• 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.

June U.S. Primaries |OT| Hey June

Status
Not open for further replies.
This one was my favorite:

wITYimQ.png
I cringed.
 

boiled goose

good with gravy
Also, if you meet her don't ask her about vaccines.

Her stance on vaccinations is not super clear, so do ask her.

If you want to disagree with her though, She supports mandatory GMO labeling and is anti nuclear power. Also probably the two biggest things I think Bernie is on the wrong side of.

https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN/status/740520540667023360

I can't wait to see that number rise to over 400.

This has been a landslide.

A ten point win is a solid win. A landslide??? Nah.

Could be:

1. The AP naming Clinton the winner of the primary.
2. Disenchantment from Bernie's statements recently.
3. People were planning on voting Hillary all along but wanted to hear Bernie out at the rallies.

The average voter is not the same as the enthusiastic Bernie supporter.
Bernie wins with engaged, young people. There are a lot of un engaged young people that dont vote.
There are also a lot of old engaged old people, but they turn up to vote in higher numbers.

People confuse the active engagement on political forums or with your groups of friends with the engagement of the average person.
To many people they might have seen a Bernie or a Cruz speech once or heard the names in passing in the news. They are more familiar with a name like Clinton.
Just ask some relatives over 45 if they know the policy differences between Trump, Hillary, Bernie, Rubio? You will get pretty shallow answers.

There are a lot of voters who are not actively engaged. Too busy or indifferent to really care that much.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Her stance on vaccinations is not super clear, so do ask her.

If you want to disagree with her though, She supports mandatory GMO labeling and is anti nuclear power. Also probably the two biggest things I think Bernie is on the wrong side of.

Let me put it this way, before she did her most recent AMA the Green Party had to take their anti-vaxx stuff off their website since people would keep asking about it whenever she did an AMA. She'd never answer the question when asked anyway.

Also, if you can't give a straight answer on vaccines then you don't have a good answer to give and are likely on the wrong side of the issue.
 

boiled goose

good with gravy
Let me put it this way, before she did her most recent AMA the Green Party had to take their anti-vaxx stuff off their website since people would keep asking about it whenever she did an AMA. She'd never answer the question when asked anyway.

Also, if you can't give a straight answer on vaccines then you don't have a good answer to give and are likely on the wrong side of the issue.

She definitely needs to be held accountable for the non answer. It might be either. She doesn't want to allienate the fringe anti vax left or doesn't want to expose her own anti vax beliefs. Her being a doctor... I hope it's the former. Still unacceptable to pander to incorrect views.
 
She definitely needs to be held accountable for the non answer. It might be either. She doesn't want to allienate the fringe anti vax left or doesn't want to expose her own anti vax beliefs. Her being a doctor... I hope it's the former. Still unacceptable to pander to incorrect views.
I think it's even worse if she wants to validate the fringe anti vax left by not condemning them.
 
It would require unprecedented rules changes - you would have to "unbind" all pledged delegates for the first round of voting, and then hope that enough would vote against Trump that he didn't get it. The only way that would happen is if something truly catastrophic turned up that meant he was, without and quibbling, completely unelectable. His racism against a judge doesn't come close to that unfortunately.

Technically, they can make the rules say whatever they want. I cooked up the pseudo-professional rule of "Delegates are considered unbound if they would be pledged to a candidate from a state which has not given its electors to the Republican Party in the last 4 presidential cycles." This would unbind Trump's delegates specifically since he's from New York.

It's probably a bad move to steal it, but with these judge comments blowing up his numbers, I'd be a lot more worried about down-ticket in November than I would have been a few weeks ago.
 
Ah, I see we're back to CA being "rigged" because of x,y,z. Is it just coincidence then that any type of voter suppression specifically targets Sanders supporters in such critical mass as to swing the end result?


We'll excuse the fact that lower-income, working minorities are the single most disenfranchised bloc when it comes to voter suppression. They don't get to skip out on philosophy 101 to go vote.
 
Yeah she should get a 400 pledged delegate lead and come extremely close to half the delegates with just pledged delegates alone. Probably 47% of all total delegates.
 

boiled goose

good with gravy
Pretty sure the poster meant the pledged delegate lead of 391 is the landslide, not California's results.

The 391 delegate lead is a 10 point lead.

This.

It hasn't been a close race at all. Bernie was the known loser since March 15th

I am not sure I would say that. Bernie was pretty much behind the whole time, but it has always been about a 10 point deficit. 10 points is a solid margin. Not a comfy landslide margin, but solid. but I agree that since March 15 he was pretty much guaranteed to lose.

Rows of win are better than Colums of win anyways.

The differences are so interesting.
Obama is like Bernie + the South.
Hillary did well with Hispanics and the Northeast both times, but then absorbed the South in 16.
 

Xe4

Banned
But once all votes are counted and delegates are distributed, she would have won a majority of pledged delegates.
You may be right, I just don't see it. I was doing calculations to see what the votes distributed would be and it was not enough. She'll cone very close though.
 

boiled goose

good with gravy
You may be right, I just don't see it. I was doing calculations to see what the votes distributed would be and it was not enough. She'll cone very close though.

She will have a majority of pledged delegates, but not enough to go over magic number without superdelegates.
 

Xe4

Banned
The differences are so interesting.
Obama is like Bernie + the South.
Hillary did well with Hispanics and the Northeast both times, but then absorbed the South in 16.

Yeah its very intresting. Obama won because of his coalition of black voters and impassioned millinals, vs Hillary's block of hispanic, asian, and older voters. I think Sanders could have reproduced Obama's success if he had done better with black or Hispanics. Just shoes where the future of the democratic party, and ultimately the country is, I guess.

She will have a majority of pledged delegates, but not enough to go over magic number without superdelegates.
Duh. I thought he said she will win with pledged alone. I see now what he was saying. Thanks for the clarification.
 

Miles X

Member
The 391 delegate lead is a 10 point lead.



I am not sure I would say that. Bernie was pretty much behind the whole time, but it has always been about a 10 point deficit. 10 points is a solid margin. Not a comfy landslide margin, but solid. but I agree that since March 15 he was pretty much guaranteed to lose.



The differences are so interesting.
Obama is like Bernie + the South.
Hillary did well with Hispanics and the Northeast both times, but then absorbed the South in 16.

LOL no, it's a landslide.
 

border

Member
Does anyone happen to have that infographic that shows what the delegate count would be given different sets of rules (no superdelegates, proportional superdelegates, etc)?

It was posted in this thread, but going back over all the pages I can't seem to find it.
 

Cheebo

Banned
Does anyone happen to have that infographic that shows what the delegate count would be given different sets of rules (no superdelegates, proportional superdelegates, etc)?

It was posted in this thread, but going back over all the pages I can't seem to find it.
Well at the very least Hillary would win by any possible measure.
 

border

Member
Well at the very least Hillary would win by any possible measure.

Well yes, that was the point of the infographic -- to show that Hillary wins no matter what dumb rule-set you choose to apportion delegates. I presume it was created exactly to shut down the people that whine about the supposed procedural issues.
 

hawk2025

Member
Wait wait wait

The Green Party is anti-vaxx? The actual fuck?

They also propose a moratorium on GMOs, which is, well, completely insane. Repeating a post from yesterday:

The GP's platform has as one of its main points a moratorium on GMOs:


http://www.gp.org/ecological_sustainability/#esAgriculture




The impact of this, if it came to fruition, on the economy would be nearly unprecedented.

Depending on what definition they use, this may impact:


1) Up to 92% of the corn supply
2) Up to 94% of the soy supply
3) Up to 75% of the supply of foodstuffs in general


A moratorium on GMO foods would lead to a catastrophic calamity. Even if they apply the laxest of definitions -- leading to, say, a modest decrease in supply on the teens instead of the numbers above -- it would be catastrophic, because it unequivocally impacts poor people the most.


It's not so much that the GMO stuff is secondary to their platform and they wouldn't actually go through with it in the event that they somehow win the support to do it: It's that they would even consider this as something to put on a platform in the first place. It shows a complete lack of preparation and disregard for reality. I would never trust the Green Party to run the country.


In short:

They quite directly think shutting down 75% of the supply of food in the US is a good idea.
 
The Green Party nominated a woman already, morons. The person who created this isn't a member of the Green Party, is a Bernie troll, or has been in politics since last Tuesday.

Green+Party+Presidential+Candidate+Cynthia+F5A1vbWM95ul.jpg

Hahahaha.
Christ almighty.
Totally forgot about Cynthia "Hurricane Katrina deaths include felons secretly executed then dumped by the government I Dunno Lemme Assault A Capital Hill Security Officer" McKinney. She was a Green party standard bearer.
 
watched last night on TV during my remaining hours of my banhammer.

I was ecstaticly happy for Hillary, her speech was great and inclusive and she was the better human acknowledging primary voters who voted for Bernie.

sadly, the same cannot be said for Bernie himself who failed to correct his supporters who booed Clinton when her name was mentioned and the failure of Bernie to acknowledge the historical significance unfold.

for a so-called progressive, he comes off as a individualist who is incapable of being a team player. He shrugged off all the positiveness coming from Hillary's speech and her historical milestone nomination clinch.

Now that said, I am confident that President Obama will weigh in after DC votes next Tuesday and make the case for unity.
 

boiled goose

good with gravy
Which is just moving the goalposts.
You're not meant to go over the magic number without superdelegates.

Huh? What were the initial goal posts that were moved? Just describing the facts. If a candidate goes over the magic number without superdelegates then they basically secure the nomination before the convention, no questions asked. In the current situation, Clinton is the "presumptive nominee" and not "the nominee" for that reason. Superdelegates still have to actually vote for her (they will almost undoubtedly will!!) for her to become "the nominee". Pledged delegates also have yet to actually vote for the convention, but they can't really change their votes unlike the unpledged (super) delegates.

391 delegate lead when things are proportional is a huge landslide, not even close.

Ok. So to you a 10 point lead is a huge landslide. Got it.
I agree 10 points is not close in politics.

Green Party are wacko nut jobs.

On a lot of issues, yes.
On many, they are on the right side.

hopefully she crosses over the 400+ mark after DC

She almost certainly will...

watched last night on TV during my remaining hours of my banhammer.

I was ecstaticly happy for Hillary, her speech was great and inclusive and she was the better human acknowledging primary voters who voted for Bernie.

sadly, the same cannot be said for Bernie himself who failed to correct his supporters who booed Clinton when her name was mentioned and the failure of Bernie to acknowledge the historical significance unfold.

for a so-called progressive, he comes off as a individualist who is incapable of being a team player. He shrugged off all the positiveness coming from Hillary's speech and her historical milestone nomination clinch.

Now that said, I am confident that President Obama will weigh in after DC votes next Tuesday and make the case for unity.

It was clear from the booing that Bernie supporters were not happy about Clinton's victories haha. It will take time for them to get over it. It's just natural...
Bernie not being a "team player" and not "falling in line" are part of his appeal. He has had those qualities for 40 years. "falling in line" is not a requirement to being a progressive.
 

TyrantII

Member
I am not sure I would say that. Bernie was pretty much behind the whole time, but it has always been about a 10 point deficit. 10 points is a solid margin. Not a comfy landslide margin, but solid. but I agree that since March 15 he was pretty much guaranteed to lose.

55/45 in politics is pretty close to a blow out in the US. 60/40 would be a wholloping
 
Huh? What were the initial goal posts that were moved? Just describing the facts. If a candidate goes over the magic number without superdelegates then they basically secure the nomination before the convention, no questions asked. In the current situation, Clinton is the "presumptive nominee" and not "the nominee" for that reason. Superdelegates still have to actually vote for her (they will almost undoubtedly will!!) for her to become "the nominee". Pledged delegates also have yet to actually vote for the convention, but they can't really change their votes unlike the unpledged (super) delegates.
No, Clinton is the "presumptive nominee" because the nomination isn't official until the convention, even if that candidate has collected every single delegate leading up to it.

The magic number is the majority of pledged delegates + superdelegates. Saying it's not really really real unless she reaches that number in pledged delegates only is saying she needs a supermajority of pledged delegates, a standard no previous Democratic candidate has been held to in the history of the party.
 

Wilsongt

Member
Wow, Bernie voters didn't turn out at all in Cali.

So they can come to rallies, but they can't come to the voter booths?

They voted, but I hear all of their votes got thrown into a fire pit while poll workers laughed manically and chanted "Hillary!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom