• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Clinton to clinch Democratic nomination when polls close in New Jersey

Status
Not open for further replies.
Am I just completely dumb? Probably. I'm wondering why we have a delegate target to begin with if neither candidate in a two person race can hit that target without superdelegates. It creates this bullshit situation in which you have someone clearly win, while the loser can stand back and say no one one, because the delegate target wasn't hit.
 
plop said:
Less than they used to, I think. He's come out swinging against her and she's fine nothing to answer back, despite claiming she's focusing on the general election.

Polls are getting closer. Sure it's early, but I'm beginning to think he's got a real shot at this. It's unfortunate, but the general amount of dislike and mistrust toward her, added to Trump's willingness to "go there" with regard to Bill Clinton's past may very well hand Trump this election.
Click to expand...

Almost all of the difference between her support and Bernie's support in polls comes from Bernie supporters being undecided. But they're mostly Democratic-leaning Independents who usually vote for Democrats. Maybe they won't come around, but it would be unlikely.
 
Laevateinn said:
I am moving to one of the bluest places in the country. If my vote effects the outcome of the election than Hillary is the most pathetic candidate ever. I will use my vote for the presidency to vote for the candidate whose views most closely resemble my own. It is my right as an American to do so.

Voting for Hillary will be throwing my vote away in my opinion. The only way she can expect my support is if she were to back ColoradoCare.

If it makes you feel better, I will contribute to removing Mark Kirk from the Senate.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that Colorado is one of the bluest states in the country. I mean the odds of it flipping are very rare, but complacency can have that effect. But like you said, it's your right.
 
Piggus said:
I'm not sure that Colorado is one of the bluest states in the country. I mean the odds of it flipping are very rare, but complacency can have that effect. But like you said, it's your right.
Click to expand...

I won't be in Colorado. I'll be in Illinois (Mark Kirk). I mention ColoradoCare because it is a feasible path to single payer that is on the ballot this election. If Hillary lends her support to it, I will vote for her. If she ignores it or comes out against it, I will continue refusing to support her.
 
Hillary Clinton clinching onto something sounds kind of gross.

Any way - good for her. I'm with which ever Dem gets the nom.
 
Captain Pants said:
Am I just completely dumb? Probably. I'm wondering why we have a delegate target to begin with if neither candidate in a two person race can hit that target without superdelegates. It creates this bullshit situation in which you have someone clearly win, while the loser can stand back and say no one one, because the delegate target wasn't hit.
Click to expand...

A candidate can hit the delegate target without superdelegates even in a two-person race, it's just this time (and in 2008) they won't because it was a close race with a candidate that refuses to drop out. Superdelegates are a little pointless, but they just vote for whoever wins the pledged delegate majority in the event that no one gets enough to win the nomination outright. No one (yet) has ever been a sore loser about this.
 
Hazmat said:
A candidate can hit the delegate target without superdelegates even in a two-person race, it's just this time (and in 2008) they won't because it was a close race with a candidate that refuses to drop out. Superdelegates are a little pointless, but they just vote for whoever wins the pledged delegate majority in the event that no one gets enough to win the nomination outright. No one (yet) has ever been a sore loser about this.
Click to expand...

Let's make history!
 
Hazmat said:
She has the majority of the ones that have been awarded, but not a half + 1 majority of all the pledged delegates that will be awarded. I mean, that's literally only because California has 475 and they haven't voted yet, but she doesn't have the pledged majority yet.
Click to expand...
Who's ever idea it was to have California vote so late needs to be fired.
 
Shake Appeal said:
Yeah, it's going to be a long slog after selecting the weaker candidate, so it's time to get to work.
Click to expand...

I would think the weaker candidate would be the one that the Republicans can run nonstop socialist ads against, tying him to any assortment of failed socialist states and dictators. It would be a catastrophe for the left.

You thought of that, right?
 
Im a sanders supporter and im ready for the primary to be over. She has over 3 million more votes, the people have made themselves clear.

I agree with sanders on many issues but at this point hes doing more to help trump than anything else.
 
584333.gif
 
ZealousD said:
Nobody votes for a governor or congressman based on which candidate they think they'll vote for in the national convention. Come on.
Click to expand...

If there's one thing this election season should have taught you, it's that voter ignorance is no excuse. If you didn't know that voting for a governor would make them a superdelegate, and you wouldn't have voted for them if you had known that, then you pretty much fucked up, didn't you?
 
I hope it's at least a entertaining election. Either side will probably have meltdowns like the Romney meltdown. Though I think there may be far less meltdowns if Trump lost, not many people will mourn over that, they may be happy thinking they can control him if he wins, but who knows what the heck he will do when in office.
 
EskimoJoe said:
Twenty seven bucks
I passed along today
Then I got on my PC! (Got on my PC)
And I facebanked all daaa-ayyy (facebanked all day)
You know that Weaver likes his gold (Weaver likes his gold)
He'll make sure Bernie stays. (Make sure Bernie stays)

California dreamin'! (California dreamin')
At least 'til after May.
Click to expand...
Wtf is this? Some shitty meme or what?
 
if she has more delegates after all primaries have taken place she is it

for better or worse the supers are not going to suddenly go over to him
 
pigeon said:
If there's one thing this election season should have taught you, it's that voter ignorance is no excuse. If you didn't know that voting for a governor would make them a superdelegate, and you wouldn't have voted for them if you had known that, then you pretty much fucked up, didn't you?
Click to expand...

Nobody is going to vote for or not vote for somebody based on their superdelegate status. Seriously try and paint a picture where I decide not to reelect a Democrat governor and vote for the Republican instead because the governor made a certain vote at the party convention.
 
Thequietone said:
It's all of those pesky low information voters fault. They don't know whats best for them so we need to nullify their votes so Saint Bernard can ascend his throne.

/s
Click to expand...

Well, yeah. Isn't that what you can say about Trump or any Republican voters? They're low information. They don't really know what's best for them. They're voting against their best interests. I think it's accurate to say even without looking down on anyone. Our political system breeds that ignorance and apathy and I don't think you can necessarily blame people for being victim to it.

But you can say this sort of thing about any candidate. I think it's definitely true of Clinton. But people need to realize that it's also true of Bernie. While it's certain that perfectly reasonable, well educated people may think he's the better candidate, there still exists a sizable contingent of voters who have no idea what the fuck they are supporting.

Case in point: I actually met one of the "Trump is my second choice," Berniebros yesterday. I thought this was just exaggeration and now I'm fuckin' scared!
 
ZealousD said:
Nobody is going to vote for or not vote for somebody based on their superdelegate status. Seriously try and paint a picture where I decide not to reelect a Democrat governor and vote for the Republican instead because the governor made a certain vote at the party convention.
Click to expand...

I assume you'd vote in the Democratic primary for the candidate you think would be best fit to be a superdelegate.

But even so, who cares? If being a superdelegate is unimportant enough that there's no way it could affect your vote than I don't see how it could be important enough to be "antidemocratic." Maybe you should stand up for your principles, man. If you like democracy and you think something isn't democratic it's kind of on you to vote against it or be complicit with the Establishment.
 
Shake Appeal said:
Yeah, it's going to be a long slog after selecting the weaker candidate, so it's time to get to work.
Click to expand...

the "weaker" candidate getting 3 million more votes than sanders, makes sanders what exactly?

i'd love to see someone who lost a marathon calling the people who beat them "weaker." it's a joke stance to take and the bitterness just oozes through your monitors.
 
Malfunky said:
Well, yeah. Isn't that what you can say about Trump or any Republican voters? They're low information. They don't really know what's best for them. They're voting against their best interests. I think it's accurate to say even without looking down on anyone. Our political system breeds that ignorance and apathy and I don't think you can necessarily blame people for being victim to it.

But you can say this sort of thing about any candidate. I think it's definitely true of Clinton. But people need to realize that it's also true of Bernie. While it's certain that perfectly reasonable, well educated people may think he's the better candidate, there still exists a sizable contingent of voters who have no idea what the fuck they are supporting.

Case in point: I actually met one of the "Trump is my second choice," Berniebros yesterday. I thought this was just exaggeration and now I'm fuckin' scared!
Click to expand...
You'd have a point if low information voters weren't a dog whistle for minorities. Fact is Hillary supporters aren't necessarily low information voters. We've seen what Sanders has to offer and we said no thank you. For me personally I've gone from a Sanders supporter to no thanks after I heard his lack of substance or ideas. Its easy to say you'll do something and not give any realistic ways to accomplish them.
 
ZealousD said:
The superdelegates are extremely undemocratic as far as I am concerned. The delegate and primary/caucus process itself isn't perfect but superdelegates are the least democratic part of this process.

And there's no hypocrisy from my part on this. If Bernie even attempts to clinch the nomination by turning over the superdelegates he can fuck off. And I voted for the guy.
Click to expand...

I mean literally his only path to victory is by overturning the will of the voters and stealing the supers from Clinton.

Supers are a way for the party to keep some control and prevent fucked up conventions. Clinton won the popular vote and pledged delegate vote, instead of say Sanders forcing his shit down the DNC's throat in not releasing his delegates the DNC can simply have Clinton pass on the first ballot and have everything be done with.

Parties should have some control of the party, crying about supers is silly considering the history of them and the reason behind the whining.
 
Thequietone said:
You'd have a point if low information voters weren't a dog whistle for minorities. Fact is Hillary supporters aren't necessarily low information voters. We've seen what Sanders has to offer and we said no thank you. For me personally I've gone from a Sanders supporter to no thanks after I heard his lack of substance or ideas. Its easy to say you'll do something and not give any realistic ways to accomplish them.
Click to expand...

True about that first part. Can't argue with that. The rhetoric of elections and their participants is inherently exclusionary and generally skews anti-minority. And this is very apparent from the Bernie camp, unfortunately. Those Berniebros.

I don't believe that any candidate has any substantive plan for their actual presidency. The actual reality of the office and the political process in general is such that most promises cannot be kept. Accurate plans cannot be made. Everything is proposal. Everything rhetoric. So Bernie could never push his entire agenda forward in 4 or 8 years. And I hope his followers understand that. I think what we're really voting for here is the ideology of any given candidate. So while I don't have a dog in the race, I would side with Bernie over Hillary Clinton any day of the week. Pragmatically however, if my vote made a difference come this November, I think it would be incumbent on me to vote against Donald Trump. And that means a vote for Clinton. Not a write-in. Not abstaining. A vote for the only possible challenger to the avowed fascist or the hate-group that is the GOP.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

When did you learn to type?
2
59
835
Avid Reading Horse replied
  • Locked
Ryan Coogler's SINNERS sets record, becomes first film in history to earn 16 Oscar nominations.
0
131
Represent. replied
Oscars 2026 - The nominations
2 3
137
670
DKehoe replied
When exactly did language in entertainment get so profane? It bothers me.
2 3
106
854
falconhoof replied
When Dating Becomes a Checklist: Gen Z’s Approach to Love
2 3 4
171
2K
Fenix34 replied
Top Bottom