he's pretty much already done that on multiple occasions. he's said it at multiple debates, he said it during his new hampshire speech (probably because that was the last meaningful state that he was going to win before hillary took over the race), and he'll likely continue to say it.
-
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.
This is the date Bernie Sanders Berns Out (March 15?)
- Thread starter border
- Start date
- Status
he's pretty much already done that on multiple occasions. he's said it at multiple debates, he said it during his new hampshire speech (probably because that was the last meaningful state that he was going to win before hillary took over the race), and he'll likely continue to say it.
It has effected the nation's youth, thus far the virus is not spreading to those above 45 years of age
M0nochromatic
Member
I don't think many of his dissenters actually listen to what he has to say. Just what others have to say about him.
Freeza Under The Shower
Member
I do wonder if Hillary might consider him as VP though.
Sadly, there are too many, mostly younger voters who think that Bernie can unilaterally enact policy without the help of Congress or the Supreme Court. The idea of downticket races is downright foreign to them, as is the importance of having those downticket progressives providing support to a social democrat and his or her policies.
Bernie supporters,if you want to lay the foundation for social democracy, vote and don't stay home. Don't vote for Hillary if you must (though I hope you change your minds), but vote for change at every level of government.
He's too old. From an actuarial standpoint, there's a better than even chance that he'll die before the end of an 8-year Hillary term. She needs to pick a Bernie-like progressive who's young and devoted enough to take the reins after Hillary is out of office.
Not a chance in hell.
UltimaPooh
Member
Probably not.
Though hopefully something in the administration. But that's also doubtful.
Not to mention the people in the middle that will be swayed to the Rep side if the investigations into Hillary's email debacle result in charges.
titiklabingapat
Member
Frankly it happened last Saturday in Nevada.
Super Tuesday is probably when most people will be convinced and when the media narrative will shift to the general election season of Trump* versus Clinton. So it's like we are just watching a slow-mo two to three weeks car crash now.
This story from Cook should drive the point home even more:
http://cookpolitical.com/story/9274
*=Do not let me down Trump!!!!!!!
Super Tuesday is probably when most people will be convinced and when the media narrative will shift to the general election season of Trump* versus Clinton. So it's like we are just watching a slow-mo two to three weeks car crash now.
This story from Cook should drive the point home even more:
http://cookpolitical.com/story/9274
*=Do not let me down Trump!!!!!!!
Super Tuesday will definitely decide things, so he has to do all he can before then to shore up support in the states he is advantageous in. I am wishing the absolute best for his chances, for the future of this country.
But what a horrible title that's not biased or tilted in anyway, seriously, its ridiculous how the media is so giddy at the possibility of this guy being silenced.
But what a horrible title that's not biased or tilted in anyway, seriously, its ridiculous how the media is so giddy at the possibility of this guy being silenced.
people will realize it next Tuesday but after the 15th he's basically mathematically eliminated, Clinton can stop spending as much money as she is and she can focus on republicans.
PopcornMegaphone
Banned
You could argue it happened when sanders didn't win Iowa by a solid margin. But yeah, NV basically sealed it. It wasn't just the margin of the loss, but the demographic issues as well.
RobotChant
Member
This sounds eerily similar to comments made by some Hillary supporters in '08. One of her surrogates said the Obama camp should stop antagonizing her because they'll need her to raise money if he gets the nomination.
dave is ok
aztek is ok
This guy was unfortunate to write this whole article saying that Bernie will suspend his campaign on the very day he announced he'll continue til the convention
titiklabingapat
Member
When most young people like me do not understand how important the Supreme Court appointments are (as evidenced by that recent Pew poll), especially in this election, then they deserve all the mocking thrown our way.
Also, in the hypothetical chance that Hillary wins the nom...its gonna be a bloodbath for her i think in the general, and she'll probably lose.
Independents( liberal, moderate AND conservative) will abstain, she will only get a (bigger)portion of the Democrat vote, and the GOP obviously has their guy.
This is not an election for establishment candidates and unfortunately for her, there's too much dirt she has that will get people apathetic about the process.
Independents( liberal, moderate AND conservative) will abstain, she will only get a (bigger)portion of the Democrat vote, and the GOP obviously has their guy.
This is not an election for establishment candidates and unfortunately for her, there's too much dirt she has that will get people apathetic about the process.
if a tree falls and no one listens, does it make a sound?
eBay Huckster
Member
inuhanyou's meltdown next month is gonna be fun, i think.
building on this...
clinton's already outperforming the "actual tie" margin by 11 delegates. she's probably gonna be outperforming it by 21 after saturday, and march 1st is gonna be a complete bloodbath (texas and georgia alone are gonna have substantially wider margins than sanders would need for a 50% tie)
building on this...
clinton's already outperforming the "actual tie" margin by 11 delegates. she's probably gonna be outperforming it by 21 after saturday, and march 1st is gonna be a complete bloodbath (texas and georgia alone are gonna have substantially wider margins than sanders would need for a 50% tie)
minor effort
Banned
I'm not too certain that will be the case. It's still only February, and there's right now a bit of a shockwave going Sanders supporters that he might not win this. People are disappointed, claiming they'll abstain, vote third-party, or even try to rile-up Clinton supporter by making dubious claims they'll vote for Trump. I feel a lot of it is just the venting of frustrations. We saw this eight years ago when allegedly Clinton supporters were going to either abstain or vote McCain in droves, costing Obama the election. Didn't happen.
It's still only February. After having time to process this, and more importantly watch a few months more of the campaign trail where a Trump, Cruz, or Rubio presidency might start looking like a twinge of a reality, and watch the number of those abstainers start to flock back to the Democrats. Let's observe this phenomenon after the conventions. Let's observe this following a debate or two of Hillary versus [GOP Candidate].
Besides, one could say divisions are high among GOP too.
The maths gets very hard for Bernie in March yes. Clinton will have all the momentum from NV and SC, her Southern firewall appears stronger than ever and the Sanders campaign seems to be focusing on a handful of Super Tuesday states in the Midwest and North East that cannot run up the numbers to challenge big delegate heavy states where Clinton is leading double digits.
Barring something unforeseen it looks like we're in for Clinton v Trump.
Barring something unforeseen it looks like we're in for Clinton v Trump.
Yes, i'm sure if Hillary Clinton wins Super Tuesday, you will find more pleasure in me personally melting down like a fandom warrior than having any actual statement about the future of our country or what your candidate represents.
dehydratedbabies
Member
Petty and embarrassing.
eBay Huckster
Member
Petty and embarrassing like pretending turnout's going to sink enough to guarantee a GOP win, regardless of candidate, only because Clinton wins the nomination? In spite of practically every political scientist outside of the Foxsphere thinking it's a tossup at worst?
(Sabato has it at 247-206, Cook has it at 253-191, Rothenberg has it at 249-191, all with the underlying assumption that Clinton wins the nomination - yet all of these are magically going to be reversed because of an as-yet-nonexistent shitfit against the "establishment" outside of the GOP.)
I sure will, because your meltdowns will be completely irrelevant to any of the latter.
I'll also find pleasure in your clown shoes hyperbolic statements about independents staying home for the general election (among several other prognostications based on flimsy evidence at best but presented as immutable facts) inevitably being wrong because you can't possibly conceive that anyone but Sanders could possibly win.
Nothing hypothetical about it - it's all but done already, and will be undeniably so by the middle of March.
That said, there won't be a bloodbath. Trump has higher negatives than Hillary, and the split between the two won't be that wide among independents. Democrats love her, and enough conservative women and minorities have been thrown under the bus by Trump that she could be considered the lesser evil by many. The real bloodbath would be the socialist (well, the social Democrat, but which voters world know the difference?) versus anyone. Independents hate socialists, Republicans universally despise them, and even a bunch of Democrats are wary. Good luck changing the national narrative regarding socialism in a few months.
