2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumCiting polls right now showing Bernie ahead of Trump mean NOTHING. Absolutely NOTHING.
Bernie hasn't been vetted. Most Americans know very little about Bernie. Bernie hasn't withstood the AVALANCHE of negative right wing attacks that would CRUSH him.
These polls right now are MEANINGLESS. Totally MEANINGLESS. And anyone who knows the slightest thing about electoral politics and poll numbers at this juncture knows they are MEANINGLESS.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
SheenaR
(2,052 posts)If you think Trump has scratched the surface of his attacks you are grossly mistaken. She will enter the fall looking very badly and constantly having to defend every poor decision she (and her spouse) have ever made.
Even if Bernie is vetted in the harshest fashion, no Bernie supporter is bailing because they hear something bad about him. And according to all here, he'd have all of Hillary's supporters as well, since Party loyalty is a must.
He'd get attacked. He'd still win. As you all say, #math
QC
(26,371 posts)
think
(11,641 posts)On Sun May 22, 2016, 11:46 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING!!!!!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2027486
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Please do not hide this. I'm collecting samples like this about Sanders' supporters. Perfect example.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun May 22, 2016, 11:58 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Perfect example of alert trolling? Misuse, as admitted, of the alert system.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I will let this go with a warning. Next time, put commas between nothings.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: What kind of person alerts and posts something like this as there reason?:
The person who sent the alert wrote: Please do not hide this. I'm collecting samples like this about Sanders' supporters. Perfect example.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: annoying and silly but not against the TOS
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I am voting to leave, but it isn't due to the Alerter's request.
I do find this alert very curious and I hope it isn't due to a Disruptive Meta manipulation of the jury system. 'Collecting samples' about a candidates supporters seem bit stalky and rather creepy.
It shouldn't be done, and using the alert/jury system to do so seems like an abuse of the system.
That is not cool, alerter.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
Cannot reply to automated messages
Alert abuse Delete this DU Mail
QC
(26,371 posts)It's definite alert stalking, which we have known goes on for a long time, though the management denied it until very recently.
Rex
(65,616 posts)RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)think
(11,641 posts)
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Please do not hide this. I'm collecting samples like this about Sanders' supporters. Perfect example.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun May 22, 2016, 11:58 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Perfect example of alert trolling? Misuse, as admitted, of the alert system.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I will let this go with a warning. Next time, put commas between nothings.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: What kind of person alerts and posts something like this as there reason?:
The person who sent the alert wrote: Please do not hide this. I'm collecting samples like this about Sanders' supporters. Perfect example.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: annoying and silly but not against the TOS
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I am voting to leave, but it isn't due to the Alerter's request.
I do find this alert very curious and I hope it isn't due to a Disruptive Meta manipulation of the jury system. 'Collecting samples' about a candidates supporters seem bit stalky and rather creepy.
It shouldn't be done, and using the alert/jury system to do so seems like an abuse of the system.
That is not cool, alerter.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)We cannot get complacent. We all need to really understand the difference between a Trump and Clinton Presidency. Just look at the possible names Trump threw out there for the SC.
CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)
still_one
(92,061 posts)also because when those national polls ask alleged Sanders supporter who they will vote for, Hillary or trump, they are answering trump, which is falsely skewing the results:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/5/20/1528871/-Beware-of-Trump-GOP-supporters-posing-as-Democrats-to-sow-division
The fact is when DEMOCRATS are asked, Hillary wins:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html
When the primaries are over, and there are only two candidates, watch the numbers change dramatically in Hillary's favor
This is a con job, and the media along with the willing blind acceptance of some sanders supporters are going along with it, but it is not reality
hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)Sanders has more crossover appeal than Clinton.
Clinton will have to win the election with only democrats so turnout is going to have to be crucial.
still_one
(92,061 posts)hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)I don't think they show that Trump will beat Clinton. The campaign hasn't begun.
However they show there is a segment of those who support Sanders, probably independents and some republicans, who will never vote for Clinton.
I believe that Clinton can make up for that with other voters though.
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)Sure, tell me those ads in 2006 when Bernie ran for senate don't exist.
See, here's the deal, Bernie has hardly any baggage and you all can't figure that out because yours has an absolute ton of it and you've become used to that, blinded by your own candidates imperfections, you've come to accept it and think it's no big deal.
Polls mean nothing, eh? Because no campaign pays attention to those, right? If you believe that, I have Moon Base Alpha Centari for sale on Saturn I'll sell you.
