Bernie Tells Delegates He Did NOT Concede---So What Does His Endorsement of Clinton Mean?
©2016 by JusticeGazette.org
July 12, 2016. After his endorsement of Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders called his delegates and said the following (according to a report from Lori Miller).
"I AM STILL OFFICIALLY A CANDIDATE. WE ARE GOING TO PHILLY. I DID NOT AND WILL NOT CONCEDE. I AM NOT SUSPENDING MY CAMPAIGN. I HOPE WE GET ENOUGH VOTES BUT SHE WILL LIKELY BE THE NOMINEE. WHEN SHE IS, I WILL COME OUT OF THE CONVENTION AND DO EVERYTHING I CAN TO BEAT DONALD TRUMP AND I HOPE YOU WILL JOIN ME."
What does the failure to concede mean in view of Bernie's endorsement of Clinton? The endorsement has left most of his supporters in shock and despair, feeling betrayed and angry. Many have asked for a refund, feeling he broke his promise not to endorse prior to the convention. Others are making excuses, mischaracterizing a rule against candidates endorsing against nominated candidates in races that are not their own. There has never been a rule requiring a candidate to endorse his or her opponent for the nomination in his or her own race.
In new polling, more than 98% of Sanders supporters polled stated they will not vote for Hillary Clinton, despite the endorsement. Instead of decreasing, the opposition to Clinton among Sanders supporters, recent events have dramatically increased the refusal to supporter her. In terms of the general election, while the new polling reveals virtually no Sanders supporters plan to vote for Clinton, more than 30% said they might vote directly for Donald Trump to defeat Clinton. Many of the Sanders supporters have noted that Trump is closer to Sanders in terms of opposing the TPP, supporting single-payer health care, opposing fracking and opposing genetically modified foods. Jill Stein, the presumptive Green Nominee for President will likely get a lot of the fallout. Polls showed that, if Bernie had taken up Jill's offer and run as the Green Presidential candidate, he would have defeated both Clinton and Trump in November. So, in endorsing Hillary and sticking with the Democratic Party, he appears to be intentionally giving up the Presidency. Jill's selfless offer to step aside for Bernie, however, is something that is resonating strongly with Sanders supporters.
The Sanders delegates are still expected to vote through the final vote for Bernie Sanders at the Convention. At the delegate caucuses, as a condition of being selected, the Sanders delegates pledged to vote against Clinton even if Bernie endorsed her. Their own honor is at stake, requiring them to follow through in voting against Clinton at the convention. However, will disappointment and confusion change their convictions and will some of Bernie's 1900 delegates stay home to cut their economic losses? So far, Bernie's supporters have continued to be much more active, energetic and reliable than Clinton's supporters.
There is a lot of speculation about why Bernie went against his promise and endorsed Hillary before the convention. Though there has been a talk about the platform, the current proposed Democratic platform is the most Republican in the last hundred years. Some platform crumbs doled out to the Sanders supporters have been treated as huge victories by those desperate to claim their efforts have had an effect on the Democratic Party. However, candidates and leaders ignore platforms, going more often against the platform than with it. Often during the approval process on the convention floor, the "nay" votes are not even requested as the rules for adopting the platform are rarely followed. The platform is at best a propaganda piece. If following the platform were a requirement, Bill Clinton would have been in violation of the 1992 and 1996 platforms during each of his years in office. Likewise, Barack Obama went against his party's platform on a regular basis.
Then, what is really at stake for Bernie? Last, week, in the House of Representatives, Bernie was booed. Though this may have seemed petty, the Democratic Caucuses and leaders in Congress have been known to be retaliatory. In 2004, Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi removed six-term Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney's seniority on her committees in retaliation for McKinney's daring to question George W. Bush's foreign policy. (There is a great deal of collusion between the Bush's and the Democratic Party. Bill Clinton has regularly hung out with George W. Bush. who is now backing HIllary Clinton. Dick Cheney is also backing HIllary Clinton. So are the Koch Brothers.)
