What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Bernie Sanders HQ! *A decent human being. (5 Viewers)

timschochet said:
According to Chuck Todd on Meet the Press, it is nearly mathematically impossible for Bernie to catch Hillary. That's his claim, not mine, but he seemed pretty confident about it. And FTR, Todd is NOT a Hillary fan; he's been very critical of her and very complimentary of Bernie all along. He also said this would be true even if Bernie convinced all of the super delegates in states he won to support him. 
Click to expand...
Chuck is FOS - it's unlikely that the demographics change (namely black support) so that Bernie can earn 55% of the remaining vote but it's ignorant/dishonest to say it's mathematically impossible.

 
timschochet said:
According to Chuck Todd on Meet the Press, it is nearly mathematically impossible for Bernie to catch Hillary. That's his claim, not mine, but he seemed pretty confident about it. And FTR, Todd is NOT a Hillary fan; he's been very critical of her and very complimentary of Bernie all along. He also said this would be true even if Bernie convinced all of the super delegates in states he won to support him. 
Click to expand...
Then he is bad at math

 
timschochet said:
If Todd is correct, and if Bernie really can't win, I think it's irresponsible of him to continue to attack Hillary. I'm not suggesting he should get out of the race; he owes it to his supporters to stay in until the convention. But by criticizing Hillary all he's doing is helping the Republican candidate in November. And it's making it harder to unify the party.  Bernie should IMO return to promoting his own ideas, which is the main reason he got in the race in the first place. 
Click to expand...
How can that be possible when Bernie has more pledged Delegates than Obama did at this point? And remember Hillary still owned a majority of the Super Delegates at this point as well.

 
timschochet said:
If Todd is correct, and if Bernie really can't win, I think it's irresponsible of him to continue to attack Hillary. I'm not suggesting he should get out of the race; he owes it to his supporters to stay in until the convention. But by criticizing Hillary all he's doing is helping the Republican candidate in November. And it's making it harder to unify the party.  Bernie should IMO return to promoting his own ideas, which is the main reason he got in the race in the first place. 
Click to expand...
Blah blah blah." Support the party" is such a terrible way to think. 

 
Short Corner said:
2016 delegates vs 2008
Click to expand...
Here was the picture.  So, it doesn't have any cite to check it.  But I strongly suspect it is misleading, maybe because of one of these two reasons:

1) The first 35 states in 2008 were not the same states as the first 35 states in 2016.  So it seems possible that more total pledged delegates have been allocated, and therefore even if Bernie has more than Obama had, that represents a smaller fraction of the total.

2) If you remember, I think both Florida and some other state had all their delegates stripped away because they held their primary too early in the process.  So Obama's total delegates would really only have been from 33 states, not 35.

If you think about it, this picture has to be misleading.  At this point in 2008, Obama had a significant lead over Hillary in pledged delegates.  In 2016, Hillary has a significant lead over Bernie.  How can the statistic in the picture be reconciled with that fact?

 
timschochet said:
If Todd is correct, and if Bernie really can't win, I think it's irresponsible of him to continue to attack Hillary. I'm not suggesting he should get out of the race; he owes it to his supporters to stay in until the convention. But by criticizing Hillary all he's doing is helping the Republican candidate in November. And it's making it harder to unify the party.  Bernie should IMO return to promoting his own ideas, which is the main reason he got in the race in the first place. 
Click to expand...
If?  He's obviously not correct.  

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Here was the picture.  So, it doesn't have any cite to check it.  But I strongly suspect it is misleading, maybe because of one of these two reasons:

1) The first 35 states in 2008 were not the same states as the first 35 states in 2016.  So it seems possible that more total pledged delegates have been allocated, and therefore even if Bernie has more than Obama had, that represents a smaller fraction of the total.

2) If you remember, I think both Florida and some other state had all their delegates stripped away because they held their primary too early in the process.  So Obama's total delegates would really only have been from 33 states, not 35.

If you think about it, this picture has to be misleading.  At this point in 2008, Obama had a significant lead over Hillary in pledged delegates.  In 2016, Hillary has a significant lead over Bernie.  How can the statistic in the picture be reconciled with that fact?
Click to expand...
Without doing any research, I don't think there are the same number of delegates each election cycle - i.e. I don't think its a fixed number (well its fixed all right - fixed by the party....)

So, it is very likely apples to oranges.  But, I am also fairly confident that Bernie would not be whining about Hillary if the roles were reversed.  If Hillary can't handle some criticism from a democratic socialist, then she certainly is not ready for the GOP...

 
Sinn Fein said:
So, it is very likely apples to oranges.  But, I am also fairly confident that Bernie would not be whining about Hillary if the roles were reversed.  If Hillary can't handle some criticism from a democratic socialist, then she certainly is not ready for the GOP...
Click to expand...
Right, my point was just the apples to oranges thing.  It bothers me when people on my side of things make bad or misleading arguments.

 
timschochet said:
If Todd is correct, and if Bernie really can't win, I think it's irresponsible of him to continue to attack Hillary. I'm not suggesting he should get out of the race; he owes it to his supporters to stay in until the convention. But by criticizing Hillary all he's doing is helping the Republican candidate in November. And it's making it harder to unify the party.  Bernie should IMO return to promoting his own ideas, which is the main reason he got in the race in the first place. 
Click to expand...
Is Bernie bringing up secret truths the Republicans would have been otherwise unaware of and/or unwilling to attack her on? 

ETA what do you mean he should return to promoting his own ideas?  When did he stop? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
AnonymousBob said:
Is Bernie bringing up secret truths the Republicans would have been otherwise unaware of and/or unwilling to attack her on? 
Click to expand...
Exactly.  

Shameful that, not only is Hillary not putting him away--and its April, for chrissakes--she's actually losing momentum.  No message, no platform, whining up and down that this old man won't go away.  The sense of entitlement with this woman.

 
AnonymousBob said:
Is Bernie bringing up secret truths the Republicans would have been otherwise unaware of and/or unwilling to attack her on? 

ETA what do you mean he should return to promoting his own ideas?  When did he stop? 
Click to expand...
1. No, but Bernie is speaking to Democrats. He shouldn't be trashing Hillary at this point IMO IF he has no real chance of winning, because the party needs to be unified in November. 

2. I've watched his speeches recently and he's spent a good deal of time attacking Hillary. I don't think this is a good idea for the Democratic Party. 

 
timschochet said:
1. No, but Bernie is speaking to Democrats. He shouldn't be trashing Hillary at this point IMO IF he has no real chance of winning, because the party needs to be unified in November. 

2. I've watched his speeches recently and he's spent a good deal of time attacking Hillary. I don't think this is a good idea for the Democratic Party. 
Click to expand...
What attack(s) concern you the most?

 
cobalt_27 said:
What attack(s) concern you the most?
Click to expand...
I want Bernie fans to be voting for Hillary in November. So really any criticism of Hillary that would make these people hesitate to vote for her should be off the table. I would like him to praise her. 

I know I'm going to be laughed at for writing this, but its what I believe. 

 
timschochet said:
1. No, but Bernie is speaking to Democrats. He shouldn't be trashing Hillary at this point IMO IF he has no real chance of winning, because the party needs to be unified in November. 

2. I've watched his speeches recently and he's spent a good deal of time attacking Hillary. I don't think this is a good idea for the Democratic Party. 
Click to expand...
I think you better embrace that unified is not going to happen if Clinton is the nominee.  Rather Bernie run for president as indy.

 
timschochet said:
I want Bernie fans to be voting for Hillary in November. So really any criticism of Hillary that would make these people hesitate to vote for her should be off the table. I would like him to praise her. 

I know I'm going to be laughed at for writing this, but its what I believe. 
Click to expand...
Tim, I'll try again:  What attack(s) concern you the most?

 
timschochet said:
The implication that she is a shill for the oil companies, Wall Street, and big business. 
Click to expand...
This is not new news.  She is and has been for years.  Bernie is staying exactly on message by pointing out the distinction between him and his opponent.  That's completely fair and, honestly, has to be expected in an election.  One has to point out why he/she is the better candidate and sometimes that requires spelling out the contrast.  That's what he's done.  And, don't act like Hillary hasn't been on the attack with Bernie either.  I didn't see you post ever that you wish she'd stop pointing out their differences in policy, style, governance.

 
timschochet said:
1. No, but Bernie is speaking to Democrats. He shouldn't be trashing Hillary at this point IMO IF he has no real chance of winning, because the party needs to be unified in November. 

2. I've watched his speeches recently and he's spent a good deal of time attacking Hillary. I don't think this is a good idea for the Democratic Party. 
Click to expand...
Do you believe he has no real shot of winning? 

 
Apparently you guys failed to read my entire post. I began it with these words: IF TODD IS RIGHT AND THERE'S NO CHANCE BERNIE CAN WIN. 

Now I don't know if he's right or not. My understanding from several sources is that he's got to win Wisconsin by a big margin (more than 11 points,) and then he has to win New York and California by big margins. That seems awfully unlikely to me. But impossible? I don't know. My point was that if Bernie's got no chance, he doesn't need to quit (in fact I don't think he should, it's not fair to his supporters) but he doesn't need to attack Hillary either. 

If Bernie still has a shot, then naturally he should continue to fight. 

 
timschochet said:
Apparently you guys failed to read my entire post. I began it with these words: IF TODD IS RIGHT AND THERE'S NO CHANCE BERNIE CAN WIN. 

Now I don't know if he's right or not. My understanding from several sources is that he's got to win Wisconsin by a big margin (more than 11 points,) and then he has to win New York and California by big margins. That seems awfully unlikely to me. But impossible? I don't know. My point was that if Bernie's got no chance, he doesn't need to quit (in fact I don't think he should, it's not fair to his supporters) but he doesn't need to attack Hillary either. 

If Bernie still has a shot, then naturally he should continue to fight. 
Click to expand...
I think we've established Chuck Todd understands math worse than MoP. I'm trying to figure out if you're in the same boat. If not, why bother asking this absurd line? 

 
timschochet said:
Apparently you guys failed to read my entire post. I began it with these words: IF TODD IS RIGHT AND THERE'S NO CHANCE BERNIE CAN WIN. 

Now I don't know if he's right or not. My understanding from several sources is that he's got to win Wisconsin by a big margin (more than 11 points,) and then he has to win New York and California by big margins. That seems awfully unlikely to me. But impossible? I don't know. My point was that if Bernie's got no chance, he doesn't need to quit (in fact I don't think he should, it's not fair to his supporters) but he doesn't need to attack Hillary either. 

If Bernie still has a shot, then naturally he should continue to fight. 
Click to expand...
Tim, we can read just fine.  The point many of us are making is how ludicrous it is to expect one candidate to lay off the gas, when you have no problem with the other one throwing haymakers.  Bernie is doing what every presidential candidate does, which is drawing distinctions between himself and his opponent...which necessarily is going to be viewed by the opposition as negative.  Bernie's actually been really kind to Hillary, much to the dismay and frustration of many.  

But, this whole line that he shouldn't attack her is unrealistic, unprecedented, and sounds a lot like the entitled treatment Hillary and her supporters expect.  Which is why so many people hate her.

 
Hillary has been attacking Bernie plain as day by blatantly lying or at best misleading folks about him. Bernie has rolled his eyes in debates and called her out for some of her lies. Frankly if she can't hack his rather soft comments on the truth I shudder to imagine how she'll handle Donald and wonder if maybe she really isn't cut out to be President. 

 
cobalt_27 said:
Tim, we can read just fine.  The point many of us are making is how ludicrous it is to expect one candidate to lay off the gas, when you have no problem with the other one throwing haymakers.  Bernie is doing what every presidential candidate does, which is drawing distinctions between himself and his opponent...which necessarily is going to be viewed by the opposition as negative.  Bernie's actually been really kind to Hillary, much to the dismay and frustration of many.  

But, this whole line that he shouldn't attack her is unrealistic, unprecedented, and sounds a lot like the entitled treatment Hillary and her supporters expect.  Which is why so many people hate her.
Click to expand...
:P  There is virtually nothing I could write that would add to the hatred. Most of you have made your mind up about Hillary Clinton long ago. Some of you will vote for her very reluctantly, most of you won't. That's fine. I just hope you're not representative. 

 
There will be two states, Wisconsin and Wyoming, and (hopefully) a debate between now and New York. So with the possibility of "momentum" and a good debate performance - and the possibility of more press coverage of Hillary's email scandal - I think NY is winnable for Bernie. True, he's behind and she's leading and he's a flawed candidate and she's a freaking pro. But enough the "impossible" nonsense. 

 
NorvilleBarnes said:
There will be two states, Wisconsin and Wyoming, and (hopefully) a debate between now and New York. So with the possibility of "momentum" and a good debate performance - and the possibility of more press coverage of Hillary's email scandal - I think NY is winnable for Bernie. True, he's behind and she's leading and he's a flawed candidate and she's a freaking pro. But enough the "impossible" nonsense. 
Click to expand...
Is it true that it wouldn't be enough for him just to win New York, but that he needs to win by a big margin? Because if that's the case, even your scenario, which seems against the odds, won't be enough. 

 
AnonymousBob said:
Hillary has been attacking Bernie plain as day by blatantly lying or at best misleading folks about him. Bernie has rolled his eyes in debates and called her out for some of her lies. Frankly if she can't hack his rather soft comments on the truth I shudder to imagine how she'll handle Donald and wonder if maybe she really isn't cut out to be President. 
Click to expand...
This is such a concern for me, as someone who absolutely doesn't want Trump anywhere near the WH.  She is so incredibly thin-skinned and loses her mind whenever challenged, Trump is going to make her look bat#### crazy.  If she's getting all worked up over the implication that she's been in the pockets of big business, just think of how this goes when Trump brings up Vince Foster (and, no, Tim...before you freak out, I don't think the Clintons killed him...I'm merely pointing out that Trump has no boundaries, and he'll go there with her, and I don't think she has the disposition to handle any of it effectively...and, thus, will lose to Trump, lord help us).

 
NorvilleBarnes said:
There will be two states, Wisconsin and Wyoming, and (hopefully) a debate between now and New York. So with the possibility of "momentum" and a good debate performance - and the possibility of more press coverage of Hillary's email scandal - I think NY is winnable for Bernie. True, he's behind and she's leading and he's a flawed candidate and she's a freaking pro. But enough the "impossible" nonsense. 
Click to expand...
She was ahead by a comfortable margin in WI several weeks ago.  Clearly, somethings not working out for her, and that's why NY looms as a big concern.

 
cobalt_27 said:
She was ahead by a comfortable margin in WI several weeks ago.  Clearly, somethings not working out for her, and that's why NY looms as a big concern.
Click to expand...
There's a bunch of stuff not working out for her:

1. She's just not a great speaker. 

2. Her platform, which is essentially 4 more years of Obama, doesn't excite progressives in the party who want more change (and are also anti-establishment.)

3. A lot of people just don't like her. 

But despite all this, she's still very likely to be our next President. 

 
AnonymousBob said:
And for the rest of us she's doing great work this campaign to ensure we finally will. And it's not leaning in a favorable direction. 
Click to expand...
She's really run an awful campaign and done nothing to shape a favorable perception of her.  Best thing she has going for her n my case is Trump.  While I think he might be the worst candidate for her to face (see above), she gets my vote, and I'm sure many others, only because Trump is such a horrible option.  Otherwise, I'd support virtually anyone else over her.

 
The most recent poll has Bernie down by 10 in NY.  He was down by as much as 50. He just keeps gaining. He was supposed to lose Wisconsin too. Then he campaigned there and Hillary had to abandon ship. Her supposed firewall is crumbling before our eyes. To the point blank voters in Wisconsin are now backing Bernie by 11 points.

Impossible? That's what this campaign has been achieving. 

 
Meanwhile Hillary is now running a commercial in Wisconsin that says Bernie's free college plan will turn over control of higher ed to Scott Walker. This reminds me of when she tried to link Bernie with the Koch brothers. I have rarely seen a less deft and more inept politician in modern American life. 

 
The_Man said:
Meanwhile Hillary is now running a commercial in Wisconsin that says Bernie's free college plan will turn over control of higher ed to Scott Walker. This reminds me of when she tried to link Bernie with the Koch brothers. I have rarely seen a less deft and more inept politician in modern American life. 
Click to expand...
Look at him!  He's so far left he wraps around and becomes a neocon!

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Did Barack Obama Destroy Abortion Rights By Lying About Codifying Roe v. Wade? (6/26/22 7:24 PST)
Replies
4
Views
536
squistion
squistion
GordonGekko
Revisiting The Young Turks 2016 Election Meltdown Over Trump's Stunning Victory (7/7/2022 9:35 PST)
Replies
16
Views
460
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
How Hillary Clinton's Toxic "Rape Narrative" Helped To Destroy Roe Vs Wade (5/9/22 5:07 PST)
Replies
22
Views
817
jm192
jm192

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
Top