Now that that dolt -Ted Cruz- can no longer
- Thread starter EERs 3:16
- Start date
He'll continue to suck, all his sad little life. He's counting on getting the nomination through a brokered convention, because many in the mainstream are so blinded with horror by Trump the Terrible that they actually believe Ted to be a viable alternative.
Unless Bernie decides to run as an Independent - he may split the vote enough that the Republican nominee wins. Not advocating it, just a possibility.
Indeed. I think it's more likely that Trump would split off if he doesn't get the nomination.
Yeah. Not getting my blood racing either.
When this is all over, the GOP needs to do some serious soul searching. This election illustrated to all that the GOP lacks support from their own constituency and I can see how it could get worse. The party is fully engulfed in flames and where they go from here is anyone's guess.
Last edited:
Me too. She had so much momentum from the get-go that I think other good candidates figured she was unbeatable.
The GOP does fine at the local and state lever, much better than the Dems, it's the national level where they get killed with their stupidity.
Going against Ol Bernie and Martin she was unbeatable. It was set up for her from the start.
I know its popular to say this about the GOP but have you noticed the candidates fielded by the democrats yet? Have noticed the far leftists driving the agenda of the DNC? It's not a party problem. It's a national problem.
The dem candidates have strong support from the party and there's no infighting within the party. It's a cohesive unit.
Last edited:
That's what I keep trying to tell people - nobody is talking about a brokered convention in Philadelphia or talking about Hillary's candidacy being a disaster for the party or desperately trying to draft somebody else to run. The GOP has done all of those things and the primaries aren't even over yet. And the prospect of Hillary as president doesn't have our allies spooked: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/trump-terrifies-world-leaders-222233
Because the the leftists have drowned out the moderates doesn't make it a cohesive party. You'd see more defections if the republicans weren't also a mess.
There will always be philosophical differences across a cross section of a party. But in the end, the dems will select a candidate that they feel represents the core principles of the party. It is a very functional process. The GOP voters had to reach far outside the GOP candidate pool to get a candidate they want. Now the party wants to veto the wishes of the voters in a contested convention. This is as dysfunctional as you can get.
The dems would be in more trouble if not for the super delegates. The comfortable lead that Hillary enjoys includes 93% of the super delegates (Bill Clinton is one). Taking out the supers, she has a 1428 to 1151 lead in delegates. She has 502 of 540 supers. If those were split pro-rata, she would have 299 to Bernie's 241. That would drop her lead from 1930 to 1180 down to 1727 to 1392 with 2383 being the magic number. It should be closer.
All this sounds like I'm ragging on the Dem's process, but the GOP process isn't much better in many states. Several states don't elect pledged delegates in the primary. A lot of them hold party caucuses after the fact to elect the delegates, and some of those states are going to elect delegates who will vote for a specific favorite after the first ballot. For example, they may have to vote for the winner of the primary, say it's Trump, on the first ballot, but all of the delegates are Cruz supporters. It stinks of a rigged system without having to employ a tactic like super delegates. Worse yet, PA has a horrible system. The winner of PA gets 17 delegates on the first ballot. The remaining 54 are directly elected without having to declare how they will vote on any ballot. I heard a news guy in PA say that he contacted 4 delegates on his local ballot. One said he was a Cruz supporter, one said she would vote first ballot how the district voted, and 2 said that they weren't sure how they would vote yet. He has to choose 3 people from that group. He also had to contact them directly to find out the information. That's a horrible system.
The dem process is flawed just as you pointed out. I wish they would get rid of the superdelegates all together. Let it all come down to whomever the people vote for.
The dem superdelegates are doing the same thing the GOP proposes to do in convention.
No they aren't. First, superdelegates have been part of the Democrats' nominating process since 1982, and second, Bernie isn't leading Hillary in the delegate count. So once again, nobody on that side is trying to figure out a way to keep the candidate who's winning every freaking primary from getting the nomination the way the GOP is with Trump. I find it hilarious that the GOP mainstream is appalled at the monster they unleashed after almost 8 years of pandering to White working class anger and ignorance.
"Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don't have to be in a position where they are running against grass-roots activists."--DNC Chairperson, Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
In other words, superdelegates exist to subvert the vote of the people if the people do not vote in harmony with party leadership wishes.
The issue is that she has a lead of 277 in elected delegate (out of 2579 so far). She has a 464 delegate lead in the super delegates out of the 540 assigned so far. Take a state like Wisconsin for example. Sanders won that state by 13.5%, and he got 48 delegates to Clinton's 38. The problem he faces is that state is likely a tie for him when the 10 super delegates vote.
I don't get this notion that Hillary is some crazy left-wing radical. You can say lots of bad things about Hillary--she's slimy, sleazy, underhanded, dishonest, corrupt, a corporate sellout, a likely rape-enabler, etc. But accusing her of extremism is one thing that simply doesn't correlate well with the facts. She's more in the pocket of Wall Street and business interests than probably any Dem or GOP candidate. She might talk a game about regulations, but ultimately she's an incrementalist and compromiser, if not a complete waffler when the chips are down in the battle of Joe public vs. corporate America. She's a war hawk and fully committed to the perpetuation of war profiteering and the military industrial complex. She and her husband ushered in welfare reform and declared 'the era of big govt over.' I'm not saying she's a Republican, but she'd do one hell of a job playing one on TV most of the time. Social liberalism? She, like Obama didn't 'evolve' on gay marriage until it was already patently obvious that a growing majority of the country had. The only reason at all she's even given token gestures to her progressive base is because of having to campaign against Bernie Sanders. The one somewhat leftist position she has latched onto is guns. I will concede that. I think she's more about using that issue for riling the base, rather than making serious plans to push more restrictions. It's a battle that's already been lost. The gun issue is off the table in America, for all practical purposes.
Hitchens was once quoted (my paraphrasing), "I'm often asked why it is that liberals dislike the Clintons so much. The far better question is why so many conservatives do, considering he helped deliver so much of their 80's agenda in the 90's." I think it's a question worth asking, if we're being honest about people's respective spots on the political spectrum.
Hitchens was once quoted (my paraphrasing), "I'm often asked why it is that liberals dislike the Clintons so much. The far better question is why so many conservatives do, considering he helped deliver so much of their 80's agenda in the 90's." I think it's a question worth asking, if we're being honest about people's respective spots on the political spectrum.
Nonsense. The nickname "super delegate" merely designates delegates who are not bound by the result of a primary or caucus. Every one of those super delegates is free to vote for Bernie at the convention if they so choose - not that many of them will. Stop trying to gloss over what the GOP is doing to itself with the playground tactic of "but look at them!" - I repeat, Hillary is leading the delegate count, but nobody is trying to derail Hillary from getting the nomination, unlike Trump, who is leading in the delegate count and has his party stumbling around like blind dogs in the meat house trying to figure out to keep the nomination out of his hands.
Will Hillary be her sweet little ole self if she wins. Hell of a lot of power assigned to a woman with long-term memory who was scorned 8 years ago.. Remember those Democrat power brokers who abandoned her and jumped on Obama's train? Should they look over their shoulder to see if Bill or Hill is in the shadows? Unless she is going to immediately start campaigning for next time, the two of them could be tough cats to have after you. For History, Bill was absolutely dangerous with the tales he could leak when he no longer needed support. Reportedly Hillary had about 400 tax forms from Republican finance people scattered over her bedroom floor.
Good comments.......thats why I posted several day ago that some folks might be in for a surprise or big letdown if she becomes the POTUS.
The DNC chair says it's not nonsense. It's a quote. I don't think what the GOP is doing with Trump is a problem. The GOP decided to solve these problems in conference. The DNC decided to solve the same problem with superdelegates.
You seem to think by defining superdelegate you somehow supported your point. You didn't. You made mine. In NH each of the 24 bound delegates is equal to 10,457 votes. That means that each superdelegate's pledge is of equal weight as 10,457 voters. Sanders won 15 to Clinton's 9. But 6 superdelegates pledged to Clinton and two remained unpledged. Thus the delegate count stands as a tie despite Sanders winning the popular vote by over 22%.
Hillary is running very far left of where Bill governed. Webb is a moderate. There's a large gulf between where Hillary is running and where Webb is. She may govern like Bill but she's running like Gore Vidal.
Bill was actually brought back toward center in his second term to get along with Repub Congress. Obama has nothing but liberal genes. He has refused to come more to the center to work with Repub Congress. He will accomplish zero this year because he refuses to negotiate toward the center.
OK, that's one state. Once again, show me where Bernie and some other candidate have publicly pledged to join forces to stop Hillary from getting the nomination, as Cruz and Kasich announced this morning to stop Trump. The difference isn't in the two parties' nominating process, it's in the fact that one recognizes its leading vote-getting candidate would be a disaster as the nominee, and the other one doesn't.
Are you serious? I think the "one" is desperate and groping for a life preserver. The Republican leadership is a total clusterfuk.
What did they think was going to happen after catering to the base's lowest common denominator for the past 7-1/2 years? They brought this clusterfuk on themselves.
I know, but they seemed to be caught completely off guard by it. Just like Frankenstein, they want to kill the monster they created.
Exactly. Six months ago, the GOP had Trump sign a promise that he would stick with the GOP through thick and thin.....
Why do you point to Trump? The other two remaining in the race said they would reassess. You are learning nothing from watching Fox about their "fair and balanced" motto. " Why can't we all get along?"Exactly. Six months ago, the GOP had Trump sign a promise that he would stick with the GOP through thick and thin.....
Because he's winning and for obvious reasons, the GOP can't get rid of him fast enough.
So, you are Hillary all the way? Strong position to support your chosen candidate.