AP: Clinton clinches Democratic Nomination

Status
Not open for further replies.
That gives me a great idea.

Let's sew Sanders into the couch and have people insult him.

He'd have to be naked of course.

I just read this aloud. Everyone in my living room began to scream with laughter.

(I'm sure my neighbors appreciate it, lol..)
 
Sanders will not shut the hell up about superdelegates until Clinton receives enough pledged delegates to meet the minimum required without them, which hopefully happens tomorrow.

But even in such a scenario I imagine Sanders will still say there's a chance despite it being mathematically impossible if Clinton has enough pledged delegates, possibly recommending an increase in the number of superdelegates in existence in order to vote for him.
 
Shit, Iphone autocorrected to Killer Smile. lol

killer-mike-2014-smile-billboard-650.jpg


I mean, it is a pretty killer smile.
 
I do take solace in knowing that this will be looked back on in the fashion of "remember when we all thought an old disheveled angry guy was awesome? Yeesh what we're we thinking." Much as people do shell suits and fanny packs.
 
there should be avatar bets to whether or not bernie sanders drops out this week.

If he doesn't concede tomorrow night/Wednesday, it should be clear that he does it June 14/15 after the DC primary. There's no reason to drag it out until July. The pledged count reflects the will of the people, super delegates should not overrule that.
 
And of course Bernie is being a big baby saying she isn't, and wants to go to the convention to try and persuade like over 300 superdelegates to flip which have already said their vote is going to Clinton. There is nothing he can do.

Its over, he lost. Time to buck up and get out.
 
He Who Berned Himself should admit defeat already. Does he even have a political career to go back to? How many bridges did this guy bern?
 
Bernie seemed tired as all hell in the press conference earlier today and dodged every question about anything past California. I don't doubt he's resigned to dropping out soon.

That's what I'm saying. I was expecting something worse like his entire face on their back but what they got is tame.

I gotcha fam

img_1904.jpg
 
I turned 18 and voted for Bill in 1996 by absentee from school in Virginia up to Pennsylvania. Was very nice to have my first election be a rout.

Looking forward to Hills 20 years later.
 
I do take solace in knowing that this will be looked back on in the fashion of "remember when we all thought an old disheveled angry guy was awesome? Yeesh what we're we thinking." Much as people do shell suits and fanny packs.

If he concedes 'soon' (within a week or two) and stumps for Hillary, he will be the Left-wing of the partys martyr for a long time. Too good for this sinful party, but he did his duty to the country.

If he drags this out a lot longer, gets nastier, then you might well be right.

...Does he even have a political career to go back to? How many bridges did this guy bern?

He is insanely popular in his state. His seat is secure as long as he wants it, I'm sure.
 
Thank fucking god. I was so gungho Bernie out of the gate. Donated a few times to his campaign, but after a few debates and watching him on the trail, it became abundantly clear he is a one note band and seems woefully equipped to lead this country in anything other than a upturning economy, which I don't even think we quite have yet. Him to some extent, but mostly his followers, became everything they pretended to revile at the start. Hate filled shitbags in their own little distortion bubble. Hang around long enough and you eventually become the villain. Bernie, you contributed some amazingly important talking points and political messages that I hope carry through to the mid term elections, but you over stayed your welcome and failed to evolve as a candidate. Also, lolz to all the Bernie people threatening to not vote for Hilary. Whatevs, Bernie's main demo, the youth, never vote in the first place.
 
*ahem*...

The media does not care about the candidates, the voters, or what primaries remain. They care about being the first to call the race.
The AP called 2008 in March before the Texas primary? I'm honestly asking.

Do you think the AP calling the primary a day before CA will depress turnout?
 
I mean, this also seems a little weird, because if you want to allow for the practical impossibility of Bernie winning the pledged delegates based on his performance tomorrow (he'd need to beat his best-state performances in primaries and caucuses), then why not also allow for the practical impossibility of Bernie flipping all the superdelegates across the board?

It's like the general election, right? They don't call it until the polls close in enough places and someone gets to 270. Primaries are obviously different and they drag on, but the polls haven't closed and nobody has gotten to the magic number yet and there are still multiple people in the race. Hit the number.

But as for getting the super delegates to flip, I don't think that should or will happen unless the pledged count calls for it. The votes are the will of the people, and the people have not yet completely ensured Clinton's win. Just wait for it to happen.

Anyway, it's whatever. I just don't like this call right now. It's going to suppress the vote, it's going to inflame the Bernie supporter just a bit more, and I know AP doesn't need to care about any of it. The timing just grates, that's all, and it wouldn't happen absent those idiotic super delegates.
 
I get that you want to beat up on how dumb the Berniebros are, but neither of these things would be hypocritical if true and I don't think either of them are true. It's possible to agree with Bernie's ideas but disagree that he's correctly identified the best way to implement them in the absence of his victory; it's also possible to believe that your vote, even if it has no chance of being cast for the winner, expresses an important principle.

