login
Hillary (Page 7)
-
No new posts
|
 2016-04-06 9:24 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Master  2802    Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member |  Subject: RE: HillaryOriginally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by tuwood The thing is, Clinton is still leading Sanders by almost 2.5 Million popular votes, so it's not as if "the people" haven't made their voices heard. The 500 people who voted for Sanders in Alaska notwithstanding, the popular vote still resoundingly favors Clinton, so if you're saying that the superdelegates ought to vote with the people, then clearly, casting their ballot for Hillary is the correct thing to do. By contrast, Trump has a little over 9 million popular votes, considerably more than any of the other GOP candidates (Cruz is second with 6.3M), but it still means that considerably more than half of the GOP voters voted for someone other than Trump. That, in my opinion, makes a much stronger case for a brokered convention that what's happening on the D side. Regardless, it'll all be over soon. I doubt Bernie's going to win New York, and if he loses, I don't see a path to victory for him. He really needs to win both CA and NY at this point, and I don't see him winning either. He hasn't done well in states with diverse populations. Originally posted by marysia83 Originally posted by tuwood I hate when they keep including superdelegates in counts. It's a number of 700 that can change completely. It's so misleading :/ First I've heard talk of a brokered convention on this side of the race: Would be very interesting if we had brokered conventions from both parties. Agree, I tend to look at the actual delegates when comparing how close their race is. It's pretty darn close. Then again, I suspect many of those super delegates are pretty hard core Hillary supporters and don't really care what the people think.
popular vote in the primaries is nearly meaningless. caucus states, in which Bernie does better, have WAY WAY fewer voters due to the nature of how they are run. Bernie could have a big delegate lead and still be losing by popular vote. There is a reason that they have delegates. Sanders just crushed in 7 or the last 8 states, and is barely behind now. makes me laugh that you all still want to count him out. He is still behind 200+ delegates. He gained a whole like 10 from WI, so he still is fighting a large headwind and has to win something like 65% of the remaining delegates to beat Hillary, not counting ANY Superdelegates. Not very likely IMO with the upcoming closed primaries in more diverse states as jmk mentioned, unlike WI which was open so anyone could vote in the D primary there. That helps Bernie as he wins most independents. |
| 2016-04-06 9:27 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by tuwood The thing is, Clinton is still leading Sanders by almost 2.5 Million popular votes, so it's not as if "the people" haven't made their voices heard. The 500 people who voted for Sanders in Alaska notwithstanding, the popular vote still resoundingly favors Clinton, so if you're saying that the superdelegates ought to vote with the people, then clearly, casting their ballot for Hillary is the correct thing to do. By contrast, Trump has a little over 9 million popular votes, considerably more than any of the other GOP candidates (Cruz is second with 6.3M), but it still means that considerably more than half of the GOP voters voted for someone other than Trump. That, in my opinion, makes a much stronger case for a brokered convention that what's happening on the D side. Regardless, it'll all be over soon. I doubt Bernie's going to win New York, and if he loses, I don't see a path to victory for him. He really needs to win both CA and NY at this point, and I don't see him winning either. He hasn't done well in states with diverse populations. Originally posted by marysia83 Originally posted by tuwood I hate when they keep including superdelegates in counts. It's a number of 700 that can change completely. It's so misleading :/ First I've heard talk of a brokered convention on this side of the race: Would be very interesting if we had brokered conventions from both parties. Agree, I tend to look at the actual delegates when comparing how close their race is. It's pretty darn close. Then again, I suspect many of those super delegates are pretty hard core Hillary supporters and don't really care what the people think.
popular vote in the primaries is nearly meaningless. caucus states, in which Bernie does better, have WAY WAY fewer voters due to the nature of how they are run. Bernie could have a big delegate lead and still be losing by popular vote. There is a reason that they have delegates. Sanders just crushed in 7 or the last 8 states, and is barely behind now. makes me laugh that you all still want to count him out. He's not "barely behind". He's behind by a lot. More than 200 delegates and 400 superdelegates. The big races left are NY, CA, NJ, and PA. If he doesn't win at least 3 out of four of those and win them by a lot, he's done, and I don't think he'll win any of them, much less do so convincingly. And it's not just me who feels this way: From Nate Silver: (http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-really-hard-to-get-bernie-sanders-988-more-delegates/) "If you’re a Sanders supporter, you might look at the map and see some states — Oregon, Rhode Island, West Virginia, Montana and so forth — that look pretty good for Sanders, a lot like the ones that gave Sanders landslide wins earlier in the campaign. But those states have relatively few delegates. Instead, about 65 percent of the remaining delegates are in California, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Maryland — all states where Sanders trails Clinton in the polls and sometimes trails her by a lot. To reach a pledged delegate majority, Sanders will have to win most of the delegates from those big states. A major loss in any of them could be fatal to his chances. He could afford to lose one or two of them narrowly, but then he’d need to make up ground elsewhere — he’d probably have to win California by double digits, for example. Sanders will also need to gain ground on Clinton in a series of medium-sized states such as Wisconsin, Indiana, Kentucky and New Mexico. Demographics suggest that these states could be close, but close won’t be enough for Sanders. He’ll need to win several of them easily. None of this is all that likely. Frankly, none of it is at all likely. If the remaining states vote based on the same demographic patterns established by the previous ones, Clinton will probably gain further ground on Sanders. If they vote as state-by-state polling suggests they will, Clinton could roughly double her current advantage over Sanders and wind up winning the nomination by 400 to 500 pledged delegates. |
| 2016-04-06 9:38 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by tuwood The thing is, Clinton is still leading Sanders by almost 2.5 Million popular votes, so it's not as if "the people" haven't made their voices heard. The 500 people who voted for Sanders in Alaska notwithstanding, the popular vote still resoundingly favors Clinton, so if you're saying that the superdelegates ought to vote with the people, then clearly, casting their ballot for Hillary is the correct thing to do. By contrast, Trump has a little over 9 million popular votes, considerably more than any of the other GOP candidates (Cruz is second with 6.3M), but it still means that considerably more than half of the GOP voters voted for someone other than Trump. That, in my opinion, makes a much stronger case for a brokered convention that what's happening on the D side. Regardless, it'll all be over soon. I doubt Bernie's going to win New York, and if he loses, I don't see a path to victory for him. He really needs to win both CA and NY at this point, and I don't see him winning either. He hasn't done well in states with diverse populations. Originally posted by marysia83 Originally posted by tuwood I hate when they keep including superdelegates in counts. It's a number of 700 that can change completely. It's so misleading :/ First I've heard talk of a brokered convention on this side of the race: Would be very interesting if we had brokered conventions from both parties. Agree, I tend to look at the actual delegates when comparing how close their race is. It's pretty darn close. Then again, I suspect many of those super delegates are pretty hard core Hillary supporters and don't really care what the people think.
popular vote in the primaries is nearly meaningless. caucus states, in which Bernie does better, have WAY WAY fewer voters due to the nature of how they are run. Bernie could have a big delegate lead and still be losing by popular vote. There is a reason that they have delegates. Sanders just crushed in 7 or the last 8 states, and is barely behind now. makes me laugh that you all still want to count him out. I haven't counted him out in any way and agree with your assessment. The way things are trending, Hillary may be limping into a brokered convention behind in the non super delegate count. I know everyones focusing on the train wreck ensuing on the Republican side, but things aren't all peachy on the Democrat side either. |
| 2016-04-06 9:41 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Champion 6993 Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by tuwood The way things are trending, Hillary may be limping into a brokered convention behind in the non super delegate count. I know everyones focusing on the train wreck ensuing on the Republican side, but things aren't all peachy on the Democrat side either. True. If Sanders wins but super delegatges steal it we will have just as many problems if they steal it from Trump. Almost makes me hope both sides do it and really shake things up. Really who goes first because I think a bad response will get the other party in line. |
| 2016-04-06 10:14 AM in reply to: chirunner134 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by chirunner134 Originally posted by tuwood True. If Sanders wins but super delegatges steal it we will have just as many problems if they steal it from Trump. Almost makes me hope both sides do it and really shake things up. Really who goes first because I think a bad response will get the other party in line. The way things are trending, Hillary may be limping into a brokered convention behind in the non super delegate count. I know everyones focusing on the train wreck ensuing on the Republican side, but things aren't all peachy on the Democrat side either. Yes, I would much prefer that Republicans riot against Republicans and the Dems have their own riots. There will be less ill will for all involved. |
