OldBrownsFan Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 This match up is looking more and more likely and I would have never thought it possible. If Trump wins the SC primary easily tomorrow I don't see how he gets stopped. SC should have been a good state for Cruz but the polls show Trump even beating out Cruz for the evangelical Christian vote which is huge in SC and one that should have favored Cruz. I get the feeling all the old rules in politics are going out the window and we are living in some different times. Rubio has locked up about all the major endorsements in SC including congressman Trey Gowdy and governor Nikki Haley who are very popular in SC but that doesn't seem to move the needle much at all for Rubio. Neither Cruz, Rubio or Kasich will be getting out of the race and their splitting of the votes only makes Trump winning almost inevitable. Jeb Bush has been a non factor and he had a huge amount of money in starting his campaign. As for Sanders although he still might lose to Clinton with a rigged super delegate system I wonder what kind of odds you would have gotten in Vegas that he would win the democratic nomination? Some interesting politics are going on today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 1.. Conservatives and Republicans still think of Trump is something of a clown with no real agenda beyond bombast and bullshit. The free shit guys are going to love Bernie Sanders. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 I saw a report that Jeb has called his donors and said he's out unless he finishes in a "strong third" in SC. Sanders I'm still not sure about - he might not survive super Tuesday. NH was always pretty much a guaranteed win for him, the others not so much. The super delegate thing is a non-factor, if he wins the most state-appointed delegates he wins - period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 19, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 Sanders has surged recently in national polls and now it looks like he has a real shot of winning Nevada tomorrow so he will have a lot of momentum going into South Carolina where Clinton is currently ahead of him by about 20 points. I don't see how Jeb finishes in the top three. He seems like a lock to come in fourth. And the democrats super delegates are a huge factor and are nothing but corrupt politics: Un-Democratic Party: DNC Chair Says Superdelegates Ensure Elites Don't Have to Run 'Against Grassroots Activists' Critics say the unelected superdelegate system is rigged. Debbie Wasserman Schultz basically admitted this is true. By Ben Norton / Salon February 18, 2016 Print 270 COMMENTS The Democratic Party’s superdelegate system has come under attack this presidential election, as critics blast it as undemocratic. There are hundreds of superdelegates, unelected party elites, who can sway the primary election, undermining the candidate democratically chosen by the party’s mass base. Bernie Sanders won the primary election in New Hampshire by a landslide in early February, with 60 percent of votes to Hillary Clinton’s 38 percent. Sanders won every demographic group, excluding rich voters and those aged 65 and older. Yet, although Clinton drastically lost, she ended up leaving with an equal number of delegates. This is because of the superdelegate system. Sanders won 15 delegates in the primary; Clinton won just nine. But New Hampshire has eight superdelegates — also known as unpledged delegates — and six of these unelected party elites pledged support for Clinton. Despite the fact that Sanders had drastically more votes, therefore, both candidates got an equal number of total delegates. Because of this system, the Washington Post points out, Sanders could technically win the primary election, earning a majority of the 1,670 delegates determined by actual voting, but still lose the Democratic Party’s nomination, if Clinton gets most of the party’s 712 unelected unpledged delegates. Critics have begun to ask why this undemocratic system exists. CNN’s Jake Tapper posed precisely this question to Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, an ally of Hillary Clinton who co-chaired her former presidential; campaign, in a Feb. 11 interview. She responded with shockingly blunt honesty. “What do you tell voters who are new to the process who say this makes them feel like it’s all rigged?” Tapper asked the DNC chair. “Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists,” Wasserman Schultz calmly explained. Tapper did not press her on her response. “I’m not sure that that answer would satisfy an anxious young voter, but let’s move on,” he said, and dropped the issue just when it was getting hot. You can watch Wasserman Schultz’s interview below, from CNN’s YouTube channel. Unelected superdelegates have been overwhelmingly backing Hillary Clinton in the presidential campaign. Clinton, who has received many millions of dollars from Wall Street and was long seen as the assumed Democratic candidate, is beginning to sweat, while Sanders’ enormous grassroots campaign continues to grow. In October 2015, long before the primaries even began and Americans actually started voting, Clinton’s campaign boasted that it had secured the endorsements of well over 500 superdelegates. NPR reported in November that Clinton had a 45-to-1 superdelegate advantage over Sanders. Two months before any voting even began, Clinton had 15 percent of the delegates needed to secure the Democratic Party’s nomination — or, as NPR wrote, “In other words, Clinton starts with a 15 percentage point head start over Sanders.” Controversy similarly erupted around the superdelegate system in the 2008 election. The Democratic Party approached a crossroads, deliberating whether or not to get rid of superdelegates, but decided to hold on to the system. A DNC committeeperson for Maine disappointingly toldNewsweek in 2010 “The superdelegate system is an outdated and undemocratic way of doing things that’s unsuited for modern times. The farther we veer away from one person, one vote, the worse it is for our party. If we let the current system stand in light of what happened in 2008, it seems pretty clear this is never going to change.” The DNC itself has been widely accused of acting in the interest of Clinton. Present Chair Wasserman Schultz served as a co-chair of Clinton’s 2008 campaign for president. More recently, the DNC has been criticized for scheduling debates at very inconvenient times — like the Saturday night before Christmas, during a football game — allegedly to reduce the number of viewers. Sanders’ campaign has accused the DNC and Wasserman Schultz of “actively attempting to undermine” his bid for president. A transcript of Wasserman Schultz’s remarks on CNN is included below, as reported by the Washington Post: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 super delegates never decided the nomination and that isn't going to change in 2016. They'll fall in line if Sanders wins the majority of state-appointed delegates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 Wouldnt surprise me one bit if the Democratic party found a way to keep Bernie out and put Hillary in....even if they have to lie, steal and cheat to get her there....might just be too many big money people and power brokers who want Hillary for her not to get the nomination....wasnt paying close attention to the details, but didnt some funny shit already happen in Iowa that favored her??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 19, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 I'm not democrat so how the DNC runs their elections is their business but if I were a voter and particularly a Sanders supporter I would be very upset about how this whole election was run. The democrat elites had more in mind of a coronation for Hillary Clinton than having elections and letting the democratic voters decide their candidate. Not just with these superdelegates but also having scheduled so few debates and worse yet putting them on at times when viewership is sure to be low. I understand the establishments of both parties want the candidates in November who they think gives them the best chance to win but that does not give them the right to put their thumbs on the scale and show blatant favoratism. It is the same way with the republican establishment who probably would like nothing better than to see Trump not win the nomination as he does have the highest negatives and polls show him to the weakest of candidates to run in November. I think the establishments of both parties should just get out of the way and let the voters decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted February 19, 2016 Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 If it comes down to trump and sanders I might have to vote for crazy old uncle bernie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 20, 2016 Report Share Posted February 20, 2016 I'm not democrat so how the DNC runs their elections is their business but if I were a voter and particularly a Sanders supporter I would be very upset about how this whole election was run. The democrat elites had more in mind of a coronation for Hillary Clinton than having elections and letting the democratic voters decide their candidate. Not just with these superdelegates but also having scheduled so few debates and worse yet putting them on at times when viewership is sure to be low. I understand the establishments of both parties want the candidates in November who they think gives them the best chance to win but that does not give them the right to put their thumbs on the scale and show blatant favoratism. It is the same way with the republican establishment who probably would like nothing better than to see Trump not win the nomination as he does have the highest negatives and polls show him to the weakest of candidates to run in November. I think the establishments of both parties should just get out of the way and let the voters decide. Plenty of Bernie supporters are pissed about it. I don't really know many/any Hillary supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 20, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2016 Plenty of Bernie supporters are pissed about it. I don't really know many/any Hillary supporters. I don't know if Trump can win in November or not. He defies political gravity all the time. All the talking heads say no and the demographics are bad for the republicans in that there is no way republicans can win presidential elections with just the white vote, every election they need more and more minority votes mainly Hispanic. So the republican establishment tried to pick the winner Jeb Bush and loaded him up with money which to this point has been just money thrown out the window with how he has done in the polls. I don't know if there are any shenanigans going on with these debate audiences but it sure looks like the candidate who is leading all the others by a large number (Trump) would have a few more supporters in the audience. All the constant booing of Trump at the debates gives a bad perception to the television viewers. I would like to see the republicans get the most electable candidate for November but if it ends up Trump so be it, the voters decided and not the establishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 20, 2016 Report Share Posted February 20, 2016 Trump has the biggest appeal of independents and Democrats. I disagree with any talking head that says he doesn't have a chance in November - especially against Clinton I could see a lot of Democrats defecting, and a lot of moderates (the majority of the country) may go for Trump over Sanders. Of course too early to project though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 20, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2016 Trump has the biggest appeal of independents and Democrats. I disagree with any talking head that says he doesn't have a chance in November - especially against Clinton I could see a lot of Democrats defecting, and a lot of moderates (the majority of the country) may go for Trump over Sanders. Of course too early to project though No doubt all the political pundits who make the big bucks analyzing elections have been wrong with Trump so far. Sanders as well on the democrat side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.