US POLITICS XX: Stuck In a Caucus You Can't Get Out Of

[womanfish]

With 14 States voting 3 days after South Carolina, I don't think South Carolina matters that much, unless Biden losses or only wins by a couple of points
even so how does that change what people are going to do three days later? are people in California the biggest state which is going for Sanders, going to jump to Biden if it wins by 10 points in South Carolina, I don't think so

Here's just a hypothetical.

Joe shocks everyone and wins by 10 points in SC.

This validates his narrative that IA and NH are so misrepresentitive, and NV and SC show the real Dem electorate.
This win pushes Amy and Warren out before Super Tuesday. Pete, drops immediately after.

This doesn't shift 10 points in California. But right now, Bernie could get ALL the delegates from California. Like 420 or something. If Joe gets boosts of about 5 points or so in TX, CA, NC, VA, and other Super Tuesday states, it actually could put him in first place in some of those, and at the very least get 2nd/3rd and get delegates. Instead of not getting to 15% in CA and Bernie gets them all. Game over...

I also think after last nights debate, where Bloomberg was still sorta weak. If Joe wins big in SC, people who went to Bloomberg because they thought Biden was out of this, may move back to him.

Lots of wild cards here.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Given that it's mostly old men dying of this, he should be a tad more circumspect.

Don't forget he's like a teflon cockroach, really tough to do him harm or kill him ? Plus he's just Superman-impervious to everything in his own mind.

 

[womanfish]

So narcissistic that he sees a pandemic only in terms of how it affects his reelection. And sees a media conspiracy in everything.


Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

4h
Low Ratings Fake News MSDNC (Comcast) &
@CNN
are doing everything possible to make the Caronavirus look as bad as possible, including panicking markets, if possible. Likewise their incompetent Do Nothing Democrat comrades are all talk, no action. USA in great shape!
@CDCgov
.....

Trump using the term comrades... Irony is truly dead.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

With 14 States voting 3 days after South Carolina, I don't think South Carolina matters that much, unless Biden losses or only wins by a couple of points
even so how does that change what people are going to do three days later? are people in California the biggest state which is going for Sanders, going to jump to Biden if it wins by 10 points in South Carolina, I don't think so

The delegates are awarded proportionally vs winner take all. Combine that with the 15% viability threshold and even a small bump or drop could be very important in deciding whether or not we have a race or a runaway come Wednesday morning.

Biden's average in California is 13%. A 2% bump makes him viable and he gets a share of the delegates. If Pete tanks in South Carolina and half of his 9% goes to Biden or Bloomberg, that's a huge shift in delegates. And remember, the allocation is done not just by statewide vote but also in each individual district.

If Biden tanks and nobody hits 15% other than Bernie? Bernie takes every state wide delegate. So yea, last night and South Carolina can very much have a huge impact on what happens Tuesday.

 

[Irvine511]

Bernie could get ALL the delegates from California. Like 420 or something.

Heh [emoji57]

 

[mikal]

New Clemson poll has Biden with an 18% lead.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

The statewide race is worth 35% of the delegates in California. The rest is divided up district by district.

So a candidate could easily not reach the 15% threshold statewide and still come away with a decent number of delegates.

So there's almost no scenario in which Bernie takes all of the delegates. His popular vote win could also, in theory, only produce a small delegate lead.

All signs point to a comfortable statewide victory for Sanders - but there's still a shit ton of other delegates to be awarded there, making even a small bump from South Carolina potentially huge for a given candidate.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Also has anyone tried to interview Uncle Dick today? Cause I'm here for that

 

[womanfish]

Also has anyone tried to interview Uncle Dick today? Cause I'm here for that

Crazy thing. I grew up in Wisconsin. And I had an Uncle Dick, that was often in a deer stand.

Amy speaks to me i guess.

 

[womanfish]

New Clemson poll has Biden with an 18% lead.

The latest three SC polls have him at +8, +15 and +18.

All these were pre-debate, pre-Clyburn.

 

[mikal]

Crazy thing. I grew up in Wisconsin. And I had an Uncle Dick, that was often in a deer stand.



Amy speaks to me i guess.

I live in Wisconsin and definitely don't have a Uncle Dick.

 

[womanfish]

Ok, I hadn't really thought about this before. But looking at the Super Tuesday polls. If Bloombergs numbers were added to Biden's, even just 75% of them. Biden would be leading in almost every state, except maybe CA.

So say Bloomberg doesn't shock the world and drop out before Super Tuesday. If near the end of the primary, Bloomberg drops and has a fairly hefty amount of delegates. He can endorse Biden, and those "free-agent" delegates that were pledged to Bloomberg usually follow the endorsement. That could in the end, hand the nom to Biden.

On a crazier note. After super tuesday, Biden announces Bloomberg as his running mate. (I said crazy) But if Mike doesn't really want the job, but is running because he's afraid no one else can win, then maybe. Would be quite the force actually. Have a candidate that is strong with working class, minorities, women and suburban voters, along with one strong with minority and suburban support from Bloomberg, and of course. The money.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

That is, indeed, crazy.

 

[anitram]

The man is worth over $60 billion dollars. He hasn’t played second fiddle in his life to anyone in decades. No way would he be VP.

If Biden runs away with it in SC there will be a lot of pressure on Amy and Pete to drop out. Warren isn’t really in Biden’s lane.

 

[womanfish]

That is, indeed, crazy.

LOL. Yeah, strike Biden Bloomberg idea. That would be a rough ticket in retrospect.

 

[deep]

I don't think it matters how poorly anyone does in SC, none will drop out before Super Tuesday.

They have invested too much time and what not, they all want to believe the next vote will go them that elusive boost.


after Tuesday, sure some will drop out.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Total trainwreck potential with Trump coming on soon to talk about the coronavirus. CNN has Dr. Sanjay Gupta there and he's going to try to ask questions, good luck with that. Trump will probably refuse or call him a fake doctor.

WH considering a czar to deal with the virus situation.

 

[namkcuR]

Feel the need to get down some thoughts about Bernie here.

I sort of feel like I don't have a team here. I'm not a 100% Bernie loyalist like Peef and Dave, but nor do I agree with some of the vitriol that some people in here have been spitting at him lately.

I started out supporting Bernie over Hillary in 2016, but by the Spring I had soured on him a little, due to the behavior of his supporters(whether that behavior is reflective of a majority or simply a loud minority) and due to his seeming lack of interest in foreign policy. This is despite the fact that I am ideologically to the left of Hillary.

I started this campaign out as a Warren supporter. Still am. She's still my #1 choice, but it's not happening. She seems like an ideal bridge between the left and the establishment, but the left is not terribly interested in bridges and the monied interests that fund the establishment don't like Warren.

So now it's Bernie or one of the remaining centrists. People fret about whether or not Sanders can win in November, but I don't see a single one of these centrists as being a sure bet to win. Biden comes off as a confused old man too often, and when he's not doing that, he's relying on "Obama" and "I was the one" too much. Klobuchar is DOA. Pete is the most well-spoken of all of them, but he's almost too smooth, hasn't proven the ability to attract minorities, and has imo shifted positions too much. Bloomberg's debates haven't gone well enough to make anyone overly confident that he'd do well against Trump, and his aggressive "get off my lawn" approach to anything halfway-leftist is off-putting.

If any of these people seemed like an overwhelming favorite, I'd favor them, because beating Trump is the most important thing.

But none of them seem like that to me, at least not right now. And if that's the case, and if Warren is done, than I might as well go with the guy who both has policies that I favor and an actual chance to win the nomination, even if I do have concerns about him.

I do have concerns, and I understand you guys' concerns. But some of you are going over-the-top. I have seen people fear-mongering with the word 'socialist' in here, and when you do that, you sound like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity. Don't.

We need to get past this cold-war mentality already. When Bloomberg accused Bernie of communism in his first debate, I rolled my eyes so hard. This attempt, that the media is complicit in, to connect Bernie to Cuba and the Soviet Union and Nicaragua, etc et al, as though that's the kind of society he wants to create, is disingenuous. Nobody actually believes that. Not the candidates, not the media, and not anyone in here. But there are uneducated voters who would fall for it, and that's the point.

At the same time, Bernie does himself no favors when given the opportunity to debunk that stuff. It frustrates me that we still have to have this conversation, but we do, the accusations are going to come, and he needs to get a hell of a lot better at combating that stuff if he's going to be the nominee. Like, you have no intention of creating a pure socialist, authoritarian society, so say that when you're asked, and say it clearly, emphatically, and without equivocation.

And he needs to stop letting his staff tweet out unhelpful crap about coming for the Democratic Establishment too.

I also see, both in here and in the media, this panic, this prognostication that he's going to lose in a landslide, lose 40 states, and we'll lose the House because of it. That just seems extreme to me. I'm not saying he'll definitely win. It will probably be a close election in terms of the electoral college(but not the popular vote). But he could win.

So, I generally support Bernie's policies(even if I'm not wild about the man), and I'm not overly convinced of anyone else's certain path to victory, so for now, I'm cautiously supporting him(while being sad that Warren is being counted out). Also, and it's sad I have to say this, but another reason I'm increasingly supportive of him is that I increasingly don't trust his supporters to show up for anyone else in November.

Thanks for reading.

 

[DaveC]

edit: whoops wrong thread.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

The latest and greatest from The Prick, errr I mean Chris Cillizza’s The Point.

Totally different. This guy is so fucking smug, I bet his ass just loves Mayor Pete. Smugness4president.

Anyways, I wanted to point out 75% of democrats, 45% of independents, and 15% of republicans.

For the approximately 155 million registered voters, we have about 30% republican, 30% democrat, and 60% independent. Or... 46.5 million republicans, 46.5 million democrats, and 93 million independents.

In a country where about 110 million people vote in any given election, of the 155 million voters, we have a turnout at like 71%.

34.875 million democrat voters said they would be willing to vote for a socialist. 41.85 million independent voters said they would be willing to vote for a socialist. 6.975 million republican voters said they would be willing to vote for a socialist. So a total of 83.7 million people are willing to vote for a socialist. Slap a 71% factor on that number for turnout. 59.4 million voters (the ballpark of what a candidate gets). Oh, also, 83.7 million is over half of 155 million (77.5 million).

So I’ve just done a shit ton of hand waving first order math that says what? There are way more than enough people willing to vote for a socialist in this country, so really? Turnout is important for such a candidate. As with any candidate. Who knew?

 

[anitram]

Which idiot Sanders surrogate went to publicly say "hard pass" to Bloomberg's money in the general election? Jesus Christ.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Which idiot Sanders surrogate went to publicly say "hard pass" to Bloomberg's money in the general election? Jesus Christ.

How on earth do you think bernie sanders could take a dime from Mike Bloomberg at this point? He can’t. That’s not even in the conversation.

 

[anitram]

Thanks for reading.

Great post. I consider myself to be on your team. Warren supporter and ideologically closer to Bernie than to, say, Klobuchar. I still think that Warren would be ideal - she is more intelligent than Bernie, she is much more policy and results-oriented, she is an outright capitalist and proposes smart, doable things. However, she is a woman who sounds like a "know it all" and "like she's lecturing America" and "Fauxahontas" and God knows what else people fling at her. She got destroyed for providing details about her plans while Bernie is allowed to propose this, that and the other thing and nobody cares anymore that he can't pay for any of it. As a woman I find it infuriating because to me, it's yet another example of how the odds are stacked against us.

Bloomberg really is doing fine on the CNN town hall. He's not Mr. Charisma but he's not un-informed.

 

[anitram]

How on earth do you think bernie sanders could take a dime from Mike Bloomberg at this point? He can’t. That’s not even in the conversation.

I think that you find middle ground - Bernie doesn't have to take the money directly BUT he is not a lone man on a mission out there no matter how much he likes to believe that. Happily accept Bloomberg's money down ticked and make that clear. "While Bernie is not looking to accept money from billionaires, there are hundreds of down ticket Democratic candidates who could be helped greatly." Easy enough.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

I think that you find middle ground - Bernie doesn't have to take the money directly BUT he is not a lone man on a mission out there no matter how much he likes to believe that. Happily accept Bloomberg's money down ticked and make that clear. "While Bernie is not looking to accept money from billionaires, there are hundreds of down ticket Democratic candidates who could be helped greatly." Easy enough.

Bernie doesn’t have to state that though? Democrat candidates down ticket aren’t beholden to Sanders. They very well might be running as moderates to keep sanders in check, happily taking bloomybucks.

There’s enough money to go around.

 

[Irvine511]

In a week, we are going to be back to the start: Bernie vs Biden.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Great post. I consider myself to be on your team. Warren supporter and ideologically closer to Bernie than to, say, Klobuchar. I still think that Warren would be ideal - she is more intelligent than Bernie, she is much more policy and results-oriented, she is an outright capitalist and proposes smart, doable things. However, she is a woman who sounds like a "know it all" and "like she's lecturing America" and "Fauxahontas" and God knows what else people fling at her. She got destroyed for providing details about her plans while Bernie is allowed to propose this, that and the other thing and nobody cares anymore that he can't pay for any of it. As a woman I find it infuriating because to me, it's yet another example of how the odds are stacked against us.

This and namkcuR's post sum up my take on everything perfectly.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Wow, these South Carolina polls really are erratic. I suspect the Biden blowouts are more accurate than the close calls, but we will see.

 

[Vlad n U 2]

View attachment 12411

The latest and greatest from The Prick, errr I mean Chris Cillizza’s The Point.

Totally different. This guy is so fucking smug, I bet his ass just loves Mayor Pete. Smugness4president.

Anyways, I wanted to point out 75% of democrats, 45% of independents, and 15% of republicans.

For the approximately 155 million registered voters, we have about 30% republican, 30% democrat, and 60% independent. Or... 46.5 million republicans, 46.5 million democrats, and 93 million independents.

In a country where about 110 million people vote in any given election, of the 155 million voters, we have a turnout at like 71%.

34.875 million democrat voters said they would be willing to vote for a socialist. 41.85 million independent voters said they would be willing to vote for a socialist. 6.975 million republican voters said they would be willing to vote for a socialist. So a total of 83.7 million people are willing to vote for a socialist. Slap a 71% factor on that number for turnout. 59.4 million voters (the ballpark of what a candidate gets). Oh, also, 83.7 million is over half of 155 million (77.5 million).

So I’ve just done a shit ton of hand waving first order math that says what? There are way more than enough people willing to vote for a socialist in this country, so really? Turnout is important for such a candidate. As with any candidate. Who knew?

Politics is just a game, a curiousity to someone like Cillizza. He'll have a cushy life no matter the result.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

He’s just so... high school English. Write an argumentative paper. He loves citing first order facts which are in fact... facts... but utilizing them in incredibly faulty ways. And with such smugness. I can’t think of a “journalist” I hate more. He’s up there with Hannity, at least. Definitely the Hannity across the isle.