| 2016-04-06 10:30 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by chirunner134 Originally posted by tuwood True. If Sanders wins but super delegatges steal it we will have just as many problems if they steal it from Trump. Almost makes me hope both sides do it and really shake things up. Really who goes first because I think a bad response will get the other party in line. The way things are trending, Hillary may be limping into a brokered convention behind in the non super delegate count. I know everyones focusing on the train wreck ensuing on the Republican side, but things aren't all peachy on the Democrat side either. Yes, I would much prefer that Republicans riot against Republicans and the Dems have their own riots. There will be less ill will for all involved. You going to be able to retire before the conventions? :-D |
| 2016-04-06 10:56 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 6993 Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by chirunner134 Originally posted by tuwood True. If Sanders wins but super delegatges steal it we will have just as many problems if they steal it from Trump. Almost makes me hope both sides do it and really shake things up. Really who goes first because I think a bad response will get the other party in line. The way things are trending, Hillary may be limping into a brokered convention behind in the non super delegate count. I know everyones focusing on the train wreck ensuing on the Republican side, but things aren't all peachy on the Democrat side either. Yes, I would much prefer that Republicans riot against Republicans and the Dems have their own riots. There will be less ill will for all involved. Yeah I would agree with that too. We have too much ill will between parties right now. |
| 2016-04-06 11:49 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by tuwood The thing is, Clinton is still leading Sanders by almost 2.5 Million popular votes, so it's not as if "the people" haven't made their voices heard. The 500 people who voted for Sanders in Alaska notwithstanding, the popular vote still resoundingly favors Clinton, so if you're saying that the superdelegates ought to vote with the people, then clearly, casting their ballot for Hillary is the correct thing to do. By contrast, Trump has a little over 9 million popular votes, considerably more than any of the other GOP candidates (Cruz is second with 6.3M), but it still means that considerably more than half of the GOP voters voted for someone other than Trump. That, in my opinion, makes a much stronger case for a brokered convention that what's happening on the D side. Regardless, it'll all be over soon. I doubt Bernie's going to win New York, and if he loses, I don't see a path to victory for him. He really needs to win both CA and NY at this point, and I don't see him winning either. He hasn't done well in states with diverse populations. Originally posted by marysia83 Originally posted by tuwood I hate when they keep including superdelegates in counts. It's a number of 700 that can change completely. It's so misleading :/ First I've heard talk of a brokered convention on this side of the race: Would be very interesting if we had brokered conventions from both parties. Agree, I tend to look at the actual delegates when comparing how close their race is. It's pretty darn close. Then again, I suspect many of those super delegates are pretty hard core Hillary supporters and don't really care what the people think.
popular vote in the primaries is nearly meaningless. caucus states, in which Bernie does better, have WAY WAY fewer voters due to the nature of how they are run. Bernie could have a big delegate lead and still be losing by popular vote. There is a reason that they have delegates. Sanders just crushed in 7 or the last 8 states, and is barely behind now. makes me laugh that you all still want to count him out. I haven't counted him out in any way and agree with your assessment. The way things are trending, Hillary may be limping into a brokered convention behind in the non super delegate count. I know everyones focusing on the train wreck ensuing on the Republican side, but things aren't all peachy on the Democrat side either. So, to review: Bernie Sanders' campaign manager thinks we may be headed to a brokered convention on the Dem side, and that's all the evidence you need to be convinced, but a zillion scientists tell you that climate change is real, but you're still on the fence? |
| 2016-04-06 1:46 PM in reply to: jmk-brooklyn |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by tuwood So, to review: Bernie Sanders' campaign manager thinks we may be headed to a brokered convention on the Dem side, and that's all the evidence you need to be convinced, but a zillion scientists tell you that climate change is real, but you're still on the fence? Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by tuwood The thing is, Clinton is still leading Sanders by almost 2.5 Million popular votes, so it's not as if "the people" haven't made their voices heard. The 500 people who voted for Sanders in Alaska notwithstanding, the popular vote still resoundingly favors Clinton, so if you're saying that the superdelegates ought to vote with the people, then clearly, casting their ballot for Hillary is the correct thing to do. By contrast, Trump has a little over 9 million popular votes, considerably more than any of the other GOP candidates (Cruz is second with 6.3M), but it still means that considerably more than half of the GOP voters voted for someone other than Trump. That, in my opinion, makes a much stronger case for a brokered convention that what's happening on the D side. Regardless, it'll all be over soon. I doubt Bernie's going to win New York, and if he loses, I don't see a path to victory for him. He really needs to win both CA and NY at this point, and I don't see him winning either. He hasn't done well in states with diverse populations. Originally posted by marysia83 Originally posted by tuwood I hate when they keep including superdelegates in counts. It's a number of 700 that can change completely. It's so misleading :/ First I've heard talk of a brokered convention on this side of the race: Would be very interesting if we had brokered conventions from both parties. Agree, I tend to look at the actual delegates when comparing how close their race is. It's pretty darn close. Then again, I suspect many of those super delegates are pretty hard core Hillary supporters and don't really care what the people think.
popular vote in the primaries is nearly meaningless. caucus states, in which Bernie does better, have WAY WAY fewer voters due to the nature of how they are run. Bernie could have a big delegate lead and still be losing by popular vote. There is a reason that they have delegates. Sanders just crushed in 7 or the last 8 states, and is barely behind now. makes me laugh that you all still want to count him out. I haven't counted him out in any way and agree with your assessment. The way things are trending, Hillary may be limping into a brokered convention behind in the non super delegate count. I know everyones focusing on the train wreck ensuing on the Republican side, but things aren't all peachy on the Democrat side either. lol, you crack me up. I don't think I've ever said climate change wasn't real so I'm not sure what you're fishing for there. (oh, and there aren't a zillion people on the planet, so I challenge your inaccurate citation) :-P |
| 2016-04-06 6:57 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by tuwood So, to review: Bernie Sanders' campaign manager thinks we may be headed to a brokered convention on the Dem side, and that's all the evidence you need to be convinced, but a zillion scientists tell you that climate change is real, but you're still on the fence? Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by tuwood The thing is, Clinton is still leading Sanders by almost 2.5 Million popular votes, so it's not as if "the people" haven't made their voices heard. The 500 people who voted for Sanders in Alaska notwithstanding, the popular vote still resoundingly favors Clinton, so if you're saying that the superdelegates ought to vote with the people, then clearly, casting their ballot for Hillary is the correct thing to do. By contrast, Trump has a little over 9 million popular votes, considerably more than any of the other GOP candidates (Cruz is second with 6.3M), but it still means that considerably more than half of the GOP voters voted for someone other than Trump. That, in my opinion, makes a much stronger case for a brokered convention that what's happening on the D side. Regardless, it'll all be over soon. I doubt Bernie's going to win New York, and if he loses, I don't see a path to victory for him. He really needs to win both CA and NY at this point, and I don't see him winning either. He hasn't done well in states with diverse populations. Originally posted by marysia83 Originally posted by tuwood I hate when they keep including superdelegates in counts. It's a number of 700 that can change completely. It's so misleading :/ First I've heard talk of a brokered convention on this side of the race: Would be very interesting if we had brokered conventions from both parties. Agree, I tend to look at the actual delegates when comparing how close their race is. It's pretty darn close. Then again, I suspect many of those super delegates are pretty hard core Hillary supporters and don't really care what the people think.
popular vote in the primaries is nearly meaningless. caucus states, in which Bernie does better, have WAY WAY fewer voters due to the nature of how they are run. Bernie could have a big delegate lead and still be losing by popular vote. There is a reason that they have delegates. Sanders just crushed in 7 or the last 8 states, and is barely behind now. makes me laugh that you all still want to count him out. I haven't counted him out in any way and agree with your assessment. The way things are trending, Hillary may be limping into a brokered convention behind in the non super delegate count. I know everyones focusing on the train wreck ensuing on the Republican side, but things aren't all peachy on the Democrat side either. lol, you crack me up. I don't think I've ever said climate change wasn't real so I'm not sure what you're fishing for there. (oh, and there aren't a zillion people on the planet, so I challenge your inaccurate citation) :-P I'm mostly busting your chops of course, making reference to the fact that you're extremely hard to sway on some fronts, but let the campaign manager for Bernie Sanders tell you he thinks he's closing the gap on Hillary and that's all you need to hear. |
| 2016-04-08 5:22 PM in reply to: jmk-brooklyn |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hillary Hah, she is a criminal: OK, in all seriousness I can't believe somebody made this into an article. Even I have to stand up for Hillary when it comes to this level of stupid attacks.
|
| 2016-04-14 8:45 PM in reply to: tuwood |
| 1731 Denver, Colorado | Subject: RE: Hillary ....watching democratic debate and getting super nervous.... |
| 2016-04-15 8:26 AM in reply to: marysia83 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by marysia83 ....watching democratic debate and getting super nervous.... There seems to be impending melt downs coming in both political parties. |
| 2016-04-15 8:44 AM in reply to: tuwood |
| 1731 Denver, Colorado | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by marysia83 ....watching democratic debate and getting super nervous.... There seems to be impending melt downs coming in both political parties. I have to agree. I must say there were times when I got more and more annoyed with their attacks. Which made me a bit disappointed. I don't think it was the best strategy, especially since people are pretty tired of the aggression bombs during this election. |
| 2016-04-15 8:47 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by marysia83 ....watching democratic debate and getting super nervous.... There seems to be impending melt downs coming in both political parties. Good.....like I said, that means we will have separate riots. It'll be cleaner that way....less hate. |
| 2016-04-15 9:04 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
| Deep in the Heart of Texas | Subject: RE: Hillary It was odd listening to the presumptive nominee for the Democrats getting booed at the debate last night - people just don't like her. |
| 2016-04-15 9:15 AM in reply to: Hook'em |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by Hook'em It was odd listening to the presumptive nominee for the Democrats getting booed at the debate last night - people just don't like her. Might be more fair to say - which is true for ALL the candidates - that SOME people just don't like her. In fact, as of a month ago she led all candidates in votes received, and, last I looked, she is still leading the Bern in the polls by double digits in all the NE primary states which are up next. (PrimaryVoteTotals.PNG) Attachments ---------------- PrimaryVoteTotals.PNG (7KB - 12 downloads) |
| 2016-04-15 9:33 AM in reply to: ejshowers |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Hillary Found current info: (LatestPrimaryVoteTotals.PNG) Attachments ---------------- LatestPrimaryVoteTotals.PNG (4KB - 13 downloads) |
| 2016-04-15 9:45 AM in reply to: ejshowers |
| Deep in the Heart of Texas | Subject: RE: Hillary She getting the most votes because she's running against Bernie Sanders, not because she is well liked. I'm glad she was not just anointed as the nominee and I think she is lucky that Sanders was the only person to really challenge her for the nomination. Several times in the part of the debate I watched last night, she couldn't even start talking as she was drowned out by those cheering for Sanders. Other times, her points were followed by negative reactions from the audience. |
| 2016-04-15 9:48 AM in reply to: Hook'em |
| Deep in the Heart of Texas | Subject: RE: Hillary |
| 2016-04-15 9:57 AM in reply to: ejshowers |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Hook'em Might be more fair to say - which is true for ALL the candidates - that SOME people just don't like her. In fact, as of a month ago she led all candidates in votes received, and, last I looked, she is still leading the Bern in the polls by double digits in all the NE primary states which are up next. It was odd listening to the presumptive nominee for the Democrats getting booed at the debate last night - people just don't like her. We've hashed out before that the number of votes really don't matter, but I do find it interesting that she has the numbers she has in a two person race whereas Trump and Cruz have their numbers in a 19 person race that's now a three person race. |
| 2016-04-15 10:26 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Hook'em Might be more fair to say - which is true for ALL the candidates - that SOME people just don't like her. In fact, as of a month ago she led all candidates in votes received, and, last I looked, she is still leading the Bern in the polls by double digits in all the NE primary states which are up next. It was odd listening to the presumptive nominee for the Democrats getting booed at the debate last night - people just don't like her. We've hashed out before that the number of votes really don't matter, but I do find it interesting that she has the numbers she has in a two person race whereas Trump and Cruz have their numbers in a 19 person race that's now a three person race. My only point (ONLY!) was that she has received plenty of votes - 9.4 millions so far it appears - so SOME people must like her well enough. That was ALL I was trying to point out. |
| 2016-04-15 10:39 AM in reply to: Hook'em |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by Hook'em She getting the most votes because she's running against Bernie Sanders, not because she is well liked. I'm glad she was not just anointed as the nominee and I think she is lucky that Sanders was the only person to really challenge her for the nomination. Several times in the part of the debate I watched last night, she couldn't even start talking as she was drowned out by those cheering for Sanders. Other times, her points were followed by negative reactions from the audience. That's interesting, because, from where I sat, the amount of booing was pretty even on both sides. There were certainly a couple of times when Bernie had to pause and restart his comments because of the audience reaction. Hillary also got cheers a few times, as did Sanders. If you put a political debate in a big arena like the Barclay's Center, especially surrounded by thousands of New Yorkers, you're going to get strong reactions on both sides. I wouldn't read a whole lot into it. As EJ pointed out, a more valid data point is the millions of people that have voted for her, not the few hundred that booed her. I've said all along that I'm not in love with her as a candidate, but I'm not in love with Sanders either. I think she would get a lot more done than he would, and anyone (literally anyone) is better than either of the two options on the GOP side, imo. |
| 2016-04-20 9:23 AM in reply to: jmk-brooklyn |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Hillary Well... I think the party's over for Sanders. He needed to win and win big in NY to have a clear path to the nomination. Not only did he continue to demonstrate that he can only appeal to a narrow swath of voters, he got beaten pretty handily. He needs a miracle to have a shot at this point. It's not even about superdelegates. Hillary's lead is around 300 pledged delegates and if you take out California, which Sanders won't win either, there are barely 300 delegates left to be had. He'll need to crush Hillary in the remaining contests and then squeak out a win in CA to get enough votes to secure the nomination. And this isn't the GOP-- there will be no contested convention. I've been a little disappointed with the tone that his campaign has been taking lately. Last night, he congratulated Hillary and then proceeded to call the system rigged and to call for open primaries because of his supposed appeal among independents. If he wanted to run as an independent, he should have done so. You can't declare yourself a Democrat, then complain that since you can't get enough Democrats to vote for you, that the system is unfair. |
| 2016-04-20 9:44 AM in reply to: jmk-brooklyn |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hillary Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Well... I think the party's over for Sanders. He needed to win and win big in NY to have a clear path to the nomination. Not only did he continue to demonstrate that he can only appeal to a narrow swath of voters, he got beaten pretty handily. He needs a miracle to have a shot at this point. It's not even about superdelegates. Hillary's lead is around 300 pledged delegates and if you take out California, which Sanders won't win either, there are barely 300 delegates left to be had. He'll need to crush Hillary in the remaining contests and then squeak out a win in CA to get enough votes to secure the nomination. And this isn't the GOP-- there will be no contested convention. I've been a little disappointed with the tone that his campaign has been taking lately. Last night, he congratulated Hillary and then proceeded to call the system rigged and to call for open primaries because of his supposed appeal among independents. If he wanted to run as an independent, he should have done so. You can't declare yourself a Democrat, then complain that since you can't get enough Democrats to vote for you, that the system is unfair. I've been cheering for Bernie because I think he is the weaker of the two candidates and easier to defeat. They're both really weak, but Bernie is weaker. I know everybody is railing about the super delegates, but as long as Hillary gets the majority of regular delegates then i think it becomes a much smaller issue. If Bernie were to hypothetically get more regular delegates (very unlikely) and Hillary won because of the super delegates then it would be a really big mess. Is there a magic number of delegates on the Democratic side that prevents a contested convention like the Repubs have? Wondering if there's a "Cruz" strategy for Bernie to hang in until the convention and try to win it on a second vote type of thing. I'm also curious how the prolonged and increasingly negative race will effect Bernie supporters getting behind Hillary in the end. I've got a handful of facebook friends who are hard core Bernie supporters and you'd think they were Tea Party whacko's by all the Hillary hatred stuff they're posting. I'm finding it difficult to believe they'll jump into team Hillary after she gets the nod, but I could be wrong. |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK