2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumDoes It Seem To You That Many Hillary Supporters Are A Tad Worried ???
| 35 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited | |
| Yes, just a tad. | |
1 (3%) |
|
| No, way more than a tad. | |
30 (86%) |
|
| Nope, secure in the fact that she will be the Nominee, And The President. | |
4 (11%) |
|
| Obligatory Other... | |
0 (0%) |
|
| 1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided. | |
| Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll |
|
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)confident; rather than, worried ... in the least.
However, I do sense that posts like yours betray a lack of confidence and insecurity ... like you are trying (way too hard) to convince yourself of something your know will not come to pass, despite your hopes and dreams.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)
Depaysement
(1,835 posts)So who do you support then?
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)O'Malley.
He's just heavily smited by quite a few Bernie supporters on this board because he raised questions about racial inequalities as opposed to economic inequalities.
Depaysement
(1,835 posts)No offense to the guy, but I already have a life. 
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)A cursory search would give you the info you need. He's a popular DUer.
Depaysement
(1,835 posts)I asked a question.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Used to any questioning of "who do you support" being loaded. Carry on! 
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)because he stands for all that we support without the baggage that the other candidates bring.
Depaysement
(1,835 posts)MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)I'm a life-long Democrat who is fortunate enough to live in California.
Yet the the major parties would be well advised to check into THIS:
DULink: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251954155
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)
Gothmog
(179,867 posts)I agree with your analysis
I was so sorry to read about the loss of your mom. Losing a parent is hard. My mom passed away five years ago.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)
sheshe2
(97,626 posts)
DemocratSinceBirth
(101,852 posts)lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Even if Hillary were to lose both Iowa and NH (highly unlikely, IMO). She'd still in great shape to win the nomination.
Now, losing either of those states would be a huge blow to the Sanders campaign, one of which it would not be able to recover.
So, no, I'm not worried. I feed good and confident about Hillary winning the nomination
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)With a poll no less. Classy.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)But you won't.
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)I've been reading you for 10 years. You're rough around the edges, but tolerable.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Seriously.
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)I'm gettin old Willy, and the friend pool is dwindling. I guess I just like hanging with Dems.
Best to you and yours!
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)The Stockholm thing was just too much for me. It was very nice of you to offer all those smilies. I just think you and I are different.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Peace.
sheshe2
(97,626 posts)Star Member MeNMyVolt (756 posts)
19. Thanks Willy, but I can't.
The Stockholm thing was just too much for me. It was very nice of you to offer all those smilies. I just think you and I are different.
20. Well... The People That Know Me Here, Knew It Was A Throw-Away Line... Sorry You Did Not.
A throw away line?
sheshe2
(97,626 posts)MeNMyVolt (756 posts)
19. Thanks Willy, but I can't.
The Stockholm thing was just too much for me. It was very nice of you to offer all those smilies. I just think you and I are different.
WillyT
20. Well... The People That Know Me Here, Knew It Was A Throw-Away Line... Sorry You Did Not.
Peace.
Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with the captors. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness.[1][2] The FBI's Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly eight percent of victims show evidence of Stockholm syndrome.[3]
Stockholm syndrome can be seen as a form of traumatic bonding, which does not necessarily require a hostage scenario, but which describes "strong emotional ties that develop between two persons where one person intermittently harasses, beats, threatens, abuses, or intimidates the other."[4] One commonly used hypothesis to explain the effect of Stockholm syndrome is based on Freudian theory. It suggests that the bonding is the individual's response to trauma in becoming a victim. Identifying with the aggressor is one way that the ego defends itself. When a victim believes the same values as the aggressor, they cease to be perceived as a threat.[5]
Stockholm syndrome is sometimes erroneously referred to as Helsinki syndrome.[6][7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome
betsuni
(29,078 posts)We know you.
senz
(11,945 posts)People who don't appreciate that quality have some growing to do.
Give 'em time. 
artislife
(9,497 posts)
tritsofme
(19,900 posts)about the general election.
The stakes are incredibly high, holding the White House for three consecutive terms is no small feat. Someone like Rubio finding his way to the GOP nomination instead of Trump worries me quite a bit.
Sanders has never given me a reason to worry. He has certainly become a major candidate, and his fundraising has been especially impressive, but he has never been a serious contender for the nomination.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)... "scared shitless" comes to mind.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I think some seem to be emotionally over-identified with the whole deal, or something. Maybe they're still angry that she was "robbed" in 2008. Maybe they feel like Hillary winning will vindicate that, or maybe something unrelated that is bothering them personally.
It is ... above my psychoanalytical pay grade.
All I know is, I've always given her good odds of winning the nomination, and I still do. But I wont go all fukushima meltdown if she doesn't.
In the unlikely event that's what happens, holy fuck. Look out, the shit losin' will be epic.
Gothmog
(179,867 posts)This is not so much of an emotional decision for me as a practical and financial one. I trust Nate Silver and his analysis and I understand how the predictive markets work (including the limitations of such markets). I am not worried about the nomination right now and if I had any real concerns I would have opened an Irish account and purchase the appropriate contract. I could have locked in some good odds if I had done this before Biden dropped out but I was too busy with a child's wedding. Now the option pricing is not that attractive but better than it was last week
Bleacher Creature
(11,504 posts)In 2008 Barack Obama ran a masterful campaign and pulled off the upset. He earned it. Moreover, he emerged as a fantastic candidate, and has been an even better President.
If Bernie pulls it off - and I do think it would take a miracle at this point - he's going to have to earn it. That would mean that he would have learned how to run an effective campaign and would be a much better candidate. If that happens, I sure won't be disappointed.
senz
(11,945 posts)He is the only candidate who isn't taking corporate money; he is making it with small individual donors like me. The mass media is terrified of his anti-oligarchy message, so he's making it without the obvious publicity. But he just keeps going against tremendous odds.
He's not in it for power and ego and prestige. These things mean nothing to him. He is in it for the American people. Period.
He is earning it. Oh Lord, is he earning it.
Respect this man.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)The absolute WORST outcome with Hillary losing would be Bernie winning the nomination, which is still pretty fucking awesome. How often is the worst case scenario still a great thing?
I'm quite pleased with all three candidates.
senz
(11,945 posts)
DJ13
(23,671 posts)Even with the Clinton friendly MSM refusing to acknowledge Bernie they are living in a nightmare, "oh no, not again!" like its 2008 all over again.
DFW
(60,186 posts)Of course, I don't read every thread. There are other sites than DU as well, although with that, I mean German, French and British news sites, I don't read any candidate-partisan sites at all. DU does seem to be obsessed with trashing Hillary for the most part, which I find a little odd, seeing as how Bernie himself doesn't seem to share this obsession. So there's a question that asks itself: if it's not Bernie's style or wish to constantly bash Hillary (as opposed to promoting Bernie), then just why is it so pervasive on DU? I get that genuine Bernie supporters put his good points out there. I get that Hillary's supporters put her good points out there. I get that ANY candidate's supporters put forth the points that put their man (or woman) in the best possible light. But posters who ONLY put out negative posts about ANY of our candidates (and I include Bernie as a Democratic candidate here) in tsunami-like inundations are suspect to me.
To answer the OP, as the most obsessively negative posters do not seem to be Hillary supporters, it therefore does not seem to me that her supporters are conspicuously worried. It seems to me that the most shrill and negative posts are the most worried ones. But that's just one man's (my) observation. I'm sure there are people who spend more time here than I do,and might see things in a different light.
The only negative posts I'm interested reading are ones that trash Republicans. Bernie isn't my enemy. Hillary isn't my enemy. O'Malley isn't my enemy. Republicans are.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)
IMO, they have a better than 50% chance of her becoming the nominee of the Democrat party.
But they really need to worry about her chances in the general election. Unless the republican nominee is Jeb! they will destroy her.
There just isn't very much to like about her.
murielm99
(32,988 posts)That says all we need to know about you.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)Sorry, but until they start ridding the party of some of the stench that has affected it for the past 20 years, it's no longer Democratic.
murielm99
(32,988 posts)As for stench, DU has had a bad one since this primary began. It is not coming from Hillary, either.
Goodbye.
Gothmog
(179,867 posts)I could make a great deal of money betting against Clinton being the nominee if I had any real doubts. The odds of Sanders being the nominee have jumped from 5% to 9% but that is not a significant enough shift to make me worry. http://predictwise.com/politics/2016-president-winner/ Hillary Clinton is at 90% chance of being the nominee and that number is probably about right and I would not bet against these odds.
Again, I love playing the market and the odds of Clinton being the nominee are in my range and so it would be a bad investment to purchase an option contract on her not being the nominee. Neither the free market nor I are worried about Clinton not being the nominee
If you really believe that Sanders will be the nominee, you will still get good odds (just not as good as last week). If Sanders did become the nominee, you would do very very well on this investment. At 9% Sanders is not as good of investment as when Sanders was at 5% but the pricing of the options are not that bad.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)It looked lonely.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)should have to lick the spoon.
George II
(67,782 posts)
elleng
(141,926 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(101,852 posts)Will it be an early knock out?
Will it be a mid round knock out?
Will it be a late round knock out?
Will it be a decision?
My only concern is how long I have to wait for my gratification because payback is a ______________
whatthehey
(3,660 posts)What of?
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)...or you would have told us why you did.
randome
(34,845 posts)...then every debate becomes a war. And that's not why we're here. (Most of us, anyways.)
If you believe in numbers, then it's extremely likely that Clinton gets the nomination. If you don't believe in numbers, well...you're in good company with climate change deniers and the Flat Earth Society.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]