-
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 |OT4| Tyler New Chief Exit Pollster at CNN
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
FlowersisBritish
fleurs n'est pas britannique
Why are they not reliable voters?
Macho Madness
Member
Bradley!
hey ivy
got somethin to show ya
FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK
maabus1999
Member
Probably both are heavily slanted independent, which would make it more sensible. Lots of more conservative voters like the "anti free trade" message of Bernie...just like Trump.
shinra-bansho
Member
Makes sense to me. ABC. Anyone but Clinton.
Also cross reference with gender statistics.
It is over, and has been for a while. Even now, after 6 consecutive wins, Hillary's lead over Bernie is more than double the max lead Obama had over Hillary in '08. This race hasn't been close since Hillary blew Sanders out in SC, and since then everything's largely gone according to plan. The only reason this primary is still a thing is because Bernie has the money to keep going, and the media has an interest in keeping up the illusion that this race is close. Hillary's not having trouble in the slightest.
A lot of Sanders voters like him because they think he's more honest, not because he's so left.
People perplexed by the rise of either Trump or Sanders need to realize that ideology takes a back seat to personality for many voters. This is why Trump could conceivably beat Hillary Clinton
Wait, what? I must be reading this wrong. A significant portion of Bern voters in WI thought that the next president should simultaneously be more/less liberal than Obama?
maabus1999
Member
Sanders really should've dropped after the 5 State sweep by Clinton. That sealed any mathematical chance he had outside of making unrealistic margins in NY/CA.
Macho Madness
Member
There's a lot of reasons and young voters aren't monolithic so it's hard to explain but it's a combination of disillusionment, priorities, inspiration, and a little bit of ignorance.
excelsiorlef
Member
Open primary.
maabus1999
Member
Would you be surprised that Politifact rates Clinton overall more truthful (slightly) than Sanders based off comments they've made?
Abinash117
Member
I wonder why some of y'all are so prone to diablosing ? It was expected for him to win these states and I expected Hillary to win most of these states now.
And_Gignac
Member
hey ivy
got somethin to show ya
That 11% is going to get charmed by Trump in November.
This is why Sanders is *extremely* needed.
I know, I was there today. What confuses me is that many must have said both.
I hate this because they're rating select comments not every single thing they say.
Macho Madness
Member
The point of me posting this was to explain the Dem Bradley voters and why more of them were Bernie voters.
You would have thought Clinton has the bigger cult of personality with all of this "YAS QUEEN"-ing, though. Besides, don't Sanders detractors call him an ideologue if anything? Can't have it both ways.
I don't actually mind Bernie staying in the race. Even Obama admitted that the primaries going so long actually benefited his general election campaign.
I just wish that, if Bernie were going to keep going, he'd stop be such a dishonest slime bucket and attacking Hillary like a Republican.
eBay Huckster
Member
that and in the actual numbers, they've consistently trended at 20% under the overall turnout numbers for presidential elections since before the minimum voting age was lowered, for those exact reasons (though I'd wager it was less disillusionment prior to Vietnam)
maabus1999
Member
Well of course, and Clinton has many more years of rated comments. But it is fun to say when it is brought up.
Honestly though, I don't see either more honest than the other, outside of Hillary being a little "smart" with the email issue early last year. Was a bad look for her that month.
Welcome to the media horse race. Pundity isn't about facts or even about being right, it's about creating a narrative that keeps eyes on the tube and people engaged so they see your commercials.
There's plenty of new media out on the net with a more grounded view, and ones that dive into data based reporting. There's also worse echo chambers than the MSM. Tread smartly!
Honestly, as an outsider, I would place Clinton with the rest of the right wing loonies. Heck, even Sanders is moderate by our standards. Her foreign policy is very much like a Republican's though, with Israel once again being the only hope against those big-bad Muslims.
FlowersisBritish
fleurs n'est pas britannique
I mean, sure, him winning is a statistical anomaly, but it's still possible. And he's gonna keep going until it's literally impossible. If you don't count the super delegates, she only has a two hundred pledged delegate lead that hasn't really been getting that much wider. Rather, with each win that divide is a little closer. You can't really call it won and done till that moment. Also, wait, what? Since when has the media been calling this close? Ever since Bernie was giving speeches to crowds of a dozen people in some park people have been saying he has no chance. Not saying he's going to win, but the media has been saying Hilary's got this in the bag since people were still voting of O'Malley.
Cesare Borgia
Banned
Nice win by Sanders.
maabus1999
Member
Speaking of Obama, Obama wants the primary to end "soon" so he can start campaigning for the Democrats. The longer Sanders stays in, the longer Obama has to stay out without risking the "neutral" stance he is going for.