Finally, while Stein's anti-GMO position is nutso, the world isn't reddit and a lot of people weigh other issues above GMOs on the scale of political importance. Even among Greens, I can't imagine GMOs make the top 10 or 20 issues versus foreign policy pacifism, education, pensions, access to healthcare, poverty reduction, a carbon tax, supporting union labour, etc.

It would plainly be inappropriate for someone to tell you you're voting for a strident murderer and war hawk simply because you've chosen to support Hillary, because a) that's reductionist, and b) people would be imputing motives to you that aren't fair.

It's OK for people to vote for who they want to vote for. The only thing more embarrassing that losers flailing around because they can't cope with losing is winners flailing around because they can't cope with winning.



I mean, this also seems a little weird, because if you want to allow for the practical impossibility of Bernie winning the pledged delegates based on his performance tomorrow (he'd need to beat his best-state performances in primaries and caucuses), then why not also allow for the practical impossibility of Bernie flipping all the superdelegates across the board?


You make a good point overall, but consider this:

The GP's platform has as one of its main points a moratorium on GMOs:


http://www.gp.org/ecological_sustainability/#esAgriculture

Applying the Precautionary Principle to genetically modified organisms (GMOs), we support a moratorium until safety can be demonstrated by independent (non-corporate funded), long-term tests for food safety, genetic drift, resistance, soil health, effects on non-target organisms, and cumulative interactions.


The impact of this, if it came to fruition, on the economy would be nearly unprecedented.

Depending on what definition they use, this may impact:


1) Up to 92% of the corn supply
2) Up to 94% of the soy supply
3) Up to 75% of the supply of foodstuffs in general


A moratorium on GMO foods would lead to a catastrophic calamity. Even if they apply the laxest of definitions -- leading to, say, a modest decrease in supply on the teens instead of the numbers above -- it would be catastrophic, because it unequivocally impacts poor people the most.


It's not so much that the GMO stuff is secondary to their platform and they wouldn't actually go through with it in the event that they somehow win the support to do it: It's that they would even consider this as something to put on a platform in the first place. It shows a complete lack of preparation and disregard for reality. I would never trust the Green Party to run the country.
 
Lol Clinton was probably like

Jonah-Hill-Cut-It-Out.gif


Cut it out Supers, wait till tomorrow after the vote, no need to piss people off!

Supers: F* this, we want in this train NOW
 
If he concedes 'soon' (within a week or two) and stumps for Hillary, he will be the Left-wing of the partys martyr for a long time. Too good for this sinful party, but he did his duty to the country.

If he drags this out a lot longer, gets nastier, then you might well be right.
I think his legacy will best be served by stumping for Clinton, but I am sure that his cult of personality esque sway over some of his followers will fade eitherway. I doubt the tattoo owners will feel like their tattoos were a great idea of he manages not to piss away all the goodwill he has gained.
 
I turned 18 and voted for Bill in 1996 by absentee from school in Virginia up to Pennsylvania. Was very nice to have my first election be a rout.

Looking forward to Hills 20 years later.


I turned 18 and voted for him in 96 in Ohio. Pretty happy with the results, I must say.
 
You make a good point overall, but consider this:

The GP's platform has as one of its main points a moratorium on GMOs:


http://www.gp.org/ecological_sustainability/#esAgriculture




The impact of this, if it came to fruition, on the economy would be nearly unprecedented.

Depending on what definition they use, this result in:


1) Up to 92% of the corn supply
2) Up to 94% of the soy supply
3) Up to 75% of the supply of foodstuffs in general


A moratorium on GMO foods would lead to a catastrophic calamity. Even if they apply the laxest of definitions, even a modest decrease in supply on the teens would be catastrophic, because it unequivocally impacts poor people the most.


It's not so much that the GMO stuff is secondary to their platform and they wouldn't actually go through with it in the event that they somehow win the support to do it: It's that they would even consider this as something to put on a platform in the first place. It shows a complete lack of preparation and disregard for reality. I would never trust the Green Party to run the country.
Green Party also supports publicly funded homeopathy, which is just as dangerous.

From the platform on their website:
Gj9DHMC.png
 
He Who Berned Himself should admit defeat already. Does he even have a political career to go back to? How many bridges did this guy bern?

1) It is typical for losing candidates to not concede until after they've mathematically lost--Hillary waited 5 days until after being mathematically eliminated and other previous losers held out until the convention to concede. Some never endorsed the candidate they lost to. It's ok.

2) I don't know what kind of leverage you think it is to taunt Bernie by saying he might burn his bridges with a party he wasn't a member of 2 years ago. The career he'll go back to is his career as US senator in a safe seat in a safe state where he won 80% of the primary vote. The Democrats aren't going to run a serious candidate against Bernie, who votes and caucuses with them in the senate, especially not in an election where they're likely to win or lose the senate by a single seat.

Man oh man you guys have got to stop assuming that reddit or whatever hot takes you read on twitter are reality.

You make a good point overall, but consider this:

The GP's platform has as one of its main points a moratorium on GMOs:

I have literally no idea why you are telling me this but it seems very clear you are angry at people who don't like GMOs.
 
Congrats to Hilldawg. Now can HilGAF stop being so fucking condescending and patronizing toward their Bernie counterparts?

can we stop this nonsense? this is a sport, it's to elect our next leader, so what if Bernie made Hillary squirm a bit? they both need to be vetted to hell and back! we should be glad that someone like Bernie Sanders ran, it hopefully means it galvanizes people into paying close attention to their local races.

Hey come on guys, don't interrupt the circlejerk slamdown! Just get started on that unification process.
 
Good for Hillary. Honestly I expect Sanders to drop after DC, when Clinton ends up with a pledged delagate nomination.

Even if he did want to go to Philly, I don't think he has the cash on hand to get there, especially as donations will go completely dry after Cali.

I actually think she wanted to win tomorrow, lol, not that it matters. News sites can call someone the presumptive nominee whenever they feel like, she was one since NY, even without the magic number.
 
If he concedes 'soon' (within a week or two) and stumps for Hillary, he will be the Left-wing of the partys martyr for a long time. Too good for this sinful party, but he did his duty to the country.

If he drags this out a lot longer, gets nastier, then you might well be right.



He is insanely popular in his state. His seat is secure as long as he wants it, I'm sure.

I think we've passed that point, honestly. The least he can do is pack it in ASAP. If he would have dropped out a few months back so Clinton's campaign could focus on the general, then yes. But now we've gotten to the point where even the President is ready to just call it and ignore what Sanders is doing. But letting the Republicans finish up their circus before the Democrats killed any chance of him being remembered as some liberal martyr. Not to mention how useless he has been for downticket candidates. We're looking at the real life equivalent of that gif from The Office right now. You know the one.
 
I have literally no idea why you are telling me this but it seems very clear you are angry at people who don't like GMOs.

It shows? :p


I was just making the point that, while it is true that the GMO issue may indeed rank relatively low for supporters, the specifics of how they go about it in building a platform says a lot about how the party approaches issues.
 
Im confused, how did she clinch the nomination? What delegates were distributed today?

From what I understand, AP was contacting a lot of unconfirmed supers today (probably following up on the rumors from the other day that she had ~40+ supers ready to commit Tuesday) and apparently they got enough confirmations back in that they were confident in her having enough.
 
It's like the general election, right? They don't call it until the polls close and someone gets to 270. Primaries are obviously different and they drag on, but the polls haven't closed and nobody has gotten to the magic number yet and there are still multiple people in the race. Hit the number.

It kinda just think this is hair splitting. If after Ohio a presidential candidate had 269 EVs, it may be the case that decision desks would hold off, or it may be the case that they go ahead and call it. Calling it isn't a 100% sun-rises-tomorrow certainty, it's where the possibility of error is vanishingly small.

Anyway, it's whatever. I just don't like this call right now. It's going to suppress the vote, it's going to inflame the Bernie supporter just a bit more, and I know AP doesn't need to care about any of it. The timing just grates, that's all, and it wouldn't happen absent those idiotic super delegates.

I find it hard to believe the "suppression effect" would be either identifiable or relevant. Alaska and Hawaii probably have suppressed turnout because the result of the election is typically known by the time people would be off work to vote. I don't think that means we should or shouldn't call it for their sake. My own home country used to have an asinine law where it was illegal to share election results with people on the west coast, which was just nutso, because half the time the west coast polls would close and the news would cut in "LOL Election's Over folks". Thankfully that law is no longer enforced because it's not viable to enforce it, and the sky didn't fall.

I just kinda feel like the angle here is that this is a gut feeling with the rationalization of why it matters back-filled and it doesn't quite fit. I mean, whatever, you recognize your position is just a normative one, and the cat is out of the bag now so no big deal regardless. But just while we're talking about the merits of the position I just don't see the question of whether or not to call it as being particularly important.
 
From what I understand, AP was contacting a lot of unconfirmed supers today (probably following up on the rumors from the other day that she had ~40+ supers ready to commit Tuesday) and apparently they got enough confirmations back in that they were confident in her having enough.

Oh. But if they're going by projected superdelegates how is this different than any other day ?
 
Bernie seemed tired as all hell in the press conference earlier today and dodged every question about anything past California. I don't doubt he's resigned to dropping out soon.



I gotcha fam

img_1904.jpg

Out of the corner of my eye, it looked like a shirtless Bernie wearing a dicky:

LfDDU2N.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom