IGX

DrDonkeyLove wrote:

vern wrote:If Trump turns Pennsylvania red, it's over.

Unless he does something particularly stupid, he's going to put states in play that have been dark blue for a long time. Van Jones, former Obamaite minion and SJW extraordinaire, says that Trump could turn 30% of blacks in his direction and if he can get 1/2 of that group to vote for him, he wins.

milosz wrote:

DrDonkeyLove wrote:

vern wrote:If Trump turns Pennsylvania red, it's over.

Unless he does something particularly stupid, he's going to put states in play that have been dark blue for a long time. Van Jones, former Obamaite minion and SJW extraordinaire, says that Trump could turn 30% of blacks in his direction and if he can get 1/2 of that group to vote for him, he wins.

This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read at IGX.

Kazuya Mishima wrote:Who knows...even the great Nate Silver blew this one.

http://www.businessinsider.com/nate-sil ... ong-2016-5

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

Kazuya Mishima wrote:Who knows...even the great Nate Silver blew this one.

http://www.businessinsider.com/nate-sil ... ong-2016-5

DrDonkeyLove wrote:

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

Kazuya Mishima wrote:Who knows...even the great Nate Silver blew this one.

http://www.businessinsider.com/nate-sil ... ong-2016-5

Nate's wrong again. The Republican party has not lost its mind; the establishment utterly despises him.

Voters in Republican primaries including tens of thousands of Democrats who either voted for him in open primaries or who switched parties for the primary are responsible for the ascension of Trump. The vast majority of Trump votes were a direct vote against the Republican party.

In effect he's a 3rd party candidate who hijacked the Republican nomination.

DrDonkeyLove wrote:

milosz wrote:

DrDonkeyLove wrote:

vern wrote:If Trump turns Pennsylvania red, it's over.

Unless he does something particularly stupid, he's going to put states in play that have been dark blue for a long time. Van Jones, former Obamaite minion and SJW extraordinaire, says that Trump could turn 30% of blacks in his direction and if he can get 1/2 of that group to vote for him, he wins.

This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read at IGX.

If you dismiss Van Jones you're a racist and don't belong here.

milosz wrote:Bah. Trump's not pulling Democrats or independents in any meaningful numbers, shows no signs of turning back the minority vote that is dooming the GOP in national elections.

His popularity with less than half of GOP primary voters does not point to some groundswell of support.

The amazing thing is that even with demographics working against them, Hillary being the presumptive nominee made this a reasonably easy win for the Republicans and they fucked it up.

That's why Nate Silver misread the situation - everyone assumed that some adults in the GOP would assert control to salvage the election.

DikTracy6000 wrote:Vincente Fox has just apologized to Trump for saying he won't pay for the fucking wall. Said he'd like to go halfies on it. Why is Fox offering the olive branch already?

milosz wrote:Lead with a non-sequitur then a half-truth (what Democrats crossed over did so to vote against Trump, natch) then insulting blather. Are you sure you're not Trump himself?

Honestly, do you even try to match your shit to reality? THE PARTY DID THE SAME THING IT'S DONE FOREVER WITH SUPERDELEGATES... TO THWART THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE... WAIT, HILLARY ACTUALLY HAS A MAJORITY OF THE POPULAR VOTE?!

Much love to Bernie and I won't be voting for Hillary (either Johnson or Stein - the benefits of a one-party state) but she's fuckin' winning the primary popular vote. Conspiracies and rigging are bullshit.

What’s disturbing, though, is that in spite of the actual closeness of the contest between them, members of the political establishment, called superdelegates, are going against the will of the voters in their own states to support Clinton over Sanders.

For instance, on Saturday, Sanders won every county in Washington state and won nearly 75% of the vote. It was a drubbing.

Will of the people be damned, the superdelegates in Washington all said they are voting for Clinton, including Gov. Jay Inslee, U.S. Sens. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray and U.S. Reps. Jim McDermott, Suzan DelBene, Rick Larsen, Adam Smith, Denny Heck and Derek Kilmer.

This is preposterous. Sanders handily won the state and won every congressional district by a landslide, but the governor, the senators and the congresspeople don’t care. They are firmly against the will of the people in their state.
Not a single superdelegate vote from Washington is going to Sanders.
Not one.
...In fact, this is happening all over the country.

In spite of Sanders winning 15 states — including some by an 80-20 margin — over 94% of the 498 superdelegates have said they are backing Clinton anyway. Clinton currently has 469 superdelegate votes to just 29 for Sanders.

In Minnesota, Sanders won 61.6% of the vote, but 13 of the 16 superdelegates there, or 81%, including the governor, the senators, and many DNC members, say they are going for Hillary anyway. They aren’t even slightly persuaded by the will of the people.

In other states, like Colorado, where Sanders won with 59% of the vote, not a single superdelegate is voting for him. The same is true for Nebraska, where he won 57% of the vote but isn’t getting a single superdelegate.
...Clinton supporters are quick to say, “these are the rules the candidates agreed upon,” and maybe that’s true, but voters are being ripped off. We didn’t decide on these rules and these officials are clearly going against the will of the people in their own states to support the establishment candidate who arranged for their support long before this election began.

Right now, if Sanders had the superdelegate votes that Clinton currently has, he’d be winning this race handily with 1,444 total delegates to Clinton’s 1,272.

Don’t say superdelegates aren’t determining this race. They are, and the practice should be abolished — immediately.

Thud wrote:

DikTracy6000 wrote:Vincente Fox has just apologized to Trump for saying he won't pay for the fucking wall. Said he'd like to go halfies on it. Why is Fox offering the olive branch already?

Apologized, but where are you seeing he'd like to go halves on it? Link?

milosz wrote:I can't believe a person paid to draw in eyeballs who doesn't like Hillary said that it's unfair! Shock and amazement all around.

Let's go back to facts: superdelegates are, at this moment, irrelevant. They have not cast a vote and will not until the convention. If one wishes to argue that the will of the (Democratic) people is being thwarted by Hillary, this should be a very easy case to prove: Bernie would be winning the popular vote. He's not. It's really that simple. Superdelegates are irrelevant to any conversation around this issue as long as Hillary is winning the popular vote (and the popular delegate count).

If you abolished superdelegates yesterday... the race would be the same. Hillary would still be winning.

That's not even getting into your asinine "b-b-b-bad Democrats hate democracy" bullshit - call me when you're this much of a bitch about winner take all GOP primaries and the anti-democratic Electoral College and Senate.

Yes I Have Balls wrote:Reagan Democrats have had a name for the last 40 years. They're called Republicans.

DrDonkeyLove wrote:
Super delegates are irrelevant? Seems like the party put an awful lot of Hillary effort into this irrelevancy.

Now the Senate is anti-democratic too?