Democratic Primaries

krissey

(1,205 posts)

33. You said a win is a win. It isn't a win. It is a loss. Squeaking out would be a loss for Sanders

Reply to musicblind (Reply #32)

Thu Feb 6, 2020, 01:39 AM

Feb 2020

even if officially a win. He needed more. He didn't get more. This is his SC. That is what it has to do with your post.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

91 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Iowa - 97% of the vote is in. Top two are 0.1% different [View all] mysteryowl Feb 2020 OP

our revolution? lol nt msongs Feb 2020 #1

Dancing requires timing ChubbyStar Feb 2020 #3

Not a Sanders fan, but that's a tie. emmaverybo Feb 2020 #2

Not in a dash. Scurrilous Feb 2020 #86

Yep. But I think it's a marathon folks want other folks to perceive as a dash so they can seal it emmaverybo Feb 2020 #90

A win is a win. musicblind Feb 2020 #4

Yep, primaries with rank choice voting mysteryowl Feb 2020 #5

I really like that idea of ranked choice voting for everything. Tiggeroshii Feb 2020 #6

Works great. mysteryowl Feb 2020 #9

It would almost definitely make it impossible to get results within a relatively short window TexasTowelie Feb 2020 #49

Aussies use it Wabbajack_ Feb 2020 #60

Getting a result in relatively short order is just DeminPennswoods Feb 2020 #73

Rank-choice voting wouldn't be good for a Bernie... scheming daemons Feb 2020 #12

Where are you getting your facts? JudyM Feb 2020 #18

From the Iowa caucuses. He didn't get much of the 2nd-alignment vote. scheming daemons Feb 2020 #21

Actually a lot of people just like him a lot without loving him. My conservative father and JudyM Feb 2020 #28

Sanders has little appeal outside of his base. radius777 Feb 2020 #20

Please share your data sources backing up your assertions. JudyM Feb 2020 #35

The assertions are self-evident radius777 Feb 2020 #40

Hm, well ok. JudyM Feb 2020 #42

If the polls from 2016 had any validity TexasTowelie Feb 2020 #63

I wouldn't discount the polls that much ... JudyM Feb 2020 #80

Dead last for me. OneMoreCupOfCoffee Feb 2020 #84

minus the peer pressure AND reduced participation. -n/t lapfog_1 Feb 2020 #70

Actually it was the second highest turnout on record Tweedy Feb 2020 #83

I meant that the caucus method, in general, lapfog_1 Feb 2020 #85

Caucuses Tweedy Feb 2020 #91

Turnout was higher in the midterms. Scurrilous Feb 2020 #89

If Biden comes in behind another or only barely wins SC, that will be damaging for him. krissey Feb 2020 #8

Ok. musicblind Feb 2020 #32

You said a win is a win. It isn't a win. It is a loss. Squeaking out would be a loss for Sanders krissey Feb 2020 #33

Oh. What confused me was you said Biden musicblind Feb 2020 #36

Cool. krissey Feb 2020 #37

And winning literally every count would certainly be a win. HowardZinnfandel Feb 2020 #11

False. Bill Clinton lost both Iowa and NH in 1992 primaries. scheming daemons Feb 2020 #13

I think you misread previous post unc70 Feb 2020 #17

Try again. HowardZinnfandel Feb 2020 #38

Sorry, misread it. scheming daemons Feb 2020 #39

If that matters, it'll be the first time. HowardZinnfandel Feb 2020 #47

It's not so much the number.... as that the winner is less than 30% scheming daemons Feb 2020 #50

Carter in 76 was. HowardZinnfandel Feb 2020 #54

No. former9thward Feb 2020 #74

Why would it and why should it? Shall we overlook his lack of AA support? emmaverybo Feb 2020 #43

Um...I thought I already said... HowardZinnfandel Feb 2020 #57

Not a gambling gal so we will see what we see. emmaverybo Feb 2020 #69

Bernie, a win?! Frontrunner status?! How is that even possible?! InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2020 #55

I can't disagree, sort of like denying math, universal laws and all that. nt BootinUp Feb 2020 #16

Since when does simple math come into play in attempts to deny Bernie the Democratic nomination?! InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2020 #58

I'm not buying that. TexasTowelie Feb 2020 #64

Very good point. I have found myself deciding that I am good with a Buttigieg win the last krissey Feb 2020 #67

Of COURSE it'll be treated differently... IT'S BERNIE!! But I LOVE it... InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2020 #52

Which win though? quakerboy Feb 2020 #61

Strong showing for Buttiigieg. Might as well be a loss for Sanders. He didn't get what he needed. krissey Feb 2020 #7

What did Bernie need? ChubbyStar Feb 2020 #10

Expectation was a resounding, comfortable victory scheming daemons Feb 2020 #14

No it wasn't. It was a dead heat with Biden. Biden flopped. Not Bernie Hassin Bin Sober Feb 2020 #22

That speaks more to Biden's lack of support Gravitycollapse Feb 2020 #24

Speaks to Iowa and caucus is all it speaks to. emmaverybo Feb 2020 #44

He got the numbers he needed Polybius Feb 2020 #72

Um, no democrattotheend Feb 2020 #88

Sanders says he can get new people radius777 Feb 2020 #15

don't know what time it is there, but the big # precincts haven't reported, and they all lean Bernie floppyboo Feb 2020 #23

Nate Cohn predicts Pete will win: radius777 Feb 2020 #25

That was before the needle was revealed to be broken. Tiggeroshii Feb 2020 #26

Tie for delegates, but Pete can't catch up to Bernie on popular vote, so #1 Berning! floppyboo Feb 2020 #30

He posted that 8 hours ago melman Feb 2020 #31

Yeah I saw that - edited my post to reflect that. /nt radius777 Feb 2020 #34

I respect your opinion but respectfully disagree...cept for your last line. But Mayor Pete did great InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2020 #62

It's Bernie, so no opportunity to bash him will be missed...what's else is there to understand?! InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2020 #53

Motherfucking A ChubbyStar Feb 2020 #65

They can't even concede THAT!! Hahaha!! But that's just another GOOD thing to CELEBRATE!! InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2020 #68

Now it is all Russian money and GOP slop donations that fueled Bernie ChubbyStar Feb 2020 #81

As they say in french: "Tu me fais rire... mais c'est vrai!! " InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2020 #82

The martyrdom routine gets old fast. His anemic campaign snapped defeat from the jaws of victory. LanternWaste Feb 2020 #77

Message auto-removed Name removed Feb 2020 #27

They suspended the needle melman Feb 2020 #19

And I lost my damn decoder ring just now too. nt BootinUp Feb 2020 #29

Are they testing reliability of the needle or is there more to it that that? JudyM Feb 2020 #41

There's a lot more to it than that. They left out the satellite caucuses. HowardZinnfandel Feb 2020 #45

So they're basically saying it's too close to call because the data hasn't been accounted for in JudyM Feb 2020 #46

Good question HowardZinnfandel Feb 2020 #48

Eek, what a career downer. JudyM Feb 2020 #56

I don't think he'll be fired HowardZinnfandel Feb 2020 #59

Whoever was managing the election in Iowa, that's a different story. JudyM Feb 2020 #79

One person one vote is democratic tirebiter Feb 2020 #51

Buttigieg and Sanders both won Iowa's piece of shit caucus. phleshdef Feb 2020 #66

True. Iowa should be AFTER Super Tuesday mysteryowl Feb 2020 #71

in fairness, Pete's only been running 10 months, bernie has 4 year headstart nt Fresh_Start Feb 2020 #75

Judging from the polls, they were wrong at least for Iliyah Feb 2020 #76

Yep. It was a tie, and it decided only 41 out of some 4,000 delegates. Laelth Feb 2020 #78

Wow. Two cycles in a row democrattotheend Feb 2020 #87