|
Hail Satan
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 11:56 |
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:there are elections where the party with increased turnout in the general wins, i assume. i think 2008 is an example. i found an article saying 1972 and 1988 were counter-examples, where the losing party had higher turnout in the primary. Both of those elections were during times of general contentment and happiness with the direction of the country (plus Nixon was the incumbent and HWBush may as well have been,) which is probably why Nixon won 520-17 and HWBush won 426-111
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 05:29
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Hillary cackled as she drew her katana. We came, we saw, he died.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 05:29
|
|
|
CubsWoo posted:Both of those elections were incumbent elections during times of general contentment and happiness with the direction of the country, which is probably why Nixon won 520-17 and HWBush won 426-111 Reminder the Dukakis was up like 7 [iirc] points coming out of the convention. There's more going on than "happiness and contentment." Republican turnout blew Democratic turnout out of the water in 2000 and Gore still won the popular vote [e: After running a, uh, questionable campaign.]. Low turnout in primaries isn't a good sign by any loving measure, but its not predictive in any definition of the word. e: Actually I just went back and looked through 2000 in particular and yeah. Republican turnout was nearly 2:1 in NH, 3:1 in Delaware [lmao] and Arizona, and Michigan something weird happened that I don't remember on the democratic side and cba to look up. Schnorkles has issued a correction as of 06:08 on Mar 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
TRUMP *click* is pretty much going to be the story of Super Tuesday and the rest of the election cycle
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 05:43
|
|
|
The big question is: if Bernie loses Massachusetts will he drop out right then and there, or will he stick it out for the Flint debate and subsequent primary? Or just do what Ben Carson's doing and stay around forever, eroding all good will towards him from people who aren't straight up deluded? SpiderHyphenMan has issued a correction as of 06:19 on Mar 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:04
|
|
|
The is zero chance he is dropping tomorrow
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:19
|
|
|
SpiderHyphenMan posted:The big question is: if Bernie loses Massachusetts will he drop out right then and there, or will he stick it out for the Flint debate and subsequent primary? I imagine he sticks around as long as he can to try to keep Hillary honest
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:19
|
|
|
Why Republicans should brace for a contested convention Republican commentators have dismissed concerns over a contested convention with a hand-waving reference to “winner-take-all” primaries later in the calendar. Like so much of the rest of Republican reasoning, that confidence is built on a set of factual assumptions not born out in the world around us. These are the reasons we can anticipate a contest at the convention to select the nominee. 1) Few delegates will be assigned in a true, statewide, winner-take-all contest. Only eight states, delivering less than 400 of the necessary 1247 delegates needed for a majority, will be awarded in a winner-take-all fashion. One of them, Ohio, is a likely win for Kasich who is otherwise a delegate laggard. He is unlikely to drop out before that March 15th primary. 2) The system is only designed to select a winner if one candidate can consistently top 50%. Most of the states that commentators describe as “winner-take-all” are in fact proportional unless one candidate tops 50%. That list of about 12 states includes some big ones, like Texas (155) and New York (95). Something remarkable and unpredictable would have to happen in the five weeks or so for someone to reach 50% just about anywhere. 3) Trump has a hard ceiling somewhere in the mid-thirties. So does every other GOP candidate. Pollsters have made clear that Trump’s support dries up beyond about a third of GOP voters in almost every state. What they haven’t mentioned is that practically every other candidate experiences a similar, fairly low ceiling. Cruz may actually top out a bit lower than Trump. Pollsters point to voters’ generally favorable image of Rubio. However, that only extends to their view of him as a person, not as a candidate. Once negative campaigning focuses in on Rubio, his embrace of immigration reform will translate into a hard cap. That cap is made worse by Rubio’s general weakness as a candidate. He may be less annoying than Cruz and less revolting than Trump, but he’s not very good at this. We have a deeply divided Republican primary electorate, creating strong incentives to stay in the race for candidates in the top four or five. 4) A vast majority