Bullish on Bernie: The Bernie Sanders 2016 Thread

[Tony Stark]

Most likely, though personally I hope you lose that bet for Sanders sake

I won't be upset at all if I lose it assuming that Bernie goes on to destroy Trump.

 

[Manopolus]

I'm going to take the likely record turnout in Arizona as a good sign for Bernie. Yes, I know the polling there (the only place in today's primaries that HAS polling) favors Hillary, but it's sounding like a huge number of people are showing up. That means that the poll numbers will very likely be wrong, due to the fact that the polls tend to count on certain people NOT showing up.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...t-trump-cruz-kasich-clinton-sanders/82134252/

In any case, it won't likely be as bad as the polling suggested. I don't think it'll even be close to that, even in a loss.

It's also assuming that enough of the masses of people are voting on the (D) side to be greater than normal. It could be almost exclusively the (R) side drawing the crowds, as far as I know.

 

[Manopolus]

Double post.

Having problems with the site doing wonky things again. I'm hitting "post" and it freezes up... so I don't know whether it actually got posted or not... then the double shows up like 10 minutes later or so. I don't think it's the internet connection. The site itself seems to be acting odd. I can't get into advanced mode sometimes either.

 

[Trakar]

I'm going to take the likely record turnout in Arizona as a good sign for Bernie. Yes, I know the polling there (the only place in today's primaries that HAS polling) favors Hillary, but it's sounding like a huge number of people are showing up. That means that the poll numbers will very likely be wrong if enough of the crowd is voting on the Dem side.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...t-trump-cruz-kasich-clinton-sanders/82134252/

Two big considerations:

AZ has closed primaries, no independents can vote,

AZ early voting opened in Feb. and about half of the expected voting occurred before today.

Don't get me wrong, I'm hopeful, and an impressive ground game is in play, but these considerations leave plenty of room for unease. Out of all the western states Hillary's best shot is AZ.

 

[Tony Stark]

I'm going to take the likely record turnout in Arizona as a good sign for Bernie. Yes, I know the polling there (the only place in today's primaries that HAS polling) favors Hillary, but it's sounding like a huge number of people are showing up. That means that the poll numbers will very likely be wrong if enough of the crowd is voting on the Dem side.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...t-trump-cruz-kasich-clinton-sanders/82134252/

There is high turnout because they just mail everybody ballots. But only registered Democrats/Republicans. Thus favoring Hillary. Bernie is going to lose in Arizona. Probably pretty badly. BTW I voted Bernie in the Arizona primary a few weeks ago.

[Imgw=800]https://imgur.com/ErR23DH.jpg[/imgw]

 

[Trakar]

Double post.

Having problems with the site doing wonky things again. I'm hitting "post" and it freezes up... so I don't know whether it actually got posted or not... then the double shows up like 10 minutes later or so. I don't think it's the internet connection. The site itself seems to be acting odd. I can't get into advanced mode sometimes either.

I had similar trouble the last couple of days, I was blaming it on the weather some good storms rolling through over the weekend and Monday.

 

[Tony Stark]

Two big considerations:

AZ has closed primaries, no independents can vote,

AZ early voting opened in Feb. and about half of the expected voting occurred before today.

Don't get me wrong, I'm hopeful, and an impressive ground game is in play, but these considerations leave plenty of room for unease. Out of all the western states Hillary's best shot is AZ.

She is probably going to win California too.

 

[Belz...]

I can't spoonfeed you context of witty points!

So you have nothing, then.

What the hell? So if a person votes AND writes letters to their government threatening a lack of support if they their objective is not reached they are contradicting themselves?

What a nonsensical read of what I said. Please explain how in the blue hell you went from my post to yours.

 

[Manopolus]

There is high turnout because they just mail everybody ballots. But only registered Democrats/Republicans. Thus favoring Hillary. Bernie is going to lose in Arizona. Probably pretty badly. BTW I voted Bernie in the Arizona primary a few weeks ago.

Well, I'll stop short of saying he'll win there. He most likely will win in the other two states (Idaho and Utah), so I'm just hoping its a net gain in delegates overall, once it's done with.

 

[Joey McGee]

So you have nothing, then.

This may come as a shock but, the fact that you haven't understood me isn't evidence to me that I haven't made sense!

What a nonsensical read of what I said. Please explain how in the blue hell you went from my post to yours.

Here's comes the airplane! bbbbbrrrrrRRRRRRROOOOOOMMMM!!!! INTO THE CAVE BRRRRRROOOOMMMMMM!!!!!

Do you agree that not going through the voting process and instead lobbying the government with money and influence is inherently anti-democratic?"

I vote for someone. Then I write them a letter and I say hey, if you don't do what I want, I'm gonna not only not vote for you, I'm not gonna send you any more money for your campaign. And I'm gonna tell all my friends to stop voting for you, and tell them to stop sending you donations too! Suddenly, I'm a lobbyist, and anti-democracy!

Now, can you see clearly how lobbying isn't inherently anti-democratic and depends on the person doing it and their motives? Oh but all of that extra work... can't we just say all lobbying is bad?

I'm sorry for the mocking tone, sort of.

 

[Tony Stark]

Well, I'll stop short of saying he'll win there. He most likely will win in the other two states (Idaho and Utah), so I'm just hoping its a net gain in delegates overall, once it's done with.

Nearly double the people live in Arizona as do Idaho+Utah. I doubt it.

 

[jsfisher]

This was recently posted in another Bernie Sanders thread. It applies here, as well.

The topic of this thread is, nominally, some aspect of Bernie Sanders and his campaign for president. While no intelligent member of this forum would knowingly stray off of that topic, it seems some of you nonetheless have.

I can only assume this is accidental, so I bring this to everyone's attention, here, in the sincere hopes that knowledge is power and you will all be empowered to take posts that focus on people and things not Bernie to threads more in line with people and things not Bernie.

Thank you.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jsfisher

 

[Trakar]

She is probably going to win California too.

We'll see. I'd say the largest factor in determining the outcome in California's primary will be whether or not it is relevant. If it is relevant and the turnout is high (>85% of 2008) Bernie has a very good shot of winning it.

 

[wareyin]

"Pundits on TV" have very obviously been for Clinton's campaign from the beginning. Sorry, but it's the plain truth. No, it's not a conspiracy. Sanders' campaign has been antagonistic towards the press throughout the election, and the press tends to reciprocate. Furthermore, they've been calling Hillary inevitable since the campaign began. It has been so freaking obvious all along that it's almost hilarious to hear from someone that hasn't noticed.

Seriously, the main press outlets have been "for" Clinton in as obvious of a manner as they've been "against" Trump. Those are the two who get the most exposure of any of the candidates in the press, period. No, it probably isn't a conspiracy. They probably figured that those were their most profitable candidates to cover individually, without collusion, well before the campaigns really started.

Furthermore, they're really just parroting Washington political noise at this point -- from people that have supported Clinton all along. Even Obama has subtly made comments in that direction.

Whether or not the press, or Obama, or my next door neighbor is "for" Clinton, their actions are not the actions of the Clinton campaign. I'm not sure how to make this more clear.

An attempt to demoralize the other side doesn't strike you as a little underhanded?

No, it is not underhanded. The press, other politicians, and random people on the internet are always going to say "bad things" about a politician. It's the nature of politics. Also, if it were coming from Sanders' opponent, it would be the "other side". That is not the case, here.

I'm not the one that is claiming to know the future. I'm playing the part of the militant agnostic screaming that I don't know, but neither do you. Sorry if that insults your pop-culture/press-inspired religion.

Being aware of the polls, and their past and current accuracy, is not claiming to know the future. Are you certain that you are the agnostic, rather than the follower of a different religion, here?

 

[wareyin]

Nearly double the people live in Arizona as do Idaho+Utah. I doubt it.

AZ has 75 pledged delegates to 23 in ID plus 33 in UT. It's the delegates that really count, here. Sanders can win big in ID and UT, but still come out of tonight further behind on delegates.

 

[Manopolus]

AZ has 75 pledged delegates to 23 in ID plus 33 in UT. It's the delegates that really count, here. Sanders can win big in ID and UT, but still come out of tonight further behind on delegates.

Possible, but I don't think he'll lose badly enough in Arizona for this to be the case. That's just a hunch though. As a worst-case scenario, it'll be around Ohio numbers. It won't be anywhere near as bad as Mississippi, partially because he actually campaigned in Arizona (he didn't in Mississippi). Making speeches and talking to people actually does make a difference.

If he does lose ground in delegates, I'm pretty sure it won't be by much. I expect him to actually gain, in any case. I don't know whether it'll be enough or not though. Alaska, Hawaii, and Washington are next on Saturday. Those look pretty good for Bernie (especially Washington). Of those that happen this week, Arizona is the only one he's might lose IMO. Once you go further into the future, the results may depend upon these results to a degree. Again, the attrition factor is even more relevant based on perceptions of his chance of succeeding. If he does well this week, we could be back in the saddle up to a point. Success begets success and so on.

Of course, the attrition/demotivation factor can't be accounted for any more than the current polls can account for new voters.

 

[Tony Stark]

Possible, but I don't think he'll lose badly enough in Arizona for this to be the case. That's just a hunch though. As a worst-case scenario, it'll be around Ohio numbers. It won't be anywhere near as bad as Mississippi, partially because he actually campaigned in Arizona (he didn't in Mississippi). Making speeches and talking to people actually does make a difference.

If he does lose ground in delegates, I'm pretty sure it won't be by much. I expect him to actually gain, in any case. I don't know whether it'll be enough or not though. Alaska, Hawaii, and Washington are next on Saturday. Those look pretty good for Bernie (especially Washington). Of those that happen this week, Arizona is the only one he's might lose IMO.

Of course, the attrition/demotivation factor can't be accounted for any more than the current polls can account for new voters.

If he doesn't win at least 58% of the delegates today, he will have to win an even higher percentage of the rest of the ones from there on out for him to get the rest of the pledged delegates.

 

[Manopolus]

If he doesn't win at least 58% of the delegates today, he will have to win an even higher percentage of the rest of the ones from there on out for him to get the rest of the pledged delegates.

True, but I think he will do that -- maybe not tonight, but by the end of Saturday. In any case, a numerical win in delegates received will still prop up the public perception and the morale of his supporters, even if he doesn't attain 58%. This will help him in future contests.

 

[d4m10n]

I'm going to say that once the number goes from 58% up to 66% we'll be in faith-based territory.

 

[Tony Stark]

True, but I think he will do that -- maybe not tonight, but by the end of Saturday.

And then he hits high delegate states like NY which could completely wipe out his gains. Hell, even a tie or a small win in NY would be bad for him, and that's the best he could hope for.