• 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 |OT3| You know what they say about big Michigans - big Florida

Status
Not open for further replies.
My math is telling me that the spread needs to be 57-43 in every state.

Realistically speaking, do superdelegates close that gap substantially if he starts taking big blue states by large numbers?
There are 2020 Delegates left. Bernie has 856. He needs 1527 more to win. That would require him to win 75% of all remaining pledged Delegates. If you just want to give him a majority of pledged delegates, then 58-60% would give him that.

Hillary won the big blue States last time and it wasn't enough to keep the supers and gain more. There is no realistic path to the nomination for Bernie. If Hillary manages 45% in every remaining state, she'll have more pledged delegates than Bernie.
 

ampere

Member
I was rooting for Ron Paul in 2008. The oil spike scared the crap out of me. Ron Paul was a good starter candidate because he helped me get informed pretty rapidly. I read the Constitution a few times and learned a lot about economics and foreign intervention.

I was super big into Ron Paul as well, especially in high school. I was pretty libertarian at the time.

2008 was my first election (was 19), ended up voting for Obama because I realized you kinda had to pick him or McCain. I'm happy that I voted, but I'm 99% sure I skipped on the midterm elections in 2010 which was a huge mistake. At least I did vote again in 2012 and 2014.


She's in good hands. Obama can still make a damn good speech.

Bernie does a 180 on Merrick Garland

Eh, I think Obama withdraws the nomination if it really goes that long without being approved, so not a big issue that he said that imo
 

teiresias

Member
The nomination will be withdrawn after the November election, I imagine, if it does indeed continue to languish in the Senate.

Hilary will be President elect, and subsequently, would have a mandate to pick her own Supreme Court nominee. Hopefully with a Democratic Senate for confirmation.

Although I would expect that she would like to begin her presidency with a clean slate.

Saying all that, I still expect Republicans to submit when it becomes apparent that they are heading to electoral suicide with a madman at the helm.

I think the nomination stays if Dems don't take back the Senate and there's a 50/50 chance it's withdrawn if Dems do take the Senate.

I think a withdrawal is less likely for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the messaging and optics of hammering Republicans in the Senate for not acting on it and then refusing to have anyone named for the nomination in the remaining days of the Obama term.
 
Cd7m5MiUIAEF2Gi.jpg
https://twitter.com/SopanDeb/status/711260682121928705
whyyyyy
 
If Garland's that left (if the charts are to be believed) then how could anyone be upset?

The GOP was in "lets not offend latinos" mode especially with how qualified she was, no one else on that bench had as much casework behind them during their nominations.
Really masterful pick on Obama's part then.
 

shem935

Banned

tomtom94

Member
I have this feeling Trump will get killed, if not on the way to the General election then after he loses it.

There's a part of me that hopes Trump loses and goes through on his threat to attempt a violent revolution, if only so anyone dumb enough to think that would actually work can be neatly killed off.
 
Who would even be better? Most measures I've seen show him as not very moderate.

CbXvgRtUsAAlcpM.jpg:large


CdrhDRhW0AAIJu9.jpg


PYpbVFj.png
Yeah the thing about him being super moderate/centrist just seems to be one of those things that gets repeated a lot until everyone just assumes it's true. Even by the most conservative estimate of those three Garland would represent a huge swing left. And I don't mean that in the sense of like "well even a Kennedy clone would swing it left" except not really because when is he ever in the minority.

Garland as the "swing vote" might side with conservatives on a handful of criminal justice issues and with the liberals on everything else. Sounds good to me.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
If Garland's that left (if the charts are to be believed) then how could anyone be upset?


Really masterful pick on Obama's part then.

He's probably more contentious from a process standpoint than a policy standpoint. He's 63. It's kind of a wasted opportunity even assuming he lives to be 80.

I'm sure he's also a corporatist and "tough on crime" (just like Obama), which makes him a NEOLIBERAL
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Who would even be better? Most measures I've seen show him as not very moderate.

Those are all extremely subjective charts that don't really say much without knowledge of their selection and weighing process. For instance, I'm guessing that "potential nominee" chart is looking at moderate and uncontroversial judges because that's who should be looked at for this particular scenario, but the potential moves a lot further left after the voter mandate republicans are supposedly waiting for.

Garland is a great pick for this situation, but in a situation where liberals hold the presidency and senate, they should want someone younger, further to the left in criminal law, and more confident in creating new precedent and interpretation of the law.
 

teiresias

Member
There's a part of me that hopes Trump loses and goes through on his threat to attempt a violent revolution, if only so anyone dumb enough to think that would actually work can be neatly killed off.

*backing out slowly . . .* Seriously guys, why the hell even go to that place?!?!

Just the schadenfreude involved in having to see how Trump's ego even processes a GE loss on the evening of it happening is enough to make me giddy. I still say he refuses to give a concession speech or speak at all, though the possibility of him throwing some insane, rhetorical diarrhea-of-the-mouth over the national airwaves even worse than his current talk wouldn't surprise me.
 

effzee

Member
What is Trump talking about? He said he wishes the media would show how many people are here. MSNBC is and was showing the wide shot of the crowd.
 
You gotta wonder if that was planned by CNN. Literally seconds before Trump starts with his BS about "I wish the media would show the crowds we have here.". CNN had zoomed out to show the entire area from on top of a building.

edit: glad someone else noticed :p
 

HylianTom

Banned
Why do I fucking watch this shit?
I don't know, but we're sitting here roaring with laughter at this. Just one ridiculous thing after another, like a male Palin is up there riffing for us.

I guess I should feel bad about laughing at a monster, but I can't help it.
 
I don't know, but we're sitting here roaring with laughter at this. Just one ridiculous thing after another, like a male Palin is up there riffing for us.

I guess I should feel bad about laughing at a monster, but I can't help it.

Kyle texted me and was like "Fuck this guy. Fuck him" Someone in his training class drove like 15 hours to go to this thing today. Ugh. My mom's opened the wine and is pretty much just cussing out everyone on that stage.
 
I'm not going to eat Oreos any more, I guaran---Here's what's going to happen folks......

Hahahaha, "Fuck Arizona, build it anywhere, not among you shit stains."
 
So you get ready for this, mind your own biz
'Cause I am bad, yeah the microphone wiz
No need to sit, 'cause we're 2 Unlimited
Ready, ready, ready for this

Feel the base, you just get closer
Be impressed by the words I chose of
Once again kickin' it live
Doin' everything yo just to survive

Above the law, I take our stand
Being on stage with a mic in my hand
Bustin' it loud to the crowd
The age is 20, I'm from the south
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom