Sanders's path (or lack thereof) to victory (from 538) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 19, 2024, 11:33:09 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Sanders's path (or lack thereof) to victory (from 538) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Sanders's path (or lack thereof) to victory (from 538)  (Read 1147 times)
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,300
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
« on: March 30, 2016, 01:15:20 PM »

It's not about him winning anymore. It's about getting as many delegates as he can, so that he can influence the Democratic platform.
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,300
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2016, 02:16:33 PM »

So, he basically needs to win every remaining state except Maryland, Delaware, and DC. That will not happen. Winning New York, California, and Pennsylvania? Impossible.
I understand NY and CA, but why couldn't he win PA? I'm not all that familiar with PA demographics.

FWIW, polls give him a much better shot at CA than PA.
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,300
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2016, 05:08:19 PM »

I posted this in the '40% in NY thread,' but I think it's pretty relevant here, so here ya go --
 
"I too think that it would be a bad idea for Bernie to start packing up his things in boxes marked  1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVE, WASHINGTON DC 20500, but I don't really think that that's relevant to the conversation.

First of all -- Sanders basically got into the race because no other prog would. Excepting the time between Feb 9,  8:00 pm eastern and the morning of the NV caucus, wining was never his* plan. I think he mainly wanted to remind everyone that Progs are a growing faction in the party, since Warren wasn't going to contest the nom. 

Second -- there are a LOT of other things you can do at a party convention other than get nominated for President.  Think of this primary campaign as a trojan horse to sneak in 1900-2100 progressive activists into the smoke filled room. Think of those activists demanding strong anti-super PAC, anti free-trade planks in the platform. Think of a speaking schedule with Warren, Ellison, Gabbard, Sanders grabbing the top spots.

There's every reason for him to stay in until the end and grab every delegate he can.

*by his, I of course mean Bernie, Jane Sanders, Devine, Briggs, and the rest of the inner circle"

I think the 'he can't win, so he should drop out' logic is pretty shortsighted.

This. Bernie was always a longshot for the nomination, and while he may have had times during the campaign where it looked like he had a shot at winning, this was always about more than that.
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,300
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2016, 10:51:59 PM »

It's mathematically all but certain that Clinton will clinch the nomination on June 7th. (For fun, I did the math to see what Clinton would need in order to secure the nomination before then, and it's about as likely as Sanders winning the nomination) I'm not denying that. Obviously, the more delegates Bernie gets, the better, as that means he gets a greater influence over the Democratic platform at the DNC.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.018 seconds with 9 queries.