EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 3559
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
Soularion
Canada2764 Posts
| ||
|
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
| ||
|
Soularion
Canada2764 Posts
On April 06 2016 19:15 Kipsate wrote: So after this string of victories for Sanders, what does the math look like? More or less the same. He needs something like ~56-57% of the remaining delegates- New York is the state that most matters, and a big win (5-10+ points) there means it's entirely possible for him to glide with momentum and Clinton-frustration to more wins while a loss more or less dooms him. Of course there are more hurdles past New York, but New York is just the first and most important if you wanna see Sanders win. It's worth noting that - especially considering the interview - Clinton and Sanders will be -at each others necks- going into New York, and Sanders being able to move past that to a win in a state that Clinton has hyped up incredibly as her 'firewall' would be completely devastating to her campaign and would likely cause a lot of turmoil and even more anger than we're already seeing. The Democratic race is very much falling apart at the seams, and everything's kind of going to shit. | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
On April 06 2016 19:15 Kipsate wrote: So after this string of victories for Sanders, what does the math look like? We don't really know before the delegates are awarded. Currently, Sanders has been projected to receive 46 delegates which would be below the mark of 50 that he needs (so he'd need another +4 from somewhere) but I don't think the result is final and he'll probably end up around 48 or 49 delegates. | ||
|
Lord Tolkien
United States12083 Posts
On April 06 2016 19:15 Kipsate wrote: So after this string of victories for Sanders, what does the math look like? He needed something along the lines of a 16% win margin to be on track to tie in delegates, and has ~14%. Fell slightly short of what he needed, but overperformed the polls and it's a needed win. It's enough to keep him in the race, and he should roughly hit his needed delegate count for a majority, from 538, but he's underperformed in previous races so he ideally needed an even bigger wins from hereon out. Overall, it's a "momentum" win, but doesn't change the nomination math or outlook: he still needs to win exceptionally high margins in large delegate states like NY, PA, and CA, while minimizing his losses in Maryland, and would have to keep repeating tonight from now until the convention. The biggest takeaway from tonight is that a brokered convention is becoming more and more likely. Trump is not on track to hit a majority of delegates by the Republican convention, and things will probably get incredibly strange. | ||
|
Soularion
Canada2764 Posts
Holy shit. Also, state seems to be pretty tight in General Election polls, with John Kasich seeming to easily win- reinforces the idea that Cruz/Trump would be quite bad nominees while establishment republicans like Kasich or Ryan would lead to solid victories and at minimum a tight election. | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1QyXK5P.png) Edit: And it's worth noting that with regard to general election polls that these massively favour candidates who don't get much attention: Kasich and Sanders come to mind. That's because no-one is targeting them with negative ads. | ||
|
Soularion
Canada2764 Posts
On April 06 2016 20:59 Ghanburighan wrote: Would be nice to actually see the numbers: Edit: And it's worth noting that with regard to general election polls that these massively favour candidates who don't get much attention: Kasich and Sanders come to mind. That's because no-one is targeting them with negative ads. Straight up forgot you can directly link images on TL, I'm pretty smart. | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
if you are expecting some sort of nuance from sanders keep waiting | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
What a lame vision of the world. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18378 Posts
On April 06 2016 21:51 WhiteDog wrote: We know protesting is not good, the truth is in the middle right ? What a lame vision of the world. Protesting is great. Show you're unhappy about what's happening. But it takes more to lead the country than standing in a square waving a flag. For instance, I am quite qualified to protest, but severely underqualified to be president. Sanders is increasingly showing that he isn't really qualified either. | ||
|
Soularion
Canada2764 Posts
On April 06 2016 21:58 Acrofales wrote: Protesting is great. Show you're unhappy about what's happening. But it takes more to lead the country than standing in a square waving a flag. For instance, I am quite qualified to protest, but severely underqualified to be president. Sanders is increasingly showing that he isn't really qualified either. The only person 'qualified' for the presidency still in the race is Clinton, who is and has been the most 'qualified' candidate for a solid decade now. However, people don't like qualifications. They've seen where the standard establishment gets them and most of them are left unhappy, so they're starting to care less about those qualifications. Is Sanders as experienced and battle-hardened as Clinton is? Nope. Is he ready to be president? Not as much as her, but he's ready to be the face of a revolution. He's ready to say the things other liberal democrats say but with enough of a backbone and enough of a history of supporting those efforts that it doesn't quite matter that he doesn't have a perfect plan for it. He has an idea, and presumably he'll surround himself with people who will help him achieve that idea. What we're seeing in this race is the battle between a very liberal vision and a less liberal reality, and we'll have to wait and see how it turns out but I don't necessarily think it's as white-and-black as a lot of people are making it seem regarding the entire interview thing. Maybe Sanders would be a horrible president. Maybe he'd be an amazing one. We don't know, because we haven't had a president like him before. Obama was the closest example, and hey- Obama was pretty alright. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On April 06 2016 21:58 Acrofales wrote: Protesting is great. Show you're unhappy about what's happening. But it takes more to lead the country than standing in a square waving a flag. For instance, I am quite qualified to protest, but severely underqualified to be president. Sanders is increasingly showing that he isn't really qualified either. I disagree with your post entirely. A president is a representative, not an expert. You are the representative of a country of 300 millions people, don't tell me you can't ask for experts to find solutions that goes in accordance with the value that your electorate asked you to defend. A president is here to cut, not to mold. To go back to Obama, for exemple, many people at some point wanted him to hire Krugman or Stiglitz. Do you expect Obama to understand the financial market after one of the biggest crisis of the last century, while even the most qualified don't ? He just have to pick the right people, and tell them the objectives. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
That last skill is undervalued by many politics nerds, who assume that everyone should be informed about everything at all times. | ||
|
Soularion
Canada2764 Posts
| ||
|
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
I don't think its a big deal but the public might think it is. | ||
|
Soularion
Canada2764 Posts
On April 06 2016 22:14 Kipsate wrote: I don't think people expect Sanders to lay out a complete plan but they expect a better response to a question he build his platform on. Something, anything, even saying that you have experts or w/e to create policy. I imagine he already talked with experts about something. It comes across as insecure/unprepared. I don't think its a big deal but the public might think it is. Mhm, exactly. I predict it'll hurt him but it won't decide anything, as the amount of voters he turns off probably won't be that much higher than the amount of voters who find out about him because of this. It will entrench a lot of Clinton supporters though, which is probably the bigger deal. | ||
| ||