Going into the general, I'd feel much better taking my chances with Hillary than with Bernie. Of course, that's merely hypothetical too since he'll be effectively done by next week.
eyeball_kid
Member
The Daily Beast is owned by media mega-company IAC.
Chelsea Clinton is on the Board of Directors at IAC.
Make of that what you will, but there has been a consistent bias against Bernie in the media, mostly ignoring him during the first part of the campaign, and then painting him as someone who has little to no chance.
Chelsea Clinton is on the Board of Directors at IAC.
Make of that what you will, but there has been a consistent bias against Bernie in the media, mostly ignoring him during the first part of the campaign, and then painting him as someone who has little to no chance.
Orbis Tabula
Member
True, but then, candidates almost always say that they'll continue to the convention. What else would they say? In reality, they stay in until they run out of money.
minor effort
Banned
Wasn't Jeb Bush saying he's in it until the convention until the day he dropped out?
Anecdotal, but a good majority of the people I know right now in Colorado walking and calling for Bernie, long time democrats who walked/called for Obama in '08 and '12 have pretty much voiced their lack of interest in working for a Clinton win.
I feel like that's going to be a lot of people, the Clinton campaign has been built on piles of money, while the Sander's campaign has been the kind of excitement you saw with Obama. Maybe she can win November with money, and good for her if she does, but it's not going to be because of any great grass roots effort by democrats who feel like she brings change to the table.
The people who support Sanders see a desire for change. It seems like the people who support Clinton do it in the hopes that not much changes for another 8 years.
I feel like that's going to be a lot of people, the Clinton campaign has been built on piles of money, while the Sander's campaign has been the kind of excitement you saw with Obama. Maybe she can win November with money, and good for her if she does, but it's not going to be because of any great grass roots effort by democrats who feel like she brings change to the table.
The people who support Sanders see a desire for change. It seems like the people who support Clinton do it in the hopes that not much changes for another 8 years.
Hoho for breakfast
Member
Realistically I think a lot of Sanders supporters will stay home and not vote at all if the choices are Clinton or Trump.
People want real...actual change for the better, and I know I don't feel like either of them will bring that. A nut or a fraud, take your pick! That doesn't get people excited to vote.
Unfortunately it doesn't seem like Sanders is getting enough people excited either.
People want real...actual change for the better, and I know I don't feel like either of them will bring that. A nut or a fraud, take your pick! That doesn't get people excited to vote.
Unfortunately it doesn't seem like Sanders is getting enough people excited either.
Orbis Tabula
Member
I'm sure he was. A lot of people were saying he would stay in until at least Florida. And it would make sense for him to do so, strategically. But, of course, he didn't. Because he was running out of money. It's pretty much the only reason anyone drops out.
Mushroomer25
Member
There's a big difference between 'a lot' online, and 'a lot' in the real world. Especially with months to go, and so much on the line. Combined with Bernie himself inevitably campaigning for people to vote Clinton - and I think it's not a major concern.
Dr_LucienSanchez
Banned
I think that by now we should probably dispel with the notion that all/most Sanders supporters are just regurgitating 'right wing talking points.' That just dismisses valid criticisms that many progressives have with the Clintons and furthermore paints everything with a partisan brush.
But who knows, maybe Michelle Alexander was right wing all along when going over some of those criticisms recently.
Yeah, it does seem somewhat petty.
afternoon delight
Member
Don't vote, that always teaches them! Abstain! Don't compromise your integrity, don't dirty yourself by voting, just ignore it! Life's a bitch and then you die, yolo, #imgoodwitit
minor effort
Banned
Yeah. Although if he has the money, it's probably more encouraging to stay in the game when it's only a two-person race as opposed to a six-person race like it was when Jeb dropped out, even if it's a losing battle.
Or, they aren't involved in cheerleading a campaign that factually has little to no chance.
I mean I assume that would make more sense than a vast conspiracy
AstroZombie
Banned
She's too old as well. 69 should be retired. Feel like late 40s or early 50s is the right age.
eyeball_kid
Member
Not cheerleading is one thing. Writing a thinly-veiled hit piece is quite another. But of course, this is the new journalism.
Orbis Tabula
Member
Yeah. The question will be if he can maintain his fundraising momentum throughout March. The reason I think he'll be dropping out sometime that month isn't because he'll be convinced by delegate math, or see the writing on the wall, but moreso because I expect donations will start to decrease and enthusiasm will dampen when he's forced to trudge through a run of states that present loss after loss after loss for him. I mean, he could end up like Ron Paul and honestly keep contesting it all the way to the convention, provided he can ride the cash he has.
now be nice ebay.
BartScott.gif
Huh? I'm an independent myself, and there will be someone I vote for this fall. Abstaining from voting is always a decision that makes me scratch my head to be honest.
titiklabingapat
Member
If they wanted real change, they'll be voting in the mid-term elections too.
When did math become a hit piece? I swear to god, many of Bernie's supporters are dangerously close to echoing the same anti-science, anti-math and conspiracy theory loving sentiments that many on the right do.
ShironRedshift
Member
Hit piece? Even if we entertain that, the math is what it is and the polls remain what they are. If you disagree, then what path to victory does Sanders have at this point?
... so you're saying there's a chance.
Eh, he's been expecting to lose South Carolina for months. If he can't take Massachusetts or Colorado, it's curtains.
The thing you have to take into account is, this is not a simple ideological disagreement within a party about policy for many in the Sanders camp. That is where Hillary Clinton would be blindsided in a general, and what i think a lot of people who are not Sanders supporters tend to miss that when they take voting blocs into account.
Obama fanboys and Hillary fanboys, and Obama and Hillary themselves were far closer than anything on the table today, and they were in the same party regardless of how ugly their rhetoric got
For most Bernie Sanders supporters specifically, this election is not about 'free stuff' or 'sky high promises' or specific nuances between the candidates in policy at all. Most of his support comes from people who are serious about wanting a clean break from choosing corrupt candidates who are not genuine about their intentions for the country, we can see that also in another way with Trump, although they are completely on the opposite side.
In Hillary, they don't 'see' a candidate who is a moderate center right candidate that pushes for legislation that was GOP legislation just a few years back, and is hawkish on foreign policy as we've grown used to from the new Democrats.
If that was the only problem, i think this would turn out to be a repeat of Obama 2012, where he still won handily.
For many people supporting Sanders, choosing Hillary is tantamount to supporting a broken system with revolving door influences with many special interests and severe conflicts of interest in almost every area of government between the political establishment and the corporate establishment, rigged against the ordinary lower class citizen.
And because of that, there WILL be a large amount of people who either not vote on principle, vote for Trump out of spite, or become disillusioned with the political process again and just drop out of politic circles. Those new voters Bernie brought into the political process because of his honesty aren't staying around and voting for her, unfortunately they were the first time younger voters who were really enthused about him, consistently giving him over 70% of the younger vote, and aren't enthused about anything regarding Hillary.
Ziltoidia 9
Member
I don't think she is going to be charged at this point, tho it never really seemed like she would be, mostly because of the current administration. I highly doubt she gets charged during the GE, if she was going to get charged it would be in the very near future or would have happened months ago. But hell, I might be wrong, but it just doesn't seem at this point it is going to happen. Hear Emails was getting old really fast, and the coverage of it as slowed waaaay down, mostly because I think the right wants to hold off on blowing their load on it until the right political time.
I agree that the SC is the most important issue of the land right now, and if anything, ensuring that like RBG can retire during the next administration if she decides to. I think though that that angle hasn't really started, and will be a very huge issue this fall and be very apparent to the voters, and they will know the stakes, on both sides. It might be a gift for Hillary, so people will get out and vote.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked