• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Sanders wins Wyoming Caucus; ties pledged delegates; math; rules :(

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Moppeh

Banned
Foffy said:
Can someone try to explain, within reason, how someone can win votes yet lose the goodies that winning votes is supposed to accomplish.

I mean..why even vote if the goodie is not even up for grabs by the direction of the general public?
Click to expand...

Mathematically, the delegates were given out fairly and reasonably. With an even number of 14 up for grabs, they each got seven.

The superdelegates usually align themselves based on national popularity as opposed to a state level, so since Hillary is leading, she got those.
 
A

aspiegamer

Member
Moff said:
I am not an american but the way I understand it the primaries are not necessarily a democratic process, it's how the party internally chooses it's candidate for the actual election. so the delegates make sure that the candidate is someone who represents the party well.
even if you call that "rigged", Sanders can still run for president on his own the way I understand it, just not with the party's blessing
Click to expand...
This is an extremely reasonable interpretation. Listen to this man. Caucuses in particular are not at all a democratic process. They're awful.
FliXFantatier said:
Yes and yes, not sure how anyone can dispute that.
Click to expand...
You do understand how ironic crying about disenfranchisement is in a caucus state for Sanders, right?
 
G

goomba

Banned
Bernie and Trump should both start their own new parties with true democratic foundations with no superpacs or super delegates.
 
Z

Zipzo

Banned
Moppeh said:
Mathematically, the delegates were given out fairly and reasonably. With an even number of 14 up for grabs, they each got seven.

The superdelegates usually align themselves based on national popularity as opposed to a state level, so since Hillary is leading, she got those.
Click to expand...

He won by 12% though in that particular area...that's not a 50-50 split.

There's a valley there that isn't being accounted for.

Even if we completely disregard the super delegates, a 50/50 split for winning 56% of the vote is still eyebrow raising.
 
S

StopMakingSense

Member
Zipzo said:
He won by 12% though in that particular area...that's not a 50-50 split.

There's a valley there that isn't being accounted for.

Even if we completely disregard the super delegates, a 50/50 split for winning 56% of the vote is still eyebrow raising.
Click to expand...

Because Wyoming has so few delegates, and an even number of delegates, the threshold for going from net neutral delegates allocations to +2 is very high.
 
W

woolley

Member
Zipzo said:
Not having the party behind you though is about the same as having a 0% chance of getting the nomination, therefore having the party behind you becomes a pretty crucial element of the process anyway.
Click to expand...

Well it's voting to pick someone to represent the party. So having party support is a pretty big part of the process. Super-delegates aren't some new phenomena, they have been around for decades and everyone that decides to run knows the rules of the party.
 
W

water_wendi

Water is not wet!
exmachina64 said:
Advocating violent revolt against the government, got it.
Click to expand...

Compromise has always been the United States fatal flaw, one that originated from the start by allying with slavers against the British and has been present in the Republic throughout its entire history including current events. Eventually things are going to break, im just advocating the selection of those that will make that break happen as quickly as possible.
 
M

Maledict

Member
I also love complaints about democracy and super delegates from the campaign whose literal strategy is:

1) every super delegates in states Sanders won has to vote for Sanders because it's the will of the state

2) super delegates in states Hillary win should vote for Sanders because he's better


The utter hypocrisy in that statement and these complaints is amusing, but also sad.
 
M

Moppeh

Banned
Maledict said:
I also love complaints about democracy and super delegates from the campaign whose literal strategy is:

1) every super delegates in states Sanders won has to vote for Sanders because it's the will of the state

2) super delegates in states Hillary win should vote for Sanders because he's better


The utter hypocrisy in that statement and these complaints is amusing, but also sad.
Click to expand...

But he's fighting the system and using it against The Man, so it's okay.
 
S

StopMakingSense

Member
goomba said:
So noone going to explain why this wasnt so then ?
Click to expand...

Because that's not how the math works in the actual way delegates are determined. It is broken up in a way that breaks toward Hillary. It's also simplified because WY only has one congressional district.

(the percentage is separately run against At Large, CD, and bound PLEO delegate totals, then added up)

There are 8 CD delegates, 55.7% for B gives him 4.457 Delegates to 3.543. Rounded to 4-4

There are 4 At-Large delegates, 55.7% for B gives him 2.23 to 1.77. Rounded to 2-2.

There are 2 Bound PLEO delegates, 55.7% for B gives him 1.12 to 0.88. Rounded to 1-1.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/WY-D
 
IpsoFacto

IpsoFacto

Member
This pretty strange because it almost gives the impression that the Democrat Party does not trust it's constituency.
 
S

soundscream

Member
Zipzo said:
Everybody has bias, that's the nature of being a human and being able to politically align yourself at all.

Pointing it out doesn't really achieve anything.
Click to expand...
A Rupert Murdoch owned paper and a former Republican congressman don't have the best interest of the Democratic party at heart.
 
N

neoanarch

Member
IpsoFacto said:
This pretty strange because it almost gives the impression that the Democrat Party does not trust it's constituency.
Click to expand...
Why do you say that? Cause again nationwide in total votes Sanders is losing big. BIG. Like the delegate count is skewed toward Sanders so massively that it seems like he still has a shot.
 
W

WhiteRabbitEXE

Member
Gotchaye said:
This isn't true. Clinton only has 11 delegates out of Wyoming if you count superdelegates who were not and never were going to be assigned as a result of the election and are still not required to vote for her. They could change their minds, and in fact most people expect that as a whole the superdelegates would not deny Sanders the nomination if he had a democratic mandate.

Clinton tied Sanders in pledged delegates from the Wyoming primary because nobody lives in Wyoming and this is just how the rounding works out. Sanders would have taken a delegate off of Clinton if he'd gotten I think less than 1% more of the vote.
Click to expand...

but the anti-Sanders conspiracy!
 
G

Gotchaye

Member
neoanarch said:
Why do you say that? Cause again nationwide in total votes Sanders is losing big. BIG. Like the delegate count is skewed toward Sanders so massively that it seems like he still has a shot.
Click to expand...

I mean, would you trust a group of people who have given Hillary Clinton a commanding lead in the popular vote?

Edit: Also I didn't think that the pledged delegate count was that far off of the popular vote. Like a few percent in favor of Sanders at best.
 
T

typist

Member
Hillary netted 2 delegates in Iowa even though she only won by 0.2%. Surely the split in Wyoming should have been 8-6 or more if Bernie won by about 12%?
 
M

Mercury Fred

Banned
Zipzo said:
Everybody has bias, that's the nature of being a human and being able to politically align yourself at all.

Pointing it out doesn't really achieve anything.
Click to expand...
Perhaps then ask yourself why right wing talking heads are always on the front lines of calling foul on Sanders's behalf.
 
Z

Zipzo

Banned
WhiteRabbitEXE said:
but the anti-Sanders conspiracy!
Click to expand...

I don't think this is fair.

While I do not think there is a full-blown conspiracy going on, it is an un-mitigated fact that he garners a lot less media coverage than, say, Trump.

It has gotten a lot better over time as Sanders has gained popularity, especially with the younger generation who is no stranger to social media and spreading the word through any means they can.
 
F

Foffy

Banned
water_wendi said:
Compromise has always been the United States fatal flaw, one that originated from the start by allying with slavers against the British and has been present in the Republic throughout its entire history including current events. Eventually things are going to break, im just advocating the selection of those that will make that break happen as quickly as possible.
Click to expand...

I can get how compromise is always a devil, because in many instances, one is willing to compromise with others who, for lack of a better term, are void in reason. This is mainstream Republicans in our climate today.

I don't know if a "fuck you and your pigshitted thoughts" is really an answer here, however. I would find it far more productive to attack beliefs that create behavior, but we're talking about the same party that shudders at the words "climate change" and hides behind the one belief system that somehow shouldn't be attacked, which is religion, that is also the body of some of the worst thoughts humans have ever projected.

I think a race to the bottom is a natural happening, by the way. No need to wish it or demand acceleration. The extremes of what we're dealing with will create insolubility, and within that, the window of reason and progress can potentially open up. But by the same token, so does the window of exploitation and corruption. Look at how Republicans literally want to do nothing because a Democrat is in charge, and what they do can simply be described as obstruction, both in the domain of politics and the slime they get away with to the citizens they represent.
 
C

ClosingADoor

Member
water_wendi said:
Compromise has always been the United States fatal flaw, one that originated from the start by allying with slavers against the British and has been present in the Republic throughout its entire history including current events. Eventually things are going to break, im just advocating the selection of those that will make that break happen as quickly as possible.
Click to expand...
Compromise is essential for politics and running a country. The US problem at the moment seems to be that one side doesn't want to compromise on anything and rather see the country burn.
 
G

Gotchaye

Member
typist said:
Hillary netted 2 delegates in Iowa even though she only won by 0.2%. Surely the split in Wyoming should have been 8-6 or more if Bernie won by about 12%?
Click to expand...

