Support NeoGAF

[JesseEwiak]

You're assuming a large portion of the GOP electorate will realize that their racism and sexism is preventing them from winning elections and will just stop being racist and sexist in order the get fiscally conservative people in office. The truth is that a lot if these people side with the GOP because of their regressive social views.

The actual problem for the GOP is simple - the Democrat's could adjust and become more fiscally moderate and socially liberal in the 90's because those Rockefeller Republican's were getting scared off by the former Dixiecrats entering the party.

But, the issue is, the amount of WWC voters they could to vote for the GOP even if they went full populist would be outbalanced by every Country Club Republican jumping ship to the DNC, along with shutting them off to non-white voters.

OTOH though, they can't do anything to appeal to Millenials (such as drop the anti-gay marriage planks) or non-white people (criminal justice reform, immigration reform) without pissing off their current base.

 

[Battersea Power Station]

haven't read the thread? it's completely accurate.

LOL! nice edit chump. but I still saw it.

You're basically saying the Democratic process is a waste of time because after a certain level of probability, we should count it as a certainty. Also, you're being purposefully antagonizing because you enjoy sticking it to strangers online who disagree with you.

 

[Miles X]

You're basically saying the Democratic process is a waste of time because after a certain level of probability, we should count it as a certainty. Also, you're being purposefully antagonizing because you enjoy sticking it to strangers online who disagree with you.

I mean by all means let everyone have their vote, but Bernie carrying on this charade as if he has a chance is just giving false hope at this point.

 

[Manmademan]

You're basically saying the Democratic process is a waste of time because after a certain level of probability, we should count it as a certainty. Also, you're being purposefully antagonizing because you enjoy sticking it to strangers online who disagree with you.

Like I said, read the thread. The way the democratic party has structured its primary, it is completely, utterly, totally implausible for Sanders to win the nomination, barring something catastrophic like Clinton going to prison and handing it to him by default.

This isn't just me saying this, I can quote a dozen people saying the same damn thing for the exact same reason in this thread.

This is not a horse race. The nomination is decided. All we're doing is running out the clock. At this point there have been enough debates that there's not much left to say to move the narrative either. The same is also true for the republican side. If you've been paying attention you're as informed as you're going to be. Do the remaining states deserve a chance to cast a vote? sure. But realize that these votes are meaningless to the outcome. The early lead is simply insurmountable.

Spend more time reading and less time being asshurt on the internet.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

You're basically saying the Democratic process is a waste of time because after a certain level of probability, we should count it as a certainty. Also, you're being purposefully antagonizing because you enjoy sticking it to strangers online who disagree with you.

Clinton was rightly criticized for not dropping out in 2008 after Obama had a lead that was about half the size of hers today.

 

[Krowley]

We'll see Bernie lose NY, NJ, ML and Penn, yes lol.

He has the midwest left, maybe west coast (but not Cali, and least not any huge margin).

It's pointless talking about him getting 20+ wins in NY ect and saying "we'll see" why not just say he's gonna with 30 points in Florida tomorrow while you're at it?



I didn't even see that bit, I realise now he's just joking around.

Actually no, lol I just didn't have the schedule right in my head.

I was thinking there were a more caucus states between the 15th and NY. He should get blowouts in pretty much all the remaining caucuses. But he'll still have a good head of steam going into NY.

Between tomorrow and NY he'll have:

Arizona

Idaho

Utah

Alaska

Hawaii

Washington

Wisconsin

Wyoming

---------------------

He should win most or all of those unless his campaign collapses.

So not 12, but a very good number.

And he doesn't have to win NY by 20. Just 10. Assuming he gets big wins in all the other important places, and gets the kinds of blowouts he needs in the caucus states.

 

[Miles X]

Actually no, lol I just didn't have the schedule right in my head.

I was thinking there were a bunch of caucus states between the 15th and NY. He should get blowouts in pretty much all the remaining caucuses.

Between tomorrow and NY he'll have

Arizona

Idaho

Utah

Alaska

Hawaii

Washington

Wisconson

Wyoming

---------------------

He should win most or all of those unless his campaign collapses.

So not 12, but a very good number.

And he doesn't have to win NY by 20. Just 10.

Arizona is a closed primary that borders Cali (and Nevada which she won), it's a bloody long stretch to call that for Bernie. Alaska and Hawaii? Just because they're caucuses doesn't mean he auto wins them. Hillary won Iowa (by a whisker) and Nevada.

There is no winning streak happening, and there is no winning NY by any %.

 

[Manmademan]

Clinton was rightly criticized for not dropping out in 2008 after Obama had a lead that was about half the size of hers today.

Agree here, though in that case she was kinda/sorta trying to make the argument to have michigan and florida (which she won, but were excluded) included.

it was POSSIBLE that if she did well enough in the home stretch and the DNC reversed its decision and awarded those two states their delegates, she COULD have won it. That would have been disastrous for the party however and I don't think anyone really wanted that outcome.

Obama was simply too OP though. I think even with those states included he still had the electoral vote lead.

 

[shortsFortallPeople]

Actually no, lol I just didn't have the schedule right in my head.

I was thinking there were a more caucus states between the 15th and NY. He should get blowouts in pretty much all the remaining caucuses. But he'll still have a good head of steam going into NY.

Between tomorrow and NY he'll have:

Arizona

Idaho

Utah

Alaska

Hawaii

Washington

Wisconsin

Wyoming

---------------------

He should win most or all of those unless his campaign collapses.

So not 12, but a very good number.

And he doesn't have to win NY by 20. Just 10.

It would be the biggest upset in primary history. It's incredibly unlikely that he comes out of this the nominee.

Plus he has zero shot at Arizona.

 

[Battersea Power Station]

I mean by all means let everyone have their vote, but Bernie carrying on this charade as if he has a chance is just giving false hope at this point.

Like I said, read the thread. The way the democratic party has structured its primary, it is completely, utterly, totally implausible for Sanders to win the nomination, barring something catastrophic like Clinton going to prison and handing it to him by default.

This isn't just me saying this, I can quote a dozen people saying the same damn thing for the exact same reason in this thread.

This is not a horse race. The nomination is decided. All we're doing is running out the clock. At this point there have been enough debates that there's not much left to say. Do the remaining states deserve a chance to cast a vote? sure. But realize that these votes are meaningless to the outcome. The early lead is simply insurmountable.

Spend more time reading and less time being asshurt on the internet.

Sorry. I don't usually curse. But who the fuck cares how implausible it is?

Running a campaign is never a waste of time if the candidate believes in his convictions. Who knows, maybe Ralph Nader warmed up people enough for Sanders to have the support he has today. Maybe in 2032 someone like him can actually win. This doesn't happen all at once. Cultural changes take time and change in national discourse takes many pushes.

This brand of disgusting cynicism is infuriatingly misguided, counter-productive, and self-defeating.

And by the way, politicians affect people's lives and livelihood. If someone gets excited about that, shame on you for trying to make yourself seem superior and dismissing them by calling them "asshurt." You're just being gross.

 

[danm999]

Between tomorrow and NY he'll have:

Arizona

Idaho

Utah

Alaska

Hawaii

Washington

Wisconsin

Wyoming

---------------------

He should win most or all of those unless his campaign collapses.

Do we have polling to support him winning all these?

 

[Miles X]

Sorry. I don't usually curse. But who the fuck cares how implausible it is?

Running a campaign is never a waste of time if the candidate believes in his convictions. Who knows, maybe Ralph Nader warmed up people enough for Sanders to have the support he has today. Maybe in 2032 someone like him can actually win. This doesn't happen all at once. Cultural changes take time and change in national discourse takes many pushes.

This brand of disgusting cynicism is infuriatingly misguided, counter-productive, and self-defeating.

And by the way, politicians affect people's lives and livelihood. If someone gets excited about that, shame on you for trying to make yourself seem superior and dismissing them by calling them "asshurt." You're just being gross.

I mean, you completely ignore the fact that he could be doing damage. If he conceeded she could start focusing on the GE, the less bad press (which Bernie is contributing) the better and lets not even start with Bernie souring young voters on her.

Do we have polling to support him winning all these?

Any of these*

 

[NeoXChaos]

Do we have polling to support him winning all these?

your likely to not get any polling on any of them except for Arizona and Wisconsin. The networks and polling firms dont want to risk their rep on caucuses

 

[Manmademan]

Sorry. I don't usually curse. But who the fuck cares how implausible it is?

The entire point of the thread is discussing polling and "can sanders win the nomination." the answer is no. It's decided. That's "who the fuck cares."

if you can't put your feelings aside and discuss things rationally, perhaps this isn't the place for you.

I mean, you completely ignore the fact that he could be doing damage. If he conceeded she could start focusing on the GE, the less bad press (which Bernie is contributing) the better and lets not even start with Bernie souring young voters on her.

also true, but goes beyond the scope of the thread a bit. Worth noting is that Obama took great pains to avoid going negative against Clinton at ALL in 2008, and Clinton kinda/sorta barely kept that sort of talk in check as well. I'm not seeing that this time around.

 

[Krowley]

Arizona is a closed primary that borders Cali (and Nevada which she won), it's a bloody long stretch to call that for Bernie. Alaska and Hawaii? Just because they're caucuses doesn't mean he auto wins them. Hillary won Iowa (by a whisker) and Nevada.

There is no winning streak happening, and there is no winning NY by any %.

There were tons of people just like you (possibly including you?) saying the very same shit about Michigan a week before the actual vote happened.

Sometimes people are just wrong. From the way you talk, with all that certainty and the way you're trying to bully people with your arrogant opinion, I'm sure you've never been one of those people, but there's a first time for everything.

 

[Wafflecakes]

There were tons of people just like you (possibly including you?) saying the very same shit about Michigan a week before the actual vote happened.

Sometimes people are just wrong. From the way you talk, with all that certainty and the way you're trying to bully people with your arrogant opinion, I'm sure you've never been one of those people, but there's a first time for everything.

Lol. Wow.....this post is something.

 

[danm999]

Ok, here's the best I could find;

Arizona; Clinton substantially ahead, last poll late Feb.

Idaho: Sanders slightly ahead, last poll late Feb.

Utah: Clinton moderately ahead, last poll early Feb.

Alaska: Clinton slightly ahead, last poll mid Jan.

Washington: Clinton ahead but el oh el they're from May last year and Warren is coming in second so these ones appear useless.

Wisconsin: Sanders slightly ahead, but pretty tight. Last poll from late Feb.

Can't find anything from Hawaii, Wyoming.

 

[Krowley]

Lol. Wow.....this post is something.

*shrug* I'm sick of the dismissive and arrogant tone. You can be a Hillary supporter without being an asshole about it.

Ok, here's the best I could find;

Arizona; Clinton substantially ahead, last poll late Feb.

Idaho: Sanders slightly ahead, last poll late Feb.

Utah: Clinton moderately ahead, last poll early Feb.

Alaska: Clinton slightly ahead, last poll mid Jan.

Washington: Clinton ahead but el oh el they're from May last year and Warren is coming in second so these ones appear useless.

Wisconsin: Sanders slightly ahead, but pretty tight. Last poll from late Feb.

Can't find anything from Hawaii, Wyoming.

You won't find much recent polling. The general assumption (in most places where I spend my time) has been that Sanders will win most of the remaining caucuses, and most of them will be blowouts.

I'm not sure why this is the case, but it seems to be a common assumption. If it isn't true, then he has no hope in hell. For real.

edit: it's probably because most of them are in very white rural states, and they're normally attended by very liberal activist types.

 

[Miles X]

There were tons of people just like you (possibly including you?) saying the very same shit about Michigan a week before the actual vote happened.

Sometimes people are just wrong. From the way you talk, with all that certainty and the way you're trying to bully people with your arrogant opinion, I'm sure you've never been one of those people, but there's a first time for everything.

Ah yes, Michigan the saviour completely voids all future polls (and the ones that came before it that were spot on) I have read up enough on why Michigan turned out the way it did but I've heard they have very poor polling techniques or something? Don't quote me, but it's clearly an anomoly.

Not bullying (what?) It's just silly listening to these fantasist outcomes for Bernie.

*shrug* I'm sick of the dismissive and arrogant tone. You can be a Hillary supporter without being an asshole about it.

You can be a Bernie support without using dream math.

I liken this a lot to WiiU Vs Xbox One. When people thought it could win out WW.

