|
But the Times HATES THE CLINTONS!!!!
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 13:32 |
|
|
waitwhatno posted:How much damage could Trump possibly cause, if elected? Most likely be the first man to declare a real war through twitter or every other form of social media. it wouldn't matter who it was against or what it was about, the moment he types it is when he's already on the phone with the military demanding the full extent of the US military to attack X.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
blue squares posted:But the Times HATES THE CLINTONS!!!! The editorial board is separate from the newsroom.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Northjayhawk posted:The importance of Iowa is not to pick the winner, it is to kill off a few candidates in a crowded field. You don't have to win Iowa, but you usually can't come in 4th or 5th place. How is JEB! doing these days? He's in 5th place you say? TROIKA CURES GREEK posted:Iowa on the Republican side is incredibly favorable to super religious people, which is why the winner doesn't usually win. Trump winning would almost certainly cement his victory since it's such an unfavorable state demographically for him. The Iowa Dem side demographically is very close to the overall demographics of the democratic party (a little more left but not much in practice) which is why it's a much better predictor. The difference in delegate allocation between parties is very good for Trump and Cruz. The Iowa Democratic caucus is a real caucus. It is the first step in a long process with multiple convention elections. Every step has a minimum viability threshold of 15%. Like most things Republican, the R Iowa Caucus is a bag of garbage wearing a designer suit. The 'caucus' is merely an in-person primary. Delegates to the Republican National Convention are awarded proportionally based on the Statewide total vote. Additionally, there is no viability threshold, just a few rounding rules. If the Republican Caucuses were done like a real caucus, Jeb, Rubio or any one of the establishment candidates could possibly win in the end. But in this stupid rear end system, Trump and Cruz are gonna take away a bunch of delegates while Bush and the others might scrape one or two each. Worse, they are bound to their candidate at the convention unless there is only one candidate nominated (fat loving chance) or after the first ballot. The Republican system is an absolute clusterfuck this year.  Bernie might lose Iowa by technicality anyway. If all his voters are packed into a few counties and he doesn't meet the viability threshold in rural areas, Clinton could walk away with a sizable majority of delegates on a flimsy total vote win or even a GWB-type win. But whining about that is like whining about Congress having more than 240 republicans on a slim national majority of the total vote. Both are working as designed and intended for reasons older than anyone's current political ambitions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:Hillary and Bernie are neck and neck right now in the polls in Iowa, it's anyones game but 538 predicts hillary by quite a large margin. yeah because if i understand it right it works on basically the same principle as the FPTP system for the Presidency, except if the states got votes based on geography rather than population. So basically there's like 100 (made up number) delegate districts, and like 10 of them are the Bernie centric college town. In terms of population, he might be equal with Hillary, but she's got the diffused population on her side.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Lu Yan posted:Like most things Republican, the R Iowa Caucus is a bag of garbage wearing a designer suit. The 'caucus' is merely an in-person primary. Delegates to the Republican National Convention are awarded proportionally based on the Statewide total vote. Additionally, there is no viability threshold, just a few rounding rules. This is the first time they've bound delegates based on the precinct vote totals, a rule change made specifically to deal with the Paulites. It's something they might revise at the convention this year, depending on what they decide to do about Colorado cancelling its caucus poll to get around the binding.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
computer parts posted:yeah because if i understand it right it works on basically the same principle as the FPTP system for the Presidency, except if the states got votes based on geography rather than population. I've heard that Bernie's campaign is shipping students off back to their hometowns to caucus, how well is that going? I can imagine that a few of them wouldn't want to be skipping class on Monday.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
blue squares posted:But the Times HATES THE CLINTONS!!!! There's no other electable democrat running
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
blue squares posted:Is this the first time someone has live-tweeted a mental breakdown over the course of 6 months?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
blue squares posted:But the Times HATES THE CLINTONS!!!! I actually forgot they endorsed her for the 08 primary  I think Nate is in the hahahahahahaha stage of madness, and I'm not looking forward to the hAHAHAheeheehohoAhahaHAAA stage, poor guy  waitwhatno posted:How much damage could Trump possibly cause, if elected? I think we've reassured you before to not freak out over the possibility that Trump will actually become president, but any president will have control of immense military and regulatory resources, obviously, sooooo worst case scenario, it's literally the end of humanity? But I don't see that happening. He's not to be underestimated, but Trump is a lot of talk right now and would probably do his best to preserve the general economic and foreign affairs status quo as president (minus his nativist policies).
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
computer parts posted:yeah because if i understand it right it works on basically the same principle as the FPTP system for the Presidency, except if the states got votes based on geography rather than population. There are 1618 caucus precincts, and then they are counted through the 99 counties, and then the actual delegate count gets determined on the basis, partially, of the 4 federal house districts, but also from the precincts and the county results. In the 2008 Caucus this resulted in Obama getting 2 or 3 fewer delegates then he should have based on how people voted in the caucuses, and Clinton being 2 delegates ahead and Edwards 1 delegate ahead of where they should have been. Also Clinton was second place in delegates despite being 3rd place in the vote. It's a trainwreck.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:How much damage could Trump possibly cause, if elected? He's going to destroy the democratic party by making this country great again, if that's what you mean.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
I don't think Trump the president would be nearly as scary as Trump the candidate. Certainly less scary than Cruz the president. He doesn't have ideology. He'd probably be another harmful buffoon president like Reagan or Dubya.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
computer parts posted:yeah because if i understand it right it works on basically the same principle as the FPTP system for the Presidency, except if the states got votes based on geography rather than population. She's also solidly ahead in recent polls.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
Combed Thunderclap posted:I think we've reassured you before to not freak out over the possibility that Trump will actually become president Nobody expected him to win the primary either. Something really weird is going on and no one understands it completely yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:Nobody expected him to win the primary either. Something really weird is going on and no one understands it completely yet. Maybe the GOP's voter base really is that ignorant and racist and all it took was some rich guy who didn't give a poo poo about what other rich people wanted? It's really not that hard to figure out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
Can someone explain to me (an idiot) why caucuses are anything other than a straight popularity vote? Mimicry of the actual electoral process?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Can someone explain to me (an idiot) why caucuses are anything other than a straight popularity vote? Mimicry of the actual electoral process? Really the Iowa Democratic Caucuses reflect how most party convention delegates were chosen before the 70s, only with more public involvement. It's designed to appease all the party bigwigs, really, by paying attention to all the various bits of the state. Also Iowa can't have just a normal primary election if they want to go before New Hampshire, because New Hampshire state law says that their primary election is to be the first in the nation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/jfritze/status/693481723401756672 Who from the opposition is gonna say I told you so
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Can someone explain to me (an idiot) why caucuses are anything other than a straight popularity vote? Mimicry of the actual electoral process? Back when America was founded, every election was a caucus. You could bring a barrell of beer to the caucus and have everyone who wanted to drink sit on or around it; you could beat the poo poo outta the folk who refused to come to your corner. Caucuses are the most American of traditions, and have become far too civil since the advent of cameras.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Vertical Lime posted:https://twitter.com/jfritze/status/693481723401756672 All sorts of exciting and interesting things are gonna be said. Inevitably someone will ask Trump for his take and it's possible that harnessing the thermal energy therein will produce a high enough yield to drop oil below $10/barrel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
Joementum posted:This is the first time they've bound delegates based on the precinct vote totals, a rule change made specifically to deal with the Paulites. It's something they might revise at the convention this year, depending on what they decide to do about Colorado cancelling its caucus poll to get around the binding. They were supposed to replace it with an actual primary election, but the bill died in the Republican-controlled house. My guess is that nothing is done, the delegates probably will all stand uncommitted. It only really matters if a cluster of Colorado delegates could push any candidate past 50% in the first round.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Vertical Lime posted:https://twitter.com/jfritze/status/693481723401756672 Oh, the faux apeshit brigade will freak out about it. But was there a US president who visited a mosque before? Well hell yes. George W Bush 10 days after 911!
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Can someone explain to me (an idiot) why caucuses are anything other than a straight popularity vote? Mimicry of the actual electoral process? The purpose of the caucus is to build the party organization. They select county and district delegates so that they can get people who want to volunteer for the party connected with their peers. The Presidential selection part of them started as a pure straw poll and only became meaningful after the McGovern reforms in '72.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
So is it looking likely that Trump will win Iowa? Cause that'd be great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:So is it looking likely that Trump will win Iowa? Cause that'd be great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
Obama never needed to visit a Mosque; the White House was converted into one in an unofficial ceremony somewhere in January of 2009.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:So is it looking likely that Trump will win Iowa? Cause that'd be great. I think Cruz will most likely win. The question is how close Trump will come.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
It's been like 10 pages, but I feel like whoever was trying to argue for Ted Kennedy as an anti-establishment figure deserves a special achievement award for bringing hilarious comedy here to D&D.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I mean probably, but it's so hard to know since it's a caucus as opposed to a regular primary. The R side really isn't as complicated as people are making it, Trump is almost certainly going to win at this point. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/30/business/donald-trump-unions.html?_r=0 lol, not just the nomination either.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:Nobody expected him to win the primary either. Something really weird is going on and no one understands it completely yet. Actually I predicted this in september or october, people just didn't pay close enough attention but it was obvious back then he was going to be a solid contender.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
Is anyone else rooting for Cruz to win? If Trump wins the nomination and gets dumpstered in the GE we'll have 4 more years of right-wingers crowing about how they lost because their candidate wasn't conservative enough. Also Trump isn't nearly as evil as Cruz.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:Is anyone else rooting for Cruz to win? If Trump wins the nomination and gets dumpstered in the GE we'll have 4 more years of right-wing hacks crowing that they lost because their candidate wasn't conservative enough. Also Trump isn't nearly as evil as Cruz. That'll happen no matter who the Republican candidate is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Zanzibar Ham posted:That'll happen no matter who the Republican candidate is. I'm not so sure. We haven't tested the theory in the post-tea party era. It would be fun to tune into Glen Beck after Cruz got trounced.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
I want Cruz to win because of all the predictions that he'll hurt the down ticket races the most. Plus I want to see all the inventive ways the rest of the Republicans try and kill him by a thousand cuts
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
Sanders and Clinton have agreed to four more debates http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/clinton-and-sanders-four-more-debates-218448
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
Logikv9 posted:I've heard that Bernie's campaign is shipping students off back to their hometowns to caucus, how well is that going? I can imagine that a few of them wouldn't want to be skipping class on Monday. He may as well try, but I doubt it'll work out. Not many students will want to drive home Monday night and come back early in the morning for classes. Also, if you are a very liberal college student in a more conservative family, it might be uncomfortable to publicly declare to all your family and neighbors that you feel the Bern.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:Is anyone else rooting for Cruz to win? If Trump wins the nomination and gets dumpstered in the GE we'll have 4 more years of right-wingers crowing about how they lost because their candidate wasn't conservative enough. Also Trump isn't nearly as evil as Cruz. Strategically, it would be best if the Donald wins so they can conveniently use that as an excuse to nominate another unelectable turd in 2020. Comedically, it would be best if Cruz wins to see how the gently caress they can explain why their true conservative was killed in the election.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:I don't think Trump the president would be nearly as scary as Trump the candidate. Certainly less scary than Cruz the president. He doesn't have ideology. He'd probably be another harmful buffoon president like Reagan or Dubya. These are the worst Presidents though. Like half of "why did we gently caress this up?" can be traced to Reagan's administration.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 13:32 |
|
|
Northjayhawk posted:Comedically, it would be best if Cruz wins to see how the gently caress they can explain why their true conservative was killed in the election. I can answer this one easier than I can breathe. He would obviously not be conservative enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 20:34
|
|
