• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Who's Going to Win South Carolina?

  • Joe Biden

    Votes: 585 39.2%
  • Bernie Sanders

    Votes: 853 57.2%
  • Elizabeth Warren

    Votes: 24 1.6%
  • Pete Buttigieg

    Votes: 7 0.5%
  • THE KLOBBERER

    Votes: 16 1.1%
  • Tom Steyer

    Votes: 6 0.4%

  • Total voters
    1,491
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nov 2, 2017
2,090
Hold up, unwarranted animosity? If you looked at how Gaf/Era talked about Bernie since 2016, you'd think he was a legit monster. For the longest time, this site talked about him the way Chris Matthew does, this Berniessance is rather recent phenomenon, probably a strong case of the silent majority finally speaking out.
Legit, it was common to label Bernie an egomaniac in it entirely for his own gain. It was fucking nuts. Expressed even the slightest doubt about Hillary and you got jumped by a whole bunch of people. Including mods iirc.

It's not a great climate now either, but it least isn't as bad as it was then. Progress woo
 

jviggy43

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
18,184
Like I said before, if Bernie and Warren's positions were reversed, the calls for him to drop out would be deafening.

"OMG Bernie, just in it for his ego and ruining this country's chance at progressive politics. Just wants Trump to win!!!!" And heck I'd even agree. Why isn't Warren held to the same standard?

Heck the calls for Bernie to drop out were already prominent here 4 months ago when Warren was leading in the polls, before the primaries even started.
Yup. From his announcement right up until January people were saying hes done and he should drop out and support Warren.
 

Rats

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,111
It's been my position since the beginning that one should drop out and endorse the other as soon as it makes sense to. Warren is pretty much at that point, barring a miracle on Super Tuesday.
 

Deleted member 41502

User requested account closure
Banned
Mar 28, 2018
1,177
Like I said before, if Bernie and Warren's positions were reversed, the calls for him to drop out would be deafening.

"OMG Bernie, just in it for his ego and ruining this country's chance at progressive politics. Just wants Trump to win!!!!" And heck I'd even agree. Why isn't Warren held to the same standard?

Heck the calls for Bernie to drop out were already prominent here 4 months ago when Warren was leading in the polls, before the primaries even started.
Are there not calls for Warren to drop out or something? I follow a lot of Warren supporters who have said she should. I don't follow many Bernie bros, but I assume they're doing the same (i.e. your post).
 

discotheque

Member
Dec 23, 2019
3,858
Yeah that would be a disaster. Super Tuesday has to be it when the field gets culled to 2-3 running at most.
Agreed. If you actually want a Democrat to beat Trump, you should to be calling for this. Any candidate that wins via a brokered convention is going into the general in a hugely compromised position. Regardless of who you think deserves the nom more and who you think is being a hypocrite, you NEED to acknowledge the risks here.
 

uncelestial

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,060
San Francisco, CA, USA
People on here were parroting the brain-dead "Bernie has a smaller percentage of the votes than he had in 2016" line, too.

Warren can do as she likes, honestly. I like her -- liked her more in the past, but still think she's good people -- but nothing she does is going to impact this nomination process in any meaningful way at this point, stay or go.
 

Deleted member 16657

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,198
Like I said before, if Bernie and Warren's positions were reversed, the calls for him to drop out would be deafening.

"OMG Bernie, just in it for his ego and ruining this country's chance at progressive politics. Just wants Trump to win!!!!" And heck I'd even agree. Why isn't Warren held to the same standard?

Heck the calls for Bernie to drop out were already prominent here 4 months ago when Warren was leading in the polls, before the primaries even started.

I agree that people were eager to see Bernie drop out, especially if they felt that Bernie had hurt Hillary's chances.

That said I think the situation has changed ever since Warren compromised on M4A. Instead of siphoning away progressive votes from Bernie as expected, she's actually doing more to help him by taking away many Biden/Pete voters. Last I checked it was something like 60% of Warren voters had a moderate as their second choice, so staying in the race is actually helping Bernie, though at a great cost to her campaign that likely won't be paid off anytime soon.
 

