Bernie Can't Win

[Angry Floof]

The New York Times seems to be backtracking their endorsement of Hillary. http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/02/new-york-times-rethinks-hillary-clinton-for-president/

 

[untermensche]

If the media becomes critical of Hillary they can hurt her.

Her support is paper thin in many people.

The more people hear Bernie the more they side with him.

 

[Angry Floof]

Good promo for Bernie.

Don't underestimate him. (Or, if you're a Republican, don't misunderestimate him.

[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/YZ2ZSLjg5zk[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Tom Sawyer]

If the media becomes critical of Hillary they can hurt her.

Her support is paper thin in many people.

The more people hear Bernie the more they side with him.

But it's happening too late. He's about 200 delegates behind and most, if not all, of the remaining primaries award them proportionally. His stunning upset in Michigan netted him seven. He has passed the point where the potential math could possibly work in his favour.

That's ignoring the super-delegates and just counting who the Democratic voters are deciding on. With them, her lead goes from insurmountable to some synonym of insurmountable which conveys even more insurmountability. The only reason that they'd abandon her would be over concerns about her electability and those concerns don't exist - especially with Trump as the nominee or some other nominee about whom the entire campaign is focused on how not even his own party wanted him.

Sanders just doesn't have a path to victory.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

If the media becomes critical of Hillary they can hurt her.

Her support is paper thin in many people.

The more people hear Bernie the more they side with him.

But it's happening too late. He's about 200 delegates behind and most, if not all, of the remaining primaries award them proportionally. His stunning upset in Michigan netted him seven. He has passed the point where the potential math could possibly work in his favour.

That's ignoring the super-delegates and just counting who the Democratic voters are deciding on. With them, her lead goes from insurmountable to some synonym of insurmountable which conveys even more insurmountability. The only reason that they'd abandon her would be over concerns about her electability and those concerns don't exist - especially with Trump as the nominee or some other nominee about whom the entire campaign is focused on how not even his own party wanted him.

Sanders just doesn't have a path to victory.

untermensche doesn't understand why Sanders is losing in many states... minorities. Some of them aren't listening and will continue to support Clinton. The odd thing is that Sanders supports a modified justice system, a living wage more so than Clinton.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

untermensche doesn't understand why Sanders is losing in many states... minorities. Some of them aren't listening and will continue to support Clinton. The odd thing is that Sanders supports a modified justice system, a living wage more so than Clinton.

Ya, and pretty much everyone who'd vote for Trump if he shot a guy in the middle of the street would be better off under either of them. That doesn't stop them from being Trump voters. Clinton's worked her ass off to get the support of the minority communities and all Sanders did was take actual real action to advance the cause of civil rights instead of catering to politically and demographically useful people and events for self-serving reasons. He's the one who made the choice to go about it that way and he's the one who needs to live with the consequences of that.

 

[untermensche]

If the media becomes critical of Hillary they can hurt her.

Her support is paper thin in many people.

The more people hear Bernie the more they side with him.

But it's happening too late. He's about 200 delegates behind and most, if not all, of the remaining primaries award them proportionally. His stunning upset in Michigan netted him seven. He has passed the point where the potential math could possibly work in his favour.

That's ignoring the super-delegates and just counting who the Democratic voters are deciding on. With them, her lead goes from insurmountable to some synonym of insurmountable which conveys even more insurmountability. The only reason that they'd abandon her would be over concerns about her electability and those concerns don't exist - especially with Trump as the nominee or some other nominee about whom the entire campaign is focused on how not even his own party wanted him.

Sanders just doesn't have a path to victory.

And Hillary doesn't necessarily either.

When uber-right goes against right-lite maybe uber-right wins.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

untermensche doesn't understand why Sanders is losing in many states... minorities. Some of them aren't listening and will continue to support Clinton. The odd thing is that Sanders supports a modified justice system, a living wage more so than Clinton.

Ya, and pretty much everyone who'd vote for Trump if he shot a guy in the middle of the street would be better off under either of them. That doesn't stop them from being Trump voters. Clinton's worked her ass off to get the support of the minority communities and all Sanders did was take actual real action to advance the cause of civil rights instead of catering to politically and demographically useful people and events for self-serving reasons. He's the one who made the choice to go about it that way and he's the one who needs to live with the consequences of that.

And to the best of my knowledge, Sanders hasn't been bragging about being arrested in a protest.

I remember seeing a comment on Facebook complaining that he wasn't in the South, where things were hot.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

And Hillary doesn't necessarily either.

When uber-right goes against right-lite maybe uber-right wins.

No, Clinton's path to victory is clear and straightforward. She continues doing exactly what she's doing exactly how she's doing it. So long as she doesn't drop below 40% support, on average, in each of the remaining contests, she wins the Democratic nomination. At that point, the numbers are greatly in her favour of winning the electoral college in November, provided that she just keeps doing exactly what she's doing now.

Sanders doesn't have a similar path. He needs to have Clinton's support levels plummet. If that plummet starts six days from now, it's too late for him. Given that Clinton never takes a power drill to a black baby's head while there are cameras in the room so he can't count on a video of her doing that, I don't see how he gets at least a third of her current backers into his camp before next Tuesday when the job gets much harder and then he'll need to get at least half of them to catch up.

- - - Updated - - -

I remember seeing a comment on Facebook complaining that he wasn't in the South, where things were hot.

Well, perhaps he has overactive sweat glands and needed to confine his actions to the more temperate regions of the country. You can't hold a person's medical conditions against them.

 

[untermensche]

No, Clinton's path to victory is clear and straightforward. She continues doing exactly what she's doing exactly how she's doing it. So long as she doesn't drop below 40% support, on average, in each of the remaining contests, she wins the Democratic nomination. At that point, the numbers are greatly in her favour of winning the electoral college in November, provided that she just keeps doing exactly what she's doing now.

Sanders doesn't have a similar path. He needs to have Clinton's support levels plummet. If that plummet starts six days from now, it's too late for him. Given that Clinton never takes a power drill to a black baby's head while there are cameras in the room so he can't count on a video of her doing that, I don't see how he gets at least a third of her current backers into his camp before next Tuesday when the job gets much harder and then he'll need to get at least half of them to catch up.

You give Clinton credit for support with blacks.

But it is based on Obama, not her.

Blacks trust Obama more than some old white guy they never heard of until a couple of months ago.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

No, Clinton's path to victory is clear and straightforward. She continues doing exactly what she's doing exactly how she's doing it. So long as she doesn't drop below 40% support, on average, in each of the remaining contests, she wins the Democratic nomination. At that point, the numbers are greatly in her favour of winning the electoral college in November, provided that she just keeps doing exactly what she's doing now.

Sanders doesn't have a similar path. He needs to have Clinton's support levels plummet. If that plummet starts six days from now, it's too late for him. Given that Clinton never takes a power drill to a black baby's head while there are cameras in the room so he can't count on a video of her doing that, I don't see how he gets at least a third of her current backers into his camp before next Tuesday when the job gets much harder and then he'll need to get at least half of them to catch up.

You give Clinton credit for support with blacks.

But it is based on Obama, not her.

Blacks trust Obama more than some old white guy they never heard of until a couple of months ago.

OK ...

That sounded like you were getting towards a point but then you stopped. I take it that your meaning is that Clinton's support amongst blacks is unwarranted and Sanders can flip them into his supporters. What is the method that he uses to successfully accomplish this before next week and they start voting again in large states? That's what I meant when I asked you what you felt his path to victory was. It means that Sanders does X, Y and Z and that gets him to the lead in the delegate totals. We can take it as a given for the sake of the argument that if he beats Clinton in the pledged delegates, a large enough percentage of the super-delegates will switch their support to him to have him maintain his lead.

What are X, Y and Z and how does he accomplish them and within what timeline? You seem to be taking the position that he can win the Democratic nomination but I don't see how you're having him get to that point.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

That is exactly his trouble. Sanders made a few comments, not the best way to explain his position, but certainly not meant to be taken a bad way, and some resented what he said. There are some that look for certain trigger words in order to be happy. Unfortunately having to say "Black lives matter" is one of them.

And Blacks (as a voting block) aren't for Clinton because of Obama. They were for Clinton before they were for Obama.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

untermensche doesn't understand why Sanders is losing in many states... minorities.

Is this really a race-based observation or is it socio-economic class or access to political knowledge or ___?

 

[untermensche]

You give Clinton credit for support with blacks.

But it is based on Obama, not her.

Blacks trust Obama more than some old white guy they never heard of until a couple of months ago.

OK ...

That sounded like you were getting towards a point but then you stopped. I take it that your meaning is that Clinton's support amongst blacks is unwarranted and Sanders can flip them into his supporters. What is the method that he uses to successfully accomplish this before next week and they start voting again in large states? That's what I meant when I asked you what you felt his path to victory was. It means that Sanders does X, Y and Z and that gets him to the lead in the delegate totals. We can take it as a given for the sake of the argument that if he beats Clinton in the pledged delegates, a large enough percentage of the super-delegates will switch their support to him to have him maintain his lead.

What are X, Y and Z and how does he accomplish them and within what timeline? You seem to be taking the position that he can win the Democratic nomination but I don't see how you're having him get to that point.

Not everything is simply fodder for the horse race.

There are issues and matters of importance to discuss.

Obama throwing his support behind Clinton may have sealed Bernie's fate but Bernie has been heard, and if Clinton wants to get the people who support Bernie to support her she will have to move. And she will have to deal with these people up until November.

And if she moves, Bernie wins and the future is unknown.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

OK ...

That sounded like you were getting towards a point but then you stopped. I take it that your meaning is that Clinton's support amongst blacks is unwarranted and Sanders can flip them into his supporters. What is the method that he uses to successfully accomplish this before next week and they start voting again in large states? That's what I meant when I asked you what you felt his path to victory was. It means that Sanders does X, Y and Z and that gets him to the lead in the delegate totals. We can take it as a given for the sake of the argument that if he beats Clinton in the pledged delegates, a large enough percentage of the super-delegates will switch their support to him to have him maintain his lead.

What are X, Y and Z and how does he accomplish them and within what timeline? You seem to be taking the position that he can win the Democratic nomination but I don't see how you're having him get to that point.

Not everything is simply fodder for the horse race.

There are issues and matters of importance to discuss.

Obama throwing his support behind Clinton may have sealed Bernie's fate but Bernie has been heard, and if Clinton wants to get the people who support Bernie to support her she will have to move. And she will have to deal with these people up until November.

And if she moves, Bernie wins and the future is unknown.

First off, Obama hasn't thrown his support behind anyone and has gone out of his way to not take a position on either of the candidates. It's Clinton who's been aligning herself with Obama and talking about how Sanders hasn't been supporting him. Obama hasn't commented on the matter. In what way do you feel Obama's thrown his support behind Clinton?

I don't understand your "if she moves" point at all. If she abandons the left wing positions she's been advocating and moves towards the center, she will do so after the primary and during the general election. At that point, Sanders will have already lost, so I don't see how you have him winning there. Are you saying that if she abandons her entire campaign strategy that's been working successfully to win her the nomination and adopts a completely new strategy for ... reasons ... then Sanders has a chance?

Also, what do you mean it's not about a horse race? Sanders needs about 60% of the remaining vote in order to win. Full stop. What issues and matters of importance do you see him using in order to get those numbers? If he doesn't get them, he loses no matter what ideas and matters he discusses. If he doesn't get them before next Tuesday, he'll need about 65%.

At some point, Sanders supporters start sounding like Clinton supporters did in 2008. That point is pretty much next Wednesday. Sanders ideas are catching on, but they're not catching on enough. He needs to hit certain targets in voter support and he has been missing those targets. As time goes on, those targets get further and further away and he doesn't get any closer to them.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Note that Bernie does better in polls versus Trump than Hillary. So she could do better against Trump by wearing a Bernie body suit.

 

[angelo]

Instead of blaming the " whites" or anyone else for their problems, why not first look at themselves! Is this what's called the " black privileged?"

For a person who lives so far away from the country you are talking about, you seem to have a proportional understanding of said nation.

We have the very same problems with our indigenous people, like making up 3% of the population, but over 30% of incarcerations. Even after billions of aud's been spent on them every year.

 

[bigfield]

Indigenous Australian history and sociology: another topic Angelo knows nothing about.

 

[angelo]

Angelo also likes getting straight to the point of showing up political correctness where it's used to support an agenda and idealistic impossible thoughts process.

 

[bigfield]

Angelo also likes getting straight to the point of showing up political correctness where it's used to support an agenda and idealistic impossible thoughts process.

No, you're just flat-out ignorant of the past and current status of Indigenous people in this country; that's why you write inane garbage like this:

Instead of blaming the " whites" or anyone else for their problems, why not first look at themselves! Is this what's called the " black privileged?"

We have the very same problems with our indigenous people, like making up 3% of the population, but over 30% of incarcerations. Even after billions of aud's been spent on them every year.

If you has any idea about the history and current situation of Indigenous People in Australia, you would never make the spectacularly retarded suggestion that they should blame themselves for their situation, nor would you suggest that they benefit from 'black privilege'.



Apologies to the Americans for yet another stupid Australian derail.