« prev   random   next »

0
2

Clinton 'wins Democratic nomination'

By Strategist follow Strategist   2016 Jun 6, 6:19pm 8,024 views   45 comments   watch   nsfw   quote   share    


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36466228

Hillary Clinton has clinched the Democratic Party nomination for US president after reaching the required number of delegates, according to AP. The news agency's tally puts Mrs Clinton on 2,383 - the number needed to make her the presumptive nominee. Mrs Clinton will become the first female nominee for a major US political party. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, her rival for the nomination, said he intended to stay in the race until the party's convention in July. Mrs Clinton reached the threshold with a big win in Puerto Rico and a burst of last-minute support from party insiders called superdelegates,...

« First    « Previous    Comments 5 - 44 of 44    Last »

6   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Jun 7, 5:36am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

How can you say Clinton won more superdelegates, when they dont vote for another seven weeks at the convention?

Why do you think that the party has superdelegates in the first place?

One does not win elections in this country by popular vote, you have to dismiss those who are confused about this, as too ignorant to join the discussion, no?

7   Tenpoundbass   ignore (15)   2016 Jun 7, 5:39am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

errc says

Right there is the ~2.8 million votes that make up her lead. Votes that have zero bearing on winning a general election. So why should those votes be weighted with such strength as to earn her the nomination?

Context is important. Bernie kicked her ass in blue states that held caucus, yet there is no popular vote totals to be had in those states.

So it's easy to see, why anyone with the slightest penchant toward being liberal or progressive, will make the argument for the better candidate, against the woman who is basically a Republican holding the party hostage.

Hey I'm right there with you. But your man Bernie has a serious resource allocation deficiency.
The man clearly is clueless on how to deal with the immediate threat at hand, while focusing on the person or thing at that time least detrimental to your plans. As Donald has been up to this point.

While he was holding hands through out the first few Democrat debates with Hilderbeast, while the while DNC field fired pot shots at the Donald. It was abundantly clear to me, that Hillary had those three fool idiot dudes up there. Helping her punch the wind out of Donald Trump, while avoiding the first scathing blow from nary an opponent.

Bernie was a frog in Hillary's boiling Piss. He sat in it with that big stupid Jew grin on his face while Hillary turned up the heat and boiled him alive. He talking about Donald Trump, while Hillary was standing behind him with a blunt object sizing up his head and measuring the speed and velocity of her swing.

Hey I got an Idea Bernie, send some more Mandingos over to Trump's rally now that you've handed the nomination over to Hillary you clueless fucking oaf!

8   tatupu70   ignore (0)   2016 Jun 7, 5:50am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

How can you say Clinton won more superdelegates, when they dont vote for another seven weeks at the convention?

Why do you think that the party has superdelegates in the first place?

One does not win elections in this country by popular vote, you have to dismiss those who are confused about this, as too ignorant to join the discussion, no?

OK--you are correct. She has won support from the more superdelegates to this point. They haven't voted yet.

The party has superdelegates to prevent a candidate from winning the primary that would lose in the general election.

Who is confused about the way this country votes?

9   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Jun 7, 5:56am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The man clearly is clueless on how to deal with the immediate threat at hand, while focusing on the person or thing at that time least detrimental to your plans. As Donald has been up to this point.

------------

That's an odd statement, as the most ardent Trump supporters spent 10x as much energy, bashing Sanders, as they have Clinton.

Meanwhile Bernie has railed against the System since day one. The System is the enemy, and the System wants to churn out Clinton vs Trump.

The System is also do afraid of Bernie that you have the AP and bbc releasing breaking news on the eve of the last day of elections, that Hillary has won the nomination. That's some pretty strange timing, but it just goes to show how out of touch they are. Their goal is to dissuade the June 7 voters into staying home rather than voting Bernie, by trying to dupe them into thinking that the race is over. This could very well backfire, because Sanders voters are the most informed voting bloc, and will see right through this. Hell, it is one last false move to rally against. Otoh, the low information voters might actually believe it, and celebrate early and not bother voting. I mean, we're talking Clinton voters here; blacks and women over 40. Speaking honestly to these facts, only brings on attacks from those who hate the truth, freedom of speech, and this country.

10   HydroCabron   ignore (1)   2016 Jun 7, 6:18am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

as the most ardent Trump supporters spent 10x as much energy, bashing Sanders, as they have Clinton.

Have you been reading the same Internet that I have?

All the Trump supporters (except for the complete morons) pretend to support Sanders, or at least not to mind him much.

11   HydroCabron   ignore (1)   2016 Jun 7, 6:20am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

Their goal is to dissuade the June 7 voters into staying home rather than voting Bernie, by trying to dupe them into thinking that the race is over

If Sanders takes 2/3 of the vote in both California and New Jersey tonight, Clinton still picks up enough pledged (non-super) delegates to win.

Sanders can't even beat Hillary Clinton. How can he be a better choice against Trump?

12   Tenpoundbass   ignore (15)   2016 Jun 7, 6:28am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

errc says

That's an odd statement, as the most ardent Trump supporters spent 10x as much energy, bashing Sanders, as they have Clinton

Nope neither of them has even rated on my list of shit to worry about.

Our focus has been 100% on a crooked rigged GOP trying to thwart the will of the Republican electoriate.

I couldn't figure out what in the Fuck Bernie sanders was doing sending his Mandingos to shut down Chicago, then he tried it New York, he had them in Navada, he had them in Arizona well tried to, but Sheriff Joe isn't on the Federal govermnet instigation payroll.

Bernie has proved him self to be the dumbest son of a bitch in the history of Politics.

Now get this. I am totally relieved, PHEW!!!! You have no idea. He was the only guy that had a chance to beat Trump. I would bet you anything. Those possitive Hillary numbers in the polls, leading Trump and everyone else, was Bernie's numbers. Not only did she Steal his delegates, but his poll numbers to, while She Cuckled him into providing defense and cover against Trump. His expert skills Marxist, Sal Alynski SzuSitzu was exactly what Hillary was lacking. And for that She thanks you Sir. Bernie was played like a cum filled rubber.

If there's a lesson to be learned here it's. know who your oppenent is asshole.

13   marcus   ignore (10)   2016 Jun 7, 6:32am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says

being liberal or progressive, will make the argument for the better candidate, against the woman who is basically a Republican holding the party hostage.

Yes, Hillary is basically a republican in some ways, as Obama has been. Bernie would be better. But to prefer him in the general, you have to either think he has a better chance of beating Trump or you have to think Trump isn't all that risky (that is that he might not be that bad).

I don't think either of those things, so I'm probably for Hillary even if I would rather see Bernie as President. I definitely would like to see the shift in the public's political policy perception that a Bernie win would reflect.

14   Tenpoundbass   ignore (15)   2016 Jun 7, 6:42am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Spoken like a true lifer marcus. You hang on baby, don't let that Trump boogey man come along and make you have to work for a living.

15   marcus   ignore (10)   2016 Jun 7, 7:01am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Tenpoundbass says

make you have to work for a living.

Right. I work at least twice as hard as you. You have no idea. If you want you can envy me for job security. But don't think for a minute that I don't work harder than you.

16   HydroCabron   ignore (1)   2016 Jun 7, 7:12am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Tenpoundbass says

don't let that Trump boogey man come along and make you have to work for a living.

I'm I'll be forced to defraud desperate people in "University" scams? Noooo!

17   tatupu70   ignore (0)   2016 Jun 7, 7:14am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

HydroCabron says

Sanders can't even beat Hillary Clinton. How can he be a better choice against Trump?

That's easy. A very, very high percentage of the voters that are voting for Hillary will support the Dem nominee no matter who it is. The percentage of Bernie voters that will vote for Hillary is potentially smaller. And Independents favor Sanders by huge margins.

In the general Sanders would definitely appear to be a stronger candidate. Especially against Trump.

18   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Jun 7, 7:18am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

If Sanders takes 2/3 of the vote in both California and New Jersey tonight, Clinton still picks up enough pledged (non-super) delegates to win.

Sanders can't even beat Hillary Clinton. How can he be a better choice against Trump?

-------------

Why do you keep posting this lie?

Oh yeah, you're a CrookedHillary voter, lying is all you know

19   marcus   ignore (10)   2016 Jun 7, 7:20am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

tatupu70 says

That's easy. A very, very high percentage of the voters that are voting for Hillary will support the Dem nominee no matter who it is.

Yes, but then there's the majority of moderate democrats that don't even vote in the primary and all the people who usually vote democrat for President but who call themselves independents. And then there's the republicans (especially pro choice republican women) who might vote for Hillary or might just not vote if it's between Trump and Hillary, but the commie big spending liberal Sanders will get them out to vote for Trump.

20   HydroCabron   ignore (1)   2016 Jun 7, 7:25am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

tatupu70 says

In the general Sanders would definitely appear to be a stronger candidate. Especially against Trump.

