Quote :

"If God help us Trump wins in November, do you think I should have a right to vote in a Democratic primary for president come 2020 even though I'm not a member and don't agree with a lot of the party's platform?"

Yes?

As an independent, I may wish to vote in a Democratic primary one election and in a Republican primary another election, but fuck if I'm ever going to identify as a member of one of those two parties.

[Edited on May 10, 2016 at 10:08 PM. Reason : ]

5/10/2016 10:05:20 PM

with 30% of the vote in, the Nebraska primary has already passed the caucus in terms of turnout.

How little does West Virginia matter in democratic primaries? exit polls show 35% of the people who voted for sanders have said they would vote for trump over sanders in November. 9% of clinton voters would vote trump over clinton.

5/10/2016 10:28:57 PM

^
idk where you got those numbers but here's what the actual exit poll said:





http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/live-democratic-primary-exit-poll-results/story?id=38992745

5/11/2016 12:04:07 AM

Quote :

"if superdelegates weren't a thing, Hillary would have a 342 pledged delegate lead on Bernie at this point. which would mean Bernie would have to win 68.85 of the remaining delegates to beat clinton. so basically nothing would change."

If supers weren't a thing, the pro-Hillary media couldn't have reported a 1000 delegate lead in January and acted like she had this thing long locked up. Too many potential voters either stayed home or didn't bother listening to Bernie's message because they thought he didn't have a chance, which then became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Furthering the point that this was rigged in Hillary's favor from the beginning.

5/11/2016 12:28:01 AM

Quote :

"If supers weren't a thing, the pro-Hillary media couldn't have reported a 1000 delegate lead in January and acted like she had this thing long locked up."

Sure, if supers weren't a thing, instead she would have claimed a 500 delegate lead, with the same narrative.

I love Bernie as much as you, but he got beat, soundly.

5/11/2016 1:11:06 AM

She didn't have an actual lead until Super Tuesday.

5/11/2016 1:16:41 AM

So where are you pulling this 1000 number from? I was just doing arithmetic on your numbers.

But yeah it's not exactly breaking news that the Democratic Party did everything they could to help Hillary to win the primary.

[Edited on May 11, 2016 at 1:31 AM. Reason : Which is understandable given Hillary's Democratic legacy and the fact Bernie is new to the party.]

5/11/2016 1:24:14 AM

Bernie was just a pawn to give the illusion that Democratic party members have a choice. This role was determined in 2008 when she lost to Obama.

5/11/2016 8:22:51 AM

adultswim that's a completely different cut of the exit poll data. it takes in to account ALL democrat voters. if you isolate them by who they voted for and ask them who they will vote for in November, it's a completely different story

Quote :

"In fact, 39 percent of Sanders voters said they would vote for Trump over Sanders in the fall. For Clinton, nine percent of her voters say they plan to come out for Trump in the general election."

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-supporters-boost-bernie-sanders-west-virginia-n571791

the devil's in the details man

Quote :

"But yeah it's not exactly breaking news that the Democratic Party did everything they could to help Hillary to win the primary."

yeah they did. except for letting a life long independent find jesus, flip to join the party, and run on their ticket with access to all the DNC resources. but other than that, preordained

[Edited on May 11, 2016 at 9:13 AM. Reason : ]

5/11/2016 9:11:21 AM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/bernie-sanders-could-still-win-the-democratic-nomination----no-seriously_b_9898436.html

5/11/2016 2:34:18 PM

Quote :

"The idea that Clinton is in a dead heat with Trump in the three most important battleground states at a time when Trump is the most unpopular major-party candidate in American history is horrifying to Democrats."

This.

5/11/2016 6:00:21 PM

^^ lol that fucking guy again?

^ as I said before, remember polling averages. those matter. a statistical outlier that has a larger percentage of republicans polls than they exist on the voter rolls isn't cause for consternation outside of any place that doesn't make money off page views.

5/12/2016 11:30:08 AM

^ the trends matter more and these don't favor Hillary.

5/12/2016 12:39:34 PM

Clinton, Hillary Diane Rodham 12,647,631 55.97%
Sanders, Bernard "Bernie" 9,570,525 42.35%

5/12/2016 12:50:11 PM

More election fraud, this time in our own state:

http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2016/05/state-board-of-elections-investigates-fraud-in-durham

Also in Baltimore:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-ci-election-intervention-20160512-story.html

Really piling up.

5/12/2016 7:00:13 PM

I thought voter fraud was just a right-wing myth?

5/12/2016 9:31:13 PM

those links refer to election fraud, not voter fraud

5/12/2016 9:35:19 PM

Quote :

"^ the trends matter more and these don't favor Hillary."

yeah ok

5/12/2016 10:17:36 PM

Quote :

" those links refer to election fraud, not voter fraud"

And I'm sure that dummy still doesn't know the difference.

That said tho, Hillary won, by a lot. Shits over


[Edited on May 13, 2016 at 1:53 AM. Reason : ]

5/13/2016 1:51:24 AM

^^ a 6 point lead with the current trend for her being down is not a good sign, what was the margin of error there, 4 or 5 points?

Polls in May aren't particularly useful in any case.

This election will be close. Bernie dragging this out isn't helping her, the Republicans are grudgingly uniting behind Trump. He's a douce canoe, but he's going to be hard to run against. The last thing she wants is to be in a personality contest. There's also a decent chance he picks up some disaffected Bernie folks because of his protectionist economic policies and general anger at Hillary/the Democratic establishment.

I think ultimately she'll win, but it's going to be a lot more difficult of a campaign than it might appear at first blush.

5/13/2016 6:32:20 AM

No need for name calling synapse. I'd hate for you to have to go sit in the corner. The first article then, for Durham, shouldn't have mentioned the voter ID law, if the subject was election fraud and not voter fraud.

5/13/2016 7:11:18 AM

*swoon*

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/05/12/joe_biden_wanted_elizabeth_warren_as_vp_if_he_ran.html

^ here try to learn something today - http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/9/28/1137404/-Terminology-is-important-Election-Fraud-v-Voter-Fraud

5/13/2016 11:17:33 AM

Quote :

"That said tho, Hillary won, by a lot. Shits over"

Yeah but who knows how the narrative would have changed if she lost Massachusetts, for instance? Exit polls there showed Sanders winning by 5%. We only hear about the instances that are discovered and reported on. And we never find out exactly what happened and who is to blame. It goes beyond this election. We know our voting system is vulnerable to manipulation. We need true audits to figure out how it can be fixed.

5/13/2016 11:45:17 AM

are we really going back to the Tim Robbins 'splainin well with exit polls again?

5/13/2016 1:59:53 PM

Tim Robbins wasn't the one who analyzed the exit polls. He just wrote an article about it.

5/13/2016 2:28:41 PM

Quote :

"There's also a decent chance he picks up some disaffected Bernie folks because of his protectionist economic policies and general anger at Hillary/the Democratic establishment."

I think that's going to be an incredibly low number. It makes more sense for #NeverTrump republicans to vote for Hillary because she's actually a conservative on several issues, but the largest number of Bernie supporters who won't vote for Hillary is because they don't want to let the DNC think it's ok to pull this crap and ignore the voices on the left.

This election could be either the largest percent voter turnout in history (everyone trying to keep one or the other from winning) or the smallest (no one wanting to vote for either and just staying home). I don't think either candidate gets a 2nd term.

5/13/2016 2:34:44 PM

I would think that Bernie Sanders supporters disapprove of Hillary Clinton mostly for being too far to the right and would more likely stay home than vote Republican.

5/13/2016 2:51:10 PM

Quote :

"I would think that Bernie Sanders supporters disapprove of Hillary Clinton mostly for being too far to the right and but will still vote for her"

ftfy

5/13/2016 3:03:35 PM

^^That's pretty much what I'm saying. I'm going to be one of those people unless she gives me a reason to vote for her that isn't "don't let Trump win."

5/13/2016 3:28:05 PM

I'd vote for her if she came out in support of single payer, although I'd find it hard to trust her.

Endorsing Colorado's single payer ballot initiative would be a start.

5/13/2016 3:34:04 PM

I don't know she could; her campaign has already criticized the Sanders plan for raising taxes on the middle class.

[Edited on May 13, 2016 at 5:15 PM. Reason : ]

5/13/2016 5:08:10 PM

Hillary may be running against the one candidate in history who lies more than her.

5/13/2016 6:45:29 PM

SMH, ya'll motherfuckers are gonna make me defend Hillary,

^^,^^^

Check out her "Medicare buy-in" plan. It would give people 50+ the option to go ahead and pay to enroll in Medicare. Theoretically that would drop costs for younger people too.