In 2005, when Democratic leaders in the California State Legislature forced a confirmation vote for Republican Bruce McPherson for California Secretary of State, legislators were told that they would lose all party funding and all party support and be the subject of other retaliatory action if they voted against McPherson or officially abstained. In protest, Paul Koretz, Lori Saldana and Jackie Goldberg locked themselves in their offices. The gist of this is that retaliation and threats from Democratic leaders do exist and elected officials are sometimes under the gun.
So what could they do to Bernie? Limit his influence to the latrine-cleaning committee after they create one just for retaliation purposes. The Democrats have never been known to abide by rules. Whether as President or as Senator, Bernie has an agenda he wants to get through. The only way to end the issuance of such threats by party officials would be if the Democratic Party lost to independents or to an opposition party in November.
The Clinton endorsement has devastated a great many Sanders supporters, who now feel as if a spouse or parent has just died or taken up with their worst enemy. Sanders brought in a lot of first-time voters, who are now mostly disillusioned. Some supporters are terrified that Sanders will turn over his lists to Hillary Clinton, who will retaliate against them. Some are experiencing PTSD over the perceived betrayal. Some families fear there may even be some suicides--especially given the millions who now feel their hopes and dreams for a better life have been crushed. Some very low income people have given their food money to Bernie Sanders in the faith that he would never endorse Clinton prior to the convention. Those supporters will likely never trust any candidate again. So while there continues to be hope, most of Sanders supporters are experiencing tremendous disillusionment, fear, anger, and feelings of betrayal and hopelessness. Nothing Hillary or Trump was capable of doing is as damaging to the morale of Sanders supporters as Bernie's endorsement of Clinton.
The revolution is not over. Thousands of activists and delegates have borrowed money to arrange to be in Philadelphia for the revolution Bernie called for. With or without Bernie, it will take place. Perhaps, Dennis Kucinich or Cynthia McKinney will come to the forefront and lead the masses to victory. Perhaps, Jill Stein will surprise everyone with a Green victory.
The Democratic Party will likely lose in November and out of the ashes a new people's party just might be born. The public has gotten an education that won't go away. Wall Street may be able to temporarily hang on but the awakened public is ready to end the vote rigging and take back its country from the 1% now or in the near future.
"I AM STILL OFFICIALLY A CANDIDATE. WE ARE GOING TO PHILLY. I DID NOT AND WILL NOT CONCEDE. I AM NOT SUSPENDING MY CAMPAIGN. I HOPE WE GET ENOUGH VOTES BUT SHE WILL LIKELY BE THE NOMINEE. WHEN SHE IS, I WILL COME OUT OF THE CONVENTION AND DO EVERYTHING I CAN TO BEAT DONALD TRUMP AND I HOPE YOU WILL JOIN ME."
What does the failure to concede mean in view of Bernie's endorsement of Clinton? The endorsement has left most of his supporters in shock and despair, feeling betrayed and angry. Many have asked for a refund, feeling he broke his promise not to endorse prior to the convention. Others are making excuses, mischaracterizing a rule against candidates endorsing against nominated candidates in races that are not their own. There has never been a rule requiring a candidate to endorse his or her opponent for the nomination in his or her own race.
In new polling, more than 98% of Sanders supporters polled stated they will not vote for Hillary Clinton, despite the endorsement. Instead of decreasing, the opposition to Clinton among Sanders supporters, recent events have dramatically increased the refusal to supporter her. In terms of the general election, while the new polling reveals virtually no Sanders supporters plan to vote for Clinton, more than 30% said they might vote directly for Donald Trump to defeat Clinton. Many of the Sanders supporters have noted that Trump is closer to Sanders in terms of opposing the TPP, supporting single-payer health care, opposing fracking and opposing genetically modified foods. Jill Stein, the presumptive Green Nominee for President will likely get a lot of the fallout. Polls showed that, if Bernie had taken up Jill's offer and run as the Green Presidential candidate, he would have defeated both Clinton and Trump in November. So, in endorsing Hillary and sticking with the Democratic Party, he appears to be intentionally giving up the Presidency. Jill's selfless offer to step aside for Bernie, however, is something that is resonating strongly with Sanders supporters.