Without checking, I bet that what happened here is that Iowa has more than one congressional district and so the state-wide vote alone does not determine how many delegates each candidate gets. Plus some of those districts may have had odd numbers of delegates, which would give one candidate a delegate lead for getting 50%+1 of the vote there.
 
I

Inuhanyou

Believes Dragon Quest is a franchise managed by Sony
Super Delegates, ridiculous "open and closed primary" procedures, horrible debate scheduling, Dem party super PAC organizing months and months before the primaries even start...what a 'Democracy' we've got.

Not to say we all don't really know that its a farce anyway, what the Democrats publicly espouse compared to their actual thoughts, but its always nice to see it in action.

Well, i have all the praise in the world for Bern getting this far despite all the jerry mandering the media and the Dems and the conservatives have flung at him. New York will probably be insurmountable, just because of its 'closed primary' status...he does far better with the liberal base of the Dem party and liberal/moderate independents on board.

If he had both of those groups voting, he'd easily beat her in NY is my view, But since independents cant vote in it, and the ability to switch your party to Dem to vote ended a while back, before he was able to really campaign personally in the state, his support will be limited, and New York is still one of those must win states to come back in the delegate math.
 
P

Puppen

Banned
water_wendi said:
The system is a failure, top to bottom. Nonviolence has failed us. There is not other choice.
Click to expand...

How old are you? Are you aware of the absurdity and cluelessness in this post?

I'm also just laughing at people calling the system rigged only because their guy didn't win. If it was the other way around they'd be saying the system worked.
 
F

Frankfurter

Member
StopMakingSense said:
Because that's not how the math works in the actual way delegates are determined. It is broken up in a way that breaks toward Hillary. It's also simplified because WY only has one congressional district.

(the percentage is separately run against At Large, CD, and bound PLEO delegate totals, then added up)

There are 8 CD delegates, 55.7% for B gives him 4.457 Delegates to 3.543. Rounded to 4-4

There are 4 At-Large delegates, 55.7% for B gives him 2.23 to 1.77. Rounded to 2-2.

There are 2 Bound PLEO delegates, 55.7% for B gives him 1.12 to 0.88. Rounded to 1-1.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/WY-D
Click to expand...


That's an amazing way to make sure that the average citizen is just pissed.
 
M

mclem

Member
These superdelegates are a real problem, but I think it's overshadowing the fact that after winning the primaries so convincingly thanks to her massive superdelegate lead in 2008, Hillary is now running for a third term.
 
M

Moppeh

Banned
Inuhanyou said:
Super Delegates, ridiculous "open and closed primary" procedures, horrible debate scheduling, Dem party super PAC organizing months and months before the primaries even start...what a 'Democracy' we've got.

Not to say we all don't really know that its a farce anyway, what the Democrats publicly espouse compared to their actual thoughts, but its always nice to see it in action.

Well, i have all the praise in the world for Bern getting this far despite all the jerry mandering the media and the Dems and the conservatives have flung at him. New York will probably be insurmountable, just because of its 'closed primary' status...he does far better with the liberal base of the Dem party and liberal/moderate independents on board.

If he had both of those groups voting, he'd easily beat her easily, But since independents cant vote in it, and the ability to switch your party to Dem to vote ended a while back, before he was able to really campaign personally in the state, his support will be limited, and New York is still one of those must win states to come back in the delegate math.
Click to expand...

Why should Independents be deciding the leader for a party they aren't affiliated with?
 
S

soundscream

Member
There's no coming back. There are no winner take all states. He's done, he's been done which is why this whole argument is silly. Not only is it not rigged it doesn't make any difference.
 
S

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Frankfurter said:
That's an amazing way to make sure that the average citizen is just pissed.
Click to expand...

If people are getting pissed over math, this country is doomed. There is no conspiracy here, the OP has an agenda by virtue of including Superdelegates to make it seem like something else happened.

The delegates ended up being split 7-7 due to the small size of the state in population and the math used to award them.
 
Z

Zipzo

Banned
Suikoguy said:
If people are getting pissed over math, this country is doomed. There is no conspiracy here, the OP has an agenda by virtue of including Superdelegates to make it seem like something else happened.

The delegates ended up being split 7-7 due to the small size of the state in population and the math used to award them.
Click to expand...

The math does not explain a 7:7 split though. It also does not explain 4 super delegate pledges in the opposite direction of their caucus's favorite.
 
C

Clefargle

Member
The fact that Bernie supporters are freaking out over this is just more fuel for my view that they never once looked into this until the numbers rolled in. This is how it works, don't like it? Try and fix it, but not during the election your trying to win. None of this is "Undemocratic", it's a private party and the rules were created before Clinton ever ran, it wasn't set up to help her. It was set up to help whoever the Superdelegates break towards. In this case that is Clinton.
 
T

teruterubozu

Member
Suikoguy said:
If people are getting pissed over math, this country is doomed. There is no conspiracy here, the OP has an agenda by virtue of including Superdelegates to make it seem like something else happened.

The delegates ended up being split 7-7 due to the small size of the state in population and the math used to award them.
Click to expand...

People are mad at the math, not math in general.
 
Z

Zipzo

Banned
euphemism said:
The fact that Bernie supporters are freaking out over this is just more fuel for my view that they never once looked into this until the numbers rolled in. This is how it works, don't like it? Try and fix it, but not during the election your trying to win. None of this is "Undemocratic", it's a private party and the rules were created before Clinton ever ran, it wasn't set up to help her. It was set up to help whoever the Superdelegates break towards. In this case that is Clinton.
Click to expand...

...but Sanders does want to change how the system works. That's like one of his main talking points.
 
M

Moppeh

Banned
Zipzo said:
The math does not explain a 7:7 split though. It also does not explain 4 super delegate pledges in the opposite direction of their caucus's favorite.
Click to expand...

As I said previously, superdelegates aren't tied to the voting pattern of their state and instead usually vote in line with the national preference.
 
L

lednerg

Member
soundscream said:
There's no coming back. There are no winner take all states. He's done, he's been done which is why this whole argument is silly. Not only is it not rigged it doesn't make any difference.
Click to expand...

Holding out hope for another Michigan. Also, a record 6 million people have given money to the campaign, so he's basically obligated to continue as he has.

This movement didn't start with Sanders and it won't end with him. This election cycle is just a taste of things to come. The Baby Boomers are dropping like flies, and their kids and grandkids don't have the stupid Red Scare ingrained in their memories.
 
C

Clefargle

Member
Zipzo said:
The math does not explain a 7:7 split though. It also does not explain 4 super delegate pledges in the opposite direction of their caucus's favorite.
Click to expand...

The math does explain that split:

StopMakingSense said:
Because that's not how the math works in the actual way delegates are determined. It is broken up in a way that breaks toward Hillary. It's also simplified because WY only has one congressional district.

(the percentage is separately run against At Large, CD, and bound PLEO delegate totals, then added up)

There are 8 CD delegates, 55.7% for B gives him 4.457 Delegates to 3.543. Rounded to 4-4

There are 4 At-Large delegates, 55.7% for B gives him 2.23 to 1.77. Rounded to 2-2.

There are 2 Bound PLEO delegates, 55.7% for B gives him 1.12 to 0.88. Rounded to 1-1.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/WY-D
Click to expand...

And no math will explain the Superdelegates endorsing however they want to. That has always been the case and could change if Sanders could win enough pledged delegates. But he consistently falls short of the numbers needed to convince them. If he were to ever get enough numbers to really make the case that the will of the people in behind him, Superdelegates would change to endorsing him for sure. But he can't and won't so they won't.
 
B

Brakke

Banned
Zipzo said:
The math does not explain a 7:7 split though. It also does not explain 4 super delegate pledges in the opposite direction of their caucus's favorite.
Click to expand...

"Their caucus's favorite" is a nonsense phrase tho. Superdelegates aren't bound by "their" caucus. The caucus is totally irrelevant to the mandate given to the superdelegates.

Indeed, superdelegate "pledges" isn't even real. There's no mechanism there, no enforcement. Come convention, they're tree to flip.
 
C

Clefargle

Member
Zipzo said:
...but Sanders does want to change how the system works. That's like one of his main talking points.
Click to expand...

Yes and if you read my post you'll see I said that if they want to fix it, during an election isn't the time. He should have started years ago. You can't fix a system and run in it at the same time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
1 In 10 Sanders Primary Voters Ended Up Supporting Trump
7 8 9 10 11
524
45K
Ekai replied
  • Locked
Bernie Sanders isn't ruling out a 2020 presidential run
4 5 6 7 8
356
28K
Kieli replied
  • Locked
Shouting match erupts between Clinton and Trump aides at Harvard forum
2
74
12K
ultratruman replied
  • Locked
Bernie Sanders endorses his brother in race to replace David Cameron
2
50
7K
Charles Brandon replied
  • Locked
Third-party voters are “trading votes” with Clinton voters to defeat Trump
2
64
7K
mugwhump replied
Top Bottom