END TO END BERNERS: The Official Bernie Sanders 2020 Crew thread

And I’m not just (only partially) saying this bc I think PA should get to go firet

IA and NH are pretty insane about keeping their status. They will move the voting into December or earlier if prodded. (check Stranglehold podcast)

DNC has the power to ignore the results tho

shocking that a white minority insists on clinging to power by whatever means necessary, surely there is no precedent for such behavior in our political system

NH law: “The presidential primary election shall be held on the second Tuesday in March or on a Tuesday selected by the secretary of state which is 7 days or more immediately preceding the date on which any other state shall hold a similar election, whichever is earlier, of each year when a president of the United States is to be elected or the year previous…”

nate silver is totally otm that iowa and nh are shitty states to start the primaries in

this wasn't really what was in dispute

He is right about why they are shitty as well.

We're sort of off topic now but VT is right that Nate's "dataset" is way too limited for him to be making authoritative claims

theres been maybe 7 competitive nonincumbent iowa caucuses in this timeframe, and fewer involving nonwhite candidates. nate describes that as “40 years of data” to huckster people into thinking that’s statistically significant. this fuckin bimbo i swear to god https://t.co/HXqWCNL9jY

— Virgil Xmas 🎄 (@virgiltexas) December 4, 2019

That's completely idiotic. There are other states than Iowa - I may be a foreigner, but I know as much - and the dynamic that certain demographics might like certain candidates is kinda well founded. From 40 years of data.

i do not understand the fucking point of this conversation

It's a tankie melt argument, as bad as anything centrists cook up. OF COURSE giving extra white states extra influence is bad for minority candidates.

i'm glad virgil was able to draw himself away from his glass cocaine table long enough to own nate silver and kamala harris all at once

theres been maybe 7 competitive nonincumbent iowa caucuses in this timeframe

from 1976-2016 there were 11 dem caucuses. 1996 and 2012 were non-competitive, but 1980 was definitely not.

"maybe 7" is the kind of hard data that i go crazy for

in another tweet VT agree that they're shitty unrepresentative/arbitrary states to start with! what's arguing against is making the case for that based on data wonkery

*what he's, misplaced my glass table

i do not understand the fucking point of this conversation

― american bradass (BradNelson), Thursday, December 5, 2019 10:30 AM (four minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Come on Simon, that's not what Nate did to begin with. That's a new argument VT concocted because he realized he was shitting himself in public.

We don't have to pretend we're idiots who don't know anything. 'Maybe 7' is a great example of this.

Come on Simon, that's not what Nate did to begin with. That's a new argument VT concocted because he realized he was shitting himself in public.

― Frederik B, Thursday, December 5, 2019 9:36 AM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

game knows game

God I miss the days where marxists were more likely to be hardcore history/sociology nerds, rather than podcasters who can't count to seven.

marxists are into hardcore history?

Fred and Mordy's nonstop po-faced posts and concern trolls in this thread are almost amusing.

and I once again ritually FP'd myself for helping stoke this

"now imagine you were a proletarian, and the bourgeoisie are appropriating the surplus value you create"

read that as "hardcore henry nerds"

Obama is from the Midwest & he only had 1 serious opponent in the 2008 primaries. It’s not rocket science. Nate Silver is otm about IA/NH imo.

Fred and Mordy's nonstop po-faced posts and concern trolls in this thread are almost amusing.

something something idpol

i thought about that but it's such a long way around to get there - if bernie were leading polls in iowa i understand why berners might feel affronted by the idea that iowa isn't a good state to start with but buttigieg is leading who everyone on ilx afaict thinks is an idiot so why should ppl like virgil, xyzzy, hurting whoever care about the argument that iowa is a bad state to start primaries in

Bernie's leading in NH though I think

according to rcp buttigieg is leading in both

probably because they're averaging in that St. Anselm poll that has Buttigieg up by 10. The others have Bernie ahead.

even so "bernie is leading in one of these two states if you ignore one of the polls therefore nate silver is an asshole for suggesting IA and NH aren't the best states for primaries" is some real genius brain level shit

IA & NH are terrible primary states for Dems AND Nate Silver is an asshole

what are we arguing about

otm

buttigieg is leading who everyone on ilx afaict thinks is an idiot

I do not think Buttigeig is an idiot. Far from it. He is a fairly bright young man. But I do think he is deliberately taking rhetorically vague or meaningless positions that pander to voters who are under-informed, provincial, or are themselves idiotic.

Additionally, he is making some rookie mistakes related to his complete lack of experience in running a national campaign or even a statewide campaign. He may learn enough in the next several months to make up for this deficiency, if he were to become the nominee. Or he may not.

buttigeig is going nowhere. he can maybe win iowa or new hampshire - too far out to tell - but as i mentioned above he has no non-white support. this is honestly biden's to lose, still.

Yeah I didn’t think it was possible for any of the legit candidates to fall below Biden in my estimation but here we are

shit wrong thread

"why should ppl like virgil, xyzzy, hurting whoever care about the argument that iowa is a bad state to start primaries in"

The head of the Danish film critics association is using what Nate Silver is saying to advance the opinion that Sanders isn't doing well. That tweet (and others like it) are showing he is full of it. You were going about how Corbyn is pretty much the British Trump so I'd expect it would be difficult for you to keep up.

I'm not head of the Danish film critics association yet. She is my flatmate.

Also, I thought this board agreed that no matter what happens we don't drag peoples personal lives into beef on the board?

Anyways, comrade alphabet explains it quite well never the less. Nate Silver says Sanders isn't doing so well, so he has to be discredited. That's it, basically. That the back and forth in question mostly shows virgil is wrong and silver is right, that's unfortunate, but as you can see it's not a problem for the already converted. Naysayers has to be discredited, no matter what.

Lol that was a joke. You are fairly open about your film writing on here.

And no Virgil was not proved wrong. And again, it's just one of many howlers from Nate as pundit. So you relying on him for your view on Sanders is funny but not surprising.

Difficult to see Pete doing well in SC. Confused about direction the thread has taken.

It's just not okay to make jokes out of other posters personal lives, how fucking hard is that to comprehend?

Seriously, it's like discussing with a toddler.

And that joke would be out of bounds if you actually were three years old, btw. Those are the rules.

Seriously you shouldn't be talking about people's ability to comprehend anything.

both of you should stop