+- The South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz)
+-- Forum: Hall of Historical Records (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Archives (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-141.html)
+---- Forum: South Pacific International Airport (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-99.html)
+----- Forum: Lampshade Bar and Grill (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-190.html)
+------ Forum: South Pacific University (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-30.html)
+------ Thread: 2016 in America (/thread-2449.html)
RE: 2016 in America - Punchwood - 04-19-2016
(04-19-2016, 05:19 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote:(04-14-2016, 11:24 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: What happens here is it doesn't bode well with me when someone claims to want an even debate, but obviously (and everyone is seeing this, make no mistake) you just ignore or diminish opposing views. Your basic argument is "Bernie is awful", and when someone points out the flaws in your argument, you either ignore them or...ignore them.
Case in point:
(04-19-2016, 05:13 PM)Punchwood Wrote: Wolf shut up quite frankly.
I had meant that to show my angry at the ludicrous rubbish Wolf came out with. I'll gladly still debate people about why Hillary is better than Bernie. If your going to say I don't want to debate this issue please at least come up with good arguments that can't be proven to be crap in a single post.
RE: 2016 in America - Wolf - 04-19-2016
(04-19-2016, 05:13 PM)Punchwood Wrote: I had meant that to show my angry at the ludicrous rubbish Wolf came out with. I'll gladly still debate people about why Hillary is better than Bernie. If your going to say I don't want to debate this issue please at least come up with good arguments that can't be proven to be crap in a single post.
Rubbish? The writer of the bit has been a Clinton supporter since at least 2007. His own Linkedin profile states that he was an Area Leader for the Hillary Clinton Campaign from July 2007 – February 2008 (8 months). During which he "Participated in organizational campaign conference calls led by Hillary Clinton. Utilized the campaign's online call-center/database to contact individual voters regarding voter needs and awareness."
He mentions absolutely none of this in his article and instead pretends to be a disillusioned former Bernie supporter. His credibility is highly questionable.
RE: 2016 in America - Jay Coop - 04-19-2016
Punch, you still have yet to answer my post, which I shall re-post for you:
"I want to add to Resentine's point. Clinton's campaign hasn't been perfect either. In New Hampshire, Madeleine Albright, who was campaigning with Hillary Clinton and talking about women supporting Bernie Sanders, said, "There is a special place in hell for women that don't help each other." You said you wouldn't vote for Sanders because his supporters (actually one supporter) used the word, "whore." Would you give Hillary a break for this statement by Albright?"
EDIT: and Wolf has a point.
RE: 2016 in America - Punchwood - 04-20-2016
(04-19-2016, 10:01 PM)Qvait Wrote: Punch, you still have yet to answer my post, which I shall re-post for you:
"I want to add to Resentine's point. Clinton's campaign hasn't been perfect either. In New Hampshire, Madeleine Albright, who was campaigning with Hillary Clinton and talking about women supporting Bernie Sanders, said, "There is a special place in hell for women that don't help each other." You said you wouldn't vote for Sanders because his supporters (actually one supporter) used the word, "whore." Would you give Hillary a break for this statement by Albright?"
EDIT: and Wolf has a point.
While I don't agree with what she said it's not as bad as calling some a whore is it? I never said I wouldn't vote for Sanders due to that one support but that it put me off him even more.
RE: 2016 in America - Punchwood - 04-20-2016
So Hilary won New York. There was no upset or "political revolution" she beat him by a decisive 15% margin. After all the hype Sanders and his team made he was wrong he did not win he lost. He will go on to lose more states and then the nomination.
RE: 2016 in America - Jay Coop - 04-20-2016
(04-20-2016, 04:52 PM)Punchwood Wrote: So Hilary won New York. There was no upset or "political revolution" she beat him by a decisive 15% margin. After all the hype Sanders and his team made he was wrong he did not win he lost. He will go on to lose more states and then the nomination.
You can't discount Senator Sanders because he lost New York. For crying out loud, it was Secretary Clinton's home state. Senator Sanders won his home state of Vermont, Senator Cruz won his home state of Texas, and Governor Kasich won his home state of Ohio. Look at Trump, whose home state is also New York. He won the state decisively, but Senator Cruz isn't down and out for the count. There is still a chance that the Democratic superdelegates would switch over from Secretary Clinton to Senator Sanders as much as it is that Trump doesn't make it to 1,237 delegates by the Convention, at which point, he could get screwed over by the RNC. Long story short, the race isn't over until we get to the Convention.
RE: 2016 in America - Punchwood - 04-20-2016
(04-20-2016, 05:20 PM)Qvait Wrote: You can't discount Senator Sanders because he lost New York. For crying out loud, it was Secretary Clinton's home state. Look at Trump, whose home state is also New York. He won the state decisively, but Senator Cruz isn't down and out for the count. There is still a chance that the Democratic superdelegates would switch over from Secretary Clinton to Senator Sanders as much as it is that Trump doesn't make it to 1,237 delegates by the Convention, at which point, he could get screwed over by the RNC. Long story short, the race isn't over until we get to the Convention.
It is though. Sanders has lost. Unless he wins every remaining state by huge margins then he won't overtake Hillary and he is not going the win all remaining states and he is not going to win them all by huge margins. He could win every remain state 55%-45% and he still wouldn't overtake Hillary. The superdelegates aren't going to support Sanders unless he overtakes Hillary which he won't. Plus it would be incredibly hypocritical if he won by superdelegates as his supports and I believe he calls them "undemocratic" and "unfair." The fact that you are saying to win, the superdelegates would have to go against the will of the people? That shows what a bad place you are in. Hillary could have the nomination by Tuesday for gods sake (it's very unlikely however, basically impossible. She'd need 453 and there are 463 up for grabs but mathematically she could still win but she won't) and you still cling onto the hope that you'll win. By May Hillary will have won the nomination by a mixture of superdelegates and pledged delegates, by June she will have won it just by pledged delegates and then for all I care Sanders can have everyone of the superdelegates.
RE: 2016 in America - Tsunamy - 04-20-2016
I have to agree with Punch here. Sanders' campaign manager was on MSNBC last night and him trying to explain where the delegate's are going to come from was embarrassing.
As I've been saying — and will continue to say — it sucks. As a Hillary supporter from 2008, I get it. It's heartbreaking to watch it play out and know there's nothing that can be done about it — despite victories here and there.
Sanders didn't — and doesn't — have the momentum to overcome Clinton. While "momentum" is just a media narrative anyhow, if he was trending upward New York would've been closer than it was. Likewise, unless something changes quickly, he's going to lose PA next week as well — and Maryland by a wide margin.
This is a really good read on how the race is playing out: http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/04/20/many_hillary_clinton_supporters_in_new_york_kept_their_allegiances_quiet.html
Hillary has had — and continues to have — a ton of support. But it isn't from the bastions of the left or from the points of typical political power. In short: the white guys aren't supporting her. But everyone else in the Democratic primary is. We just hear more about Sander because white guys control a lot of the levers of power and get to decide the media narrative.
2016 in America - Resentine - 04-20-2016
God it isn't white guys. -.- Sanders leads among young voters(18-29) at almost 80%. That's where his momentum is, not with whites, but with the young. I'm so sick of the bullshit "White, Rural, weird" paint that the media's given us.
RE: 2016 in America - Tsunamy - 04-20-2016
(04-20-2016, 07:35 PM)Resentine Wrote: God it isn't white guys. -.- Sanders leads among young voters(18-29) at almost 80%. That's where his momentum is, not with whites, but with the young. I'm so sick of the bullshit "White, Rural, weird" paint that the media's given us.
Res — look at the poll numbers. The best predictor of how Sanders does if whether or not there is an higher than average minority population.
It's indisputable that the youth are in his camp — sure. But look at where the rest of this support is coming from?
Equally, I'd venture a guess that if you break 18-29 year olds down by demo, he's doing better with white guys than everyone else. Age and other demographic factors aren't mutually exclusive.