Buttload of Faith: the 2016 Presidential Primary Thread (Pt 2)

Yeah, Hillary was looking for Gore vs. Bradley type results (63-37 in Iowa), not an actual fight. I think it looks good for Sanders, but ymmv.

Iowa has a minuscule number of delegates but the democrats apportion them by district. The republicans have changed how they do it three or four times in Iowa because the organizers were literally counting votes and declaring themselves the delegates and then voting for whoever they wanted at the convention!

and what is the incentive for the media to declare Hillary inevitable exactly? doesn't a tight race generate more clicks and eyeballs? xxp

like I cannot even explain how dumb the evolution of republican straw poll/caucus crap has been in this state

btw my theory is still that Iowa republicans are into picking the most batshit candidate, it's just that enough of them didn't even view Trump as an actual candidate, and Cruz reads as a politician but nuts

Cruz is telling everyone "Morning is Coming"

and "Yes We Can," wow this guy

according to HuffPo the gap between clinton and sanders is getting bigger in favor of clinton

also he was just talking about how "THAT is the power of grass roots" but for a second I thought he said "the power of craft services"

the only accurate website is this one iirc https://www.idpcaucuses.com/#/state

it's the direct line to the iowa democratic party

It reminded me of "You don't know the power of the dark side"

alternatively: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/pages/interactives/elections-results-primaries-2016/#/

national sites are just hitting refresh really fast on local sites or are relying on exit polls

wow Bill Clinton is looking pretty rough these days.

xxp how is winning by less than a percentage point 'inevitable' tho, even in media-logic

― j., Monday, February 1, 2016 11:20 PM (9 minutes ago)

because a lot of voters aren't watching the results unfold in real time like we are. most people are going to see that clinton won, say oh yeah, she was supposed to win right, and that will be that

Bill standing behind her open-mouthed is such a distraction... not a helpful visual imo

xp yeah but they might see uh a 'box score'

'huh 50% huh?'

sticker-faced guy in the background is even worse

clinton couldn't even win clinton county, what a disaster for her campaign

Are Clinton and Sanders splitting the delegates either way, or will the winner come away with one extra?

it'll be close

The biggest indicator in Cruz's victory speech that his campaign will crash and burn is that he proudly used the phrase "Judeo-Christian values." That is a huge RED FLAG for more people than it isn't, even among casual Christians. When you start dropping "Judeo-Christian" into the conversation, people think of Falwell and Robertson.

I'm assuming the percentages are actually number of delegates they got out of the total allocated. I don't think "votes" are counted in the percentages, or at least I hope not xp

huh apparently they are, which... popular vote numbers are useless here, as usual

Clinton currently at 22, Sanders at 21

The biggest indicator in Cruz's victory speech that his campaign will crash and burn is that he proudly used the phrase "Judeo-Christian values." That is a huge RED FLAG for more people than it isn't, even among casual Christians. When you start dropping "Judeo-Christian" into the conversation, people think of Falwell and Robertson.

Well at least things ain't boring

I like the phrase "People of the Book"

Bernie needs a lozenge

Much as I love the guy, every time I see him on TV I wish he would carry around a nice tall mug of soothing chamomile.

clinton 663-660 sanders

the only accurate website is this one iirc https://www.idpcaucuses.com/#/state

it's the direct line to the iowa democratic party

― μpright mammal (mh), Tuesday, February 2, 2016 4:29 AM (33 minutes ago)

i keep checking back to this site and clinton's score keeps wobbling back and forth from 49.9 to 49.8, it's kind of stomach-churning. (sanders is at 49.6 percent.) and it just changed again as i was writing this. what a night.

Ok, I didn't realize that Fort Raccoon had merely been a suggested name for the location.

the demoines register site seems to be the most up-to-date

(and reports to two decimal points)

is it too simple-minded to think the older voters would have been more likely to vote earlier hence counted earlier? (thus, sanders could close the gap?)

msnbc totally waited until they could update clinton's total from 665 to 667.

bullshit

I would like to see Ted Cruz put up against a not-yet-invented military technology that would vaporize his insides in a flash of light.

bernie's making one last push, but it doesn't look good. the big county with de moines in it still has 22 precints left to report, and it's been solid hilary

amazing showing though. closer than anyone had it being

o'malley is the nader of the democratic primary I would blame him

I don't hear any pundits questioning the clichéd characterization of the Dem race as a conflict between "passion" vs "getting things done"

xp all the news is about how hip young people have been flocking to dsm the past several years soooo

i've seen graphs indicating that sanders basically took the youth vote, clinton the older vote, decreasingly or increasingly, respectively, but turnout in the top two age brackets was just higher as a share of the total turnout

intentional pun? (iatee)

I like the phrase "People of the Book"

if he loses a close race then hilary's inevitability is just confirmed

If this is true, we deserve a dictatorship.

O'Malley and Huckabee quit btw

I have no idea which of these three guys will win the Republican nomination. None.

Let me help you: Rubio.

i can't really figure out why o'malley stayed in the race this long.

That's why I said it! xxp

And it doesn't quite, it is how Muslims refer to other abrahamic religions pre-islam

My middle name is "earnestly explains someone else's joke" so

With 99% reporting there's a .14% lead for Clinton over Sanders. This shit defies predictability, apparently.