Super Tuesday Primary Discussion


You could at least register a protest vote for Not Trump, by voting for one of the others. I don’t suppose that’ll help much; but it’s something.

(this comment presuming that you are indeed registered Republican.)

On top of all that the primary is for president only. There are no down ballot races to vote on Tuesday. Colorado is still using their caucus system on March 7th for other offices.

It’s even more confusing that that. The March 7 caucuses are one, but not the only, way to qualify to be on the Colorado primary ballot for offices other than president. The primary takes place on June 30 (or more accurately, primary polls close on June 30 since Colorado is 100% mail in).

The June 30 primary decides who will appear on the ballot in November.

That 15% threshold is a huge boost to Bernie at the moment. Ensuring that numerous votes for Buttigieg, Klob, Warren etc. go for naught.

Right? He’s had his ballot for over two weeks now.

He’s started several threads about the Democratic primary in that time period, but couldn’t be bothered to Google five names on a ballot that is only voting for one office.

This was my first time voting on Super Tuesday or in a presidential primary that actually matters, as I moved from Illinois to Colorado last month.
It looks like Sanders is a lock to win CO, with all the rest of the candidates battling it out just to get to the 15% threshold for delegates. I voted for Pete. He is ultimately the best one left standing, but I would’ve preferred Yang, Inslee or Hickenlooper.
Although I predict Warren will come in 2nd here, and Biden in 3rd.

You’re right. One week ago Biden was up 4 points, 27-23. South Carolina Primary Results 2020 | Live Election Map

He wins by 30 one week later. My point stands.

There is a cost/benefit to things and time is valuable. How much time should the poster devote to researching also ran joke candidates against Trump in the Republican primary? Do you think Trump might lose renomination if people just looked at these quality candidates?

Nate Silver projecting a close Super Tuesday:

Some takeaways: Texas is close. It doesn’t really matter who wins because of the proportionality the winner will only get a couple more delegates anyways. Warren and Bloomberg hovering around 15% in many, many states.

That is the perverse part of this 15% rule. Let’s say we have Bernie 30%, Biden 24%, and Bloomberg 15%. If you are a moderate voter who supports Biden, it is to your tactical advantage to vote for Bloomberg in this scenario.

Should the vote change to Bernie 30%, Biden 25%, and Bloomberg 14%, then Bloomberg gets nothing and his delegates are reallocated proportionally to Bernie and Biden. If he gets 15%, then he gets his full proportion, which is in effect all anti-Bernie votes. Say 15% gets you 60 delegates.

If Bloomy gets 14% then those 60 delegates are probably given 32-28 for Bernie. If Bloomy gets 15%, then he gets all 60, making 60 anti-Bernie votes. That is a net -64 delegate loss for Bernie based on a different third place candidate who you aren’t worried about getting an additional 1% (or indeed a fraction of 1%).

Likewise if Warren breaches 15% then that is actually better for Bernie than him convincing that extra 1% of Warren voters to vote for him!! The 15% rule makes it better in this situation to lose votes to a like-minded candidate.

Reply nitpick: It starts on Super Tuesday, and ends a week later, so results will not be known before 3/11.

You might be right about this, but your link doesn’t support your claim. Even if it did support your claim, reality was 11 points different than original claim so I’m not sure your point does stand or even what your point is.

Why don’t you get your facts straight, make a clear claim, and then link to the data that supports it?

I think someone who posts in this forum as much as Saint Cad has over this election cycle and the 2016 election cycle should know who Bill Weld is. Barring that, I think such a person should probably keep their ignorance to themselves rather than bragging about it when starting thread after thread about a primary that they are refusing to participate in.

I wonder how much of the Latinx/Black gap is an artifact of the age gap? (Clearly not all of it.) The Latinx eligible voter population is skewed much younger than the Black eligible voting population.

The votes Tuesday really are the strongest test yet of a major element of Sanders’ electability theory. If he can get the traditionally non-voting blocs young and Latinx voters to come out to the polls in large numbers Tuesday he will dominate California and Texas, moving significantly ahead, and providing actual evidence that he can do that. If not? He may win those states but much more narrowly, and his electability theory deflates three notches.

Except that the only reason that Warren is still in the race is to prevent Sanders from winning and ensure a brokered convention, which everyone but Sanders now views as to their benefit. “Like-minded candidate” is just a narrative gloss on what’s actually going on. In reality, everyone who isn’t Sanders is aiming to keep Sanders from having a majority.

Sorry, wrong link: South Carolina President: Democratic primary Polls | FiveThirtyEight

Bottom part of the page, poll release 2/24. An A+ rated poll of Likely Voters shows Biden +4. Biden was +30. That’s a 26 point swing. One below it shows Biden +1, a 29 point swing.

Is there something wrong with this math? Assume a state has 100 delegates. Assume Warren’s delegates will vote for Bernie when she drops out.

If the primary results are Biden 45%, Bernie 45% and Warren 10%, then Bernie and Biden each get 45 delegates. As Warren did not meet the threshold, her votes are reallocated such that the top two get 5 each and the final delegate haul is Bernie 50, Biden 50.

Now imagine Bernie sees this and asks certain of his supporters to vote for Warren. The new results are Biden 45%, Bernie 40%, Warren 15%. This means that after Warren gives up the ghost Bernie now has 55 delegates to Biden’s 45.

By losing 5% of the vote to a different candidate and coming in second instead of first (assume he originally won by a few hundred votes), and presumably being less popular with the party, Bernie goes from a tie in delegates to plus 10. How does that make sense?

You had me up to here. It seems to assume that Warren would support Bernie after dropping out. Maybe she would. But her delegates aren’t bound to vote as she sees fit, they’re bound to her. Once she releases her delegates they could vote for whoever.

“Your Bathysphere is filled with tar,”
Said Buttigieg
To Klobuchar.

“A condor perched upon the ledge,”
Said Klobuchar
To Buttigieg.

I was thinking this exact thing earlier today.

More or less.

Sorry, folks!

Just feeling a bit Edward leery of the whole situation.

My point is that not only should we not assume that, Warren has said the opposite of this. Like I said, the whole point of everyone’s campaign who is not Sanders at this point is to prevent Sanders from getting a majority, get to a brokered convention, not nominate Sanders, and […] profit. For anyone who is not a legitimate threat to beat Sanders directly (i.e. anyone but Biden), your only hope is to get to the convention and then have weird shit happen.

It would make no sense for Warren to be in the race right now attacking Sanders and having aides telling reporters their focus is on blunting Sanders’ momentum, and then hand off support to him by dropping out. If Warren wanted to give delegates to Sanders, there would be a very simple and easy way to do that. She’s doing the other thing. The only thing suggesting Warren/Sanders cooperation at this point is just that bare assumption based on the thinking that Warren is the furthest left other candidate. Every other indication is that she’s just the furthest left of the Stop Sanders coalition.

BTW we just lost Buttigieg.

During the flight? I would have been pissed if I had reservations in Dallas or was planning to meet friends. Dude could have at least told them prior to the flight.