In the primary process the whole entire point is to gain delegates. And based one the results, the most likely outcome is a tie in national delegates. So Bernie didn't win.
I dunno if this is the actual dilemma, though.idk about you guys. but I would rather have a president who tries to pass things I like and fail than one who doesn't even try???
Not really. Depends a lot on implementation and public relations. Republicans are very happy to take it in the teeth if it makes Democrats and minorities miserable.Are we considering all of those EOs equal because I keep stipulating popularity for a reason. If you improve peoples material conditions and then immediately take it away you don't think they'll form the understanding that something good was taken from them and then they agree that they want it back?
Functionally they tied in terms of delegates, but nobody likes a tie.In the primary process the whole entire point is to gain delegates. And based one the results, the most likely outcome is a tie in national delegates. So Bernie didn't win.
Butti nuked NH with ads just as much as Iowa, so that bit's not over. And he does have a decent warchest still. For Biden, his demos are more not-Iowa, but yeah, the media is loving the narrative of a falling Biden atm and that hurts him. We'll see how that works out in Nevada and SC.As a Bernie supporter going into Iowa, my main fear was Biden, not Pete. As far as I'm concerned, Iowa was a moral victory for me because Biden just sunk (lower than Warren, jesus). I really don't care how the delegates are split up, and everyone tells me Pete swamped Iowa with ads so I don't think he can repeat this performance unless his war chest is just that big. Biden becomes more of a passing nightmare with every hour.
let's forget about Iowa. Bernie and Pete did great; Biden flopped. They might never get all the issues in the data fixed but a fraction of an SDE here and there is not going to change the results. Ban caucuses.
Despite Sanders leading by thousands in the popular vote. I think that's the point those posters were getting at.
let's forget about Iowa. Bernie and Pete did great; Biden flopped. They might never get all the issues in the data fixed but a fraction of an SDE here and there is not going to change the results. Ban caucuses.
Functionally they tied in terms of delegates, but nobody likes a tie.
Bernie received more votes.
Bernie won.
Watching these town halls, the contrast between the questions Pete & Warren received is incredible. The tone also just seems drastically different. Warren was constantly getting pushed by Cuomo on tough questions regarding gun control, health care & immigration. Meanwhile Cuomo's treating this like a stand-up set & has barely pushed Pete.
That's the rule for actual elections, but for a caucus... hell if I know.Don't campaigns have to pay for recounts? Like that Jill Stein kickstarter?
Seriously it would be a waste of money to do it for a symbolic victory that doesn't net any national delegates.
The bigger picture - if Biden and Warren collapse....who benefits the most Sanders or Buttigieg?????
The bigger picture - if Biden and Warren collapse....who benefits the most Sanders or Buttigieg?????
Elections really aren't that complicated you guys. How did the US manage to fuck up this entire process so thoroughly?
The bigger picture - if Biden and Warren collapse....who benefits the most Sanders or Buttigieg?????
That is a ridiculous comment from Sanders. Anybody who feels like that is a remote possibility is being delusional.
McConnell won't vote on Chuck Grassleys prescription drug bill, one that the president of McConnell's own party gives lip service to in his campaign speeches and has widespread support among McConnells own constituents.
I mean... I guess? Whatever gets you through the night, is alright
That's... not Warren's planIf that's the case then Biden and Warren's plan of crafting the perfect bipartisan bill to sway the senate is even more of a fantasy.
Am I the only one who doesn't know who this Pete guy is or how to pronounce his name?
Biden people will split among Pete and Bernie so that's a wash.The bigger picture - if Biden and Warren collapse....who benefits the most Sanders or Buttigieg?????
pete. More Warren supporters went to him in Iowa than to Sanders.
The errors in the data (that are unlikely to be corrected) favor sanders to overtake Pete, and we have video of suspicious coin toss wins for Pete.
It was pretty obviously stolen, but it won't matter in the long run.
There's literally no argument that Pete won based on the data we have.
Nnnnot really?It's not as bird brained as Biden but isn't her plan to slow roll watered down programs to garner support to eventually get M4A?
There is, though. Like, a very close race on SDEs that Pete won is at least an argument, even if you don't agree with it.There's literally no argument that Pete won based on the data we have.
People are a little too certain of this I think. It's not unprecedented for a candidate to be doing poorly nationally (including with black voters) and then do well in early contests and build the coalition once people are paying more attention.Your question just happened to be answered a mere second before, but to add:
It has been clear for a year that Buttigieg's voters are extremely limited to just a few states due to the demographics of his voters.
You can make some educated guesses based on platform and policy, but that's all. It's just guesswork....actually, how do we even know (or reasonably exptrapolate) this stuff about people moving to specific candidates when we just have the totals and no actual data on individuals shifting?
Lol no
All 4 of them probably go 75 percent to bernie and 25 percent back to not votingBiden people will split among Pete and Bernie so that's a wash.
Warren people will split among Bernie and Pete.
Here's the real unmentioned wild card: YangGang
Do they go to Bernie or do they disappear? If they go to Bernie they can push him over Pete but they're just as likely to sit it out, I don't get those people.
Nnnnot really?
Her plan is to pass a public option more or less immediately, work on other legislative priorities, and then circle back around to M4A later rather than spending all her political capital on it and probably not getting anything else done. If it works out, the first-term pro-democracy reforms would make it a lot easier to pass anyway.
A difference of less than two SDEs, less than .1%. That's if you trust the methodology, which none of us do.There is, though. Like, a very close race on SDEs that Pete won is at least an argument, even if you don't agree with it.
Oh, sure.The end result is the same, passing anything using political capital in the senate is impossible if Mitch wont even look at something his own party wants.
Hey, that's your argument, that's your argument. Just don't like the idea that there's no argument to be had at all. Makes people act dumb, provokes hostilities, all that.A difference of less than two SDEs, less than .001%. That's if you trust the methodology, which none of us do.
The most charatable thing you can say about Pete in real-world terms is that he tied on delegates.
But Bernie got more votes. Bernie won.
Cuz at this point, either camp asking for a recount is a losing strategy. Both want to claim victory and move on. Dragging this out for even longer in order to gain bragging rights doesn't really help anybodyDunno why the campaign wouldn't also ask for a recount if this is the route they're going to go
I'm up for arguing whether Bernie won or tied. That's fair game.Oh, sure.
Let me be clear, if we don't get the Senate nobody's passing anything. That should be priority #2.
Hey, that's your argument, that's your argument. Just don't like the idea that there's no argument to be had at all. Makes people act dumb, provokes hostilities, all that.
Discrepancies are all part of the process in Iowa. Guarantee you some hurt Pete, some helped him. The satellite caucus thing sticks out. If they've landed on a 2-delegate lead, that's what he's got. You want to say that Bernie got the popular vote and that's what matters, go for it. But please don't say that there's no argument at all.
Yuuuuup.Cuz at this point, either camp asking for a recount is a losing strategy. Both want to claim victory and move on. Dragging this out for even longer in order to gain bragging rights doesn't really help anybody