What Spiva said is true; the DNC could’ve just outright chosen the candidate they favored rather than take it to their members. The fact that they left it up to a vote, goes to show that they believe in democracy. But, they also have the right to support the candidates they feel best fit with the party platform, otherwise; this leaves the Democratic Party vulnerable to candidates that have very little connection to their values as witnessed with the RNC when Donald Trump became the GOP candidate. Let me ask you a question, Jordan, do you believe that just anyone who wants to become the Democratic Party presidential candidate should be given an equal opportunity and equal support to do so? Do you not realize that this could open up the Democratic Party to bastardization in the form of a candidate who shares very little with the Democratic Party? Look at the lineup of candidates the GOP wound up with during the primaries and look who wound up as their chosen candidate; is this really how you want the DNC to run their primaries? Is it any wonder that the DNC favored Clinton when she’s been a Dem for over 30 years, actively supporting the party and working towards instituting their policies all of those years? You think the DNC should favor an Independent who used the Democratic Party and its resources to run for president because he knew he’d have no hope in hell of running as an Independent? I keep hearing from Bernie supporters how the primaries were rigged yet they have no evidence to show in order to back up this claim other than a couple of emails which show a few members of the DNC favored Clinton, like that is a big surprise, considering she’s been an active member of the Democratic Party for 30 years. Look, I like Bernie, too, and even though I did favor Clinton, I would’ve gladly thrown my support behind Sanders had he won the primaries. I like that he has taken to the road in this Unity Tour along with Perez and that he is pushing for universal healthcare. If Bernie decided to run again, I might even support him, based upon many of his actions since the election, though to be honest, he didn’t have much of anything on his record to show before the election and that was another reason why Clinton was the better candidate, in my opinion. But, I digress, I really fail to see what you and TYT think you are accomplishing in touting Spiva’s remark as some major story when all it really shows is that Sanders was given a fair shake by leaving the candidacy up to a vote rather than declaring Clinton the candidate outright, as the DNC has every right to do. It just goes to show that so many of Bernie’s supporters are so bitter over their loss, they’ll jump on anything as proof that they really would’ve won. Look, Bernie lost…your candidate lost…fair and square…maybe time to move on? Why not use the energy spent on this sort of silliness to support Bernie in his fight for universal healthcare by showing empirically how it is a sustainable program? I’m sure Bernie would appreciate that much more than repeated attempts to try to sweeten sour grapes with nothing.