Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[penguinofhonor]

But if she tries to appeal to the people who voted for Sanders in the primary, she'll be flip-flopping more and stealing his ideas, further proving she's evil and untrustworthy.

[mainiac]

Er...  If I'm reading this right, Sanders could still technically win more pledged delegates.  It's not going to happen, but it's possible?  Which makes the imbalance of superdelegates still kinda relevant.

The complaints about superdelegates are bullshit and always has been.  The only time the superdelegates mattered was 2008 and they sided with the guy who lead the popular vote over Clinton.



Clinton, incidentally was neck and neck with Obama in 2008 compared to Sanders who has trailed a lot farther for a lot longer.

It keeps coming back to this.  Sanders lost fair and square.  But some people dont want to admit that he trails by 3 million votes.  So they will latch onto anything, anything at all to claim that the Clinton people cheated.  And they have the fucking gall to do things like try and overturn the majority vote in Nevada and complain they are being discriminated against!  Fucking shameless.  They try and disenfranchise people and then claim they are the victims.

Seems to me it's irrelevant whether she has it in the bag or not. Presumably she needs a fair chunk of the Sanders supporters to win the general election & has to pay attention to how many voters preferred someone else & a different set of policies.

Yeah, cuz the sun and moon revolve around the Bernie Sanders supporters.  Unlike for instance those conservative Clinton supports in the south.

[smjjames]

So, Trump has released his potential SCOTUS nominee list. Mostly conservatives, though theres a couple centrists in there. Also, it's apparently mostly from the list that Heritage Foundation gave Trump.

I wonder when Clinton will release her list? Could win over some Sanders supporters. Though she's politically savvy enough to be careful with playing that card so to speak.

[wobbly]

Seems to me it's irrelevant whether she has it in the bag or not. Presumably she needs a fair chunk of the Sanders supporters to win the general election & has to pay attention to how many voters preferred someone else & a different set of policies.

Yeah, cuz the sun and moon revolve around the Bernie Sanders supporters.  Unlike for instance those conservative Clinton supports in the south.

It does? News to me. I don't even particularly care which one wins. Not my country's election, they both seem like reasonable candidates & certainly better than an alternative like Trump. But feel free to be as snarky as you like anyway.

[mainiac]

It does? News to me. I don't even particularly care which one wins. Not my country's election, they both seem like reasonable candidates & certainly better than an alternative like Trump. But feel free to be as snarky as you like anyway.

When people state the obvious but imply the untrue, I get snarky.  Yes Clinton wants the votes of the people who like Sanders.  Clinton would also love the votes of the people who like Ted Cruz.  A vote is a vote.  There is no reason to think that Sanders voters will be treated any different from every other voter in every past race.

I wonder when Clinton will release her list? Could win over some Sanders supporters. Though she's politically savvy enough to be careful with playing that card so to speak.

Sabato had an interesting article on the subject a while back:
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/the-veepstakes-part-one-clintons-choices/

The interesting part of his article is that a lot of the traditional strong choices for Clinton would have a cost of putting important Senate seats or governorships in jeopardy.  My take on that is an relative unknown is a lot more likely.

Whoops, I was talking VP not justices.

[milo christiansen]

You know what? It is my country's election, and I can say that, AFAICT, they are all assholes...

[Zangi]

But if she tries to appeal to the people who voted for Sanders in the primary, she'll be flip-flopping more and stealing his ideas, further proving she's evil and untrustworthy.

Trump seems to be tacking back toward the center.  'Flip-flopping'

I don't think flip-flopping could be defined as... evil.

[mainiac]

It's not flip flopping if no one ever believed you in the first place.  Trump hax!

[milo christiansen]

Just like the last 20+ years before...

Hey, when you have to elect a politician what do you expect?

[mainiac]

It doesn't happen every time.  For instance in 2000 we decided that instead of an election we would have the supreme court decide.

[Andux]

And they have the fucking gall to do things like try and overturn the majority vote in Nevada and complain they are being discriminated against!  Fucking shameless.  They try and disenfranchise people and then claim they are the victims.

They didn't "try and disenfranchise people" in Nevada; they gained a few delegates at the county level simply because they showed up for the county conventions when a bunch of Hillary's people didn't. Debate the fairness of that if you will, but don't try to blame the Sanders campaign for the flaws of the convention system.

As far as the state convention goes, this article (and the video at the end) gives a good summary of why people are pissed off about it (TL;DR: Disregard procedure, acquire boos). In another video, Dan Rolle, a congressional candidate who was at the convention, goes into more detail on the procedural stuff.

The whole thing reminds me of this bullshit in 2012.

[mainiac]

\(TL;DR: Disregard procedure, acquire boos).

More like try to overturn democracy, get slapped down, get butthurt.  This is the fucking bullshit.  When they dont get special treatment they claim they are victims.

[Rolan7]

The whole thing reminds me of this bullshit in 2012.

Holy shit that's fucking bullshit.

[smjjames]

The whole thing reminds me of this bullshit in 2012.

Holy shit that's fucking bullshit.

What's also bullshit is youtube not having captions available

[PTTG??]

Let's take a moment and reflect on the fact that the 2016 election sounds like a sarcastic "projection" made in 1996.