2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumI'm not a bettor, but PredictWise says there's a 97% chance of Hillary getting the nomination
and a 73% chance of the Democrat winning in the general.
http://predictwise.com/politics/
Bleacher Creature
(11,257 posts)SCantiGOP
(13,871 posts)(Saw a post in Sanders forum saying Clinton needs 60 something per cent of remaining delegates to go over the top without the superdelegates. I think I will put my faith in this statement that I just copied off of MSNBC):
In pledged delegates, Clinton currently holds a lead of 331 delegates with Washington delegates to still be allocated (was 270 before last night)
Clinton 1,620 (56%)
Sanders 1,289 (44%)
Clinton must win 36% of remaining pledged delegates to get a majority in pledged delegates (was 41%)
Sanders must win 64% of remaining pledged delegates to get a majority in pledged delegates (was 59%)
In overall delegates (pledged + super), Clinton holds an overall lead of 787 delegates (was 695)
thesquanderer
(11,990 posts)bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)throughout this primary. Amazing.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)jmcc
(2 posts)You spent 20 years telling your base Hillary was the devil. You did it so well that a significant portion of the left now dislikes her. And you also turned a blind eye to the tebag racists because they voted for your candidates.
Well guess what, now you get the candidate you have been hammering for years against a nationalist who is so reprehensible he may end your party.
Oh yeah, guess who her first nomination to the court will be. If it makes you feel any better 30 years from now, history will remember his administration much better than you have tried to paint it.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)Great 2nd post.
Welcome to DU!
moriah
(8,311 posts)Bill has no experience as a judge, and that's important for the top court.
Even if it would be (edit: almost) worth doing as an April Fool's Joke just to see Limbaugh's head explode.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)to the Supreme Court.
moriah
(8,311 posts)Experience as an attorney, even a Constitutional Law expert, isn't quite the same as experience on an actual bench.
jcgoldie
(11,639 posts)Says he couldn't take the monotony of it wants to travel around and talk about issues after his term. Who knows I guess he could have been sandbagging like Paul Ryan.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)StevieM
(10,500 posts)To be honest, I doubt the Republican Party will end. They always find a way to come back and do more damage.
They may have to take us into a second great depression in order for the American people to finally be done with them.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)and nod my head in approval.
Welcome!
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Go ahead and gloat and drink your martinis while 2.5 million children are homeless. The oligarchy doesn't care about them. Democrats should. But some Democrats think having a Clinton Aristocracy is more important.
Stuckinthebush
(10,847 posts)Grow up
We've all been there. You don't always win
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)People are literally dying because of the greed of the Rich Fat Cats that control our government. It's easy for some to side with them and ignore those in the 99% struggling.
I know it's just a game to you and I welcome your condescension.
Demsrule86
(68,643 posts)And it is no game. The idea that we could lose the general because Berne staying in this race- when it is pointless- scares me to death. I don't say he does not have the right. But should he do this is a different question? Already kids are not eating well and some go hungry. They do; we do what we can. Often we use our own money. But anyone who says...better Trump than Hillary is putting the hungry at great risk and others as well. The GOP could win all branches of the government .Think about that.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)And even if Clinton does win the general, the poor and homeless numbers will continue to grow. The solutions she offers will simply move resources from one part of the 99% to another. The 1% will continue their looting of our resources and won't contribute a dime to helping us.
jcgoldie
(11,639 posts)Therefore no chance of defeating Trump. Your opinion on that hypothetical matchup doesn't matter much more than batman vs superman at this point.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)jcgoldie
(11,639 posts)Your argument doesn't hold water no matter how many posts you have here.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)if he loses, there is NO question which of the remaining options is THEN best, is there!
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)would still be homeless? c'mon. let's not lie so blatantly.,
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)time before this campaign. I find it repulsive that people calling themselves Democrats would turn their backs on those struggling in the 99% just to side with the Rich.
I recognize that a Sanders win would probably not dent the corrupt culture that your side holds so dear. I find it funny that you try to reject the Koch Bros that recognize that your side will help them. If you think that a Wall Street controlled presidency will help the poor you are fooling yourself. They might allow some social justice (cake) while they tighten the economic strangle-hold. Martin Luther King Jr. recognized that you can't have social justice without economic justice.
I think the fact that your side finds it necessary to disparage those of us fighting for the 99% very telling. Remember you've chosen to side with the Koch Bros. and other Rich Fat Cats. Either you revere them for their wealth or you believe their lies about helping those struggling.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)your accusations true.
there is nothing to substantiate that Hillary voters do not care about poverty and plenty to suggest they do.
be as mad as you want, but don't pretend that you and yours care about these issues that are cared about throughout the democratic party.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)conservative side that merely pretends to be concerned with those struggling.
The $5,000,000,000,000 that the 99% gave the wealthy bank bailout blackmail comes directly from our ability to help those struggling.
There are two sides to this class war and you can't support Goldman-Sachs and think you can also help the poor.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)they are not the bernie vs hillary sides.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)heated debates between the Progressive Side and the Conservative Side. Goldman-Sachs and the Koch Bros both have come out to say they support Clinton and it's not because they think she is progressive.
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)Everything has to be shoehorned into your 19th century class war framework, and you think this gives you special insight into everyone who doesn't agree with you - if they do anything to help the poor but don't buy into your class warfare narrative, they're 'just pretending'. Basically you present like a religious person that happens to be fixated on Marxist dogma, endlessly repeating your beliefs without real evidence that they're true and trying to lay guilt trips on anyone who has a different point of view from you. In reality you're not the arbiter of moral standards, you're just one other person with an opinion and not a very persuasive one at that.
Demsrule86
(68,643 posts)are putting those kids and others at risk because they won't vote for the Democratic candidate.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)There's a whole lot of allegation in your response. No supporting evidence, objective or otherwise about martinis, lack of care, gloating, aristocracies, et. al., but still... great job on the allegations! I'd guess you'd be very successful as an author of bumper-stickers.
Maru Kitteh
(28,342 posts)And that was before the most recent results. Should look even better now.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)Maru Kitteh
(28,342 posts)The momentum, the very feel has changed. It's hers.
qdouble
(891 posts)Bernie gained 500 momentum points by winning Rhode Island