|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 02 2016 12:42 darthfoley wrote:
Sanders picking up VT, OK, CO, MN is not bad actually if results hold. No way he was gonna ever win the south. Dream night if he were to win MA, but it seems a little too late for that.
Clinton 7:5 Sanders = ideal
Clinton 8:4 Sanders = decent
anything worse is really bad for his campaign. I will be quite interested to see how close other states are, considering much of her "firewall" has already voted.
I'm afraid for Colorado. Clinton is doing well in the beginning of Denver county so far and that's a lot of votes if the trend continues.
His lead is starting to look pretty good tho
|
On March 02 2016 12:46 Seuss wrote:
Minnesota is looking like it'll go to Rubio, though Cruz could still beat him. Trump almost certainly placing third there.
Still not a good night for Rubio, especially if he stays below the 20% threshold in some of these states.
Cruz can't beat him. 9% with 53% counted doesn't happen.
Trump has solid percentages everywhere though, so even though he didn't win everything, this plays super nicely for him.
|
On March 02 2016 12:42 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2016 12:33 oBlade wrote:On March 02 2016 11:50 Jibba wrote:On March 02 2016 11:45 oBlade wrote:On March 02 2016 11:45 Jibba wrote:
I wonder if Cruz is introspective enough to realize he's reaping what he sowed. This began with him. How do you figure that? This is the evolution of the Tea Party. They - McCain, Romney, McConnell - kowtowed for easy social conservative votes and lost their party. Trump figured out how to appeal to the same emotions, better than Cruz. I don't agree with this analysis, with McCain being one of the roots of the Tea Party. I don't personally know that the Tea Party is a faction so much as a label people adopt just to stir the pot and get attention. The point is not supposed to be social issues, by the way, but it gets confusing because people like Michelle Bachmann, part of the religious right, are also some of the people who stand out from the Tea Party. Trump has broad appeal. That doesn't mean he's not polarizing. But he's a public figure (a la Schwarzenegger), he's a self-identified conservative (a la Reagan), and he's a billionaire (Perot). It's not just Tea Partying. I might be wrong, but I don't see it. Palin was one of the roots of the Tea Party, not McCain. But he's the one that gave her a microphone. The Tea Party was a blanket populist movement that railed against the federal government and "the man". Its foundation was emotions more than issues, but it was easiest to tap into that through social conservatism. This also gave rise to the immense obstructionism we have now. It promoted the political outside (which Cruz was when he used it to win his election). Trump's broad appeal is with angry people, whose angered was stirred by the Tea Party. This may have been inevitable, but to me this is simply the next step of angry populism (which is obviously not new, but that was the new form of it.)
Yeah, McCain is the only reason anyone knows who Sarah Palin is of course. And okay, I see what you mean, it's like a manifestation of the populism that's only very strong at the national level - because of apathy, the "Tea Party" wing has fizzled out generally.
|
On March 02 2016 12:42 darthfoley wrote:
Sanders picking up VT, OK, CO, MN is not bad actually if results hold. No way he was gonna ever win the south. Dream night if he were to win MA, but it seems a little too late for that.
Clinton 7:5 Sanders = ideal
Clinton 8:4 Sanders = decent
anything worse is really bad for his campaign. I will be quite interested to see how close other states are, considering much of her "firewall" has already voted.
Actually, from the numbers I'm seeing currently, he's largely underperforming (with a few exceptions), and far below what his targets should be to reach a majority of delegates.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
this cruz guy talking about electability with trump lol. look in the mirror
|
On March 02 2016 12:47 Warfie wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2016 12:41 Plansix wrote:On March 02 2016 12:38 Warfie wrote:
anyone watching CNN? I feel like all Van Jones ever wants to talk about is how this and that is racist and so on. I mean it's an important issue but this guy just goes on and on about what I as a european feel is insignificant stuff.. Someone yelling "Die n*****" tried to assassinate a black woman running for sheriff today. Another guy got stabbed in the gut by white supremacists this weekend. This is not normal and its only going to get worse. Hm yes. I just sometimes get the impression he/they are talking about and taking excessive 'offense' at random shit when that energy would be better extended elsewhere, on more serious cases
No they are talking about people dying or getting attacked. You see, the "offensive" stuff turns into normalizing ideas like black people should die rather than be sheriff of a town. When a member of the KKK endorses someone and they don't denounce it instantly, white supremacists think their time has come. Time to take America back.
|
bernie can claim state wins but hillary can claim she got a lot more superfriends and blew him out -- 3 states by 40%, 3 states by 30%+
|
Don't really care about the elections, not really a fan of any of the nominees (except for trump meme's), But, it's annoying that Bernie isn't doing better. I really want to see a full tilt presidential debate between Trump and Sanders later this year.
|
On March 02 2016 12:42 darthfoley wrote:
Sanders picking up VT, OK, CO, MN is not bad actually if results hold. No way he was gonna ever win the south. Dream night if he were to win MA, but it seems a little too late for that.
Clinton 7:5 Sanders = ideal
Clinton 8:4 Sanders = decent
anything worse is really bad for his campaign. I will be quite interested to see how close other states are, considering much of her "firewall" has already voted.
Him possibly shutting her out in VT and still grabbing delegates everywhere else would make a nice bonus. (does he need 20% in AL or is that just on the R side?)
Looks like Hillary's firewall failed to end Sanders campaign though.
|
Nate Silver saying the same thing about Sanders/Clinton that I talked about before:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/86vUulu.png)
|
On March 02 2016 12:49 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2016 12:42 darthfoley wrote:
Sanders picking up VT, OK, CO, MN is not bad actually if results hold. No way he was gonna ever win the south. Dream night if he were to win MA, but it seems a little too late for that.
Clinton 7:5 Sanders = ideal
Clinton 8:4 Sanders = decent
anything worse is really bad for his campaign. I will be quite interested to see how close other states are, considering much of her "firewall" has already voted. Actually, from the numbers I'm seeing currently, he's largely underperforming (with a few exceptions), and far below what his targets should be to reach a majority of delegates.
Where did he underperform outside of Mass? He's currently up 13 in CO, 19 in MN, won OK by 10, and won VT by 72%
I mean it would've been nice to do better in southern states or VA, but not sure what else he was supposed to do tonight
|
So at this point it's plausible to predict a Hillary vs. Trump general election.
|
On March 02 2016 08:34 Mohdoo wrote:GH, I challenge you to read this piece by Jon Favreau (Obama speech writer): http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/26/why-electing-hillary-in-16-is-more-important-than-electing-obama-in-08.htmlHe comes from a very similar position that you seem to have: Show nested quote +
I get it. I didn’t start off as her biggest fan either. During the 2008 campaign, I wrote plenty of less-than-complimentary words about Hillary Clinton in my role as Barack Obama’s speechwriter. Then, a few weeks after the election, I had a well-documented run-in with a piece of cardboard that bore a striking resemblance to the incoming Secretary of State.
It was one of the stupider, more disrespectful mistakes I’ve made, and one that could have cost me a job if Hillary hadn’t accepted my apology, which she did with grace and humor. As a result, I had the chance to serve in the Obama administration with someone who was far different than the caricature I had helped perpetuate.
Please at least read it.
Would a "Romney works really hard and he really cares about people" article make you more likely to have voted for him in 2012?
|
It's very surprising to me what the BLM movement did to Sanders... He was obviously their best hope.
Now I'm very worried that the predictions are correct and the young people won't go out and vote for the "lesser evil" that is Hillary Clinton. I know I myself wouldn't want to vote for that woman.
|
United States22883 Posts
|
On March 02 2016 12:55 darthfoley wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2016 12:49 kwizach wrote:On March 02 2016 12:42 darthfoley wrote:
Sanders picking up VT, OK, CO, MN is not bad actually if results hold. No way he was gonna ever win the south. Dream night if he were to win MA, but it seems a little too late for that.
Clinton 7:5 Sanders = ideal
Clinton 8:4 Sanders = decent
anything worse is really bad for his campaign. I will be quite interested to see how close other states are, considering much of her "firewall" has already voted. Actually, from the numbers I'm seeing currently, he's largely underperforming (with a few exceptions), and far below what his targets should be to reach a majority of delegates. Where did he underperform outside of Mass? He's currently up 13 in CO, 19 in MN, won OK by 10, and won VT by 72% I mean it would've been nice to do better in southern states or VA, but not sure what else he was supposed to do tonight
See what Ghanburighan just posted, as I was indeed referring to the 538 targets for both candidates. He's underperforming everywhere except Oklahoma thus far (several races are far from over, though, obviously).
|
On March 02 2016 12:52 ticklishmusic wrote:
bernie can claim state wins but hillary can claim she got a lot more superfriends and blew him out -- 3 states by 40%, 3 states by 30%+
Yeah claiming superfriends is something Hillary's camp has been actively trying to get media outlets to stop mentioning, so I doubt the camp will.
Considering she won red states I'm not sure they matter much. Virginia could be a thing but Trump's probably flipping that without record turnout on the dem side, which we know Hillary won't get.
|
On March 02 2016 12:59 Djzapz wrote:
It's very surprising to me what the BLM movement did to Sanders... He was obviously their best hope.
Now I'm very worried that the predictions are correct and the young people won't go out and vote for the "lesser evil" that is Hillary Clinton. I know I myself wouldn't want to vote for that woman.
He is a socialist, independent that is pro gun from Vermont? He has done very little that any other run of the mill Democrat. The man has negative relationship with black voters in the south and it showed.
|
On March 02 2016 12:50 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2016 12:47 Warfie wrote:On March 02 2016 12:41 Plansix wrote:On March 02 2016 12:38 Warfie wrote:
anyone watching CNN? I feel like all Van Jones ever wants to talk about is how this and that is racist and so on. I mean it's an important issue but this guy just goes on and on about what I as a european feel is insignificant stuff.. Someone yelling "Die n*****" tried to assassinate a black woman running for sheriff today. Another guy got stabbed in the gut by white supremacists this weekend. This is not normal and its only going to get worse. Hm yes. I just sometimes get the impression he/they are talking about and taking excessive 'offense' at random shit when that energy would be better extended elsewhere, on more serious cases No they are talking about people dying or getting attacked. You see, the "offensive" stuff turns into normalizing ideas like black people should die rather than be sheriff of a town. When a member of the KKK endorses someone and they don't denounce it instantly, white supremacists think their time has come. Time to take America back.
I hope I'm never at a place where I blame political candidates in a free country for shootings.
|
MA gap closed from 3.5% to 2.4% from 65% reporting to 80% reporting, so it'll definitely be very close, probably within a percentage point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
