plagiarize
Banned
No. I mean, they're considered states he needs to win if he's going to go on to win. So not upsets. Polls had Hillary ahead in MA the last few days, but it's been back and forth, and polls had him ahead by a nose in OK.
Super Tuesday 2016 |OT| The Final Incursion is a double Incursion (Mar 5-15 contests)
- Thread starter B-Dubs
- Start date
- Status
No. I mean, they're considered states he needs to win if he's going to go on to win. So not upsets. Polls had Hillary ahead in MA the last few days, but it's been back and forth, and polls had him ahead by a nose in OK.
boiled goose
good with gravy
If the doesnt win MA i think it is over. But he needs to win CO and Minne or at least one to craft a path to victory.
Battersea Power Station
Member
That's not true. It gives him slightly more delegates.
Trump's 6% of rubio right now in VA.
Orbis Tabula
Member
In vermont? Yeah, that's an insane margin.
Yep. It's all about delegates.
brainchild
Banned
I'm at a caucus site in MN right now and just chose to be a delegate. I then found out that we're contemplating doing a walking subcaucus...WHYYYYYY?!!!!!!!!
This shit is so archaic.
Oh, and Bernie's looking good, at least at this precinct
This shit is so archaic.
Oh, and Bernie's looking good, at least at this precinct
plagiarize
Banned
I'm not *declaring* anything. I was just explaining why Hillary winning states that she was expected to win is bad for Bernie.
gutter_trash
Banned
c'mon Trump! get 50% in Georgia
BreezyLimbo
Banned
If bernie is that close...
.....In Saltybet we would call this !real.
.....In Saltybet we would call this !real.
LyleLanley
Banned
Any good streams besides cnn?
Orthogonal
Member
I'm at a caucus site in MN right now and just chose to be a delegate. I then found out that we're contemplating doing a walking subcaucus...WHYYYYYY?!!!!!!!!
This site is so archaic.
Oh, and Bernie's looking good, at least at this precinct
What is a "walking subcaucus"?
Yep, it will keep him in the race, but no better then Hilary staying in the race after super tuesday in 2008, except Bernie doesn't have the superdelgate foolishness to fall back on either. Remember the road to winning the primary is paved in delegates, not state wins. He is getting blown out in key high delagate states and aside from Vermount is only barely winning which means the delegates are split up almost evenly. He needs convincing wins, tieing or barely winning doesn't cut it.
superdeluxe
Member
Perception of winning states? Clinton did the same thing in 2008, but Obama crushed her regards to delegates because huge wins in south
I disagree that it's all about the delegates tonight.
It's still in momentum phase.
Bernie has several favorable states coming up.
If he can win 4-5 states tonight with a relatively impressive showing, and then win many of the next ones it might help him lead up to a big win in CA and just generally get favorable news coverage.
Of course he has to win 4 states first. Preferably 5. But he'll be lucky with 3, that's the problem.
It's still in momentum phase.
Bernie has several favorable states coming up.
If he can win 4-5 states tonight with a relatively impressive showing, and then win many of the next ones it might help him lead up to a big win in CA and just generally get favorable news coverage.
Of course he has to win 4 states first. Preferably 5. But he'll be lucky with 3, that's the problem.
Do what, exactly? In the states he's competitive in, he might pull out victories by a few (at most) points. Big deal - he walks away with as many, or nearly as many, delegates as Hillary. Those 20+ percent wins in Hillary's states, on the other hand, are padding her totals quite nicely.
It's not about the percentages, it's about the delegates. Hillary's racking them up much faster than Bernie is, or has to, in order to stay competitive.
And I seriously disagree with the 'momentum' bit. The only momentum is among the under-30s, and they're all staying home anyway. I wouldn't change my vote to Bernie no matter how well he did, and considering how firm Hillary's support is based on polling, momentum is going to be a non-issue.
No. Everyone was saying Bernie would only win Vermont.
Elfforkusu
Member
I want to believe, but that's different from believing!
In fact, I still want to believe, and still don't!
boiled goose
good with gravy
On the TYT spinning, Anna and John are sometimes frustratingly biased, and Jimmy is unapologetic with criticism but is not delusional about results. Cenk and Ben are a bit more grounded because of their experience, but Cenk definitely skews things a bit too much sometimes (claims are sometimes too strong)
SoRuffShoNuff
Member
Bernie barely winning OK and MA means nothing when Hillary is blowing him out in the other states. When you have delegates rewarded proportionally you need blowout wins.
Everyone?!
This. He has a chance!
Which a few counties in Texas will entirely wipe out. If Sanders wins all of Vermont and essentially splits MA, OK, MN, and CO, his small gain will be wiped out almost entirely by Texas and Virginia, never mind Tennessee, Georgia, etc. Winning states is nice to put in a speech or on a commercial, but delegates are what matters. Super Delegates in split states will almost certainly go toward Hillary if past trends are any indication.
shinra-bansho
Member
Oklahoma wouldn't be.
Massachusetts would be a bit, based on recent polling. But it will be close enough that it will be something of a Pyrrhic victory if he does win. It's something he needs to win given the table today.
Officerrob
Banned
Everyone was saying Vermont was the only guaranteed victory
Grover Cleveland
Member
The race was effectively over barring something super unexpected (like HRC getting arrested) after Nevada.
Even if Bernie were to win OK and MA, that doesn't change his math due to the fact that those are proportional primaries. Unless he flat out crushes Clinton in those states, it doesn't offset Clinton's huge gains from the Southern primaries.
It just maybe gives him the idea that he can run this race for another few weeks.
plagiarize
Banned
The benchmark isn't 'doing better than everyone said he would'. The benchmark isn't 'doing much better than where he was in the polls six months ago'. It's winning the needed delegates.
And no, not everyone was saying Sanders would only win Vermont. Vermont was his sure thing.
Calamari41
41 > 38
I hope Virginia gets called as a Rubio loss before Trump's speech so he can work that in
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
Bernie winning five states is the best case scenario.
superdeluxe
Member
Bing predicted that, that was it. Most media thought sanders would do well in Minnesota/Colorado/Oklahoma etc
boiled goose
good with gravy
The reason for the optimism if he wins those states is that super tuesday is his most difficult hurdle with all of its southern states. things get a bit less tough for him later.
GAF's pro hillary consensus was a Hillary sweep outside of Vermont. It can still happen, but I am already seeing some damage control.
theignoramus
Member
That narrative was absolutely a thing after the blowout in SC
wow!
brainchild
Banned
Wiki said:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walking_subcaucus
I mean, on paper that's fine, but we have to split into groups and basically have a mini caucus for EACH DELEGATE. It's going to be a royal pain in the ass.
Grover Cleveland
Member
The Logical Conclusion of the Southern Strategy
- Status