|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On February 07 2020 22:30 Broetchenholer wrote:
We don't. Nobody disputes that the dnc fucked up the caucus. I dispute the theory of some people that this fuck up was orchestrated because Bernie was winning. Which was the immediate reaction of some posters, because the dnc is bad.
@gh: so, please explain me how Pete profited from all of this, whil Bernie did not.
I'm having this discussion because your first intervention talked about how things would stay the same in the end, suggesting to me that you didn't think a recanvass was necessary (or a good idea).
|
|
|
Indeed, given the current state of things, Bernie benefits from having Biden in the race while Pete is hot.
|
On February 07 2020 22:36 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2020 22:30 Broetchenholer wrote:
We don't. Nobody disputes that the dnc fucked up the caucus. I dispute the theory of some people that this fuck up was orchestrated because Bernie was winning. Which was the immediate reaction of some posters, because the dnc is bad.
@gh: so, please explain me how Pete profited from all of this, whil Bernie did not. I haven't seen anyone argue that the fuck up was orchestrated because Bernie was winning. Presumably vague accusations of "conspiracy theories" are aimed at me and I have already said multiple times that these issues go back decades so that isn't me (or anyone I've noticed here).
Getting that gaslighted feeling again. Are you saying you didn’t think the mess in Iowa (delay in reporting first results, more delays in reporting remaining results, discrepancies and internal inconsistencies in reported results, etc.) was actually intentionally orchestrated by the DNC to hurt Bernie? If you’re wondering why people got the impression that’s your position I could show you some of your posts that would seem to imply that. For starters, didn’t you put “mass incompetence” in scare quotes just in the last page or two, as though you thought it was absurd to think this outcome wasn’t intentional?
Or are you just bristling at the term “conspiracy theory?” Because it’s literally a theory that the DNC conspired to orchestrate what looks like massive logistical failures but was actually according to plan, is it not?
|
On February 08 2020 00:33 farvacola wrote:
Indeed, given the current state of things, Bernie benefits from having Biden in the race while Pete is hot.
Yes and no. At least previously Biden's supporters have had Sanders as the second choice. But it's unclear if that still holds (I couldn't find post-Iowa data), but if it did hold true then Sanders would have the most to gain from Biden dropping out.
It's a bit of a weird state right now where Warren supports are digging in hard. Almost by definition, otherwise they would abandon her because she has no path to victory. It's unclear how much of her strong base remaining will go to Bernie given what Warren said/did and that Bernie is the obstacle that kept her from doing better (well besides herself).
Biden supports are jumping ship, which we will probably continue to see, but by a lot of accounts 'electability' was their primary reason for support so they really only care about who the perceive as the likely winner. Which would be Bernie except for the media spin around Iowa.
Pete diehards will never vote Bernie so they're just sort of out there doing their own thing. So it's good that Pete is in the race since his votes would never be Sander's anyways, but the media spin from Iowa is probably costing Sanders a lot of Biden people jumping ship and if Pete somehow wins NH then they'll probably start to solidify as Pete supporters which would be bad for Sanders.
|
On February 08 2020 00:54 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2020 00:33 farvacola wrote:
Indeed, given the current state of things, Bernie benefits from having Biden in the race while Pete is hot. Yes and no. At least previously Biden's supporters have had Sanders as the second choice. But it's unclear if that still holds (I couldn't find post-Iowa data), but if it did hold true then Sanders would have the most to gain from Biden dropping out. It's a bit of a weird state right now where Warren supports are digging in hard. Almost by definition, otherwise they would abandon her because she has no path to victory. It's unclear how much of her strong base remaining will go to Bernie given what Warren said/did and that Bernie is the obstacle that kept her from doing better (well besides herself). Biden supports are jumping ship, which we will probably continue to see, but by a lot of accounts 'electability' was their primary reason for support so they really only care about who the perceive as the likely winner. Which would be Bernie except for the media spin around Iowa. Pete diehards will never vote Bernie so they're just sort of out there doing their own thing. So it's good that Pete is in the race since his votes would never be Sander's anyways, but the media spin from Iowa is probably costing Sanders a lot of Biden people jumping ship and if Pete somehow wins NH then they'll probably start to solidify as Pete supporters which would be bad for Sanders.
