2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf Hillary got 80% of the votes that are left
There'd still be a contested convention.
LexVegas
(6,063 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts).....the most famous woman in the world still can't shake of a political unknown who a year ago was known by 2% of the American public?
Zynx
(21,328 posts)Bernie is only "in" this because he refuses to accept reality.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Remember, polls show Hillary losing to Trump in a GE. This is a huge issue.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)We often pretend the prophecies we tell ourselves are huge issues, and just as quickly dismiss the objective, peer-reviewed evidence that doesn't support our self-validating pretense and biases.
Hue issue, indeed.
LoverOfLiberty
(1,438 posts)a very close race between the Hillary and Bernie in CA.
So, why would we override the will of the voters based on polls?
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)And it's deeply offensive that you're so dismissive of the voters' choice. Remember, Bernie is a democratic socialist. Are you?
jzodda
(2,124 posts)and all within margin of error.
So no and also...
Fuck the polls till September and the battle lines are fully drawn. Using polling, which changes from day to day or week to week is a terrible way to pick a candidate.
Why have a nomination contest at all if you want to use polls.
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)The phrase "polls show" means nothing. Stop using it.
As it stands a handful of polls had a trump lead. That no longer holds true
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)Hillary ran a warm-up campaign for the general election and Bernie got taken to the outhouse. You know why nobody heard of Bernie? He's never really done anything. He has always been a follower. His campaign style shows why. Everybody knew than when colleges let out for the summer, that Bernie was done. He is a bitter person, hell, both he and his wife are bitter people and poor losers.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)and take a look at GE matchup because those are the numbers which matter.
Only Bernie beats Trump clearly, Hillary does not and this is going to be the argument. Hillary's numbers NEVER go up.
You say Bernie hasn't done anything when in reality he has done a lot more than Hillary and guess what, he hasn't sent people into battle to kill other peoples kids either.
You can sit here and criticize Bernie all you want and spew personal attacks on him but remember this, no other candidate in history has been under an FBI investigation and Hillary's numbers are some of the lowest ever of any Dem candidate.
That's reality. And oh, just in case you didn't know, Bernie is called the amendment king and he has the highest approval rating of ANY US senator.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)And no he has not done more than Hillary. Nor does your "he polls better" argument matter at all.
ExtraGriz
(488 posts)Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Just because he has yet to admit defeat doesn't mean he's still in it and there will not be a contested convention. If you think there will be you don't know what a contested convention actually is.
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)One more won't hurt.
jcgoldie
(11,631 posts)The way they toss around this phrase it seems to just mean that the loser refuses to accept reality.
My wife likes to watch that show the voice where amateurs compete in singing contests. We usually have a "contested viewing". We watch it but I'm not happy about it
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)Zynx
(21,328 posts)Hillary's super delegates aren't budging.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)So yes, actually there will be.
Zynx
(21,328 posts)jzodda
(2,124 posts)A contested convention is where a candidate does not have enough votes to secure the nomination on the first ballot.
She has the needed votes so there is NOTHING TO CONTEST.
floppyboo
(2,461 posts)jzodda
(2,124 posts)Its beyond fantasy to think that they will change their minds. They have decided and keep in mind after yesterday she needs less and less of them overall making it even harder.
Waiting for an indictment seems to me to be a terrible political strategy.
floppyboo
(2,461 posts)There is a whole platform to be discussed. There is the need to keep this movement strong and going forward to save the progressive movement - and to keep the Democratic Party from 3rd way certain death. Or at least, get a new name or something.
jzodda
(2,124 posts)But if I were BS I would start negotiating this stuff like today and not wait till convention.
floppyboo
(2,461 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Oh that's fucking RICH!!!! Setting an entirely new standard to achieve a nomination for the first woman nominee in history!!!!!!!
You do realize the standard ever since the introduction of Super Delegates (by Tad Devine, no less), the race is called when the magic number is reached, SUPER DELEGATES INCLUDED, don't you?
Oh man, you guys just don't even BOTHER hiding it any more!!!!!!
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)She won, end of story.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)It's a long shot but anything can happen. It's politics. This country elected W twice. All bets are off.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)You shouldn't either. See my statement about W
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Contested convention- you get $600-
No contested convention- you pay me $200
What a deal! Send me a PM with your personal info and well get something started!
MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)come on now that's pretty tempting right? Name your wager.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Over.
The Democrats have a nominee, it isn't Bernie.
Time to move on...
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)But this story isn't over, not by a long shot.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)FSogol
(45,485 posts)vote. HRC has more than enough, hence no contested convention.
PS, there is only one Primary left (DC) with 20 delegates.
robbedvoter
(28,290 posts)of voting. What am I missing here?
pinebox
(5,761 posts)I'm not convinced personally because nothing is a certainty in politics, ever
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)It's over, she has way more than she needs to win.
Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)And Bernie Sanders is delusional if he thinks otherwise...maybe Obama can talk some sense into this angry bitter person.
TwilightZone
(25,471 posts)"2016 Democratic and Republican Delegate Count Update. Clinton 2,523, Sanders 1,690"
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/
You might want to update your graph since the source is obviously not Green Papers.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)However it does look like we could have a contested convention.
TwilightZone
(25,471 posts)And you clearly have no idea what a contested convention is.
liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)Only include the numbers you want to include
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
pinebox
(5,761 posts)And can't go after the message.
We'll see, Philly is going to be FUN!
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)Nawww, wait until Philly.
Logical
(22,457 posts)alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)The California ass-kicking was a precursor of what's to come in DC. The convention will be fun, too.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)Day in and day out. You do know that all this crap you post isn't going to change things. If you put half as much time into actually going out and trying to get Bernie elected as you do trashing Hillary every day, Bernie might have won.
Someone is mad because someone on the internet has an opinion that is different than their own.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)grossproffit
(5,591 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)Put on by people on twitter. Not official.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)Clinton's current PLEDGED delegate count is: 2,184.
She needed 2,026 pledged delegates for a majority. She has that. She needs 2383 to win the nomination at the convention, she has 571 promised Super D's.
As of right now, HRC received 15,565,922 of the popular vote--Trump has received 13,266,491 and Bernie has received 11,883,209.
The voice of the people have spoken--they clearly want HRC to be our Democratic nominee. So who in their right mind thinks that she is going to lose so many Super D's, that she'll lose the nomination? How many Democratic power players are going to flip to Bernie after he's spend a good portion of the primary tearing the Democratic Party down? Certainly not Democratic loyalists...most of which are Super D's.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)"The voice of the people have spoken--they clearly want HRC to be our Democratic nominee."
No actually they haven't. "The people" refers to everyone. You get THAT in a GE not in primaries.
If you ask how he gets SD's, here you go.
This will be the argument and it's a strong one.
still_one
(92,190 posts)electoral college
Now that it is a two person race, because Bernie has lost, those numbers are going to change dramatically in Hillary's favor.
There is no "hypothetical" about it anymore
floppyboo
(2,461 posts)and Bernie bests Trump with higher #'s in every one.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)you just don't like what they've said. I get this was the primary election, but the people spoke, and they want HRC as the Democratic Presidential nominee, full stop.
And as the still_one said, polls this far out aren't reliable. So, no, Bernie doesn't really have a case because as the General goes on, Clinton will garner more support.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)And you don't get to pretend that everyone who didn't vote wanted Bernie.
still_one
(92,190 posts)you said by all measures show that this was a huge victory.
After yesterdays results, plus the previous primaries, there is no doubt that Hillary has a much more broad based support than Sanders.
It is time to move on to the general election
zappaman
(20,606 posts)still_one
(92,190 posts)Democrats want her to be the nominee.
Are you even going to vote for her in the general election? That is your business, but a large number of Sanders supporters, along with a broad diversified demographic will be voting for Hillary in November.
Here is the current delegate account:
Hillary 2178 Sanders 1810
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/delegate-targets/
Its over, deal with it
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)You need to remember that. See my reply above about polling in the GE.
This will be the argument Bernie will make.
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)still_one
(92,190 posts)the electoral college, plus up until yesterday they were hypothetical, since it assumed a three person race. That is no longer the case, it is now a two person race
onenote
(42,703 posts)They know that the election will be fought out in a limited number of states.
They know that Sanders isn't likely to have coat-tails, particularly if his most avid supporters view any elected official that supported Clinton as an "establishment" Democrat who should be primaried, not re-elected.
They know that national polling done 5 months before an election, before the VPs are named, before the conventions are held, before the debates aren't worth diddly squat.
The SDs are aware of those polls and they haven't switched positions. Pointing out those polls again won't change a thing.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Your dismissing the voters as "a bubble" is more offensive than anything Donald Trump has said.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)It's "you're" for a start (sorry but that is a pet peeve of mine), secondly, it's offensive that I say that? Are you 100% sure of that? I stand by my assertions.
It's completely hypocritical of Dems to shut out Indy voters in the primaries and slam them how they shouldn't be allowed to vote in said primaries and yet come kissing their butt when the GE comes around.
It's a bubble. She is popular among a very majority of Dems and ONLY that, nothing more. We've been through this a gazillion times and you know what's up and you know what her numbers are, after all, you support her so I expect you to know what you're up against.
If you get mad about someone saying the word "bubble" then you are going to have a very tough time when Trump throws every single thing including the kitchen sink from Furr's Cafeteria at her.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Saying that the voters are a "bubble" is a incredibly offensive. And news flash, independents can vote in the Democratic primaries. Many did. The fact that others chose not to vote does not mean they were shut out.
BTW you might want to read again, "your" was the correct word. I was saying "your dismissing of the voters", not "you are dismissing of the voters".