BootinUp
(47,085 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)Hm? What? Not much there is there?
BootinUp
(47,085 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)BootinUp
(47,085 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)The only bubble is the one you're in thinking Hillary is a "clean" candidate
creeksneakers2
(7,472 posts)If Bernie got the nomination there would be a months long blizzard of commercials showing people having heart attacks being told they'll have to wait nine months for an appointment, bread lines in Venezuela, people unable to pay their bills because their taxes have gone too high, etc. They'd have film of Bernie calling himself a socialist and at the end of every commercial they'd show Bernie shouting "REVOLUTION."
It would be a billion dollar campaign against him and Bernie would only have his $27 donations to fight back with.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Sorry but it hasn't worked.
FBI investigations though area reality
BootinUp
(47,085 posts)He was another unkown quantity, and the polls at this time showed him walking all over poppy Bush. How did that work out for us?
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Just not what a lot of people think it means...
Rex
(65,616 posts)
Sancho
(9,067 posts)The media want a "contest" so they can get ratings.
Bernie wants to collect money, so he lies and pretends he is in the race.
Pollsters will poll ANYTHING, no matter if it's realistic. It's big business.
It's too late to either promote or vet Bernie - he is history.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)And Bernie still lost.
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)MEANINGLESS, THEY'RE MEANINGLESS I SAY. MEANINGLESS! ARGHHH!
She is circling the drain. And this primary is by no means over.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)primary is over. Never have been accurate before. Silly.
saltpoint
(50,986 posts)people if they like the Kentucky Derby.
And as in most polling, percentages are given. This many people like it. This many people don't. A certain percentage have no opinion one way or the other.
The polling for the Kentucky Derby does not address whether people like horses. Or, more specifically, if they do like horses, whether they think racing horses around a race track is a good use of their strength and beauty.
Adding this question would do two things. First, it would potentially alter the results of the polling. And second, it would make a lot of people's heads explode because it's too layered for a quick yes-or-no poll.
Ultimately it's fair to conclude that there are people out there who do like the Kentucky Derby because they like horses and horses are front-and-center at that event, but as well, there are people who love horses and who dislike the Derby because they feel it exploits horses.
I think you should do a post on this at your soonest convenience.
Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)"Anyone who knows the slightest thing about electoral politics and poll numbers" knows who Brock is and what he does. He is Clinton's Karl Rove. And he clearly found nothing on Sanders at all, so he designed a campaign to attack Sanders' strengths with dirty tricks and "Big Lies" on Sanders' early civil rights activism, on his strong feminism and on his energetic, laudable young supporters.
"Bernie hasn't been vetted"? That is laughably naive.
TheKentuckian
(25,020 posts)Hell, you maybe were one of those doing the pushing the inevitable meme before the last inaugural but you definitely weren't being a voice of reason on the issue.
Clinton hasn't had to fend off too many negative ads either, the only time she has won a general election was in cleared fields, in a blue state, against nobody sacrificial lambs. Sure she has been attacked but she's not typically been the actual target but rather as a point to attack someone else.
I can get how one could convince themselves that since she has been hit for so long that rock bottom is baked into the cake but that isn't necessarily true. Especially if a candidate either has the space or the brass to attack where the typical TeaPubliKLAN won't or can't even with a straight face.
It may not be as easy to have Trump hit where she wants to be in a general.
She is built to defend that she isn't a commie, isn't too soft on use of force, isn't a friend to business, and other areas the common peckerwood always try to make hay against a Democrat.
She is plenty of untapped veins of negative ore in her mines, they just aren't in an area where most have any desire to make an effort because they are just as open and maybe take a bigger hit in the areas so they are stuck peppering her with made up nonsense.
Trump is more of an egotist than an ideologue nor will the Fox news crowd actually abandon him for taking about any position any more than they already have. All he has to do is not seem to crazy to have the nuclear football and he can hit from where ever he so chooses.
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)just for this. Now, back to the ignore list you go
Vinca
(50,237 posts)Are there any such polls????
insta8er
(960 posts)"madam president".
frylock
(34,825 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)I mean, why would anyone talk about someone who has no chance, right?
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)
RAFisher
(466 posts)But that doesn't mean they are meaningless. Here's an example of a meaningless metric: If it rains on May 22 in New York City of an election year then the Republican win. That's meaningless.