Seems like reasonable analysis.
Problem for Pete after leaving NH (presuming he does well) is that he has ~0% Black support and that shows no sign of changing.
EDIT: Nationally he still trails Bloomberg
|
On February 08 2020 00:59 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2020 00:54 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 00:33 farvacola wrote:
Indeed, given the current state of things, Bernie benefits from having Biden in the race while Pete is hot. Yes and no. At least previously Biden's supporters have had Sanders as the second choice. But it's unclear if that still holds (I couldn't find post-Iowa data), but if it did hold true then Sanders would have the most to gain from Biden dropping out. It's a bit of a weird state right now where Warren supports are digging in hard. Almost by definition, otherwise they would abandon her because she has no path to victory. It's unclear how much of her strong base remaining will go to Bernie given what Warren said/did and that Bernie is the obstacle that kept her from doing better (well besides herself). Biden supports are jumping ship, which we will probably continue to see, but by a lot of accounts 'electability' was their primary reason for support so they really only care about who the perceive as the likely winner. Which would be Bernie except for the media spin around Iowa. Pete diehards will never vote Bernie so they're just sort of out there doing their own thing. So it's good that Pete is in the race since his votes would never be Sander's anyways, but the media spin from Iowa is probably costing Sanders a lot of Biden people jumping ship and if Pete somehow wins NH then they'll probably start to solidify as Pete supporters which would be bad for Sanders. Seems like reasonable analysis. Problem for Pete after leaving NH (presuming he does well) is that he has ~0% Black support and that shows no sign of changing.
Yeah but I really wouldn't want to take that bet as a Sander's supporter. If Pete wins NH + "wins" Iowa then the media narrative can override the hatred. Also 0% black support can just as easily mean that demographic doesn't vote in the primary.
Winning NH is going to be really really important for Sanders I think, but if he does then Pete is probably going to be in real trouble.
|
On February 08 2020 01:04 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2020 00:59 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 08 2020 00:54 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 00:33 farvacola wrote:
Indeed, given the current state of things, Bernie benefits from having Biden in the race while Pete is hot. Yes and no. At least previously Biden's supporters have had Sanders as the second choice. But it's unclear if that still holds (I couldn't find post-Iowa data), but if it did hold true then Sanders would have the most to gain from Biden dropping out. It's a bit of a weird state right now where Warren supports are digging in hard. Almost by definition, otherwise they would abandon her because she has no path to victory. It's unclear how much of her strong base remaining will go to Bernie given what Warren said/did and that Bernie is the obstacle that kept her from doing better (well besides herself). Biden supports are jumping ship, which we will probably continue to see, but by a lot of accounts 'electability' was their primary reason for support so they really only care about who the perceive as the likely winner. Which would be Bernie except for the media spin around Iowa. Pete diehards will never vote Bernie so they're just sort of out there doing their own thing. So it's good that Pete is in the race since his votes would never be Sander's anyways, but the media spin from Iowa is probably costing Sanders a lot of Biden people jumping ship and if Pete somehow wins NH then they'll probably start to solidify as Pete supporters which would be bad for Sanders. Seems like reasonable analysis. Problem for Pete after leaving NH (presuming he does well) is that he has ~0% Black support and that shows no sign of changing. Yeah but I really wouldn't want to take that bet as a Sander's supporter. If Pete wins NH + "wins" Iowa then the media narrative can override the hatred. Also 0% black support can just as easily mean that demographic doesn't vote in the primary. Winning NH is going to be really really important for Sanders I think, but if he does then Pete is probably going to be in real trouble.
I would. Younger Black voters where Sanders dominates will still be voting (provided Iowa doesn't make them think it is useless).
Not sure what hatred you're talking about? Anything less than a 10%+ (maybe more) win will be painted as a loss for Sanders by the media imo so I'd agree he has to do well in NH to inhibit those aiming for a contested convention.
|
I went through the thread quickly to see if I made everything up in my head, but I think I did not. The discussion ignited around GHs post, that the dnc specifically posted their first result to show Bernie losing. Before he had already stated, that surely nobody believes Bernie could be losing. This was taken by ChristianS and me as problematic, because it would require the knowledge that Bernie would win, which could not be had.
Basically, as the dnc did not publish numbers that showed Bernie winning, the dnc must have cheated. Also, the dnc cheats.
Now, we still don't have correct numbers that show who has won, but I fail to see how a difference in 0.2 percent of the public vote matters in terms of momentum. That does not mean we should accept faulty numbers, at some point these need to be correct. But this will not shape the public discourse of how the candidates did in iowa.
|
On February 08 2020 01:10 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2020 01:04 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 00:59 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 08 2020 00:54 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 00:33 farvacola wrote:
Indeed, given the current state of things, Bernie benefits from having Biden in the race while Pete is hot. Yes and no. At least previously Biden's supporters have had Sanders as the second choice. But it's unclear if that still holds (I couldn't find post-Iowa data), but if it did hold true then Sanders would have the most to gain from Biden dropping out. It's a bit of a weird state right now where Warren supports are digging in hard. Almost by definition, otherwise they would abandon her because she has no path to victory. It's unclear how much of her strong base remaining will go to Bernie given what Warren said/did and that Bernie is the obstacle that kept her from doing better (well besides herself). Biden supports are jumping ship, which we will probably continue to see, but by a lot of accounts 'electability' was their primary reason for support so they really only care about who the perceive as the likely winner. Which would be Bernie except for the media spin around Iowa. Pete diehards will never vote Bernie so they're just sort of out there doing their own thing. So it's good that Pete is in the race since his votes would never be Sander's anyways, but the media spin from Iowa is probably costing Sanders a lot of Biden people jumping ship and if Pete somehow wins NH then they'll probably start to solidify as Pete supporters which would be bad for Sanders. Seems like reasonable analysis. Problem for Pete after leaving NH (presuming he does well) is that he has ~0% Black support and that shows no sign of changing. Yeah but I really wouldn't want to take that bet as a Sander's supporter. If Pete wins NH + "wins" Iowa then the media narrative can override the hatred. Also 0% black support can just as easily mean that demographic doesn't vote in the primary. Winning NH is going to be really really important for Sanders I think, but if he does then Pete is probably going to be in real trouble. Not sure what hatred you're talking about?
The hatred I mean is 0% Black Support Pete has. Maybe it's unfair to call it hatred, but if it's 0% support it sure seems like it :D.
On February 08 2020 01:10 Broetchenholer wrote:
But this will not shape the public discourse of how the candidates did in iowa.
What? It already has. Pete has enjoyed days and days of being treated like a winner which was helped immensely by the slow staggered results release and inaccuracies.
If the caucus went normally, besides the fact that Bernie probably actually won SDEs, the only reasonable narrative would be an actual tie with a note about Sander's much better vote total. Instead the media got to use the late counting of the sat. caucuses to make a narrative based around a +2 or +3 SDE% lead by Pete Buttigieg.
|
On February 08 2020 01:12 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2020 01:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 08 2020 01:04 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 00:59 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 08 2020 00:54 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 00:33 farvacola wrote:
Indeed, given the current state of things, Bernie benefits from having Biden in the race while Pete is hot. Yes and no. At least previously Biden's supporters have had Sanders as the second choice. But it's unclear if that still holds (I couldn't find post-Iowa data), but if it did hold true then Sanders would have the most to gain from Biden dropping out. It's a bit of a weird state right now where Warren supports are digging in hard. Almost by definition, otherwise they would abandon her because she has no path to victory. It's unclear how much of her strong base remaining will go to Bernie given what Warren said/did and that Bernie is the obstacle that kept her from doing better (well besides herself). Biden supports are jumping ship, which we will probably continue to see, but by a lot of accounts 'electability' was their primary reason for support so they really only care about who the perceive as the likely winner. Which would be Bernie except for the media spin around Iowa. Pete diehards will never vote Bernie so they're just sort of out there doing their own thing. So it's good that Pete is in the race since his votes would never be Sander's anyways, but the media spin from Iowa is probably costing Sanders a lot of Biden people jumping ship and if Pete somehow wins NH then they'll probably start to solidify as Pete supporters which would be bad for Sanders. Seems like reasonable analysis. Problem for Pete after leaving NH (presuming he does well) is that he has ~0% Black support and that shows no sign of changing. Yeah but I really wouldn't want to take that bet as a Sander's supporter. If Pete wins NH + "wins" Iowa then the media narrative can override the hatred. Also 0% black support can just as easily mean that demographic doesn't vote in the primary. Winning NH is going to be really really important for Sanders I think, but if he does then Pete is probably going to be in real trouble. Not sure what hatred you're talking about? The hatred I mean is 0% Black Support Pete has. Maybe it's unfair to call it hatred, but if it's 0% support it sure seems like it :D.
Didn't want to assume but yeah it is not "hatred" but a combination of several factors. Primarily the little record he has is bad. Firing the Black police chief for exposing racism in the police department and replacing him with a white cop linked to a questionable homicide is enough for most to dismiss him.
He'd need something like Obama campaigning with/for Pete state to state to get more than the margin of error above 0% support among Black voters
|
On February 08 2020 01:12 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2020 01:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 08 2020 01:04 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 00:59 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 08 2020 00:54 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 00:33 farvacola wrote:
Indeed, given the current state of things, Bernie benefits from having Biden in the race while Pete is hot. Yes and no. At least previously Biden's supporters have had Sanders as the second choice. But it's unclear if that still holds (I couldn't find post-Iowa data), but if it did hold true then Sanders would have the most to gain from Biden dropping out. It's a bit of a weird state right now where Warren supports are digging in hard. Almost by definition, otherwise they would abandon her because she has no path to victory. It's unclear how much of her strong base remaining will go to Bernie given what Warren said/did and that Bernie is the obstacle that kept her from doing better (well besides herself). Biden supports are jumping ship, which we will probably continue to see, but by a lot of accounts 'electability' was their primary reason for support so they really only care about who the perceive as the likely winner. Which would be Bernie except for the media spin around Iowa. Pete diehards will never vote Bernie so they're just sort of out there doing their own thing. So it's good that Pete is in the race since his votes would never be Sander's anyways, but the media spin from Iowa is probably costing Sanders a lot of Biden people jumping ship and if Pete somehow wins NH then they'll probably start to solidify as Pete supporters which would be bad for Sanders. Seems like reasonable analysis. Problem for Pete after leaving NH (presuming he does well) is that he has ~0% Black support and that shows no sign of changing. Yeah but I really wouldn't want to take that bet as a Sander's supporter. If Pete wins NH + "wins" Iowa then the media narrative can override the hatred. Also 0% black support can just as easily mean that demographic doesn't vote in the primary. Winning NH is going to be really really important for Sanders I think, but if he does then Pete is probably going to be in real trouble. Not sure what hatred you're talking about? The hatred I mean is 0% Black Support Pete has. Maybe it's unfair to call it hatred, but if it's 0% support it sure seems like it :D. Show nested quote +On February 08 2020 01:10 Broetchenholer wrote:
But this will not shape the public discourse of how the candidates did in iowa. What? It already has. Pete has enjoyed days and days of being treated like a winner which was helped immensely by the slow staggered results release and inaccuracies. If the caucus went normally, besides the fact that Bernie probably actually won SDEs, the only reasonable narrative would be an actual tie with a note about Sander's much better vote total. Instead the media got to use the late counting of the sat. caucuses to make a narrative based around a +2 or +3 SDE% lead by Pete Buttigieg.
Reinforced by the fact that they counted the satellites, results that they must have had from the start as they were the first caucuses held, at the end / very end. Count the satellites first and the narrative of the three days is that Bernie is leading with Pete slightly behind.
|
My prediction for this debate:
1. Buttigieg and Bernie basically full on at war with each other. Bernie will paint Buttigieg as clumsy, rich-serving and out of touch.
2. Buttigieg will do his classic "look guys I'm just trying to make promises I can keep" bullshit
3. Biden will try to get loud and mad to regain a sense of relevance, but it'll just be awkward and reinforce his decline
4. Warren can go 2 ways. First, she realizes attacking Bernie is only a bad thing and goes after Buttigieg. Or she decides to try to overthrow Bernie.
I really need Warren to start bending the knee. If NH goes the way it looks like its going to, her campaign is really awkward moving forward. Nevada, SC, California, Texas all look bad for Warren. Where does she get delegates?
Right now Warren's only reason to stay in the race is to hope to be either Buttigieg or Biden's VP.
|
On February 08 2020 01:45 Mohdoo wrote:
Right now Warren's only reason to stay in the race is to hope to be either Buttigieg or Biden's VP.
Which is baffling because she was a shoe in for Bernie's VP if she didn't try to trample him to regain relevancy. She may still be.
But in general if she continues to tack right, then it tells you exactly why so few brought into her campaign and what she's really all about.
|
On February 08 2020 01:51 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2020 01:45 Mohdoo wrote:
Right now Warren's only reason to stay in the race is to hope to be either Buttigieg or Biden's VP. Which is baffling because she was a shoe in for Bernie's VP if she didn't try to trample him to regain relevancy. She may still be. But in general if she continues to tack right, then it tells you exactly why so few brought into her campaign and what she's really all about.
If she bends the knee by being a liberal attack dog during tonight's debate, I don't mind her being VP. I honestly don't know who I'd prefer other than Yang right now. My ideal is still Bernie+Yang.
|
On February 08 2020 01:12 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2020 01:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 08 2020 01:04 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 00:59 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 08 2020 00:54 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 00:33 farvacola wrote:
Indeed, given the current state of things, Bernie benefits from having Biden in the race while Pete is hot. Yes and no. At least previously Biden's supporters have had Sanders as the second choice. But it's unclear if that still holds (I couldn't find post-Iowa data), but if it did hold true then Sanders would have the most to gain from Biden dropping out. It's a bit of a weird state right now where Warren supports are digging in hard. Almost by definition, otherwise they would abandon her because she has no path to victory. It's unclear how much of her strong base remaining will go to Bernie given what Warren said/did and that Bernie is the obstacle that kept her from doing better (well besides herself). Biden supports are jumping ship, which we will probably continue to see, but by a lot of accounts 'electability' was their primary reason for support so they really only care about who the perceive as the likely winner. Which would be Bernie except for the media spin around Iowa. Pete diehards will never vote Bernie so they're just sort of out there doing their own thing. So it's good that Pete is in the race since his votes would never be Sander's anyways, but the media spin from Iowa is probably costing Sanders a lot of Biden people jumping ship and if Pete somehow wins NH then they'll probably start to solidify as Pete supporters which would be bad for Sanders. Seems like reasonable analysis. Problem for Pete after leaving NH (presuming he does well) is that he has ~0% Black support and that shows no sign of changing. Yeah but I really wouldn't want to take that bet as a Sander's supporter. If Pete wins NH + "wins" Iowa then the media narrative can override the hatred. Also 0% black support can just as easily mean that demographic doesn't vote in the primary. Winning NH is going to be really really important for Sanders I think, but if he does then Pete is probably going to be in real trouble. Not sure what hatred you're talking about? The hatred I mean is 0% Black Support Pete has. Maybe it's unfair to call it hatred, but if it's 0% support it sure seems like it :D. Show nested quote +On February 08 2020 01:10 Broetchenholer wrote:
But this will not shape the public discourse of how the candidates did in iowa. What? It already has. Pete has enjoyed days and days of being treated like a winner which was helped immensely by the slow staggered results release and inaccuracies. If the caucus went normally, besides the fact that Bernie probably actually won SDEs, the only reasonable narrative would be an actual tie with a note about Sander's much better vote total. Instead the media got to use the late counting of the sat. caucuses to make a narrative based around a +2 or +3 SDE% lead by Pete Buttigieg.
But Pete seems to still have the lead. The final numbers might in the end be slightly closer, but if you want to call a winner its the major. I look at those numbers and see two clear winners, no matter from which day they are.
|
As long as Booty doesn't pull off some insane miracle by winning SC, I don't mind him getting more delegates in Iowa. Of course I want Bernie to ravage the primary and force apologies from every other candidate for opposing his might, but Biden and Booty's rivalry going on as long as possible is good. But Warren needs to stop. She's toast.
|
The polls fluctuate too much every week to get anything meaningful out of them, unless they're taken the day before the primary. All you can gather from them is that any candidate who's less than 5% is irrelevant.
|
On February 08 2020 02:31 Broetchenholer wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2020 01:12 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 01:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 08 2020 01:04 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 00:59 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 08 2020 00:54 Logo wrote:On February 08 2020 00:33 farvacola wrote:
Indeed, given the current state of things, Bernie benefits from having Biden in the race while Pete is hot. Yes and no. At least previously Biden's supporters have had Sanders as the second choice. But it's unclear if that still holds (I couldn't find post-Iowa data), but if it did hold true then Sanders would have the most to gain from Biden dropping out. It's a bit of a weird state right now where Warren supports are digging in hard. Almost by definition, otherwise they would abandon her because she has no path to victory. It's unclear how much of her strong base remaining will go to Bernie given what Warren said/did and that Bernie is the obstacle that kept her from doing better (well besides herself). Biden supports are jumping ship, which we will probably continue to see, but by a lot of accounts 'electability' was their primary reason for support so they really only care about who the perceive as the likely winner. Which would be Bernie except for the media spin around Iowa. Pete diehards will never vote Bernie so they're just sort of out there doing their own thing. So it's good that Pete is in the race since his votes would never be Sander's anyways, but the media spin from Iowa is probably costing Sanders a lot of Biden people jumping ship and if Pete somehow wins NH then they'll probably start to solidify as Pete supporters which would be bad for Sanders. Seems like reasonable analysis. Problem for Pete after leaving NH (presuming he does well) is that he has ~0% Black support and that shows no sign of changing. Yeah but I really wouldn't want to take that bet as a Sander's supporter. If Pete wins NH + "wins" Iowa then the media narrative can override the hatred. Also 0% black support can just as easily mean that demographic doesn't vote in the primary. Winning NH is going to be really really important for Sanders I think, but if he does then Pete is probably going to be in real trouble. Not sure what hatred you're talking about? The hatred I mean is 0% Black Support Pete has. Maybe it's unfair to call it hatred, but if it's 0% support it sure seems like it :D. On February 08 2020 01:10 Broetchenholer wrote:
But this will not shape the public discourse of how the candidates did in iowa. What? It already has. Pete has enjoyed days and days of being treated like a winner which was helped immensely by the slow staggered results release and inaccuracies. If the caucus went normally, besides the fact that Bernie probably actually won SDEs, the only reasonable narrative would be an actual tie with a note about Sander's much better vote total. Instead the media got to use the late counting of the sat. caucuses to make a narrative based around a +2 or +3 SDE% lead by Pete Buttigieg. But Pete seems to still have the lead. The final numbers might in the end be slightly closer, but if you want to call a winner its the major. I look at those numbers and see two clear winners, no matter from which day they are.
Why does SDE determine the winner?
|
On February 08 2020 03:30 JohnDelaney wrote:
The polls fluctuate too much every week to get anything meaningful out of them, unless they're taken the day before the primary. All you can gather from them is that any candidate who's less than 5% is irrelevant.
I hope you realize that includes you
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
