Super Tuesday 4. I'm really feeling (The After Bern) March 22, 26 contests

Status
Not open for further replies.
What? Caucuses are great. They help break through the media hype by allowing potential voters to talk things through. While they can be slow and intimidating, a caucus is more democratic than a straight-up primary.

Remember that voting for your leaders is simply the easiest mechanism of democracy, and not the defining trait of democracy.

Aka peer pressure and passive aggressive bullying. I'm really not surprised Bernie does well in caucuses.

When people get to vote how they really feel and with no pressure, you see Hillary winning ...

Like I said, so glad caucuses finish this Saturday for the most part.
 
What? Caucuses are great. They help break through the media hype by allowing potential voters to talk things through. While they can be slow and intimidating, a caucus is more democratic than a straight-up primary.

Remember that voting for your leaders is simply the easiest mechanism of democracy, and not the defining trait of democracy.

Bullshit.

Democracy - a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
 
Aka peer pressure and passive aggressive bullying. I'm really not surprised Bernie does well in caucuses.

When people get to vote how they really feel and with no pressure, you see Hillary winning ...

Yeah, no. Caucuses allow voters to be more informed, because the media does a generally poor job at explaining candidates' ideologies. If aggressive supporters were the reason why Bernie succeeds, we'd also see Trump dominating caucuses. But instead, Cruz does substantially better in caucuses than he does in primaries.

A caucus helps democracy by reducing the power of name recognition, which is inherently anti-democratic by preventing fair exposure.

Bullshit.

Democracy - a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

I'm not sure what you're trying to insinuate. A caucus isn't any more exclusive than a primary, except for the lack of absentee ballots and early voting. An ideal system would allow for a caucus and early votes.
 
What? Caucuses are great. They help break through the media hype by allowing potential voters to talk things through. While they can be slow and intimidating, a caucus is more democratic than a straight-up primary.

Remember that voting for your leaders is simply the easiest mechanism of democracy, and not the defining trait of democracy.

If you believe in one person one vote, caucuses are the least democratic thing you can come up with, especially in relation to a primary.
 
What? Caucuses are great. They help break through the media hype by allowing potential voters to talk things through. While they can be slow and intimidating, a caucus is more democratic than a straight-up primary.

Remember that voting for your leaders is simply the easiest mechanism of democracy, and not the defining trait of democracy.

The Republican caucus system is just a primary run by the party, sometimes with restrictions on voting hours. It is a secret ballot, and you just show up to drop your vote off. The Utah caucus allows people to vote online.
 
People are still standing in line to vote. Its kind of appalling that the state was called when people are literally voting right now.

If every single vote that remains outstanding went to Sanders he would still lose. That's why it's called.
 
I like the negatives and positives, it's a mixed bag. Def don't want every state to be that way, but I can see why some should be.

it's really easy to take wealth and health for granted.
 
Yeah, no. Caucuses allow voters to be more informed, because the media does a generally poor job at explaining candidates' ideologies. If aggressive supporters were the reason why Bernie succeeds, we'd also see Trump dominating caucuses. But instead, Cruz does substantially better in caucuses than he does in primaries.

A caucus helps democracy by reducing the power of name recognition, which is inherently anti-democratic by preventing fair exposure.

It allows more outspoken, aggressive people to impose their views onto others. Don't act like states that have primaries are all clueless and don't really know who they're voting for.

A lot of these caucuses just happen to be in places that favour Cruz and Bernie anyway, so they have the majority of voices pushing down on Clinton and Trump supporters.
 
I'm not sure what you're trying to insinuate. A caucus isn't any more exclusive than a primary, except for the lack of absentee ballots and early voting. An ideal system would allow for a caucus and early votes.

The only person who could believe this is a delusional person.

Caucuses are more exclusive by definition because they have a specific time and and take an excess amount of time to participate in. This alone makes them more exclusive.
 
If every single vote that remains outstanding went to Sanders he would still lose. That's why it's called.

Sure, but is it ethically fair? These candidates in the primary are fighting for delegates right? Which means every vote counts. Is it not possible that people who find out the state is already called just leave instead of going ahead with their vote? Its impossible for sanders to win the state, every one and their grandma knows that but I find it not ok for them to call a state when people are in line voting right now.
 
Sure, but is it ethically fair? These candidates in the primary are fighting for delegates right? Which means every vote counts. Is it not possible that people who find out the state is already called just leave instead of going ahead with their vote? Its impossible for sanders to win the state, every one and their grandma knows that but I find it not ok for them to call a state when people are in line voting right now.


The call is strictly for the popular vote.

I'm not sure what your point is.
 
They're also undemocratic.

Say you have two districts, each worth 2 delegates.

In the first, Candidate A gets 14 votes, and Candidate B gets 15. Under proportional representation, they each get 1 delegate.

In the second, Candidate A gets 100 votes, and Candidate B gets 25. Because of proprotional representation, they, again, split the delegates.

So, one candidate has way, way more of the popular vote than the other, yet they are still tied 2-2. If it were a primary, it would have been allocated 3-1.
 
What? Caucuses are great. They help break through the media hype by allowing potential voters to talk things through. While they can be slow and intimidating, a caucus is more democratic than a straight-up primary.

