• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT2| we love the poorly educated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sam Wang's Super Tuesday projection
qjC4xhs.jpg
As you can see, the number of delegates drops off fairly steeply for candidates with lower vote share. This dropoff is a direct consequence of the rules, which strongly favor the candidate with the largest fraction of the vote. Combined with early-state delegates, Trump would have a cumulative total of 354 out of 720 delegates, or 49%. If he outperforms polls by even a little bit, or if he gets some of the delegates unassigned by my code, he could well get to 50% of delegates.

(I also note that we now have a firm number: an average vote share of 32% on Tuesday is approximately enough to get Donald Trump 50% of cumulative delegates.)

The other estimated cumulative delegate totals are: Cruz 213, Rubio 98, Kasich 16, and Carson 12. Ted Cruz was already planning to stay in the race past Tuesday; these outcomes would ensure it.
After Super Tuesday, conditions get even tougher for Rubio. The next few winner-take-all states favor Trump. In Ohio (66 delegates), Trump holds a lead of only 3.5%, so attacks on Trump might flip Ohio – to Ohio Governor John Kasich. That would get Kasich almost caught up with Rubio in delegates. In Florida (99 delegates), Trump leads Rubio by 18 percentage points, making that race a probable humiliation to Rubio in his own home state.
 
It might have been a cable ad buy, because I got one here for Bernie too. It's the first Bernie ad I've seen all year. I saw a few Hillary ones thus far.
 

Iolo

Member
This is something I've argued with the Rubio people as well... Rubio may take 2nd place in popular vote from Cruz but Cruz will still lead in delegates due to Texas. Establishment am cry.

Which is interesting because Wang has Rubio at 200 delegates behind instead of 100 like the analyses saying he still has a chance.
 
White voters want Obama's policies to continue 43%. 39% want more liberal policies. 13% want them to be more conservative.

Nina Turner already saying that SC was a lost cause from the beginning.
 
Which is interesting because Wang has Rubio at 200 delegates behind instead of 100 like the analyses saying he still has a chance.

It's mostly because those analyses don't take into account the actual rules for awarding delegates.
Eight Super Tuesday states require a candidate to get at least 13 to 20 percent of the vote in order to get any statewide delegates. Cruz appears to be below threshold in Alabama, Georgia, and Vermont. Rubio appears to be below threshold in Alaska, Tennessee, Texas, and Vermont. And then there are Congressional district-level delegates, which account for about one-third of the delegates to be awarded. Here, the rules are even worse for runners-up: in addition to the threshold requirement, the tendency is to give two delegates to the top finisher and one delegate to the second-place finisher. At the district level, Cruz and Rubio are about equally likely to fall into the third-place abyss.
 

PBY

Banned
People are here to enjoy a win tonight instead of fretting about the GOP.

I'm good with that. I guess I'm not as excited because for me, I don't really care as between Hillary and Bernie, would be more than happy with both.
 
Because it's not extremely white?

In coded language, yes. She did the "SC has a long history with Clinton" thing. But, ya, she was basically saying it was a racial issue.

If Bernie wanted to win decently among whites in SC, I would think he'd want more whites to want more liberal policies. Only 7% of AA voters want more liberal policies, which I think Hillary successfully tied to the idea of a repudiation of Obama's legacy.
 
So, excuse the non-sequitur again, but I guess I'll note that, I think both Clinton and Sanders have mixed pasts on LGBT issues.

On the issue of same sex marriage, Sanders changed his stance for the better earlier, and for some people, however they may identify, that may be an entirely valid reasoning for voting for him.
For others, straight, gay, cis, trans it may not be sufficient.

One may look at his activities as Mayor of Burlington or hers as Secretary of State or any other role they've held on issues of importance. That's anyone's personal prerogative. They've both done good things, and less than good things. They'll both do good things, and probably also do less than good things.

Nowhere have I expressed that you can't be simultaneously affected by LGBT issues and support Sanders.

In a thread that wasn't even about gay marriage from memory, the timing of Clinton's change in position was brought up as a wedge issue to show she was a flip-flopper. I was curious whether those arguing about it at length were actually affected by that change in position.
I'm not sure how exactly that was taken as a slight, but it wasn't intended as one. I'm not sure why a response wasn't directed directly at me, I'm normally pretty open to discussion.

Back to scheduled broadcasting.
 
Hillary has a -13 approval rating among overall Americans and will have the easiest presidential victory (counting both primary and general ease) of any non-incumbent since... ever? Even FDR struggled through the primary.
 

Bronx-Man

Banned
Hillary has a -13 approval rating among overall Americans and will have the easiest presidential victory (counting both primary and general ease) of any non-incumbent since... ever? Even FDR struggled through the primary.

I'll said it before, but Hillary is winning the GE in the biggest landslide since Reagan's inauguration. It's just lopsided as hell at this point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom