So how 'bout that bird though?
It gave Sanders the one thing he needed.
Even. More. Memes.
It gave Sanders the one thing he needed.
Even. More. Memes.
2016 Election Clusterfun
- Thread starter Colonel Thunder
- Start date
I'm so fucking tired of Bernie Sanders memes. People act like he's the second coming of Jesus.
But on the other hand, I think that a lot of good can be done by especially his most fervent supporters. I mean, just think of what'll happen after a Bernie dropout. We'd see a massive increase in consumer spending from all the ice packs and anal creams bought to treat their butthurt after riding Bernie's dick for the last year. To say nothing of r/sandersforpresident becoming the biggest salt mine since the Pacific Ocean.
To be fair, I assume it's of a very appreciable size. Much bigger than, say, Trump's, on the basis that his tiny fingers probably correspond to general extremity length all around.
"Let me tell you, women love my penis. It's a really big penis. It's a really great penis. And it's going to be even greater once I'm president. And the Mexicans are going to pay for it!"
……………………„„-~^^~„-„„_
………………„-^*'' : : „'' : : : : *-„
…………..„-* : : :„„--/ : : : : : : : '\
…………./ : : „-* . .| : : : : : : : : '|
……….../ : „-* . . . | : : : : : : : : |
………...\„-* . . . . .| : : : : : : : :'|
……….../ . . . . . . '| : : : : : : : :|
……..../ . . . . . . . .'\ : : : : : : : |
……../ . . . . . . . . . .\ : : : : : : :|
……./ . . . . . . . . . . . '\ : : : : : /
….../ . . . . . . . . . . . . . *-„„„„-*'
….'/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '|
…/ . . . . . . . ./ . . . . . . .|
../ . . . . . . . .'/ . . . . . . .'|
./ . . . . . . . . / . . . . . . .'|
'/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'|
'| . . . . . \ . . . . . . . . . .|
'| . . . . . . \„_^- „ . . . . .'|
'| . . . . . . . . .'\ .\ ./ '/ . |
| .\ . . . . . . . . . \ .'' / . '|
| . . . . . . . . . . / .'/ . . .|
| . . . . . . .| . . / ./ ./ . .|
Yeah. Caucus + Naturally favorable + Like no effort by Hillary is leading to impressively strong performances by Bernie, much better than expected. It's a good sign for him. He'll win Wyoming for sure, and probably in that same exceptional range.
As for Wisconsin, well we've had one poll last week that put Hillary at +6, and nothing else, and I'm skeptical of it. I still believe Wisconsin to be a Bernie favorable state because it is white af and all, though I don't think he'll win it by the same degree he did the last few states. If the Emerson poll is right and Bernie loses (or at least doesn't win by a good margin), then that's pretty bad. But I don't think that'll happen. It's an open primary though, and while it's not as good as an open caucus for Bernie, it's much better than a closed primary considering how many unaffiliated young voters there are. I think he'll pass through here fine. Somewhere in the Minnesota range, maybe a bit better.
Of course, all eyes are truly on New York. It's the next guillotine state that the Bernie campaign has to survive. Like Michigan was ahead of the ides of March, New York is the vanguard for the five states voting a week after. Connecticut, Delaware, Rhode Island, Maryland, and Pennsylvania. I think this was Hillary's strategy. Let Bernie have his wins (although she's probably trying to at least pull in a less embarrassing performance in Wisconsin after such blowouts), and put him to rest in the closed primaries of the not-rural Northeast. Meanwhile Bernie's really pulling for the results of Massachusetts to be a fluke, and depending on the naturally liberal tilt of these states to come through for him, while Hillary's banking on their minority populations and affluence.
@Firedemon my biggest issue after a brief look through that article is that the only demographic split it seems to be talking about is race. That's... unrealistic and an extremely simplified view of the democratic electorate. Regardless, even then you can see the author mentioning racial shares of the electorate and it's juxtaposed in a way that really undercuts the declared targets. For example, the author mentions the CA and NJ electorate was 40-50% minority, but Bernie's target is winning by 10 and 16 pt margins respectively. Same thing happens in Maryland. Notes it as 47% minority in 2008 with mention of how many are black and black women, and has Hillary winning at only 55 as the the requirement. Bernie couldn't break 40% in the border states of Arizona or Texas, yet the necessary target is 47% in New Mexico. I'm not saying it doesn't show a nice path of mostly decent wins with a few losses, but that doesn't mean those wins are actually realistic. Need doesn't mean should.
Targets aren't necessarily predictions. "This is what we think you need to get" isn't the same as "This is what we think you will get". This is a good example of that. Obviously the second should go into the first if you want your targets to actually be properly set up, and they're still very useful tools of evaluating how a candidate is doing. They let you see how they're performing in a way that (theoretically) accounts for the noise of states being naturally favorable to one side or another, and that's really useful. The problem is that they don't come with difficulty levels. Needless to say, the one listed in that NPR article is set to hard mode.
It does make a good point about Bernie being able to take pride in getting his message out. Bernie's candidacy is, in a nutshell, picking up the fallen mantle of the failed Occupy Wall Street movement and trying to accomplish something with it. He's seeking the standard populist route of forcing his cause onto a major political party with more muscle to accomplish it than he ever will. And, while it's too early to call, he's clearly done a better job of it than Occupy ever did.
As for Wisconsin, well we've had one poll last week that put Hillary at +6, and nothing else, and I'm skeptical of it. I still believe Wisconsin to be a Bernie favorable state because it is white af and all, though I don't think he'll win it by the same degree he did the last few states. If the Emerson poll is right and Bernie loses (or at least doesn't win by a good margin), then that's pretty bad. But I don't think that'll happen. It's an open primary though, and while it's not as good as an open caucus for Bernie, it's much better than a closed primary considering how many unaffiliated young voters there are. I think he'll pass through here fine. Somewhere in the Minnesota range, maybe a bit better.
Of course, all eyes are truly on New York. It's the next guillotine state that the Bernie campaign has to survive. Like Michigan was ahead of the ides of March, New York is the vanguard for the five states voting a week after. Connecticut, Delaware, Rhode Island, Maryland, and Pennsylvania. I think this was Hillary's strategy. Let Bernie have his wins (although she's probably trying to at least pull in a less embarrassing performance in Wisconsin after such blowouts), and put him to rest in the closed primaries of the not-rural Northeast. Meanwhile Bernie's really pulling for the results of Massachusetts to be a fluke, and depending on the naturally liberal tilt of these states to come through for him, while Hillary's banking on their minority populations and affluence.
@Firedemon my biggest issue after a brief look through that article is that the only demographic split it seems to be talking about is race. That's... unrealistic and an extremely simplified view of the democratic electorate. Regardless, even then you can see the author mentioning racial shares of the electorate and it's juxtaposed in a way that really undercuts the declared targets. For example, the author mentions the CA and NJ electorate was 40-50% minority, but Bernie's target is winning by 10 and 16 pt margins respectively. Same thing happens in Maryland. Notes it as 47% minority in 2008 with mention of how many are black and black women, and has Hillary winning at only 55 as the the requirement. Bernie couldn't break 40% in the border states of Arizona or Texas, yet the necessary target is 47% in New Mexico. I'm not saying it doesn't show a nice path of mostly decent wins with a few losses, but that doesn't mean those wins are actually realistic. Need doesn't mean should.
Targets aren't necessarily predictions. "This is what we think you need to get" isn't the same as "This is what we think you will get". This is a good example of that. Obviously the second should go into the first if you want your targets to actually be properly set up, and they're still very useful tools of evaluating how a candidate is doing. They let you see how they're performing in a way that (theoretically) accounts for the noise of states being naturally favorable to one side or another, and that's really useful. The problem is that they don't come with difficulty levels. Needless to say, the one listed in that NPR article is set to hard mode.
It does make a good point about Bernie being able to take pride in getting his message out. Bernie's candidacy is, in a nutshell, picking up the fallen mantle of the failed Occupy Wall Street movement and trying to accomplish something with it. He's seeking the standard populist route of forcing his cause onto a major political party with more muscle to accomplish it than he ever will. And, while it's too early to call, he's clearly done a better job of it than Occupy ever did.
Thank you Secret Service.
Then why does he write about how his woman would be better off being raped by a group of men?
tl;dr, Bernie wrote some fucked up shit when he was younger.
Tonight's story is Wisconsin. Polls are closing about now, so let's look at the stakes.
The Democrats
So the general consensus is that Hillary's already won, she just needs to hit more states. Bernie, however, has vowed to stick it out until the bitter end, so this is still kindof a thing. Let's start by looking at the original 538 delegate targets:
Hillary: 38/86
Bernie: 48/86
Basically, "on track" means a 55-44 victory for Bernie, or a solid 10 point win. Keep in mind, these are the original targets. Bernie really fell behind in the south by having all the appeal of a Republican to minorities. In order to keep going for the nomination, he needs to hit a new set of targets. Nate Silver finagled a Bernie Miracle path here. The new target is a small bump to 50 delegates, which requires a 58-42 victory. He is unlikely to hit this margin. He will still win the state.
The Republicans
So Wisconsin's 42 delegates are given out as follows: 18 to the overall winner, and then 3 to the winner of each congressional district. And Wisconsin has 8 districts.
Cruz is likely go come home with the 18 point prize, in fact, it's already been called for him because he fucking slaughtered Trump here. He was beating Trump in the polls, and Trump almost never outperforms his polling average. He does terrible with late-deciding voters. The question is who takes what districts? Trump's real goal is to take home a few districts, so if he accomplishes that then he's happy. Kasich also wants to win one of them, and try and prove that he can actually help with the "stop trump" cause. Cruz is putting his eyes on a statewide sweep.
Cruz has already won the 4th district (Milwaukee), as well as the fifth, which is primarily Milwaukee suburbs.
While we wait for a final call on Bernie's victory margin, this is where the fun'll be.
Tonight's story is Wisconsin. Polls are closing about now, so let's look at the stakes.
The Democrats
So the general consensus is that Hillary's already won, she just needs to hit more states. Bernie, however, has vowed to stick it out until the bitter end, so this is still kindof a thing. Let's start by looking at the original 538 delegate targets:
Hillary: 38/86
Bernie: 48/86
Basically, "on track" means a 55-44 victory for Bernie, or a solid 10 point win. Keep in mind, these are the original targets. Bernie really fell behind in the south by having all the appeal of a Republican to minorities. In order to keep going for the nomination, he needs to hit a new set of targets. Nate Silver finagled a Bernie Miracle path here. The new target is a small bump to 50 delegates, which requires a 58-42 victory. He is unlikely to hit this margin. He will still win the state.
The Republicans
So Wisconsin's 42 delegates are given out as follows: 18 to the overall winner, and then 3 to the winner of each congressional district. And Wisconsin has 8 districts.
Cruz is likely go come home with the 18 point prize, in fact, it's already been called for him because he fucking slaughtered Trump here. He was beating Trump in the polls, and Trump almost never outperforms his polling average. He does terrible with late-deciding voters. The question is who takes what districts? Trump's real goal is to take home a few districts, so if he accomplishes that then he's happy. Kasich also wants to win one of them, and try and prove that he can actually help with the "stop trump" cause. Cruz is putting his eyes on a statewide sweep.
Cruz has already won the 4th district (Milwaukee), as well as the fifth, which is primarily Milwaukee suburbs.
While we wait for a final call on Bernie's victory margin, this is where the fun'll be.
Last edited: