Reply With Quote
In the context of delegate numbers. Keep up.
My candidate?I bet you're just so mad about all those heinous lies Bernie's campaign spreads about your candidate aren't you?you can't make this up.
Oh and I explained why Bernie has a solid argument (that's becoming ever more solid every passing state) that he's better vs Trump than Hillary. Just because you don't care about the actual FACTS like Bernie beating Trump and Cruz well outside of the margin of error in every available head to head poll doesn't mean I'm anti-fact.
I'm not voting in the New York Primaries. I have zero stakes in this fight. Muahahaha
So keep your head spinning.
And as far as Bernie beating Trump well outside the error of margin, that's true..but so is Hillary.
As a Bernie supporter, dont you get embarrassed you have to bring poll numbers up? That's exactly what a Trump dumbass would do.
Does it matter how big iether one beats Trump as long as they beat him? Both Bernie and Hillary beat Trump and Cruz rather handily and outside the margin of error so I dont know what your beef is.
In the context of delegate numbers. Keep up.
You continue to abrasively suggest that is the only facet worth looking at. It's not. Just because you want to contain the argument and beat a strawman when I'm not even arguing about his delegate lead means nothing in terms of his actual momentum going forward.
And yes, your candidate. it's very, very obvious youre in the Hillary camp. Comparing me to a Donald Trump fan because I brought up facts thoroughly confirms that.
That's a conclusion you came to by yourself. If that's what you want to believe, then you are free to believe it.
But you're wrong, I asure you.
Delegate math is not the only thing I have pointed out so you're also wrong in that. What about the vote count? You cant overlook the fact people like you and I have casted over 2 million more votes for her than Bernie.
That's just fact, I ain't making that up.
I'm just here to discuss . I have no sides nor do I plan on voting for either one in these primaries.
You get more delegates by getting more votes. The two are intrinsically linked. Like I said, no one is disputing either. And instead of being so defensive, maybe you should look back to my NUMEROUS posts in this thread where I definitively call Bernie winning a long shot.
I understand Hillary's probably going to win.
Doesn't mean Bernie winning NY "wouldn't matter." It absolutely would be a major deal, if only for propaganda purposes. See the big picture instead of just saying "Hillary's delegate lead is way too big." In case you haven't realized it yet, that is EXACTLY why superdelegates exist, and why pushing a vote on the floor can and possibly will happen. The DNC wants the candidate who beats the other guy better, not the populist pick. Bernie has an argument that's increasing in resonance every day that HE is the better pick for the general. Hillary may beat Trump, but her unfavorability rating is HUGE. She will not drive out voters like Bernie will, and she CERTAINLY does NOT have any kind of lead when it comes to independents, who tend to turn elections one way or the other. BERNIE wins outright in that regard, which in my opinion, makes him a better candidate for the general.
Your assertion that the only wins that would matter for Bernie are 30+ point ones isn't a fact. He needs slightly under 57% of the remaining delegates. There's plenty of ways to accomplish that besides just huge 30+ point wins.
In that we agree.
It would be a psychological blow to her if she lost New York even if by a few points. Specially since he has won 5 out of the last 6 contests. And I'm fairly certain he will win Wisconsin and Wyoming.
So her losing New York also would be pretty devasting mentally.
Not plenty, but there is one other way I would say. Superdelegates.
If he continues to win states after states, he can make the case to them to switch and balance the scale.
I'm not sure if you fully understand what 57% of remaining delegates entails. He can win some by huge margins, others by small margins, and even lose a few and he'd still catch her if he hits that 57%.
But I'm sure Hillary's target is somewhere in the 30 percentile. She's more likely to hit that every time than he is 57% which is why superdelegates are sort of his only way out.
No, I'm pretty sure her target would be slightly over 43%. And yeah her target is more likely but I wasn't responding to that. I was responding to the assertion that he needs 30+ point wins for his victories to matter.
Almost all Clinton supporters would be ok with Bernie winning but not the other way around. The democratic party needs to understand this.
eh, they say that. but they're all going to vote clinton over trump when push comes to shove
good on him for winning wisconsin (though not really a big delegate push)... but apparently he had a really rough interview the other day with the new york daily news
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ews-interview/
Progressives, ...IMO young liberal voters would more likely show up to vote against Trump than Cruz....although young females might show for Clinton...
I was a bit disappointed, I will admit.
Bernie seems like he's going to over rely on the executive order with this type of response, something I personally have a lot of issues with.
But it's hilarious that he's being compared to Cruz on CNN etc when Bernie has won 6 more states IIRC and by higher margins. The race between him and Clinton is MUCH closer than Cruz and Trump; the difference is, the establishment Repubs HATE Trump.
"over rely on the executive order with this type of response"
Any Dem president faced with Repug strict obstructionist Congress has to advance America with Exec Orders.
Which of these would be voted up by Repug Congress?
https://berniesanders.com/issues/
Bernie had real balls to even talk to an extreme right wing rag.
Another day. Another poster wrecking reck
No one is denying that.
The real problem isn't congress, it is the SCOTUS striking down these orders. If people greatly benefit from the EOs then it is a low chance Congress will have the unity to pass laws contrary to them, especially with such deadlock as has been for years and years now.
But the SCOTUS would have no problem dealing a major blow in the name of the law - even a more liberal one.
"it is the SCOTUS striking down these orders"
do you have list of EOs that SCOTUS has killed since 2000? I really can't remember any since 2009.
Funny, I don't remember you showing your face last night. You got ed with a 12 inch strapon raw.Another day. Another poster wrecking reck
He botched that interview pretty hardcore. I listened to the 50+ minute interview. He seemed rattled and caught off guard on almost every question.
He's so weak on foreign policy.
The only foreign policy question that actually mattered in a Bernie presidency was concerning captured ISIS. The rest of the questions are stupid, for the stupid, by the stupid. We're 20 trillion in debt, we dont need more wars, we dont need to police the world. Thats why Bernie doesnt know, and frankly, doesnt care. Domestic issues are what the 99% are worried about. Bull about israel or riding the subway is just that, bull .
Bernie now saying that Hillary is not qualified. That seems to throw the unity ticket hopes out the window.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/06/politi...ton-qualified/
This guy is on an all out attack it seems. Desperation?
Not quite sure why he's going the route of Trump when he's winning states after states. Perhaps he knows he's coming up on a huge wall he's bound to crash in? New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, Connecticut are all going to Clinton.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions