• 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.

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.

LegendofJoe

Member
Oct 28, 2017
12,086
Arkansas, USA
There's going to be a lot more pressure riding on Bernie's age if he gets the win. So the VP slot is arguably far more important than it normally is and and a more conservative choice is a nonstarter.

He has to pick a Progressive that will replace him to calm those fears in case he kicks the bucket.

You're under the delusion that leftists are large enough in number to carry a general election. They aren't, Sanders picking someone like AOC (if she was eligible) would be a horrible decision.
 

Blue Skies

Banned
Mar 27, 2019
9,224
Bernie needs a more moderate running mate to persuade people who think he's too left.

well, if he wants to win
 

NihonTiger

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,518
I just answered my own question: if Baldwin is VP, we are -1 in the Senate until a special election or the next primary/general election.
 

Deleted member 58401

User requested account closure
Banned
Jul 7, 2019
895
this is the problem with buttigieg's numbers, which is so glaring that I frankly find it bizarre that they decided they were good enough to use

if all you have are your candidate's numbers, and you have some assumptions about what numbers you need to hit in order to win, you're making a lot of fucking assumptions here. if you hit your marks and you predict a 1pt victory over sanders, but sanders overperforms by 3pts, you lose! and how do they know this isn't the case? they don't! they have absolutely no idea! their model might be wrong! they literally cannot show that it isn't!

like, if they don't have a full breakdown of every candidate's numbers, it's fucking appalling that they chose to declare victory (and let's not entertain for a second that the boo-urns defense is anything other than total horseshit). completely divorced from if they did win or not, because we still don't know (they might have! who can say?), this is incredibly stupid.
It's dumb to claim he won, definitely, but it's public. So he knows where he won and where Bernie won and how much Biden got, etc. Every caucus group ends the same way: they read the supporter size, the percentage, and the delegates apportioned to each viable candidate.

My guess is him and Bernie and the others just wrote down those results from as many places as they had staff.
 
Last edited:

Volimar

volunteer forum janitor
Member
Oct 25, 2017
38,515


Really weird and unusual to see this come from the Bernie camp.



"To be fair, this was from last night when the misinformation was everywhere. She probably shouldn't have said anything without more concrete stuff, but I get that everyone was frustrated." - is what i was going to say, but after reading the rest of her recent timeline I'm less inclined to give the benefit of the doubt.
 

nelsonroyale

Member
Oct 28, 2017
12,128
People getting caught up in diversions. Pete announcing victory is much more troubling than all this conspiracy theorising or wasting time chasing them on Twitter. But some people love to get sidelines down the irrelevance hole, and then grandstand.
 

MoogleMaestro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,111


Really weird and unusual to see this come from the Bernie camp.



It's actually not that unusual at all. Bernie is a great guy and potentially a good leader, but man, the campaign surrounding him is completely off the rails with extremism and twitter-drama obsessed managers. I wish he would clamp down on some of the campaign's surrounding staff when it comes to messaging to try to unify the party more. Unfortunately, I don't think unification of the party is one of Bernie's top concerns which is going to make for a rough general election regardless of who wins.
 

Kurdel

Member
Nov 7, 2017
12,157
What is she supposed to say?

god forbid that woman try to not lose her job

Come on, leave the volunteer alone.

Be fair to her. She was in a pressure situation where she has to be sensitive to caucus-goers and is surrounded by people and cameras. I'm sure she doesn't genuinely respect that bigot's opinion.

Nah she can fuck off

This civility bullshit is how liberals normalized homophobia before public opinion shifted in the late 00's, shame on this volonteer for saying she "totally respects" this vile woman's opinion.
 

Nothing Loud

Literally Cinderella
Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,987
Nah she can fuck off

This civility bullshit is how liberals normalized homophobia before public opinion shifted in the late 00's, shame on this volonteer for saying she "totally respects" this vile woman's opinion.

She's not a bystander, she's doing a job and she has to be impartial and she's surrounded by cameras in the most contentious caucus in recent memory. She most definitely said the most she could. If she were just another bystander, she probably could have chimed in with something more assertive, but isn't she a caucus rep volunteer?
 

msdstc

Member
Nov 6, 2017
6,876
Nah she can fuck off

This civility bullshit is how liberals normalized homophobia before public opinion shifted in the late 00's, shame on this volonteer for saying she "totally respects" this vile woman's opinion.

So you'd be willing to lose your job and permanently damage your career over calling someone an asshole? Someone that you will never convince otherwise? Give me a fucking break. I fully agree if you're off the job and you see an asshole say something you can tell them to fuck off and go on your way, but her flipping out on that woman gets her in massive trouble. Posts like these are incredibly hypocritical and a bunch of bullshit. I don't know where you work, but I'm wiling to bet you wouldn't stand up to your bosses on plenty of immoral issues.
 

Deleted member 31817

Nov 7, 2017
30,876
Nah she can fuck off

This civility bullshit is how liberals normalized homophobia before public opinion shifted in the late 00's, shame on this volonteer for saying she "totally respects" this vile woman's opinion.
She's working for a presidential campaign
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,090
You're under the delusion that leftists are large enough in number to carry a general election. They aren't, Sanders picking someone like AOC (if she was eligible) would be a horrible decision.
If the Sanders campaign makes it that far I suspect they'll be looking to go against conventional wisdom like so much of their campaign already is.

I've seen Warren and Barbera Lee floating around before and those are probably the type of people the campaign theoretically would be looking at. Especially with the age fear floating around Bernie right now.
 

Jiggy

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
9,287
wherever
With so many candidates and no clear frontrunner I doubt anyone's dropping out anytime soon. We might be headed straight for a brokered convention.
 

Kurdel

Member
Nov 7, 2017
12,157
So you'd be willing to lose your job and permanently damage your career over calling someone an asshole? Someone that you will never convince otherwise? Give me a fucking break. I fully agree if you're off the job and you see an asshole say something you can tell them to fuck off and go on your way, but her flipping out on that woman gets her in massive trouble. Posts like these are incredibly hypocritical and a bunch of bullshit. I don't know where you work, but I'm wiling to bet you wouldn't stand up to your bosses on plenty of immoral issues.

She is a volonteer to a political campaign lead by a gay man, and she cannot even repudiate homphobia without coddling a bigoted piece of shit.

He is running on that fact, his people being so limp in rejecting homophobia is a terrible look.
 
Oct 27, 2017
684
USA
This is such a shit show. They are talking on MSNBC about how some of these locations allowed non-viable candidates to become viable after realignment meaning that some candidates received delegates when they shouldn't have. We actually witnessed this live on MSNBC last night. Warren at one location was non-viable after first count but then after realignment they gained one person and was allowed to be viable. Results are forever tainted.
 

daschysta

Member
Mar 24, 2019
893
Why should pete own any responsibility over something he had no part of? If anything, Bernie has more ownership over this mess than anyone since he pushed for the change of the Caucus rules...
The rules change are fine, there should be more transparency and reporting. It isn't their fault the Iowa Democratic Party is incompetent.
 

SecondNature

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,159
Nah she can fuck off

This civility bullshit is how liberals normalized homophobia before public opinion shifted in the late 00's, shame on this volonteer for saying she "totally respects" this vile woman's opinion.
Not everyone is behind a computer screen and can say anything they want. You're getting hung up on a woman who seems to be around kids (maybe her own), and is put on the spot. Not everyone has the personality or awareness/experience to be in the kind of conversation she found herself in.
 

Deleted member 46493

User requested account closure
Banned
Aug 7, 2018
5,231
With so many candidates and no clear frontrunner I doubt anyone's dropping out anytime soon. We might be headed straight for a brokered convention.
No one's dropping out today, nor should they, regardless of how they did. Same with NH. I expect a few dropouts (as in, real candidates dropping out not those always polling low) after Super Tuesday.
 

Deleted member 31817

Nov 7, 2017
30,876
She is a volonteer to a political campaign lead by a gay man, and she cannot even repudiate homphobia without coddling a bigoted piece of shit.

He is running on that fact, his people being so limp in rejecting homophobia is a terrible look.
Ok then blame Pete for coddling them, the volunteer has to act as if they're an extension of the candidate and you can't say whatever you want.
 

Rockets

Member
Sep 12, 2018
3,011
83885521_702954560108928_8518712708403560448_n.png
That would be really stupid
 

msdstc

Member
Nov 6, 2017
6,876
She is a volonteer to a political campaign lead by a gay man, and she cannot even repudiate homphobia without coddling a bigoted piece of shit.

He is running on that fact, his people being so limp in rejecting homophobia is a terrible look.

I can damn near guarantee, Pete himself would be fucking livid if she threw a fit in this moment. That woman is vile, the video makes me sick to my stomach, but that volunteer handled it the best she could.
 

LegendofJoe

Member
Oct 28, 2017
12,086
Arkansas, USA
If the Sanders campaign makes it that far I suspect they'll be looking to go against conventional wisdom like so much of their campaign already is.

I've seen Warren and Barbera Lee floating around before and those are probably the type of people the campaign theoretically would be looking at. Especially with the age fear floating around Bernie right now.

Both Warren and Lee are in their early 70s, if age is the primary concern neither would be good picks. The primary concern should be winning, the best way to do that would be for Bernie to balance the ticket to assuage people who are hesitant to support him.
 

daschysta

Member
Mar 24, 2019
893
This is such a shit show. They are talking on MSNBC about how some of these locations allowed non-viable candidates to become viable after realignment meaning that some candidates received delegates when they shouldn't have. We actually witnessed this live on MSNBC last night. Warren at one location was non-viable after first count but then after realignment they gained one person and was allowed to be viable. Results are forever tainted.
I was wondering about this, I thought that Unviable candidates had to redistribute themselves or leave? It was happening constantly, and likely altered the results significantly if that isn't allowed.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,179
With so many candidates and no clear frontrunner I doubt anyone's dropping out anytime soon. We might be headed straight for a brokered convention.

I don't see Klobuchar sticking around too much longer. She needed to hit top 3 to have a real shot
Unless she does great in New Hampshire, I think she's out.
 

Finale Fireworker

Love each other or die trying.
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,713
United States
With so many candidates and no clear frontrunner I doubt anyone's dropping out anytime soon. We might be headed straight for a brokered convention.
Are you saying nationally? Because Biden and Sanders are pretty safely our frontrunners in aggregate. Warren, unless she retains her momentum, will probably step aside after Super Tuesday and nobody else (at the moment) is a viable competitive candidate.

Things can definitely change and maybe Bloomberg will manage to displace Biden or something crazy like that but from where we are standing now I'd still make the best guess above.
 

Kurdel

Member
Nov 7, 2017
12,157
I can damn near guarantee, Pete himself would be fucking livid if she threw a fit in this moment. That woman is vile, the video makes me sick to my stomach, but that volunteer handled it the best she could.

Of course, Pete is a ghoul he would love to have this womans vote.

Ok then blame Pete for coddling them, the volunteer has to act as if they're an extension of the candidate and you can't say whatever you want.

Don't worry, I can do both and feel quite confortable.
 
Nov 1, 2017
3,201
This is such a shit show. They are talking on MSNBC about how some of these locations allowed non-viable candidates to become viable after realignment meaning that some candidates received delegates when they shouldn't have. We actually witnessed this live on MSNBC last night. Warren at one location was non-viable after first count but then after realignment they gained one person and was allowed to be viable. Results are forever tainted.

This is allowed. From Wikipedia: "Once viability is determined, participants have roughly another 30 minutes to realign: although supporters of viable candidates are locked in to their choice, the supporters of inviable candidates may find a viable candidate to support, join together with supporters of another inviable candidate to secure a delegate for one of the two, or abstain."

Also, the exact situation you described happened at my precinct but we weren't on MSNBC afaik
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,471
Just to expand off of the coin flip theme. Was listening to Sam Seder last night and one of the callers was at a site where only Bernie and Warren were viable. For the realignment, apparently all the supporters of the other candidates (Biden, Booty, Yang, Klob) pooled together and literally just pulled a name (either Bernie or Warren) out of a hat.

Democracy, amirite
 
Oct 25, 2017
9,053
This is such a shit show. They are talking on MSNBC about how some of these locations allowed non-viable candidates to become viable after realignment meaning that some candidates received delegates when they shouldn't have. We actually witnessed this live on MSNBC last night. Warren at one location was non-viable after first count but then after realignment they gained one person and was allowed to be viable. Results are forever tainted.
I was wondering about this, I thought that Unviable candidates had to redistribute themselves or leave? It was happening constantly, and likely altered the results significantly if that isn't allowed.

It influenced maybe a handful of the 7000 delegates, and was in line with how some of the previous caucuses were run.

Thems the breaks for having a fucking head count system at 1700 locations. There is not the remotest chance that everything goes smoothly in an eight-way race.
 

Kurdel

Member
Nov 7, 2017
12,157
Not everyone is behind a computer screen and can say anything they want. You're getting hung up on a woman who seems to be around kids (maybe her own), and is put on the spot. Not everyone has the personality or awareness/experience to be in the kind of conversation she found herself in.

When you are working for a gay man that is campaining on that fact, you need to do better than "If someone would cancel their vote for him over his homosexuality, it is important to make her feel understood and accepted first. Than try and deprogram decades of bigotry on the spot" lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.