The Sanders delegates are still expected to vote through the final vote for Bernie Sanders at the Convention. At the delegate caucuses, as a condition of being selected, the Sanders delegates pledged to vote against Clinton even if Bernie endorsed her. Their own honor is at stake, requiring them to follow through in voting against Clinton at the convention. However, will disappointment and confusion change their convictions and will some of Bernie's 1900 delegates stay home to cut their economic losses? So far, Bernie's supporters have continued to be much more active, energetic and reliable than Clinton's supporters.
There is a lot of speculation about why Bernie went against his promise and endorsed Hillary before the convention. Though there has been a talk about the platform, the current proposed Democratic platform is the most Republican in the last hundred years. Some platform crumbs doled out to the Sanders supporters have been treated as huge victories by those desperate to claim their efforts have had an effect on the Democratic Party. However, candidates and leaders ignore platforms, going more often against the platform than with it. Often during the approval process on the convention floor, the "nay" votes are not even requested as the rules for adopting the platform are rarely followed. The platform is at best a propaganda piece. If following the platform were a requirement, Bill Clinton would have been in violation of the 1992 and 1996 platforms during each of his years in office. Likewise, Barack Obama went against his party's platform on a regular basis.
Then, what is really at stake for Bernie? Last, week, in the House of Representatives, Bernie was booed. Though this may have seemed petty, the Democratic Caucuses and leaders in Congress have been known to be retaliatory. In 2004, Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi removed six-term Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney's seniority on her committees in retaliation for McKinney's daring to question George W. Bush's foreign policy. (There is a great deal of collusion between the Bush's and the Democratic Party. Bill Clinton has regularly hung out with George W. Bush. who is now backing HIllary Clinton. Dick Cheney is also backing HIllary Clinton. So are the Koch Brothers.)
In 2005, when Democratic leaders in the California State Legislature forced a confirmation vote for Republican Bruce McPherson for California Secretary of State, legislators were told that they would lose all party funding and all party support and be the subject of other retaliatory action if they voted against McPherson or officially abstained. In protest, Paul Koretz, Lori Saldana and Jackie Goldberg locked themselves in their offices. The gist of this is that retaliation and threats from Democratic leaders do exist and elected officials are sometimes under the gun.
So what could they do to Bernie? Limit his influence to the latrine-cleaning committee after they create one just for retaliation purposes. The Democrats have never been known to abide by rules. Whether as President or as Senator, Bernie has an agenda he wants to get through. The only way to end the issuance of such threats by party officials would be if the Democratic Party lost to independents or to an opposition party in November.
The Clinton endorsement has devastated a great many Sanders supporters, who now feel as if a spouse or parent has just died or taken up with their worst enemy. Sanders brought in a lot of first-time voters, who are now mostly disillusioned. Some supporters are terrified that Sanders will turn over his lists to Hillary Clinton, who will retaliate against them. Some are experiencing PTSD over the perceived betrayal. Some families fear there may even be some suicides--especially given the millions who now feel their hopes and dreams for a better life have been crushed. Some very low income people have given their food money to Bernie Sanders in the faith that he would never endorse Clinton prior to the convention. Those supporters will likely never trust any candidate again. So while there continues to be hope, most of Sanders supporters are experiencing tremendous disillusionment, fear, anger, and feelings of betrayal and hopelessness. Nothing Hillary or Trump was capable of doing is as damaging to the morale of Sanders supporters as Bernie's endorsement of Clinton.
The revolution is not over. Thousands of activists and delegates have borrowed money to arrange to be in Philadelphia for the revolution Bernie called for. With or without Bernie, it will take place. Perhaps, Dennis Kucinich or Cynthia McKinney will come to the forefront and lead the masses to victory. Perhaps, Jill Stein will surprise everyone with a Green victory.
The Democratic Party will likely lose in November and out of the ashes a new people's party just might be born. The public has gotten an education that won't go away. Wall Street may be able to temporarily hang on but the awakened public is ready to end the vote rigging and take back its country from the 1% now or in the near future.