Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Bernie edges to odds-on for the nomination as the Nevada caucu

135

Comments

  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117
    @Big_G_NorthWales

    You have no regrets...but you have posted here about your support for environmental issues....

    Cruise ships dispose of a lot of waste and chemical by products into the sea...you wouldn't want your local council to just dump stuff....

    Like Fox...I went on a small boat Nile cruise many years ago which I loved and still remember...but I couldn't do it now..no more than eat a steak.....

    I've been to Vegas.... and New York many times....but I've changed, even these last couple of years. I haven't changed my iphones/MAC/tablet now for 2 years..I think about this stuff a lot more now

  • Chameleon said:

    A second in NV for Biden would be big, would put SC in the bag.

    Urban areas only so far?
  • glwglw Posts: 9,910

    Looks like NV will help Trump to another four years then.

    This is Corbyn redux.

    Jeez.

    The only thing Democrats should care about in 2020 is replacing Trump, and if that meant Clinton has another shot they should support that. Instead they are drawing up a list for Santa and seem on the whole oblivious to how much shit is going to get thrown at Sanders by the media, big business, the GOP, and Trump; and never mind all the dodgy voter registration, electoral roll culling, advertising blitz, social media shit-stirring and foreign interference that is ramping up.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153
    Given he's essentially already won there's little reason to disbelieve he means what he says.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,037

    kinabalu said:

    Thats what they said about Corbyn...

    That Jeremy Corbyn failed to win an election here does not predestine the defeat of every radical left politician throughout the western world for the foreseeable future. He is just not that totemic.
    It does in the USA I am afraid.
    If you think a bellowing, ranty, red faced N Eastern socialist can win against Trump then I have a dozen bridges to sell you :-)
    What's this? Is Ronnie Campbell standing?
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042

    Chameleon said:

    A second in NV for Biden would be big, would put SC in the bag.

    Urban areas only so far?
    I believe so, yes.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    4% of precincts in:

    Sanders 33%
    Biden 17%
    Pete 15%
    Warren 14%
    Klobuchar 10%

    (First choice vote, CBS just now)
  • Quincel said:

    Chameleon said:

    A second in NV for Biden would be big, would put SC in the bag.

    Urban areas only so far?
    I believe so, yes.
    Go Pete :smiley:
  • kinabalu said:

    Thats what they said about Corbyn...

    That Jeremy Corbyn failed to win an election here does not predestine the defeat of every radical left politician throughout the western world for the foreseeable future. He is just not that totemic.
    It does in the USA I am afraid.
    If you think a bellowing, ranty, red faced N Eastern socialist can win against Trump then I have a dozen bridges to sell you :-)
    What's this? Is Ronnie Campbell standing?
    He would have more chance frankly. At least he's not a millionaire socialist to my knowledge.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    tyson said:

    tyson said:



    I like walking...I average over 21,500 steps per day...

    You couldn't pay me to sit on a fucking cruise ship stuck with a bunch of Daily Mail reading grey heads stuffing their faces and professing their admiration for Boris Johnson...

    It's not that bad! A friend who is a big fan perauded me to take one week-long cruise, and it was quite pleasant, with the usual mix of humanity - the star was a modest artist, who spent the whole trip sketching real and imagined maritime sights to amuse his grand-daughter when he arrived. I played a lot of bridge and did some dancing. I wouldn't do it again but it was a nice change.
    Nick......you've not convinced me comrade....

    Doubtless transporting 3000 by boat across the Atlantic by boat is better for the environment that a long haul flight...that is the kind of argument that washes with me and I was hoping Big_G to throw back...not the fact that you did a spot of dancing...
    Mmm, but you're shifting the argument. You were saying that cruise ships are full of pompous plutocrats. I said not in my limited experience, and you say ha, but it's the environment that I was thinking of. You should be a politician! :)
  • glw said:

    Looks like NV will help Trump to another four years then.

    This is Corbyn redux.

    Jeez.

    The only thing Democrats should care about in 2020 is replacing Trump, and if that meant Clinton has another shot they should support that. Instead they are drawing up a list for Santa and seem on the whole oblivious to how much shit is going to get thrown at Sanders by the media, big business, the GOP, and Trump; and never mind all the dodgy voter registration, electoral roll culling, advertising blitz, social media shit-stirring and foreign interference that is ramping up.
    Post of the day. :+1:
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,386
    Gabs3 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Thats what they said about Corbyn...

    That Jeremy Corbyn failed to win an election here does not predestine the defeat of every radical left politician throughout the western world for the foreseeable future. He is just not that totemic.
    It does in the USA I am afraid.
    Sanders is not nearly as left economically and he has consistently opposed autocratic regimes on right and left for 30 years.
    Trump will paint him (somewhat ironically re: Trump/Putin love-in) as a Soviet sympathiser.
  • tyson said:

    tyson said:



    I like walking...I average over 21,500 steps per day...

    You couldn't pay me to sit on a fucking cruise ship stuck with a bunch of Daily Mail reading grey heads stuffing their faces and professing their admiration for Boris Johnson...

    It's not that bad! A friend who is a big fan perauded me to take one week-long cruise, and it was quite pleasant, with the usual mix of humanity - the star was a modest artist, who spent the whole trip sketching real and imagined maritime sights to amuse his grand-daughter when he arrived. I played a lot of bridge and did some dancing. I wouldn't do it again but it was a nice change.
    Nick......you've not convinced me comrade....

    Doubtless transporting 3000 by boat across the Atlantic by boat is better for the environment that a long haul flight...that is the kind of argument that washes with me and I was hoping Big_G to throw back...not the fact that you did a spot of dancing...
    Mmm, but you're shifting the argument. You were saying that cruise ships are full of pompous plutocrats. I said not in my limited experience, and you say ha, but it's the environment that I was thinking of. You should be a politician! :)
    Because there is no argument, he's just a hate-filled bigot.
  • tyson said:

    @Big_G_NorthWales

    You have no regrets...but you have posted here about your support for environmental issues....

    Cruise ships dispose of a lot of waste and chemical by products into the sea...you wouldn't want your local council to just dump stuff....

    Like Fox...I went on a small boat Nile cruise many years ago which I loved and still remember...but I couldn't do it now..no more than eat a steak.....

    I've been to Vegas.... and New York many times....but I've changed, even these last couple of years. I haven't changed my iphones/MAC/tablet now for 2 years..I think about this stuff a lot more now

    Cruise ships are much more environmentally friendly and will continue to evolve

    We have done the Nile cruise with our children and it is a good example of cruising giving access to places and experiences, as was the case when we went to the Antarctic and Artic

    I actually agree with some of your comments but making them political does reduce there effect
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117

    These people hated New Labour because it tried discipline over message.

    Yet iirc not a single MP was suspended, even Corbyn, who may as well have been working for the Tories.

    https://twitter.com/DawnButlerBrent/status/1231249349969137664

    I don't actually recall Corbyn ever making a personal criticism of Blair or Brown (or anyone else much, he doesn't do personality stuff), let alone working to undermine them. He obviously disagreed with them lots about issues (almost without exception without risk to the Government, as he wasn't rebelling on issues that the Tories opposed). To be fair to Butler (who I'm not putting high on my own paper) I don't think she'd expel someone for disagreeing with policies.
    Sadly, Corbyn has been a disaster for the Labour Party, but more importantly to being responsible for the situation now where we have the prospect of 10 years of rampant neoliberalism and all that it entails...it is difficult to imagine anyone who has been more disastrous to the cause of vulnerable people (and the environmental) in the UK than Jeremy Corbyn- possibly Len McCluskey...
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    Interesting difference in Sanders' support from Corbyn is that Corbyn did better with better-educated voters, while Sanders is very much the reverse:

    https://apps.npr.org/liveblogs/20200222-nevada/#entrance-polls-point-to-a-60

    He's also scoring best among men. Arguably this augurs well for a battle with Trump for the Rust Belt.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,910
    eadric said:

    My God, are they really gonna nominate Sanders?

