Support NeoGAF

[brainchild]

Well today is a sad day.

I don't understand senseless murders like this. But I guess that's why they're considered senseless.

 

[noshten]

Oh please.

You didn't say anything to what I said to you before. Now you want me to respond your backtrack that has registered voters national of every voter from both parties. Lol you either don't know how polling and partisanship works, or you know full well that you are bsing me and given no context to your BS.

You are liberal, right? Stop being like Fox News. You literally just posted a poll of registered voters from different parties and show the favorably differences between Bernie and Hillary and said "Look at his big crowds." .

Nope, you failed to address how having 650 000 individual contributes isn't showing his fund raising capability.Especially while the large majority of the country hasn't even heard about him yet, since he hasn't had the national stage due to the DNC pushing debates back into October.

You haven't actually proven that Bernie is better organizationally or better at fundraising than Obama. The totals tell. The fact that Bernie has these significant advantages over Obama—including, might I add, that's he's white—and the best he could do after all this media attention, tweeting, huge crowds and supposedly huge base of supporters, is just 5 million dollars more than what Obama hauled in in the same quarter? When in the year totals, he's 38 million behind what Obama had? You want to call that proof that Bernie is better organized and a better fundraiser than Obama?

Bernie couldn't raise more than Hillary for a quarter in which he is supposedly rising dramatically and she has had lots of bad news. He has less cash on hand than Hillary despite her campaign's crazy spending. Her campaign is building tech tools and hiring data analysts to properly utilize the tools needed for grassroots operations. Bernie's campaign is, instead, stuck spending on his own campaign TV ads, which Priorities USA can do for Hillary instead.

You can talk numbers of people. But I'm talking about the numbers in money, because that's what we have for comparison with Obama, and in the numbers in money, Bernie loses.

I fail to see any of your points having real merit.

You surely break down the deficiencies of Sanders but fail to address the advantages Obama has over him. From a organizational standpoint Americans were able to see 13 Debates between Democratic candidates from April 2007 till October 2007 - at large a lot of voters are unfamiliar with Bernie's policy or agenda. Despite that he has managed to galvanize those who are politically active on the net and the individual contributions are a milestone which you are downplaying.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I really fear Rubio.

I just fear he'll be able to peel enough latino and black voters (not many are needed btw) in places like FL and VA. Add in Kasich and I think you've got a really "moderate sounding" general election candidate that is best against Hillary's weaknesses.

The issues I see for him are his stance on abortion. Other wise he's set himself up great for the general. He's got proposals for student loans, for paid leave, for taxes, that "sound good" (but all are reinforcing corporations and rich peoples leverage over the less well off). I just fear he's enough of an empty suit that a desire to avoid the clinton mire and along with the media's general desire to take her down will lead to a small victory for him. He's running a smart campaign so far. Much better than Bush.

The biggest issue he has is winning the primary but I really don't think the racists who would take him out over his immigration stance are a big enough force and he's going to have people like sheldon keeping him in if they bail on Bush.

Rubio is also hard to attack personally too and smear his campaign as just for the rich (which it is). He's response to the BLM question was great too, meaning it was bullshit but it sounded nice.

And that's really why I fear him, I don't trust the country to see past the BS. He sounds good enough and clintons been damaged enough I certainly see a possibility of her losing.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

You surely break down the deficiencies of Sanders but fail to address the advantages Obama has over him. From a organizational standpoint Americans were able to see 13 Debates between Democratic candidates from April 2007 till October 2007 - at large a lot of voters are unfamiliar with Bernie's policy or agenda. Despite that he has managed to galvanize those who are politically active on the net and the individual contributions are a milestone which you are downplaying.

How many Democrats are unfamiliar with him?

 

[Retromelon]

He's got proposals for student loans, for paid leave, for taxes, that "sound good" (but all are reinforcing corporations and rich peoples leverage over the less well off). I just fear he's enough of an empty suit that a desire to avoid the clinton mire and along with the media's general desire to take her down will lead to a small victory for him.

If it was smokin joe biden he debated, or bill clinton, he wouldn't be able to get away with it. Joe would smile throughout every word he said and call it all malarkey, and bill would carefully explain why its bullshit in a way that doesn't sound like a lecture.
Can hillary learn to do that? That will make or break her
I am convinced paul ryan was a far more formidable foe on a debate stage to face than marco rubio will ever be

 

[Cheebo]

I really fear Rubio.

I just fear he'll be able to peel enough latino and black voters (not many are needed btw) in places like FL and VA. Add in Kasich and I think you've got a really "moderate sounding" general election candidate that is best against Hillary's weaknesses.

The issues I see for him are his stance on abortion. Other wise he's set himself up great for the general. He's got proposals for student loans, for paid leave, for taxes, that "sound good" (but all are reinforcing corporations and rich peoples leverage over the less well off). I just fear he's enough of an empty suit that a desire to avoid the clinton mire and along with the media's general desire to take her down will lead to a small victory for him. He's running a smart campaign so far. Much better than Bush.

The biggest issue he has is winning the primary but I really don't think the racists who would take him out over his immigration stance are a big enough force and he's going to have people like sheldon keeping him in if they bail on Bush.

Rubio is also hard to attack personally too and smear his campaign as just for the rich (which it is). He's response to the BLM question was great too, meaning it was bullshit but it sounded nice.

And that's really why I fear him, I don't trust the country to see past the BS. He sounds good enough and clintons been damaged enough I certainly see a possibility of her losing.

His rise has been fascinating because it has been so behind the scenes. Fiorina got all the attention post-Debate 2 yet his bounce has him neck and neck with her for third place in virtually all national polls now and the far and away leading non-outsider candidate across all national and state polling. He has usurped Jeb at that spot and the distance between the two only continues to grow.

He has been sneaking into second in a lot of the state polling too lately.

 

[BertramCooper]

Has Trump gone after Rubio for his spotty financial past yet?

It would be HUGELY hypocritical for Trump, obviously, but it's Trump, so it seems like something he'd do.

 

[B-Dubs]

Has Trump gone after Rubio for his spotty financial past yet?

It would be HUGELY hypocritical for Trump, obviously, but it's Trump, so it seems like something he'd do.

Trump's gonna get him on immigration. He's gonna go for that insta-kill.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

If it was smokin joe biden he debated, or bill clinton, he wouldn't be able to get away with it. Joe would smile throughout every word he said and call it all malarkey, and bill would carefully explain why its bullshit in a way that doesn't sound like a lecture.
Can hillary learn to do that? That will make or break her
I am convinced paul ryan was a far more formidable foe on a debate stage to face than marco rubio will ever be

Rubio strategy would be Romney in the first debate. Just lie and hope you don't get called out. I think the moderators are less likely to actually call out their BS like crowley did. With out her obama's adamancy wouldn't have produced that moment.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

His rise has been fascinating because it has been so behind the scenes. Fiorina got all the attention post-Debate 2 yet his bounce has him neck and neck with her for third place in virtually all national polls now and the far and away leading non-outsider candidate across all national and state polling. He has usurped Jeb at that spot and the distance between the two only continues to grow.

He has been sneaking into second in a lot of the state polling too lately.

Also explains his rise in the predictwise markets. The people who put big money on this stuff noticed.

http://www.predictwise.com/politics/2016RepNomination

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Trump's gonna get him on immigration. He's gonna go for that insta-kill.

I don't believe the immigration before anything else part of the GOP is big enough for that to be an issue if he can beat out Bush and others drop out.

The only way it hurts him is if people like Ben Carson, and Fiorina can stay in. Otherwise electability will matter more. I don't know why the trump stans still don't get this. He's influencing the race but he's not going to get the votes.

 

[Coriolanus]

No explanation at all? So historically strong support for Bill and Hillary Clinton from minorities for the past 25 years is just due to her front runner status in 2016?

That's not an explanation. What i'm looking for is an explanation as to why that support is there. That it is there, and has been there for a while, is evident.

It'd be kind of fun to just sit back and watch if their view wasn't destructive and downright dangerous. He'd lose in a massive landslide and set back the country decades.

Out of curiosity, but who is this republican that could make a democrat lose in a massive landslide?

 

[noshten]

How many Democrats are unfamiliar with him?