of delegates are ‘soft-pledged,’ meaning they shed their attachment to their assigned candidate after a failed first ballot. Here’s where the Republican ‘Red Wedding Scenario’ gets its energy. Most GOP delegates are only locked into their selection if there is a clear winner. Soft-committed delegates are basically only committed if the convention doesn’t matter. After a first failed ballot, serious, involved, committed members of the Republican Party – the kind of people who become convention delegates – are set free from the yahoos who voted in the primaries. They get to pick the winner. In 100 out of 100 potential runs of that scenario, Donald Trump fails to win the nomination. In fact, there is reason to expect that the nominee would be someone who wasn’t even a candidate in the primaries. 5) There are no brokers. Note the vital difference between a ‘contested’ and a ‘brokered’ convention. Decades ago, before primaries played such a prominent role, powerful interests in the parties negotiated the convention outcome. This was a vital service, as 2500 people who don’t know each other will often have difficulty organizing themselves toward a sensible outcome without the help of some leadership. In a scenario like we face this year, a dozen or so leading figures should be able to help mediate an outcome prior to the convention, at least limiting the convention delegates to two or three reasonably options. There are no authoritative figures inside the party with the credibility and influence it takes to bring potential rivals together. It will be an unpredictable, bare-knuckles fight. There is a chance that a contest on the convention floor could extend beyond the convention, with more than one claimant insisting that he was the winner in a disputed outcome that lands in the courts. 6) And a note about Rule 40. Some have pointed out that Rule 40 would bar consideration of any potential nominee who failed to win a majority of the delegates in at least 8 states. Rule 40 doesn’t matter because the party gets to make the rules more or less on the fly, within the constraints of what is politically possible. If primary results dictate that Rule 40 becomes a problem, then the party will simply change it at the start of the convention. The real difficulty here is that we have no political structure in place to allow the Republican Party to select its nominee in a convention. Over the past seventy years or so our conventions have evolved from a real political process to a pep rally focused on marketing a nominee who, for all intents and purposes, was selected before anyone cast a primary ballot. Forcing the convention to perform the complex task of selecting the party’s nominee for the White House is like taking sailboat down a Class 5 rapid. In some ways, this kind of catastrophic institutional challenge might be just the medicine we need. Maybe we will recognize the cost of building an entire political platform on fantasies. Perhaps out of the wreckage of Cleveland we can build something more credible. Evolutionary forces have a way of imposing discipline when we fail to do it ourselves.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:22
|
|
|
SpiderHyphenMan posted:The big question is: if Bernie loses Massachusetts will he drop out right then and there, or will he stick it out for the Flint debate and subsequent primary? Bernie will stick around as long as he's getting donations and he can "make a point". What I'd love for him to do, is campaign and fund raise and then use that money to support down-ticket D races (or just help Hillary, but helping down-ticket is probably more useful, and might be a better strategy in some places).
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:23
|
|
|
^ ) ^ two posts above: i think 3) is the biggest problem. second choice polling consistently indicates that every candidate has a double-digit minority of their supporters who will go to trump when they drop out. that's why his ceiling has continued to rise as the field has narrowed. actual voters don't conform to logical political categories and that's why i think trump will be winning 50%+ of the vote after the next few candidates drop out. But We'll See as for bernie. i hope he sticks around for a few more weeks to give his policy ideas a continued platform and cushion the blow for his supporters (or surge and win, but setting that possibility aside for the moment), then campaigns for hillary, then tries to keep hillary honest as a senator during her administration ifbh (if we're being honest) edit: oh yeah giving his money to extant democratic congressional candidates would be a really good thing too, like as far as bending the arc of history toward justice or w/e that's pretty much the best you can do oystertoadfish has issued a correction as of 06:29 on Mar 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
JosefStalinator posted:Bernie will stick around as long as he's getting donations and he can "make a point". Well you're in luck, he said he'd 'consider' it!
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:26
|
|
|
SpiderHyphenMan posted:The big question is: if Bernie loses Massachusetts will he drop out right then and there, or will he stick it out for the Flint debate and subsequent primary? Oh, I'mma get sunk for real posting here, but... I think he goes to the convention. Seriously. I mean, he has the funding(6.5 million in 24 hours?, loving insane!) He is successfully getting his views on social issues out. Despite delagate counts, he has no reason not to sit back and watch what happens. Trump is already ramping up his rhetoric machine to target Hillary - which may or may not sway her supporters (some of the poo poo he will say is going to get soooo nasty). Trump's accusations may gain some leverage against her. Bernie could possibly pick up some voters who flee her ship in fear. Hell, from the links I've seen the next few weeks are going to be escalating the email situation, and Bernie stands to gain from that. I think he also knows if he gives up after all of the support he has built up with the party youth he'll kill a lot political idealism and almost disenfranchise those young voters because they will feel like they are getting screwed. And in the meantime, you never know what will happen: Clinton throwing more BLM protesters out of rallies and disappointing some of her "firewall", Bloomburg/Romney deciding to run, there could be another "Howard Dean scream" moment, the speech transcripts could wind up released and some huge negative is in them... Who knows? I know I'm not in the majority on this one, but I really do think Bernie stays in and trys to pull off something big by the convention Hell, I was already hit up by some group either on my email or on twitter by some group petitioning to have a Bernie/Trump debate that would exclude all other candidates. I don't see the point in it, but it would be interesting to watch. Worst case scenario, I think, is that he takes it to the convention, brokers so deals before conceding, and then throws his support behind Hillary (which may or may not choose to follow his advice). He'll still be an excellent Senator and will likely be well respected for trying to keep pushing issues that need to be addressed. Okay, guys... feel free to mock away now. Devil Bird Thing has issued a correction as of 06:46 on Mar 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:43
|
|
|
I'm looking forward to Hillary absolutely slaying Bernie tomorrow and Rubio coming in 2nd consistently making him the REAL winner who will definitely secure the GOP nomination.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
funny way to spell posted:I'm looking forward to Hillary absolutely slaying Bernie tomorrow and Rubio coming in 2nd consistently making him the REAL winner who will definitely secure the GOP nomination. Anyone betting against Mitt Romney at this point is a blind, uninformed fool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
funny way to spell posted:I'm looking forward to Hillary absolutely slaying Bernie tomorrow and Rubio coming in 2nd consistently making him the REAL winner who will definitely secure the GOP nomination. Rubio will not win a single state but this will be a victory and momentum for him for reasons
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
Sanders has to stay in because otherwise /s4p/ hits the Heaven's Gate button and does Bernie really want all those lives on his hands?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
I live in Idaho and my highly scientific bumper-stickers-and-yard-signs polling says Ben Carson is winning this bitch so he at least has to stick it out another week.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:54
|
|
|
*shoves envelope in mailbox* TRUMP!
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
mannerup posted:Rubio will not win a single state but this will be a victory and momentum for him for reasons Rubio is gonna ride into a brokered convention demanding coronation because he's a constant second place getter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
Sex Hobbit posted:I live in Idaho and my highly scientific bumper-stickers-and-yard-signs polling says Ben Carson is winning this bitch so he at least has to stick it out another week. Our illustrious governor endorsed fellow jackass Kasich.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:03
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Rubio is gonna ride into a brokered convention demanding coronation because he's a constant second place getter. i think trump'll get the 50%+s and other results he needs for the 1200something delegates to win on the first ballot (not tomorrow, but i think his momentum will be increased 24 hours from now), but if he doesnt then rubio would actually do this and succeed, it would be literal historical truth that it had happened but on the other hand here's a hypothetical; trump has his votes but the establishment burns the cleveland convention center or whatever to the ground and declare a party emergency so rubio can seize power and suddenly the nazi Shuh is on the other foot i love when i do stupid translate poo poo and the last language i tried is still there. nazi shoe in xhosa? neembadada lwamaNazi edit: it seems like historians now think the reichstag fire really was just one random possibly mentally handicapped dutch communist who decided to commit arson all on his own. the whole history of the nazis is basically contingency.docx
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
Zen Dudeism posted:Oh, I'mma get sunk for real posting here, but... I think he goes to the convention. Seriously. You put 10x more thought into it than SpiderHyphenMan, which isn't surprising. "Eroding goodwill" is a give away he really hasn't been paying attention to what is going on in this democratic primary.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
Non-scientific anecdote polling from Virginia: my Bernie bro brother is voting for Bernie, as am I; he has successfully convinced my "moderate independent" (misses Reagan, wishes things were more civil, in practice votes Democratic in most elections) father to do the same. We convinced our Baptist, Republican mother, who is terrified of Trump, that Rubio is also terrible and she should vote for Kasich as a protest.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
Goetta posted:The is zero chance he is dropping tomorrow Yeah, he's sticking around till at least the middle of March, but if he loses Colorado, MN or MA he should drop out. Zen Dudeism posted:Oh, I'mma get sunk for real posting here, but... I think he goes to the convention. Seriously. Going to the convention would be a waste of his and the nominee's resources unless something drastically changes in the contests coming up between now and March 15, by which time Hillary should, if polls hold, have essentially secured the nomination. If he wants to be pridefully stubborn, I suppose he could hang in until she hits the magic number in April, but that would not really be a good look for him and a waste of resources. Just as it was a waste of resources for Hillary to stick it out as long as she did in '08.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:16
|
|
|
poo poo this is tomorrow? Quick, tell me who to vote for
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:39
|
|
|
gilmore
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
There's no point in Bernie quitting if he decides to stick around after Super Tuesday since he'll do fairly well in the remaining states and there's always the chance Hillary will slip on a banana peel and fall in jail ha ha ha
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:44
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:There's no point in Bernie quitting if he decides to stick around after Super Tuesday since he'll do fairly well in the remaining states and there's always the chance Hillary will slip on a banana peel and fall in jail ha ha ha There's also no point in him continuing to fight a race that will be over, either. It would become a vanity campaign and that would not be a good look for him -- again, any better of a look than it was for Hillary when she hung around way too long in 08 -- which is something many people have criticized her for on this very forum. BI NOW GAY LATER has issued a correction as of 07:53 on Mar 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:50
|
|
|
Full day of work tomorrow out-of-state, so cannot caucus. Gonna follow this thread. Gonna drink heavily and stash empties in Brenda's mailbox. gently caress Brenda.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:52
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:An unforeseen future nestled somewhere in time. I'm glad we're all here together at the end
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:55
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:There's also no point in him continuing to fight a race that will be over, either. It would become a vanity campaign and that would not be a good look for him -- again, any better of a look than it was for Hillary when she hung around way too long in 08 -- which is something many people have criticized her for on this very forum. I don't see what the moral quandary is as long as he stops begging unemployed Redditors for their vacuum pennies once most of the states are called.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:56
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:I don't see what the moral quandary is as long as he stops begging unemployed Redditors for their vacuum pennies once most of the states are called. It's just a vanity campaign at that point, and he'd be essentially still forcing Hillary to continue to spend money on him instead of the Republicans. Again, my assumption is that if polling holds, by March 15 he will have fallen far enough behind in pledged delegates that it will be over for intents and purposes. If he wants to gut it out until she hits the magic number sometime in April, okay then but that's just pride on his part.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 08:00
|
|
|
My polling location in Atlanta only has paid parking and I'd have to be there for hours so I don't think I'm going to vote today. LITERALLY A POLL TAX
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 08:11
|
|
|
It's Donald 'Chaos Candidate' Trump versus Marco 'Roboto' Rubio. Get ready for a historic stumping.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 08:18
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:My polling location in Atlanta only has paid parking and I'd have to be there for hours so I don't think I'm going to vote today. Is there any public transportation? I'm sure any of the local campaign headquarters would be thrilled to offer you info.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 08:23
|
|
|
SpiderHyphenMan posted:The big question is: if Bernie loses Massachusetts will he drop out right then and there, or will he stick it out for the Flint debate and subsequent primary? Clinton won Massachusetts in 2008, not Obama. I'm not sure if it'll immediately matter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 08:44
|
|
|
CubsWoo posted:Sanders has to stay in because otherwise /s4p/ hits the Heaven's Gate button and does Bernie really want all those lives on his hands? No they'll be hitting that button in a few hours
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 08:48
|
|
|
Ollu posted:Clinton won Massachusetts in 2008, not Obama. I'm not sure if it'll immediately matter. Mass should slightly favor him. Liberal, fairly white, demo where he's well known.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 08:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 11:56 |
|
|
dear op
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 11:04
|
|