    Is America determined to copy Britain in everything???


    It is an almost magical phenomenon

    The best thing that could happen to the US right now would be for Sanders to have another heart attack leading him to withdraw his candidacy.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    glw said:

    Looks like NV will help Trump to another four years then.

    This is Corbyn redux.

    Jeez.

    The only thing Democrats should care about in 2020 is replacing Trump, and if that meant Clinton has another shot they should support that. Instead they are drawing up a list for Santa and seem on the whole oblivious to how much shit is going to get thrown at Sanders by the media, big business, the GOP, and Trump; and never mind all the dodgy voter registration, electoral roll culling, advertising blitz, social media shit-stirring and foreign interference that is ramping up.
    The fundamental problem the Dems have is that the primary electorate for their party is way way left of the general electorate.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Fox calls NV for Sanders
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    kle4 said:

    Given he's essentially already won there's little reason to disbelieve he means what he says.
    There's every reason to disbelieve him. Leaving aside the obvious facts that (a) he's a politician and (b) the votes have yet actually to be cast, there's nothing to be gained from telling the Corbyn cult (who now constitute the majority of the party membership) that most of their beliefs need to be moderated or ditched because the general electorate (whom they despise as bigoted and/or thick anyway) won't stomach them.

    One assumes that his strategy for beating the far Left and turning the party around is of the frog in a slowly warming saucepan variety. How far he'll manage to get I don't know. Dealing with the completely bonkers tax and spending plans and even the anti-Semitism issue won't be nearly as hard as suppressing the total obsession with sectarian identity politics and Europe, which pervades even the surviving minority of the party that hasn't given in to the Stop the War tendency.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153
    edited February 2020
    eadric said:

    My God, are they really gonna nominate Sanders?

    He certainly seems to have the easiest path to nomination, and I get the impression the shift for mainstream democrats to fall in line shall not be far off. John Oliver did a recent bit on his Medicaid plans which was pretty token in any critique (I don't know if it is a good plan or not, but usually he raises more about criticisms by way of example even if he argues for it directly) for example. There could be a tipping point in his support.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    How do they know that large numbers of Trump supporters aren’t registering as Democrats for the primaries?
  • eadric said:

    My God, are they really gonna nominate Sanders?

    Is America determined to copy Britain in everything???


    It is an almost magical phenomenon

    Looks that way. And they will get Trump and possible end of the Republic.

  • glwglw Posts: 9,910
    Tim_B said:

    The fundamental problem the Dems have is that the primary electorate for their party is way way left of the general electorate.

    Yep, I've long been perplexed with the use of primaries, they seem to throw away all the wheat and leave only chaff.
  • Tim_B said:

    glw said:

    Looks like NV will help Trump to another four years then.

    This is Corbyn redux.

    Jeez.

    The only thing Democrats should care about in 2020 is replacing Trump, and if that meant Clinton has another shot they should support that. Instead they are drawing up a list for Santa and seem on the whole oblivious to how much shit is going to get thrown at Sanders by the media, big business, the GOP, and Trump; and never mind all the dodgy voter registration, electoral roll culling, advertising blitz, social media shit-stirring and foreign interference that is ramping up.
    The fundamental problem the Dems have is that the primary electorate for their party is way way left of the general electorate.
    Is it too much to ask for them to raise their heads from their lovely pure navels and select someone who can win?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153
    edited February 2020

    kle4 said:

    Given he's essentially already won there's little reason to disbelieve he means what he says.
    There's every reason to disbelieve him. Leaving aside the obvious facts that (a) he's a politician and (b) the votes have yet actually to be cast, there's nothing to be gained from telling the Corbyn cult (who now constitute the majority of the party membership) that most of their beliefs need to be moderated or ditched because the general electorate (whom they despise as bigoted and/or thick anyway) won't stomach them.