Establishment polls don't provide such insight and seem to be more interested in possible Biden/GOP match ups than covering people who are actually in the race.

 

[B-Dubs]

I don't believe the immigration before anything else part of the GOP is big enough for that to be an issue if he can beat out Bush and others drop out.

The only way it hurts him is if people like Ben Carson, and Fiorina can stay in. Otherwise electability will matter more. I don't know why the trump stans still don't get this. He's influencing the race but he's not going to get the votes.

The fact that Rubio was on the same side as Obama on an issue is what's going to deal the massive damage, the issue itself is irrelevant.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I really want Bush to start taking down Rubio but I don't think the party is stupid enough. I think they know Rubio is much strong on running than a third Bush.

Seriously what does Bush offer that Rubio doesn't. He has the whole Governor thing but I don't see that really mattering. Where is he different on the issues?

 

[NYCmetsfan]

The fact that Rubio was on the same side as Obama on an issue is what's going to deal the massive damage, the issue itself is irrelevant.

So was Romney. I don't see how immigration reform isn't his romneycare. It doesn't matter. That segment of the party NEVER gets their guy.

What is different in that in a head to head against trump, or bush (who has the same problem) or carley is that the difference. Again, they want to win.

 

[B-Dubs]

So was Romney. I don't see how immigration reform isn't his romneycare. It doesn't matter. That segment of the party NEVER gets their guy.

What is different in that in a head to head against trump, or bush (who has the same problem) or carley is that the difference. Again, they want to win.

The crazies are a lot stronger this time around.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Establishment polls don't provide such insight and seem to be more interested in possible Biden/GOP match ups than covering people who are actually in the race.

Well, can't argue with that sick logic. We need to start some grassroots polling.

 

[noshten]

Well, can't argue with that sick logic. We need to start some grassroots polling.

Indeed, the pollsters for some reason have decided to omit such options.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Indeed, the pollsters for some reason have decided to omit such options.

The anointed one is clearly being favored by pollsters.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

The crazies are a lot stronger this time around.

I really don't see evidence of this. Trumps support isn't all crazies. He's drawing lots of moderates that I think just like the un-PC ness of it. I don't see why they're not going to back a competitive candidate if the opportunity presents itself.

You guys seem to think the normal laws of politics have been suspended. I don't see evidence of this at all. Trump leading and outsiders at above 50 in October doesn't mean it will be that way in january or march

 

[Cheebo]

Indeed, the pollsters for some reason have decided to omit such options.

What are you talking about? Omitting grass roots polling? we get plenty of Bernie gen election polling. He is in third place of course Biden gets more. Biden is without question based on party leadership support he would gather and polling numbers a more legitimate contender than Bernie despite not being officially even in yet.

 

[noshten]

What are you talking about? Omitting grass roots polling? we get plenty of Bernie gen election polling. He is in third place of course Biden gets more.

Aggregate polling has him in second and he is actually running for president.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-democratic-primary

 

[ivysaur12]

Weeeee

Jonathan Weisman ‏@jonathanweisman
BIG SIREN: Fed govt set to exhaust its ability to borrow on Nov. 5, wks earlier than expected, Treasury announces. Huge pressure on Congress

 

[Cheebo]

Aggregate polling has him in second and he is actually running for president.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-democratic-primary

But does anyone think he would be in a general to warrant more polls than he gets? No. It would be a waste of time and money. He isn't getting to the general. Biden would he get in would clearly have a far far better shot at making it to the general.

I mean it would be fun to see how Obama would poll against trump and the like but I can see why it would be a waste of time to poll that, similarity to Bernie.

Now I want to see how and Obama third term poll would look honestly lol

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Establishment pollsters understate Sanders support too.

 

[Cheebo]

Bernie is secretly leading y'all . Don't trust the establishment media and their #lies

 

[Jack Remington]

Weeeee

If Obama, Pelosi and Reid had just repealed the goddamn debt ceiling in 2009, we could have avoided so many problems over the last four years.

 

[Roland_Gunner]

You guys seem to think the normal laws of politics have been suspended. I don't see evidence of this at all. Trump leading and outsiders at above 50 in October doesn't mean it will be that way in january or march

Specifically what evidence makes you thing things will return to normal in early 2016? In 2012 none of the random pop-up candidates lasted nearly as long as Trump has and Romney never fell lower that 2nd while Trump, Carson, and Fiorina have been the top 3 for weeks now.

 

[dramatis]

You surely break down the deficiencies of Sanders but fail to address the advantages Obama has over him. From a organizational standpoint Americans were able to see 13 Debates between Democratic candidates from April 2007 till October 2007 - at large a lot of voters are unfamiliar with Bernie's policy or agenda. Despite that he has managed to galvanize those who are politically active on the net and the individual contributions are a milestone which you are downplaying.

In the 2008 Democratic primary there were 26 debates total with 16 in which at least 6 candidates participated. There is no need for 26 debates for 8 candidates.

For this run around, 6 debates with 6 candidates (one hypothetical?) sounds pretty reasonable considering that each candidate will get a reasonable share of speaking time total. At some point, there are diminishing returns to the debates. How many debates will the public need? Why don't they just debate every day of the primary until the primaries end in all the states?

Ironically, Bernie supporters like to complain about the number of debates, and also claim that the debates will give Bernie a boost, but if there were all those debates in 2008, and Obama couldn't get a bump up in the polls until the primaries started, then what is so important about the debates? lol

Obama managed to galvanize those who were politically active...and got them to be active on the net. His campaign revolutionized how campaigns could be conducted using the web as a tool. Bernie's campaign is only riding on the coattails of the Obama campaign's achievements. I ask you again, how is Bernie a better organized campaigner and a better fundraiser than Obama? Saying, "Bernie has huge amounts of individual contributors, it's a milestone!" isn't proof of how he's either the first or the second. Twitter grew probably 100 times what it was in 2007. Political activity on the web has probably grown a tremendous amount since 2008. Why has Bernie only gained so little over Obama if he honestly is better at this than Obama?

 

[thepotatoman]

I thought we were supposed to work off of endorsements and donations as the reason to dismiss Trump. Rubio's endorsements consist soley of 4 representatives and he's 4th in FEC filed donations, behind Carson.

I'm sure he has decent PAC support, but he's not exactly strong in the endorsement and donations. Bush on the other hand is killing it in that area, and yet now he apparently isn't the favorite anymore.

There really isn't any historical trend you could latch onto to predict this one at all. Just your own analysis of the abilities of the candidates and the psychology of the electorate.

 

[Cheebo]

I thought we were supposed to work off of endorsements and donations as the reason to dismiss Trump. Rubio's endorsements consist soley of 4 representatives and he's 4th in FEC filed donations, behind Carson.

I'm sure he has decent PAC support, but he's not exactly strong in the endorsement and donations. Bush on the other hand is killing it in that area, and yet now he apparently isn't the favorite anymore.

There really isn't any historical trend you could latch onto to predict this one at all. Just your own analysis of the abilities of the candidates and the psychology of the electorate.

The predictions and betting on Rubio is pretty simple.

They all assume the outsiders will flame out and a establishment candidate will win. Who is the leading establishment candidate in all polling? Rubio. Who is the only establishment candidate to show positive poll movement? Rubio.

 

[ivysaur12]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...-s-doctor-background-brief-20150930-post.html

yo, fuck Alan Grayson.

Democratic congressional candidate Dr. Dena Minning has expressed her passion as a physician treating patients -- yet records indicate she has never obtained a medical license, and may have treated patients for only for a brief part of her career.

Minning, 44, a south Orange County resident, is in a packed contest for the Democratic nomination in Florida’s 9th Congressional District.

When she announced her candidacy, on July 24, she put out a statement declaring, “As a doctor, I have dedicated my life to improving the health of others by treating our nation’s veterans, providing medical care to patients regardless of the ability to pay, and researching cures for deadly diseases such as cancer and Ebola.

“As a doctor, I have healed many people,” she concluded.

Last week she held a campaign fund-raising event, targeting doctors, at Washington University in St. Louis Medical School, where she earned both a medical degree and a doctorate in molecular cell biology in 2000. She also is running a fund-raising page on the Democratic fund-raising site ActBlue.com, entitled, “Doctors for Dr. Dena Minning.” The page declares, “Please contribute to my campaign today to put a Doctor in the House!”

Yet her work treating patients may have been limited to two years of training, more than a decade ago.

“Dr. Minning performed her medical residency at the University of California, San Francisco for which a medical license was not required. During this time, Dr. Minning treated hundreds if not thousands of patients as a physician,” her spokesman, Shawn Shahzad, said in an email responding to an inquiry about her medical experience.

She served that residency in internal medicine after earning her doctorates. California law allowed her two years of combined training for a medical internship and a residency before she would have had to get a medical license.

But she never did, in California, nor in any of the other states she has lived since, including Florida, according to a search of those states' licensure databases.

Since leaving the university, Minning has worked as a biochemist developing new drugs, which has earned her some acclaim; and as a biotechnology entrepreneur and lobbyist, which has earned her some financial success.

Now, she is a wildcard candidate in the District 9 race. Minning is the only one of five Democrats there who has no professional or organizational background in politics. Still, she is close to the incumbent, U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Orlando, who has chosen to run for the U.S. Senate instead of re-election. She lives with him.

Minning was not available to discuss her career as a physician. She has not spoken to the media since announcing her candidacy more than two months ago.

Killer eyeshadow, too:

 

[Cheebo]

I still can't wrap my head around how Grayson leads primary polling in Florida.

 

[NeoXChaos]

The predictions and betting on Rubio is pretty simple.

They all assume the outsiders will flame out and a establishment candidate will win. Who is the leading establishment candidate in all polling? Rubio. Who is the only establishment candidate to show positive poll movement? Rubio.

Well that is what I think will ultimately happen. I agree with metsfan's analysis. I could be wrong and 2016 might be the year but we will see.

 

[ivysaur12]

I still can't wrap my head around how Grayson leads primary polling in Florida.

There aren't enough polls to really say what will happen (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/senate/fl/florida_senate_democratic_primary-5378.html) but it's still insane. God, he's the worst. He's not even that progressive! He just said something inflammatory about healthcare that one time.

 

[noshten]

But does anyone think he would be in a general to warrant more polls than he gets? No. It would be a waste of time and money. He isn't getting to the general. Biden would he get in would clearly have a far far better shot at making it to the general.

I mean it would be fun to see how Obama would poll against trump and the like but I can see why it would be a waste of time to poll that, similarity to Bernie.

Now I want to see how and Obama third term poll would look honestly lol

Wasting time and money isn't stopping mainstream media covering and polling the Republican circus. Obviously there are certain tendencies in the media and it appears they are pushing your agenda thus you are perfectly ok with them. I'm sure you were also expecting this election to be Bush - Hillary

In the 2008 Democratic primary there were 26 debates total with 16 in which at least 6 candidates participated. There is no need for 26 debates for 8 candidates.

For this run around, 6 debates with 6 candidates (one hypothetical?) sounds pretty reasonable considering that each candidate will get a reasonable share of speaking time total. At some point, there are diminishing returns to the debates. How many debates will the public need? Why don't they just debate every day of the primary until the primaries end in all the states?

Ironically, Bernie supporters like to complain about the number of debates, and also claim that the debates will give Bernie a boost, but if there were all those debates in 2008, and Obama couldn't get a bump up in the polls until the primaries started, then what is so important about the debates? lol

Obama managed to galvanize those who were politically active...and got them to be active on the net. His campaign revolutionized how campaigns could be conducted using the web as a tool. Bernie's campaign is only riding on the coattails of the Obama campaign's achievements. I ask you again, how is Bernie a better organized campaigner and a better fundraiser than Obama? Saying, "Bernie has huge amounts of individual contributors, it's a milestone!" isn't proof of how he's either the first or the second. Twitter grew probably 100 times what it was in 2007. Political activity on the web has probably grown a tremendous amount since 2008. Why has Bernie only gained so little over Obama if he honestly is better at this than Obama?

Those debates provided him exposure that you are underplaying. We are not talking about an insignificant number of debates, he gained national spotlight despite being in a similar position to begin with in terms of recognition. Beginning his campaign February 10, 2007 as a relatively unknown entity but had plenty of free press via the debates to gain recognition.
Bernie has gained a comparable amount to Obama - despite lacking this national wide exposure. Hence the thread

 

[NeoXChaos]

Wasting time and money isn't stopping mainstream media covering and polling the Republican circus. Obviously there are certain tendencies in the media and it appears they are pushing your agenda thus you are perfectly ok with them. I'm sure you were also expecting this election to be Bush - Hillary




Those debates provided him exposure that you are underplaying. We are not talking about an insignificant number of debates, he gained national spotlight despite being in a similar position to begin with in terms of recognition. Beginning his campaign February 10, 2007 as a relatively unknown entity but had plenty of free press via the debates to gain recognition.
Bernie has gained a comparable amount to Obama - despite lacking this national wide exposure. Hence the thread

IMO that is still probably what we will get in the end.

https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/649643605901078528

 

[Cheebo]

I'm sure you were also expecting this election to be Bush - Hillary

I have been saying here since the primary race first started I have always felt the GOP base in 2016 would not nominate Bush, so that is not correct.

Bush's campaign is in no shape or way ever comparable to the situation in the Dem side.

IMO that is still probably what we will get in the end.

I am still curious, why? He isn't even the leading establishment canidate anymore and continues to fade. It seems like his big doners are on the verge of abandoning him based on recent reports.

 

[thepotatoman]

The predictions and betting on Rubio is pretty simple.

They all assume the outsiders will flame out and a establishment candidate will win. Who is the leading establishment candidate in all polling? Rubio. Who is the only establishment candidate to show positive poll movement? Rubio.

It's just interesting that a movement in the polls now is actionable, while the movement in the polls as trump was rising wasn't.

And I'm still trying to figure out historically where the outsiders had a strong lead before flaming out. Giuliani, Perry, and Gingrich weren't exactly big outsiders. Cain is an outsider but he barely lasted a week on top with barely any margin over Romney. Before that it's basically Goldwater and Reagan, who didn't exactly flame out.

It seems like an assumption based on what your gut feels about the psychology of the electorate, which might end up being right. I just wish there was something stronger to act off of.

 

[NeoXChaos]

I have been saying here since the primary race first started I have always felt the GOP base in 2016 would not nominate Bush, so that is not correct.

Bush's campaign is in no shape or way ever comparable to the situation in the Dem side.


I am still curious, why? He isn't even the leading establishment canidate anymore and continues to fade. It seems like his big doners are on the verge of abandoning him based on recent reports.

I just have a gut feeling that the old rules still apply in regards to the nomination. Bush is going to go nuclear on all his opponents eventually.

I will say however that the money the others have throws a wrench into this. It could be a cancel out effect.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

It's just interesting that a movement in the polls now is actionable, while the movement in the polls as trump was rising wasn't.

And I'm still trying to figure out historically where the outsiders had a strong lead before flaming out. Giuliani, Perry, and Gingrich weren't exactly big outsiders. Cain is an outsider but he barely lasted a week on top with barely any margin over Romney. Before that it's basically Goldwater and Reagan, who didn't exactly flame out.

It seems like an assumption based on what your gut feels about the psychology of the electorate, which might end up being right. I just wish there was something stronger to act off of.

Trump and the other outsiders rise is directly correlated with media exposure, especially trumps, but when voting happens people tend to sit down and think about how to actually win.

As I've said before, answering a pollster is cheap, voting is expensive.

I see trump as a longer living gingrich who basically rose because he was rude to a moderator and said some un-pc things (Child Labor!) Trumps rise is not a voice of support to trump, its a signal to the rest of the party, act more like him. We want this rather than this meek timid stuff

 

[Aaron Strife]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...-s-doctor-background-brief-20150930-post.html

yo, fuck Alan Grayson.



Killer eyeshadow, too:

Eyeshadow that just makes you look like you have scurvy.

 

[HylianTom]

I just have a gut feeling that the old rules still apply in regards to the nomination. Bush is going to go nuclear on all his opponents eventually.

I will say however that the money the others have throws a wrench into this. It could be a cancel out effect.

Citizens United allowing more candidates to stay in the campaign deeper into the process might be one of the biggest bulletpoints of this entire primary season, especially if their establishment nominee emerges heavily damaged, or if their candidate is one of the "outsiders" who won with help from a divided field, or if

Spoiler

{*OhPleaseOhPleaseOhPleeeeease!*}

they end-up with a brokered convention.

 

[Abinash117]

Nope, you failed to address how having 650 000 individual contributes isn't showing his fund raising capability.Especially while the large majority of the country hasn't even heard about him yet, since he hasn't had the national stage due to the DNC pushing debates back into October.



You surely break down the deficiencies of Sanders but fail to address the advantages Obama has over him. From a organizational standpoint Americans were able to see 13 Debates between Democratic candidates from April 2007 till October 2007 - at large a lot of voters are unfamiliar with Bernie's policy or agenda. Despite that he has managed to galvanize those who are politically active on the net and the individual contributions are a milestone which you are downplaying.

You don't seem to read what said if actually formulate arguments instead of posting Fox News like material you would have seen that I said

The difference between Sanders and Hillary fundraising is the cause of there positions. Sanders HAS to rely on individuals to get any money; the thing is Sanders is the only candidate that is extremely liberal and has similar in views to many of the 18-29 year old bracket. He is also the only dem candidate that is campaigning and saying very liberal views. It not unsurprising that he has lots of individual donors if anyone thinks about it.

Plus with your own words that the internet is different from 2007/8 which I said is true.

Instead your next post was this mostly.

But your next post is Hillary Clinton Favorable Rating
Asked of 897 registered voters
Favorable 43%
Unfavorable 55%
Not Heard Enough 1%
Undecided 1%

Bernie Sanders Favorable Rating
Asked of 897 registered voters
Favorable 36%
Unfavorable 29%
Not Heard Enough 25%
Undecided 8%

There is still at least 25% - Bernie can win/lose with momentum or more exposure.

 

[B-Dubs]

You don't seem to read what said if actually formulate arguments instead of posting Fox News like material you would have seen that I said



Plus with your own words that the internet is different from 2007/8 which I said is true.

Instead your next post was this mostly.

But your next post is Hillary Clinton Favorable Rating
Asked of 897 registered voters
Favorable 43%
Unfavorable 55%
Not Heard Enough 1%
Undecided 1%

Bernie Sanders Favorable Rating
Asked of 897 registered voters
Favorable 36%
Unfavorable 29%
Not Heard Enough 25%
Undecided 8%

There is still at least 25% - Bernie can win/lose with momentum or more exposure.

I'd, again, like to point out that favorability ratings do not translate into actual votes. If they did Joe Biden would be in first place right now.

 

[noshten]

You don't seem to read what said if actually formulate arguments instead of posting Fox News like material you would have seen that I said



Plus with your own words that the internet is different from 2007/8 which I said is true.

Instead your next post was this mostly.

But your next post is Hillary Clinton Favorable Rating
Asked of 897 registered voters
Favorable 43%
Unfavorable 55%
Not Heard Enough 1%
Undecided 1%

Bernie Sanders Favorable Rating
Asked of 897 registered voters
Favorable 36%
Unfavorable 29%
Not Heard Enough 25%
Undecided 8%

There is still at least 25% - Bernie can win/lose with momentum or more exposure.

My next post wasn't aimed at you, if it was I would have quote you.

 

[Fenderputty]

Weeeee

Man, weeee indeed.

 

[Abinash117]

My next post wasn't aimed at you, if it was I would have quote you.

Might has well be since you giving no context to it whatsoever and I was only few people you was continuously arguing with. The people you was arguing with; that poll you posted has little to do with anything when it was showing registered voters of the three main political groups of how they view Hillary and Bernie .

 

[Jack Remington]

I really fear Rubio.

I don't. He's awkward on stage and has already taken some stances that will be quite damaging in the general. He's against rape and incest exceptions for a hypothetical abortion ban, which should cost him dearly with women. He also said he'd try to change the makeup of the Supreme Court specifically to overturn Obergefell, which will really hurt him with the youth vote.

I just fear he'll be able to peel enough latino and black voters (not many are needed btw) in places like FL and VA.

He may do a bit better with Latino voters than Romney. Black voters, I don't see it.