2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VII

[BEAL]

The longer this goes on for Bernie, the worse it'll get for him.

Clinton has played things petty nice and clean, but I think that'll change soon if he doesn't drop out after losing some of the upcoming primaries.

And it's nothing compared to what the GOP will do with him. Right now they aren't even talking about him, their focus is on their own mess....with any shots across the isle towards Clinton.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by BEAL

The longer this goes on for Bernie, the worse it'll get for him.

Clinton has played things petty nice and clean, but I think that'll change soon if he doesn't drop out after losing some of the upcoming primaries.

And it's nothing compared to what the GOP will do with him. Right now they aren't even talking about him, their focus is on their own mess....with any shots across the isle towards Clinton.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

This is such a strange post.

You must work for Senator Clinton, since you're drawing conclusions that Sanders has already lost the upcoming primaries? Bernie isn't in a position to drop out of the race. And he's currently contesting the upcoming states quite so.

Clinton can't take shots at Sanders. That's the thing. She needs his supporters to join her when she cliches. She isn't about to get nastier. Not until she's legitimately scared of losing the nomination.

[BVS]

Hands down Bernie supporters are more annoying; he's getting messiah treatment while they pretend Obama got nothing accomplished and is an asshole for compromising. The only group more annoying are the Trump disciples.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[BEAL]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

This is such a strange post.

You must work for Senator Clinton, since you're drawing conclusions that Sanders has already lost the upcoming primaries? Bernie isn't in a position to drop out of the race. And he's currently contesting the upcoming states quite so.

Clinton can't take shots at Sanders. That's the thing. She needs his supporters to join her when she cliches. She isn't about to get nastier. Not until she's legitimately scared of losing the nomination.

No. I'm just tired of seeing Sanders as some sort of Christ like figure.

He's won the last 7-8 contests....in the whitest parts of the country. He's building momentum.

Will Bernie supporters get behind Clinton if/when she is the nominee? Most Clinton supporters I know say yes. Some of the Bernie ones say no, they'll stay home or write his name in.

I am not a fan of Clinton. I'm just a lesser fan of hyperbole


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[BigMacPhisto]

I won't vote for Clinton, but I would vote for Sanders. I'm a life-long Socialist and have always been a registered Green, so Clinton's policies come nowhere close to what I support. And that's the big difference in a general election as Sanders would get people on the far-left, populist independents, etc. Hillary draws nobody new into the fold.

And yes, Obama didn't get shit done outside of the ACA. This isn't some narrative concocted by Sanders supporters, it's the damn truth ever since Republicans gained control of the House (and they were a huge annoyance in the Senate before that). I also don't see the point of "compromise" when the right just wants to have things their way and that's final...if Clinton "compromises" it will merely mean passing right-wing legislation. They are never, ever in a million years going to promote progressive legislation, so reaching a hand out across the aisle is absolutely pointless and would be just a setback for this country. Bill Clinton did that shit with a Republican congress on welfare reform, increasing the prison state, NAFTA, repeal of Glass-Steagall...and look where it got us...

[Irvine511]

[BigMacPhisto]

Originally Posted by Popmartijn

Define big win. Wyoming has a total of 14 delegates to divide. Sanders is projected (by the 538 site you're linking to) to win 9 of them, with the other 5 going to Clinton. This would reduce Clinton's lead to 206 delegates (from 210). Not exactly a big change if you ask me.

1) That site's projections are what a candidate would need to receive in a 50-50 national race in order to win the nomination. That isn't what they think Sanders will receive. Sanders will very likely defeat Clinton by a much larger margin than 9-to-5 delegates in Wyoming given how handily he crushed her in neighboring states.

2) It's pointless to look at Clinton's actual delegate lead. Rather, look at the numbers Sanders needs to get on that FiveThirtyEight projection and add in the 88 that he trails where he should currently be on that projection. The other 120 or so delegates that he trails her by would automatically be made up simply by him reaching the targets necessary in the remaining contests. In other words, Sanders was supposed to trail Clinton by that margin up until this point if the race were tied nationally as the early states were more favorable to her demographically.

So, again, the magic number is finding 88 delegates to win while meeting those targets on the FiveThirtyEight page. The FiveThirtyEight target for California is merely a 2 delegate win (about a half percentage point victory, if that). If Sanders were to win California by ten points, he'd make up about 45 of that 88 delegate disadvantage and would only need to do 40 delegates better than the rest of the state projections on that FiveThirtyEight list.

I mean, theoretically, he could just slowly inch up on her and hope for a 60 delegate win in California in June with two months still remaining to build up that momentum. That's how close this race actually is in terms of pledged delegates. The super delegate situation is irrelevant until we know who actually won the pledged delegate majority. If it's Clinton, then Sanders can just push towards the convention in order to support his message and be a fall-back candidate. If it's Sanders, Sanders sure as hell deserves to be the nominee and it will all come down to whether or not there's 300 or so P.O.S. human beings who have no respect for democracy despite their own party's name and will refuse to move to Sanders' camp.

My guess? Sanders winning the pledged delegate majority will mean hundreds of super delegates will shift to his column fairly quickly. As I've said repeatedly, why on earth they would want to disenfranchise so many young voters in favor of ones that will mostly be dead in twenty years (and for a much weaker candidate, no less) would be truly baffling. It would also completely invalidate the primary process completely as all of the money and time spent on it would have been a complete waste as hundreds of super delegates endorsed Clinton before a single vote was cast in Iowa.

[LuckyNumber7]

The superdelegate lead is not irrelevant. Not at all. When Clinton has enough delegates combined of pledged and unpledged delegates to secure the nomination, assuming this isn't very near the convention, she's going to declare victory if she has a pledged delegate lead.

Sanders very much so is in a race to tie up the pledged delegates if he wants the superdelegates to be irrelevant. They have absolutely zero obligation to change sides if they're on the side of the majority.

[Mack_Again]

Originally Posted by BVS

Hands down Bernie supporters are more annoying; he's getting messiah treatment while they pretend Obama got nothing accomplished and is an asshole for compromising. The only group more annoying are the Trump disciples.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

thanx because I probably was annoying. I'll turn myself into devout catholic and start believing core republican principles from now on

[BEAL]

I'm just curious how Bernie would get his socialist programs approved when Obama failed.

Despite the troubles Obama had, he still did accomplish quite a bit and you could argue the country is doing as well as it ever has been.

A gridlocked DC is usually good for country


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[Mack_Again]

Originally Posted by BEAL

A gridlocked DC is usually good for country


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

gridlocked Tokyo in Japan is currently destroying people's lives. and rich people get richer.

[mikal]

Originally Posted by BVS

Hands down Bernie supporters are more annoying; he's getting messiah treatment while they pretend Obama got nothing accomplished and is an asshole for compromising. The only group more annoying are the Trump disciples.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Yeah, I pretty much agree, though guessing that it's relative to who your FB friends are how much they post about politics.

[Mack_Again]

Originally Posted by BVS

Hands down Bernie supporters are more annoying; he's getting messiah treatment while they pretend Obama got nothing accomplished and is an asshole for compromising. The only group more annoying are the Trump disciples.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

most of my friends who supports Jesus Bernie are decent but one guy keeps posting about social justice (especially about Flint water thing) and straight up socialism promotion (like pro-Lenin, USSR, that kind of shit) and that is getting pretty annoying by now.

[womanfish]

Originally Posted by Mack_Again

thanx because I probably was annoying. I'll turn myself into devout catholic and start believing core republican principles from now on

I'm also annoying. thank you for putting up with it everyone!

[BigMacPhisto]

Originally Posted by BEAL

I'm just curious how Bernie would get his socialist programs approved when Obama failed.

Despite the troubles Obama had, he still did accomplish quite a bit and you could argue the country is doing as well as it ever has been.

A gridlocked DC is usually good for country

Sanders will face gridlock, so most of it won't happen, but he can take a much more liberal stance than Clinton when it comes to appointing justices, enacting executive orders, etc.

However, the big difference between Sanders and Obama is that the "revolution" doesn't end with Sanders being given the Presidency as it did with Obama. Obama's supporters that weren't black stayed home in the mid-terms and weren't even remotely politically active (and it didn't help that the right-wing soon launched their "grassroots" Tea Party nonsense thereafter). Sanders will actually get people in the streets. If Sanders calls to have 100,000 people march on Washington for (insert legislation here) in the Spring of 2017 he'll have that number multiple times over.

It's theoretically possible that some Republicans might agree to, say, a minimum wage hike if millions are descending on Washington and if their constituents are badgering them night-and-day with phone calls and if the spotlight on this issue in the media starts putting a target on Republicans for not supporting the working poor, etc. Plenty of white trailer trash voters checking off the R-box that would love to have a huge raise to $15 an hour for example.

And are you really supposed to expect even the slightest chance when Clinton is President? She doesn't mobilize anybody. She'll tell some members of congress to write up some minimum wage legislation (asking for a mere $12 an hour as that's what she currently supports) and said legislation will be half heartedly sent to the House floor where Paul Ryan will refuse to let them have a vote. Then Clinton will go, "see, Republicans! I told you they would do that!" and then proceed to carpet bomb middle-east villages and attempt to negotiate social welfare cuts with Republicans in order to stop another fiscal cliff situation. No thanks.

[Mack_Again]

Trump Catches Self Briefly Believing Own Campaign Rhetoric - The Onion - America's Finest News Source

well this is what Onion can do in this irony-filled campaign.

[mikal]

Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto

However, the big difference between Sanders and Obama is that the "revolution" doesn't end with Sanders being given the Presidency as it did with Obama.

How in the world do you know this?

[trojanchick99]

The most annoying supporters amongst my friends are Bernie supporters. It's not like all Bernie supporters are insufferable it's the very, very vocal minority. I'll still take that over Trump supporters any day.

Sent from my SM-G920V using U2 Interference mobile app

[BigMacPhisto]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

The superdelegate lead is not irrelevant. Not at all. When Clinton has enough delegates combined of pledged and unpledged delegates to secure the nomination, assuming this isn't very near the convention, she's going to declare victory if she has a pledged delegate lead.

Sanders very much so is in a race to tie up the pledged delegates if he wants the superdelegates to be irrelevant. They have absolutely zero obligation to change sides if they're on the side of the majority.

I completely agree with your second paragraph. Entirely. They will not convince anybody to flip if he isn't the pledged delegate leader.

As for your first point, I'm in agreement as well. Clinton will declare victory once she reaches the magic number of overall delegates. It's an outright untruth to say the least and she'll probably get some flack for it...even funnier, it may actually make her supporters less likely to bother to vote in the remaining primary states, making it even easier for Sanders to get to the pledged delegate mark if he's anywhere close. Regardless, Clinton declaring herself the nominee before she reaches an unquestionable pledged delegate majority will reek of pure desperation. If she's actually sitting comfortable after the results come in from states like New York and Pennsylvania, I think she'll be humble until the convention.

[Mack_Again]

Originally Posted by mikal

How in the world do you know this?

how in the world would I believe anyone?