Granted, it's not Medicare for all ala Bernie, and it's bullshit that Dems are still catering to has-been boomers while throwing the young under the bus, and she is only "floating" the plan right now so I understand the trust issues.

So she is already softening on her "it's gon be too expensive, etc" stance. I truly think if Bernie voters respond positively to this softening, she'll continue to move in that direction. Progressives need to keep PUSHING!

5/13/2016 8:09:14 PM

^I think if we let up now then she won't go far enough.

[Edited on May 13, 2016 at 8:51 PM. Reason : -]

5/13/2016 8:51:04 PM

I don't disagree. I'm not telling you to toe the line. Really I'm saying to continue participating, even after the election. There are going to many more opportunities in the near future IMO

5/13/2016 9:51:15 PM

with bernie on track to win Kentucky today, do southern votes magically matter again?

5/17/2016 10:13:26 AM

only the white ones

5/17/2016 10:18:28 AM

Death threats to Nevada democratic party members? guess that comes from the 15% of the bernie supporters who say they're gonna vote for trump

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/17/us/politics/bernie-sanders-supporters-nevada.html?_r=0

at least they provide some shade for Jane Sanders, considering the college she ran in to the ground announced they're shutting down the entire school. that's one way to reduce tuition costs!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/05/16/vermont-college-that-bernie-sanderss-wife-once-led-is-closing/

[Edited on May 17, 2016 at 3:09 PM. Reason : .]

5/17/2016 3:07:58 PM

That statement he put out... wow, not a good look.

5/17/2016 3:15:41 PM

"Hey, maybe you deserve those death threats"

5/17/2016 3:19:44 PM

Quote :

"with bernie on track to win Kentucky today, do southern votes magically matter again?"

kentucky is not really southern but it doesn't matter because that argument was put to rest when clinton won the northeast by a lot

That is of course, after the media pushed pro-clinton narratives based on southern and superdelegate voting.

5/17/2016 3:29:16 PM

hilarious. within 24 hours I have had someone tell me that Cincinnati ins't far from Kentucky, so southern drawl there does exist (in support of RW's Tom O'Brien lies) and now I find out that Kentucky isn't actually part of the South.

Live your narrative

[Edited on May 17, 2016 at 3:32 PM. Reason : .]

5/17/2016 3:31:18 PM

Quote :

"now I find out that Kentucky isn't actually part of the South."

the fuck it's not

[Edited on May 17, 2016 at 3:36 PM. Reason : you got earl'd]

[Edited on May 17, 2016 at 3:47 PM. Reason : lol the civil war line. foh mane]

5/17/2016 3:35:46 PM

debatable especially considering "southern" is a vague description.

5/17/2016 3:45:29 PM

are we in the 1800's? i think not



[Edited on May 17, 2016 at 3:57 PM. Reason : .]

5/17/2016 3:56:34 PM

Kentucky has always been more midwest than it has south. Culturally it's more like Indiana than it is like Tennessee. Same in Missouri, Iowa, and most of Ohio and Illinois outside of the big cities.

5/17/2016 4:18:41 PM

lol no

anyway, it's fun to see this come back up after dtwrong and earl spent a portion of March arguing with me about how Ohio is part of the bible belt/south

[Edited on May 17, 2016 at 4:30 PM. Reason : .]

5/17/2016 4:28:46 PM

^^No, not really. My parents live in Kentucky and it's much more southern than the other states you mentioned. Missouri (where I was born and lived for 12 years) is quintessentially Midwest except for some parts of the Ozarks near Arkansas. Indiana is about as Midwest as you can get, Iowa is Midwest farm country. Ohio is Midwest with pockets of the state that are more like the mid Atlantic.

Kentucky is very much a Southern state with the exception of Louisville and the extreme northern part of the state near Ohio.

[Edited on May 17, 2016 at 4:32 PM. Reason : Carats ]

5/17/2016 4:31:37 PM

Quote :

"That statement he put out... wow, not a good look"

Really? Why?

Thought it was great, personally. He denounced the threats while explaining in detail why people were upset.

[Edited on May 17, 2016 at 4:50 PM. Reason : .]

5/17/2016 4:36:49 PM

Quote :

"Kentucky has always been more midwest than it has south."

Bullshit. You and Earl are obviously arguing this because Bernie, which is dumb.

5/17/2016 4:46:37 PM