I agree with her, especially on the idea that a lot of this election is set in stone unless the Republican cheat way too hard to be subtle.
-
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.
US PoliEra 2020 |OT 2| Dershowitz says "Quid Pro Quo on the Go?" [See Staff Post]
- Thread starter TheHunter
- Start date
- Status
I agree with her, especially on the idea that a lot of this election is set in stone unless the Republican cheat way too hard to be subtle.
Bernie is a state heavily reliant on AA voters and Bernie's the worse of the two with that group by a mile.
Yeah predicting one election is not impressive. I want to believe, but nah, not enough credibility yet.
can someone help me, as a non-american who's very confused by this Iowa caucus: did Buttigieg actually won? is this confirmed by the DNC? because the media in my country is putting out news and profiles about Pete and talking about how it's a surprise and etc, but then i enter here and there was people talking about Bernie being tied or that actually he won over Pete, so i got really confused
Maybe if I put it this way it will give some comfort: if Bernie, Buttigieg, or Bloomberg beats back an authoritarian monster through the artful use of fat-shaming, it wouldn't even rank in the top-ten worst compromises the postwar Democratic Party ever made. In fact, we should carve those fucking fat jokes into the side of a mountain for future generations to soberly reflect upon as a warning to rightwing demagogues.
Last edited:
I disagree. He's worse with the core electorate of black voters who will turn out for any democratic nominee (aside from maybe Pete), but he does better with the young black voters who feel disenchanted by current politics. The latter vote is a more important swing group (unfortunately).
FYI, I'm not biased here because I prefer Biden as a President 100x over Bernie. I can't stand Bernie at all. I am absolutely hating that I am saying Bernie is a better candidate than Biden, but it's important to look beyond your ideology and personal interests here. Biden's campaign is flailing hard, and he's not going to make it to November at his current pace. No one really believes in him. His general election polling numbers have been obliterated in the past year, and they're only going to keep going down because his support really isn't as strong as it seems.
Oh my god, they are doing this into response to please their king who did a short monologue of it during his speech yesterday.
Going the Hillary Clinton route really worked out well for her in Wisconsin, Michigan, etc.. Why shouldn't he not repeat it?
And I thought CPAC couldn't get any worse after booking Zironia and Polyester or Nigel on there.
It's a surprise in so that Pete over performed expectations. It's a virtual tie for SDEs.
That said there are at least 14 discrepancies in the data that the Sanders camp have pointed out which give him a 2.5 SDE gain which would put him over the top even on SDEs (currently the SDE difference is 1.5 with Pete on top). This would make Sanders the definitive winner of Iowa and he has claimed victory on this.
Bernie leads in total raw votes both for first votes, the 2nd allocation and final as well.
But all of this matters very little now... the damage has been done. Both Pete and Bernie got the surge in polls that was desired going into NH but the biggest story (aside from the debacle itself) is Biden under performing hard and he was the front runner of this race. So despite being a debacle the results ended up having their desired effects though a bit muffled.
NH is now the real starting battleground and whoever wins this will have momentum. Eyes on Sanders to hold the lead and Buttiegeg to cause an upset.
Aside from being Joe Biden his campaign infrastructure is also another worry of mine were he to win. He strikes me as the type that wouldn't buy into hi-tech stuff
I'm just going to say a flat 18.
Bitecofer is my damn hero. I hope she's right.
I'll believe it when I see it. Every time it has been speculated that Bernie or Warren will go on the offensive during a debate, they don't.
I won't be surprised at all if this stays on Twitter and goes nowhere else.
Just got a text from Pete's campaign asking if I was gonna vote for him in our primary. I said no and that I was going for forma. Then he asked if Pete was in my top five. Pretty weird.
I don't entirely get why people don't take DEVAL over Butti or Bidie or Bloomie. He has legit governing experience and isn't a ramshackle mess who's liable to croak or get me-too'ed at any moment.
I guess it's because no one knows he's running.
But in other words:
GIVE THE DEVAL HIS DUE
Maybe don't enter into the race after 10 months and like 8 debates have already taken place?I don't entirely get why people don't take DEVAL over Butti or Bidie. He has legit experience and isn't a ramshackle mess who's liable to croak dor get me-too'ed at any moment.
I guess it's because no one knows he's running.
But in other words:
GIVE THE DEVAL HIS DUE
No respect for later jumpers.
It's kinda funny how the moderate side of the Democrats are messing this up for themselves. This was such an easy path to nomination for them and people even want a moderate candidate .. yet now you got too many cooks in the kitchen and you got Mayo Pete eating Biden's lunch.
Certainly form my twitter news feed he doesn't exist. Steyer barely does, and Bloomberg a little more than him.
It's confusing because the rules around the Iowa caucus don't make any reasonable sense and the result of decades of overly complex rules stacked on top of each other. The gist of it thought is that Bernie won the popular vote and Pete won the delegate allocation by a fraction of a point. You can mostly consider it a tie imo.
I don't disagree, but I bet that most people in this thread would feel better about Deval as president than Mayor Pete or Bloomberg.
There's quite a few people still identifying enough SDE errors to make it so that it's a Sanders squeak win, but even so at this point I doubt it matters. NH debate is tonight and then the vote next week. We'll get results from Iowa soon enough but everyone's so confused that I can't imagine it impacts anymore than it already ha shuffled things about. Whatever chance at a massive impact Iowa had, they squandered it and continue to embarrass themselves to this day.
You know, I remember a couple months ago jokingly saying Butti was the candidate best positioned to pull off an Obama, and... I can honestly see it happening. Fuck.
That was exactly my takeaway. She has a compelling argument, but so were the counter arguments. For all of the arguments over the quality of election analysis and prediction, I think there is an element to the whole thing that is more art than science. The data scientist may hate that idea, like she said she would be a shit scientist if she let a handful of anecdotal interviews sway her, but at some level you need to have your pulse on electorate in ways that the data can't capture. Sometimes the data can be pointing one way, but if you have your ear on the ground and your nose out of the books you can feel how the winds are blowing. In 2016, to me, it was increasingly clear that the winds were blowing at Trump's back. Nothing could sink him, his people were ride-or-die, and were feeding off the "us against the world" mentality. I couldn't quantify it, still can't, but it felt to me like there some sort of cosmic narrative was being set up and that we were crashing towards its shocking conclusion. I'm not saying that this un-quantifiable "gut feeling" is appropriate for science, but with politics being so deeply emotional I think data scientist are missing something intangible with their stone-cold approach to predicting outcomes.
Is he saying there are people who didn't even cry as babies?
Shit like this alone should prove Trump is unfit for office and lead to impeachment. But here we are.
He has one major data point in his favor – Democrats haven't won back the White House with a candidate over 50 since... FDR?
He has the financial backing of Obama, and I think a lot of his staff too
If Sanders runs away with it in NH as he currently is in polling, I don't see how Pete continues on this 'next obama momentum' appeal. Guy is six feet under with literally anyone who isn't white. A lot of people were pinning their hopes and dreams on Iowa, now moving to NH with a much less clear narrative going into it. Good luck after that.
Don't you know? Conservative men don't try. They eat nails for breakfast and all that bullshit toxic masculinity stuff.
"Sir, I've never cried in my life, not even as a baby. But when I heard what Shifty Schiff and Nasty Pelussi did to you, our greatest astronaut-president, I wept harder than Chuck Schumer begging AOC to let him keep his senate seat."
Literally forget he exists till he pops out of thin air in random moments, they don't even drag him along for every event which is the oddest thing since they clearly branded him as the singular guy who proves they're 'not racist'
I remember the shit people gave Al Gore for his tall tails (and honestly he does have a problem) but Trump is like an entire new universe of dishonesty. He's physically incapable of telling any story without completely fabricating every aspect of it to make himself look better. I can't imagine how much time it would take a psychologist to accurately diagnose his many personality disorders.
- Status