By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Official 2020 US Election: Democratic Party Discussion

https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-poll-2020-new-hampshire-election-primary-1485364

According to this poll, Sanders is not only ahead in New Hampshire, he leads conservatives and moderates there. People may underestimate how much Sanders can unite people across ideological divides.



Around the Network
Moren said:
I think Sanders has this primary in the bag. NH is his, and the non-Sanders candidates have Steyer to deal with later, and Bloomberg after that.

I believe the majority of Democrats and Americans prefer a non-populist, center-left approach, but that faction of the party is irreparably split.

What's been most frustrating is Pete. He will never be president. Not now, not later, not ever. He'd likely lose the African American vote to Steve King.
And despite this, despite the lack of qualifications, despite his abysmal connection to minority voters - his ego, sense of entitlement and vanity are more important than his values and his principles. I've never had a "I deserve to be president" vibe coming off as strongly as his. And he won't care once the primary is over.

I had predicted Amy would drop out the day after Iowa, but I guess she's going at it for a while too. I admire her determination, but she's just acting as a spoiler by this point. The "Klobuchar surge" was real, just not in the way anyone expected.

I think enough has been said about Bloomberg. I just hope they annihilate him in the next debate if he decides to go, or empty chair him if he doesn't.

Could you explain the bolded, a little more? I don't know much about him beyond his policy stances, which I like. What baggage does he have that makes you think the bolded is true? What happened to give people this idea of him? 



Cerebralbore101 said:
Moren said:
He'd likely lose the African American vote to Steve King.
And despite this, despite the lack of qualifications, despite his abysmal connection to minority voters - his ego, sense of entitlement and vanity are more important than his values and his principles.

Could you explain the bolded, a little more? I don't know much about him beyond his policy stances, which I like. What baggage does he have that makes you think the bolded is true? What happened to give people this idea of him? 

I was obviously exaggerating the Steve King line, but yeah.

As far I understand, race relations in South Bend (where he used to be mayor) were pretty poor, and there even was a police chief scandal at one point during his tenure. So having little connection to the only AA constituents you've ever had is already a very shaky start.

I don't think he helped his case during the initial months of his campaign. You can't build non-existing relations overnight (and even Steyer seems to be far more effective at connecting with black South Carolina voters). From the "fake endorsements" to the stock photo from Africa, he seemed to try to force the appearance to be liked, rather than being legitimately liked.

And I can't judge the court of public opinion, and it could be the minority voters were already firmly behind Biden and Sanders and had appetite for little else, but even among staffers, there were accusations that they were chosen as tokens for his campaign. If the public perceives this as patronizing, it only furthers his disconnect among non-white voters.

I was on team Pete until it became apparent he had no shot at the nomination. This is not coming from me, but from pretty much every analyst and model in existence. Even when he was "victorious" in Iowa, models basically collapsed Biden, skyrocketed Sanders, and had little movement for Pete.

Hence my second line (which is more of a personal opinion). He has no path to the nomination, but he'll continue to run sinking other more viable candidates (yes, I believe, even after Monday, that Biden and Warren are far more viable than Pete). I don't think he is being true to his vision of America if he understands this fact and chooses to willfully ignore it.



So, as the results of the last precincts trickle in and it look more and more likely that Bernie Sanders could eventually claim victory, … Tom Perez calls for a recount:

The DNC seemingly does everything to avoid declaring Sanders a winner of Iowa at a time it might have impact on momentum.

Sanders himself apparently calls sort of victory:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UI5jnlcdMy0

EDIT: In the video above, a reporter asked why we should believe Sanders victory speech, if Mayor Pete is touting his voctory for days now. Sanders simply answers that he has 6000 more votes.

Last edited by Mnementh - on 06 February 2020

3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

After all of his shenanigans and getting caught with the most shady crap ever, it turns out he's behind the recount in the end because the satellite caucuses which were heavily people of colour are the deciding factor to give the win to Bernie. Mayor cheat can't stop cheating.



Follow my Gaming and Graphics Business on facebook and on Twitter:

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=101878997952596&ref=br_rs

https://twitter.com/KellyGGWD

Around the Network
uran10 said:

After all of his shenanigans and getting caught with the most shady crap ever, it turns out he's behind the recount in the end because the satellite caucuses which were heavily people of colour are the deciding factor to give the win to Bernie. Mayor cheat can't stop cheating.

So, SDEs not reflecting the popular vote is fair, but allocating SDEs from satellite caucuses isn't fair? Does Pete's campaign have a speck of self awareness here? 



Kyle's thoughts on Iowa.



Follow my Gaming and Graphics Business on facebook and on Twitter:

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=101878997952596&ref=br_rs

https://twitter.com/KellyGGWD

Jaicee said:

We now (finally) have 97% of the results in and it is now clear that Bernie Sanders has won the popular vote. As of this count, he is leading in the popular vote by a percentage point and a half, with 26.5% of the vote, compared to an even 25% for his nearest rival, Pete Buttigieg, even after voters had the opportunity to go with their second-choice preferences. (His lead before that realignment was larger.) If current trends continue, Sanders will also likely get the most delegates out of Iowa. (The Wikipedia page lays this stuff out the most clearly, I think, and is regularly updated.) These results, together with the sheer margin of Joe Biden's defeat (fourth place in both the actual vote and delegate count) indicate that Bernie Sanders has a strong chance of becoming the nominee! That's because the neoliberals seem to be more divided in their preferences, splitting their votes three ways in this contest, and four ways in the national polling, compared with a two-way split in the progressive camp. That comparative division has just landed Sanders a win he didn't have in 2016, at least by the most basic metric anyway.

Also, @tsogud endeavored to doubt me on the approximate turnout numbers earlier, questioning what my sources could possibly be. My source was the Iowa State Democratic Party itself, which projected total turnout based on 25% of the voting locations reporting, and with 97% of the results in now, we can indeed see that the total turnout will, in fact, prove to be almost identical to that of 2016. With 97% of the results in, 168,685 votes are accounted for, compared to 171,517 who voted in the Iowa Democratic Caucus in 2016. As much is not an auspicious sign of where the presidential election might go regardless of who the Democratic nominee winds up being.

Anyway, I'd like to momentarily point out an interesting "coincidence" that I have observed in the delegate allocations so far, based, again, on 97% of the results being in:

Candidates with larger delegate share than vote share:

Buttigieg: 25% of votes, 26.2% of delegates
Biden: 13.7% of votes, 15.8% of delegates

Candidates with same delegate share as vote share:

Klobuchar: 12.2% of votes, 12.2% of delegates
Yang: 1% of votes, 1% of delegates

Candidates with smaller delegate share than vote share:

Sanders: 26.5% of votes, 26.1% of delegates
Warren: 20.3% of votes, 18.5% of delegates

Isn't it an interesting coincidence that the discrepancies just happen to align with ideologies?

It was an honest ask because I really didn't see anything at that point in time, as it was still early and we had barely any results.



 

Should Warren drop out right now, and if so, who should she endorse?



 

Bernie with the Receipts. He's not playing this time around:



Follow my Gaming and Graphics Business on facebook and on Twitter:

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=101878997952596&ref=br_rs

https://twitter.com/KellyGGWD