SUUUUUPPPPPPPERRRRR TUESDAY. Will Trumps remarks finally hurt him? (Doubtiful). WIll one of the republican second stringers drop out! Probably one or two. (I'm looking at you Carson!) Will Sanders win anything more then Vermont? (Maybe OK, MN, CO) Will it be enough that matters (Nope all states are proportional)
If he loses Mass. it's done for him. =/ Then I move on to the conundrum of do I vote for Hillary. Being in California, not voting is basically voting democrat.
Even if he does win in Mass, it's done for him. He will not win Arkansas, he will not win Alabama, he will not win Georgia, he will not win Tennessee, he will not win Texas, and he won't win Virginia. It was done for Bernie as soon as the numbers from SC and Arizona were in. He may win Mass and Oklahoma, two states with combined population less than half of Texas alone. I like Bernie as much as the next commie, but he ain't getting the nomination.
Even if he does win in Mass, it's done for him. He will not win Arkansas, he will not win Alabama, he will not win Georgia, he will not win Tennessee, he will not win Texas, and he won't win Virginia. It was done for Bernie as soon as the numbers from SC and Arizona were in. He may win Mass and Oklahoma, two states with combined population less than half of Texas alone. I like Bernie as much as the next commie, but he ain't getting the nomination.
Something interesting has come of this - I've seen a few people wondering if they should vote burnie in states with open primaries where he's getting a less than 1% chance of winning just because they want to show support, or vote strategically and vote for rubio against trump to win the nomination.
Hell, even I'm hoping Sanders loses this and I voted for him. I want him to be the nominee, but I don't think he will be and I want the infighting to end.
It would be kinda great if this was all over and we could start unifying against the inevitable Trump campaign. It's happening, Trump is getting his nomination, and the left needs to buck up and vote in power this season.
Hell, even I'm hoping Sanders loses this and I voted for him. I want him to be the nominee, but I don't think he will be and I want the infighting to end.
I think a contested primary is good for the party. Otherwise, everyone will stop talking about the Democratic side until all of the dust has settled. This happened to Al Gore in 2000.
Hell, even I'm hoping Sanders loses this and I voted for him. I want him to be the nominee, but I don't think he will be and I want the infighting to end.
I think a contested primary is good for the party. Otherwise, everyone will stop talking about the Democratic side until all of the dust has settled. This happened to Al Gore in 2000.
Maybe. My argument is strictly emotional. I want the election to end more than I want to see any given candidate win.
It would be kinda great if this was all over and we could start unifying against the inevitable Trump campaign. It's happening, Trump is getting his nomination, and the left needs to buck up and vote in power this season.
And in the next midterm. But honestly one thing I am worried about is that if Bernie doesn't take the nomination and thus disappointing the large section of the youth vote he commands, we'll see a repeat of 2010 at the midterms.
Yeah. He's already polling better than Hillary in theoretical runnings against most of the Republican candidates, mainly by people who view him as Anti-Establishment compared to Hillary being the Obama-Establishment, so I feel him not taking it is gonna send a bunch of people into the doldrums.
If he loses and he wants to play the game properly, he'll come out in support of Hillary and urge people to vote Liberal. I also think it would be cool of Hillary to put him on the cabinet, but it won't happen.
FiveThirtyEight pointed out in their last podcast that it's not that fair to compare Bernie's head-to-heads with Hillary's - Bernie's name recognition isn't nearly as good, and so he would get more support as "generic Democrat" by people who don't actually know much about him.
FiveThirtyEight pointed out in their last podcast that it's not that fair to compare Bernie's head-to-heads with Hillary's - Bernie's name recognition isn't nearly as good, and so he would get more support as "generic Democrat" by people who don't actually know much about him.
Let's also not forget that the numbers where Hillary struggles compared to Bernie are not counting the democrats supporting Bernie who may(and probably will) switch their support if she takes the nomination.
Updates: Bernie takes Vermont(no surprise), Hillary has taken Georgia and Virginia.
I really want the D race to be over so we can focus on sitting back, collecting money and beating the crap out of Trump in the general or making fun of republicans at their contested convention :-p
I frequently try to explain that lesser of two evils is not a legitimate reason not to vote because "I would vote Nixon over Hitler every time" but I was hoping it wouldn't come to that.
I find it particularly baffling the sheer amount of dislike Hillary receives from younger voters. You'd think she kicked their puppies or something.
Granted, she's been in politics for a while, and she does come across as "Rich White woman", but after staring into the abyss that would be a Trump presidency... God damn.
As much as I like Bernie's positions, even if be gets elected, unless they flip the House and Senate very little of what he wants will get implemented.
I find it particularly baffling the sheer amount of dislike Hillary receives from younger voters. You'd think she kicked their puppies or something.
Have you seen half the shit floating around the internet about her? If people believed even half of it, they'd think she's the next Hitler just waiting for her chance. Really, they'd think that if they only believed the stuff that's true, but taken completely out of context - I mean, for one example, the Superpredators thing.
She made a speech, where she mentioned "superpredators", which people say is referring to black people, and with the transcribed soundbite you've seen, sure seems like it. She clearly supported this legislation that had a disproportionate effect on black people, so she obviously doesn't care about, or worse, hates black people! If she's making a political speech, and she was a senator, she must have supported that legislation!
Except, that's all nonsense. She was making a speech to a university, during her Husband's second election campaign, and using the 1994 omnibus crime bill as an example of how the Clinton Administration had been tough on violent crime. The superpredators thing had wide support among experts, and the evidence seemed to support it. It was widely seen as a very left-wing policy, and had support from a large number of groups, including black community leaders and groups, women's groups, and so on. Even Sanders voted in favor, twice, as I mentioned previously.
(Though I do have some small admiration for their handling of the issue - while the gun control lie was clumsy and easily debunked with public records, you must admit using it to address both that issue, and put a patch over some of his poor gun control record is a pretty fucking clever maneuver. Someone buy his strategist a beer.)
She was also the First Lady at the time, and while the amount of political power the first lady holds is another debate, let's just say she had no official power, and no vote on the legislation. It wasn't until some time afterward that we became aware of the negative effects of the bill.
You can spin anything into a negative, by changing the context of it, or presenting the right thing without context and letting people build their own. Or, in some other cases, just removing like chopping half the quote to make it say something different, and presenting it with no other information - like when people were claiming she called low-income black people "deadbeats", was actually a complete re-write of something she said a few times during that period.
Having my brother be super-hardcore into Trump into the election is 80% gut-churning awful and 20% fascinating. It's a strangely a good way to judge what a high IQ person actually believes in when it comes to what Trump could actually bring to politics. Even when it comes to Hilary, he made a blatant point to say the lack of experience of Trump is better for the country than Hilary's supposedly terrible foreign record.
This is a quote he said from a conversation we had: "You see, in America, when people think of our government the word that comes to mind is...fairness. And in the EU, which is more like a confederacy, they believe in strength as their number one goal. If they were to speak to Trump across the table, Trump could still be able to posture in a manner to garner their respect even if he didn't know all the information."
You get some reaaaaaaaaally fascinating ideas of what people will conjure to openly avoid Trump's faults. And not recent stuff he's said in the past 2 years, but completely ignoring his rise as a pop culture icon in the 80s to all the various mistakes he's made business-wise. They really want to believe an outsider who doesn't care can save American politics.
I don't know who it is you guys read that support Trump. Statistically speaking I must know someone who does, but whoever they are they aren't very vocal about it.
This should scare the every living shit out of every single rational person.
Are primary turnouts predictive of general turnout? I'm imagining the most extreme case, where e.g. Hillary is unopposed. You wouldn't necessarily get many voters showing up.
Actually the only thing you can point to in the primary turn out, is Bernie's Revolution is only showing up in the 18-29 demographic and everyone else either doesn't care with D win or voting for Hillary generally. You can't make any comparisons to turn out in a primary to the general, since it generally is driven by how contested it is and how derisive. I'd vote in the Republican primary if I could and I'm a hardcore D. So in states where you can change your party easily or declare when you vote or let independents in will tend towards the more interesting race. Which by all measures is Trump.
Comments
If he loses and he wants to play the game properly, he'll come out in support of Hillary and urge people to vote Liberal. I also think it would be cool of Hillary to put him on the cabinet, but it won't happen.
Evangelical
Dedicated to the people
Compassionate to everyone
Righteous in values
Unrivaled in competency
Zealous in duty
Infallible in every way
Studious in all disciplines
The best candidate
He knows all
Everyone cannot deny him
Zurc
Omnipotent
Deified he should be
Impossible to defeat
Astute
Corrupt him you cannot
Keeps America safe
I love Ted Cruz
Lover of democracy
Lover of the people
Evangelical
Rated 10/10 politician
Updates: Bernie takes Vermont(no surprise), Hillary has taken Georgia and Virginia.
Alabama : 92-6
Arkansas: 90-10
GA: 83-16
OK: 75-22
TX : 80-18
TN: 85-12
VA: 84-16
Granted, she's been in politics for a while, and she does come across as "Rich White woman", but after staring into the abyss that would be a Trump presidency... God damn.
As much as I like Bernie's positions, even if be gets elected, unless they flip the House and Senate very little of what he wants will get implemented.
She made a speech, where she mentioned "superpredators", which people say is referring to black people, and with the transcribed soundbite you've seen, sure seems like it. She clearly supported this legislation that had a disproportionate effect on black people, so she obviously doesn't care about, or worse, hates black people! If she's making a political speech, and she was a senator, she must have supported that legislation!
Except, that's all nonsense. She was making a speech to a university, during her Husband's second election campaign, and using the 1994 omnibus crime bill as an example of how the Clinton Administration had been tough on violent crime. The superpredators thing had wide support among experts, and the evidence seemed to support it. It was widely seen as a very left-wing policy, and had support from a large number of groups, including black community leaders and groups, women's groups, and so on. Even Sanders voted in favor, twice, as I mentioned previously.
(Though I do have some small admiration for their handling of the issue - while the gun control lie was clumsy and easily debunked with public records, you must admit using it to address both that issue, and put a patch over some of his poor gun control record is a pretty fucking clever maneuver. Someone buy his strategist a beer.)
She was also the First Lady at the time, and while the amount of political power the first lady holds is another debate, let's just say she had no official power, and no vote on the legislation. It wasn't until some time afterward that we became aware of the negative effects of the bill.
You can spin anything into a negative, by changing the context of it, or presenting the right thing without context and letting people build their own. Or, in some other cases, just removing like chopping half the quote to make it say something different, and presenting it with no other information - like when people were claiming she called low-income black people "deadbeats", was actually a complete re-write of something she said a few times during that period.
This is a quote he said from a conversation we had: "You see, in America, when people think of our government the word that comes to mind is...fairness. And in the EU, which is more like a confederacy, they believe in strength as their number one goal. If they were to speak to Trump across the table, Trump could still be able to posture in a manner to garner their respect even if he didn't know all the information."
You get some reaaaaaaaaally fascinating ideas of what people will conjure to openly avoid Trump's faults. And not recent stuff he's said in the past 2 years, but completely ignoring his rise as a pop culture icon in the 80s to all the various mistakes he's made business-wise. They really want to believe an outsider who doesn't care can save American politics.
I don't know who it is you guys read that support Trump. Statistically speaking I must know someone who does, but whoever they are they aren't very vocal about it.