Remember that voting for your leaders is simply the easiest mechanism of democracy, and not the defining trait of democracy.

They take longer, on a specific time. Some people even have a hard time voting because of work or personal schedules, much less a specific block of hours. Voters should also be free to listen (or not) to anyone to inform their vote.
 
They're also undemocratic.

Say you have two districts, each worth 2 delegates.

In the first, Candidate A gets 14 votes, and Candidate B gets 15. Under proportional representation, they each get 1 delegate.

In the second, Candidate A gets 100 votes, and Candidate B gets 25. Because of proprotional representation, they, again, split the delegates.

So, one candidate has way, way more of the popular vote than the other, yet they are still tied 2-2. If it were a primary, it would have been allocated 3-1.

You are probably like one of 3 posters on this forum that understand caucus math.
 
Dayum! Bernie crushed it in UT and will in ID. Bodes well for him in whiter northern states. As I figured it's gonna end up a wash tonight with neither candidate more than a few voters in either direction. Unless Bernie manages to make Clinton unviable, which I don't think is likely.

Bodes well for the future states up through Washington for him, but I doubt his gains will last. Come mid April those will all go down the drain with NY and co on the ballot.
 
Yeah, no. Caucuses allow voters to be more informed, because the media does a generally poor job at explaining candidates' ideologies. If aggressive supporters were the reason why Bernie succeeds, we'd also see Trump dominating caucuses. But instead, Cruz does substantially better in caucuses than he does in primaries.

A caucus helps democracy by reducing the power of name recognition, which is inherently anti-democratic by preventing fair exposure.

I'm not sure what you're trying to insinuate. A caucus isn't any more exclusive than a primary, except for the lack of absentee ballots and early voting. An ideal system would allow for a caucus and early votes.

You seem to be misinformed. Republican caucuses are by secret ballot and do not require talking to each other. Cruz does well in Republican caucuses because of limited voting hours which makes GOTV infrastructure important. In Iowa for example, everyone had to be at their caucus location at 7:00 PM to vote, whereas in a primary you can put your vote in anytime from 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM (usually).

It is very undemocratic, that is why the Nevada caucus has 30 delegates up for grabs but only a total of 75,216 people voted while New Hampshire had only 23 delegates, but over 285,000 people voted! Over 200,000 more people voted because it was a primary even though there should be more voters in Nevada based on population (it is even more undemocratic in Nevada given the fact that many people do not have 9-5 jobs in the casino industry, so a limited hour caucus will always be disenfranchising a large swath of people).
 
They probably despise Hillary even more, so not gonna happen.

I dont buy a jump from Ted Cruz to Hillary. It makes logical sense if Mormons were voting for a moderate like Kasich, but the switch from Cruz to Clinton is a complete ideological 180. Ill believe it when I see that same polling data in the fall.
 
you know what else is undemocratic, superpacs

Yes they are, and Hillary is using them because that is what you have to do to win.

Just like how Bernie hates Super Delegates, but is now on his needs servicing them to keep his dreams alive.

Are they both hypocrites? Yes, but effective ones.
 
Does anyone know why the NYT and other election result trackers aren't tracking the results for the Iowa caucus now?
 
you know what else is undemocratic, superpacs

bladesunglassescatch.uphill

You do know almost all Democrats want Citizen United gone because of the money spent on Congressional races, not Presidential right? Gives the GOP a huge advantage on top of the gerrymandering in many states. Not like Bernie is the only one saying that. Like everyone forget when Obama State of the Union speech several years ago now...
 
Interesting! Will be fun to watch what happens at least. A lot of commentators seem to think he won't hit 1237 but you make a compelling case.

A lot of commentators are GOP establishment hacks who dont want to acknowledge the inevitable. If Trump was their man,they'd be calling on the other candidates to drop out at this point.
 
Does anyone know why the NYT and other election result trackers aren't tracking the results for the Iowa caucus now?

You mean Idaho on the Dem side?

The Idaho Democratic party said they're not releasing results until they get them all in. Most have probably reported by now, but still waiting on the two congressional districts in Boise.
 
You mean Idaho on the Dem side?

The Idaho Democratic party said they're not releasing results until they get them all in. Most have probably reported by now, but still waiting on the two congressional districts in Boise.

Yep.
And it looks like cruz's lead in Utah is expanding now.
 
Trump did better in Arizona than I thought he would. He is beating Cruz by 110,000 votes right now.

Utah is not a surprise. That was always Cruz best state.

Cruz needs like 85% of the remaining delegates to reach 1237. He has a bunch of tough states coming up though. New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. All these states don't look promising for Cruz. He is screwed.

He really needed to do better in the South. Trump dominating the SEC states basically destroyed his pathway.

Glenn Beck was raging against southern evangelicals and accused them of betraying God by not voting Cruz. Kind of funny though that evangelicals are indeed a big reason Trump won the South. Had Cruz done much better with that group, he would be on his way to the nomination.
 
Just as importantly, Bernie missed both his delagate target and will likely miss the 57-58% he needs tonight, which actually pits him back further, even though he may gain a few delagates. He needs huge Utah like wins in every most every state (not every state so he can get less than good wins or small losses in a few), and I'm extremely hesitant to say he will get them.

Miracles do happen but 1000:1 says he doesn't win.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom