Not shocking. They have similar audiences - affluent or suburban whites. The primary appeal for both to this crowd is "they're smart".
-
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
Not shocking. They have similar audiences - affluent or suburban whites. The primary appeal for both to this crowd is "they're smart".
The Bernie camp, in setting up the satellite caucuses in the first place, wrote up the rules for how delegates should be awarded. It appears I'm racist because I think those agreed-upon rules should just be followed?
But in this thread people are saying Pete should move on and that it doesn't matter anyway because Sanders got the minority vote, which should be the only focus. Funny how that wasn't the line of thought when Hillary killed Bernie with POC back in 2016.
Maybe a moral victory. By the measure that has traditionally counted until this year (SDEs), he lost by a little bit. By actual pledged delegate count, it's a tie. By popular vote, he won by a little bit. Either side can point to one of those and claim victory, but in the end, the actual pledged delegate count is what will matter, and neither side 'won' that.
To me, the bigger 'win' is Biden's underperformance. So much for Biden's inevitability going forward.
One of the questions leading up to this has been what portion of Warren's supporters are actually progressives and which are centrist types who have clinged onto her as a last ditch effort to avoid Sanders. Make of that what you will.
I'm glad Bernie came out and declared victory. There's no way you can let Pete be the only one claiming victory in this clusterfuck.
I mean if it was reversed it would be a terrible move by Bernie to try and get a small sde win by a technicality at the expanse minorities.
I would think how many national delegates you get would be the most important since that's what actually determines the nominee, but maybe that's crazy 🤷♂️
The problem isn't they didn't follow the rules, as they aren't clear. The problem is the rules have two interpretations. If the interpretation wasn't going to decide the contest, it wouldn't be an issue (at least as not as big of one).
Pausing with one satellite caucuses remaining, and then deciding which interpretation you're going to go with is basically a moratorium for them on who they think should win.
It would be political malpractice for him not to bring it up. Iowa exists as first to vote with a caucus at the expense of minorities in the first place.
No the IDP wrote the rules for this, and badly it would seem.
Does 83 year old Bernie Sanders run for re-election?
or would he endorse someone else in 2024?
or would he endorse someone else in 2024?
Iowa's about momentum, and it looks like Bernie is getting it. Pete and Bernie are getting the same amount of delegates anyway.
Iowa has 24 of the national delegates. To win in first round of the primary you need just under 2000. The only reason that Iowa matters at all is that it can be used as a poll going forward.
although i am now imagining the nightmare situation where Bernie loses the 1st round by 1 delegate
OP
OP
Still nothing, huh?
Iowa.
Iowa.
Literally no part of this is good for the Iowa caucuses. Everything could be (and frankly I still think is) entirely above board and it'd still be a nigh-unprecedented trainwreck. This is very likely the last ever Iowa caucus.
Choice A: Bitch and Win Nobody will remember the bitching in two weeks when they're looking at a map with the entire state in your colors.
Choice B: Maybe win or tie anyway...?
Again, Iowa as a representation of the nation going first with a caucus is already fucking minorities in the party. Using it as a barometer of popular opinion is already a fucking over of minorities.
Appears to me that Pete is getting the bigger bump in the most recent polls of NH I've seen?
Ok, but how can a first choice vote be considered the most important thing here? Final SDE is typically how the media calls a winner, not first choice, so that metric isn't gonna get a candidate meaningful traction in the media and national delegates aren't awarded on that vote either, ya?
Again that's not political malpractice. Political malpractice would be if the Iowa DP made that, not Bernie.
I love AOC but let's not get ahead of ourselves. Wayyy too young.
Smart doesn't mean anything in and of itself, that's the issue. Characteristics are meaningless if they're not being put to use for the right causes. Warren's good, Pete's bad. I don't care if he can speak 7 languages.
It's kind of incredible the corner the IDP has backed themselves into now. They're going to have to make a choice to interpret their rules one way or another, and that interpretation is very likely going to decide who wins the most SDEs.
Whoever they now pick they're guaranteed themselves to generate an incredible amount of ill will, on top of their manifest incompetence in running the caucus in the first place, in an environment where people are questioning why they even get to go first at all given they're an extremely small, unrepresentative state.
The only hope they've really got is that the next few weeks, months and years are such a shit show that everybody forgets about this anyway, and by the time 2024/2028 rolls around it's all a distant memory.
Whoever they now pick they're guaranteed themselves to generate an incredible amount of ill will, on top of their manifest incompetence in running the caucus in the first place, in an environment where people are questioning why they even get to go first at all given they're an extremely small, unrepresentative state.
The only hope they've really got is that the next few weeks, months and years are such a shit show that everybody forgets about this anyway, and by the time 2024/2028 rolls around it's all a distant memory.
The DNC set up a committee that wrote up a bunch of recommendations for caucuses and superdelegates to appease the "concerns" of the Bernie camp: https://desmoinesregister.com/story...absentee-voting-public-vote-totals/934913001/
Iowa is not gonna be this momentum creator.
But if it makes y'all feel better, New Hampshire is definitely gonna be the momentum creator, and Bernie Sanders is poised to win.
now, question, what is the conversation if Pete pulls the upset?
But if it makes y'all feel better, New Hampshire is definitely gonna be the momentum creator, and Bernie Sanders is poised to win.
now, question, what is the conversation if Pete pulls the upset?
I don't know how anyone can take the SDEs seriously with this satellite nonsense, the coin flip nonsense, and all the other nonsense.
Yes Sanders wanted the satellite caucuses held.
He did not specify how they were to be weighted. That was for the IDP to decide and what will now be decisive.
Iowa's never been about momentum. The winner of Iowa's Democratic caucus has had about a coin flip chance to win the nomination since they started doing them. On the Republican side, President Ted Cruz is sure to have his own input on how caucus momentum helped propel him to his party's nomination in 2016. The only thing Iowa is consistently good for is determining how many of Iowa's pledged delegates end up going to the candidate that Iowa's voters chose in their caucus.
The results of NH, on the other hand, are much more interesting from a momentum standpoint. In that case, Bernie is still the frontrunner (and will likely remain so), but I'd be a little concerned about Bernie's overall frontrunner status if Pete pulls off a surprise win there.
Last edited:
If Pete pulls through in New Hampshire i'd say Brokered Convention happens and I promise you nobody wants that (except Bloomberg)
The conversation is then that the chance of a contested convention raises a ton. Probably better than 1/3rd chance (at around 1/4 chance already).
She turns 35 a month before the 2024 general. Would she be eligible to run before that or does that not matter as long as you're 35 when you're set to take the office?
Has any 20th century president run on the basis of being one term only?
The amount of time she would be in the House at that point >>>>> Pete's record.
Won the popular vote. If he "loses," it's based on SDEs, but even then, he and Pete're likely walking away with the same number of actual delegates.
- Status