What Went Down in Nevada

I’ve had a busy day while trying to grasp what happened yesterday at the Nevada state Democratic convention. Every source I consult is telling a different story. All I know for certain is that the Sanders contingent believe they were steamrollered, and the Clinton people think Sanders supporters are barbarians with bad table manners.

A little background — the state convention is where the Nevada the delegation to the DNC convention is finalized. You might remember that Clinton won the Nevada caucuses back in February, giving her 20 delegates and Sanders 15 delegates. Then in April, Sanders’s supporters took advantage of Clinton delegate no shows at the Clark County convention to increase the number of Sanders supporters Clark County (home of Las Vegas) sent to the state convention, where 12 more delegates would be chosen. This potentially made it possible to flip the state from Clinton to Sanders.

Well, that didn’t happen. Somehow, 56 Sanders delegates (enough to have changed the final vote) to the state convention were stripped of their delegate status. Various reasons were given, the most common being that they couldn’t prove they had registered as Democrats or that they even lived in Nevada. But it’s not clear how those determinations were made. I believe (again, news stories are not consistent on this) that Clinton got seven more delegates and Sanders five.

What went wrong?

Convention Credential Committee Co-Chair Leslie Sexton said 64 Sanders delegates — almost double Sanders’ eventual 33 delegate shortfall — were disqualified for various reasons and not given the opportunity to appeal, The Hill reported.

Sexton initially said she was not allowed to give a report about Sanders’ delegates — for an unspecified reason — but she eventually presented her findings once chants of “recount” and “let her speak” broke out, The Hill reported.

“Contrary to procedures and precedents set by the committee, nearly none of the 64 people were presented with the opportunity to be heard by the committee or to demonstrate that they are registered Democrats,” Sexton said.

“Sanders supporters have accused state party leaders of rigging the process against them, and they objected to procedural votes to approve the rules of the event,” it says here. Sanders people booed Sen. Barbara Boxer when she called for “unity,” and the senator didn’t take it well. Eventually the chair, Roberta Lange, called for an adjournment; according to several accounts she then seconded herself and banged the event to a close. State troopers immediately took over to clear people out of the hall.

This account of events at Real Clear Politics, with lots of videos, is especially damning.

Since I wasn’t there, and there are so many conflicting accounts  I can’t say who responsible for things getting out of control, but the end result is a lot of anger. Sanders supporters are increasingly certain the entire nominating process has been rigged for Clinton (possibly because it has) and they are increasingly hostile to the Democratic Party.

Way to go, folks.

15 thoughts on “What Went Down in Nevada

  1. I have to agree with Gulag here. There’s been some substantive moves by HRC in the last couple of weeks, including formal opposition to lame-duck consideration of TPP between Nov & Jan. She’s been leveling her attacks almost exclusively at Trump. I’m no mind-reader, but if Clinton wants to reconcile with Bernie & his people, she’s starting do the things that will grease the wheels of cooperation.

    DWS however is in charge of the DNC. There has been a rebellion in fact, not just in name by the Bernie people. Schultz is one of the most abrasive, confrontational and obnoxious people in Washington. For people who work for HER, (and I think that’s how she views all registered democrats) to defy her authority and support a candidate that the DNC has made it clear they do not like, is treason. From what I read, the high-handed authoritarian style, complete to having the cops empty the building after the chair seconded her own motion to end the proceeding, smells like DWS to me.

    Confirmation of this will be if HRC tries to smooth things out with the Sanders campaign. I think HRC know she has the nomination in the bag – she’s after Sanders voters, not Sanders delegates.

  2. According to the video, the room in which this convention took place is all festooned with Hillary banners. It could be me, but if I was looking to support a Sanders candidacy I’d wonder if I was in the right place.. One could get the impression that it was strictly a Hillary event and any opposition to that end was only window dressing to give it an air of legitimacy. I couldn’t make out what the banners said. Hillary..ready to do “something”. Maybe ready for some intense incrementalism?

  3. Did you know that Barbara Boxer’s daughter Nicole is married to Hillary’s brother Tony Rodham? Hillary is family.

    I would direct people to a show I just heard in which both a Nevada delegate (and candidate for congress) Dan Rolle and Nina Turner speak with Benjamin Dixon about what happened. It’s about midway through the broadcast, at approximately 32 minutes in.


  4. If there’s one politician in America who could lose to Trump, that politician is Hillary Clinton. She and her apparatchiks have learned nothing from 2008 – and apparently not much from 2000 either.

    I have to say, it feels so good not to be a Democrat any longer. I got so tired of defending an ineffectual, whiny bunch of losers as “my” candidates.

  5. MA – I hope Debbie Wasserman Schultz set you a thank-you card for (presumably) registering as an Independent. Because in most states, the warm fuzzy feeling of not being associated with ‘whiney’ candidates, you allow the party machine(s) to rig the system, supplying only candidates republican AND democrat who will be loyal to the party first and their sources of funds second, their future lobbyist employer third, and the actual stupid voters who are checking out of the only source of power they have – voting – in self-righteous droves.

    There’s a reason that in election after election the candidates are BOTH repulsive – they were selected by hacks, not by voters, because the voters ceded their authority in a quest for a phony sense of superiority.

    Well done. (said with max snark)

  6. Swami: I see Ryan’s eyes different. To me, they are not baby blue but ice blue and very cold. IMO, bedroom eyes are brown, soft and hypnotizing. Probably like yours!

  7. @Doug

    If you want to keep clutching the burden of being a Democrat to you, that’s your choice – but you’ll find life gets much easier if you stop trying to guilt-trip others who no longer wish to deal with a corrupt party controlled by frauds like Clinton and Wassermann Schultz. I wish you well in your future endeavors.

  8. “In 2014, voter turnout was the lowest since World War II. Fewer than one in five young people showed up to vote—2014. And the four who stayed home determined the course of this country just as much as the single one who voted. Because apathy has consequences. It determines who our Congress is. It determines what policies they prioritize. It even, for example, determines whether a really highly qualified Supreme Court nominee receives the courtesy of a hearing and a vote in the United States Senate.”

    Barack Obama 5/2016

    It’s just as true of the primaries. You force yourself into an absentee status if you aren’t registered with either of the major parties. So who selects? Not you. The democratic party has a long slimy history. The progressives in 1968, registered democrats, changed the course of the party from racism. Piously joining the green party and staying away from Chicago would not have gotten it done.

    My ‘future endeavors’ include organizations like Democracy Spring – 1400 people got arrested on the steps of the Capitol last month in a demonstration that mobilized thousands. We’re being told that online petitions will be more effective – I disagree. Patriots are gonna get the job done without violence, at least from our side. But it won’t get done by critics on the sidelines. MLK’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail says it well.

    “Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.”

    My complaint is not that you wish to watch history safely from the sidelines – it’s that you want to declare your apathy is a virtue.

  9. “My complaint is not that you wish to watch history safely from the sidelines – it’s that you want to declare your apathy is a virtue.”

    Since you know nothing whatever about my life or future plans, Doug, I shall simply smile at your rant and remind you that you get more flies with honey than vinegar. I wish you well in your endeavors and hope that you develop a more convincing political outreach strategy in the future.

  10. I read a long description of the NV debacle from a HRC supporter, one evidently very familiar with the arcane workings of the state’s Dem party’s convoluted procedures. The Bernie crowd were evidently outsiders not familiar or raised on the intricate rules, and they were, as I often see, on the young and idealistic side. Systems work for those who run them. That is reality and needs to be accepeted, because if the Dem party is to be renovated (desperately needed) they need to learn to run it. I recall the John Anderson campaign. BTDT.

Comments are closed.