2016 Presidential Primaries [ SUPER TUESDAY | 3-1-'16]

This has been over since Super Tuesday.

The same AP called it for Trump the weekend before the deciding vote.
As they did for Obama in 2008.
This is nothing new or nefarious. Just reporters trying to be first

I forget who ygot beat out Obama that year.
Can you help a brother out ?
 
Good speech from Trump tonight after a horrible week. Teleprompter with Trumpisms mixed in is probably the best Trump going forward.
 
This election is so depressing. Clinton is horrible and Trump is horrible. And libertarians finally have their chance and it turns out Gary Johnson is terrible as well.

let's just all admit that we're all depressed and maybe we'll give it another go in 4 years.
 
57Brave said:
This has been over since Super Tuesday.

The same AP called it for Trump the weekend before the deciding vote.
As they did for Obama in 2008.
This is nothing new or nefarious. Just reporters trying to be first

I forget who ygot beat out Obama that year.
Can you help a brother out ?
Click to expand...

I can't find any proof they did it with Obama. Did an archive search. I'm not gonna comb for a long time, the only thing I found was someone on June 3rd saying that based on their tally Obama was th enominee. Not a Giant post the day before anyone voted saying that Obama was the nominee because he had a massive super delegate advantage.

HRC and Wasserman-Schultz are con artists. Hillary would have won the nomination anyway but the DNC did everything in their power to keep Bernie voters down.
 
Remember updates of Super Delegate standing all through the 2008 primaries and heard (not read) a report earlier in the week saying the bru-ha-ha over AP declaring Clinton the "presumptive winner". Looking it up I found these two 2008 reports . Not exactly the click bait the 2016 announcement yet pretty much the same .
Key word, presumptive. They presumed --

What you wrote about DNC on it's face looks correct. I don't think procedurally (process) the Clinton campaign viewed Sanders as anything more than an obstacle on the way.
The same report I heard above said the Clinton Campaign never did oppo research (personal) on Sanders. That made me say Hmmmm
Ideologically (policy) I hope they took Sanders seriously. Only time will tell.

As far as Wasserman-Schultz - her job is to raise money and make sure everything runs on schedule (process)
No more or less

Like I said, ideolocically (policy) I hope HRC has taken Sanders seriously
......

these reports of Super Delegate counts from 2008

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/topstories/2008-02-22-535125231_x.htm

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/04/superdelegates_trickling_towar.html
 
After last night's results, I'm having a hard time understanding Sanders' logic for staying in if he's also cutting staff. Who's going to back him when he shows up to Philadelphia?
 
57Brave said:
Remember updates of Super Delegate standing all through the 2008 primaries and heard (not read) a report earlier in the week saying the bru-ha-ha over AP declaring Clinton the "presumptive winner". Looking it up I found these two 2008 reports . Not exactly the click bait the 2016 announcement yet pretty much the same .

Key word, presumptive. They presumed --

What you wrote about DNC on it's face looks correct. I don't think procedurally (process) the Clinton campaign viewed Sanders as anything more than an obstacle on the way.

The same report I heard above said the Clinton Campaign never did oppo research (personal) on Sanders. That made me say Hmmmm

Ideologically (policy) I hope they took Sanders seriously. Only time will tell.

As far as Wasserman-Schultz - her job is to raise money and make sure everything runs on schedule (process)

No more or less

Like I said, ideolocically (policy) I hope HRC has taken Sanders seriously

......

these reports of Super Delegate counts from 2008

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/topstories/2008-02-22-535125231_x.htm

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/04/superdelegates_trickling_towar.html
Click to expand...

Did you even read the articles you linked?
 
bravesnumberone said:
After last night's results, I'm having a hard time understanding Sanders' logic for staying in if he's also cutting staff. Who's going to back him when he shows up to Philadelphia?
Click to expand...

Sanders has an army of free help via social media. He knows what he's doing. He's gonna have a huge rally outside of the convention and get as many in the convention as he can to support his agenda. He was cutting staff to save money. Money likely going to his pet congressional and Senate battles.
 
Runnin said:
Bernie's last hope, that only he can beat Trump, is not looking good with Trump's latest implosion.
Click to expand...

It wasn't gonna happen anyway. This is gonna be an ugly election for the big parties. Good news for those of us who hate those 2 parties is the Green and LIbertarian parties should have all-time high results.
 
zitothebrave said:
That isn't even remotely comparable to what happened this go around.

Counting super delegates and projecting winners based off super delegates is 100% different. Sorry you don't see it because you're so far up the Ass's Ass.
Click to expand...

Of course I see that. My point is/was it is not unprecedented for the media to contact,count and predict super delegates before they actually vote.
Like I said above the 2008 predictions were not as subject to the click bait of 2016

This was in no way an official proclamation.

Z, I have been an admirer of Sen Sanders since he was Mayor of Burlington and did in fact vote for him the day that for all intent and purposes Sec Clinton wrapped up the nomination.
I have yet to cast a vote for HRC

So please, differentiate between the policy,politics and personalities involved.
She won and it was clear as the nose on Weird Al Yankovich's face since Super Tuesday.
I don't get the vitriol aimed at people pointing that out
 
zitothebrave said:
It wasn't gonna happen anyway. This is gonna be an ugly election for the big parties. Good news for those of us who hate those 2 parties is the Green and LIbertarian parties should have all-time high results.
Click to expand...

Why will it be ugly ?

Green and Libertarian Parties are for children and people to impatient to understand the what's and how's of the political process .
I listened to Gary Johnson talk for an hour earlier this week.
Have you ever sat and listened to him ?

a) he has no constituency therefore he will have no legislature to work with
b) I hate to sound Trumpish but he polls at what, tops 10%. ****, Ross Perot received 20% of the vote
c) what states will Gary Johnson win? Electoral College votes ?
d) Voting is a privilege. There are two choices.
Pick one

or sound like the guy at the football game criticizing the coach after the first series and screaming for the backup QB
.....

Again, as a Sanders voter I don't understand the vitriol aimed at Clinton.
 
57Brave said:
Why will it be ugly ?

Green and Libertarian Parties are for children and people to impatient to understand the what's and how's of the political process .
I listened to Gary Johnson talk for an hour earlier this week.
Have you ever sat and listened to him ?

a) he has no constituency therefore he will have no legislature to work with
b) I hate to sound Trumpish but he polls at what, tops 10%. ****, Ross Perot received 20% of the vote
c) what states will Gary Johnson win? Electoral College votes ?
d) Voting is a privilege. There are two choices.
Pick one

or sound like the guy at the football game criticizing the coach after the first series and screaming for the backup QB
.....

Again, as a Sanders voter I don't understand the vitriol aimed at Clinton.
Click to expand...

I don't often result to posts like this, but the ****ty nature of your post is making me do this

A - So what? If Congress wants anything to pass that he doesn't they'll have to work together.
B- Who gives a **** about polls so early? We'll see what happens when Bernie supporters who were alienated by the democratic party turn their head towards.
C - Doesn't really matter. ALl we need is a couple elections of 3rd party guys doing well and getting in on debates to make the 2 party system be exposed for the sham that it is.
D - **** you. I don't usually like ot leave my rsponses crass and simple, but **** you. Voting is a right. And who I cast my vote for is none of your damned business. I hope Hillary loses just to watch you wallow in your own self pity for supporting a ****ty party like the Democrats.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top