I’m writing this, not to defend Hillary. She’s done enough on her own to merit suspicion. I write this because the trend lately is for the extreme left to use the same tactics to twist information that they would otherwise condemn. And while some may say it is for a good cause, the means most definitely don’t justify the ends. In fact, it renders the people who engage in this behavior, no different from the establishment they so feverishly upbraid in the name of social values.
The Nevada Democratic Convention was filled with drama, chaos and bad leadership decisions but what I contend here is that it was not marred by fraud. Was Ms. Lange an opportunistic fuck? Yes! Was she fraudulent in her actions? The answer is a resounding No.
I will go into the fraudulent claims in detail but I’ll explain first what I mean when I say Ms. Lange was an opportunistic fuck. The videos going around the Internet prove only one thing: Few people there knew Robert’s Rules of Order. This, you can argue, is a form of voter suppression, but I have great experience with this, having been part of a business fraternity that never seemed to get it right at the chapter level. Those who learned Robert’s Rules controlled chapter meetings. Those who didn’t were simply disruptive and often hated for making meetings unnecessarily long. Ms. Lange took full advantage of that to impose her will, but that is far from fraudulent.
A now to many contested points:
1. 64 or 58 (many varying reports on this) Bernie delegates were denied entry
a. Hillary delegates were denied entry as well (8 to be exact)
b. The claim that these delegates were illegally purged is unsubstantiated. I challenge you to find that proof. I’ve spent hours trying to and all I can find is accounts of people who “didn’t know” the rules. Where are the names of these delegates? Why are these delegates not being vocal/public if they were illegally purged? Instead we have this lady (alleged Clinton supporter) saying someone other than her received a text saying that Lange had instructed group leaders to purge whoever they wanted. What? Lange was like “ohhh kick them out, whoever you want.” Even if what she says is true, her husband’s name, also an alleged Clinton supporter, was the one who was “scrubbed”; so there was voter purge on the Clinton Side? Does that prove anything for Sanders’ delegates being purged? Especially if the agenda here is that Bernie delegates were purged to give Clinton the advantage. There is one take away from the interview with this woman: in a room almost evenly split between Bernie and Hillary supporters, “it was about who could scream the loudest.”
c. Admittedly many of these delegates were not registered as democrats before the May 1st deadline and I invite anyone to give a reason for why someone not committed to a party should have a say in who the nominee of THAT party is. There isn’t any. Bernie could have run as an independent and gathered all his dems to make the switch. Instead he ran as a Democrat and at every turn the rhetoric has been “Disenfranchised Voters”. I call that lazy. IT IS LITERALLY JUST A PAPER WITH YOUR AFFILIATION ON IT. IT TAKES MINIMAL TIME TO REGISTER AND COME THE GENERAL ELECTION YOU CAN VOTE FOR WHOEVER YOU WANT. THERE ARE NO TARGETED ADVERTISEMENTS; NO DEMAND FOR PARTY CONTRIBUTIONS; NOTHING. THE ARGUMENT IS SIMPLY ABOUT PRIDE AND PRIDE REALLY NEVER GETS US ANYWHERE. Yes, I’m E-yelling because this particularly angers me; especially living in Miami where almost everyone I know is enamored with Bernie and yet he lost here. Yes, here. Not just Florida but in this county specifically.
UPDATE: In the Reddit link above, the original poster deleted his/her comments, but the sub comments tell you everything. The final link in the takeaways section provides a screen shot of the original comment.
d. There is also the argument that these delegates were not given a chance to prove their eligibility. Prove how? Was the convention supposed to hold off while people went home to search for this proof or lack thereof? They are granted a hearing with the credentials committee if they had proof. 8 were granted such a hearing and then seated. (I’d cite this but a quick google search will show this number consistently appearing in both liberal and conservative news coverage and Pro-Bernie bloggers)
e. The Minority Report was not produced by the credentials committee as I’ve seen plastered all over everyone’s posts and blogs. This report was produced (out-of-order) by a group of Bernie Supporters led by Sander’s campaign staff. It was drawn up after the initial count revealed that Hillary had filled more delegate seats. And to clear things up about what actually happened that day please read the official complaint which outlines how these allegations were orchestrated. Two accounts from a Bernie and Hillary delegate present are linked below and corroborate this fact.
2. Nevada caucus system
a. Tier 1: Hillary Won (by a small margin but won nonetheless): 13 delegates went to Hillary, 10 went to Bernie. This preliminary caucus is more representative of the popular vote.
b. Tier 2: Sanders won overwhelmingly but mostly because Hillary delegates just didn’t show up. (Of the 4889 delegates Hillary had won only 2386 showed up)
c. Tier 3: Hillary wins again by a small margin but one that is proportional to the original caucus results. (by the way, nearly 400 elected Bernie delegates did not show up. Why are you not mad at them?)
3. New Convention Rules: Before the convention, the committee met to devise new rules that would have to be approved at the convention before any order of business was discussed
a. A lawsuit was filed by a group of party supporters. Among other claims in the law suit is that delegates were misled about deadline to run for state party office. A judge, presented with EVIDENCE, ruled this was not the case and that leaders on the Bernie movement were responsible for the confusion (http://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/may/13/judge-dismisses-case-filed-by-sanders-supporters-a/).
b. A petition followed, claiming the Committee did not have quorum when the rules were adopted yet provides no proof for that allegation. And while I agree that the rules were iffy, they are strikingly similar to the 2008 rules that worked AGAINST Hillary. Eight years have passed and no one brought up these issues until THEIR candidate seemed to be affected by it?
c. The rules of the convention were circulated long before the convention (otherwise there would have been no time to file a lawsuit) See convention rules here . Under section VII, the call to order is scheduled for 9 am. The 10 am that people argue about only appears in the Eventbrite page where delegates could register. The language there stipulates that delegates will not be allowed to register after 10 am; NOT that the call to order will happen at that time. By the way, credentialing started the night before so NO EXCUSES on that front.
d. Under Robert’s rules of order, a meeting cannot be called to order unless quorum is established. Quorum is defined in most cases as the majority (50+1) of the members of the convention unless otherwise established. Section VIII establishes quorum as 40% of the registered delegates. Assuming all 3,846 delegates or alternates registered (2,124 for Bernie and 1,722 for Hillary), 40% is 1,538 and 50% is 1,923. The delegate count after all alternates were seated was 3,357. By all means lay this quorum bullshit to rest. Quorum was definitely established and this initial count took place before the vote to approve the rules took place.
e. When the motion to approve the rules was made, a Bernie supporter seconded the motion. Why did he second the motion, if there was so much outrage regarding the rules? Maybe, just maybe, because the committee charged with making and approving these rules, was evenly appointed across Hillary and Bernie delegates and had worked diligently to create these rules.
4. The nay video floating around.
a. Go somewhere quiet, turn up the volume and really take these videos in. At most the Nays and Ayes are equal. The only thing you can accurately discern from the video is that the Bernie delegates yelled for longer.
b. Having confirmed the delegate count one can only assume that the Berners were louder but certain not that their nays constituted the 2/3’s necessary to amend the rules. Knowing this, Roberta Lange was right in approving the motion. (See convention rules)
c. If you believe that someone’s phone video camera can accurately capture the sounds of thousands of people, well then I don’t know why you even read this far.
- Roberta Lang’s voice is something I never want to hear again but the fraudulent accusations are simply false. Ultimately, she used Robert’s Rules of Order to her advantage. Also, even those on the Bernie side recount how delegates rushed the front and acted unruly, while attempting to circumvent the rules. Paired with the many death threats she has received since the convention, I am certain that she was justified in her swift ending of the meeting. That doesn’t make her less of a Fucktard, and it certainly doesn’t negate the fact that her behavior was highly seditious but it does show how the chaos orchestrated by Bernie delegates did more harm than good.
- There was profound irresponsibility from Bernie campaign leaders who misinformed delegates on several deadlines, interpretation of the rules, and delegate credentialing guidelines.
- “keep in mind that this result is actually the reflection of the portion of the process that had the most individual voters — the original caucus. The Sanders Delegation was upset that they had ultimately failed to change that original projection, which was arguably the most Democratic one.”
- This was all over 5-7 delegates…. -________-
- Most importantly, let’s come together to eliminate caucuses. The process is silly and lends itself to chicanery and the very type of civil unrest that gave Bernie supporters a bad name instead of a voice.