Democratic caucuses and primaries

[Trebuchet]

I don't think "dead cat bounce" is the proper term here.

A dead count bounce suggests a temporary rise during a period of lengthy decline. Things go up, but its only for a short period before things start to go down again.

I am sure Biden did get some benefit from the other moderates dropping out... but given things like policy alignment, the "not Sanders" factor, etc., I don't think Biden's improvement is temporary.

(Not that its guaranteed he will win the nomination... just that his improvement isn't temporary.)

I think Sanders will do better in the next set of primaries, not because people will be re-evaluating Biden, but because the next primaries involve states that Sanders won handily in 2016... Idaho, Washington, and North Dakota were all states that Sanders beat Clinton by more than 10%.

Washington's previous primary was after Clinton had all but locked up the nom. Not many people voted, and the votes for Sanders were most likely mostly protest votes. Where Sanders actually won was in the caucuses in March. Linky

ETA: Now that we are having a more meaningful primary, next week, I wouldn't be surprised to see Bernie do pretty well.

 

[Segnosaur]

If Biden wins over Sanders in these States, maybe it will settle the old feud about Clintons' electability.

Biden being "Clinton 2.0", a stronger performance for him in these areas indicates that it was something about HRC herself that made her a particularly bad candidate.

Thing I'm curious about...

Lets say Biden starts to pull ahead in the delegate count. Will Bernie stay in the race until numerically eliminated (like he did in 2016) before supposedly supporting Clinton?

Or will he recognize the mistake from the past, drop out earlier (before he his mathematically elimination, but if Biden gets such a lead that continuing would be a waste of time for Sanders)?

 

[d4m10n]

I think Sanders will do better in the next set of primaries, not because people will be re-evaluating Biden, but because the next primaries involve states that Sanders won handily in 2016... Idaho, Washington, and North Dakota were all states that Sanders beat Clinton by more than 10%.

March 10th
MI: Tossup
WA: BS+10
MO: JB+17
MS: JB+23
ID: BS+5
ND: BS+5

Overall, I'd say Bernie is going to have a good day, but the polling aggregators and forecast models have yet to absorb certain recent developments which may well shift the numbers towards Joe.

ETA: March 17th is going to be a rough day for the Sanders campaign, unless something goes bigly their way in the next two weeks. I expect Biden to crush it in FL and at least hold his own everywhere else that day.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

If Biden wins over Sanders in these States, maybe it will settle the old feud about Clintons' electability.

Biden being "Clinton 2.0", a stronger performance for him in these areas indicates that it was something about HRC herself that made her a particularly bad candidate.

We'll never really know with any certainty. Politics does not provide well controlled experiments.

Biden may win because he isn't burdened with Hillary's baggage, or he may win because a strong anti-Trump reaction, or for some other reason.

The same could be said of a hypothetical Bernie victory.

People will speculate that this or that factor was driving a result, but there's never any real certainty, even after the fact.

Politics is messy because there is no way to really test alternative scenarios. Elections are one time events.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

March 10th
MI: Tossup
WA: BS+10
MO: JB+17
MS: JB+23
ID: BS+5
ND: BS+5

Overall, I'd say Bernie is going to have a good day, but the polling aggregators and forecast models have yet to absorb certain recent developments which may well shift the numbers towards Joe.

Interesting scenario. Biden's strongest in states that won't go to the D in the general, Bernie strongest in states that won't go R in the general, and things less clear in swing states. This race could be a real nail-biter right to the end.

 

[Brainster]

If Biden wins over Sanders in these States, maybe it will settle the old feud about Clintons' electability.

Biden being "Clinton 2.0", a stronger performance for him in these areas indicates that it was something about HRC herself that made her a particularly bad candidate.

Too many other variables. For starters, one could say that the difference between Biden and Clinton is that the latter has two X chromosomes, or that people wanted to end the Bush and Clinton dynasties.

 

[Segnosaur]

If Biden wins over Sanders in these States, maybe it will settle the old feud about Clintons' electability.

Biden being "Clinton 2.0", a stronger performance for him in these areas indicates that it was something about HRC herself that made her a particularly bad candidate.

Too many other variables. For starters, one could say that the difference between Biden and Clinton is that the latter has two X chromosomes, or that people wanted to end the Bush and Clinton dynasties.

Plus, there is the whole "2 Terms is enough for a party to hold the white house... give it to the other side".

 

[Kestrel]

Too many other variables. For starters, one could say that the difference between Biden and Clinton is that the latter has two X chromosomes, or that people wanted to end the Bush and Clinton dynasties.

Why do we call the Clintons a dynasty when only one generation has been involved in politics?

 

[theprestige]

Why do we call the Clintons a dynasty when only one generation has been involved in politics?

