0
27

[–] Owlchemy 0 points 27 points (+27|-0) ago  (edited ago)

This ... basically stolen from an article on the subject ... in short ... they disqualified Sanders delegates for no apparent reason, refused to do a recount when it was clear one was needed, and then closed the thing to all discussion once Clinton delegates were declared winners:

    The chair of the convention announced that the convention rules passed on voice vote, when the vote was a clear no-vote. At the very least, the Chair should have 
    allowed for a headcount.
    The chair allowed its Credentials Committee to en mass rule that 64 delegates were ineligible without offering an opportunity for 58 of them to be heard. That decision 
    enabled the Clinton campaign to end up with a 30-vote majority.
    The chair refused to acknowledge any motions made from the floor or allow votes on them.
    The chair refused to accept any petitions for amendments to the rules that were properly submitted.

0
13

[–] tragicwhale [S] 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

Holy shit...thanks for the answer...I guess. In disbelief.

0
7

[–] Chiefpacman 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago  (edited ago)

At least they pretended like the vote meant something.

Unlike the GOP in Colorado.

1
16

[–] UnknownCitizen 1 points 16 points (+17|-1) ago 

First, they ran initial delegate counts earlier than they were supposed, before all of the delegates showed up. Second, 64 of Sander's delegates were barred with no reason given at the convention or any recourse. They literally said they were barred "for reasons." Third, they adopted a last minute rules change that favored Clinton. They did this by voice vote. The voice vote was overwhelmingly against the rules change, yet the woman stood up there and said the Yea's had it, then she closed the convention, completely ignoring procedure, and she left. Fifth, Sander's final delegate count was 1,662 and Clinton's was 1,695 for a difference of 33, meaning things would have gone very differently had procedure and rules been followed. Sixth, they Sheriffs were already at the convention, a lot of them, seemingly in anticipation for what was going to happen.

Oh, on top of this was Barbara Boxer's condescending speech at the convention which did nothing to help the situation. It was all a very very sad sight for something that should have been jovial and a happy experience to exercise hard fought rights.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/279930-nevada-dem-convention-devolves-into-chaos

http://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/may/14/at-democratic-convention-in-las-vegas-rules-divide/

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/05/15/barbara_boxer_to_nevada_democrats_if_you_boo_me_youre_booing_bernie_sanders.html

I would have probably been arrested for civil disobedience. One of the main purposes of democracy is to allow peaceful protest and avoid costly and tragic conflict but Kennedy was wise in his words when he pointed out that, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." With fewer and fewer form of protest, opportunities to protest, rights to protest, and ability to protest, I fear our democracy would have failed in that respect and those word may become becoming a reality.

0
4

[–] tragicwhale [S] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Very well put and frightfully accurate I think. Thanks for that Unknown.

0
3

[–] UnknownCitizen 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Most Welcome :)

0
11

[–] 5237419? 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

The wicked witch of the north cast an evil spell and the media reported that she was the victim when her cheating is exposed.

0
6

[–] tragicwhale [S] 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Ha, I've gathered as much, but I was wondering why exactly the people were mad.