makingmusic476
Member
Haven't seen this one in a while.
2 Super 2 Tuesday |OT| I'm Really Feeling (The Bern) (3/15, 3/22, 3/26 Contests)
- Thread starter ivysaur12
- Start date
- Status
Grizzlyjin
Supersonic, idiotic, disconnecting, not respecting, who would really ever wanna go and top that
Yeah, I saw that on politico. Grasping at straws with no justification. Bare minimum, he should wind down his fundraising. He gets a lot of small donations from people that probably don't have tons of extra cash to begin with.
Sanders will revert to a message candidate again at some stage. He's about to go on a win streak in a bit so it'll probably happen after New York.
It's more realistic then winning New York and California by 20+ point so... progress?
Wouldn't the gap be more than what the super delegates can compensate once this is finally over?
Confident to be on the right path? This is not even funny anymore.
Framing her as an untrustworthy politician, is not the best thing he could do, but it also isn't completely untrue. He feels that she is part of the establishment, and lets be honest here, she is. Many feel that once you are in that, you lose your actual goal and policies because you have to be beholden to those who got you in the position (donors and the party itself). We all assume this of the Republican candidates, why is Hillary far removed from this?
I felt they both did as well as they could with some flops on both sides.
I already know she could of been harder, they both could of done a lot more to each other, but then we would be looking at Blue GOP, which they wanted to keep from happening.
I do not think Bernie would of lost to GOP candidates, especially Trump. He simply can not win, not with the white votes alone, every other marginalized group, he offended. Taxes and socialist attacks alone, I do not believe would of worked.
excelsiorlef
Member
There's like 700 of them
I'm not saying that Sanders supporters are these unassailable saints, because I think we're all very much aware as people on the internet during this election cycle that there are sizable numbers of them who are toxic, incredibly unpleasant people.
What I'm getting at is that for all the talk of the dreaded "Berniebros", there are also a good number of Clinton supporters (typically people rocking the "H" avatars, primarily on Twitter though I've seen a few on Gaf, as I mentioned in my awful, passive-aggressive blanket statement) who will turn the smugness up to 11 and deride anyone they see as unsupportive as politically illiterate or just not "getting" it. I have enormous respect for Secretary Clinton and will support her if she's the nominee, but this whole narrative that Sanders supporters are this horrible, monolithic horde of trolls that should turn any "reasonable" person away from their candidate isn't helped by the fact that it's so often pushed by people who can be just as disagreeable and off-putting when it comes to their own candidate.
I'm not disagreeing with you. My point was never that Hillary has been perfect, but she has been fair. She ran a relatively clean campaign against Sanders, and held a lot of very obvious punches she could have thrown at him.
There's like, one guy with a Hillary logo avatar here. Adam. He's a bit obsessed. You should get used to that sooner rather than later if you're to frequent political threads.
Now, people with Hillary herself in their avatars, that's a different story. But I don't know what level of smugness you'd attribute to that.
Leona Lewis
Banned
Politico said:
Gaming the system. Overturning the will of the voters.
Truly the revolution we deserve.
excelsiorlef
Member
Gaming the system. Overturning the will of the voters.
Truly the revolution we deserve.
He should go for it by all means. There's something fascinating about a supposed principled man going crazy and playing dirty once he discovers that one needs to be a politician to win an election. Or moreso actually that he now has to reveal himself as the politician (that he always was) just like everyone else.
Fall from high horses and all that.
It's also so transparent and doomed to fail to boot.
That's a pretty exact estimate! How many elections did you run to come to that conclusion?
Gaming the system. Overturning the will of the voters.
Truly the revolution we deserve.
A socialist revolution is never achieved through democratic means anyhow. He's too old to start a guerrilla movement though. Maybe he can finance one from the donations.
/jk
excelsiorlef
Member
I dunno. It's not speculation that this news is coming from it's his campaign manager literally saying this is our plan.
He has to either drop out or say he has a plan for the nomination.
Saying "we'll convince the superdelegates to switch" is probably more reasonable than saying "we'll win California by like 40 points."
Although I will note that he keeps switching back and forth between the two plans!
I guess it's probably just him I've seen in a bunch of threads, haha. I probably should have presented my argument in a way that wasn't as vague/snarky and wouldn't have devolved into a weird semi-flame war.
It's just so frustrating to me to see people who act like they have the moral high ground over people they end up being just as toxic and overbearing as in the process. In a race this close, behavior that wards off undecideds and people who don't eat, sleep, live, and breathe Hillary or Bernie does no good for either candidate.
Why do people think the next few weeks are going to be amazing for Sanders?
There are only a few states which I would call likely for him.
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Clinton is likely to win
Maryland
DC
Everywhere else is anyone's guess, but I'd give Clinton a slight edge in NY (home state) Penn (won in 08), NM and AZ (latino population).
I'd give Sanders a slight edge in Cali (no clue really though. It could easily go to Clinton cause of the Latino population) and Utah.
Definetly better for Sanders, but not the slaughter some are making it out to be. The only huge state Sanders is likely to do really well in is Washington, and I don't know if those margins are going to be large enough at all.
There are only a few states which I would call likely for him.
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Clinton is likely to win
Maryland
DC
Everywhere else is anyone's guess, but I'd give Clinton a slight edge in NY (home state) Penn (won in 08), NM and AZ (latino population).
I'd give Sanders a slight edge in Cali (no clue really though. It could easily go to Clinton cause of the Latino population) and Utah.
Definetly better for Sanders, but not the slaughter some are making it out to be. The only huge state Sanders is likely to do really well in is Washington, and I don't know if those margins are going to be large enough at all.
Gaming the system. Overturning the will of the voters.
Truly the revolution we deserve.
and people were off put with my exaggeration earlier. this reaction post is ridiculous.
what are you talking about? this isn't dirty, he has the funds, theres a tiny chance, he's going to continue to run for the nomination.
Because if the next few weeks AREN'T going to be amazing for Sanders then it really kind of calls into question why he doesn't just drop out now.
So it's important for people who want him to keep running to believe that he has a bunch of good states coming up so that he can come back into the race.
It IS surprising (and pretty ugly) to see him advocate for this approach.
what approach and what is ugly about it? explain please.
Leona Lewis
Banned
I don't think hanging your hopes on entering a convention 300+ delegates behind and having all the superdelegates migrate over to your side for reasons can be considered a "run" any more than what Kasich's faulty math will require, but that's just me.
It's an affront to the democratic process.
Trying to get super delegates to switch from current pledges against the front-runner, who has the popular vote and the pledged delegate count lead, is the pure backdoor politicking.
it is fundamentally undemocratic. Hillary is leading in all of the democratically voted ways, popular votes and pledged delegates.
And actually goes against what Bernie was campaign for in the very beginning. To now say he wants to abuse the system after saying he was above using dirty politics to get ahead is pure hypocrisy.
Gaming the system. Overturning the will of the voters.
Truly the revolution we deserve.
Exactly what is the angle here?
Are you people striving for actual substantive changes you can qualify and explain? Because I am rooting for the team, not just following a particular player blindly like a love drunk groupie. Because last I checked, Bernie and Hillary are on the same team and both are working toward similar goals in their own ways.
I for one support the general concept behind every policy Bernie supports. And frankly, if you had a gun to Clinton's head she probably would admit that deep down she does as well. So wtf is all this relishing and celebratory bullshit? Dancing around at the prospect that the Bernie revolution is dead?
Do you all REALLY want the momentum and support for Bernie and thus his ideas to be dead and buried? Because I fucking don't!
I've lived through the 90's and 2000's where the Democratic Party was slowly poisoned by the Reagan conservatism and in their weakened state allowed themselves to be dragged further and further to the right. Landing us in a place presently that I don't think any Democrat wants it to remain that is voting for Hillary or Bernie.
I supported Hillary because I think she ultimately has the best chance to win and I'm a pragmatist, but my fucking god if I am not astoundingly proud with what Bernie has accomplished. What he has done in less then a year to change the conversation, move the base of the party, energize the youth, pressure the establishment to liberalize and inspire a new brand of politics in the Democratic Party.
Fuck this contemptuous sports mentality bullshit, these are two people on the same team and Bernie is reminding everyone what it is that the Democratic Party is ultimately about and working for. Even if some Hillary supporters have completely lost sight of what the party they support used to stand for.
titiklabingapat
Member
Not to pile on you, but is this your first election cycle?
Trust me, Hillary could have said and done a lot worse. She did with Obama in 08. And The GOP in the general will be a hundred times more relentless than she will ever be.
Using superdelegets to go against the primary vote winner. That's an amazingly inside-baseball strategy for an "outsider" candidate.
And kinda gross, just as it would be if Hillary used superdelegates to win the nomination.
I mean, I don't think this argument is really any better than it was when Sanders supporters were making it about Hillary's superdelegate lead.
The Democratic primary has rules, both parties agreed to those rules in order to run for the nomination. Having to work within dumb rules because of an unfavorable contract you had to agree to to get access to infrastructure is about as American as it gets!
So complaining that those rules are antidemocratic now is not that persuasive, and it's especially unpersuasive when the two sides keep switching positions.
If Sanders can actually convince all the superdelegates to switch to him and override Hillary's lead in pledged delegates, then, I mean, good job, I guess. Hillary should probably run third-party if that happens!
But there's approximately zero chance it would ever happen. Superdelegates generally don't ever overrule the delegates. Why would they do it this time around to support a non-Democrat over the most successful Democratic establishment politician not named Obama?
I'm looking over polling for the next few weeks, and it seems as if Hillary and Donald have pretty big leads. And the GOP side is winner-take-all.
Utah hasn't had any polling since February. Nothing from Idaho. Or Alaska since January. Same with Hawaii.
Utah hasn't had any polling since February. Nothing from Idaho. Or Alaska since January. Same with Hawaii.
Leona Lewis
Banned
You should probably read what you're quoting before wasting all this word count on it.
Only one of the three posts your diatribe was directed at can even marginally be considered a celebration of the events that befell Sanders' chances today.
Dash_Riprock
Member
I thought Bernie was supposed to be above shit like this?
Guess Washington really does corrupt even the best of us.
Guess Washington really does corrupt even the best of us.
shinra-bansho
Member
They're not going to switch.
If they do whatever. The party decides.
But they won't.
If you were alright with it before and now aren't or vice versa... eh.
If they do whatever. The party decides.
But they won't.
If you were alright with it before and now aren't or vice versa... eh.
Grizzlyjin
Supersonic, idiotic, disconnecting, not respecting, who would really ever wanna go and top that
Be honest, if Sanders was the front runner and Hillary tried that, you don't think his supporters would be calling foul?
I'm hesitant to even call it a strategy, it's just... wasteful. Not just money, but their own time. If they were even remotely close in delegates, it would be smart. But right now, it's like asking someone if they want to buy a ticket on the Titanic the day after it sunk. It's definitely not consistent with the image his campaign has cultivated. But I doubt you'll hear any out cry from Clinton supporters because it's laughable, politically speaking.
I read your post and it fits perfectly into what I just said.
Try again. But since you have no interest in anything but rooting for the player and not grasping the lager concept of the team and how it all works, I'll leave you to get back to your empty excercise.
Leona Lewis
Banned
I don't think there's anyone who can reasonably argue that the superdelegate system as a whole isn't just anti-democratic nonsense.
The difference, though, is that Hillary earned (for lack of a better term) her unpledged delegates. She did not actively swipe them from another candidate, and worse, from a candidate who's already built an insurmountable lead in both pledged delegates and (more tellingly) the popular vote.
I don't know what you're trying to say, and I don't think you care enough to clarify.
Carry on.
"The schedule is such that I might win a bunch of states in the last stretch of the campaign. Considering the 24/7 news cycle, maybe superdelegates will forget I'm very behind on pledged delegates, acknowledge my 'momentum', and throw me the nomination."
This would be borderline Machiavellian if it wasn't little more than wishful thinking. Bernie is experiencing a big moment, there's a segment of the population that loves him, and he believes in what he's doing. It's his right to march on. It's just that the more implausible him winning becomes, the more he's going to need to latch onto these sort of ridiculous scenarios to give his most fervent supporters hope.
They're going to argue that he's stronger electorally come November.
Good luck to him.
Not with that tax plan.
Grizzlyjin
Supersonic, idiotic, disconnecting, not respecting, who would really ever wanna go and top that
I wonder what they're going to base that argument on. If the Dem base liked him so much, he would be winning or at least competitive. To be a fly on that wall tomorrow.
User 463088
Banned
He's just so much stronger than the person he can't beat.
The super delegate system is totally appropriate for a Madisonian democracy. We're not ancient Athens. If you want to be president the system expects you to build a lot of consensus with existing power structures first. That seems fine to me, like, Trump is an object lesson in why we should continue developing and electing professional politicians.
The second half of your post is silly, like, the super delegates aren't candy. You can't swipe them. You have to actually present a case strong enough to convince them, which is exactly what Hillary did in the first place.
If they're already pledged to another candidate who's much popular, well, your case just needs to be that much better. But if it is then good for you, I think.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
I wonder if Bernie will throw the gauntlet down and bring up the emails by the time his campaign is through as a Hail Mary
User 463088
Banned
Never!
Unknown Soldier
Member
Hillary didn't concede the nomination to Obama until June 7th, 2008.
This sound familiar to anyone right now?
Hillary decided to to stay around until June, despite Obama gaining an insurmountable delegate lead by probably late April or early May. There were even calls for her to withdraw earlier than that, because John McCain had already locked up his Republican nomination and the Democrats wanted to move on to preparing for the general.
Seeing the Hillary supporters now calling for Bernie to withdraw instead of grinding it out until June is pretty hilarious and hypocritical. Bernie has every right to stay in this 2016 race, whether he is mathematically eliminated or not, for as long as Hillary did in 2008.
I might add that by the end the Hillary supporters were very harmful to their own party's chances in the general. It was desperate Hillary supporters, in the waning days of her 2008 campaign, that began circulating emails claiming that Obama wasn't born in the United States and was not eligible to run for President.
Hillary's campaign later disavowed these claims, which did not originate from them, when she finally conceded and endorsed Obama, but the damage was done because the Birther movement was born and the Republicans didn't take all that long before they stole that idea and used it to undermine Obama for years.
So let's put the idea to bed that Bernie needs to withdraw now because he has no mathematical chance, or that his remaining in the race is going to do some irreparable damage to Hillary's chances in the general. Because if Hillary couldn't do it to Obama in 2008, Bernie certainly won't be able to do it to Hillary in 2016.
This sound familiar to anyone right now?
Hillary decided to to stay around until June, despite Obama gaining an insurmountable delegate lead by probably late April or early May. There were even calls for her to withdraw earlier than that, because John McCain had already locked up his Republican nomination and the Democrats wanted to move on to preparing for the general.
Seeing the Hillary supporters now calling for Bernie to withdraw instead of grinding it out until June is pretty hilarious and hypocritical. Bernie has every right to stay in this 2016 race, whether he is mathematically eliminated or not, for as long as Hillary did in 2008.
I might add that by the end the Hillary supporters were very harmful to their own party's chances in the general. It was desperate Hillary supporters, in the waning days of her 2008 campaign, that began circulating emails claiming that Obama wasn't born in the United States and was not eligible to run for President.
Hillary's campaign later disavowed these claims, which did not originate from them, when she finally conceded and endorsed Obama, but the damage was done because the Birther movement was born and the Republicans didn't take all that long before they stole that idea and used it to undermine Obama for years.
So let's put the idea to bed that Bernie needs to withdraw now because he has no mathematical chance, or that his remaining in the race is going to do some irreparable damage to Hillary's chances in the general. Because if Hillary couldn't do it to Obama in 2008, Bernie certainly won't be able to do it to Hillary in 2016.
- Status