Because natural languages are not perfect systems of formal logic.

The most likely reason is that people see some meaningful similarity between Hillary's spousal connection to Bill, and Jeb's and W's filial connection to Gerge HW. While the former is not dynastic in the literal sense, figuratively it's another obnoxious family political connection. So the label fits, and almost everyone who sees the word in this context can easily grasp its meaning.

Do you ever wonder if space aliens are already among us, but they haven't told us yet because they can't figure out how English is actually used?

 

[d4m10n]

Do you ever wonder if space aliens are already among us, but they haven't told us yet because they can't figure out how English is actually used?

I'd've thought Kestrel's point was that literal dynasties are more of a long term threat to democratic values than a power couple who have yet to produce a poltical heir.

(A sentiment I'd support, though I still wish Jeb! had prevailed over the deplorables.)

 

[d4m10n]

This race could be a real nail-biter right to the end.

Columnist Josh Barro takes entirely the opposite view:

https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/1235653306698960897

I'm just putting that out there to see whether it pans out.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Columnist Josh Barro takes entirely the opposite view:

https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/1235653306698960897

I'm just putting that out there to see whether it pans out.

There were legit, serious, non-parody thinkpieces leading up to 2016 that someone wrote, had edited, had reviewed, and were published in actual newspapers about how Hillary was gonna turn Texas blue that election.

 

[theprestige]

I'd've thought Kestrel's point was that literal dynasties are more of a long term threat to democratic values than a power couple who have yet to produce a poltical heir.

It'd be nice if people actually said what they had to say, rather than post cryptic rhetorical questions.

That said, I probably wasn't as clear as I could have been.

My point is that Americans don't really use the term to describe literal multi-generational dynasties. Rather, it's used to describe a certain degree of familial connection in politics that many Americans find at least mildly distasteful.

---

Is the argument that it's not fair to hand Hillary a "dynasty" disqualification, because her candidacy was not particularly dynastic?

If so, then my rebuttal is that Hillary gets a "dynasty" disqualification because her campaign falls under the heading of problematic family political connections that Americans find at least midly distasteful.

 

[Suddenly]

Because natural languages are not perfect systems of formal logic.

The most likely reason is that people see some meaningful similarity between Hillary's spousal connection to Bill, and Jeb's and W's filial connection to Gerge HW. While the former is not dynastic in the literal sense, figuratively it's another obnoxious family political connection. So the label fits, and almost everyone who sees the word in this context can easily grasp its meaning.

Do you ever wonder if space aliens are already among us, but they haven't told us yet because they can't figure out how English is actually used?

That and there are dictionary definitions of "dynasty" that do not require it to be generational.

"a powerful group or family that maintains its position for a considerable time"

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dynasty

 

[d4m10n]

There were legit, serious, non-parody thinkpieces leading up to 2016 that someone wrote, had edited, had reviewed, and were published in actual newspapers about how Hillary was gonna turn Texas blue that election.

Tryna think up a way to bet on Barro's bold prediction.

How about "Over/under for the earliest date upon which only one candidate is still mathematically capable of reaching 1,991 pledged delegates."

What would you say is the most likely date range (point estimate if you want to think like a bookie)?

 

[carlitos]

In a likely futile effort to retrack the convo, what website do you guys have bookmarked for pledged delegate estimates?

I was using Wikipedia - it's comprehensive and people seem to be updating it really quickly.

Google itself also seems to have a widget with delegate count when you search for "democratic primary" or something close. Ditto for republicans - Bill Weld has 1.

 

[ahhell]

I was using Wikipedia - it's comprehensive and people seem to be updating it really quickly.

Google itself also seems to have a widget with delegate count when you search for "democratic primary" or something close. Ditto for republicans - Bill Weld has 1.

I hope that delegate came from Colorado. So far my strategy of voting for the least Trumpy Republican in the primaries has not panned out.

 

[dudalb]

I suppose that if large numbers of young Bernie supporters actually do start showing up and actually do vote for him in the upcoming elections, then Bernie may actually be to get the nomination after all.

However, considering that large numbers of young Bernie supporters did not turn up when Bernie had a decent chance of getting the nomination, then I do not expect that large numbers of your Bernie supporters will show up now that his nomination is becoming quite unlikely.

I got a feeling a lot of the young voters supported Bernie on line because it was the "cool and hip" thing to do, but did not bother to actually get out and vote for him.

 

[dudalb]

Michigan seems to be moving from a tossup into the "Biden lighly favored " category.

 

[Cabbage]

Do you ever wonder if space aliens are already among us, but they haven't told us yet because they can't figure out how English is actually used?

Shhhhhh............you're not supposed to say that part out loud.