Support NeoGAF

[Timeaisis]

I feel like their supporters would kill each other.

 

[Balphon]

The whole superdelegate conversation is slightly surreal given that they havent ever really been a consequential force in the nomination process.

I also find it fairly ironic that Sanders is himself a superdelegate while Clinton is not.

 

[Aaron Strife]

They don't poll WV very far out but the reference point that most everyone (seriously at the beginning of the primary process it was unanimously assumed she would carry the state easily) used to come to the conclusion that she was going to win was her 41% victory over Obama in the 2008 primary.

In 2016 she lost to Sanders by 16%

Uh I don't know who you were talking to but most analysts were predicting a big Sanders win.

http://www.benchmarkpolitics.com/2016/05/west-virginia-democratic-benchmark.html?m=1

 

[Atlagev]

They don't poll WV very far out but the reference point that most everyone (seriously at the beginning of the primary process it was unanimously assumed she would carry the state easily) used to come to the conclusion that she was going to win was her 41% victory over Obama in the 2008 primary.

In 2016 she lost to Sanders by 16%

There's a reason she won West Virginia by 41% over Obama, though...

 

[Armaros]

The whole superdelegate conversation is slightly surreal given that they havent ever really been a consequential force in the nomination process.

I also find it fairly ironic that Sanders is himself a superdelegate while Clinton is not.

All elected congressional democrats are super delegates (Bernie become one when he ran as a democrat)

 

[Clockwork5]

Las Vegas barely budged. In fact, her chances are back to 64%.

I forgot that the POTUS was elected by Vegas.

 

[Blader]

I understand what you are saying, however, if Supers we tied to the winner of the popular vote in their respective state, then the race would look a lot closer.

Also, I do think the Supers stacked the deck. They stacked from a public image standpoint. People will choose a candidate with the best chance to win. If they see a candidate is leading, they tend to support said candidate. Noe, this doesn't apply to all voters, but not all voters are as invested or informed in the election. Had the Supers not been used throughout the election process by the media and poll after poll, showcasing a large lead from Hillary, negating any movement or momentum gained by Bernie, then the race would be a lot different.

That sounds like something you would need to poll before definitively saying "the race would be a lot different if the media didn't group pledged and super delegates together." That said, I personally find it hard to believe that whatever perceptions came from a superdelegate lead contributed to an over 3 million vote gap between Hillary and Bernie. I think if you're generally informed enough to know about delegates and track delegate totals, you're informed enough to know the difference between pledged and super delegates.

Trump? lol

I guarantee Republicans wish they had superdelegates this year.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

They don't poll WV very far out but the reference point that most everyone (seriously at the beginning of the primary process it was unanimously assumed she would carry the state easily) used to come to the conclusion that she was going to win was her 41% victory over Obama in the 2008 primary.

In 2016 she lost to Sanders by 16%

That ignores everything that has changed regarding demographics between now and 2008. She is losing white states she won in 2008 against Obama and this was documented way before West Virginia. Winning WV was basically a mark of shame for her considering the clear and blatant racism that came out of that state. A convicted felon almost got as many votes as Obama did.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...west-virginia/2012/05/09/gIQA7GwtCU_blog.html

 

[Mr Clutch]

Closer in what way? He would still be losing significantly and if supers were tied to the winner of their state, they would just be pledged delegates and no longer need to exist.

Closer in the sense that throughout the election, Hillary was shown leading from the get go due to the pledged delegates before any primaries even occurred. The media ran with it like crazy. Pledging them to the popular vote, representing the voice of the people in their state which is what they are to do in the first place, would give a more realistic view on delegate count and not influence voter choice. You can deny it all you want, but most voters aren't entirely informed. They vote on recognition, policy headlines, and winning chances. I'd be comfortable to bet a small percentage of voters actually take the time to know their candidates, their candidates history in public office, their past stances and current stances, policies in depth, etc.

 

[Nazgul_Hunter]

They don't poll WV very far out but the reference point that most everyone (seriously at the beginning of the primary process it was unanimously assumed she would carry the state easily) used to come to the conclusion that she was going to win was her 41% victory over Obama in the 2008 primary.

In 2016 she lost to Sanders by 16%

It was obvious way before WV that Clintons coalition looked way more like Obamas and Bernies like hers in 2008. It wasn't a surprise and she'd been trailing in every WV poll that came out this year.

 

[Balphon]

All elected congressional democrats are super delegates (Bernie become one when he ran as a democrat)

Yeah, I know why he's a super, I just think it's amusing.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

I forgot that the POTUS was elected by Vegas.

Yikes.

 

[Clockwork5]

It was obvious way before WV that Clintons coalition looked way more like Obamas and Bernies like hers in 2008. It wasn't a surprise and she'd been trailing in every WV poll that came out this year.

Especially considering she blatantly said she was going to put coal miners out of a job.

 

[JustenP88]

I forgot that the POTUS was elected by Vegas.

Hardline Democrats have trouble telling the difference between sporting events and elections.

 

[SayItWithMe]

She wins she wins...just sick and tired of having another president in the top 1% who can give a shit less about the American people and sitting there lining there pockets...one day we will be progressive and make some changes in this country.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

I forgot that the POTUS was elected by Vegas.

You'd be surprised how accurate the betting markets are for this.

 

[pigeon]

They don't poll WV very far out but the reference point that most everyone (seriously at the beginning of the primary process it was unanimously assumed she would carry the state easily) used to come to the conclusion that she was going to win was her 41% victory over Obama in the 2008 primary.

In 2016 she lost to Sanders by 16%

A shorter version of this post is "no."

Nobody thought Hillary was winning West Virginia.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Especially considering she blatantly said she was going to put coal miners out of a job.

Are you interested in an actual discussion or just repeating political soundbites? She also said she had a 30 billion dollar plan to help coal miners transition to new careers.

 

[Mr Clutch]

That sounds like something you would need to poll before definitively saying "the race would be a lot different if the media didn't group pledged and super delegates together." That said, I personally find it hard to believe that whatever perceptions came from a superdelegate lead contributed to an over 3 million vote gap between Hillary and Bernie. I think if you're generally informed enough to know about delegates and track delegate totals, you're informed enough to know the difference between pledged and super delegates.



I guarantee Republicans wish they had superdelegates this year.

The only problem with this is, in the beginning, the delegate count was represented as a total vote count of sorts. It wasn't separated. It wasn't until just recently did they begin to mention how SDs could flip their vote, etc. From my observations and conversations with those I know or suspected of not being the "informed" voter, they were sure Bernie had no chance and that "Hillary is winning". Keep in mind, that observation happened in January.

 

[Clockwork5]

You'd be surprised how accurate the betting markets are for this.

Yeah 6 months out, I'm sure they are infallible.

 

[Wallach]

Yeah 6 months out, I'm sure they are infallible.

If you aren't interested in statistical guesswork 6 months out, why did you bring up national polls when we are 6 months out...?

 

[Link]

You'd be surprised how accurate the betting markets are for this.

We already know Sanders supporters aren't good with polling and statistics.

 

[Clockwork5]

If you aren't interested in statistical guesswork 6 months out, why did you bring up national polls when we are 6 months out...?

Because polls actually ask voters who they are going to vote for. Vegas wants to make a buck off of suckers.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Yeah 6 months out, I'm sure they are infallible.

They're more often right than wrong but this thread seems to be concerned with the improbable than the practical.

 

[Gummy]

The ability for so much of GAF to easily get behind and give unrelenting support to a (pretty dreadful)center-right candidate in Hillary is baffling to me.

 

[Maxim726X]

Because polls actually ask voters who they are going to vote for. Vegas wants to make a buck off of suckers.

I... don't think you understand how this works.

 

[SayItWithMe]

The ability for so much of GAF to easily get behind and give unrelenting support to a (pretty dreadful)center-right candidate in Hillary is baffling to me.

Agree with this so much!

 

[Irnbru]

I think Bernie has made his end game very clear, a contested convention and attempted persuasion to switch the Super-Delegate support. Will it work? You never know (but as a realist, its unlikely.)

Mmm, that delicious revolution by the will of the people.

 

[Balphon]

Because polls actually ask voters who they are going to vote for. Vegas wants to make a buck off of suckers.

Well, yeah. Which is why Vegas oddsmakers have a vested interest in crafting a betting line which reflects the real odds of something happening.

Polling uses statistical models too, it's not exactly a simple science.

 

[Armaros]

The ability for so much of GAF to easily get behind and give unrelenting support to a (pretty dreadful)center-right candidate in Hillary is baffling to me.

The ability for random GAF people to just plainly make up stuff and post it as fact will always depress me.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Because polls actually ask voters who they are going to vote for. Vegas wants to make a buck off of suckers.

If you're in the market of making money off predicting the winner, don't you think you'd hire the best possible people to help you predict the winner, using the most accurate and best methods possible?

Think about it.

 

[Link]

The ability for random GAF people to just plainly make up stuff and post it as fact will always depress me.

I've just accepted that reality means nothing to these people.

 

[SayItWithMe]

I've just accepted that reality means nothing to these people.

Pretty sure you are one of the people hes talking about...lol

 

[Orbis Tabula]

The ability for so much of GAF to easily get behind and give unrelenting support to a (pretty dreadful)center-right candidate in Hillary is baffling to me.

Agree with this so much!

It's not that hard to comprehend. There are two options, and she's better than Trump.

 

[GurgleBot20]

The ability for so much of GAF to easily get behind and give unrelenting support to a (pretty dreadful)center-right candidate in Hillary is baffling to me.

I wish just once that one of these "Hillary is really a republican!" people would offer an explanation and not just a drive-by comment...

 

[Sami+]

Bernie is an egotistical cunt. There will be no substance. There will be no debating in any productive sense. They both just want headlines. Incredible revolution.

It will just be Hillary sucks for two hours.

.

 

[Blader]

The ability for so much of GAF to easily get behind and give unrelenting support to a (pretty dreadful)center-right candidate in Hillary is baffling to me.

It's not unrelenting or blind support, many pro-Hillary Gaffers -- myself included -- have repeatedly said they don't love everything about her, have concerns about if not oppose certain elements of her platform, but also recognize she is the best bet in both enacting change and laying the groundwork for more progressive candidates in the future (e.g. appointing SCOTUS justices).

And Hillary isn't center right either.

 

[Mr Clutch]

I've just accepted that reality means nothing to these people.

Because everything a Hillary supporter says is concrete truth...

The fact of the matter is that individuals from both sides are acting fictitious. Shouldn't be held as a representative view on either candidate and their support base.

 

[Irnbru]

The ability for so much of GAF to easily get behind and give unrelenting support to a (pretty dreadful)center-right candidate in Hillary is baffling to me.

Please tell us more how she's center right according to her political career? I mean she wasn't the 11th most liberal senator or anything. I hate I have to defend Hillary, but at least she's the lesser of the two democratic evils.

 

[Armaros]

Because everything a Hillary supporter says is concrete truth...

The fact of the matter is that individuals from both sides are acting fictitious. Shouldn't be held as a representative view on either candidate and their support base.

If i was going down to their level, i would be calling Bernie a Communist. But I am not.

Doesn't stop 'Bernie or Bust' folks from trying to make the "hillary is a republican' talking point over and over again.

 

[GloriousBagel]

The ability for random GAF people to just plainly make up stuff and post it as fact will always depress me.

Hillary has a GAF account?

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

Because polls actually ask voters who they are going to vote for. Vegas wants to make a buck off of suckers.

I understand your reluctance. Here's the deal, though- betting markets are where people who want to know the actual odds go to. Polls are just one of many factors used in determining the odds. Think of average polling as just one ingredient in a very technical formula.

 

[JustenP88]

I could bring up you have war machine profiteering Bernie. If you want to go on hawkishness. All that sweet sweet military pork for Vermont.

Lol.

Fuck.

Lol.

Correct the Record! "So what if Hillary supports practically every potential military intervention that has been dreamed up since her career in national politics began?! One time Vermont got some money for a thing!"

 

[Mr Clutch]

If i was going down to their level, i would be calling Bernie a Communist. But I am not.

Doesn't stop 'Bernie or Bust' folks from trying to make the "hillary is a republican' talking point over and over again.

No, I get it. I'm merely tired of being lumped into a group I do not agree with, just like you would hate to be lumped into the Bernie commie group. I voice my opinion on here and receive an image that is not representative of me. I was bringing to attention that both sides practice these acts of fallacy.

 

[Mael]

I was simply defending my position on the question. I had asked if it was possible she loses, by wither a large or minuscule margin, and was immediately shut down and told that it was impossible she loses. I'm aware it wouldn't mean much in the sense of delegate count, but Bernie has made it clear he intends to persuade the SD to change their votes at the convention. The momentum would help.

Momentum means nothing this late in the game, it's like arguing that because you managed to run faster than Usain bolt in the last second of the course it makes up for the fact he's actually at the end of the race while you're at the midpoint.
If the race is over by the time CA vote, she can win/lose/takeashit/watchnetflix no one will care because the race will already be over.

 

[Link]

Pretty sure you are one of the people hes talking about...lol

Nah.

 

[SayItWithMe]

I wish just once that one of these "Hillary is really a republican!" people would offer an explanation and not just a drive-by comment...

Heres just one example...Her foreign policy.

https://theintercept.com/2016/03/13...-of-collaboration-with-gop-on-foreign-policy/

 

[Armaros]

Lol.

Fuck.

Lol.

Correct the Record! "So what if Hillary supports practically every potential military intervention that has been dreamed up since her career in national politics began?! One time Vermont got some money for a thing!"

I love how you minimize what that thing is.

A pork project to build unneeded fighters jets in Vermont instead of another place.

But thats fine because its just Bernie.

Heres just one example...Her foreign policy.

https://theintercept.com/2016/03/13...-of-collaboration-with-gop-on-foreign-policy/

I dont take people who post theIntercept as a good source, seriously.

 

[Justin]

Since this thread isn't really about this fake debate anymore 538 just dropped this article showing that the system isn't rigged against Bernie but has actually benefitted him which everyone whose been paying attention already knew but it's nicer to see all the math worked out.
http://53eig.ht/1Wn0sY9

 

[Mr Clutch]

Momentum means nothing this late in the game, it's like arguing that because you managed to run faster than Usain bolt in the last second of the course it makes up for the fact he's actually at the end of the race while you're at the midpoint.
If the race is over by the time CA vote, she can win/lose/takeashit/watchnetflix no one will care because the race will already be over.

Except his momentum will give more credibility to his movement and enact more progressive changes down the road. Look at Maine's decision with their Supers.