Not so Super Tuesday

[JackLuis]

Kasich wins Ohio!

Brokered Convention a real possibility?

Hillary wins Ohio, NC.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Hillary took FL too.

 

[RUlookingup]

Trump continues his March to the Presidency.

 

[grandprix1041]

Trump train

all aboard for Cleveland

 

[sr71plt]

It's a pretty super Tuesday for Clinton. She's even pulling more votes than Trump is except in Ohio and Missouri.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Looks like Sanders wins MO....but the live map I'm peeping

http://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president

Says (R)odham is getting the delegates anyhow because fuck the voters.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Looks like Sanders wins MO....but the live map I'm peeping

http://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president

Says (R)odham is getting the delegates anyhow because fuck the voters.

I did not look at the detailed map. The must have called one of the Congressional Districts for her.

 

[sr71plt]

Looks like Sanders wins MO....but the live map I'm peeping

http://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president

Says (R)odham is getting the delegates anyhow because fuck the voters.

Bullshit. Her in-the-booth voter numbers are higher than Sanders' are. What, you think people going to the polls are voters if they voted for Sanders but not if they voted for Clinton? Fooling yourself just means you're a fool. In the States she's winning, she's winning by big margins and vote percentages; where she has lost has been by small numbers, and nearly across the board this has been going on forever. Face it; more voters showing up at the polls across the board are voting for her than are voting for Sanders.

The only voters being fucked in the party are the Sanders' diehards, and, in the end, this is the case with the supporters of any candidate but one.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Oh Lordy.

 

[Aglaopheme]

It's really close. I had to check for myself I've never looked at how politico posts results. Yep, those are superdelegates.

 

[sr71plt]

Are you claiming that Clinton hasn't racked up more total primary voter votes (not that they've published them all, but she's doubled Sanders' votes in a couple of States) than Sanders has in the Super Tuesday primaries? If, so, I think you need to add again and maybe step back out of lalalalaland.

Guess some people will do anything to not face facts.

LATER:

I just did the numbers as of a few minutes ago (12:45 a.m.) for those who can't face facts:

As of now, Clinton won four primaries today and is slightly leading in one. Sanders has won zero.

Total Clinton vote over today's primaries: 3,638,250

Total Sanders vote over today's primaries: 2,761,913

Clinton received 876,337 more votes today than Bernie Sanders did--with no consideration of delegates at all, let alone superdelegates. Clinton has won more votes on every day they've come head to head in a vote.

Now tell me one more time that Sanders is having the vote stolen from him.

It is mostly about delegates, but in a two-person race, you simply can't win if you can't get more voter votes on any day you are in a head-to-head race with your opponent.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Me?

No one has said that. You just pulled that right out of thin air. Bot was talking about the State of Missouri. She's just pulled ahead in MO and it looks like she'll stay there based one the one remaining county to report.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Hillary the "apparent winner" in MO.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I did not look at the detailed map. The must have called one of the Congressional Districts for her.

Doesn't matter....he's not going to win, Democrats prefer Wall St. Billionaires.

They have gone full republican.

Bullshit. Her in-the-booth voter numbers are higher than Sanders' are.

They weren't when I posted that you hysterical fuck head.

The only voters being fucked in the party are the Sanders' diehards, and, in the end, this is the case with the supporters of any candidate but one.

No everyone is getting fucked you Goldman Sachs Dick sucker.

 

[sr71plt]

They weren't when I posted that you hysterical fuck head.

Yes, they were, you dimwit. She was leading in total votes from the first vote count report. You can fool yourself, but you can't alter facts.

She isn't going to need any superdelegates. She's won every primary election day--taken in total on the day--they've had so far. Who do you think you are fooling other than yourself?

Do I think Sanders should drop out? No, She didn't eight years ago and his presence keeps her challenged and the Democratic platform out there. He should continue as long as he wants and until they make some sort of accommodation for him to be in her administration and given a voice on policy--because he has, in fact, shown that he has significant support for his views. She needs to have as many of his supporters happy--along with him--at the end of the day.

But is he winning? No, certainly not. Is he even holding his own? No, certainly not. The best you can say is that is putting on a better showing than just about anyone thought he would and, therefore, he represents significant sentiment that needs to be accommodated (not as much in the actual party, though. He wasn't a Democrat until just before the primaries and his strongest support isn't from Democrats--it's from independents. The Democrats would still like to have their votes in the general election, of course.)

 

[BotanyBoy]

Yes, they were, you dimwit. She was leading in total votes from the first vote count report.

Not on that link she wasn't...sorry you're simply wrong, right until the end it was showing Sanders leading by nearly 2% and Hillary with the delegates.


Of course he's not, we still have to many Wall St. Reagan worshiping (D)'s around who haven't learned yet. We need some (R)odham love, watch that income disparity stay heading steady headed straight into orbit while she laughs at us all for being dumb enough to elect ANOTHER Sachs employee.

Give it time, someone like sanders is going in office in the near future.

 

[Wrong Element]

I may be wrong because I'm understandably not really up on the thought processes of conservatives, but I wonder if Trump was hurt in Ohio by the bizarre negative ad against Kasich he had up these last few days. It was so over the top, all you could do was laugh. Trying to tell GOP voters that Kasich has been a terrible governor was a fools' errand -- the guy is crazy popular here among Republicans, and I suspect they didn't take well to some New Yorker telling them they're dopes for thinking so.

I was trying to think if any Ohio pol has ever won a primary before. I'm pretty sure John Glenn was shut out in 1984. A momentous occasion, indeed, even though he's never had my vote for anything.

Kasich wins Ohio!

Brokered Convention a real possibility?

Hillary wins Ohio, NC.

I thought stopping Trump from sweeping Ohio and Florida was necessary for there still to be the possibility of the mythical brokered convention happening, not only because of the delegates Trump would have won otherwise, but because a third candidate continuing in the race is almost necessary. Right now Rubio and Kasich combined have around 300 delegates. Kasich needs to keep winning a few here and there, even if he doesn't win any more states (and I'm not sure he can).

I don;t know what Kasich's money situation is, but it can't be too good. And given that his position is still pretty damn unlikely, I don't know how much of that sweet, sweet establishment cash might be coming his way.


BTW, Kasich won 47 percent in Ohio, higher than any winning percentage Trump had tonight. The Donald is still having trouble cracking 40 percent outside of the snake-handling states (and oddly enough, Massachusetts). With only 3 candidates left, he's about out of excuses as to why he still hasn't topped 50 in any state, something even Cruz has managed (Wyoming). Unless that changes, I think we're going to have a nominee picked in Cleveland.

Do I think Sanders should drop out? No, She didn't eight years ago and his presence keeps her challenged and the Democratic platform out there. He should continue as long as he wants and until they make some sort of accommodation for him to be in her administration and given a voice on policy--because he has, in fact, shown that he has significant support for his views. She needs to have as many of his supporters happy--along with him--at the end of the day.

But is he winning? No, certainly not. Is he even holding his own? No, certainly not. The best you can say is that is putting on a better showing than just about anyone thought he would and, therefore, he represents significant sentiment that needs to be accommodated (not as much in the actual party, though. He wasn't a Democrat until just before the primaries and his strongest support isn't from Democrats--it's from independents. The Democrats would still like to have their votes in the general election, of course.)

Sanders is running to spotlight his ideology as much as trying to actually win the nomination, so I think he will stay in the race till the end, as Jesse Jackson did when he ran. He probably has the money to do so, though I suspect keeping up his lunatic fundraising pace might be a little harder now.

I suspect, though, that Hillary will increasingly ignore him and start working on her November themes. Not sure if the Dems have any more debates scheduled, but if not, there probably won't be a big clamor for them.

I ended up voting for Sanders in the end, though it was a very close call. If Hillary was going to win Ohio anyway, best that it be decisive, and it (surprisingly) was.

 

[sr71plt]

Not on that link she wasn't...sorry you're simply wrong, right until the end it was showing Sanders leading by nearly 2% and Hillary with the delegates.

In your dreams. Don't know what you were watching, but Clinton never was behind Bernie in the first states reporting yesterday--and then never was behind him in the aggregate for the rest of the race. God god, she had more than double his votes in Florida, the first state starting to report. She beat him yesterday by nearly 900,000 votes in the aggregate. Your statement that he's beating her in votes if it wasn't for the superdelegates is a pile of shit and was from the very beginning. She's always beaten him in the aggregate on polling days.

You're just being a dumb shit on this. I'm not wild about Clinton, but I'm not stupid enough to fool myself over who is winning in that party and has been winning all along. The kicker is that Sanders has done so well in a nomination that supposedly was tied up from the get go. That's a good thing--makes her accommodate a few issues he's pushing and has kept her in fighting fettle. You're saying on a porn site discussion board that she's somehow stealing a nomination that's been hers from the get go, albeit with more opposition than was anticipated, isn't going to change or affect reality one iota. It just makes you look stupid.

 

[BotanyBoy]

In your dreams. Don't know what you were watching,

I provided a link guy.....and until nearly 95% of the state had reported Sanders had a 1.5-2.3% lead in the vote but no delegates.

Just because you didn't care to look, doesn't mean it wasn't there. Sorry that's just not how the world works.

I'm not wild about Clinton

Been swingin' from her tit since she announced her candidacy.

Your statement that he's beating her in votes if it wasn't for the superdelegates is a pile of shit and was from the very beginning.

Oh look SR is making shit up again...
http://blogforarizona.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/gomer_pyle.jpg

I said he's beating her in Blue states, which is largely still true.

I have also said that Sanders couldn't win if he had any less than 70% of the popular vote to override the supers who are all bought and paid for by (R)odham Sachs and I still believe that largely to be true.

You're saying on a porn site discussion board that she's somehow stealing a nomination

That's your made up fantasy guy.....I just reported the information I had with a link that was reporting information that looked pretty fucked up.

Your leap to conclusions/assumptions about me aren't my problem nor do they reflect my intelligence as much as they do your emotional maturity and lack of self control.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

The FOX dimwits base their numbers on proportional delegates in states that winner take all. Duh.

 

[BotanyBoy]

The FOX dimwits base their numbers on proportional delegates in states that winner take all. Duh.

According to this WTA is a Republican thing.

http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2016-presidential-primary-schedule-calendar/

And the results here seem to reflect that.
http://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president

 

[sr71plt]

I provided a link guy.....and until nearly 95% of the state had reported Sanders had a 1.5-2.3% lead in the vote but no delegates.

This sure does highlight your hopeless stupidity. The votes were in before there was any reporting. I wont bother to go back and look at whatever link you're talking about because it's laughably ridiculous and irrelevant to reality. The votes were in when the poll closed. She doubled him in votes in Florida as of the time the polls closed.

You're getting to be really, really amusing in your stupidity, desperation, and refusal to recognize reality.

And, as far as who anyone backs, I've never been whole hog for Hillary. Out of all the losers and "couldn't get a bill passed" candidates, though, she's the only one who is actually a choice. Would be nice to see some others come out of the woodwork even at this late date. That said, I think I've exhibited more objectively here than most others--certainly more than a blind idiot like you have.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I wont bother to go back and look at whatever link

That was your first mistake, yes the one that led to you sticking your foot in your mouth.


The moment is gone it was a live report, and it showed sanders leading MO but not getting any delegates, which looked odd and kinda shady.

The rest of your irrelevant bullshitting about FL and pointless blather are just a cover for the fact that you're now realizing you probably fucked up on some highly emotional semi delusional kneejerk derp and wound up looking like an asshat.

Well...ya did.

http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/disneycreate/images/8/82/39400-Val-Kilmer-you-may-go-now-gif-Etao.gif/revision/latest?cb=20140119020559

 

[sr71plt]

Sanders is running to spotlight his ideology as much as trying to actually win the nomination, so I think he will stay in the race till the end, as Jesse Jackson did when he ran. He probably has the money to do so, though I suspect keeping up his lunatic fundraising pace might be a little harder now.

I suspect, though, that Hillary will increasingly ignore him and start working on her November themes. Not sure if the Dems have any more debates scheduled, but if not, there probably won't be a big clamor for them.

I ended up voting for Sanders in the end, though it was a very close call. If Hillary was going to win Ohio anyway, best that it be decisive, and it (surprisingly) was.

I think Hillary is going to increasingly fold him in (as she can), not ignore him. He has whole demographics of voters behind him that she needs either to win over or neutralize. She needs him and his inside the tent. She wants (and this appears to be) pretty much the 2008 scenario. She stuck around until June in 2008, showing that she was a force to be reckoned with even if she wasn't going to win, and Obama had to include her in his administration (remember that each proposed the other take the VP slot in that race). I can see Sanders doing the same thing she did in 2008--opt for party unity and for a say in the administration.

I suppose Sanders could be offered the VP slot. I've thought that might go to Tim Kaine, VA senator, who is from a key state, is a Clinton supporter, and was party chief during the Clinton presidency. An added bonus would be clearing the VA senatorial seat for current VA governor Terry McAuliff, who was Bill Clinton's campaign chairman.

 

[sr71plt]

That was your first mistake, yes the one that led to you sticking your foot in your mouth.


The moment is gone it was a live report, and it showed sanders leading MO but not getting any delegates, which looked odd and kinda shady.

The rest of your irrelevant bullshitting about FL and pointless blather are just a cover for the fact that you're now realizing you probably fucked up on some highly emotional semi delusional kneejerk derp and wound up looking like an asshat.

Well...ya did.

You're too far off into lalalaland even to respond to at this point. Enjoy yourself off in the land of irrelevancy and idiocy. Anyone like you obviously doesn't have an effect on anything.