Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:31 PM
hill2016 (1,772 posts)
Hopefully Hillary increases her lead to 250 - 300 tomorrow
to make it harder for Bernie to catch up. I think this is very doable!
|
39 replies, 1537 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
hill2016 | Mar 2016 | OP |
NurseJackie | Mar 2016 | #1 | |
HERVEPA | Mar 2016 | #3 | |
SheenaR | Mar 2016 | #5 | |
roguevalley | Mar 2016 | #11 | |
brooklynite | Mar 2016 | #18 | |
Chan790 | Mar 2016 | #33 | |
CajunBlazer | Mar 2016 | #35 | |
DCBob | Mar 2016 | #2 | |
SheenaR | Mar 2016 | #6 | |
DCBob | Mar 2016 | #8 | |
SheenaR | Mar 2016 | #9 | |
DCBob | Mar 2016 | #10 | |
Barack_America | Mar 2016 | #25 | |
DCBob | Mar 2016 | #29 | |
brooklynite | Mar 2016 | #19 | |
revbones | Mar 2016 | #4 | |
bigwillq | Mar 2016 | #28 | |
MoonRiver | Mar 2016 | #7 | |
morningfog | Mar 2016 | #12 | |
Ron Green | Mar 2016 | #13 | |
CajunBlazer | Mar 2016 | #36 | |
Carlo Marx | Mar 2016 | #14 | |
Alfresco | Mar 2016 | #20 | |
Logical | Mar 2016 | #24 | |
Alfresco | Mar 2016 | #26 | |
Betty Karlson | Mar 2016 | #15 | |
Alfresco | Mar 2016 | #16 | |
NurseJackie | Mar 2016 | #21 | |
Alfresco | Mar 2016 | #32 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #17 | |
CajunBlazer | Mar 2016 | #37 | |
GreatGazoo | Mar 2016 | #22 | |
Logical | Mar 2016 | #23 | |
mathewsleep | Mar 2016 | #27 | |
lumberjack_jeff | Mar 2016 | #30 | |
CajunBlazer | Mar 2016 | #38 | |
hill2016 | Mar 2016 | #39 | |
highprincipleswork | Mar 2016 | #31 | |
oldandhappy | Mar 2016 | #34 |
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:34 PM
NurseJackie (42,862 posts)
1. That's very likely ...
... and even if it's not that much, it will still be an INCREASE! Which means, of course, that Bernie falls further behind!
She with the most delegates gets the nomination. He with the fewest delegates returns to the Senate. Go, Hillary! ![]() |
Response to NurseJackie (Reply #1)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:36 PM
HERVEPA (6,107 posts)
3. Infantile post.
Response to NurseJackie (Reply #1)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:38 PM
SheenaR (2,052 posts)
5. I don't want to ruin your excitement
The lead was supposed to increase by 100+ tomorrow and she was and is expected by pundits to win all 5. It won't and she won't. By definition that is largely underperforming. So pump the brakes. The momentum is not in your favor
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() While I am at it, where should I send your shirt? http://www.bravenewlook.com/products/399255754?s=1&utm_source=facebook Safe to click btw |
Response to SheenaR (Reply #5)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:53 PM
roguevalley (40,656 posts)
11. since when have the pundits been right yet. She was supposed to obliterate him in Michigan
Response to roguevalley (Reply #11)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 01:26 PM
brooklynite (84,531 posts)
18. ...and instead he got a "virtual tie" (remember when that's what folks called Massachusetts?)
Bottom line, he still underperforming his targets; the goal here isn't to "win" States, it's to win enough delegates, and he's not.
|
Response to brooklynite (Reply #18)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 02:45 PM
Chan790 (20,176 posts)
33. Oh...they're both virtual ties. As was IA.
It's really stupid to call any of them a win for anybody. They're not moving the needle either way for Sanders or Clinton and at the convention, the delegates will offset sufficiently as to have no real impact on the outcome.
The only reason we have any attention to who wins a functional tie in a proportional primary is because ties in politics, like ties in sports, make for bad TV. Let's all stop feeding the media stupidity and call them what they are: ties and non-decisive wins where the assigned delegate-gain is less than a handful and has no clear impact. (If IA yesterday didn't show that...Clinton "won" the caucus...and lost the delegate vote in Mercer Co. yesterday, likely flipping the outcome statewide.) Winner-take-alls are different, but proportional contests can be and often are ties, actual or functional. |
Response to SheenaR (Reply #5)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 04:51 PM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
35. Say three states are "virtual ties" and FL and NC go big for Clinton
Bernie gets still further behind in delegates with 5 less states to contest. How is that good for Bernie?
In order to catch up before the convention Bernie needs to win big in a bunch of states while not losing any more by wide margins. Because if Hillary gets to the convention with even a one pledged delegate lead, the super delegates are going to give her the nomination on the first ballot. You with the jumping frog - show me a probable path for Bernie to catch up because I don't see one. |
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:36 PM
DCBob (24,689 posts)
2. Easily.. more likely around 320 after tomorrow.
![]() |
Response to DCBob (Reply #2)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:40 PM
SheenaR (2,052 posts)
6. Ayyyy
So she wins all 5 tomorrow?
|
Response to SheenaR (Reply #6)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:41 PM
DCBob (24,689 posts)
8. No.. but wins FL and NC big.
FL: 70-30
NC: 60-40 The rest are awash. |
Response to DCBob (Reply #8)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:43 PM
SheenaR (2,052 posts)
9. I got ya
Florida could certainly get out of hand. I'm basing mine on the premise that NC will be much closer.
That's why they are predictions. Someone is bound to be right! |
Response to SheenaR (Reply #9)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:44 PM
DCBob (24,689 posts)
10. You may be right about NC.
But Florida I am confident is going big for Hillary... very big.
|
Response to DCBob (Reply #10)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 02:14 PM
Barack_America (28,876 posts)
25. Can I quote you on that? 70-30. That's your prediction?
Response to Barack_America (Reply #25)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 02:19 PM
DCBob (24,689 posts)
29. Well close to it..
It all depends on whether "The Force" is with her!
![]() |
Response to DCBob (Reply #8)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 01:27 PM
brooklynite (84,531 posts)
19. I'm also giving her Ohio by a narrow margin
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:36 PM
revbones (3,660 posts)
4. Yes. We'll see tomorrow...
I'm seeing the opposing predictions on the Bernie side. It'll be interesting.
|
Response to revbones (Reply #4)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 02:17 PM
bigwillq (72,790 posts)
28. Congrats on 1,000 posts!
![]() |
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:41 PM
MoonRiver (36,925 posts)
7. Yes, it's going to be a very exciting and hopefully successful day for the Secretary!
![]() |
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 12:54 PM
morningfog (18,115 posts)
12. Won't happen. I think it will be on the order of 20-30.
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 01:00 PM
Ron Green (9,748 posts)
13. Something like that could happen; it would be a disaster of epic proportions
for the people of the United States and the world.
|
Response to Ron Green (Reply #13)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 04:54 PM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
36. Well, that's one opinion heard from
Wait we still have to hear from at least one hundred more before we can make a determination.
|
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 01:00 PM
Carlo Marx (98 posts)
14. Do you guys clap and cheer at your tv when Hillary name drops Henry Kissinger or quietly cringe?
How about when she stumbles and stammers to justify taking millions of dollars from Wall Street, "September 11" or "everybody's doing it"--do you whoop it up and high five over her brilliant response or awkwardly hope they move quickly to another topic?
|
Response to Carlo Marx (Reply #14)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 01:43 PM
Alfresco (1,698 posts)
20. Do you see RED when you read a pro-Hillary post? :-)
Response to Alfresco (Reply #20)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 02:11 PM
Logical (22,457 posts)
24. I see red, like gop red. Nt
Response to Logical (Reply #24)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 02:16 PM
Alfresco (1,698 posts)
26. I imagine republicans do too.
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 01:02 PM
Betty Karlson (7,231 posts)
15. You will understand I hope quite the opposite.
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 01:10 PM
Alfresco (1,698 posts)
16. She will. The press will be describing her lead as insurmountable putting added pressure on the BS.
Response to Alfresco (Reply #16)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 01:43 PM
NurseJackie (42,862 posts)
21. Such added pressure on the campaign will be reflected here proportionately as well.
Oh well. It won't last too much longer. Be patient.
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to NurseJackie (Reply #21)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 02:37 PM
Alfresco (1,698 posts)
32. Yep, won't be long now. :-)
![]() |
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 01:12 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
17. Hopefully, you will discover Wednesday that you "misspoke".
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #17)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 04:57 PM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
37. Wanna bet?
I had to say something - no one else replies to your posts and I didn't want you to get lonely.
|
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 01:45 PM
GreatGazoo (3,937 posts)
22. Hopefully we go forward with the most electable candidate.
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 02:09 PM
Logical (22,457 posts)
23. Lol, what was the point of this post?? Random thougts? Nt
Response to Logical (Reply #23)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 02:17 PM
mathewsleep (857 posts)
27. Day dreaming/wishful thinking
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 02:21 PM
lumberjack_jeff (33,224 posts)
30. It's all a football game to you, isn't it? n/t
Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #30)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 04:58 PM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
38. It really does come down to the math
and the math really isn't looking good for Bernie.
|
Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #30)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 10:18 PM
hill2016 (1,772 posts)
39. i assure you Sanders and his team
are watching the delegate count very very carefully
|
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 02:35 PM
highprincipleswork (3,111 posts)
31. Oh, hopefully she will not.
Response to hill2016 (Original post)
Mon Mar 14, 2016, 03:07 PM
oldandhappy (6,719 posts)