I will keep doing, but not worth it! The 2016 Presidential Primary Voting Thread

Clinton's supporters have heard it all and are still going to vote for her.

Sounds a lot like the rationale for anyone voting Trump!

I just talked to a dad at my kid's bday party who supports Sanders and said he'd vote for Trump over Clinton!

― on entre O.K. on sort K.O. (man alive), Monday, February 22, 2016 1:53 PM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This is basically just saying "I support whichever candidate has a penis." And also "my cognition is roughly equivalent to that of a dog that eats his own shit."

YES, we know that she shot Vince Foster in cold blood, then kept his severed penis as a trophy. In fact, she and Huma Abedin danced around it, singing lesbian anthems, while gleefully denying security requests from Benghazi.

YES, we know that she used blank checks from Goldman Sachs to funnel hush money to Bill's rape victims. Then, in a cocaine-fueled haze, she asked Communist Party HQ to send over a network tech to configure a strategically leak-prone e-mail server.

Don't forget Mena airport and the boys on the tracks!

Dr. C.: "trump's numbers did go up after paris and san Bernardino" - okay, my bad, but surely that means his numbers among Republicans, right?

yes. i am on your side btw on trump's chances - just clarifying that one point!

it'd be great to see some charts comparing polling for sanders to the equivalent 'left challenger' in recent elections. like not just their peak numbers but a line graph for the whole campaign. my sense is that this is a more sustained deal that is interesting a much wider swath of people, but it'd be nice to make that less imprsesionistic and anecdotal. he's definitely doing better than bill bradley who was the first such character i hopelessly voted for.

And also "my cognition is roughly equivalent to that of a dog that eats his own shit."

Pretty big constituency you'd be ignoring in this country.

people who are both dining with Bret Easton Ellis and voting for Trump

cokeheads w fond memories of the 80s?

xxp

i'm still surprised people hand out business cards down here. i lol every time

but i've seen some crazy shit on facebook. I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Abortion clinics on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those primary votes will be lost in time, like tears...in...rain.

McCarthy vs LBJ/Humphrey vs RFK/RFK is very hard to compare to Sanders v Clinton. 1968 was too chaotic to compare to anything else.

McCarthy and Humphrey were as chaotic as dog cushions.

Dr. Casino: I liked Bradley too, but the person I really would have loved to have seen more of is Paul Wellstone.

no ∞, it seemed very obvious to me BEE was not trolling

@BernieSanders
It's been 17 days, 16 hours and 32 minutes since @HillaryClinton said she would "look into" releasing her paid speeches to Wall Street.

Is Sanders more to the left and doing better than other historical left-wing protest (nomenclature?) candidates?

Absolutely.

envisioning BEE w a tiny Hillary Clinton doomsday clock that he obsessively checks

xp

i would agree, but i've seen some crazy shit on facebook

he's doing worse than Obama but better than Dean and Bradley. Go back much farther than that and you're looking at wider fields.

re: '68 - yeah but it's not like mccarthy was running as the leftie alternative to humphrey, he was running as the anti-vietnam alternative to johnson. pretty sure they were pretty similar on domestic policy for example.

feel like the bradley pattern honestly doesn't make sense until the 80s at least - it refers to a model of the party where the 'establishment' choice and presumed front-runner is the centrist, but there are others trying to keep the torch for pre-reagan-era liberalism alive and shift the window back left and all of that. maybe kennedy/carter is a prototype in a way. you get a clear left alternative with jackson in 88, but lacking the clear-from-a-year-out front-runner against which they're defined.

Sanders is farther to the left than Obama and I think there is a good argument to be made that Obama was not a left-wing protest candidate.

bill bradley who was the first such character i hopelessly voted for.

Bradley was my senator for many years in NJ and ugggggh, he was no lefty insurgent. Rubberstamped Reaganite contra funding, prioritized 'deficit reduction' in the '80s among other crimes. Held my nose and voted for him vs Gore in 2000, not fondly.

lol bradley was the speaker at my college graduation

he went on and on about the deficit

btw the raison d'etre of Eugene McCarthy's campaign was to get us out of Vietnam

that carpetbagger RFK changed his spots and leapt in once that had been illustrated to be a winning issue

i agree that bradley was not really much to the left of gore, but that's certainly what he was pitched and spun as. so he's relevant to the set under discussion re: the question: is sanders further left, and more successful, that previous characters in this role?

sure seems like it to me, I mean Gary Hart is the only other primary challenger since 1980 that I can think of who could even be thought of as leaning "left" at all!

easy to forget now, but dean was also understood that way.

no win in NY, and not 50-50, but i agree that it will be closer than people think.

― rmde bob (will), Monday, February 22, 2016 2:04 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

people saying 50/50 like this itt, do you mean the outcome is totally uncertain, or the popular vote will be close to even for each candidate?

they are different. e.g. the 2012 was never really in doubt, but the popular vote was close to even.

Hart was not to the left of Mondale. He campaigned against the Great Society and New Deal!

See: Atari Democrats.

Mondale was really the last of the New Deal true believers.

New Ideas (TM) xp

except for the hotzy action on the trail, that was his old idea

caek: popular vote will be closer than any reasonable person should feel comfortable with.

not sure if Trump can pick up any states that Romney lost, but nothing surprises me at this point.

the popular vote is always "close", but there seems to be a lot of confusion that that implies incertainty

not saying this particular election is certain, but it's important to keep the difference in mind when having a bout of 2016 worries: are you just worrying that the election is close?

not so much worried as repulsed

the only reason people thought bradley was to the left of gore is because he could sink a jumpshot

about 6 states matter in our prez elections, w/ possible exception of when there is a serious third-party run (eg Perot, Wallace).

voting for the same candidate that Bill Kristol will does NOT repulse you, huh

Here's the thing. Hillary needs to take Bill out of the picture as much as possible as soon as possible. I think everyone's underestimating the extent to which her most corrosive negative will turn out to be just this. The more he hovers behind her at every victory speech, mouth agape, the more people will be like WTF are we really doing THIS again? I say "people" but tbh that's how a part of me feels. When I see Bill, Hillary and Chelsea up on stage I get this overwhelming, visceral sense of claustrophobia, like we're trapped in an elevator with these people, and that's all history will ever give us. Repetition is madness, etc. Now I'm not about to vote for Trump on the basis of this feeling, but how many others might?

apparently bernie called for abolishing the CIA back in the '70s and now the hillary campaign is trying to use that against him

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/bernie-sanders-cia-219451#ixzz40vSbhhxK

Gore's jump shot was notoriously weak-ass.

Contrariwise, my respect for Bradley stems mainly from this John McPhee passage:

Last summer, the floor of the Princeton gym was being resurfaced, so Bradley had to put in several practice sessions at the Lawrenceville School. His first afternoon at Lawrenceville, he began by shooting fourteen-foot jump shots from the right side. He got off to a bad start, and he kept missing them. Six in a row hit the back rim of the basket and bounced out. He stopped, looking discomfited, and seemed to be making an adjustment in his mind. Then he went up for another jump shot from the same spot and hit it cleanly. Four more shots went in without a miss, and then he paused and said, “You want to know something? That basket is about an inch and a half low.” Some weeks later, I went back to Lawrenceville with a steel tape, borrowed a stepladder, and measured the height of the basket. It was nine feet ten and seven-eighths inches above the floor, or one and one-eighth inches too low.

they are different. e.g. the 2012 was never really in doubt, but the popular vote was close to even.

Uh Romney lost by like 5 million votes. The 2000 election was close to even. 2012 not so much.

Abolishing the CIA in the 1970s would have unilaterally disarmed America during the height of the Cold War and at a time when terrorist networks across the Middle East were gaining strength

wow

xp

47/51, which is what 2012 was, is close in the context of polling that is accurate to 3%.

and people sometimes seem to think closer than a few per cent implies a toss up. if it did, they'd all be toss ups.

but they're not. they're all close, but they're not all uncertain. that's my point.

hillary has such bad political instincts

guys remember when the supreme court gave the presidency to george w. bush and how that was somehow okay

dlh are u sayin wow because, like, the cia was directly radicalizing the founding fathers of the current middle east terror kults in the 70s cause anyway that's why i'm sayin wow but there are probably other reasons too

that was it yeah

Abolishing the CIA in the 1970s would have unilaterally disarmed America during the height of the Cold War and at a time when terrorist networks across the Middle East were gaining strength

It's true. The middle east of South America was full of terrorist cells!

I expect Hilz to rap Bernie's knuckles over Contract support next.

Contra support too

http://33.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbp28blMzK1qi4nyc.png

sad lol at "an arcane reference to a 1953 u.s.-backed coup in iran."

i do think that kind of thing (advocating for CIA disbandment) could hurt bernie in the general, but i can't imagine it doing shit in the primary.