• 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.

danm999

Member
Oct 29, 2017
17,128
Sydney
I couldn't take the waiting, so i decided to crunch some numbers.

Everything is a ballpark guess, so take it with a grain of salt, but basically 80 votes net you a SDE.

Of the remaining precincts, excluding the CD1, Bernie will probably get 1.530 votes and Pete 1.340. Roughly a 200 vote difference. That´s 2.5 SDEs in favor of Sanders, if the outstanding votes in those precincts follow the same rate they have followed so far in each county.

We know the DNC might change how they count satellites, but:

Right now 3.4 difference, Bernie gets and extra 2.5 and the margin stays at 0.9 for Pete.

If he loses 4 SDEs if they change the values of satellites, then Bernie needs to get 5 SDEs on CD1 to win.

So we just need to figure out the reports on CD1 caucuses to see if this will happen or not.

i have bad news for you
 

Deleted member 31817

Nov 7, 2017
30,876
I'm watching Bernie's town hall—he's great as usual—but he had a particular answer that really bothered me.

Someone asked how he'll get his legislation passed, and he essentially said "I can't do it alone! We'll need millions of people to join in and pressure they're senators to support my policies!" Which... basically means he'd be another lame duck president unable to accomplish what's urgently needed.

Just like this recent Onion article predicts:

https://politics.theonion.com/sanders-makes-last-minute-appeal-to-moderates-by-remind-1841494235

I could have sworn he was one of the candidates open to doing away with the filibuster. Am I remember this incorrectly?
This is why we need Warren.
 

Steel

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
18,220
I couldn't take the waiting, so i decided to crunch some numbers.

Everything is a ballpark guess, so take it with a grain of salt, but basically 80 votes net you a SDE.

Of the remaining precincts, excluding the CD1, Bernie will probably get 1.530 votes and Pete 1.340. Roughly a 200 vote difference. That´s 2.5 SDEs in favor of Sanders, if the outstanding votes in those precincts follow the same rate they have followed so far in each county.

We know the DNC might change how they count satellites, but:

Right now 3.4 difference, Bernie gets an extra 2.5 and the margin stays at 0.9 for Pete.

If he loses 4 SDEs if they change the values of satellites, then Bernie needs to get 5 SDEs on CD1 to win.

So we just need to figure out the reports on CD1 caucuses to see if this will happen or not.
You wasted your time. The results are in. Buttgieg kept the delegate lead, just barely, without the satellite caucus rule problem being addressed.
 

shoyz

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
531
NYTimes website says 99% reporting and I'm seeing people mention IA-1 is still missing?

Were the errors reported on Twitter fixed? That supposedly had a 1~2 swing in Bernie's favor.
 

Blue Skies

Banned
Mar 27, 2019
9,224
Pete "America's Mayor" Buttigieg townhall next.


bernies was good
I just disagree with his belief that people marching is gonna get his legislation through notch mcconnels senate.
Also, the free college idea needs work and he had a horrid answer for it.
How WILL schools deal with the sudden influx of students?

wont Private schools just become more prestigious and further divide the classes?

I just dotn think you can do all of these, M4A and Tuition free college and $15 minimum wage
 

jakomocha

Member
Oct 29, 2017
2,574
California
Honestly Pete winning by 1 SDE (a useless metric) and losing to Bernie by thousands of votes should be considered a win for Bernie. It's so lame if Pete is gonna get more delegates than Bernie from Iowa.
 

danm999

Member
Oct 29, 2017
17,128
Sydney
There are errors that are against Bernie that haven't been fixed.

mrbones.jpg
 

Blue Skies

Banned
Mar 27, 2019
9,224
Pete just got told he won on live television

When where you when America's mayor became America's president
 
Oct 26, 2017
3,532
I'm watching Bernie's town hall—he's great as usual—but he had a particular answer that really bothered me.

Someone asked how he'll get his legislation passed, and he essentially said "I can't do it alone! We'll need millions of people to join in and pressure they're senators to support my policies!" Which... basically means he'd be another lame duck president unable to accomplish what's urgently needed.

Just like this recent Onion article predicts:

https://politics.theonion.com/sanders-makes-last-minute-appeal-to-moderates-by-remind-1841494235

I could have sworn he was one of the candidates open to doing away with the filibuster. Am I remember this incorrectly?

Now, I don't think that's fair. Even in an optimal situation with a Democratic majority in both houses, I doubt every rep or senator is going to blindly follow along with whatever legislation Sanders demands. The moderates will need to be convinced and compromises will have to be made but I have no reason to believe that Sanders wouldn't be successful as a president.
 

Xaszatm

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,903
So, Perez is still a bastard for asking for a recount, right? Despite Pete winning with the current numbers?

For asking for a recount before the votes were finished just when it looked like he might have lost? Yes. I don't even care about a possible recount at this point, even if it flips it to Bernie.
 

Toxi

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
17,550
I really honestly don't think it'll be a huge issue. Mostly, I'm more worried about the people who see the "if the DNC ratfucks Bernie don't vote" pieces and read "if Bernie loses it means the DNC ratfucked him so don't vote." That's what's keeping me up, and I know for a fact that I've seen people arguing it so please don't try to tell me they don't exist, lol.
I'm more worried about how some people are prepping themselves into the mindset where every scenario in which Bernie loses it must always be some confounding factor.

That is not a healthy mindset to have about any person or ideology.
 

jml

Member
Mar 9, 2018
4,783
lol, Nate Cohn of the NYT/Upshot just said "there's no chance networks can make a call off of this info" and then a minute later CNN calls it for Pete. Good work CNN
 

Haubergeon

Member
Jan 22, 2019
2,270
lol, Nate Cohn of the NYT/Upshot just said "there's no chance networks can make a call off of this info" and then a minute later CNN calls it for Pete. Good work CNN

At least NBC had the decency to admit there are all sorts of errors and it's way too close to ever really say anytime soon, at least, who "won" officially from their perspective. CNN of course leaps on a very coincidentally well timed results report to declare it outright with Pete himself. Of course.
 

Toxi

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
17,550
Fuck, .1%. Are you serious. I know it's statistically insignificant but still.
 

lenovox1

Member
Oct 26, 2017
8,995
I'm watching Bernie's town hall—he's great as usual—but he had a particular answer that really bothered me.

Someone asked how he'll get his legislation passed, and he essentially said "I can't do it alone! We'll need millions of people to join in and pressure they're senators to support my policies!" Which... basically means he'd be another lame duck president unable to accomplish what's urgently needed.

Just like this recent Onion article predicts:

https://politics.theonion.com/sanders-makes-last-minute-appeal-to-moderates-by-remind-1841494235

I could have sworn he was one of the candidates open to doing away with the filibuster. Am I remember this incorrectly?

He has never supported removing the filibuster. He always says, "No," when asked directly.

What he does support is using backdoor methods, like the budget reconciliation.

 

Deleted member 18360

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,844
I'm more worried about how some people are prepping themselves into the mindset where every scenario in which Bernie loses it must always be some confounding factor.

That is not a healthy mindset to have about any person or ideology.

Well this was more of a case of plausible motive and opportunity imo. Like if they were going to try to diffuse any momentum that can really only be done right away before a narrative of electability plays out from him winning early states.


They still haven't corrected the mistakes: https://twitter.com/Taniel/status/1225597908369780742

Why do they keep compounding on the mistakes?

I was wondering about this, too.
 

Killthee

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,169
I'm watching Bernie's town hall—he's great as usual—but he had a particular answer that really bothered me.

Someone asked how he'll get his legislation passed, and he essentially said "I can't do it alone! We'll need millions of people to join in and pressure they're senators to support my policies!" Which... basically means he'd be another lame duck president unable to accomplish what's urgently needed.

Just like this recent Onion article predicts:

https://politics.theonion.com/sanders-makes-last-minute-appeal-to-moderates-by-remind-1841494235

I could have sworn he was one of the candidates open to doing away with the filibuster. Am I remember this incorrectly?
Youre remembering incorrectly, Warren is the one advocating for killing the filibuster while Bernie is for it staying the same. His plan for passing legislation is to use reconciliation (which has its own limitations) when possible and to create a grassroots movement for legislation that can't be passed via reconciliation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.