 

[M3z_]

When people talk about Bernie being unelectable because of his less moderate views I can't help but think that argument is utterly foolish. Of course there is a % of voters that would never be swayed to Bernie, but that exists for every candidate. The kind of voters that would be susceptible to being scared off him because of attack ads talking about socialism and what not are those who are already held to the other aisle for the most part. Results and polls have shown Bernie does very well with independents and those are the votes that swing states and elections.

Independents are scared of a 99% protecting liberal that is focused on income inequality and political corruption. The people who will get scared of Bernie are those that would just as easily be scared of Hilary.

 

[Miles X]

*shrug* I'm sick of the dismissive and arrogant tone. You can be a Hillary supporter without being an asshole about it.



You won't find polling. The general assumption (in most places where I spend my time) has been that Sanders will win most of the remaining caucuses, and most of them will be blowouts.

I'm not sure why this is the case, but it seems to be a common assumption. If it isn't true, then he has no hope in hell. For real.

Bernie supportors are young/loud/more aggressive maybe? Helps in a caucus situation. Definitely at odds with primaries where people get to vote without any peer pressure ....

Also, those caucus states are low in delegate counts. Have you looked up the numbers?

 

[MHWilliams]

Sorry. I don't usually curse. But who the fuck cares how implausible it is?

The OP in the thread that you're posting in. As such, it's up for discussion until such time the thread burns away or is locked for shenanigans.

Further, Sanders supporters, you are allowed to have hope. Other people are allowed to point out the statistics and situations surrounding the hope being somewhat unrealistic. So let's back up off each other and focus on the thread topic.

 

[Krowley]

Bernie supportors are young/loud/more aggressive maybe? Helps in a caucus situation. Definitely at odds with primaries where people get to vote without any peer pressure ....

Also, those caucus states are low in delegate counts. Have you looked up the numbers?

Yes, I fiddled with an online delegate allocation simulator thing earlier today. I was able to find a few different ways where Bernie barely edges Hillary in delegates.

In all cases, however, he has to blow her out in the caucuses, and he needs to win Washington state by a ton, and he needs to win NY and CA by about 10 points each, or else have a real blowout in one of them. Since CA is last, that would be his best chance (more time for campaigning, or some sort of gaffe or whatever)

 

[danm999]

You won't find much recent polling. The general assumption (in most places where I spend my time) has been that Sanders will win most of the remaining caucuses, and most of them will be blowouts.

I'm not sure why this is the case, but it seems to be a common assumption. If it isn't true, then he has no hope in hell. For real.

edit: it's probably because most of them are in very white rural states, and they're normally attended by very liberal activist types.

Ok but the general assumption might be on shaky ground here.

Arizona (the second biggest delegate prize) for instance is a primary with a substantial non-white population.

Hawaii is a caucus yes, but it's semi closed and Hawaii is a majority non-white state.

I'm not sure what the hell the deal is with Alaska or Utah, but I don't know they'll necessarily vote the way Kansas or Nebraska did either. I'm just not sure how these states shape up.

 

[Miles X]

If Bernie wins all these caucus states from now to New York (Idaho, Utah, Alaska, Hawaii, Washington and Wyoming) by 60/40, he gains a mere 44 delegates over Hillary ...

Wisconsin and Arizona have primaries which kinda cancel each other out in that regard. And that's him getting 60/40 in some of those states Hillary is winning in with the polls ...

Then NY comes along and she 55/45 or even 60/40's him and she gains back 25/50 delegates alone from that.

 

[Good Job Bob]

The OP in the thread that you're posting in. As such, it's up for discussion until such time the thread burns away or is locked for shenanigans.

Further, Sanders supporters, you are allowed to have hope. Other people are allowed to point out the statistics and situations surrounding the hope being somewhat unrealistic. So let's back up off each other and focus on the thread topic.

Wrong thread?

 

[noshten]

Ok, here's the best I could find;

Arizona; Clinton substantially ahead, last poll late Feb.

Idaho: Sanders slightly ahead, last poll late Feb.

Utah: Clinton moderately ahead, last poll early Feb.

Alaska: Clinton slightly ahead, last poll mid Jan.

Washington: Clinton ahead but el oh el they're from May last year and Warren is coming in second so these ones appear useless.

Wisconsin: Sanders slightly ahead, but pretty tight. Last poll from late Feb.

Can't find anything from Hawaii, Wyoming.

I wouldn't really read anything from those polls, it's an entirely different situation on the ground - we don't really know how organized Hillary's campaign is compared to what Bernie is doing. But in most of these states his campaign has several campaign field offices and ontop of an already vibrant volunteer organization. Polling firms aren't going to risk their reputation but obviously so far Sanders has won several states where he had organization and ads on his side. So it's a coin toss until these states go out and vote. After all the local party organization can definitely benefit Clinton as well as unions who had already endorsed her last year.

There is a map to get an idea what Bernie and the people who decided to back him have been able to build
http://map.berniesanders.com/

 

[Manmademan]

When people talk about Bernie being unelectable because of his less moderate views I can't help but think that argument is utterly foolish. Of course there is a % of voters that would never be swayed to Bernie, but that exists for every candidate. The kind of voters that would be susceptible to being scared off him because of attack ads talking about socialism and what not are those who are already held to the other aisle for the most part. Results and polls have shown Bernie does very well with independents and those are the votes that swing states and elections.

Independents are scared of a 99% protecting liberal that is focused on income inequality and political corruption. The people who will get scared of Bernie are those that would just as easily be scared of Hilary.

The argument against sanders in the general revolves mostly around the fact that by and large sanders isn't getting hit by republicans yet. They've been explicitly hands off, since he's doing plenty of damage to Clinton for them. The longer he stays in, the worse it is for her. Why ruin it? His favorability is very much "best case scenario."

They've been focused on Clinton and she's been the target of the right wing noise machine for YEARS at this point. AND She's being hit from the left by Sanders in the primary on top of that. THAT'S why her negatives are as high as they are.

There is actually data showing that once independents are exposed to republican push polling and talking points that emphasize sanders positions in a negative light, his favorability with independents goes through the floor. (I cannot find this one again though, it's been floating around pgaf forever though if someone wants to dig it up).

And that's not an "if", but a "when". these are the same people that managed to take a seemingly bulletproof Obama in 08 and turn him into a kenyan muslim terrorist traitor with a fake birth certificate, and 45% of the country bought that- hell a third of republicans STILL think obama has a fake birth certificate, that's how ridiculous all of that was.

I don't put a lot of faith in sanders holding up as well as Obama did OR hillary did to all of that, especially since Sanders refuses to use SuperPACs out of principle. I admire principles as much as the next guy, but trying to win a general election under that kind of onslaught and handicapping yourself so you can't respond effectively is lunacy.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

If Bernie wins all these caucus states from now to New York (Idaho, Utah, Alaska, Hawaii, Washington and Wyoming) by 60/40, he gains a mere 44 delegates over Hillary ...

Wisconsin and Arizona have primaries which kinda cancel each other out in that regard. And that's him getting 60/40 in some of those states Hillary is winning in with the polls ...

Then NY comes along and she 55/45 or even 60/40's him and she gains back 25/50 delegates alone from that.

This is the reality that the media is refusing to touch on. They just say so and so won this state. Okay, but that doesn't really mean shit unless we know who got the share of delegates.

 

[danm999]

I wouldn't really read anything from those polls, it's an entirely different situation on the ground - we don't really know how organized Hillary's campaign is compared to what Bernie is doing. But in most of these states his campaign has several campaign field offices and ontop of an already vibrant volunteer organization. Polling firms aren't going to risk their reputation but obviously so far Sanders has won several states where he had organization and ads on his side. So it's a coin toss until these states go out and vote. After all the local party organization can definitely benefit Clinton as well as unions who had already endorsed her last year.

There is a map to get an idea what Bernie and the people who decided to back him have been able to build
http://map.berniesanders.com/

I'm not putting much stock in them either, but between them and attempting to divine how GOTV efforts are going on the ground we really have very little indication how this will pan out in these smaller caucus states.

 

[ugaboga232]

The argument against sanders in the general revolves mostly around the fact that by and large sanders isn't getting hit by republicans yet. They've been explicitly hands off, since he's doing plenty of damage to Clinton for them. The longer he stays in, the worse it is for her. Why ruin it? His favorability is very much "best case scenario."

