Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 02-19-2020, 11:42 AM
dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 16,101
At this point I donít know what to believe. The only thing that will probably be good in NV is that there will likely be a lot of areas with only one or two viable candidates, so that should help with the counting. Two non viables canít make a viable.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His
  #52  
Old 02-19-2020, 03:11 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
If the latest polls from 538 are to believed it looks like a distinct possibility that Sanders will be the only one above the 15% viability threshold. Unless someone has a concentrated pocket of support in a district Sanders may walk away with all of the delegate or Biden and Warren may get one or two.
There are a few things you need to keep in mind.

First, if a precinct splits, say, 30% for Sanders, 15% for Biden, and everybody else under 15%, then the 55% that didn't vote for either one can switch to one of those two. If most of them go to Biden, it could end up being a 50-50 split in that precinct.

Second, I said "can" switch. If a voter's candidate does not get 15% in the first round of voting, they can choose to leave the caucus rather than vote for someone else.

Third - there is an exception to this; if, say, Sanders gets 30% and nobody else gets 15%, then there is no second round of voting; while Sanders is the only one with votes there, nobody who didn't vote for him can change their mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevada 2020 Democratic National Convention Delegate Selection Plan, Rule III.A.12
Upon the conclusion of the announcement of results from the initial alignment, if and only if, there are any non-viable preference groups, the eligible caucus attendees in those groups will have up to another fifteen (15) minutes to realign with a viable group.
Being able, or not able, to switch, is important, as Nevada awards its delegates to the national convention based on the "head count" at the caucuses. In effect, it is a primary with (usually) a two-step preferential vote.

I have a feeling that, if there are districts where Sanders is the only one with at least 15%, there will be different interpretations as to counting how many people actually voted for him.
"100 people showed up, and 30 voted for Sanders, while nobody else got at least 15, so Bernie is credited with all 100 votes."
"No, he only gets 30 votes, since there was no second round."
"It is implied that, since he was the only candidate, everybody would now vote for him."
"No, because the other 70 could also go home and not be counted."
  #53  
Old 02-21-2020, 10:16 AM
Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 13,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Don Guy View Post
Third - there is an exception to this; if, say, Sanders gets 30% and nobody else gets 15%, then there is no second round of voting; while Sanders is the only one with votes there, nobody who didn't vote for him can change their mind.
This is what I was thinking when I said Sanders may get all of the delegates.

Caucuses are tomorrow. When do y'all think we may have full results?
  #54  
Old 02-21-2020, 10:18 AM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,936
Here's a bit of trivia: there will be no coin tosses in case of a tie when determining delegates to the county conventions. Instead, in true Las Vegas fashion, all ties will be broken by drawing from a deck of cards; high card wins, with ties broken by the order of suits as used in bridge (i.e. spades, then hearts, then diamonds, then clubs).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
Caucuses are tomorrow. When do y'all think we may have full results?
If you mean head counts, I wouldn't be surprised if they're done by tomorrow night. Supposedly, head counts are what will be used to determine national convention delegates. The only problem might be, integrating the early votes into the total.

Last edited by That Don Guy; 02-21-2020 at 10:22 AM.
  #55  
Old 02-21-2020, 10:19 AM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 11,258
have they learned basic counting unlike Iowa? Maybe they can hire 6th graders to count.
  #56  
Old 02-21-2020, 10:25 AM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
have they learned basic counting unlike Iowa? Maybe they can hire 6th graders to count.
In Iowa, each precinct had to determine the number of county convention delegates each candidate got in that precinct, then convert those to "state delegate equivalents." This is not supposed to be the case in Nevada.
  #57  
Old 02-21-2020, 10:30 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,825
Nevada also switched out the bad app used in Iowa for a simple i-pad spreadsheet setup.
  #58  
Old 02-21-2020, 10:35 AM
enalzi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
Don't worry, they have a 143 slide instruction manual for them.
  #59  
Old 02-21-2020, 11:01 AM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Don Guy View Post
Being able, or not able, to switch, is important, as Nevada awards its delegates to the national convention based on the "head count" at the caucuses. In effect, it is a primary with (usually) a two-step preferential vote.

I have a feeling that, if there are districts where Sanders is the only one with at least 15%, there will be different interpretations as to counting how many people actually voted for him.
"100 people showed up, and 30 voted for Sanders, while nobody else got at least 15, so Bernie is credited with all 100 votes."
"No, he only gets 30 votes, since there was no second round."
"It is implied that, since he was the only candidate, everybody would now vote for him."
"No, because the other 70 could also go home and not be counted."
Er, what's that? "Rules change," you say? "National convention delegates are now based on county convention delegate counts," is it?

Here's what the rule was in June:
"The national convention delegates elected...shall be allocated in proportion to the percentage of the caucus vote won in that district by each preference at the first determining step."

Here's what it is now:
"The national convention delegates elected...shall be allocated in proportion to the percentage of the county convention delegates won in that district by each preference at the first determining step."

I guess I wasn't alone in noticing that there could be a problem with only one candidate being viable at a precinct, and it is treated as if nobody else showed up.
  #60  
Old 02-22-2020, 02:46 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,445
Betting markets right now are overwhelmingly betting on a Sanders win of at least 10 points. We'll see if they know something that hasn't been officially released yet.
  #61  
Old 02-22-2020, 02:55 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,936
What's that? Another rules change? Voters for nonviable delegatess can switch to other nonviable delegates in an attempt to make them viable? There's one precinct being shown on CNN where Warren was one voter short of 15% in the first round of voting, but at least one person moved to Warren in the second round to make her viable, and she ended up with 6 of the precinct's 15 county delegates.
  #62  
Old 02-22-2020, 03:00 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Don Guy View Post
What's that? Another rules change? Voters for nonviable delegatess can switch to other nonviable delegates in an attempt to make them viable? There's one precinct being shown on CNN where Warren was one voter short of 15% in the first round of voting, but at least one person moved to Warren in the second round to make her viable, and she ended up with 6 of the precinct's 15 county delegates.
Was that in the second round, or the first?
  #63  
Old 02-22-2020, 03:07 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
Was that in the second round, or the first?
First.

It's possible that what's happening is, there's some sort of "preliminary count" in the first round, which may not even include the early voters.
  #64  
Old 02-22-2020, 03:09 PM
dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 16,101
I hope that myself, the most diehard Sanders supporters, the most diehard Trumpers, and the most diehard neverTrumpers can agree:NO MORE FUCKING CAUCUSES!!!
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His
  #65  
Old 02-22-2020, 03:11 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,445
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
I hope that myself, the most diehard Sanders supporters, the most diehard Trumpers, and the most diehard neverTrumpers can agree:NO MORE FUCKING CAUCUSES!!!
Absolutely! Caucuses suck and should be banned.
  #66  
Old 02-22-2020, 03:14 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Don Guy View Post
What's that? Another rules change? Voters for nonviable delegatess can switch to other nonviable delegates in an attempt to make them viable? There's one precinct being shown on CNN where Warren was one voter short of 15% in the first round of voting, but at least one person moved to Warren in the second round to make her viable, and she ended up with 6 of the precinct's 15 county delegates.
538 says they swung a Biden supporter. One of their live updates also notes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nate Silver
It seems clear that Sanders is having a good day overall, but he picked up very few of the Warren/Steyer realigners at this caucus site, which is interesting. He also picked up few realigned voters in Iowa.
So I think we should remember this in future contested convention discussions. The people on the ground do not seem to be bound by the lanes determined by the chattering class.
  #67  
Old 02-22-2020, 03:20 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,936
CNN just showed the Bellagio precinct (one of the "strip caucuses" for casino employees who can't make it to their home precincts because they are working today). It ended with "uncommitted" still having 2 voters, so, apparently, there is no requirement to switch to a viable candidate.

After the first round, 6 voted for Warren and 3 for Steyer; of these 9, 6 switched to Biden, 1 to Sanders (the only two viable candidates), and 2 to uncommitted.
  #68  
Old 02-22-2020, 04:27 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,936
First controversy to pop up: one precinct is listed as having 12 delegates on the delegate allocation spreadsheet at the Nevada Democratic Party site (and, if the number of registered Democrats listed is correct, 12 is correct), but the iPad app they are using insists that it only gets 8.
  #69  
Old 02-22-2020, 04:48 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,909
I've been an MSNBC addict for years now, but they are very depressed about Bernie now. They don't think he can win I suppose, so they are not granting him any kind words or victory. The story is "what do we do!?" I believe that is a direct quote from Joy Reid.
  #70  
Old 02-22-2020, 07:08 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 28,978
Bernie by a lot, then Biden, Warren and Buttigieg.

Bernie has +50% right now but lots of tallies to come in still.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 02-22-2020 at 07:12 PM.
  #71  
Old 02-22-2020, 08:08 PM
Projammer's Avatar
Projammer is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SW Arkansas
Posts: 6,838
I wonder if Hallmark cards have a Thank You selection in Cyrillic.

Last edited by Projammer; 02-22-2020 at 08:10 PM.
  #72  
Old 02-22-2020, 08:32 PM
Tigers2B1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Just behind my eyes
Posts: 1,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
I've been an MSNBC addict for years now, but they are very depressed about Bernie now. They don't think he can win I suppose, so they are not granting him any kind words or victory. The story is "what do we do!?" I believe that is a direct quote from Joy Reid.
Maybe the Democratic Elites can come up with something even more sinister, underhanded, and despicable then they did in 2016 to undermine Sanders.
  #73  
Old 02-22-2020, 09:40 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
I've been an MSNBC addict for years now, but they are very depressed about Bernie now. They don't think he can win I suppose, so they are not granting him any kind words or victory. The story is "what do we do!?" I believe that is a direct quote from Joy Reid.
Remember Chuck Todd, an MSNBC anchor, compared "Bernie Bros" to Nazi "brown shirts".

And he was a moderator of the last debate (actually, I think he did a good job there).

The media hates Sanders.
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill
  #74  
Old 02-22-2020, 09:41 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
I hope that myself, the most diehard Sanders supporters, the most diehard Trumpers, and the most diehard neverTrumpers can agree:NO MORE FUCKING CAUCUSES!!!
Do you think a caucus is why Sanders won?
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill
  #75  
Old 02-22-2020, 09:47 PM
Socsback is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
Remember Chuck Todd, an MSNBC anchor, compared "Bernie Bros" to Nazi "brown shirts".

And he was a moderator of the last debate (actually, I think he did a good job there).

The media hates Sanders.

Serious question. Why do you think the media hates Sanders?
  #76  
Old 02-22-2020, 09:58 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socsback View Post
Serious question. Why do you think the media hates Sanders?
Six companies own most (by far...90%) media distribution in the US.

They are not liberal nor do those companies care one whit about liberal policies.

They very much want Republican tax cuts over Sanders' taxing them.
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill

Last edited by Whack-a-Mole; 02-22-2020 at 09:59 PM.
  #77  
Old 02-22-2020, 10:07 PM
Socsback is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
Six companies own most (by far...90%) media distribution in the US.

They are not liberal nor do those companies care one whit about liberal policies.

They very much want Republican tax cuts over Sanders' taxing them.

Understood. All of the Democratic candidates are calling for corporate tax hikes, though, if I'm not mistaken.

Last edited by Socsback; 02-22-2020 at 10:07 PM.
  #78  
Old 02-22-2020, 10:20 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socsback View Post
Understood. All of the Democratic candidates are calling for corporate tax hikes, though, if I'm not mistaken.
Politicians say lots of things when running that never happen.

Sanders is the candidate who is most likely to try to impose taxes on these corporations.

He may not succeed but he will try harder to do it than the rest.
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill
  #79  
Old 02-22-2020, 10:26 PM
Socsback is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
Politicians say lots of things when running that never happen.

Sanders is the candidate who is most likely to try to impose taxes on these corporations.

He may not succeed but he will try harder to do it than the rest.

So you theory is that political commentators are simply acting on behalf of the owners to protect their jobs, or that the companies are actively seeking out commentators do do their bidding for them?
  #80  
Old 02-22-2020, 10:32 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socsback View Post
So you theory is that political commentators are simply acting on behalf of the owners to protect their jobs, or that the companies are actively seeking out commentators do do their bidding for them?
Yup.

See: Chuck Todd, host of "Meet the Press" as well as an MSNBC anchor comparing Sanders' supporters to "brown shirts" (aka Nazis). That was about ten days ago.

I'd wager Chuck Todd is a very smart guy and knows better but he went there anyway. Why? Consider who holds his contract.

If you want more I can give you loads more.
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill

Last edited by Whack-a-Mole; 02-22-2020 at 10:34 PM.
  #81  
Old 02-22-2020, 10:34 PM
Socsback is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
Yup.

See: Chuck Todd, host of "Meet the Press" as well as an MSNBC anchor comparing Sanders' supporters to "brown shirts" (aka Nazis). That was about ten days ago.

If you want more I can give you loads more.
Oh, I'm not denying that some commentators don't favor Bernie. I'm just saying that I've seen some that do. I'm not convinced that there's a "bias", per se. I think everyone just has an opinion, kinda like here.
  #82  
Old 02-22-2020, 10:40 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socsback View Post
Oh, I'm not denying that some commentators don't favor Bernie. I'm just saying that I've seen some that do. I'm not convinced that there's a "bias", per se. I think everyone just has an opinion, kinda like here.
Cite? (Major media...not some fringe blogger)
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill

Last edited by Whack-a-Mole; 02-22-2020 at 10:40 PM.
  #83  
Old 02-22-2020, 11:00 PM
Rick Kitchen's Avatar
Rick Kitchen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 18,114
Will the next debate have all of the other candidates going hammer and tongs against Bernie? Will he survive it? If the answer is yes to both questions, will Individual 1 have any more to attack Bernie with than the Democrats will come at him with?
  #84  
Old 02-22-2020, 11:03 PM
Rick Kitchen's Avatar
Rick Kitchen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 18,114
nm

Last edited by Rick Kitchen; 02-22-2020 at 11:03 PM.
  #85  
Old 02-22-2020, 11:12 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Kitchen View Post
Will the next debate have all of the other candidates going hammer and tongs against Bernie? Will he survive it? If the answer is yes to both questions, will Individual 1 have any more to attack Bernie with than the Democrats will come at him with?
As the front runner the smart money is everyone will jump on that person.

The last debate was a little weird because the DNC changed its rules to let Bloomberg in and he was a super easy target.

But, in general, the strategy is to lambaste the front runner. Makes sense, that is the person you have to beat. Second place doesn't count for anything in this race. It does not matter who they are or what they are on about...you go after them.
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill
  #86  
Old 02-22-2020, 11:15 PM
Socsback is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
Cite? (Major media...not some fringe blogger)
Cite what? Analysts who favor Bernie? Krystal Ball comes to mind. Joe Rogan? Bernie's campaign has actually accused Fox News of being "fair" to him (wonder why?).

I won't even argue that most of the media pundits like Bernie. To me, it's more a case of them being concerned about what he's doing to the party, as opposed to any "conspiracy".
  #87  
Old 02-22-2020, 11:54 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socsback View Post
Cite what? Analysts who favor Bernie?
Yeah.

Major media.

I have no doubt you can find one or two but the vast majority of them hate Sanders.
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill
  #88  
Old 02-23-2020, 01:00 AM
Chisquirrel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
Yup.

See: Chuck Todd, host of "Meet the Press" as well as an MSNBC anchor comparing Sanders' supporters to "brown shirts" (aka Nazis). That was about ten days ago.

I'd wager Chuck Todd is a very smart guy and knows better but he went there anyway. Why? Consider who holds his contract.

If you want more I can give you loads more.
The article that Todd was quoting:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Last
But as a functional matter, the end result is the same: An army of people (or bots or Russians or whoever) hounding opponents, enforcing discipline, quashing any sort of dissentóand trying to preempt anyone else from taking sides against the Dear Leader.

Whether or not Bernie is personally coordinating this effort makes absolutely no difference to the facts on the ground.

No other candidate has anything like this sort of digital brownshirt brigade. I mean, except for Donald Trump.

The question no one is asking is this:

What if you canít win the presidency without an online mob?

What if we now live in a world where having a bullying, agro social media army running around popping anyone who sticks their head up is either an important ingredient for, or a critical marker of, success?
And your post was a prime example of his complaint. Chuck Todd never compared Sanders supporters to Nazis. Jonathan Last did that. Todd (though absolutely imbecilic in his decision to include that phrasing) was using that column to express exactly how there IS a group of Sanders supporters out there that will bash and trash anyone that criticizes Bernie. Instead of "Yeah, those guys are assholes", we get "Chuck Todd called us Nazis". It's Deplorables 2.0, and you're happily rolling around in the mud.

As for your cite, please define what you consider major media. Given that Socsback has already provided a couple that you ignored in your response. It's easier to find what you require when the goalpost is firmly planted.
  #89  
Old 02-23-2020, 01:11 AM
dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 16,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
Do you think a caucus is why Sanders won?
Sanders certainly benefited from caucuses in 2016, they definitely benefit candidates with fantatical supporters, Ron Paul showed that on the Republican side in the past.

Sanders would have won a Nevada primary, but it wouldn’t have been by as large of a margin, IMHO.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His

Last edited by dalej42; 02-23-2020 at 01:11 AM.
  #90  
Old 02-23-2020, 01:25 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,645
So Steyer had invested big trying to make his splash here. His current under 4% is less than a ripple. Does he drop out before or after South Carolina?

Klobuchar was not expected to do well but her so far 4.5% is underperforming even those minimal expectations. She will definitely hang in through South Carolina but failure to demonstrate ANY support of any diversity there as well and I gotta think that's it.

Buttigieg doing well enough to keep up the fight.

Biden happy to get a distant second here, but a loss in South Carolina has likely ends his campaign and hard to see how anyone will fund him even if his win there is narrow - as it very likely is as best case.

Warren pretty much hitting her minimal expectations here and riding some decent funding after her last debate. She'll hang in trough Super Tuesday anyway.
  #91  
Old 02-23-2020, 01:43 AM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel View Post
The article that Todd was quoting:



And your post was a prime example of his complaint. Chuck Todd never compared Sanders supporters to Nazis. Jonathan Last did that. Todd (though absolutely imbecilic in his decision to include that phrasing) was using that column to express exactly how there IS a group of Sanders supporters out there that will bash and trash anyone that criticizes Bernie. Instead of "Yeah, those guys are assholes", we get "Chuck Todd called us Nazis". It's Deplorables 2.0, and you're happily rolling around in the mud.

As for your cite, please define what you consider major media. Given that Socsback has already provided a couple that you ignored in your response. It's easier to find what you require when the goalpost is firmly planted.
Wow...ok...

Chuck Todd quoted someone who wrote something on "The Bulwark."

This is on MSNBC which is known as a "liberal" counter to FOX. Basically FOX but liberal. Their anchor quoted something from "The Bulwark."

Quote:
The Bulwark is an American conservative[1][2] news and opinion website founded by conservative commentators Charlie Sykes and Bill Kristol.

SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bulwark_(website)
Jonathan Last is the Executive Editor of that site.

So tell me why "liberal" MSNBC anchor Chuck Todd is quoting a distinctly conservative rag and then using it as cover because hey....he's just quoting someone else...right?

Also, while you are at it, look up "gullible."
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill
  #92  
Old 02-23-2020, 02:11 AM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Klobuchar was not expected to do well but her so far 4.5% is underperforming even those minimal expectations. She will definitely hang in through South Carolina but failure to demonstrate ANY support of any diversity there as well and I gotta think that's it.
I doubt we lose any of the last debate's candidates between SC and Super Tuesday three days later. Big chunks of the Super Tuesday votes will have already been cast thanks to early voting. The campaigns are already engaged there. The possibility of a contested convention is real meaning every delegate won may matter. There just isn't a lot of motivation to get out in that small window.

Klobuchar even looks like she is on pace to win at least one state on Super Tuesday. Home field advantage matters.
  #93  
Old 02-23-2020, 03:13 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
Six companies own most (by far...90%) media distribution in the US.

They are not liberal nor do those companies care one whit about liberal policies.

They very much want Republican tax cuts over Sanders' taxing them.
Sounds like conspiracy theory to me. Even with "Reconciliation" it will take 50 Senators to pass tax hikes; a moderate is more likely to get hikes passed than a leftist is!

NBC newsman who oppose Sanders don't do so because they want Trump to win in November. They oppose Sanders because they want Trump to lose in November.
  #94  
Old 02-23-2020, 03:26 AM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Sounds like conspiracy theory to me. Even with "Reconciliation" it will take 50 Senators to pass tax hikes; a moderate is more likely to get hikes passed than a leftist is!

NBC newsman who oppose Sanders don't do so because they want Trump to win in November. They oppose Sanders because they want Trump to lose in November.
Why would a moderate be more likely to get a tax hike through?

Also, all polls suggest Sanders beats Trump. The only one who does better (barely) is Biden. Considering how poorly Biden has done in recent elections I would expect that to change.
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill
  #95  
Old 02-23-2020, 08:25 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
Why would a moderate be more likely to get a tax hike through?

Also, all polls suggest Sanders beats Trump. The only one who does better (barely) is Biden. Considering how poorly Biden has done in recent elections I would expect that to change.
Your 1st question has been answered by me several times in other threads. Keep up.

As for polls: I want to see the results when the question is
"While at the barber-shop you saw FoxNews explain that Sanders is an extreme socialist who will bankrupt the U.S. Would you vote for the socialist or for Donald Trump?"
The Putin-GOP axis is coddling Sanders now because they think, rightly or wrongly, that he'll be easy to defeat. After he's the nominee, the gloves come off. The attacks they make will make the smearings of Kerry and Hillary look like lovers' pillow talk.
  #96  
Old 02-23-2020, 08:34 AM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 28,978
You sound as tho you think you've already lost, septimus.
  #97  
Old 02-23-2020, 08:35 AM
Jimmy Chitwood is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Near Philadelphia
Posts: 6,617
Goodness. What would a world where Bernie Sanders got smeared a lot look like??
  #98  
Old 02-23-2020, 09:06 AM
Ryan_Liam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 4,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
So Steyer had invested big trying to make his splash here. His current under 4% is less than a ripple. Does he drop out before or after South Carolina?

Klobuchar was not expected to do well but her so far 4.5% is underperforming even those minimal expectations. She will definitely hang in through South Carolina but failure to demonstrate ANY support of any diversity there as well and I gotta think that's it.

Buttigieg doing well enough to keep up the fight.

Biden happy to get a distant second here, but a loss in South Carolina has likely ends his campaign and hard to see how anyone will fund him even if his win there is narrow - as it very likely is as best case.

Warren pretty much hitting her minimal expectations here and riding some decent funding after her last debate. She'll hang in trough Super Tuesday anyway.
Warren and Buttigieg have funding problems, Warren had to get a $2million line of credit just recently.
__________________
If you can read this signature, you've scrubbed too hard.
  #99  
Old 02-23-2020, 09:10 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,826
Warren had funding problems, but the debate brought her enough money to last a week or two more at least.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 02-23-2020 at 09:11 AM.
  #100  
Old 02-23-2020, 09:23 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 12,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
So Steyer had invested big trying to make his splash here. His current under 4% is less than a ripple. Does he drop out before or after South Carolina?

Klobuchar was not expected to do well but her so far 4.5% is underperforming even those minimal expectations. She will definitely hang in through South Carolina but failure to demonstrate ANY support of any diversity there as well and I gotta think that's it.

Buttigieg doing well enough to keep up the fight.

Biden happy to get a distant second here, but a loss in South Carolina has likely ends his campaign and hard to see how anyone will fund him even if his win there is narrow - as it very likely is as best case.

Warren pretty much hitting her minimal expectations here and riding some decent funding after her last debate. She'll hang in trough Super Tuesday anyway.
Make no mistake about it: this was a knockout punch. There is no way that any of his competitors can win the nomination other than to hope he fails to clinch the nomination before the convention. Bernie didn't just win; he crushed his opposition. He absolutely stomped them into the dirt.

For anyone not named Bloomberg, last night was all she wrote. Voters in South Carolina will look at Biden's very distant second place finish and get the picture: Biden can't win. Buttigieg and Klobuchar need to sober up: They will not build the kind of coalition Sanders has. Biden had that coalition once, but it has disintegrated. As for Warren, Bernie could do what was once unthinkable: beat her in her own state.

The only one who can stop the Bernie express is Bloomberg, who can only hope to contain him and deny him pre-convention delegate victory, but that's looking less and less likely after last night.

Last edited by asahi; 02-23-2020 at 09:25 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:41 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017