I got the impression that the problems in Nevada were caused by Clinton skullduggery (those rule changes you mention)
What rules were changed though. I thought Nevada caucuses with Dems only. Part of what sounded odd was that Sanders wouldn’t know that already. They are organizers. They know the rules.
Now that sounds like a story. Any journalist corroboration yet?
Here’s a few links.
I think that what happened was that Sanders supporters out-organized Clinton ones to get more delegates in contrast with the results in February, and the DNC have tried to roll that back. With not very good results.
Going to make things really messy in Nov.
(yeah, faux news)
It is telling that the story is reported as a security issue instead of on the merits of the rules issue.
:game_die: Would You LIKE to Play a Game? :video_game:
Okay, here we go …
The Hill article you found quoted the Credentials Committee minority report which describes a due process issue being appealed to the national Dems.
“The credentials minority report is based on the challenge of 64 Sanders delegates. Contrary to the procedures and precedents set by the committee, nearly none of these 64 people were presented with the opportunity to be heard by the committee or to demonstrate that they are registered Democrats,"
Oregon primary results are starting to come in at last. Whee!
If she chose that for her obituary, that woman is my new hero.
Okay, well, if I have an untimely demise prior to November, I’m having to steal that - without the god part, of course.
Yep. Been waiting not-so-patiently all day.
Listened to this today. I don’t think he’d turn it down. And he is very pro-Hillary, but might still appeal to the left?
I’ve always had contempt for pie charts, but maybe they do serve a purpose.
I saw some of this unfolding yesterday.
Sounds like you got your wish. Although only a 0.4% margin? Jeez.