So, a double edged sword if you are an Obama fan. Also, I think Clinton has learned her lessons with Sanders up to that "5 state win" and there really hasn't been any issues/debates/etc... that have changed anything for him or her since then.
I know. I still get to be furious.
I just want to add that the republican turnout was better than the democrat. I would like to see the exit poll before you blame Bernie supporters for losing that race.
I didn't say it was mathematically impossible.It's not. But it's pretty damn unlikely at this point.
And you're missing the point of my post, which was in response to a poster who worked on Obama's 08 campaign saying that Bernie winning tonight showed that Hillary is a weak candidate. Hillary kept it MUCH closer against Obama than Sanders is keeping it with Hillary, to say that she's weak here is silly.
Exit poll had 15% of Bernie supporters voting for her versus 4% for HRC voters.
EDIT: let me be more specific. 15% of Bernie voters DIDNT vote for her opponent.
Abinash117
Member
He has been winning caucus states that have the demographics that benefits him in most. The last few states were all caucus states that is why he won them all in a row. Hillary does better in most primary states. That is why it is narrowing, but the assumptions is now that many of the later states benefit Hillary more so than Bernie, so it is more possible for her to get some winning streaks.
superdeluxe
Member
Wha? She had I believe 300+ delegates but now it's down 220+ after the Washington, Hawaii wins.
Edit: That could've been fixed easily if Bernie supporters sent the message out especially a single post on Reddit. That was a stupid missed opportunity. I would've mentioned it myself if I knew WI politics.
maabus1999
Member
Unbelievable amount of hypocrisy from that campaign when a month ago they were talking about reducing the power of super delegates as part of their possible demands at the convention.
Jimmy King
Member
what the actual fuck
RastaMentality
Banned
Jesus Christ. Contested convention talk, really?
I think the Clinton structural advantage (since, well, her husband was the last Dem president, and someone who gave her massive structural advantages) is underplayed because Obama won. She had massive freaking advantages going into 2008. Obama is an immensely gifted campaigner, but a) Bill Clinton, when he's not going into idiot mode, is as well, and b) he was a black dude from the midwest who had a suspicious name. Even Clinton dropped the hint of "maybe he's not Christian!" on 60 Minutes of all places (IIRC, I'm old. Could be totally wrong on this). I irrationally love the man (KEEP THIS IN MIND FOR MY POSTS), I don't think he should have won at that point.
Which is kind of my point. The more this drags on, the more I think a larger percentage of Sanders' vote is "Not Clinton" rather than "Yay Sanders". Her unfavorables are brutal in any non "GOP lighting itself on fire" year.
Bottom first, well, duh, the GOP is stuck with a hilarious shit show between Trump and Cruz. We have a candidate that 40% of his own party is "afraid of" in Wisconsin, and someone who is...I think, twice as far to the extreme on his side as any other modern candidate has been before. Shit, I vote we nominate ivy and have a hot ass president, but that's just me. <3
Clinton had massive, massive advantages going in to both 2008 and 2016. We look back on history differently because Obama won; and so we downplay the losers and promote the winners. Had Clinton won the primary and GE in 2008 (assuming minimal counter-factual history and McCain is dumb and goes with Palin still); we would have talked about the decades her and Bill spent courting Democratic politics and influence makers, and how her brilliant long-term planning would have paved the way for her rise, even overcoming (and, yes, she has to overcome this, sadly, even now) being a woman and the electoral disadvantages that come with it. With Biden not choosing to run (which I respect, got a story from a friend about the WH and Biden's emotions. A) I hope to god someone leaks the april fool's joke, because they fucking got Obama good and B) Biden is a strong man, but ain't no one that strong, to quote her), she was the only actual democrat to run.
EDIT: That said, the fact that Obama Boys and Bernie Bros both existed when running against Clinton makes me hella fucking suspicious about the Clinton campaign. But it's irrelevant cuz the primary's been over IMO, and that Clinton is hurt by being a woman. Way less in 2016 than 2008; but still hurt. Data don't lie, as it were.
Maybe because I was too far inside to believe what we were doing was anything beyond common sense - but the voter data and the analysis and the ground-work and follow-up...wasn't anything beyond common sense as far as I believe. It was seriously basic stuff, like trying to get as much data as they were willing to give us about themselves, and doing it on an individual basis - so that they'd be more comfortable giving us said data and that we just reminded folks that they were..uh, freaking individual human beings? If Target and Wal-Mart can get that kind of data analysis, people who are running to be the most powerful human being in the world should be able to do that kind of data analysis.
It's really, really hard for me to believe that anything we did was more than just basic computerization and modernization of already existing political processes. Damnit, we have computers, we can automate basic correlation studies as we import data and do a review on a daily/weekly basis of our correlations and run it by our qualitative folks and see if the correlations are just dumb or could have meaning. As a data / analytics person, the process is the part that I care about. The narrative that Obama's campaign was revolutionary is very, very heavily driven by the fact that he won, not just a process vs process comparison of Clinton vs Obama. But was Obama that much more gifted that Bill Clinton given context (Bill was handed a pretty rough situation, Carter and all) and capabilities? I don't know. History does funny things to our memories and our understanding of what really happened. If Obama loses 2012; he's a flash in the pan politician who didn't have the experience necessary to run the country.
Look - anyone who has seen my posts know that I am an Obama-stan to an unhealthy degree. But I genuinely believe that Clinton lost that primary as much as Obama won it. Maybe I am seriously underestimating the anti-establishment vibe in this country, but dear lord is Sanders a terrible fucking presidential candidate, and I say that as someone who would probably vote for him over Clinton. Clinton should be annihilating him. I know there's talk that Clinton is being nice...but that's reaaaally hard for me to square away with their prior history and their often stated belief that politics is war. He's an independent who joined the Dems primarily to push a message about classism, and somehow he became a (sort of?) viable candidate? HOW THE FUCK DID THIS HAPPEN?
To me, Clinton still has a lot of work to do on her unfavorables. Clinton would be an awesome dictator (I'm not kidding on this) - she's the person who isn't the most charismatic, or like being political, or glad-handling (which was a massive bonding point for her and Obama), or frankly, wants to do anything besides try to do the shit that she thinks is the right thing to do and make this country better. It makes her (IMO) a terrible US presidential candidate per our electoral process (hence my comment), but a good actual president once she gets there. A lot of people voted for GWB because they wanted to have a beer with him (what, you think the beer summit was spur of the moment? Hah.) - and as...asinine as I think that is, it's a sad fact about how Americans vote for presidential candidates. But Clinton is driven, smart as all hell, and has a systems-engineering mind that I hella respect, because she understands how systems interplay (worse than Obama, IMO, but still unbelievably good).
That said...
She's going to fucking CRUSH Cruz and/or Trump. You couldn't make easier candidates for her to oppose. The Dem primary is over. It's been over (for me, when Sanders didn't win Iowa it was over barring something jarring happening). While Obama can't officially go all in on Clinton - honestly, his best avenue is just beating the crap out of Cruz and Trump. Even though I think Sanders should bow out; because of the inanity of the GOP candidates, Obama has the same impact now as he would if Clinton were unopposed; because his contrast with Cruz and Trump isn't ideology - it's the ability to actually be President and function as a normal human being. Obama's pragmatism is the perfect antidote to Cruz / Trump ideology, and dovetails very nicely with Clinton's pragmatism (which I unbelievably respect her for when it comes to social issues assuming she comes through)
Cruz and Sanders won by a little more than I expected in each case. Interesting. So Saturday is Wymoing for the Democrats and then nothing else on either side until 4/19?
Yeah I don't mind you having or giving an opinion but few things annoy me more than when people from other countries talk about the US as if they have any clue what they are talking about. It's the same shit with Europeans who like to pretend they are above racism or some shit. You can't say the shit you've just said and consider yourself informed on American politics.
An ideologue is someone who is dogmatic and uncompromising to a fault - often more interested in pushing ideas regardless of their practicality or feasibility. I have no idea what people on a message board spamming QUEEN have anything to do with that distinction.
Yeah I don't mind you having or giving an opinion but few things annoy me more than when people from other countries talk about the US as if they have any clue what they are talking about. It's the same shit with Europeans who like to pretend they are above racism or some shit. You can't say the shit you've just said and consider yourself informed on American politics.
blackaroni
Member
https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/717561523875540992Clinton Press Sec said:
Have y'all seen this:
https://twitter.com/tmj4/status/717547327062409216
User 463088
Banned
We love you too.
A) It is over
B) As someone who lost 8 HS classmates (and 2 friends) between the ages of 18-21 to the Afghanistan theater. Fuck. That. Noise.
You willing to send us to war, we damn sure should be able to vote about the dumbasses putting lives on the line.
My wife was totally OK with me drooling over you. I'm a (mostly) straight man. I thought I'd just point this out.
shinra-bansho
Member
Well at least they're not pretending to be an American. That would be even worse... ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Thequietone
Member
I'm pretty sure he wasn't being serious.
eBay Huckster
Member
That, and I'm not exactly willing to send people between ages 18-21 to war. >_>
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked