I didn't want you to think I was being entirely serious so I removed the "conspiracy" bit.
I agree that caucuses are a flawed process, but I'm not sure if they should be removed entirely.
-
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.
April U.S. Primaries |OT| Vote in 20 Turns for World Leader
- Thread starter dramatis
- Start date
- Status
I didn't want you to think I was being entirely serious so I removed the "conspiracy" bit.
I agree that caucuses are a flawed process, but I'm not sure if they should be removed entirely.
Marion Cobretti
Member
You straight up didn't watch either of the videos that I posted did you? The shady stuff that went down was not due to anything the Bernie campaign did.
I bothered reading both of the articles you linked to.
eBay Huckster
Member
I'd put Connecticut in the PA tier and place RI in the 5-point tier at this point - the former's too similar to NYC to track significantly different, while RI is already hovering around 12 points and should tighten a bit more.
(I'm also thinking CA's gonna wind up around 6-8 points.)
Unknown Soldier
Member
Bernie's gap with Hillary has been steadily narrowing in New York and didn't he book Central Park for some insane super-rally next week?
Also the voters in New York are better informed than most, you can be damn sure they know about the Panama Papers and if Bernie starts talking about how he opposed a certain piece of legislation that Hillary supported regarding Panama he might be able to make inroads a lot faster than most people expect. Like I said, the Panama Papers are his one-in-a-lifetime chance. He better nail it.
I feel like Borg Queen being all buddy-buddy with the investment bankers is already problematic enough. People have been overlooking it in the primary but when the general rolls around, it's not a good look to be such good friends with the people who have offshore tax havens these days.
She's also the biggest recipient of pharmaceutical company contributions, more than any Republican candidate even.
His entire platform has been that he's a trustworthy and honorable guy. So I'm going to actually hold him to that standard. It's just that simple.
I don't think people are really over looking that. It's just an accepted fact that every politician is dirty in some way. It's just the sad state of politics in the U.S. Everyone is dirty when it comes to politics in the U.S.
Marion Cobretti
Member
Polls say Bernie is down by 10, but both campaigns acknowledge that it's closer than that.
Bernie has 2 whole weeks to campaign there. He's got the momentum.
Not to mention, as both campaigns acknowledge, the more time Bernie spends in a state, the faster he closes the gap and catches up.
A tie in NY is a real possibility.
eBay Huckster
Member
...Bernie's campaign manager literally just said they were shooting for 40%, that is not an indicator of a single-digit race in any universe.
Aside from literally the entire South. And Ohio. (Where for the most part, he spent more, had more people on the ground, and had more offices, and still lost by more than expected in practically every case.)
balladofwindfishes
Member
NY is MA with stronger unions AND her home turf. It's going to be a slaughter as the Albany / NYC political machine gets their votes out.
Marion Cobretti
Member
Bernie didn't spend too much time in the south frankly.
And I hate to be that guy, but the south isn't something dems are gonna win anyways.
And I hate to be that guy, but the south isn't something dems are gonna win anyways.
1) No they don't, not even Bernies own campaign say they're close
2) Momentum means shit for either Bernie or Hillary, they have the states they're predicted to win and they win them (more or less). What Bernie is doing in the mid west is not going to affect voters in the NE, just like Hillary's string of wins in the south when she had 'momentum' didn't affect Bernies 'rise'.
3) That doesn't change results so drastically that he wins states he was never suppose to win, by meaningful margins.
This is irrelevant.
Didn't he not campaign in The South very much?
Outdoor Miner
Member
And he's paid for it dearly.
Marion Cobretti
Member
I thought we were talking about the spread.
Hasphat'sAnts
Member
He campaigned pretty hard in SC, then noped the fuck outta there.
eBay Huckster
Member
His personal appearances, while they may tend to help his margins, are immaterial to the specific things I mentioned.
e: And yeah, if momentum was relevant for shit, Clinton would've shut the door entirely on the 22nd after unexpectedly sweeping the 15th.
The latter of which wouldn't have happened if Michigan's "momentum" counted for shit. Which wouldn't have happened if 3/1's momentum counted for shit.
Good luck.
I don't need it. Bernie could win every one of those states by 1 point and he'd still lose.
I believe Bernie is in need of all the luck.
maabus1999
Member
I did, and the third link I posted explains all of it in an un-biased way. Sanders campaign definitely pushed their people out but that lady you are trying to defend in that youtube link probably is done for a political/government career.
Congrats!
maabus1999
Member
Box of Kittens
Banned
This right here is why I think so little of the "political revolution." It's all about Bernie. State Supreme Court races are incredibly important, and this one was about as clear cut as possible. If people can't even be bothered to vote downballot, then it's no revolution at all.
maabus1999
Member
He actually dumped a massive amount of money into it at the start, then gave up. Way more than Clinton put into it. I think Rachael Maddow did a short section on it.
Marion Cobretti
Member
Who does better amongst independents? Who determines swing state wins in the general? Who polls better against Republicans?
With nearly 100% in Sanders is looking to win by 10% in WI, which is more than the poling aggregate but not entirely surprising as some polls had him up that much. He seems to consistently outperform his polls, especially in open primaries which is good for him, but it's looking like it's still not good enough. If he gains 5 points and then outperforms in NY he could theoretically tie it up there, which I see as highly unlikely.
Still, even if he does that is bad for him, because that actually puts him behind where he should be, especially with some states with evem larger AA population voting soon (DC and Maryland notably). Exit polls show what they have been for this democratic: Sanders does better with AA voters in the north, but still lags significantly behind Clinton.
So all in all, a good night for Sanders, but after Saturday this may be the last one for him for a while. Nor was it an excellent night for Sanders. I've never been a big fan of momentum. It's been shown to correlate very poorly with success in future states, and even without polls, extrapolation from demographics and the type of election do much better in predicting the outcome, especially once these trends are realized. So while Sanders has "momentum", I'm fairly certain that demographics will predict the winner much closer.
Still, even if he does that is bad for him, because that actually puts him behind where he should be, especially with some states with evem larger AA population voting soon (DC and Maryland notably). Exit polls show what they have been for this democratic: Sanders does better with AA voters in the north, but still lags significantly behind Clinton.
So all in all, a good night for Sanders, but after Saturday this may be the last one for him for a while. Nor was it an excellent night for Sanders. I've never been a big fan of momentum. It's been shown to correlate very poorly with success in future states, and even without polls, extrapolation from demographics and the type of election do much better in predicting the outcome, especially once these trends are realized. So while Sanders has "momentum", I'm fairly certain that demographics will predict the winner much closer.
RCP suggests a blowout in California, but a single-digit win in New York. He's from there, after all.
You're making an awful lot of assumptions about what motivates people to donate to Bernie. Is this bullshit standard used for any other candidate? 3rd party candidates? Perhaps people simply like to support what they believe in. By the way, what is considered "a real shot" at winning? At what point should he have stopped taking donations to clear your imaginary ethical bar? If rational people are aware of his chances and yet they continue to give him more money than Hillary, what's the problem? It seems like pure salt on your part at that point.
Let people have their enthusiasm. It's only an issue because the favored candidate with incredible name recognition is being beaten by a relative nobody in terms of raising funds. This narrative of Bernie "stealing" donations from people that willingly support him, no matter the odds, is pathetic.
He lost Florida, Virginia and Ohio. Arguably the three biggest swing states. Two by huge margins and one by margins bigger than most expected.
AnotherNils
Member
Box of Kittens
Banned
According to exit polls, Romney won independents 50-45 in 2012. He won independents in Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, and Pennsylvania, among other states.
That's before we get into the issue of whether winning independents in a primary is predictive of winning independents in the general.
Means little when you stack that against the advantages Hillary has.
+ AA population
+ Closed Primary
+ Senator
+ Home State (Considered, anyway)
Hasphat'sAnts
Member
Guys, guys, guys.
I just had an epiphany. why should we even let red states vote in a democratic primary? IT MAKES NO SENSE!!!!
I just had an epiphany. why should we even let red states vote in a democratic primary? IT MAKES NO SENSE!!!!
And_Gignac
Member
RCP also suggested he was winning Wisconsin by only 2.6%.
These races are going to get considerably narrower the closer we get to them, I believe.
The South is where the Democrats are needed the most. It shouldnt be neglected just because of problematic white conservatives. Bernie fucked it up majorly by not pushing himself more there. Even if he lost by SC margins in the southern states he neglected (where he lost by 40-60 margins), he would have done better than he did.
maabus1999
Member
Or that is the nature of rolling polls over a period of time.
I mean you can argue the opposite with the 5 state sweep Clinton had in March.
But with closed primaries coming up in delegate rich states, those polls will much more correct, if not underestimating Clinton IF they include independents, which some have already to their detriment.
Nope the switch to democrat was a few weeks ago in NY. You had to register to vote all together last year though. Really shitty system I registered too late (never re-registered after moving from jersey a few years back), but had a bunch of friends switch to democrat recently who are all big bernie supporters, there was a pretty decent push I saw for that.
Just to make this drama interesting, I would like to see Bernie Sanders pull ahead on voted delegates but not pull ahead in the voted delegates + super delegates to see the drama that unfolds when Sanders has won the popular vote but is denied due to super delegates and see how corrupt DNC is. Maybe it starts the protests your country needs.
Well, I mean, in the end, I hope Bernie wins in the end for you guys to better your country. But from a third party observer watching this for entertainment, I think that would make things a lot more interesting to watch.
Well, I mean, in the end, I hope Bernie wins in the end for you guys to better your country. But from a third party observer watching this for entertainment, I think that would make things a lot more interesting to watch.
Square2015
Member
RCP average +2.6 for Bernie in WI, we're now looking at +13 point win. Wow
#Pollingfail
#Pollingfail
legacyzero
Banned
Battersea Power Station
Member
Amazing result tonight. It's crazy to think that practically no one in this country even knew who Sanders was this time last year, and now he's still winning states against a political juggernaut, as well as polling extremely well against big names like Trump and Cruz.
Win or lose, this campaign is something Democrats can learn a lot from, and hopefully use in the future.
Win or lose, this campaign is something Democrats can learn a lot from, and hopefully use in the future.
I don't understand this either. Why would the DNC care about states that they don't have a chance to win in to determine which candidate they pick. Shouldn't they just care about the votes in the swing states and the blue states?
maabus1999
Member
I don't believe this is right. Oct 9, 2015 was the "affiliation" deadline in NY. Mar 25 was the "new registration" deadline. Even Vote for Bernie's website has this information correct. http://voteforbernie.org/
Your friends must have been new voters, or they are mistaken and will not be able to vote on the 19th.
For more info: http://gothamist.com/2015/10/06/democracy_bureacracy.php
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
why bother with votes anyway, they dont 100% vote the way the party wants anyway.
Those states elected Obama.
Jesus Christ.
Well, at least you're kind enough to let people know that your analysis is worthless. Thanks.
- Status