Jump to content

2020 Dems: Nevada (gonna make Iowa look competent!)


bad_teammate

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, Xian said:

One thing about Pete. He can stay calm fire. 
 

 

Yep. He was cold as a cucumber. Reminded me of me when I used to argue matter of factly with my ex girlfriend while she argued like she was ready to rip my head off. I was mostly right, but that cold delivery only made her more pissed. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BrickHorn said:

I mean, it’s not even close. 

She and she alone has convinced me the wealth tax is actually not only a good idea but consistent with our values.  She did it tonight again.  She has the most well thought out ideas and policy views.  It’s maddening that people won’t pay attention.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

I sit in front of a Bloomberg terminal all day and would happily vote for him. It's an invaluable resource. 

This is performance art rarely seen since the heady days of FC Horn or 8badmofo. I tip my cap to you, sir. 

Edited by mdmost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To do what?  Burn Trump on a stage, or be President?  Trump didn’t beat Hillary because Hillary didn’t take enough shots at him. 


Read her policy pages. Dive in. She’s got the most comprehensive plan to attack wealth inequality. It’s impressive and it’s based on investing where we need it. She’s a proven track record on corruption and protecting consumers. She’s deliberate, intelligent, and her policy chops shows she will build a stellar team and rebuild the executive apparatus that trump has destroyed.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sit in front of a Bloomberg terminal all day and would happily vote for him. It's an invaluable resource. 

Just pay him the license fee, don’t confuse that with moral character and the resume to lead the free world. Come on dude.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Oof. 
 

Maybe he can sell it as, you’re gonna lose your job, but you’ll love the free healthcare and college.  

PA voters are slightly in favor of a fracking ban and it breaks down exactly as you’d expect. Philly and Pittsburgh are in support of a ban. The yokel in the rural western part of the state who was sitting on 100 acres of forest with a hunting shack on it that is now getting paid off loves fracking. Fracking isn’t shifting the vote in PA. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Don’t get dizzy from this spin.

 

He's probably wishing he had said the women he allegedly harassed are released from their NDAs. While also having his aides already at their doorsteps with another sack of money and another NDA requiring them to say that they still have nothing to say about what happened at Bloomberg Inc and nobody has talked to them since. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, heso said:

PA voters are slightly in favor of a fracking ban and it breaks down exactly as you’d expect. Philly and Pittsburgh are in support of a ban. The yokel in the rural western part of the state who was sitting on 100 acres of forest with a hunting shack on it that is now getting paid off loves fracking. Fracking isn’t shifting the vote in PA. 

There was a 44k vote differential Last go around.   You don’t think the fracking ban will make a difference?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My only new takeaway from tonight is that Bernie was the only one on that stage that truly believes in democracy. Others too close to the office to fucking answer the simple question correctly. Shameful.

When is the last time a primary contender on either side went into the convention with a plurality and wasn’t the nominee?

Edited by Dropout
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, heso said:

PA voters are slightly in favor of a fracking ban and it breaks down exactly as you’d expect. Philly and Pittsburgh are in support of a ban. The yokel in the rural western part of the state who was sitting on 100 acres of forest with a hunting shack on it that is now getting paid off loves fracking. Fracking isn’t shifting the vote in PA. 

You can get why the yokel with the 100 acres is pro fracking. What you don't get is why the other 1000 yokels who don't own shit, but live near that 100 acres are pro fracking. 

Also in PA, it's the center that's rural. Philly in the east, Pittsburgh in the west, and Alabama in the middle. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, FondrenRoad said:

You can get why the yokel with the 100 acres is pro fracking. What you don't get is why the other 1000 yokels who don't own shit, but live near that 100 acres are pro fracking. 

Also in PA, it's the center that's rural. Philly in the east, Pittsburgh in the west, and Alabama in the middle. 

They get money off jobs and supplying the Yokels. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Xian said:

They get money off jobs and supplying the Yokels. 

No they don't. They keep working at the convenience store for minimum wage just like they were doing before. They might also have to deal with a bunch of Texas O and G folks moving in and driving up the cost of living, while still making minimum wage. 

Bernie's message should be strong for them. It won't be though, because they like being slaves for the guy that has happened to own all the land around their town for generations. But it should be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Dropout said:

My only new takeaway from tonight is that Bernie was the only one on that stage that truly believes in democracy. Others too close to the office to fucking answer the simple question correctly. Shameful.

When is the last time a primary contender on either side went in to the convention with a plurality and wasn’t the nominee?

I like Bernie and I obviously understand why he takes the stand he does. I think this is a silly take though. 

The Democratic Party is a private organization. They're not a any more bound to the will of voters than a HOA or something. They can nominate who they want. If the D field is so crowded that there's no majority, it's not un-democratic to find someone who can build a coalition. It's how Parliamentary democracies function. Typically in that situation it's the party with a plurality that ends up governing, because they can get enough smaller groups on board. Should it come to that, Bernie would likely be in a very advantageous position with a significantly larger number of delegates than anyone else. If he can't form a coalition then that's on him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, heso said:

I think Trump wins PA and I don’t think fracking will have anything to do with it. 

I dont think so.  Philly and Pitt metros have grown.  Everywhere else has shrunk.  Some towns on the PA side of the Delaware water gap are also now becoming NYC exurbs with an increasing Latino population. 

It's still all about turnout though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

I like Bernie and I obviously understand why he takes the stand he does. I think this is a silly take though. 

The Democratic Party is a private organization. They're not a any more bound to the will of voters than a HOA or something. They can nominate who they want. If the D field is so crowded that there's no majority, it's not un-democratic to find someone who can build a coalition. It's how Parliamentary democracies function. Typically in that situation it's the party with a plurality that ends up governing, because they can get enough smaller groups on board. Should it come to that, Bernie would likely be in a very advantageous position with a significantly larger number of delegates than anyone else. If he can't form a coalition then that's on him.

This private organization bullshit. The coalition is the voters. Starts and ends there.

When is the last time a contender had the plurality and wasn’t the nominee?

Edited by Dropout
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Dropout said:
When is the last time a primary contender on either side went into the convention with a plurality and wasn’t the nominee?

1968?  I think I'm wrong ... HH had a lot of delegates but did not win primaries.

Edited by Texas Jeff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Dropout said:

My only new takeaway from tonight is that Bernie was the only one on that stage that truly believes in democracy. Others too close to the office to fucking answer the simple question correctly. Shameful.

When is the last time a primary contender on either side went into the convention with a plurality and wasn’t the nominee?

Oh for the love of God, have we forgotten 2016 already??

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/06/us/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-california-primary.html

WEST HOLLYWOOD, Calif. — Senator Bernie Sanders defiantly vowed again on Sunday to take his campaign to the Democratic National Convention this summer, even as Hillary Clinton edged closer to clinching the party’s presidential nomination and the final primary contests drew near.

Two days before Tuesday’s primaries in California and five other states, Mr. Sanders repeated his pledge not to concede even if Mrs. Clinton acquires enough delegates to reach 2,383, the threshold for securing the nomination.

When Mr. Sanders, who greeted fans in West Hollywood, was asked by reporters if he remained committed to pushing for a contested convention, he said he “absolutely” was.

A convention is typically seen as contested when a candidate cannot reach the necessary delegate count using both pledged delegates and superdelegates. In 2008, Mrs. Clinton conceded to Barack Obama shortly after the final primary and before the convention. But Mr. Sanders is promising to break with tradition and extend his fight further than initially expected.

“It is extremely unlikely that Secretary Clinton will have the requisite number of pledged delegates to claim victory on Tuesday night,” Mr. Sanders said. “Now, I have heard reports that Secretary Clinton has said it’s all going to be over on Tuesday night. I have reports that the media, after the New Jersey results come in, are going to declare that it is all over. That simply is not accurate.”

 

Edited by Bruh Man
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Texas Jeff said:

1968?  I think I'm wrong ... HH had a lot of delegates but did not win primaries.

In 68, there were hardly any primaries. It was mostly state party appointment. 76 was the first "modern era" primary year. 

Also, no winning candidate has failed to win a majority of elected delegates since primaries went nationwide. If it happens this year, we will be treading on new turf. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

Oh for the love of God, have we forgotten 2016 already??

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/06/us/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-california-primary.html

WEST HOLLYWOOD, Calif. — Senator Bernie Sanders defiantly vowed again on Sunday to take his campaign to the Democratic National Convention this summer, even as Hillary Clinton edged closer to clinching the party’s presidential nomination and the final primary contests drew near.

Two days before Tuesday’s primaries in California and five other states, Mr. Sanders repeated his pledge not to concede even if Mrs. Clinton acquires enough delegates to reach 2,383, the threshold for securing the nomination.

When Mr. Sanders, who greeted fans in West Hollywood, was asked by reporters if he remained committed to pushing for a contested convention, he said he “absolutely” was.

A convention is typically seen as contested when a candidate cannot reach the necessary delegate count using both pledged delegates and superdelegates. In 2008, Mrs. Clinton conceded to Barack Obama shortly after the final primary and before the convention. But Mr. Sanders is promising to break with tradition and extend his fight further than initially expected.

“It is extremely unlikely that Secretary Clinton will have the requisite number of pledged delegates to claim victory on Tuesday night,” Mr. Sanders said. “Now, I have heard reports that Secretary Clinton has said it’s all going to be over on Tuesday night. I have reports that the media, after the New Jersey results come in, are going to declare that it is all over. That simply is not accurate.”

 

How’d that end? Did he attempt to take it from her? I haven’t forgotten shit. Have you?

 

 

Sanders received a three-minute standing ovation when he rose to speak at the Democratic National Convention on July 25. He thanked and congratulated his campaign workers and spoke of his work with the Democratic Platform Committee, saying, "there was a significant coming together between the two campaigns and we produced, by far, the most progressive platform in the history of the Democratic Party...Our job now is to see that platform implemented by a Democratic Senate, a Democratic House and a Hillary Clinton presidency – and I am going to do everything I can to make that happen."[144]

The first night of the Democratic National Convention was frequently disrupted with booing and chanting by a segment of Sanders's campaign workers termed the "Bernie or Bust" contingent. Even Sanders was booed when he said, "We must vote for Hillary Clinton."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Brandywine said:

I can’t imagine Bloomberg getting out after spending half a billion on ads. He’ll probably spend some of that money on the best debate coach in the US. 

Should have done that already, no?  And hired the world's best actors to play the roles of other candidates in a mock debate. Looks like he didn't spend all his money wisely. For his investment, he should have seen most of this debate coming and had a serviceable reply ready. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...