GoldenEye 007

Roll Tide, Y'all!
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
13,833
Texas
Agreed. If you actually want a Democrat to beat Trump, you should to be calling for this. Any candidate that wins via a brokered convention is going into the general in a hugely compromised position. Regardless of who you think deserves the nom more and who you think is being a hypocrite, you NEED to acknowledge the risks here.
Yeah I can agree with that. The pressure will be immense for those that just aren't getting enough votes to close the gap.

And yeah it's something to point to from 2016 where Bernie stayed in after Super Tuesday when it was over that everyone needs to learn from. Precious months wasted that could have been used to unify the party. It was bad judgement for him then. And it would be bad judgement now for him or anyone else to do the same. Well outside of those max 3 candidates that will have a shot after the upcoming week.
 

Mekanos

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 17, 2018
44,126
People on here were parroting the brain-dead "Bernie has a smaller percentage of the votes than he had in 2016" line, too.

Warren can do as she likes, honestly. I like her -- liked her more in the past, but still think she's good people -- but nothing she does is going to impact this nomination process in any meaningful way at this point, stay or go.

pretty much where I'm at. These last minute attempts to instigate a Bernie/Warren fight are pointless.

I do worry she's risking her Senate seat though.
 

GiantBreadbug

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,992
Ah yes, the totally normal and above board 2016 Democratic primary in which everything went completely fine and there are no irregularities to speak of.

Bernie was right to stay in the race to the convention in 2016. If he hadn't used his leverage to yank the party's platform hard to the left, I wager it would look nothing like it does now. You know, how nearly everyone has been varying degrees of desperate to convince voters they want the same things as Bernie. And even if he did drop out early, Hillary still would have lost because she was a historically awful candidate.
 

Deleted member 4614

Oct 25, 2017
6,345
Ah yes, the totally normal and above board 2016 Democratic primary in which everything went completely fine and there are no irregularities to speak of.

Bernie was right to stay in the race to the convention in 2016. If he hadn't used his leverage to yank the party's platform hard to the left, I wager it would look nothing like it does now. You know, how nearly everyone has been varying degrees of desperate to convince voters they want the same things as Bernie. And Hillary still would have lost because she was a historically awful candidate.

You should make a real claim and bring receipts instead of trading in innuendo
 

D.Lo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,348
Sydney
User Banned (1 week): Ignoring the staff post with regards to hostility
Legit, it was common to label Bernie an egomaniac in it entirely for his own gain. It was fucking nuts. Expressed even the slightest doubt about Hillary and you got jumped by a whole bunch of people. Including mods iirc.

It's not a great climate now either, but it least isn't as bad as it was then. Progress woo
100% this. Y2Kev and his Hillary army ran any dissenter out of town as a Nazi sexist Trump fan.
 

HipsterMorty

alt account
Banned
Jan 25, 2020
901
Sanders arguably had a good reason to stay in the 2016 race: to bring attention to progressive ideas. And it worked. We wouldn't be where we are today if he didn't do that. So maybe let's stop equivocating 2016 Bernie to Current Day Warren?
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,169
Wakayama
What I'm legit worried about is Bloomberg. Namely I'm worried if he doesn't get the nomination he'll continue to run independently on his own money and siphon those votes away from whoever wins the nom.
 

Mulciber

Member
Aug 22, 2018
5,217
It's funny how we're somehow expected to disown Sanders for improving his stance on an issue. The idea is to praise them for doing better and criticize them for doing worse. Nobody is here arguing that a politician has to be perfect.
Yeah, this. We shouldn't expect a candidate to get set in stone the day they announce and never improve, especially because this is a time when they are going to be traveling around the country, talking to people they might normally hear from, etc.

Hell, back in 2016, Bernie got a little softer on gun control after talking to Killer Mike in Atlanta. That's obviously the wrong direction to move, but it's an example of sitting down, listening to someone else's perspective, and thinking about it. KM framed it along the lines of how historically gun control measures have been very racist in certain parts of the country, and his community doesn't trust cops.
 

Mulciber

Member
Aug 22, 2018
5,217
What I'm legit worried about is Bloomberg. Namely I'm worried if he doesn't get the nomination he'll continue to run independently on his own money and siphon those votes away from whoever wins the nom.
Absolutely. I'm very concerned about this. He's a Republican at heart who desperately doesn't want Sanders or Warren to win. And he has all the money in the fucking world to blow on doing that to sink the Dem nominee.
 

GiantBreadbug

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,992
You should make a real claim and bring receipts instead of trading in innuendo

Claim: The DNC was in the tank for Hillary Clinton and her campaign and the party apparatus inappropriately functioned in order to favor her for the nomination.

Receipts: Not sure if you're inclined to treat these with derision or not, but here are the emails central to the scandal. Browse them at your leisure. And here's Elizabeth Warren saying it was "rigged" (which she immediately walked back but hey she does that all the time)!

Tapper then asked, "Do you agree with the notion that it was rigged?" And Warren responded simply: "Yes."

Hope this helps!

Lets let Warren make the claim



And this one!
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,086
Sanders arguably had a good reason to stay in the 2016 race: to bring attention to progressive ideas. And it worked. We wouldn't be where we are today if he didn't do that.
I'm still upset Yang dropped out because I wanted him to do this same thing. UBI bills are starting to become actual discussed things in some states because he gave it a serious platform. Yang talked a ton about being "neither left nor right", but nothing would've pulled the overton window to the left faster than making UBI seem like a legitimate policy. Plus it would've helped his chances in future elections if he were to run again.
 

Mekanos

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 17, 2018
44,126
Again, as a Bernie supporter, if it was reversed I'd be considering voting for Warren on Super Tuesday to hitch my wagon on a progressive candidate and block Biden/Bloomberg. I don't blame people who want to stick to their conviction and vote Warren, but this last minute "he said she said" stuff really doesn't help any of us.

Sometimes the candidate you support just ran a bad campaign or got outgunned or failed to connect to voters. It sucks. It could have been Warren back when she was leading in October. It wasn't and isn't. Implicitly blaming Bernie supporters for Warren failing is counterproductive.

She can stay in, she can drop out, but only one candidate has the diverse coalition and the movement.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,169
Wakayama
Absolutely. I'm very concerned about this. He's a Republican at heart who desperately doesn't want Sanders or Warren to win. And he has all the money in the fucking world to blow on doing that to sink the Dem nominee.

Exactly. He's not in this to beat Trump, he's in this to stop Bernie. And I would bet money this is his plan if Sanders wins the nomination.
 
Oct 27, 2017
5,264
Welp, Bernie Sanders is having a really with Sarah Silverman, Public Enemy and Dick Van Duke on Sunday. Yep, think I'm going to that one.
 

D.Lo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,348
Sydney
Lets let Warren make the claim


knockout dot gif.

Again, as a Bernie supporter, if it was reversed I'd be considering voting for Warren on Super Tuesday to hitch my wagon on a progressive candidate and block Biden/Bloomberg. I don't blame people who want to stick to their conviction and vote Warren, but this last minute "he said she said" stuff really doesn't help any of us.

Sometimes the candidate you support just ran a bad campaign or got outgunned or failed to connect to voters. It sucks. It could have been Warren back when she was leading in October. It wasn't and isn't. Implicitly blaming Bernie supporters for Warren failing is counterproductive.

She can stay in, she can drop out, but only one candidate has the diverse coalition and the movement.
100% this. If Warren were dominating like this so far, and Sanders was cooked, it would be the right thing to do as well. To me Warren would be 1000% preferential to Bloomberg or Buttigieg and 500% to Biden or Klob.

That said, whatever, she can stay in, doesn't seem to be splitting the progressive vote the way commentators thought it might. It may still have if she didn't try to pivot last year when sniffing the lead, but here we are.
 

Deleted member 16657

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,198
What I'm legit worried about is Bloomberg. Namely I'm worried if he doesn't get the nomination he'll continue to run independently on his own money and siphon those votes away from whoever wins the nom.

Absolutely. I'm very concerned about this. He's a Republican at heart who desperately doesn't want Sanders or Warren to win. And he has all the money in the fucking world to blow on doing that to sink the Dem nominee.

It is entirely within the realm of possibility.

LAS VEGAS — Mike Bloomberg is privately lobbying Democratic Party officials and donors allied with his moderate opponents to flip their allegiance to him — and block Bernie Sanders — in the event of a brokered national convention.
The effort, largely executed by Bloomberg's senior state-level advisers in recent weeks, attempts to prime Bloomberg for a second-ballot contest at the Democratic National Convention in July by poaching supporters of Joe Biden and other moderate Democrats, according to two Democratic strategists familiar with the talks and unaffiliated with Bloomberg.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/20/bloomberg-brokered-convention-strategy-116407

What's the point in having primaries if party insiders at the convention just override the result and choose a nominee they prefer? But Democrats who fear Sanders' takeover of the party, or who fear that a "radical" cannot beat Donald Trump, will argue that democracy needs to take a backseat to the urgency of choosing a "unity" candidate. Michael Bloomberg is reported to be plotting a brokered convention strategy, whereby other candidates would give him the delegates necessary to beat Sanders in exchange for various commitments and handouts. And Democrats are already trying to convince people that brokered conventions are fine, with the former Democratic Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell writing that we "shouldn't fear" a brokered convention, because it would be "exciting". The candidates' answers on the debate stage indicated that each of them is open to using the "process" to subvert the result of the elections, if that's what it takes to win.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/25/bernie-sanders-democrats-brokered-convention

Basically, this is moderate Voltron. Bloomberg can offer favors and compromises to the rest of the candidates to get their delegates and put himself over Bernie. Not to mention, the delegates initially pledged to Bernie have no debt to him in the second round and he more than likely will have delegates that actively do not support him that are eager to switch candidates.

However it should be important to note - this strategy applies to everyone, not just Bloomberg. Unless the country gets brainwashed by constant Bloomberg ads into believing that he is unironically THE best moderate Democrat, this strategy would likely pick Biden over Bloomberg. HOWEVER that's where the problem of Bloomberg's money comes in - he can force a situation where he is the only moderate left to pick if he continues to outspend the other candidates ad buy, poach their staff members by paying 3-4x base rates and encourage donors to not donate to other campaigns (as Yang confirmed one of his donors told him was happening on CNN).

Basically - its very fucking possible. Bloomberg has the means to continue his campaign and gut everyone else's. I will not celebrate if Joe Biden drops out after Tuesday.
 

Raiku

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,692
California, USHeyHey!
I was rewatching parts of yesterday's debate and holy shit at Bernie, after being asked about the disingenuous Cuba bullshit, not only stand his ground but immediately talk about American interventionism without blinking. It's no wonder he has the Hispanic support that he does. Dude has those big nuts.
 

fragamemnon

Member
Nov 30, 2017
6,817
I mean if you don't want a brokered convention, get the majority of the delegates! That is what is most likely to happen anyway. If we have a convention at all because of coronavirus.

No majority? Sanders needs to cut deals. If he has a strong plurality, consider some minor cabinet positions to a wide variety of voices. Weak plurality? Maybe runs on a unity ticket and doesn't get his first pick of a VP. Deals to be made and they will absolutely be offered, no one wants an unfair mess.

A weak plurality Sanders wagging fingers at everyone is the real disaster. As long as he's willing to work from his position of strength stuff like Bloomberg buying out everyone isn't going anywhere.
 

GiantBreadbug

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,992
Basically - its very fucking possible. Bloomberg has the means to continue his campaign and gut everyone else's. I will not celebrate if Joe Biden drops out after Tuesday.

Not saying the situation isn't frightening on an unprecedented scale, but I think there's a case to be made that Bernie gets more of Joe's support than Bloomberg does. I guess things can change, but I have a feeling that it's not as cut and dry as "all non-Bernie support will continue to consolidate toward one candidate." It very well could happen, but with Bernie racking up wins, I think it's gonna be hard to take the eyes of casual followers of politics off of his campaign, even if you're piping hundreds millions into the race like Mike.


This is pretty rich coming from an Amy supporter.


1v1 in 2016, 1v6~8 in 2020. heard this tired shit after NH, next
 

Deleted member 24149

Oct 29, 2017
2,150

This is pretty rich coming from an Amy supporter.

Yo that ratio though

slbbnQi.png
 

Steel

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
18,220

This is pretty rich coming from an Amy supporter.

The only place where you can actually make this argument was NH, which was a squeeker where Bernie barely got first where before it was one of his strongest states. Iowa was a squeeker too, but it wasn't a state he did well in 2016. Nevada is where he actually got a blowout win.
 

Deleted member 16657

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,198
I mean if you don't want a brokered convention, get the majority of the delegates! That is what is most likely to happen anyway. If we have a convention at all because of coronavirus.

No majority? Sanders needs to cut deals. If he has a strong plurality, consider some minor cabinet positions to a wide variety of voices. Weak plurality? Maybe runs on a unity ticket and doesn't get his first pick of a VP. Deals to be made and they will absolutely be offered, no one wants an unfair mess.

A weak plurality Sanders wagging fingers at everyone is the real disaster. As long as he's willing to work from his position of strength stuff like Bloomberg buying out everyone isn't going anywhere.

This is fascinating from a game theory standpoint. The moderates can back a candidate in unison and beat Bernie but will not be able to easily consolidate

Not saying the situation isn't frightening on an unprecedented scale, but I think there's a case to be made that Bernie gets more of Joe's support than Bloomberg does. I guess things can change, but I have a feeling that it's not as cut and dry as "all non-Bernie support will continue to consolidate toward one candidate." It very well could happen, but with Bernie racking up wins, I think it's gonna be hard to take the eyes of casual followers of politics off of his campaign, even if you're piping hundreds millions into the race like Mike.

It won't be cut and dry for sure, and Bloomberg probably has his top staffers running the numbers on how to make it happen. There's just not much information to go off of unfortunately. We're going to see delegate shifts from every pool.
 

jviggy43

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
18,184
I mean if you don't want a brokered convention, get the majority of the delegates! That is what is most likely to happen anyway. If we have a convention at all because of coronavirus.

No majority? Sanders needs to cut deals. If he has a strong plurality, consider some minor cabinet positions to a wide variety of voices. Weak plurality? Maybe runs on a unity ticket and doesn't get his first pick of a VP. Deals to be made and they will absolutely be offered, no one wants an unfair mess.

A weak plurality Sanders wagging fingers at everyone is the real disaster. As long as he's willing to work from his position of strength stuff like Bloomberg buying out everyone isn't going anywhere.
Were repeating the same arguments over and over again. Sanders doesn't have to cut any deal if he has the majority of the delegates and votes. If the Dems wanna screw around and not give it to himin a year vs Trump then they revealed themselves for who they really are anyway, but at the end of the day they have far more to lose than Bernie does.
 

Mekanos

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 17, 2018
44,126
Bernie remains the only remotely decent candidate on foreign policy


Sadly foreign policy is bottom of the barrel priorities to voters even though he blows the other candidates out of the water on it. Never thought I'd see a candidate talk on stage about the US overthrowing governments in Latin America.

EDIT: Warren links an article about a policeman's death while Islamophobic violence is taking place? lmao
 
Last edited:
May 26, 2018
24,003
Were repeating the same arguments over and over again. Sanders doesn't have to cut any deal if he has the majority of the delegates and votes. If the Dems wanna screw around and not give it to himin a year vs Trump then they revealed themselves for who they really are anyway, but at the end of the day they have far more to lose than Bernie does.

I'm just trying to figure out why other Democrats think they might win if they completely backstabbed 30 percent of their electorate. Like, where do they think their votes against Trump are coming from in that scenario?

Is anyone doing the math here? Do they think they can just force a candidate down the country's gullet in duress?

"Haha, we can take the White House, but only if we hold it hostage first!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.