Support NeoGAF

[Volimar]

As tomorrow looms, I'm finding myself less and less likely to vote for Sanders. The latest blow to my opinion on him is how he is trying to use Rahm Emanuel's endorsement of Hillary to drag her down. I've never been a fan of guilt by association as a political tactic.


Oh sweet hell not the top of the page.

 

[boiled goose]

Even if Sanders wins all 5 states tomorrow with 5 to 10 point leads, he will still lose. He needs landslides to fight Clinton's landslides in the south.

He doesn't need landslides. But solid wins. If he keeps winning, he will continue to chip away. Look at the map, it's increasing Sanders territory.

You are right though that it's unlikely he will catch up in the end.

The Sanders campaign must really be kicking themselves. If they win the rust belt but lose the nomination because of the mega losses in the South it means they bungled it.

As tomorrow looms, I'm finding myself less and less likely to vote for Sanders. The latest blow to my opinion on him is how he is trying to use Rahm Emanuel's endorsement of Hillary to drag her down. I've never been a fan of guilt by association as a political tactic.


Oh sweet hell not the top of the page.

Vote your conscience.

I will offer you a different perspective though.

In this case "guilt by association" is relevant. Sanders is trying to point out that Hillary is always willing to sacrifice her principles to play politics, while he will hold true to progressive values and call for resignations even if politically unpopular.

He is trying to draw a contrast between principles and political calculation.

Being behind, he cant really afford to not "attack".

Hillary has also done the same back. Nra, Castro, etc.

The important thing is to vote.

 

[Freyjadour]

It's called Mega Tuesday or Super Tuesday 2. The most delegates are up for grabs in one day second only to Super Tuesday. It's really not that crazy of a concept

MY STATE IS SUPER, TOO!

A long contested (but civil) primary is good for the party in general in terms of turnout, awareness, etc.

 

[Goro Majima]

You want the House to pick the president?

Oh Christ, of course there'd be a law in place to ensure the two party system even more.

This country is in desperate need of a discussion on political spectrum and proportionate representation.

 

[Manmademan]

Sorry. I must have misread your post. I thought that you were saying that the polls STILL under-weighted independents. Rather than they did in the past like with Michigan.


I am still not 100% convinced that Michigan is indicative of anything though.



I still think it is possible that the polls being wrong was a one off event.

We should know this week.

This makes a lot of sense. But wouldn't this also mean that Florida polls are similarly off?

 

[TyrantII]

I can see it now: Democrats cheer as Trump announces a 3rd party bid in response to the Republican party giving Kasich the nod despite Trump's overwhelming delegate lead. The Democrats think they have it in the bag with Hilldawg as the nominee, only to find out that Sanders too is going to run as a 3rd party.

The roller-coaster of emotions would be really quite interesting.

That would say something terrible about Sanders IMO, especially with so much on the line. Democrats and leftists are supposed to be different after all, and there's too much on the line to split a big tent party that is already shifting left.

It really comes down to if he cares more about his policy positions, or being president. Because really, the Democratic primary is more a referendum on tactics than policy at this point; pitting incremtalism and pragmatics against revolutionaries and people who want to see quick change.

 

[Korigama]

I can see it now: Democrats cheer as Trump announces a 3rd party bid in response to the Republican party giving Kasich the nod despite Trump's overwhelming delegate lead. The Democrats think they have it in the bag with Hilldawg as the nominee, only to find out that Sanders too is going to run as a 3rd party.

The roller-coaster of emotions would be really quite interesting.

Didn't Sanders already say that he wouldn't run as a third-party candidate?

 

[Bluekaveli]

Florida: 246 delegates
Illinois: 182 delegates
Missouri: 71 delegates
North Carolina: 122 delegates
Ohio: 159 delegates

 

[Violence Jack]

I'm not really following political news, but why is Hillary so popular in the southern states? Just curious.

 

[Pop-O-Matic]

I can see it now: Democrats cheer as Trump announces a 3rd party bid in response to the Republican party giving Kasich the nod despite Trump's overwhelming delegate lead. The Democrats think they have it in the bag with Hilldawg as the nominee, only to find out that Sanders too is going to run as a 3rd party.

The roller-coaster of emotions would be really quite interesting.

Throw in Cruz, Bloomberg & Kanye and it could be the greatest election this nation has ever seen.

 

[excelsiorlef]

He doesn't need landslides. But solid wins. If he keeps winning, he will continue to chip away. Look at the map, it's increasing Sanders territory.

You are right though that it's unlikely he will catch up in the end.

The Sanders campaign must really be kicking themselves. If they win the rust belt but lose the nomination because of the mega losses in the South it means they bungled it.



Vote your conscience.

I will offer you a different perspective though.

In this case "guilt by association" is relevant. Sanders is trying to point out that Hillary is always willing to sacrifice her principles to play politics, while he will hold true to progressive values and call for resignations even if politically unpopular.

He is trying to draw a contrast between principles and political calculation.

Being behind, he cant really afford to not "attack".

Hillary has also done the same back. Nra, Castro, etc.

The important thing is to vote.

He hasn't even started to chip away. How can he continue?

 

[Clefargle]

Yeah only way I see Sanders winning is in a weird nuclear bomb scenario.

If the Republicans basically steal the nomination away from Trump and then Trump runs as a third party, Sanders could also run as a third party and split the vote four ways. In that scenario I could see him winning maybe since he has a strong pull with independents.

I keep hearing this fever dream, but it won't happen. Why? Not only because Sanders isn't the type to burn the house down after the Dems accepted him as one of their own and gave him a fair shot. But also because it could result in no single candidate breaching the number of electoral votes required to win. Then the Hiuse decides and you get Cruz. I doubt sanders is self absorbed enough to take things to the brink with that eventuality looming

 

[boiled goose]

Oh Christ, of course there'd be a law in place to ensure the two party system even more.

This country is in desperate need of a discussion on political spectrum and proportionate representation.

I dont think we need more parties. The problem is that both Republicans and Democrats are not really representing their constituents but rather corporate and donor interests.

Studies on legislation pretty much prove this.

 

[KingK]

As tomorrow looms, I'm finding myself less and less likely to vote for Sanders. The latest blow to my opinion on him is how he is trying to use Rahm Emanuel's endorsement of Hillary to drag her down. I've never been a fan of guilt by association as a political tactic.


Oh sweet hell not the top of the page.

I don't think it's totally unfair. It's not like Rahm is some random dude endorsing her. He's been a very close and influential ally of the Clintons for years. He's a piece of human scum and as far as I know she hasn't disavowed his support or anything.

 

[Drek]

A long contested (but civil) primary is good for the party in general in terms of turnout, awareness, etc.

It's good up to a point. Traditionally that point isn't too far past Super Tuesday. It isn't helping the Democratic party to have Sanders demonizing NAFTA and the democratic administration that passed it while the current Democratic administration is pro-TPP, there is no sound evidence to support the claim that it causes net job loss in the U.S., and the majority of polled democrats are in favor of it.

All it really does is sow dissension among the traditional democratic base of organized labor, a group who's constituents are already fringe democrats, needing some level of cajoling to get good turnout from, and who exhibit real potential to be pushed towards Trump (as the other anti-trade deal candidate) v. Hillary due to Sanders' attack tactics.

 

[pigeon]

Oh Christ, of course there'd be a law in place to ensure the two party system even more.

This country is in desperate need of a discussion on political spectrum and proportionate representation.

America really suffers from being the first real democracy. We're basically still running the beta version and the upgrade process is too expensive in terms of human lives.

 

[kmag]

He doesn't need landslides. But solid wins. If he keeps winning, he will continue to chip away. Look at the map, it's increasing Sanders territory.

You are right though that it's unlikely he will catch up in the end.

The Sanders campaign must really be kicking themselves. If they win the rust belt but lose the nomination because of the mega losses in the South it means they bungled it.



Vote your conscience.

I will offer you a different perspective though.

In this case "guilt by association" is relevant. Sanders is trying to point out that Hillary is always willing to sacrifice her principles to play politics, while he will hold true to progressive values and call for resignations even if politically unpopular.

He is trying to draw a contrast between principles and political calculation.

Being behind, he cant really afford to not "attack".

Hillary has also done the same back. Nra, Castro, etc.

The important thing is to vote.

Until it comes to the gun lobby, then it's roll over Mr Sanders for tummy tickles.

 

[HylianTom]

I keep hearing this fever dream, but it won't happen. Why? Not only because Sanders isn't the type to burn the house down after the Dems accepted him as one of their own and gave him a fair shot. But also because it could result in no single candidate breaching the number of electoral votes required to win. Then the Hiuse decides and you get Cruz. I doubt sanders is self absorbed enough to take things to the brink with that eventuality looming

Rage
Rage
Against the dying of the light!

But seriously.. Bernie is too mathematically/politically literate to do such a thing. He knows how our system works, and he knows how the long game is played. If Bernie 1.0 doesn't do it here in 2016, Bernie 2.0 will come along in 2024 when more millennials dominate the Democratic Party's process. The important job this time around, with Congressional gridlock continuing, is to stack the courts so that Bernie 2.0's achievements aren't strangled via judicial review. And for that job, Hillary, flawed as she may be, will do fine.

 

[Arkeband]

Until it comes to the gun lobby, then it's roll over Mr Sanders for tummy tickles.

Tummy tickles, you know, like:

I will take the following concrete steps to reduce gun violence: strengthen and better enforce the instant background check system; close the gun-show loophole; make 'straw man' purchases a federal crime; ban semi-automatic assault weapons which are designed strictly for killing human beings; and work to fix our broken mental health system.

 

[SlimySnake]

As tomorrow looms, I'm finding myself less and less likely to vote for Sanders. The latest blow to my opinion on him is how he is trying to use Rahm Emanuel's endorsement of Hillary to drag her down. I've never been a fan of guilt by association as a political tactic.


Oh sweet hell not the top of the page.

I am a Hilary supporter, but Bernie's line of attack on Rahm's endorsement is completely valid. Rahm is one of the most detestable human beings in the Democrat party and Hilary ought to have distanced herself from his endorsement a long time ago.

In fact, she should've been criticizing him for months instead of accepting his endorsement.

Same goes for Obama.

 

[RustyNails]

He doesn't need landslides. But solid wins. If he keeps winning, he will continue to chip away. Look at the map, it's increasing Sanders territory.

You are right though that it's unlikely he will catch up in the end.

The Sanders campaign must really be kicking themselves. If they win the rust belt but lose the nomination because of the mega losses in the South it means they bungled it.

Those are Nate Silver's and John King's words. The ginormous lead Clinton baked in the south is insurmountable. Sanders need to run the table. If Sanders wins all the western caucus states between 15th and mid April, Hillary can win Maryland and negate all his wins.

 

[Clefargle]

Tummy tickles, you know, like:

But then he will get called a "flip flopping liar" by his supporters right? Or do they not care about "evolving positions" when it isn't Clinton?

 

[Dash_Riprock]

But then he will get called a "flip flopping liar" by his supporters right? Or do they not care about "evolving positions" when it isn't Clinton?

You just answered your own question.

 

[Drek]

He doesn't need landslides. But solid wins. If he keeps winning, he will continue to chip away. Look at the map, it's increasing Sanders territory.

He needs to win more than a few states by a few points to chip away. Since the NH primary when has he had a primary date go by that he didn't lose on the delegate count (ignoring super delegates). He needs landslides because he's lost by landslides while winning by a hair's width. But tomorrow projects to be more of the same. Sanders winning medium to small states by single digits, Clinton winning big states by double digits and stretching her lead out even more.

In this case "guilt by association" is relevant. Sanders is trying to point out that Hillary is always willing to sacrifice her principles to play politics, while he will hold true to progressive values and call for resignations even if politically unpopular.

He is trying to draw a contrast between principles and political calculation.

Being behind, he cant really afford to not "attack".

Hillary has also done the same back. Nra, Castro, etc.

The important thing is to vote.

Holy shit this is some disgusting twisting of rationale to fit a personal narrative.

Emanuel is an abject failure as mayor of Chicago but he was duly elected. Sanders has been carrying NRA water for years and they're a group directly engaged in the very kind of political favor buying Sanders claims to stand against. As for Castro, that isn't guilt by association, that was Sanders himself praising Fidel Castro.

So until Clinton comes out and says that "people need to stop complaining about Rham, he's done a good job" you're making false equivalencies here to suit your own views.

Tummy tickles, you know, like:

So do all the things that the gun lobby has already either A. OK'd or B. subverted, including throwing out their favorite "mental health" misdirection line.

 

[kmag]

Tummy tickles, you know, like:

He voted for gun industry immunity for gun misuse, everything else is ephemera. The gun industry remains the only industry in the US with that sort of immunity

He also voted against the Brady Bill you know the bill which mandated background checks not sure how that squares with his new found love of background checks.

 

[CharminUltra]

Reddit will be totes fun tomorrow.

 

[boiled goose]

Those are Nate Silver's and John King's words. The ginormous lead Clinton baked in the south is insurmountable. Sanders need to run the table. If Sanders wins all the western caucus states between 15th and mid April, Hillary can win Maryland and negate all his wins.

Sanders lost the South by 50 to 40 points. He doesn't need wins that big. If he consistently wins by 10 to 20 points he would catch up.

Of course that is still unlikely

 

[Volimar]

He also voted against the Brady Bill you know the bill which mandated background checks not sure how that squares with his new found love of background checks.

Has he given a rationalization for that?

 

[StickSoldier]

At what point did Obama start to take over during their primary in 2008?

 

[noshten]

Has he given a rationalization for that?

He doesn't believe that gun manufacturers should be sued in the case of someone using their product to kill/injure others.

 

[Drek]

Sanders lost the South by 50 to 40 points. He doesn't need wins that big. If he consistently wins by 10 to 20 points he would catch up.

Of course that is still unlikely

Any double digit win is a political landslide victory. Just because he doesn't need "lol, why you even show up?" level wins from here on out doesn't mean he doesn't need a political miracle and/or an indictment of Clinton based on some crazy tinfoil hat wearing theory to get there all the same.

 

[boiled goose]

Any double digit win is a political landslide victory. Just because he doesn't need "lol, why you even show up?" level wins from here on out doesn't mean he doesn't need a political miracle and/or an indictment of Clinton based on some crazy tinfoil hat wearing theory to get there all the same.

Im not disagreeing with you that it's very unlikely. Was simply saying that the leads dont need to be as big.

Indictment is possible. No tinhat required.

Has he given a rationalization for that?

Bernie often takes principled stances Against bills with parts he doesn't like.

Same happened with autobailout. It was tied to stuff he didn't like.

 

[Drek]

Im not disagreeing with you that it's very unlikely. Was simply saying that the leads dont need to be as big.

Indictment is possible. No tinhat required.

They going to indict Powell and Rice along with her?

 

[Dash_Riprock]

Indictment is possible. No tinhat required.

And jet fuel can't melt steel beams amirite?

 

[The Lamonster]

At what point did Obama start to take over during their primary in 2008?

He won Iowa. Probably not the answer you're looking for but at the time it was a big fucking deal.

 

[Arkeband]

He voted for gun industry immunity for gun misuse, everything else is ephemera. The gun industry remains the only industry in the US with that sort of immunity

He also voted against the Brady Bill you know the bill which mandated background checks not sure how that squares with his new found love of background checks.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...n-gun-industry-wholly-protected-all-lawsuits/

In any case, Clinton goes too far in saying the gun industry is "wholly protected from any kind of liability."

The law lists several situations that are not protected from liability. It does not protect gun dealers who transfer a gun knowing it would be used for criminal purposes, nor those who knowingly break state or federal law if the violation results in harm. Gun manufacturers can also be sued if the gun, when used properly, causes injury because the product is defective.
[...]
Not the only one

The act "is not the first federal law to grant a particular industry immunity from tort liability," said Timothy Lytton, a law professor at Georgia State University, who edited a book on gun industry litigation.

Possibly the most analogous rule -- in that it protects a specific group of potential defendants from a specific liability theory -- is one that offers some immunity to online service providers, said John Goldberg, a law professor at Harvard University and an expert in tort law, in an email to PolitiFact. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act blocks victims of online defamation from suing service providers (like Comcast) and content providers (like YouTube) for failing to monitor or remove defamatory posts uploaded by customers.

Just FYI in case you drag that line out in the future verbatim.

If you have extreme views on gun control, then yes, holding gun sellers accountable for all sales in the future (something completely absurd) sounds great because fuck it, guns are bad anyway. But it doesn't make sense. This is not the way you combat gun proliferation.

 

[boiled goose]

They going to indict Powell and Rice along with her?

I dont think it would be because of Emails! But rather mis use of state dept resources in exchange for political favors for the Clinton Foundation.

Is it likely? I dont know.

Is it possible? I think it's possible.

 

[Drek]

I dont think it would be because of Emails! But rather mis use of state dept resources in exchange for political favors for the Clinton Foundation.

Is it likely? I dont know.

Is it possible? I think it's possible.

So do you buy your tinfoil hats pre-made or do you prefer to make them yourself so you can ensure they're of optimal integrity and layer thickness?

Do you really think a 501(3)(c) that is nearly a decade old holds some secret felony conviction? Is anyone with any real merit even investigating that?

I don't know what is more depressing. The fact that you really think a 501 founded and ran by the nation's 42nd POTUS would be so poorly managed as to actually have resulted in a felony conviction for HIS SPOUSE, or the sad truth that you're probably not even in the top half of the U.S. population when it comes to delusional crackpot theories they cling to in order to rectify what they want to believe with reality.

 

[Effect]

Dems should close their primairies for registered Democrats only

I can see some of that happening as well as addressing the caucus issues going forward. Having input from independent voters is fine in theory but it should be those of a political party voting on who will represent them. Not those not identified with the party or from another party.

 

[Clefargle]

I dont think it would be because of Emails! But rather mis use of state dept resources in exchange for political favors for the Clinton Foundation.

Is it likely? I dont know.

Is it possible? I think it's possible.

Where is the evidence for this claim? I ask because I haven't read many of the emails people have talked about. Before you answer, I'm asking for evidence of quid pro quo on that server, not just CF correspondence on her SoS email.

 

[RustyNails]

Is it likely? I dont know.

Is it possible? I think it's possible.

 

[boiled goose]

So do you buy your tinfoil hats pre-made or do you prefer to make them yourself so you can ensure they're of optimal integrity and layer thickness?

Do you really think a 501(3)(c) that is nearly a decade old holds some secret felony conviction? Is anyone with any real merit even investigating that?

I don't know what is more depressing. The fact that you really think a 501 founded and ran by the nation's 42nd POTUS would be so poorly managed as to actually have resulted in a felony conviction for HIS SPOUSE, or the sad truth that you're probably not even in the top half of the U.S. population when it comes to delusional crackpot theories they cling to in order to rectify what they want to believe with reality.

First... an indictment is not a conviction.
Second i didn't say this was likely.
You are attacking a strawman.

It would not be about mismanagement. It would be about conflict of interest. At this point there is indication that there were issues. Criminal issues? I dont personally think so. Impossible, no i think it's possible.

Where is the evidence for this claim? I ask because I haven't read many of the emails people have talked about. Before you answer, I'm asking for evidence of quid pro quo on that server, not just CF correspondence on her SoS email.

Isn't this what the fbi probe MAY be looking for?

I dont believe Clinton did anything criminal because just like you we have no evidence of it yet...

Im being attacked for views i dont have. My only objection was saying that an indictment was tinfoil hat level. Seems conversation has been derailed, so we can let it go.

 

[googleplex]

Yup. Waiting for the other shoe to drop when it dawns on him there really is no getting out of the math.

He already knows he has no chance at victory but he'll stay in it to prove a point and the convince the party as a whole not to be afraid of moving to the left.

 

[Square2015]

Even if Sanders wins all 5 states tomorrow with 5 to 10 point leads, he will still lose. He needs landslides to fight Clinton's landslides in the south.

What if the super delegates switch sides? hypothetically that could overcome nearly any final Hillary lead right?

 

[GregLombardi]

What if the super delegates switch sides? hypothetically that could overcome nearly any final Hillary lead right?

They wouldn't switch sides unless Bernie has a higher delegate count.

 

[Roberto Larcos]

America really suffers from being the first real democracy.

Wait, what?

 

[PumpkinSpice]

Might have already been mentioned, but are Bernie supporters like totally losing grip on reality?

Even if he squeaks out narrow wins in mid-western states, since the Democratic Party allocates delegates proportionally, he'd barely make any difference against Hillary from those wins. And if Hillary actually wins Florida by that much, she'd get a huge delegate advantage.

It's not happening. Bernie's not going to happen.

 

[Horns]

At what point did Obama start to take over during their primary in 2008?

Obama took the lead in the middle of February 2008 going by the polls.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...s/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html

Compared to 2016, Hillary has remained at higher levels than she had in 2008 and has remained relatively steady despite immense negative stories.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep..._democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html

 

[boiled goose]

Might have already been mentioned, but are Bernie supporters like totally losing grip on reality?

Even if he squeaks out narrow wins in mid-western states, since the Democratic Party allocates delegates proportionally, he'd barely make any difference against Hillary from those wins. And if Hillary actually wins Florida by that much, she'd get a huge delegate advantage.

It's not happening. Bernie's not going to happen.

Im sure if you actually ask bernie supporters they will recognize that getting the nomination is very unlikely at this point.

 

[pigeon]

Wait, what?

Fine, fine. America really suffers from being the first country to adopt as a model the ancient democratic traditions that were developed and refined through the ages by the Iroquois Confederacy.

You know what I mean!