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.

jviggy43

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
18,184
"The gall" I'm no more responsible for other posters' remarks than you are for those people who engage in harassment and threats online. This line of argument to deflect my expression of sadness into some sort of guilt by association with a random other poster based on nothing more than your presumption of an attack is insulting to say the least.



Warren still favors m4a, but introduced a transition period before it becomes mandatory. Under her plan you could still choose to be on it the first year it passes. Both she and Sanders have pledged to force pharmaceutical companies to bring prices down in line with what they charge in other developed nations. I can't fault your anger, but giving Trump four more years to fuck over everyone, especially when he has already stated that cuts to medicare and medicaid, is just counterintuitive.



I'll be upset too. I've already said that I think whoever gets the most delegates should win, even if they aren't past the threshold. But whoever the nom is, I will vote. There's too much at stake not to.
I didn't misrepresent anything. Coming in with the "bernie bro rhetoric" on a page where someone wished him death is pretty weak. And then theres ignoring the entire context of the conversation you referred to when bringing them up in here and why its depressing. What should be depressing about that scenario is the DNC ignoring the will of the people over a VP pick and giving Trump scotus picks and the ability to cut social programs. Blaming voters for that is a bad look.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
Your literally responding to a post where Reid says point blank anything less then 50 plus 1 isnt enough for Bernie. Like, come on. He straight up said 40+ isnt good enough and your defending it with a hypothetical that doesnt even work with his own words.
You get to 50 + 1 by convincing super-Ds (if you're in range where they can put you over the top, it's not a hard sell, it's one of the two reasons they exist) or if you're not in that range but you've still got a lot and are the clear frontrunner, you make a deal like everyone else to get you over the hump.

If it's a splattery mess with no obvious frontrunner, it's just gonna end up political Papal Caucus/Fortnite/Poker/Survivor/HungerGames/insert analogy here.
 

fontguy

Avenger
Oct 8, 2018
16,317
This thread is so depressing sometimes. I really hope it isn't a microcosm of Sanders supporters everywhere. Trump getting SCOTUS picks and cutting social programs that people like me rely on to survive because Sanders couldn't win the nomination is pretty disheartening. Reminds me of the poster in the other thread that was talking about voting against Sanders because m4a would put him out of a job, and people were telling him not to be selfish and to think of others.

I'll vote with gusto for any candidate who isn't Bloomberg. If it is Bloomberg, I think I'm only slightly less fucked so I don't know what to do in that event.

Edit: In other news:


I don't even think it would come down to Sanders supporters in this hypothetical tbh. "This person lost the popular vote but you're going to vote for them anyway" is such a severely discouraging and poisonous proposition that it would, I think, depress turnout among average Dem voters to the point that it would guarantee a Republican senate and 4 more years of Trump.

I'm a staunch and annoying socialist, and I would probably still vote for anyone short of Bloomberg. But there are so many people who are almost guaranteed to tune out and just disengage entirely that I don't see how the Democrats could remain a relevant force, even if they could convince Sanders diehards to stay.
I didn't misrepresent anything. Coming in with the "bernie bro rhetoric" on a page where someone wished him death is pretty weak. And then theres ignoring the entire context of the conversation you referred to when bringing them up in here and why its depressing. What should be depressing about that scenario is the DNC ignoring the will of the people over a VP pick and giving Trump scotus picks and the ability to cut social programs. Blaming voters for that is a bad look.

Did Volimar make comments earlier itt that I missed? Because the post you and I replied to seems pretty sincere and noncombative to me.
 

Volimar

volunteer forum janitor
Member
Oct 25, 2017
39,931
I didn't misrepresent anything. Coming in with the "bernie bro rhetoric" on a page where someone wished him death is pretty weak. And then theres ignoring the entire context of the conversation you referred to when bringing them up in here and why its depressing. What should be depressing about that scenario is the DNC ignoring the will of the people over a VP pick and giving Trump scotus picks and the ability to cut social programs. Blaming voters for that is a bad look.


I'm not using "Bernie Bro" rhetoric. That's another false assertion. I came in there expressing my hope that the people in this thread that exclaimed that they'd stay home if Sanders isn't the nom don't represent his supporters at large. And nowhere in this reply are you addressing the unbelievably ridiculous notion that I should not be expressing those concerns because some other poster made some other remark. You constantly do this. You take someone's statement and exaggerate it to an unintended extreme and then try to weaponize it against them. And in this case you even tried to handcuff me to the remarks of some poster I don't even know. You also ignore my other posts in which I agree with the sentiment that Sanders should get the nom even if he doesn't pass the threshold as long as he gets the most votes. And I lament those coming cuts because they will affect me. It's not a hypothetical for people like me. Things might not get better for the poor, elderly, and disabled depending on who the democrat nominee is. They will absolutely get worse under Trump.
 

Volimar

volunteer forum janitor
Member
Oct 25, 2017
39,931
I don't even think it would come down to Sanders supporters in this hypothetical tbh. "This person lost the popular vote but you're going to vote for them anyway" is such a severely discouraging and poisonous proposition that it would, I think, depress turnout among average Dem voters to the point that it would guarantee a Republican senate and 4 more years of Trump.

For sure, even if I have to force myself to, I'll vote for Bloomberg, but he's not going to win the GE. I don't see people turning out for him at all. I can't think of a more polarizing decision that the DNC can make.

Except maybe to give it to Hillary. >.>
 

Deleted member 16657

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,198
God I wanna see some polling data on a brokered convention so badly. What percent of Sanders supporters will abstain if Bernie doesn't get the nom?

I can guarantee that the party is weighing the numbers and seeing if they can win the GE without Bernie.
 
Mar 9, 2018
3,775
n2yAjEFl.png
If he listened to his incredibly stylish wife, Jane Esmeralda Raquel Kristina, he'd know that inequality is in. That's why they call it in-equality.
 

Mekanos

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 17, 2018
44,744
I'm not voting for Bloomberg but after that debate I feel pretty confident that I won't have to. That's my only real line in the sand.

Not sure what I'd do in the event that Bernie has the most delegates but doesn't get the nom, except that I hope the Dems like losing, because whoo boy would they lose.
 

Kayla

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,316
God I wanna see some polling data on a brokered convention so badly. What percent of Sanders supporters will abstain if Bernie doesn't get the nom?

I can guarantee that the party is weighing the numbers and seeing if they can win the GE without Bernie.

What if they'd rather see trump win instead of Bernie getting the nomination? So they'd be okay with risking it with Bloomberg. That's my worry
 

WestEgg

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,050
I came in there expressing my hope that the people in this thread that exclaimed that they'd stay home if Sanders isn't the nom don't represent his supporters at large.
Even assuming everyone does turn out for the nominee despite their initial choice not making it, there's a hell of a difference between a motivated supporter and someone who will reluctantly vote. The former is going to donate, phonebank, canvas, promote on social media, and just be enthusiastic around friends and family, while the latter is a +1 on the results.
 

Volimar

volunteer forum janitor
Member
Oct 25, 2017
39,931
Even assuming everyone does turn out for the nominee despite their initial choice not making it, there's a hell of a difference between a motivated supporter and someone who will reluctantly vote. The former is going to donate, phonebank, canvas, promote on social media, and just be enthusiastic around friends and family, while the latter is a +1 on the results.


I agree.
 

gogosox82

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,385
I'm not voting for Bloomberg but after that debate I feel pretty confident that I won't have to. That's my only real line in the sand.

Not sure what I'd do in the event that Bernie has the most delegates but doesn't get the nom, except that I hope the Dems like losing, because whoo boy would they lose.
I can't see anyone else besides Bernie and Bloomberg winning at this point. Bloomberg with all of his money is a real threat but none else has the money or organization to compete with Bernie.
 

sphagnum

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
16,058
January $$$ results are out, click through to see the rest of the thread. Basically Bernie's on top, Biden still had 7 million in the bank, everyone else was struggling.

 
Oct 27, 2017
11,612
Bandung Indonesia
www.huffpost.com

Elizabeth Warren Is First Democratic Hopeful To Release Medical Records

The Massachusetts senator and presidential candidate is in “excellent health,” Warren’s physician attested.


That's literally 5 basic tests: CBC, BMP, LFT, lipid Panel, thyroid function. You get this in your yearly checkup. It just looks like it's a lot because it's multiple pages. A 2nd year medical student can go through that data in 2 minutes.

The 3 letters from the physicians would have taken MUCH MORE data into account to analyze Bernie's cardiovascular function post-MI and stenting; including analysis of EKG's, echocardiograms, angiograms among many other tests (the 5 above would have likely been drawn multiple times on Bernie during his hospital stay). Those letters are much more comprehensive in answering the pertinent question regarding his health; just because they don't release the granular numbers of his lab results does not mean that Warren's here are more useful.

The ignorance behind this is astounding; Warren actually thinks that she has released more with that document is now attacking Bernie on it, but any clinician knows that this is just pure health illiteracy at play. What are people actually expecting here, to go through each lab value themselves in Bernie's case?


For the record, this is more than enough data to gauge Warren's general health; I would never demand her lifelong medical records.



You definitely can't say because you're speaking out of your league.

This one statement in Bernie's letter "underwent a successful graded exercise treadmill examination...was able to exercise to a level that is approximately 50% higher than other men his age with a similar diagnosis...his level of fitness would be suggestive of favorable outcomes, from a cardiovascular perspective, going forward" provides more relevant information towards medical assessment than the 4 pages of labs that Warren released.

This is a good reply.

Anyone who is out of their league talking about stuff they don't know about should stop showing their ignorance and/or using it to make points for their arguments. All that achieve is to make them look idiotic and dumb.
 

RDreamer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,118
www.vox.com

The slow implosion of Joe Biden’s big bet on South Carolina, explained

Biden is still poised to win the state, but the margin is expected to be much closer than it was before.

What the hell is Biden doing?

If I wanted a centrist to win I would be demanding he just announce he is quitting now but instead I'll just say I'm thoroughly confused about his incompetence.

It was abundantly clear for a year his team was focused on South Carolina so why has he visited the state less than candidates who quit last year?

This is so incompetent it even paints the media in bad light because this was a red flag that should've been reported on back in December, January at the latest.

I knew Biden had less energy than Sanders but even now I'm taken aback by how unmotivated he is to win. If he hadn't competed the primary could've been significantly different among those who quit by January and earlier.
This is why, though he polls better, Biden would be a disaster and would lose to Trump.
 

Deleted member 11413

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
22,961
This thread is so depressing sometimes. I really hope it isn't a microcosm of Sanders supporters everywhere. Trump getting SCOTUS picks and cutting social programs that people like me rely on to survive because Sanders couldn't win the nomination is pretty disheartening. Reminds me of the poster in the other thread that was talking about voting against Sanders because m4a would put him out of a job, and people were telling him not to be selfish and to think of others.

I'll vote with gusto for any candidate who isn't Bloomberg. If it is Bloomberg, I think I'm only slightly less fucked so I don't know what to do in that event.

Edit: In other news:


Er.....the Sanders supporters in this thread aren't suggesting that other candidates dying is a positive, might wanna recalibrate who is bothering you.
 

Dahbomb

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,749
January $$$ results are out, click through to see the rest of the thread. Basically Bernie's on top, Biden still had 7 million in the bank, everyone else was struggling.


Surprised Biden still had some money left. Warren would have been done if she didn't have a crazy debate performance that raised 12 million over night (now up to 17 million total in February).
 

julian

Member
Oct 27, 2017
17,156
Was talking about the debates with coworkers today. One who says he's Republican was saying how he might vote Bloomberg. When I asked him why, he explained how he used to work for him and the company was well run.....then he told a story about how Bloomberg would often have town halls with the company and one time Bloomberg told a story about how they had to settle a suit because one of their employees was recently accused of sexual harassment. But I guess that's how he defines "well run"?
 

Rats

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,148
This is frankly a disgusting amount of money to spend


The DNC has to make a fucking rule to stop this next time.

Was talking about the debates with coworkers today. One who says he's Republican was saying how he might vote Bloomberg. When I asked him why, he explained how he used to work for him and the company was well run.....then he told a story about how Bloomberg would often have town halls with the company and one time Bloomberg told a story about how they had to settle a suit because one of their employees was recently accused of sexual harassment. But I guess that's how he defines "well run"?

Yeah that sounds like the kinda shit a Republican would be into.
 

Azzanadra

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,815
Canada
January $$$ results are out, click through to see the rest of the thread. Basically Bernie's on top, Biden still had 7 million in the bank, everyone else was struggling.



Perhaps its crazy for me to think so but shouldn't some of these candidates who are supposedly representing the working class be conscious of asking money for a race they are not likely to win? It makes sense for Bernie, Pete and Biden but that's really about it IMO. Its especially hypocritical coming from Warren who is more progressive than the other not-Bernie people to waste people's money on a race she has a less than a 1% chance of winning according to 538.
 

Seattle6418

Member
Oct 25, 2017
529
Brasília Brazil
This thread is so depressing sometimes. I really hope it isn't a microcosm of Sanders supporters everywhere. Trump getting SCOTUS picks and cutting social programs that people like me rely on to survive because Sanders couldn't win the nomination is pretty disheartening. Reminds me of the poster in the other thread that was talking about voting against Sanders because m4a would put him out of a job, and people were telling him not to be selfish and to think of others.

I'll vote with gusto for any candidate who isn't Bloomberg. If it is Bloomberg, I think I'm only slightly less fucked so I don't know what to do in that event.

That´s pretty much how many of Bernie´s supporters are thinking. Vote blue no matter what as long as it´s not Bloomberg because he´s a fucking racist-sexist Republican...

hi I have diabetes and can't afford insulin. Bernie Sanders is my only
Hope for future coverage. Warren waffled on m4a so I don't trust her to have a plan that would include poor people like me seeing as the democrats left me out of being covered with Obamacare.

Democrats Fucking suck. I will just stay home if Bernie gets ratfucked

But this opinion has to be respected because nobody is forced to do anything. If people only like one guy, it should be a huge bonus for that one guy who manages to turn out non regular voters. Somehow this is twisted as a bad thing.

www.vox.com

The slow implosion of Joe Biden’s big bet on South Carolina, explained

Biden is still poised to win the state, but the margin is expected to be much closer than it was before.

What the hell is Biden doing?

If I wanted a centrist to win I would be demanding he just announce he is quitting now but instead I'll just say I'm thoroughly confused about his incompetence.

It was abundantly clear for a year his team was focused on South Carolina so why has he visited the state less than candidates who quit last year?

This is so incompetent it even paints the media in bad light because this was a red flag that should've been reported on back in December, January at the latest.

I knew Biden had less energy than Sanders but even now I'm taken aback by how unmotivated he is to win. If he hadn't competed the primary could've been significantly different among those who quit by January and earlier.

A hot take and a small bet: Pete will have more votes than Biden in South Carolina.
 

Uncle at Nintendo

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Jan 3, 2018
8,771
Warren and Tulsi essentially had the same amount of cash on hand at the end of January. She better hope she gets 2nd in Nevada.
 

Deleted member 11413

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
22,961
I really don't think that one jerk has any relevance to Volimar or what he is saying. It's okay to be worried about what voters decide about your future.
I understand why he is worried, but the fight for M4A is literally about people like Volimar. Disability benefits and care for the disabled is a fucking joke in this country. They need more, they deserve more, and we all need to fight so that they will have it.

Look, if it ends up coming down to Trump vs. one of the moderates (not Bloomberg), we all need to swallow our pride and do the right thing. I'm confidentmost will do that. But the only candidates who actually care about people like Volimar, who are disabled, people like Kaylaz, who can't afford insulin, and the millions of other people suffering in this country with low, stagnant wages and either poor coverage or no coverage are Sanders and Warren. We can acknowledge that and still accept that we may have to vote for someone else.
 

Dyle

One Winged Slayer
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
30,408
Perhaps its crazy for me to think so but shouldn't some of these candidates who are supposedly representing the working class be conscious of asking money for a race they are not likely to win? It makes sense for Bernie, Pete and Biden but that's really about it IMO. Its especially hypocritical coming from Warren who is more progressive than the other not-Bernie people to waste people's money on a race she has a less than a 1% chance of winning according to 538.
People donating to presidential campaigns typically do so because they uniquely believe in that campaign. Telling them to donate for another campaign will often just lead to them not donating at all.

Money is not wasted on a candidate just because they can't win. Every day that someone like Warren is campaigning is time that she's spending building support for the party and its platform, helping everyone not just her own campaign. If her campaign runs out of money that's one less person doing town halls, speaking at rallies, registering voters, etc. You could certainly argue that the money might be more efficiently used by other campaigns, but it certainly isn't wasted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.