|
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. |
Lmao I forgot about that bet. Hilarious. I'm just glad to see this primary get less negative. Bernie having a more constructive message, less attacks, sounds great.
Edit: My favorite thing about Bernie is perfectly encapsulated here:
https://berniesanders.com/press-release/sanders-statement-primary-elections/
Essentially saying "We lost. So we are going to the convention and we are going to demand every single thing I want."
What a complete mess.
On April 27 2016 12:23 GreenHorizons wrote:
I'd support forcing the electoral college to decide/punt on it to expose why this game was rigged from the beginning, long before this election started. .
Wait, you're saying you want the electoral college to go against the popular vote?
|
On April 27 2016 11:35 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2016 11:33 BallinWitStalin wrote:On April 27 2016 11:11 xDaunt wrote:On April 27 2016 11:04 Introvert wrote:On April 27 2016 11:02 xDaunt wrote:On April 27 2016 11:00 Introvert wrote:On April 27 2016 10:52 xDaunt wrote:On April 27 2016 10:45 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Bernie supporters are more likely to flake out than the republicans. How do you figure? Clinton is more of a liberal Dem than Trump is a Republican. Bernie is rallying young voters who are notoriously flakey. I also expect Trump to make some big deals to get the Republican Party to rally around him. I just don't know what that means. Getting the party to rally around him is one thing, but getting people's votes is another. I wonder if Trump is really scary enough that Dems will show up just to vote against. Edit: I think you are right about the party, maybe. Trump can't self fund the general and so far donors are reluctant. I don't think that voting against someone is enough of a motivation to drive turnout. People need something to vote for. While I am inclined to agree with you in general on this principle, I don't think America has ever seen anyone like Trump run before. I genuinely think that's it's difficult to make predictions about voter turnout, based on that. It's too much of an unknown, and there's no previous experiences to really base expectations on that are (roughly) analogous. People said a lot of the same shit about Reagan.
You voting Trump in the general Dauntless?
|
On April 27 2016 13:01 Mohdoo wrote:Lmao I forgot about that bet. Hilarious. I'm just glad to see this primary get less negative. Bernie having a more constructive message, less attacks, sounds great. Edit: My favorite thing about Bernie is perfectly encapsulated here: https://berniesanders.com/press-release/sanders-statement-primary-elections/Essentially saying "We lost. So we are going to the convention and we are going to demand every single thing I want." What a complete mess. Show nested quote +On April 27 2016 12:23 GreenHorizons wrote:
I'd support forcing the electoral college to decide/punt on it to expose why this game was rigged from the beginning, long before this election started. . Wait, you're saying you want the electoral college to go against the popular vote?
No I'm saying I want it split so they have to decide themselves or punt it to the House & Senate. I'd prefer they leave it to the House & Senate, but I doubt they would. (in that situation)
Paul Ryan could still end up president too, that would be a fun tale.
|
What are you even saying? You want it split? What do you want split? How does that expose this as rigged from the beginning?
I am having a *blast* noticing a complete lack of enthusiasm on Facebook. Everyone is silent. The dream is so fucking dead and everyone knows it.
|
On April 27 2016 21:53 Mohdoo wrote:
What are you even saying? You want it split? What do you want split? How does that expose this as rigged from the beginning?
I am having a *blast* noticing a complete lack of enthusiasm on Facebook. Everyone is silent. The dream is so fucking dead and everyone knows it.
He wants the general election to not produce a 51% majority so the Presidential nomination falls to Congress (HA gl of them ever deciding on it)
Basically he is the kid who didn't have the best looking sand castle so now he wants to kick everyone elses down.
Don't worry it will pass. Just one of the stages of grief.
|
On April 27 2016 21:58 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2016 21:53 Mohdoo wrote:
What are you even saying? You want it split? What do you want split? How does that expose this as rigged from the beginning?
I am having a *blast* noticing a complete lack of enthusiasm on Facebook. Everyone is silent. The dream is so fucking dead and everyone knows it. He wants the general election to not produce a 51% majority so the Presidential nomination falls to Congress (HA gl of them ever deciding on it) Basically he is the kid who didn't have the best looking sand castle so now he wants to kick everyone elses down. Don't worry it will pass. Just one of the stages of grief.
Hilarious. Bernie's statement last night already signaled unity. He's not trying to win anymore, so he's going to stop his factually inaccurate attacks. Great progress.