They've been focused on Clinton and she's been the target of the right wing noise machine for YEARS at this point. THAT'S why her negatives are as high as they are.

There is actually data showing that once independents are exposed to republican push polling and talking points that emphasize sanders positions in a negative light, his favorability with independents goes through the floor. (I cannot find this one again though, it's been floating around pgaf forever though if someone wants to dig it up).

And that's not an "if", but a "when". these are the same people that managed to take a seemingly bulletproof Obama in 08 and turn him into a kenyan muslim terrorist traitor with a fake birth certificate, and 45% of the country bought that- hell a third of republicans STILL think obama has a fake birth certificate, that's how ridiculous all of that was.

I don't put a lot of faith in sanders holding up as well as Obama did OR hillary did to all of that, especially since Sanders refuses to use SuperPACs out of principle. I admire principles as much as the next guy, but trying to win a general election under that kind of onslaught and handicapping yourself so you can't respond effectively is lunacy.

The actual data was someone saying they saw the actual data. You could also argue Hillary hasn't been in a GE so who knows what happens when the GOP stops the infighting. It is pretty much all conjecture at this point.

 

[eBay Huckster]

Yes, I fiddled with an online delegate allocation simulator thing earlier today.

Mind linking to it, if you can find it in yr history? The only calculator I can find anywhere is on RCP, and that's just for the GOP race.

 

[Manmademan]

The actual data was someone saying they saw the actual data.

eh, no. someone did actual polling and there were some fairly damning numbers. I didn't bother bookmarking or saving it however.

You could also argue Hillary hasn't been in a GE so who knows what happens when the GOP stops the infighting. It is pretty much all conjecture at this point.

Hillary and Bill have been Washington staples since the 1990s. She's been the target of republican attacks since she tried to overhaul healthcare in 1993. All of her skeletons are LITERALLY out in the open and there is nothing left to hit her with. If you can think of something more substantial than "Benghazi" or "emails" the republicans would love to know about it.

 

[ugaboga232]

eh, no. someone did actual polling and there were some fairly damning numbers. I didn't bother bookmarking or saving it however.



Hillary and Bill have been Washington staples since the 1990s. She's been the target of republican attacks since she tried to overhaul healthcare in 1993. All of her skeletons are LITERALLY out in the open and there is nothing left to hit her with. If you can think of something more substantial than "Benghazi" or "emails" the republicans would love to know about it.

Are they? Seems just like conjecture (I agree with it for the most part but without data/seeing the future who knows).

 

[Battersea Power Station]

The OP in the thread that you're posting in. As such, it's up for discussion until such time the thread burns away or is locked for shenanigans.

Further, Sanders supporters, you are allowed to have hope. Other people are allowed to point out the statistics and situations surrounding the hope being somewhat unrealistic. So let's back up off each other and focus on the thread topic.

To be clear, my "who cares" is about whether his campaign is a waste of time or whether he's partaking in a "charade." Discussion of math is fine in this thread. The posts that are demanding the campaign be suspended in dismissive language are the ones detracting from the discussion -- there's already a separate thread about "can he really win" which is more appropriate, but even then those posts are worded poorly.

And, yeah, I'm aware that now this post is detracting from discussion as well so that's the last one from me. Feel free to delete if it's inappropriate.

 

[MHWilliams]

To be clear, my "who cares" is about whether his campaign is a waste of time or whether he's partaking in a "charade." Discussion of math is fine in this thread. The posts that are demanding the campaign be suspended in dismissive language are the ones detracting from the discussion -- there's already a separate thread about "can he really win" which is more appropriate, but even then those posts are worded poorly.

And, yeah, I'm aware that now this post is detracting from discussion as well so that's the last one from me. Feel free to delete if it's inappropriate.

Understandable.

It's all good, man. People just get heated on this topic - choosing the President of the United States is pretty important - so we like to step in before it gets so heated that we have to ban anyone.

Numbers, opinions, polls, speculation? Carry on.

 

[Miles X]

To be clear, my "who cares" is about whether his campaign is a waste of time or whether he's partaking in a "charade." Discussion of math is fine in this thread. The posts that are demanding the campaign be suspended in dismissive language are the ones detracting from the discussion -- there's already a separate thread about "can he really win" which is more appropriate, but even then those posts are worded poorly.

And, yeah, I'm aware that now this post is detracting from discussion as well so that's the last one from me. Feel free to delete if it's inappropriate.

I don't think anyone is demanding it, just at this point what is the point? (and no don't say democracy) what good can come from him staying in? He isn't pushing Hillary any further left from this point on, he isn't going to win (it's just a case of maths) and he is distracting Hillary from the GE, attacking her and poisioning the 'youth well' so to speak.

I don't know why you think Hillary supporters want Bernie out? Because we're worried? Jealous? I don't see how you can't see the reasoning for him dropping out, at least soon.

Him staying in till June is a vanity thing at that point.

Edit - at the least Bernie staying in makes for good entertainment/discussion.

 

[noshten]

Him staying in till June is a vanity thing at that point.

That's incredibly insulting

 

[superdeluxe]

Actually no, lol I just didn't have the schedule right in my head.

I was thinking there were a more caucus states between the 15th and NY. He should get blowouts in pretty much all the remaining caucuses. But he'll still have a good head of steam going into NY.

Between tomorrow and NY he'll have:

Arizona

Idaho

Utah

Alaska

Hawaii

Washington

Wisconsin

Wyoming

---------------------

He should win most or all of those unless his campaign collapses.

So not 12, but a very good number.

And he doesn't have to win NY by 20. Just 10. Assuming he gets big wins in all the other important places, and gets the kinds of blowouts he needs in the caucus states.

What makes you so certain with Hawaii & Arizona? Large minority base in Hawaii, older demo in Arizona.

 

[Miles X]

That's incredibly insulting

No it isn't? Him staying in when he isn't going to win and his just harming the chance of a dem getting in?

It's either vanity or insanity (for thinking he has a real shot), take your pick.

 

[neurosisxeno]

I don't know why you think Hillary supporters want Bernie out? Because we're worried? Jealous? I don't see how you can't see the reasoning for him dropping out, at least soon.

Because they have spent the last 9 months talking about his campaign being a waste of time? Maybe because I can't open a single page on PoliGAF or a single topic about a Democratic Debate\Town Hall\Primary\Caucus without being beaten over the head with how "done" Sanders is. That all these Hillary supporters are mad that he's not dropping out like she herself allegedly should have in 2008. Apparently even that Sanders dragging Hillary to the left is harmful to her chances in the General like somehow 50% of the country would EVER vote for Donald Trump, so she has to worry.

 

[Miles X]

Because they have spent the last 9 months talking about his campaign being a waste of time? Maybe because I can't open a single page on PoliGAF or a single topic about a Democratic Debate\Town Hall\Primary\Caucus without being beaten over the head with how "done" Sanders is. That all these Hillary supporters are mad that he's not dropping out like she herself allegedly should have in 2008. Apparently even that Sanders dragging Hillary to the left is harmful to her chances in the General like somehow 50% of the country would EVER vote for Donald Trump, so she has to worry.

That ... doesn't answer the question you quoted.

Why do you think Hillary fans want Bernie to drop out?

 

[Lord_Byron28]

I don't think anyone is demanding it, just at this point what is the point? (and no don't say democracy) what good can come from him staying in? He isn't pushing Hillary any further left from this point on, he isn't going to win (it's just a case of maths) and he is distracting Hillary from the GE, attacking her and poisioning the 'youth well' so to speak.

I don't know why you think Hillary supporters want Bernie out? Because we're worried? Jealous? I don't see how you can't see the reasoning for him dropping out, at least soon.

Him staying in till June is a vanity thing at that point.

Edit - at the least Bernie staying in makes for good entertainment/discussion.

He has consistently drawn national attention to many overlooked issues going on in this nation, the republican party as well as in the democratic party. Even though I disagree with some of his specific policies; I think it's important that he has broken the ice in terms of Democratic Socialism to the American public. Also after the Great Recession hit both ideological bases became further polarized. The right had the tea party movement that swept through in 2010. The left on the other hand responded with OWS. Bernie is the only politician to capitalize on that crowd.

He has said since the start of his campaign that he was going in it for the long haul so politicians weren't weary of the word socialism.

 

[Miles X]

He has consistently drawn national attention to many overlooked issues going on in this nation, the republican party as well as in the democratic party. Even though I disagree with some of his specific policies; I think it's important that he has broken the ice in terms of Democratic Socialism to the American public. Also after the Great Recession hit both ideological bases became further polarized. The right had the tea party movement that swept through in 2010. The left on the other hand responded with OWS. Bernie is the only politician to capitalize on that crowd.

I agree, it's great he's been in this race for a number of reasons, not just those you touched on but actually getting Hillary to stand up and fight, I felt she was a bit complacent before.

But from this point on? I feel Bernie has served his purpose.

 

[Krowley]

Mind linking to it, if you can find it in yr history? The only calculator I can find anywhere is on RCP, and that's just for the GOP race.

Sure, here: http://www.demrace.com/

I'm not sure how accurate it is in the way it distributes delegates, but it was fun to mess with.

What makes you so certain with Hawaii & Arizona? Large minority base in Hawaii, older demo in Arizona.

Mostly based on talk I've been hearing on other boards. Nothing scientific. And nothing you should be basing any assumption on.

I have heard some people saying Hawaii is kind of a stretch because it's Obama's home turf, and his connection with Hillary should help her there.

 

[noshten]

No it isn't? Him staying in when he isn't going to win and his just harming the chance of a dem getting in?

It's either vanity or insanity (for thinking he has a real shot), take your pick.

At this stage you are doing it on purpose

 

[neurosisxeno]

Why do you think Hillary fans want Bernie to drop out?

Because they want Hillary to focus on attacking the Republicans. They want a show a "party unity" where Hillary ascends to the Iron Throne at the DNC and lays out a plan for vanquishing the Republicans--like they have a chance of winning the General anyway.

 

[pigeon]

Sure, here: http://www.demrace.com/

I'm not sure how accurate it is in the way it distributes delegates, but it was fun to mess with.



Mostly based on talk I've been hearing on other boards. Nothing scientific. And nothing you should be basing any assumption on.

I have heard some people saying Hawaii is kind of a stretch because it's Obama's home turf, and his connection with Hillary should help her there.

I really don't think Bernie will win Hawaii. It's not strongly liberal so much as strongly Democratic, Obama's the favored son, and it's majority minority. I think Hillary wins it easily.

 

[Manmademan]

He has consistently drawn national attention to many overlooked issues going on in this nation, the republican party as well as in the democratic party. Even though I disagree with some of his specific policies; I think it's important that he has broken the ice in terms of Democratic Socialism to the American public. Also after the Great Recession hit both ideological bases became further polarized. The right had the tea party movement that swept through in 2010. The left on the other hand responded with OWS. Bernie is the only politician to capitalize on that crowd.

He has said since the start of his campaign that he was going in it for the long haul so politicians weren't weary of the word socialism.

wonderful. That's all well and good. all positive things.

However- and this goes back to my original post that was so gracelessly pulled out of context- we're talking about what is the point of the sanders campaign from this point on..

We've established that its implausible for an electoral victory for him at this point, even ignoring superdelegates entirely. Mathematically it's just not happening.

We've had many debates, townhalls, and stump speeches. Everything that can possibly be said by either candidate has been said- This goes double for Republicans. There have been TOO MANY debates on that end and eventually you stop educating the base and are doing nothing but supplying ammunition for attack ads.

While originally there was utility in pushing hillary to the left- we're past that point. She's as far left as she's going to go and won't go farther, because it's difficult to tack back to the center where you need to be for the GE. Ask republicans how well this works for them after they've been forced rightward in the last several primaries.

There is no horserace, this thing is over. So "taking it to the convention" accomplishes what, exactly? Besides burning funds that should probably be better used for infrastructure and ads in the GE?

What's the point in continuing to attack from the left, generating bad blood, and encouraging the more ardent supporters to sit out the GE- or worse vote Trump in protest?

There's a point at which it becomes necessary to wrap it up, endorse your opponent, and work together on stopping republicans and propping up downballot races instead. This is actually where bernie SHOULD be, stumping for potential senators in places like IA that could benefit from higher youth turnout. But nope- we're spinning wheels and attacking Clinton again like it's going to change the outcome.

 

[Miles X]

At this stage you are doing it on purpose

Doing what on purpose? It'd be nice it you actually had a counter instead of these sorts of posts.