|
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 June 07 2016 10:42 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2016 10:39 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 07 2016 10:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
The irony in all of this us this now screws even more as Sander supporters will either stay home or go third party.
I can honestly see this being how Clinton loses against Trump. I predict most of the first-time Sanders supporters, especially young ones, lose interest in the election entirely and don't even vote. This, unless Clinton starts massively sucking off Sander's voters she's in for a very rude awakening come election day.
Sandernistas are going to completely forget about this and vote Hillary by then. November is still far away, trump has to try a bit more to grab them. All he has to do is repeatedly mention that Bernie has integrity and is against the establishment just like he is, but criticize Bernie on being a socialist so he doesn't look like he's pandering.
|
I don't really understand how Sanders supporters aren't sickened by the campaign's change in tune re: superdelegates. It's one of the biggest hypocrisies of this election cycle and really leaves a sour taste in my mouth from a guy who pointed out a huge number of problems and systematic issues with the electoral system.
But it's Sanders doing it so it's fine I guess? And they were doing it tacitly every time they said Clinton wouldn't get the nomination in bound delegates alone I suppose, so it's not that new.
|
On June 07 2016 10:48 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2016 10:47 Jaaaaasper wrote:On June 07 2016 10:42 OuchyDathurts wrote:On June 07 2016 10:39 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 07 2016 10:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
The irony in all of this us this now screws even more as Sander supporters will either stay home or go third party.
I can honestly see this being how Clinton loses against Trump. I predict most of the first-time Sanders supporters, especially young ones, lose interest in the election entirely and don't even vote. This, unless Clinton starts massively sucking off Sander's voters she's in for a very rude awakening come election day. Yeah just like Obama was in for a rude awakening due to Clinton supporters in 2008. If you think Clinton has the same appeal as Obama I don't know that I can help you.
Obama, Sanders and Warren will be campaigning for Clinton for months. It'll be fine.
|
|
|
On June 07 2016 10:47 Jaaaaasper wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2016 10:42 OuchyDathurts wrote:On June 07 2016 10:39 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 07 2016 10:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
The irony in all of this us this now screws even more as Sander supporters will either stay home or go third party.
I can honestly see this being how Clinton loses against Trump. I predict most of the first-time Sanders supporters, especially young ones, lose interest in the election entirely and don't even vote. This, unless Clinton starts massively sucking off Sander's voters she's in for a very rude awakening come election day. Yeah just like Obama was in for a rude awakening due to Clinton supporters in 2008.
2008 and 2016 are entirely different elections and the Obama-Clinton feud is nothing like the Sanders-Clinton feud.
The democratic party was fractured just as much as the republican party this year.
|
On June 07 2016 11:01 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2016 10:47 Jaaaaasper wrote:On June 07 2016 10:42 OuchyDathurts wrote:On June 07 2016 10:39 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 07 2016 10:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
The irony in all of this us this now screws even more as Sander supporters will either stay home or go third party.
I can honestly see this being how Clinton loses against Trump. I predict most of the first-time Sanders supporters, especially young ones, lose interest in the election entirely and don't even vote. This, unless Clinton starts massively sucking off Sander's voters she's in for a very rude awakening come election day. Yeah just like Obama was in for a rude awakening due to Clinton supporters in 2008. 2008 and 2016 are entirely different elections and the Obama-Clinton feud is nothing like the Sanders-Clinton feud. The democratic party was fractured just as much as the republican party this year.
Just like 2008. But its different this time, we get it. Of course, so is the GOP. And people vastly over estimate the Bernie influence and the number of people who will not vote. Internet noise does not translate into reality at a one to one ratio.
|
The difference between 2016 and 2008 for the democrats is that, this year, the candidate who is not expanding the party's base is going to win the nomination. Sanders voters -- especially the young ones -- are far less likely to vote this fall with Hillary as the candidate.
|
I mean, how is this really relevant? I'm pretty sure regardless of Bernie Hillary is going to win the female, hispanic and black vote. Like is it even mathematically possible if you map the demographics down that Trump can win?
|
On June 07 2016 10:48 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2016 10:47 Jaaaaasper wrote:On June 07 2016 10:42 OuchyDathurts wrote:On June 07 2016 10:39 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 07 2016 10:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
The irony in all of this us this now screws even more as Sander supporters will either stay home or go third party.
I can honestly see this being how Clinton loses against Trump. I predict most of the first-time Sanders supporters, especially young ones, lose interest in the election entirely and don't even vote. This, unless Clinton starts massively sucking off Sander's voters she's in for a very rude awakening come election day. Yeah just like Obama was in for a rude awakening due to Clinton supporters in 2008. If you think Clinton has the same appeal as Obama I don't know that I can help you.
If you think that most Bernie supporters aren't going to support Hillary I don't know what I can do to help you. Most of the bernieorbust crowd aren't democrats to begin wiht, most of Bernies voters will vote for Hillary, becuase Trump is far worse for their goals than she is. Plus lets be honest Trump is so appalling to everyone left of the far right that Hillary doesn't need the bernie or bust crowd.
|
On June 07 2016 11:01 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2016 10:47 Jaaaaasper wrote:On June 07 2016 10:42 OuchyDathurts wrote:On June 07 2016 10:39 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 07 2016 10:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
The irony in all of this us this now screws even more as Sander supporters will either stay home or go third party.
I can honestly see this being how Clinton loses against Trump. I predict most of the first-time Sanders supporters, especially young ones, lose interest in the election entirely and don't even vote. This, unless Clinton starts massively sucking off Sander's voters she's in for a very rude awakening come election day. Yeah just like Obama was in for a rude awakening due to Clinton supporters in 2008. 2008 and 2016 are entirely different elections and the Obama-Clinton feud is nothing like the Sanders-Clinton feud. The democratic party was fractured just as much as the republican party this year.
I don't think you remember just how strong the PUMA movement was, or how bitterly fought the 2008 primaries was. Clinton voters at the tail-end of the primaries were incredibly anti-Obama, and the poll numbers reflect it.
In May 2008, less than 50% of Clinton voters would not vote for Obama and ~33% would vote McCain over Obama.
In comparison, in May 2016, something like 69% would vote for Clinton and a bare 20% said they'd vote Trump.
source1
source2
By the numbers, you're entirely incorrect here. The Democratic party is less fractured than in 2008.
|
On June 07 2016 11:15 Jaaaaasper wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2016 10:48 OuchyDathurts wrote:On June 07 2016 10:47 Jaaaaasper wrote:On June 07 2016 10:42 OuchyDathurts wrote:On June 07 2016 10:39 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 07 2016 10:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
The irony in all of this us this now screws even more as Sander supporters will either stay home or go third party.
I can honestly see this being how Clinton loses against Trump. I predict most of the first-time Sanders supporters, especially young ones, lose interest in the election entirely and don't even vote. This, unless Clinton starts massively sucking off Sander's voters she's in for a very rude awakening come election day. Yeah just like Obama was in for a rude awakening due to Clinton supporters in 2008. If you think Clinton has the same appeal as Obama I don't know that I can help you. If you think that most Bernie supporters aren't going to support Hillary I don't know what I can do to help you. Most of the bernieorbust crowd aren't democrats to begin wiht, most of Bernies voters will vote for Hillary, becuase Trump is far worse for their goals than she is. Plus lets be honest Trump is so appalling to everyone left of the far right that Hillary doesn't need the bernie or bust crowd.
There's been a considerable amount of work done by 538 and others which show this.
You know those friends who say the military budget should be all put in education? Those people weren't gonna vote for anyone but Bernie anyway.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the nature of the fracture is quite different, at least for some not insubstantial segment of sanders people.
sure, a big majority of sanders supporters would be voting for clinton, but a lot more would not be voting compared to 08.
this is especially true for rural bernie supporters with no strong ties to the democratic party. the youth will come around.
|
They have their own Bernie Bingo game. How many would you cross off? The lead in speaker mentioned, "social justice" and "you're on the right side of history" memes.
Bernie Speaking Live
Update: He's adding fuel to the fire right now, doesn't sound like a concession yet.
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On June 07 2016 09:53 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Bernie's entire campaign is a hilarious ironic joke
He ran on a borderline communist platform of redistribution of wealth from the 1% to the 99% with adding all sorts of free government programs to benefit the masses.
And what he ended up doing was taking 200 million dollars in donations from the 99% and giving it back to the 1%
So how would you run a campaign without money?
|
your Country52797 Posts
On June 07 2016 11:27 SK.Testie wrote:They have their own Bernie Bingo game. How many would you cross off? The lead in speaker mentioned, "social justice" and "you're on the right side of history" memes. Bernie Speaking Live+ Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mq5hrUDoYo
The average reddit thread would get bingo in several different ways, honestly.
|
On June 07 2016 11:08 xDaunt wrote:
The difference between 2016 and 2008 for the democrats is that, this year, the candidate who is not expanding the party's base is going to win the nomination. Sanders voters -- especially the young ones -- are far less likely to vote this fall with Hillary as the candidate.
You didn't explain how the AP calling the race for Clinton today, thus going against the scenario she favored (her campaign had been asking undecided superdelegates not to endorse her before tomorrow, so that she would clinch the magic number with the states voting that day), is supposed to indicate that the "mainstream media is in the tank for Hillary". Care to explain your reasoning? Is there someone at the AP who thought "you know what, let's fabricate numbers to call her the presumptive nominee before the next primaries"? How does it work exactly?
|
WASHINGTON (AP) — Florida's attorney general personally solicited a political contribution from Donald Trump around the same time her office deliberated joining an investigation of alleged fraud at Trump University and its affiliates
The new disclosure from Attorney General Pam Bondi's spokesman to The Associated Press on Monday provides additional details around the unusual circumstances of Trump's $25,000 donation to Bondi.
The money came from a Trump family foundation in apparent violation of rules surrounding political activities by charities. A political group backing Bondi's re-election, called And Justice for All, reported receiving the check Sept. 17, 2013 — four days after Bondi's office publicly announced she was considering joining a New York state probe of Trump University's activities, according to a 2013 report in the Orlando Sentinel.
After the check came in, Bondi's office nixed suing Trump, citing insufficient grounds to proceed.
Bondi declined repeated requests for an interview on Monday, referring all questions to Marc Reichelderfer, a political consultant who worked for her most re-election effort.
Reichelderfer told AP that Bondi spoke with Trump "several weeks" before her office publicly announced it was deliberating whether to join a lawsuit proposed by New York's Democratic attorney general. Reichelfelder said that Bondi was unaware of dozens of consumer complaints received by her office about Trump's real-estate seminars at the time she requested the donation.
"The process took at least several weeks, from the time they spoke to the time they received the contribution," Reichelderfer told AP.
The timing of the donation by Trump is notable because the now presumptive Republican presidential nominee has said he expects and receives favors from politicians to whom he gives money.
Source
|
lol @ people claiming the corporate media isn't in the tank for Hillary. Kwiz must be one of those folks who thinks Chelsea's first job was totally legit.
|
On June 07 2016 11:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
lol @ people claiming the corporate media isn't in the tank for Hillary. Kwiz must be one of those folks who thinks Chelsea's first job was totally legit.
I am looking so forward to what you say tomorrow.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
nothing wrong with leveraging publicity for charitable causes, while also making a living. better than most charities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CkSkTI6UgAAmegR.jpg)
