Democratic Primaries

rzemanfl

(29,554 posts)

7. Could you attribute the quote? I agree, but some folks who don't

Reply to Disaffected (Original post)

Mon Feb 24, 2020, 05:47 PM

Feb 2020

might get their unders in wad.

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

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

42 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I would be interested in comments on the following quote: [View all] Disaffected Feb 2020 OP

That's the way I see it. LaurenOlimina Feb 2020 #1

The super delegates will break for a more moderate lapfog_1 Feb 2020 #2

Let them whine. The Democrats will gain more independents and OnDoutside Feb 2020 #9

In the end, I believe that many Democrats will probably follow the advice given by Jane Sanders... NurseJackie Feb 2020 #10

That could happen. David__77 Feb 2020 #3

Does this astute political commentator have a name? ChubbyStar Feb 2020 #4

GMTA. n/t rzemanfl Feb 2020 #8

Yes but i don't think it's relevant or appropriate to post Disaffected Feb 2020 #11

Is the point valid or not? Orrex Feb 2020 #12

The "point" seems unfocused and based on unsupported assumptions. bluewater Feb 2020 #14

Seems like a fairly straightforward and well-reasoned assessment, but whatevs. Orrex Feb 2020 #17

Very sloppy "logic". A 5 way slpit does not mean an EQUAL split. bluewater Feb 2020 #20

I don't think anything in the OP implied an "equal" or even close to equal Disaffected Feb 2020 #21

SO who to trust more... 538 or an anonymous vague OP quote... lol bluewater Feb 2020 #22

I'm not asking anyone at all to chose one over the other. Disaffected Feb 2020 #23

Why complain at me then? I gave my comments , since you asked for them. bluewater Feb 2020 #24

You kind of explicitly proposed a false dichotomy Orrex Feb 2020 #29

BZZZT Extremely bad logic. Poor rhetoric too. bluewater Feb 2020 #34

I used "kind of" because I didn't want to call you liar. Have it your way. Orrex Feb 2020 #36

Ad hominem attack duly noted. LOL bluewater Feb 2020 #37

You know what? I see my error now, and you're correct. Orrex Feb 2020 #41

Don't you know what a comparison is? HeartlandProgressive Feb 2020 #39

LOL. Sure. Orrex Feb 2020 #40

On second thought, you're correct Orrex Feb 2020 #42

Your objection hinges on an "equal split" that was not part of the original statement Orrex Feb 2020 #27

Thank you Disaffected Feb 2020 #28

+1 2naSalit Feb 2020 #30

Strawman deflection noted. Did you not also read the body of that post? bluewater Feb 2020 #31

Oh, you're one of those. I see. Orrex Feb 2020 #32

"The split doesn't preclude it; it simply makes it astronomically unlikely." LOL bluewater Feb 2020 #35

My dry cleaner is a long time friend, I have known him since high school ChubbyStar Feb 2020 #15

LOL. I misread your tone. My mistake. Orrex Feb 2020 #18

it rather depends on the delegate count, though, doesn't it? unblock Feb 2020 #5

That's been the general consensus. Nevada made that less likely, but it's still possible. Garrett78 Feb 2020 #6

Could you attribute the quote? I agree, but some folks who don't rzemanfl Feb 2020 #7

I think it was my dry cleaner ChubbyStar Feb 2020 #13

Way too soon for such speculation Raven123 Feb 2020 #16

If Sanders does not have 1991 delegates, it goes to 2nd ballot and so on... Moderateguy Feb 2020 #19

that's... myohmy2 Feb 2020 #25

It is for this very reason that I think Bloomberg will be our nominee. Laelth Feb 2020 #26

The quoted individual doesn't understand the primary rules FBaggins Feb 2020 #33

The OP's logic is very flawed. bluewater Feb 2020 #38