most warren thing i’ve ever heard. in one breath you’ll say its good to fight for bernie’s policies (i assume you mean the ones that will save thousands from dying due to no insurance, save countless bank accounts from medical bankruptcy, keep civilians out of the way of US bombs)
but you personally dont see the need to fight for any of it
sounds about like a warren supporter to me
he’s down 300 delegates. it’s very possible. it doesn’t help that warren and yang have directed their loyal sycophants to stop fighting for progressive causes
once again i am asking for full california delegate counts
anyone who gives up now actively wants joe biden to be president
I’m just not into fighting hopeless wars, whether they involve foreign soil or domestic politics.
There are two different answers:
A) Joe Biden has not yet hit the threshold # of delegates needed to win the nomination (he needs 1991, only has something like 1200 at the moment), AND the convention hasn’t happened, so he’s not the nominee.
Or
B) If you look at the way delegates are awarded (even in states Bernie wins, Biden is going to get quite a few delegates) Bernie would essentially have to win every remaining primary by a massive margin in order to make up the gap. Polling + previous results makes this unlikely, so “it’s over” even if not official.
And of course there’s also the Biden health factor, in which case Bernie would want as many delegates as possible in order to build a case for being the nominee if Biden steps down. Also, I thing more delegates gives some more ability to influence the party platform, but I don’t know much about that whole process.
you’re just a troll, sorry i ever engaged you. enjoy your head in the sand and a lot more death that you could have helped with. fucking guy
Maybe not completely hopeless, but it feels a bit like Bernie is Conor McGregor going up against Floyd Mayweather and his fans just massively overrate his chances.
My head isn’t in the sand. I’ve just learned to be dispassionate to avoid going down the road that makes assassinating Biden start to sound thinkable rather than unthinkable.
It does not. Second place doesn’t mean anything. In the second round the delegates, including superdelegates, vote for someone other than Bernie.
You’re a fucking weirdo, man. Behind the curtain for you.
There’s déjà vu in these results: Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton found herself in largely the same position four years ago. She, too, had a slim lead among Democrats for the nomination and ran essentially evenly with Trump among registered voters. And she lagged in enthusiasm, with a low of 32% very enthusiastic in September 2016. Biden is 8 points under that mark now.
Bad as Biden’s enthusiasm score is, we’ve seen worse: As few as 17% of former Republican presidential nominee and Arizona Sen. John McCain’s supporters were very enthusiastic about his candidacy in 2008, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney saw 23% in 2012. The poor omen for Biden is that Clinton, McCain and Romney all lost.
Clinton didn’t lose, do there’s that.
Edit: arguing with the article, not Risky
hell yeah Dems, rally around a guy who almost no one is excited to vote for, sure way to win an election
She did. In the same way that an NFL team with more total yards than their opponent can still lose because everyone knew going in that points/electoral votes was the metric.
It also seems obvious that she’s going to outperform Biden.
That’s a terrible analogy and trying to herp derp erryone knows the rules where the system values votes in certain parts of the country more than others is contemptible. GTFO at acknowledging the results of a broken process as evidence of anything other the system is broken.
Clinton lost
She earned more votes. She won
I mean, obviously the electoral college has been a terrible idea from day one. But saying Clinton won is how a bunch of persisters avoid dealing with the reality that they backed a terrible candidate, and I’m not going to feed into that delusion.
I was too young to pay attention to this at the time: did Al Gore fans spend the first 4 years of GWB talking about how Gore won? He’s got a much stronger claim to that than Clinton.
Calling someone a terrible candidate when they earned more than 2,800,000 votes than the other has always been among the juiciest of pol takes.
And there were plenty of people bothered by Gore v Bush but in the end the focus became Florida, and a larger sentiment that the vote disparity was an anomaly rather than the eventual GOP/Russia tactic in national elections.
Calling someone not a terrible candidate when they LOST TO DONALD TRUMP has always been among the juiciest of pol takes.