Sanders has never faced serious scrutiny, and the polls right now feature very few engaged voters.

The GOP hatchet machine - you know, the one which can convince people that climate research is a conspiracy and that Benghazi is a scandal - well, they haven't even dusted off the first cardboard box of oppo research on Bernie - all that's sitting under a tarp in a CubeSmart storage unit on a frontage road somewhere in northern Virginia. Rove and Frank Luntz haven't even looked into pithy/alliterative attack terminology for Sanders.

21   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Jun 7, 7:30am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Let us not forget, that Clinton draws virtually all of the same Republican voters that you pragmatic dem voters, always blame for destroying everything that made America great in the first place.

A vote for Clinton is a vote for the Koch brothers. It's a vote for inequality and wealth disparity. So at least you can hang your hat on that

22   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Jun 7, 7:33am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Sanders has never faced serious scrutiny, and the polls right now feature very few engaged voters

------------

What rock have you been hiding under? All the corporate news outlets have been churning out a steady stream of anti-Bernie propaganda for months. They've yet to offer any real vetting or criticism of Clinton. Where are the transcripts from her FIRE speeches that she promised she would release at the last denate?

23   HydroCabron   ignore (1)   2016 Jun 7, 7:40am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

They've yet to offer any real vetting or criticism of Clinton.

Bullshit.

They have covered each Benghazi flare-up, amplified each (false) rumor of impending indictment, and cast her corporate speaking fees as the height of villainy while ignoring everyone else's (such as the millions Trump "earned" addressing the ACN mult-level marketing scam gatherings).

At worst, they've ignored Sanders.

24   HydroCabron   ignore (1)   2016 Jun 7, 7:41am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

Clinton draws virtually all of the same Republican voters

Yes, and that will hurt her fer sure in the general, seeing as how Da Bern would have done so much better with those voters.

Why not Nader instead? Aren't you pure?

25   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Jun 7, 7:44am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

and cast her corporate speaking fees as the height of villainy while

------------

Surely you have some proof.

Or is it just like your other lie from further up the thread, that Clinton will have enough pledged delegates to clinch the nomination, you know the one that you just ignore when challenged.

26   marcus   ignore (10)   2016 Jun 7, 8:24am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

A vote for Clinton is a vote for the Koch brothers. It's a vote for inequality and wealth disparity. So at least you can hang your hat on that.

Yes. This doesn't change until the electorate wakes up enough to change congress and gets behind someone like Bernie all the way to the white house. I understand why Bernie has your hopes up. It actually has mine up too, that young voters aren't buying the BS anymore. It's a positive indicator about the future.

As for now ? It seems we will have a choice between Trump and Clinton.

I'll hang my hat on reality.

Very soon Bernie is going to be encouraging his supporters to get behind Hillary. Will Errc give it up then ?

27   justme   ignore (0)   2016 Jun 7, 10:21am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

Context is important. Bernie kicked her ass in blue states that held caucus, yet there is no popular vote totals to be had in those states.

This is a very important observation. Bernie Sanders does not get popular-vote credit from the Caucus states.

28   Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses   ignore (0)   2016 Jun 7, 10:24am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

What rock have you been hiding under? All the corporate news outlets have been churning out a steady stream of anti-Bernie propaganda for months.

Not actually true. Most of the anti-bernie articles have been about one subject, the math that he is losing the nomination. Which has been true, so complaining about it is kinda berniebot silly.

The fair complaint Bernie and his supporters could have, is that his positive news, overflowing events has not been given the screen time it deserves, which is true.

I voted for Bernie in my state primary, but he and his movement's behavior more recently have caused me to change my mind.
1. Hasn't flushed out any substantive foreign policy positions to speak of. China? middle east? Libya? crickets.
2. In the debate, asked a foreign policy layup question, "what will you do to keep america safe in the world" he pivoted to global warming. For Fucks Sake, you've been weak on foreign policy since forever, you had to know this type of question was coming, and you revert back to something we already know where you stand? The singular lack of preparation for other parts of the job as president, gave me serious doubts. This was before my primary and I voted for him anyways, as the better aspirational candidate, but was the start of my worries.
3. Free college. I support education, but free college is too far to the extreme. People will sign up and drop every class they feel, making it 100's of times harder to actually run a college, or get students through. Richer people should pay something for college. We have a system, improve it, I support money not being the barrier to education, but that is a different goal than totally free college.
4. $15 minimum wage. This is likely economically possible in high income coastal cities, but utterly not so in much of the center of the US. The median Income in Mississippi is something like $37K. moving minimum wage to $31K a year will likely hit a state like that hard. Anybody in Mississippi working at an actual hard job for $35K would do well to find the easiest possible minimum wage job and sit on their ass. MANY liberal economists think this is a jump too far, and will lead to umemployment in exactly the cohort bernie is trying to help, law of unintended consequences will hit hard.
5. His supporters have enshrined him as "the only one..." witness the dumb as fuck bernie or bust posters here on patrick.net or any other political discussion forum. He is responsible for this in not addressing it earlier. I hold him just as responsible for this as I do for Trump's not countering the violence and racism of his supporters. I don't believe Bernie holds these positions, but it has been helpful to his campaign to allow this bernie or die energy to continue. It isn't states-manly.
6. He and his supporters claimed caucuses were unfair when he was losing them. Look it up. "caucus favor older voters , younger new voters don't go... they favor the party favorite." Then, when he began to win them, they became fair.
7. "the system was rigged against me" BS. you knew the rules when you joined.
8. Hypocracy of claiming the superdelegates are unfair and shouldn't count, but now that they are the only way for Bernie to win, his entire campaign strategy is to flip the superdelegate, getting them to vote against the majority of delegates and primary voters. "the system is unfair, but I'll try to make it even more unfair if I can win" seriously??
9. He has accomplished literally almost nothing during his time in the Senate.
10. His economic plan counts on 5% gdp growth, AS STATED IN HIS PLAN for most of his presidency. That hasn't happened in 50 years, and with an older retiring population is literally complete fucking bullshit. Ask ANY economist. And you guys say Hillary lies...

So there you have it, at this point, I wish I could take back my Bernie vote and give it to Hillary.

29   Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses   ignore (0)   2016 Jun 7, 10:26am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

justme says

This is a very important observation. Bernie Sanders does not get popular-vote credit from the Caucus states.

Those have been estimated as well; With caucuses replaced with voting, Bernie loses to Hillary by 2.5 million votes instead of 3 million votes. Thanks for playing!

30   HydroCabron   ignore (1)   2016 Jun 7, 11:02am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

that Clinton will have enough pledged delegates to clinch the nomination, you know the one that you just ignore when challenged.

Wait 12 hours; we'll find out.

31   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Jun 7, 11:14am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

That has always been the point. Let it play out. The corporatist media just keeps campaigning for Clinton (don't you wonder why), with the latest move being calling the election over on the eve of the last day of voting. Something other than Hillarys rotting clam, smells fishy.

32   tatupu70   ignore (0)   2016 Jun 7, 11:15am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses says

justme says

This is a very important observation. Bernie Sanders does not get popular-vote credit from the Caucus states.

Those have been estimated as well; With caucuses replaced with voting, Bernie loses to Hillary by 2.5 million votes instead of 3 million votes. Thanks for playing!

And that assumes the caucus results are indicative of a primary which is a dubious conclusion judging by the results in Washington (state).

33   Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses   ignore (0)   2016 Jun 7, 11:17am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

errc says

That has always been the point. Let it play out. The corporatist media just keeps campaigning for Clinton (don't you wonder why), with the latest move being calling the election over on the eve of the last day of voting. Something other than Hillarys rotting clam, smells fishy.

fucktard, they did the same for Obama, the called Trump the presumptive when his counts pledged + superdelegates who said they'd vote for him became greater than the needed number. They do the same in every single election.

Now, in bernie's case... it bothers you. .

34   Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses   ignore (0)   2016 Jun 7, 11:19am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Ironman says

Which shows that you're a total, clueless fucking idiot who's opinion means nothing..

I'll take the average IQ of Bernie supporters over the average IQ of trump supporters all day long.

even on here, the writing/thinking/logic shows much more intelligence on the bernie side, even when I don't agree with them.

35   Philistine   ignore (0)   2016 Jun 7, 11:24am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

the latest move being calling the election over on the eve of the last day of voting.

Funny enough my polling station didn't have their voting equipment as of 11 a.m. this morning. We only do this once very two years; why would I expect a bunch of incompetent county clerks to get voting equipment to the site? They offered me a provisional ballot printed on toilet paper which they were stuffing into some kind of leftover Old Milwaukee carton next to the trash cans. Yep, looks like Hillarity bagged this bitch already.

36   HydroCabron   ignore (1)   2016 Jun 7, 11:26am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

If Sanders takes 2/3 of the vote in both California and New Jersey tonight, Clinton still picks up enough pledged (non-super) delegates to win.

Sanders can't even beat Hillary Clinton. How can he be a better choice against Trump?

-------------

Why do you keep posting this lie?

I believe Bernie Sanders supporters are generally more intelligent than you, so most of them can skip this.

Pledged (non-super) delegates only (since superdelegates are unfair, unless Bernie can use them to win).

Hillary currently has 1812 pledged delegates, out of 2023 needed to clinch.

That means she needs 211 to clinch (hurr, durrr ....).

California and New Jersey award a total of 475 + 126 = 601 delegates proportionally (to vote total - there are wrinkles with congressional districts).

If Sanders gets 2/3rds of those delegates, then Hillary gets 200 of them. Since she will win at least 11 from among the remaining states (Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota) this evening, that makes 211 pledged delegates, which guarantees the nomination.

37   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Jun 7, 11:27am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Did you report them?

38   HydroCabron   ignore (1)   2016 Jun 7, 11:30am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

The corporatist media just keeps campaigning for Clinton (don't you wonder why)

This is such bullshit.

The AP was perfectly right to announce Clinton crossing the threshold last night, and did not "declare the election over."

Such an announcement is arguably worse for Hillary, because it tends to depress turnout more among the less-motivated voters, and her supporters are generally less motivated than Sanders' supporters.

39   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Jun 7, 11:31am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Sanders can't even beat Hillary Clinton. How can he be a better choice against Trump?

-------------

Why do you keep posting this lie?
I believe Bernie Sanders supporters are generally more intelligent than you, so most of them can skip this.

Pledged (non-super) delegates only (since superdelegates are unfair, unless Bernie can use them to win).

Hillary currently has 1812 pledged delegates, out of 2023 needed to clinch.

That means she needs 211 to clinch (hurr, durrr ....).

------------

Oh, you weren't lying. You just suck at numbers (typical of the low info Clinton voters)

The democrats require 2,383 delegates to clinch the nomination

40   Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses   ignore (0)   2016 Jun 7, 11:33am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Philistine says

Funny enough my polling station didn't have their voting equipment as of 11 a.m. this morning. We only do this once very two years; why would I expect a bunch of incompetent county clerks to get voting equipment to the site? They offered me a provisional ballot printed on toilet paper which they were stuffing into some kind of leftover Old Milwaukee carton next to the trash cans. Yep, looks like Hillarity bagged this bitch already.

I'm pretty sure that Hillary voters ran into the same thing there. So, claiming this as a "Hillarity bagged this bitch" based on what? other than being a stupid fuck who believes conspiracy nonsense?

41   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Jun 7, 11:42am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The AP was perfectly right to announce Clinton crossing the threshold last night, and did not "declare the election over."

------------

Who voted yesterday that prompted this declaration?

42   HydroCabron   ignore (1)   2016 Jun 7, 11:44am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

The democrats require 2,383 delegates to clinch the nomination

That includes the superdelegates, which are undemocratic (unless they put Sanders over the top).

Nobody who has won a majority of pledged delegates has ever been denied the nomination. The superdelegates should be got rid of, but they have never mattered, and they won't this time.

43   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Jun 7, 11:53am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

So you're saying that there is two separate thresholds by which one can win the democratic nomination?

One, your made up/misinformed number of 2023, which is only for pledged delegates, unless you wish to include superdelegates.

Another, the one anyone with a brain knows, is 2,383, which includes both pledged delegates from state primary elections, and superdelegates, who don't vote until the convention on 25/7/16.

Things I learned today

44   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Jun 8, 9:33am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

HydroCabron says

I believe Bernie Sanders supporters are generally more intelligent than you, so most of them can skip this.

Pledged (non-super) delegates only (since superdelegates are unfair, unless Bernie can use them to win).

Hillary currently has 1812 pledged delegates, out of 2023 needed to clinch.

That means she needs 211 to clinch (hurr, durrr ....).

California and New Jersey award a total of 475 + 126 = 601 delegates proportionally (to vote total - there are wrinkles with congressional districts).

If Sanders gets 2/3rds of those delegates, then Hillary gets 200 of them. Since she will win at least 11 from among the remaining states (Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota) this evening, that makes 211 pledged delegates, which guarantees the nomination.

This is very confusing, because i assume it to be factually correct, being that you insinuated I was the dumb ass while you learnt me sumting.

Wat happened?

« First    « Previous    Comments 5 - 44 of 44    Last »


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions