-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Democratic Presidential Primary |February OT| It Can't be Worse than Iowa, Right? (Discussion Guidelines in OP)
- Thread starter Poodlestrike
- Start date
- Status
electing Bernie could risk alienating Joe Rogan's more right wing audience, causing them to not vote Dem
There's not a lot of evidence of this, hence the worries. Sanders support comes almost entirely from people 18-35, and they're the flakiest demographic when it comes to voting. You can argue it's because there hasn't been a candidate that "excites" them like Sanders yet, but even 2008 Obama—which was a borderline cultural phenomena—wasn't able to drastically increase turnout from that group.
OP
OP
Man, why do we care? Antisemites aren't exactly going to be gushing with praise for him in any case.
Pete really fell off hard. Sanders not looking so hot either. What's the source?
Huh.
I don't really disagree at all. I think it's fucking shameful that people even need to feel "excited" to vote in 2020 given the state of things. It's like the country is being held hostage by a group of people who want to make the country better but will only do so if "better" reaches a specific arbitrary threshold they adhere to no matter what.
It's the Monmouth Iowa primary poll that was just posted. Caucuses are messy enough that we might have to look at multiple factors that could influence delegate reallocation - including how well-liked candidates are in general.
Here's a pretty good article on why there are differences in polls...
Hopefully Peepaw just decides to go to Golden Corral and then goes home to watch The Mary Tyler Moore Show instead of caucusing for Biden.
Surprised to see Bernie is doing so well in Texas considering he lost Texas in 2016 65/35.
Previous Texas polls indicating Biden's leads:
IMO these are the states to watch if you're interested in/afraid of a Bernie Sanders candidacy: states he lost in 2016 that he may win now.
Previous Texas polls indicating Biden's leads:
IMO these are the states to watch if you're interested in/afraid of a Bernie Sanders candidacy: states he lost in 2016 that he may win now.
I'm not saying I'm an anti-semite, I'm just saying we should listen to anti-semites.
Bernie w
Bernie winning Texas and California on Super Tuesday would seal the deal lol.
Bernie winning Texas and California on Super Tuesday would seal the deal lol.
Of the Super Tuesday states, 538 has Sanders winning California (flip from Clinton in 2016), Minnesota, Colorado, Utah, Maine, and Vermont, with Biden winning Texas, North Carolina, Virginia, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Alabama, Oklahoma (flip from Sanders in 2016), and Arkansas (also American Samoa).
I would say in order for Sanders to call Super Tuesday a success, he'd need to flip Massachusetts, Oklahoma and Texas at the bare minimum. Even then there is a reasonable chance that Biden nets more delegates from the other states than Sanders could by winning his states by slimmer margins.
...and to elaborate on my point from above, no, it would not. Not on its own.
Just as a helpful point of comparison, in 2016 when Sanders upset Clinton in Michigan, he net four delegates. The same day, Clinton won Mississippi's primary in a landslide and net 26 delegates. Sanders' Michigan was treated as a huge shift in momentum, but ultimately Clinton still came out ahead.
I think it's important to understand this because assuming Sanders just needs to win California and Texas, even by the slimmest of margins and he'll "seal the deal" is extremely shallow analysis. It would be very good for him, don't get me wrong, but his biggest challenge has always been about cutting down Biden's margins in the South. I'm not saying he can't do that, but it's also much too early to assume that he will.
Looks like it. If Bernie wins IA and NH he should have no problem taking MA.
New York Times introduced me to this thing called hotdish, which I have many questions about
I'm fairly confident he's not. 538's polling aggregate hasn't has a poll from MA in months, so the algorithm (or whatever) is assuming it'll match the national trends to fill in the gaps.
But that isn't counting the home field advantage - if we got fresh numbers I'd bet Warren still has a lead at this point (albeit one getting slimmer by the day).
In general polling looks kind of spotty for Super Tuesday, so I personally wouldn't be putting too much stock in a state-by-state analysis yet. Too many unknowns.
Yeah, I think the model's wrong there, just using it as a benchmark.
Also hopeful she'll win Minnesota, she dominated the informal straw (er, bean) poll we held at the State Fair last year:
They had to set up a second one for her!
the piece is written by a jewish leftist and that is definitely not the thesis
Isn't Warren leading MN and MA?
Also despite winning ME in 2016, he hasn't led a single poll this cycle.
The responses in this thread by people who have absolutely not read the article are pretty depressing.
Cool, hopefully more people ask.
In other news, bunch of interesting polls coming out today.
I really like the Yougov one, it was always a bad pollster for Bernie, and he´s up 6 almost in a tie with Joe.
It´s a shame that Texas pollster isn´t even rated, because the results were very interesting.
Only from someone whose standard of normal is Mark Zuckerberg.
This been posted yet? What's the deal with Biden consistently telling people to go vote for someone else?
It'd be funny if he didn't already hire and amplify Sirota's and Joy's dumb asses.
Even Biden knows he's a asshole.
The way he spoke to that one guy a few months back (calling him fat, challenging him to a push-up contest) was straight out of Trump's playbook.
I don't just disagree with Biden's politics, I genuinely dislike the man as a person.
Because he doesn't have a good answer for mild criticism of his positions.
OP
OP
So, just going forward, even if it's the onion: the rules of the thread are to not post tweets without commentary. Please try to follow the rule.
You know an Onion article has hit its mark when you get the flood of b-but actuallys
From the perspective of identity politics it might not be wise to call out writers who by majority are POCs and/or women and question their skills and knowledge as a totality without naming them. Even if this is for cheap laughs of the lowest common denominator.
Last edited:
Iowa will be pretty interesting because it's wide-open with how the caucus works and 1st/2nd choices, who shows up at what precincts, organization, etc. Should have a clearer picture after that and some of the also-rans will drop out.
I don't think there will be as big of a polling bounce as normal out of Iowa with everything else in the news.
I don't think there will be as big of a polling bounce as normal out of Iowa with everything else in the news.
I can't wait to not have to think about Iowa again for the next four years
"Please someone offer me VP? Please?"
"Please someone offer me VP? Please?"
The "no fake accounts from staff" part seemed like it was a specific subtweet to stuff over the weekend while the election disinfo stuff mostly just seemed like an attempt to expand and tighten existing laws that the GOP routinely flouts the weekend before an election.
- Status