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Newsflash many could not vote in primaries. See what happened in NY as an example. That is a controlled atmosphere.
Check out other states as well, much of the same situation with how people got the boot because they didn't change their registration in time, often times months ahead. You want people to vote, let them vote because this is suppression plain and simple.
As far as "you're/your", it can be read both ways. I'm sure you meant it as such
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Using an extreme outlier as an example doesn't work.
jzodda
(2,124 posts)What our votes don't count? also fuck the polls.
They are notoriously inaccurate in dealing with minorities and young voters. Hell many people these days only have a cell phone line and NO ground line. (like me)
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Never mind about the stuff which happened in AZ and other states.
Nobody said your votes don't count anywhere. Not sure where you're getting this.
"Fuck the polls!", yeah those same polls that campaigns base their leverage on and strategize from. Yeah, those polls.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)That's invalidating millions of votes.
jzodda
(2,124 posts)The convention to nominate Bernie when he didn't win the majority of pledged delegates and the popular vote.
If this were to occur it invalidates the process whereby the winner gets the nomination. To me that invalidates millions of votes because its as if they didn't count. If Bernie was where HRC is I would be saying the same thing in support of him.
That's just how I view it. As to polls, sure they are useful but less so now and more so after the conventions- The campaign kicks into high gear around labor day and that's when I start paying attention. I am sure others may view it differently.
Also I can't wait to see the latest polls after this "Mexican" fiasco.
WhiteTara
(29,715 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)The US includes everybody, not a small group of people, sorry.
Stallion
(6,474 posts)that's about 4 times more than Obama beat her in 2008 when the last non-contested "Contested convention"
occurred
6chars
(3,967 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)6chars
(3,967 posts)Hard to tell the difference between fantasy and reality here in GDP
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Your figures are wrong again.
https://interactives.ap.org/2016/delegate-tracker/
onenote
(42,703 posts)He will lose by well over 1000 votes. (He's currently down almost a thousand and DC has yet to vote and there a quite a few SDs that will switch to Clinton and a relatively small number of pledged delegates yet to be allocated).
Actually, Clinton would hit 2383 before the roll call ended, at which point a wild celebration would being on the convention floor.
brooklynite
(94,571 posts)Here's a hint: there was ALWAYS going to be a rollcall vote. Bernie could even be a part of it:
If you mean there's going to be an effort to flip votes in Bernie's favor...you're living in a fantasy world.
WhiteTara
(29,715 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Clevuh.
Gothmog
(145,231 posts)This claim is really silly but funny
YouDig
(2,280 posts)Sancho
(9,070 posts)Bernie is proving that he would be an awful President. A good President can assess the factual information and make plans to deal with reality.
Bernie is emotional, irrational, and showing poor analytical skills.
By all historical and available evidence, this primary is over and Bernie needs to say so - and ask his supporters to get behind the Democratic nominee.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)"Bernie is proving that he would be an awful President. A good President can assess the factual information and make plans to deal with reality. "
But someone under an FBI investigation would be awesome, right?
"Emotional, irrational, showing of poor analytical skills" you say? Yet remind us again who has a reputation of making horrendous bad judgment calls? You realize 4 years ago Hillary didn't even support gay marriage, right?
Many Bernie supports, a very large margin at that, have ZERO interest in supporting what amounts to a Dempublican. A whole lot of them. This is something your camp needs to come to grips with and one reason of several Hillary is the weaker candidate in a GE.
Tarc
(10,476 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)It seems like most people don't have a CLUE as to what the ACTUAL RULES are. Now, it doesn't surprise that Clinton supporters don't know the rules and don't want to follow them anyway. . . .
Well, here's how they ACTUALLY decide.
If a Democratic primary candidate can win 59 percent of the Partys pledged (primary- and caucus-won) delegates or more, the primary is decided by pledged delegates; if a Democratic primary candidate fails to meet that threshold, they are considered by DNC electoral processes to be a weak front-runner and the nomination is finally decided, instead, by superdelegates who can express support for a candidate at any time, but cannot commit themselves to anyone (i.e., cast a binding vote for any candidate) until the Democratic National Convention in July; superdelegates are unlike pledged delegates in this regard because, while pledged delegates also do not vote until the Partys convention, they cannot change their votes from what their states voting results pledged them to be though it has been argued by some that in fact they can change their votes at the Convention, with this argument most recently having been advanced by Hillary Rodham Clinton in 2008.
It's clear enough that a grade schooler could understand it. 59% of pledged delegates or it's settled AT THE CONVENTION. Neither has won 59% or the PLEDGED delegates.
Here are the numbers
Clinton . . . . . 2173 . . . . 54%
Sanders . . . . 1844 . . . . 46%
(54% is not 59%)
pinebox
(5,761 posts)rock
(13,218 posts)And why we call Bernie the Non Democratic Nominee.