    One assumes that his strategy for beating the far Left and turning the party around is of the frog in a slowly warming saucepan variety. How far he'll manage to get I don't know. Dealing with the completely bonkers tax and spending plans and even the anti-Semitism issue won't be nearly as hard as suppressing the total obsession with sectarian identity politics and Europe, which pervades even the surviving minority of the party that hasn't given in to the Stop the War tendency.
    That could be the case, but you start off assuming you know his intention is to beat the far left and proceeding from there. Which again could be correct, but how do we know that to be true? If it isn't then everything else that flows from that assumption gets tossed.

    Granted everyone involved is a politician, but I still tend to believe people mean what they say (even if it is stupid and contradictory) unless there's hard proof to the contrary.
  • Interesting difference in Sanders' support from Corbyn is that Corbyn did better with better-educated voters, while Sanders is very much the reverse:

    https://apps.npr.org/liveblogs/20200222-nevada/#entrance-polls-point-to-a-60

    He's also scoring best among men. Arguably this augurs well for a battle with Trump for the Rust Belt.

    An absolute keeper.

    Sorry Nick.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    Tim_B said:

    glw said:

    Looks like NV will help Trump to another four years then.

    This is Corbyn redux.

    Jeez.

    The only thing Democrats should care about in 2020 is replacing Trump, and if that meant Clinton has another shot they should support that. Instead they are drawing up a list for Santa and seem on the whole oblivious to how much shit is going to get thrown at Sanders by the media, big business, the GOP, and Trump; and never mind all the dodgy voter registration, electoral roll culling, advertising blitz, social media shit-stirring and foreign interference that is ramping up.
    The fundamental problem the Dems have is that the primary electorate for their party is way way left of the general electorate.
    Is it too much to ask for them to raise their heads from their lovely pure navels and select someone who can win?
    It is for a true believer
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,002
    edited February 2020
    eadric said:

    My God, are they really gonna nominate Sanders?

    Is America determined to copy Britain in everything???


    It is an almost magical phenomenon

    The other candidates aren't making it hard for him though, are they?

    https://twitter.com/xeniaporvida/status/1231270547574677506?s=20
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    alex_ said:

    How do they know that large numbers of Trump supporters aren’t registering as Democrats for the primaries?

    Three quidders?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    eadric said:

    My God, are they really gonna nominate Sanders?

    Is America determined to copy Britain in everything???


    It is an almost magical phenomenon

    The other candidates aren't making it hard for though, are they?

    https://twitter.com/xeniaporvida/status/1231270547574677506?s=20
    I thought the left were big fans of rehabilitation? :D
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,229

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    One of the big questions is that Unions absolutely HATE Sanders Medicare for all plan. One of their big selling points is the gold plated health plans their members have. They would disappear under Sanders.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    But, he got elected? :o
  • kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    I seemed to remember people saying that in 2016...
  • kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    What odds are you prepared to give on that? Small bet.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited February 2020
    Somebody really has it in for Bloomberg. He is getting hit by the level of incoming that Trump got during 2016.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    The amount of money he's raising, his audiences at this speeches queueing up the night before to get in, and his ratings improvement says you may well be incorrect.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    alex_ said:

    How do they know that large numbers of Trump supporters aren’t registering as Democrats for the primaries?

    It's easy enough in Nevada (https://www.clarkcountynv.gov/election/Pages/regcur.aspx), but if it was happening on a large scale we'd be getting some specific reports, as we did here when a probably modest number of Tories mischievously voted for Corbyn in the leadership election.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    Somebody really has it in for Bloomberg. He is getting hit by the level of incoming that Trump got during 2016.

    The best comment I've heard about Bloomberg's debate performance is that he spent $400 million to get scalped by a fake Indian.
  • eadric said:

    kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    No, he's not

    I was recently in the Deep South. When you say to these voters "Look Trump is demented and crazy", they shrug and say "Yeah, we know, but look at the Democrats"

    And these are EDUCATED voters I was talking to.

