Other Resources The Political Joe » Hillary Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
Show Per page
 
 
of 8
 
 
2016-04-20 10:10 AM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Hillary

lol, one of those Bernie supporters just posted this.  Pretty funny, yet sadly very true

https://www.facebook.com/DailyWire/videos/1544086725887153/

 



2016-04-20 10:23 AM
in reply to: tuwood

User image

Champion
6993
50001000500100100100100252525
Chicago, Illinois
Subject: RE: Hillary
without super delagates it
Hillary Bernie
1,428 1,151

with 1,646 delegates up for grabs

2,383 needed to win there is still time.

It could still come down to super delegates.

Also for get if the email thing takes Hilary down then Bernie wins by default.


2016-04-20 7:01 PM
in reply to: 0

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Hillary
Originally posted by tuwood

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.




I know there is a contingent of Bernie supporters who won't vote for Hillary no matter what, but it's a very, very small, (however strident) bunch. Nearly every democrat voter I know recognizes that despite their strong differences of opinion on a few issues, Climton and Sanders are in agreement on lots of other issues. They also realize that a non-vote or something pointless like a Sanders write-in makes it that much more likely that Cruz or Trump will sneak in, and everyone acknowledges that that's a worst case scenario.

I'm not sure why you continue to talk yourself into this idea that what's happening on the Dem side mirrors the flaming train wreck on the GOP side. They really are not much alike at all. You probably saw the poll the other day that said that a majority of Democrat voters felt this election had brought the party closer together, while a majority of GOP voters feel this election cycle has fractured the party. You don't see any democratic voters saying things like "if so and so gets the nomination, the Democratic Pary will cease to exist". Super delegates is a non-story. By the time they get to the convention, it won't matter because she'll have the pledged delegates she needs.

Even at their most acrimonious, Clinton and Sanders have been far more grown-up and presidential than either Lyin Ted or His Royal Drumphness. And Clinton won't need any underhanded malfeasance at the convention to secure the nomination. It's already over for Sanders, the only question is when he decides to stop playing out the string and lay down. Clinton doesn't really need to campaign against him anymore. He might pick up a couple of smaller wins along the way, but there isn't anyone outside the Sanders campaign that thinks he has a legitimate shot of winning any of the large remaining primaries by a significant enough margin to catch Clinton.

Edited by jmk-brooklyn 2016-04-20 7:08 PM
2016-04-20 7:59 PM
in reply to: jmk-brooklyn

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Hillary

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
Originally posted by tuwood

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.

I know there is a contingent of Bernie supporters who won't vote for Hillary no matter what, but it's a very, very small, (however strident) bunch. Nearly every democrat voter I know recognizes that despite their strong differences of opinion on a few issues, Climton and Sanders are in agreement on lots of other issues. They also realize that a non-vote or something pointless like a Sanders write-in makes it that much more likely that Cruz or Trump will sneak in, and everyone acknowledges that that's a worst case scenario. I'm not sure why you continue to talk yourself into this idea that what's happening on the Dem side mirrors the flaming train wreck on the GOP side. They really are not much alike at all. You probably saw the poll the other day that said that a majority of Democrat voters felt this election had brought the party closer together, while a majority of GOP voters feel this election cycle has fractured the party. You don't see any democratic voters saying things like "if so and so gets the nomination, the Democratic Pary will cease to exist". Super delegates is a non-story. By the time they get to the convention, it won't matter because she'll have the pledged delegates she needs. Even at their most acrimonious, Clinton and Sanders have been far more grown-up and presidential than either Lyin Ted or His Royal Drumphness. And Clinton won't need any underhanded malfeasance at the convention to secure the nomination. It's already over for Sanders, the only question is when he decides to stop playing out the string and lay down. Clinton doesn't really need to campaign against him anymore. He might pick up a couple of smaller wins along the way, but there isn't anyone outside the Sanders campaign that thinks he has a legitimate shot of winning any of the large remaining primaries by a significant enough margin to catch Clinton.

I definitely don't think the two parties are having the same issues, but they're having the same problems.  Meaning there's a lot of people waking up to the corrupt political system and trying to make a change.  That's a good thing.
The Republicans are just a little ahead of the Democrats because they haven't been blinded by a love of Obama.  They're in full on rebellion against the process and the Democrats are still mostly blindly going along with Hillary but a strong albeit not strong enough contingent are waking up.

You're absolutely correct that the Democrats are being far more civil about it, but I think that's more about them being a bit behind the curve on whats happening.  Give it another election cycle or two.  

2016-04-21 5:54 AM
in reply to: 0

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Hillary
This is a long, though well-written article that outlines many of the reasons that democrats who initially liked Sanders and felt he was good for the conversation have gotten tired of his act. The authors position on the idea of a Left Wing Tea Party is a bit alarmist, imo, but there is definitely that group who has made refusal to compromise out to be a virtue. I'm getting a little tired of listening to those people.

https://medium.com/@robinalperstein/on-becoming-anti-bernie-ee87943a...

Here are a couple of excerpts:

"What I started to see, and which seems to be on view more and more as this campaign goes on, is a person and a campaign that is intellectually and actually dishonest, hypocritical and sanctimonious, sexist, unprepared, lazy, cultish, and dangerous?—?and he has a poor temperament to boot."

"In short, in addition to hope and idealism and thirst for progressive change (which I support and share), the Sanders campaign has also awakened a dormant left-wing Tea Party that I didn’t believe existed, but that lives in a fever swamp of conspiracy-thinking and epistemic closure and rejection of fact and binary, “us v. them” thinking. And that terrifies me. The mere fact that the left’s goals are goals I largely share doesn’t make their behavior or refusal to deal in reality any more appealing than the hard right’s similar behavior. I don’t want a leftwing analogue to the extreme right’s lunacy. But that is what Sanders has unleashed among some of his supporters. In fact he’s stoking and exploiting it, and it’s dangerous."

Edited by jmk-brooklyn 2016-04-21 5:59 AM
2016-04-21 9:19 AM
in reply to: jmk-brooklyn

User image

Champion
6993
50001000500100100100100252525
Chicago, Illinois
Subject: RE: Hillary
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
"the Sanders campaign has also awakened a dormant left-wing Tea Party that I didn’t believe existed, "


Well he had to know they were there. Tea Party at its core was non partisan that was anti corruption and helping out the big guy at the expense of the little guy. It was basically hijacked by conservatives and changed into what we all think about the Tea Party.

Remember at the beginning of the election so many people were upset idea of a Clinton/Bush election. This is why you have Trump and Sanders today doing as well.

Maybe enough republicans held onto that anger from 2008 that helps fuel trump and that is why he become the man to beat. I think even from beginning Sanders branding was not as good and did not have the name nonrecognition.. I just glad even if Hillary wins it was not just a gimme. I feel a lot of her views she is pushing now are more in response to Bernie being in the election rather her being honest. Hopefully some of them stick after the election but I am not counting on it.



2016-04-21 9:40 AM
in reply to: chirunner134

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Hillary
Originally posted by chirunner134

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
"the Sanders campaign has also awakened a dormant left-wing Tea Party that I didn’t believe existed, "


Well he had to know they were there. Tea Party at its core was non partisan that was anti corruption and helping out the big guy at the expense of the little guy. It was basically hijacked by conservatives and changed into what we all think about the Tea Party.

Remember at the beginning of the election so many people were upset idea of a Clinton/Bush election. This is why you have Trump and Sanders today doing as well.

Maybe enough republicans held onto that anger from 2008 that helps fuel trump and that is why he become the man to beat. I think even from beginning Sanders branding was not as good and did not have the name nonrecognition.. I just glad even if Hillary wins it was not just a gimme. I feel a lot of her views she is pushing now are more in response to Bernie being in the election rather her being honest. Hopefully some of them stick after the election but I am not counting on it.


No, I think you're on to something. I think Bernie's message and his support has forced Clinton to shift her public stance on a few things in order not to disenfranchise his voters. That's why I've always said that I thought he was good for the conversation. What annoys me lately is that a small group of his supporters who won't stop screaming about how everything is corrupt and how "Big-this" and "Big-that" are influencing everything, and we need to tear society down to the foundation and start over. There IS corruption, and there IS wage inequality and institutionalized racism, and a whole lot of serious issues, but Sanders plan to tax our way out of it is absurd on its face, and that's BEFORE anyone figured out that his tax plan assumes that the economy is going to grow 5% a year.

There's all this hubbub about voting irregularities in Brooklyn and how lots of people weren't able to vote. Naturally, the side that lost (Bernie) is saying that it's all some sort of conspiracy, rather than the far more likely scenario which is that machines break sometimes and, when you put a bunch of untrained volunteers in charge of anything, chances are, not everything will run smoothly.
2016-04-21 9:47 AM
in reply to: jmk-brooklyn

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Hillary

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
Originally posted by chirunner134
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn "the Sanders campaign has also awakened a dormant left-wing Tea Party that I didn’t believe existed, "
Well he had to know they were there. Tea Party at its core was non partisan that was anti corruption and helping out the big guy at the expense of the little guy. It was basically hijacked by conservatives and changed into what we all think about the Tea Party. Remember at the beginning of the election so many people were upset idea of a Clinton/Bush election. This is why you have Trump and Sanders today doing as well. Maybe enough republicans held onto that anger from 2008 that helps fuel trump and that is why he become the man to beat. I think even from beginning Sanders branding was not as good and did not have the name nonrecognition.. I just glad even if Hillary wins it was not just a gimme. I feel a lot of her views she is pushing now are more in response to Bernie being in the election rather her being honest. Hopefully some of them stick after the election but I am not counting on it.
No, I think you're on to something. I think Bernie's message and his support has forced Clinton to shift her public stance on a few things in order not to disenfranchise his voters. That's why I've always said that I thought he was good for the conversation. What annoys me lately is that a small group of his supporters who won't stop screaming about how everything is corrupt and how "Big-this" and "Big-that" are influencing everything, and we need to tear society down to the foundation and start over. There IS corruption, and there IS wage inequality and institutionalized racism, and a whole lot of serious issues, but Sanders plan to tax our way out of it is absurd on its face, and that's BEFORE anyone figured out that his tax plan assumes that the economy is going to grow 5% a year. There's all this hubbub about voting irregularities in Brooklyn and how lots of people weren't able to vote. Naturally, the side that lost (Bernie) is saying that it's all some sort of conspiracy, rather than the far more likely scenario which is that machines break sometimes and, when you put a bunch of untrained volunteers in charge of anything, chances are, not everything will run smoothly.

On the machine I find the outrage a bit hollow myself on both sides.  The "voterless" primaries in CO and WY for example were set in place long before this election cycle so for anyone (cough Trump) to suggest that the GOP is rigging things to make it hard for him are a bit of a stretch.
Same thing with the "vote rigging" on the Democratic side.  Sure, things aren't perfect, but to suggest a broad Clinton conspiracy to suppress votes is a bit laughable.

Personally, I think it's more about these races typically being done by now.  Here in Nebraska we've never once had any say in the selection process because the winner is always set in stone long before it gets here.  Now the party is trying to figure out how to even get it all organized because people are actually going to show up.  Then on top of it, they get record turnouts and all heck breaks loose.  The goofy WY and CO caucus/primaries were just rubber stamps because that's all they've ever needed to be.  Now they're all looking kind of silly and will change going forward, but it's not some intentional thing.  I'm pretty sure those states would have gone Cruz anyways.

New Thread
Other Resources The Political Joe » Hillary Rss Feed  
Show Per page
 
 
of 8
 
 
RELATED ARTICLES
date : January 16, 2008
author : hillarybiscay
comments : 0
Our members chat with Hillary Biscay on Ironman racing and training, fluid and nutrition setup, Ironman post race rest, massages, mental training, becoming faster on the bike and swimming.