), then the other person should be allowed to do so too.
If there’s one rule for Hillary, the same rules should apply to Bernie. Superdelegates should not exist. But if both candidates agree to the existence of superdelegates beforehand, they should both abide by the results, even when it goes against their own side. Pretty cheesy, Kos.
(By the way, know that if any of the usual suspects are planning to thread-derail by jumping up to the top and either saying nothing that has anything to do with the diary, or saying “this diary is wrong” completely vaguely, without providing a SINGLE specific point of fact or logic that actually refutes it—and at this point we can pretty much predict, yes, you are planning to do that—I will be ignoring your post, and I urge all others to do the same. Have a great weekend.)
Sunday, May 29, 2016 · 9:59:29 PM +00:00
·
Whamadoodle
Please keep posting “it’s over” as long as you like; I am up to $50 I’ll donate to Bernie today in your names (for ParaHammer, ViaChicago, Chicago Minx, Osiris, and skatter, so far). I will continue donating $10 each time someone posts that, but I will stop replying to each “it’s over” post, since they are intended to derail the diary without actually refuting its point (since no one actually can).
I will, however, keep donating $10 each time someone posts that to me, until I reach my $2700 limit.
But since no one is actually able to refute the content of the diary, I’ll take that as a “yes, it was a bullshit diary and assertion by Kos.” For the disingenuous: there is NO OTHER REASON to court superdelegates EXCEPT to overturn the pledged-delegate vote! NO OTHER REASON. Therefore, no, my dear tapdancers, Hillary doesn’t have some magical, Good and Pure Reason for having courted them. They were courted to have in her back pocket, in case she could use them to overturn a popular vote that went against her. That’s the ONLY REASON FOR THEM.
If there were a different reason to court superdelegates, you’d be able to invent one.
Kos has been refuted. Deal with it.
Sunday, May 29, 2016 · 10:12:27 PM +00:00
·
Whamadoodle
God. The dishonesty really makes me puke.
There is ONE reason why superdelegates exist, and therefore ONE reason, and one reason only, why one courts them.
That reason is: to overturn the pledged-delegate vote. That’s it.
Not one of you people has either 1) named a SINGLE other reason, however implausible and cooked up, why one courts superdelegates; or 2) admitted that that’s a fact.
This site has gone to shit. Dishonest.
Monday, May 30, 2016 · 7:06:52 AM +00:00
·
Whamadoodle
Posters marooner and woollibaar have provided a plausible alternative answer for the idea that Hillary intended to overturn the popular vote with her superdelegates: that she merely courted them for the value of their endorsements.
This does NOT mean that she might not have intended to use them to overturn the popular vote. She may well have intended that. But it is, at least, a plausible scenario.
As far as the thread derails, you’ll be happy to know that I’m pretty sure I’ve reached my $2700 campaign contribution limit! Bernie thanks you all for getting him that money. I have to check the figures and total everything before I’m sure.
But you’ll also be happy to know that once that’s done, I’m going to be contributing all the leftover money (and there’s going to be a lot of it) to Tim Canova’s campaign, to unseat Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. Isn’t democracy great? Happy posting, everybody!