On March 30 2016 04:57 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2016 04:27 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 30 2016 03:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 30 2016 03:56 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 30 2016 03:55 GreenHorizons wrote:The delegate gap is gonna go up along with the popular vote gap over the next couple of weeks. We'll see about that. Maybe I said months, but with that correction wanna bet on it? I'll bet her lead has peaked without hesitation. One month from now (so April 29) we'll see how the numbers have changed. If Bernie has closed the gap in pledged delegate count from what it is today, I will donate $27 to his campaign (or your favorite charity/ whoever else I have no moral objection to giving to) and provide proof of the transaction. If not, I will provide you with a short list of questions about Hillary's record I want you to read up on and have you post your findings here. Does that sound fair? We will use The Green Papers for the results. As of right now, the total stands at 1266 - 1038 (Clinton +228). This is the "soft" total and estimates the outcome of the most recent contests, while the "hard" one does not take those into account. If Clinton leads by more than 228 delegates, I am considered the winner. If her lead is smaller then 228 delegates, you are. To account for potential adjustments as the numbers shake out, if the lead has changed by less than 10 delegates we will call it a wash. Sounds reasonable. One issue though. PA is already saying it will likely take weeks to count their votes. As with happened in AZ, this will likely favor HRC in projections and estimates. I'd either want PA to wait to be fully counted or not included.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RgVE4tf.png?1)
|
He's only 300 delegates behind?
That's not a bad number.
|
On April 27 2016 22:14 Incognoto wrote:
He's only 300 delegates behind?
That's not a bad number.
He needs 64% of all remaining delegates. That's almost 2:1. Clinton is up in CA and that's only gonna get better after last night. Delegates are awarded proportionally. Bernie has already indirectly said he's not running to win at this point. Clinton's win in NY clearly took a giant Dump on Sandernista morale, as evidenced by CT. Last night's results are lights out for the shaky support he had. When you run a campaign fueled by such intense rhetoric, you need to be winning. Losing so badly, using Sanders' rhetoric, makes people lose confidence, as we've seen. Looks like we were right all along. In the end, he missed his mark by quite a bit.
Anyone looking for a morning laugh, I have got you covered:
https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4gnyol/we_can_win_by_4060_pts_in_montana_north_dakota/
It is possible. We have the right candidate and the right message.
How is it possible? What's the path to victory? Obviously big wins, but how do those get achieved?
We need to make this exponential. If you do 50 calls for Bernie a day, that's amazing. If you can recruit 5 people to do 10 calls a day and get 2 of them to recruit another 5 etc then it'll rapidly swell to way more than you could ever do alone. If you talk to somebody enthusiastic about Bernie, get them involved.
Don't just spread the message. Spread the desire, spread the activism, get them to spend 20 minutes of their day getting Bernie elected. Make the west coast BERN like a wildfire.
|
On April 27 2016 22:12 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2016 21:58 Gorsameth wrote:On April 27 2016 21:53 Mohdoo wrote:
What are you even saying? You want it split? What do you want split? How does that expose this as rigged from the beginning?
I am having a *blast* noticing a complete lack of enthusiasm on Facebook. Everyone is silent. The dream is so fucking dead and everyone knows it. He wants the general election to not produce a 51% majority so the Presidential nomination falls to Congress (HA gl of them ever deciding on it) Basically he is the kid who didn't have the best looking sand castle so now he wants to kick everyone elses down. Don't worry it will pass. Just one of the stages of grief. Hilarious. Bernie's statement last night already signaled unity. He's not trying to win anymore, so he's going to stop his factually inaccurate attacks. Great progress.
I was talking about GH, not Bernie.
|
Bernie is going to do some down ticket campaigning to promote his ideas and help local elections. It is the most productive thing he can do. He can spend the time pushing his supporters to vote for Clinton and while also getting more progressive ideas into local elections. The White House is only one of many elections going on and conservatives have dominated the smaller elections for almost two decades. I totally support what he is doing.
|
On April 27 2016 14:08 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2016 11:35 xDaunt wrote:On April 27 2016 11:33 BallinWitStalin wrote:On April 27 2016 11:11 xDaunt wrote:On April 27 2016 11:04 Introvert wrote:On April 27 2016 11:02 xDaunt wrote:On April 27 2016 11:00 Introvert wrote:On April 27 2016 10:52 xDaunt wrote:Bernie supporters are more likely to flake out than the republicans. How do you figure? Clinton is more of a liberal Dem than Trump is a Republican. Bernie is rallying young voters who are notoriously flakey. I also expect Trump to make some big deals to get the Republican Party to rally around him. I just don't know what that means. Getting the party to rally around him is one thing, but getting people's votes is another. I wonder if Trump is really scary enough that Dems will show up just to vote against. Edit: I think you are right about the party, maybe. Trump can't self fund the general and so far donors are reluctant. I don't think that voting against someone is enough of a motivation to drive turnout. People need something to vote for. While I am inclined to agree with you in general on this principle, I don't think America has ever seen anyone like Trump run before. I genuinely think that's it's difficult to make predictions about voter turnout, based on that. It's too much of an unknown, and there's no previous experiences to really base expectations on that are (roughly) analogous. People said a lot of the same shit about Reagan. You voting Trump in the general Dauntless?
Yep. I sure as hell am not voting for Hillary.
|
|
|
On April 27 2016 23:41 Barrin wrote:
You know how Cruz and Kasich don't seem to have a chance but are still in the race trying to bring it to a brokered convention?
Bernie is also trying to bring it to a brokered convention where he can try to convince more delegates to vote for him. I believe he plans to use the fact that he's doing much better against Trump in national polls than Hillary is as one of his main points.
There is no way the DNC is going to be brokered convention. Hillary will get her 51%
What Bernie wants is to be able to say "These millions of people voted for my idea's. how about adopting some of them so they will vote for Hillary".
|
On April 27 2016 23:41 Barrin wrote:
You know how Cruz and Kasich don't seem to have a chance but are still in the race trying to bring it to a brokered convention?
Bernie is also trying to bring it to a brokered convention where he can try to convince more delegates to vote for him. I believe he plans to use the fact that he's doing much better against Trump in national polls than Hillary is as one of his main points.
Read the press statement. He is no longer trying to be president. He's about a month late, but better than nothing.
|
|
|
Yeah, its called reading between the lines. He isn’t going to contest the nomination in a party he is not part of at their own convention. That is beyond stupid. He is going to take his issues to the remaining states and use his visibility to help other progressives that agree with his views. He wants to keep the discussion going, which is one of the main reasons he entered the race in the first place.
|
|
|
On April 27 2016 22:19 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2016 22:14 Incognoto wrote:
He's only 300 delegates behind?
That's not a bad number. He needs 64% of all remaining delegates. That's almost 2:1. Clinton is up in CA and that's only gonna get better after last night. Delegates are awarded proportionally. Bernie has already indirectly said he's not running to win at this point. Clinton's win in NY clearly took a giant Dump on Sandernista morale, as evidenced by CT. Last night's results are lights out for the shaky support he had. When you run a campaign fueled by such intense rhetoric, you need to be winning. Losing so badly, using Sanders' rhetoric, makes people lose confidence, as we've seen. Looks like we were right all along. In the end, he missed his mark by quite a bit.
I was referring to the relative difference between the amount of support both candidates received, which isn't all that high.
Bernie won't win but that's not my point. Bernie, a progressive candidate who spoke out about some important issues (his campaign wasn't only rhetoric only, lol), garnered an interesting amount of support relative to Clinton.
Interesting to see that, that's my point.
|
On April 28 2016 00:14 Barrin wrote:
Yup. I rather disagree with Mohdoo saying "the dream is so fucking dead".
The dream of him being president is 100% dead. I love the idea of him saying a bunch of super liberal shit. He is great at spreading the liberal message. It's pretty amazing what he has done. As long as he stops trying to actually beat Clinton, I'm cool with it. But this whole thing of trying to take down Clinton has just been awkward since NY.
There's a huge difference between spreading his message and trying to be president. Clinton got a whole lot more votes than him, so he gave up *being president*. He's extremely valuable to the party and I am glad he's keeping up *spreading his message*. The crucial thing was the need for mud flinging to stop, and it seems that's the case.
|
On April 28 2016 00:14 Barrin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2016 00:04 Plansix wrote:
Yeah, its called reading between the lines. Indeed "it" is. Show nested quote +He isn’t going to contest the nomination in a party he is not part of at their own convention. That is beyond stupid. Aye, that does sound silly. But irrelevant, because he is in fact in their party. Show nested quote +He is going to take his issues to the remaining states and use his visibility to help other progressives that agree with his views. He wants to keep the discussion going, Yup. I rather disagree with Mohdoo saying "the dream is so fucking dead".
Sanders was an independent until his run this year, which is how he got on the ticket.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
