Jump to content

Ralph Nader Calls Superdelegates 'Party Hacks, Hillary's Cronies'


Strychnine

Recommended Posts

I saw this trending on Facebook, figured this was a good place for it...

http://www.newsmax.c...5/16/id/729101/

Political activist Ralph Nader said Monday Democrat superdelegates are Hillary Clinton's "cronies."

During a Facebook Live interview with The Hill, Nader blasted the Democrat party's presidential nomination process.

"If he had an open primary, he'd have beaten her," Nader said of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. "It should be open to all voters. And that helped her; that gave her a big advantage.

"The Democrats years ago didn't want an insurgency like Bernie Sanders, so they rigged it. They're called superdelegates. They're members of Congress, they're Democratic governors, they're party hacks. ... Hillary's cronies, mostly."

Nader appeared on the presidential ballot four times as a Green Party (1996, 2000), and Independent (2004, 2008) candidate. He said Sanders has too much to lose if he were to switch and run as an Independent candidate for president.

"He is a Democrat, let's face it," Nader said. "He has a committee chair in the Senate, he has a status in the Senate. He doesn't want to jeopardize that."

Sanders has frequently complained about the superdelegates that are part of the Democrat party's nomination process for president, but at this point in the campaign season, he needs those votes to help make up a sizable deficit (2,240 delegate votes to 1,473). Clinton needs to reach 2,383 votes in order to clinch the nomination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





He's not wrong.

Indeed. It's just something that hasn't really been discussed much as the universe has been revolving around Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything Trump said about the GOP process applies to the Dems x 10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not wrong.

The implication is. Bernie wouldn't be ahead if there were no super delegates. Ralph has a ego that challenges Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not wrong.

The implication is. Bernie wouldn't be ahead if there were no super delegates. Ralph has a ego that challenges Trump.

:roflol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not wrong.

The implication is. Bernie wouldn't be ahead if there were no super delegates. Ralph has a ego that challenges Trump.

The super delegate setup plays to a sense of momentum, even inevitability, and tilts the field. The networks spent the entire election season lumping in super delegates with Hillary's delegate total, even though they technically aren't counted yet, which made her lead look larger and made it look like Bernie couldn't make up the ground. Perception matters.

The implication was right too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not wrong.

The implication is. Bernie wouldn't be ahead if there were no super delegates. Ralph has a ego that challenges Trump.

The super delegate setup plays to a sense of momentum, even inevitability, and tilts the field. The networks spent the entire election season lumping in super delegates with Hillary's delegate total, even though they technically aren't counted yet, which made her lead look larger and made it look like Bernie couldn't make up the ground. Perception matters.

The implication was right too.

I'm not sure what network you watched, but the ones I've watched frequently point out that distinction because they want a horse race that doesn't exist. Nader's right about the purpose of super delegates, but that isn't why HRC is winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Members Online

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...