    Trump will win again if he faces Sanders.
    The big thing Trump has going for him is the economy is doing pretty well. While the students might like the sound of free uni and recent graduates having all their debt written off by Sanders, I wonder like here is the middle aged and oldies want such a radical change.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    eadric said:

    kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    No, he's not

    I was recently in the Deep South. When you say to these voters "Look Trump is demented and crazy", they shrug and say "Yeah, we know, but look at the Democrats"

    And these are EDUCATED voters I was talking to.

    Trump will win again if he faces Sanders.
    As one who lives in the deep South, I would agree with your observation.
  • Tim_B said:

    Somebody really has it in for Bloomberg. He is getting hit by the level of incoming that Trump got during 2016.

    The best comment I've heard about Bloomberg's debate performance is that he spent $400 million to get scalped by a fake Indian.
    Ouch!
  • eadric said:

    kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    No, he's not

    I was recently in the Deep South. When you say to these voters "Look Trump is demented and crazy", they shrug and say "Yeah, we know, but look at the Democrats"

    And these are EDUCATED voters I was talking to.

    Trump will win again if he faces Sanders.
    This. A thousand times this.

    Why do I wake at 4am in a cold sweat screaming McGovern?
  • Tim_B said:

    Somebody really has it in for Bloomberg. He is getting hit by the level of incoming that Trump got during 2016.

    The best comment I've heard about Bloomberg's debate performance is that he spent $400 million to get scalped by a fake Indian.
    It certainly not looking like the best investment he has ever made.

    But imagine what Zuckerberg had been like if he had decided to run!!!
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    eadric said:

    kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    No, he's not

    I was recently in the Deep South. When you say to these voters "Look Trump is demented and crazy", they shrug and say "Yeah, we know, but look at the Democrats"

    And these are EDUCATED voters I was talking to.

    Trump will win again if he faces Sanders.
    That anecdote would work much better if you were in a swing state rather than somewhere that voted for every Republican candidate in the last 20 years by a 40 point margin.
  • Tim_B said:

    One of the big questions is that Unions absolutely HATE Sanders Medicare for all plan. One of their big selling points is the gold plated health plans their members have. They would disappear under Sanders.

    Just one example of how he will be burnt to pieces in the general.
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052
    kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    Did you sleep through 2016 ?
  • Tim_B said:

    Somebody really has it in for Bloomberg. He is getting hit by the level of incoming that Trump got during 2016.

    The best comment I've heard about Bloomberg's debate performance is that he spent $400 million to get scalped by a fake Indian.
    It certainly not looking like the best investment he has ever made.

    But imagine what Zuckerberg had been like if he had decided to run!!!
    Facebook would look very different?
  • I :love: Douglas County. Buttigieg 57%
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,229
    RobD said:

    But, he got elected? :o

    Yes. Allowing him to prove that he is now unelectable. We would never have known for sure otherwise.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,037
    TGOHF666 said:
    RLB in third should be a reason for concern for Starmer. If Nandy gets the bulk of transfers it could be a close race.
  • I :love: Douglas County. Buttigieg 57%

    Go Buttigieg!

    Funny how looking across the Atlantic can make strange bedfellows. I can't imagine us both wanting the same person for PM, but I believe we both want the same one for President.
  • kinabalu said:

    RobD said:

    But, he got elected? :o

    Yes. Allowing him to prove that he is now unelectable. We would never have known for sure otherwise.
    What's made him unelectable to the people who voted for him last time - not you?
  • eadric said:

    Look at this tweet about Sanders. It is Corbynism, word for word

    https://twitter.com/lisapease/status/1231350640124649472?s=20

    🤮
  • eadric said:

    Look at this tweet about Sanders. It is Corbynism, word for word

    https://twitter.com/lisapease/status/1231350640124649472?s=20

    Oh God. It really is like watching a rerun of 2019. Still, all those young hipster Dems in college towns who are phone banking their little ears off for Sanders will sleep easy tonight knowing their man is a winner.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,229
    Tim_B said:

    The amount of money he's raising, his audiences at this speeches queueing up the night before to get in, and his ratings improvement says you may well be incorrect.

    He does have a punchers chance, I suppose.

    But come the time I think a sufficient number of Americans will locate their marbles.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    eadric said:

    Alistair said:

    eadric said:

    kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    No, he's not

    I was recently in the Deep South. When you say to these voters "Look Trump is demented and crazy", they shrug and say "Yeah, we know, but look at the Democrats"

    And these are EDUCATED voters I was talking to.

    Trump will win again if he faces Sanders.
    That anecdote would work much better if you were in a swing state rather than somewhere that voted for every Republican candidate in the last 20 years by a 40 point margin.
    It doesn't matter where I said this, I am talking about educated white Americans who inexplicably (at the time, to me) voted for a deranged, declining fool like Trump. They did it because they think the Democrats are even crazier, with their idiot identity politics and elitist anti-patriotism.

    If the Dems nominate Sanders then this perception will be reinforced, and Trump will probably win by a bigger margin.
    "Idiot identity politics" == saying slavery was bad.

    There is an entire propoganda effort I the Southern States to wipe clean the stain of slavery. You have school text books presenting the 'positive' side of slavery.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    eadric said:

    This is big. Sorry to be a fear mongerer, but it is

    https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1231346166555643905?s=20

    It's not the actual numbers (which are tiny) it is the near-exponential growth


  • brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    edited February 2020

    These people hated New Labour because it tried discipline over message.
    Yet iirc not a single MP was suspended, even Corbyn, who may as well have been working for the Tories.
    https://twitter.com/DawnButlerBrent/status/1231249349969137664

    Dawn Butler resigned from Jeremy Corbyn's shadow cabinet over Brexit policy, after breaking a three-line whip...
  • speedy2speedy2 Posts: 981
    Looking at the Nevada Entrance Polls, if that is the result then no one is dropping out.

    But Sanders will definetly win at least a plurality of delegates, getting 53% of Hispanics means game over in the West.
  • eadric said:

    This is big. Sorry to be a fear mongerer, but it is

    https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1231346166555643905?s=20

    It's not the actual numbers (which are tiny) it is the near-exponential growth

    That's not big. If it was near-exponential in all nations then it would be big.

    Instead its just cherrypicking. A fallacy that leads to confirmation bias.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    That seems like a garbage statement. The Dems lost 2016 because of differential turnoit not swing voters.
  • speedy2speedy2 Posts: 981
    Tim_B said:

    eadric said:

    kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    No, he's not

    I was recently in the Deep South. When you say to these voters "Look Trump is demented and crazy", they shrug and say "Yeah, we know, but look at the Democrats"

    And these are EDUCATED voters I was talking to.

    Trump will win again if he faces Sanders.
    As one who lives in the deep South, I would agree with your observation.
    What matters is the Mid-West, that's where all the swing states that matter are.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    speedy2 said:

    Looking at the Nevada Entrance Polls, if that is the result then no one is dropping out.

    But Sanders will definetly win at least a plurality of delegates, getting 53% of Hispanics means game over in the West.

    I once again say I am completely floored by the Sanders Hispanic numbers. Complete game changer.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    edited February 2020
    eadric said:

    THIS is what could win it for Sanders, if America decides it needs emergency socialist health care

    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1231349085900353537?s=20

    Wow you really are in excellent fiction form tonight Sean. The leap from the coronavirus to Bernie's election is a sleight of hand that would have made Paul Daniels proud.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533

    <

    The big thing Trump has going for him is the economy is doing pretty well. While the students might like the sound of free uni and recent graduates having all their debt written off by Sanders, I wonder like here is the middle aged and oldies want such a radical change.

    Sanders does best with the young and OK with the middle-aged, but he's 3rd among 65+ voters (they prefer Biden - perhaps they think Sanders is too young...), according to the Neva entry poll:

    https://apps.npr.org/liveblogs/20200222-nevada/#entrance-polls-point-to-a-60
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,483
    Climate denial? Do some of us deny the existence of a climate?
  • eadric said:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalcy_bias

    "As for events in world history, the normalcy bias explains why, when the volcano Vesuvius erupted, the residents of Pompeii watched for hours without evacuating.[9] It explains why thousands of people refused to leave New Orleans as Hurricane Katrina approached[10] and why at least 70% of 9/11 survivors spoke with others before leaving.[8] Officials at the White Star Line made insufficient preparations to evacuate passengers on the Titanic and people refused evacuation orders because they underestimated the odds of a worst-case scenario and minimized its potential impact.[11] Similarly, experts connected with the Fukushima nuclear power plant were strongly convinced that a multiple reactor meltdown could never occur.[12]"

    "Overreaction
    The opposite of normalcy bias is overreaction bias. Noting the effect regression to the mean, most deviations from normalcy do not lead to catastrophe, despite regular predictions of doomsday.[further explanation needed] Both underreaction (normalcy bias) and overreaction (worst-case thinking) are cognitive flaws and may extend to patterns of cognitive distortions.[18]"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
    "Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or strengthens one's prior personal beliefs or hypotheses.[1] It is a type of cognitive bias. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for desired outcomes, for emotionally charged issues, and for deeply-entrenched beliefs.

    People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations)."
  • speedy2speedy2 Posts: 981
    I'm call Nevada for Sanders.
  • If its Trump vs Sanders, I imagine CNN will be 24/7 of their hosts just smashing their heads into the desk.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    speedy2 said:

    Tim_B said:

    eadric said:

    kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    No, he's not

    I was recently in the Deep South. When you say to these voters "Look Trump is demented and crazy", they shrug and say "Yeah, we know, but look at the Democrats"

    And these are EDUCATED voters I was talking to.

    Trump will win again if he faces Sanders.
    As one who lives in the deep South, I would agree with your observation.
    What matters is the Mid-West, that's where all the swing states that matter are.
    True, but also PA
  • Next BBC director general must be a reformer, as 'no change' is not an option, Baroness Morgan warns

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/02/22/next-bbc-director-general-must-reformer-no-change-not-option/
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,229
    eadric said:

    No, he's not

    I was recently in the Deep South. When you say to these voters "Look Trump is demented and crazy", they shrug and say "Yeah, we know, but look at the Democrats"

    And these are EDUCATED voters I was talking to.

    Trump will win again if he faces Sanders.

    He is going to lose. What will be interesting is the margin. I think it will be big for the Dems but I'm not quite so confident about that.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,601
    kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    Wish you were right but unfortunately Bernie will struggle to win over swing voters outside the north-east and west.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    speedy2 said:

    I'm call Nevada for Sanders.

    Very brave - Fox called it at 5:20pm eastern
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Sean you really need to a) cut back on the Barolo and b) substitute it with a chill pill.

    You're even more loopy than usual this evening.
  • speedy2speedy2 Posts: 981
    edited February 2020

    <

    The big thing Trump has going for him is the economy is doing pretty well. While the students might like the sound of free uni and recent graduates having all their debt written off by Sanders, I wonder like here is the middle aged and oldies want such a radical change.

    Sanders does best with the young and OK with the middle-aged, but he's 3rd among 65+ voters (they prefer Biden - perhaps they think Sanders is too young...), according to the Neva entry poll:

    https://apps.npr.org/liveblogs/20200222-nevada/#entrance-polls-point-to-a-60
    Old people don't like change.
    Trump had the same issue in 2016 and he still has an issue with very old people today.

    Trump and Sanders are change that is unfamiliar.
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052
    eadric said:

    eadric said:

    THIS is what could win it for Sanders, if America decides it needs emergency socialist health care

    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1231349085900353537?s=20

    Wow you really are in excellent fiction form tonight Sean. The leap from the coronavirus to Bernie's election is a sleight of hand that would have made Paul Daniels proud.
    Why should this not be a factor, you dribbling cretin?

    Trump's advisors think coronavirus could LOSE the election for them, even against a mad lefty dwarf like Sanders

    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/21/coronavirus-trump-white-house-116650
    Why do you need Medicare if you are dying of the most deadly outbreak of deadly flu zombie death ever ?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153

    TGOHF666 said:
    RLB in third should be a reason for concern for Starmer. If Nandy gets the bulk of transfers it could be a close race.
    But Starmer seems more acceptable to the Corbynites than Nandy doesn't he?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,229
    @Philip_Thompson

    Trump is 1.7 on Betfair.
  • speedy2speedy2 Posts: 981
    Tim_B said:

    speedy2 said:

    I'm call Nevada for Sanders.

    Very brave - Fox called it at 5:20pm eastern
    I still needed votes, it's a caucus too.
  • Alistair said:

    That seems like a garbage statement. The Dems lost 2016 because of differential turnoit not swing voters.
    The Dems lost 2016 because of swing voters in key sates like Pennsylvania and Michigan.
  • kinabalu said:

    @Philip_Thompson

    Trump is 1.7 on Betfair.

    I know, that's hardly "unelectable" now is it?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:

    That seems like a garbage statement. The Dems lost 2016 because of differential turnoit not swing voters.
    The Dems lost 2016 because of swing voters in key sates like Pennsylvania and Michigan.
    In Michigan the fall in turnout of the black vote was more than enough to cover the gap.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153

    eadric said:

    Look at this tweet about Sanders. It is Corbynism, word for word

    https://twitter.com/lisapease/status/1231350640124649472?s=20

    Oh God. It really is like watching a rerun of 2019. Still, all those young hipster Dems in college towns who are phone banking their little ears off for Sanders will sleep easy tonight knowing their man is a winner.
    It does feel like that. Wariness about translating political lessons across the atlantic as one must be, a lot of the reasoning used is so similar its hard not to predict similar outcomes.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,037
    kle4 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    RLB in third should be a reason for concern for Starmer. If Nandy gets the bulk of transfers it could be a close race.
    But Starmer seems more acceptable to the Corbynites than Nandy doesn't he?
    Perhaps a bit of wishcasting on my part.

    #Sandy4Nandy makes me a less than impartial observer.

    But I believe that Nandy will get more RLB second preferences than vice versa.

    Night all.
  • speedy2speedy2 Posts: 981
    edited February 2020
    Nevada Democratic party announces the results will be in "soon".

    Translation: We don't know.
  • Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    That seems like a garbage statement. The Dems lost 2016 because of differential turnoit not swing voters.
    The Dems lost 2016 because of swing voters in key sates like Pennsylvania and Michigan.
    In Michigan the fall in turnout of the black vote was more than enough to cover the gap.
    The fall in the black vote is a misnomer, it was a reversion to mean. Clinton polled as well with the black vote as prior Democrats excluding Obama had done - the high turnout Obama got in 2012 where the black turnout exceeded white turnout for the only time ever was an exception not the norm.

    Michigan last failed to go for the Democrats when their nominee was Dukakis but it failed to go for Hillary Clinton. Because she didn't campaign there much and it swung to Trump, not because of turnout.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,386
    kinabalu said:

    It does in the USA I am afraid.

    No. Trump is uniquely unelectable. He's toast.
    Your plan has one flaw, he already has been elected.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,601
    O/T

    "Would you kill one person to save five? Depends if you’re a millennial or not
    Unthinkable: Should we be worried about the apparent rise of utilitarianism?

    Joe Humphreys"

    https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/would-you-kill-one-person-to-save-five-depends-if-you-re-a-millennial-or-not-1.4173661#.XlEbMdAVSRA.twitter
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,229

    I seemed to remember people saying that in 2016...

    And those same people are saying he WILL win this time. Will they be wrong again?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:

    That seems like a garbage statement. The Dems lost 2016 because of differential turnoit not swing voters.
    The Dems lost 2016 because of swing voters in key sates like Pennsylvania and Michigan.
    In Michigan Romney got 44.7%
    Trump got 47.5%

    That's 2.8 points more.

    Clinton got 6.9 points less.

    That's not voters swing from Dem to Republican. That was Trump juicing the Republican turnout and Clinton depressing the Dem turnout.
This discussion has been closed.