2016 Republican Primary

[CID1990]

Well, when you are winning states like Wyoming with 34 total delegates, and none of them are winner take all states, you are not going to make up much ground.


I didn't hear any Sanders supporters complaining on the day of the AZ/ID/UT primaries/caucuses, when Clinton got far more total votes but less delegates.

I think there are 18 delegates from Wyoming. But you're right about it being hard to make up ground when you beat your opponent 56/44 and you get 7 delegates and she gets 11.

Hey jon you've responded to every other post in this thread...

why not this one?

[dbackjon]

I think there are 18 delegates from Wyoming. But you're right about it being hard to make up ground when you beat your opponent 56/44 and you get 7 delegates and she gets 11.

Hey jon you've responded to every other post in this thread...

why not this one?

Thank you for bringing this to my attention - I missed it.


First off, it was a 7/7 split in projected delegates. NO actual delegates have been awarded since this caucus only selects candidates for the state convention. The other four are super delegates, that are not bound to any candidate, and can change their mind.


Each state has rules on how delegates are awarded. Something both candidates were aware of.

It would be like a football team saying they were cheated by getting the same 6 points for a touchdown as the opposing team, even though the other team only had to drive 20 yards to get the TD while the other team had to drive 80 yards.

[89Hen]

It would be like a football team saying they were cheated by getting the same 6 points for a touchdown as the opposing team, even though the other team only had to drive 20 yards to get the TD while the other team had to drive 80 yards.

It actually would be more like the one going 80 yards getting 5 points.

[89Hen]

Nats try to extend the Braves losing streak to start the season to 7 tonight. Gio on the mound for the Nats, anxious to see which Gio shows up.

[Grizalltheway]

Nats try to extend the Braves losing streak to start the season to 7 tonight. Gio on the mound for the Nats, anxious to see which Gio shows up.

Uh oh! Quick, somebody come get butthurt about this!

[DSUrocks07]

I see you saying, " I don't hear Sanders complaining when Clinton won more votes and but received less delegates."

That didn't happen. I just don't see what you're trying to say or you need to word it better.

Again, reread and comprehend.

I'm guessing dback is combining all three state primaries/caucuses for some odd reason...

Democrats = "protect the views of the minority...unless we have a majority, then fuck em.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[UNI88]

And yet, you and your ilk keep blathering on and on about how the Republican party is irrelevant these days.

I have never said that. I have always recognized it for the evil it is

And here it is ...

[DSUrocks07]

And yet, you and your ilk keep blathering on and on about how the Republican party is irrelevant these days.

I have never said that. I have always recognized it for the evil it is

[youtube]http://youtu.be/-7GNHqipgrk[/youtube]

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[houndawg]

Link? That's not the way I've seen it reported.

You expect me to do your google work for you?

Really easy to find. The effected areas in Maricopa County were primarily either retirement areas (Trump) or minority areas (Clinton).

any credible reporting has been saying that.

affected.

[houndawg]

I think there are 18 delegates from Wyoming. But you're right about it being hard to make up ground when you beat your opponent 56/44 and you get 7 delegates and she gets 11.

Bernie received 11% more votes than HRC in Wyoming yet they each get 7 delegates.

Its being reported as 7 and 11 by the so-called liberal media. All this counting the super delegates as down with Hillary shows who the owners of the media are really opposed to, and it ain't Hillary.

[kalm]

Link? That's not the way I've seen it reported.

You expect me to do your google work for you?

Really easy to find. The effected areas in Maricopa County were primarily either retirement areas (Trump) or minority areas (Clinton).

any credible reporting has been saying that.

As a matter of fact, I do.

This is how it affected Sanders:

Consider: in Arizona yesterday, the election was called almost immediately by the media, with Clinton appearing to “win” the state by a margin of 61.5% to 36.1%. Of course, this was all early voting. CNN even wrongly reported that these early votes constituted the live vote in 41% of all Arizona precincts — rather than merely mail-in votes constituting a percentage of the total projected vote in the state — which allowed most Americans to go to bed believing both that Clinton had won Arizona by more than 25 points and that that margin was the result of nearly half of Arizona’s precincts reporting their live-voting results. Neither was true.

In fact, as of the time of that 61.5% to 36.1% “win,” not a single precinct in Arizona had reported its Election Day results.

Indeed, more than two and a half hours after polls closed in Arizona, officials there had counted only 54,000 of the estimated 431,000 Election Day ballots.

That’s about 12%.

So how did Bernie Sanders do on Election Day in Arizona?

As of the writing of this essay (2:45 AM ET), Sanders was leading Clinton in Election Day voting in Arizona 50.2% to 49.8%, with just under 75,000 votes (about 17.3% of all Election Day votes) counted.

So imagine, for a moment, that early votes were reported to the media last rather than first. Which, of course, they quite easily could be, given that they’re less — rather than more — reflective of the actual state of opinion on Election Day. Were early votes reported last rather than first, Arizona as of 2:45 AM ET would have been considered not only too close to call but a genuine nail-biter. In fact, only 400 or so Election Day votes were separating the two Democratic candidates at that point — though the momentum with each new vote counted was quite clearly in Sanders’ favor.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abra ... 28076.html

[Ibanez]

You expect me to do your google work for you?

Really easy to find. The effected areas in Maricopa County were primarily either retirement areas (Trump) or minority areas (Clinton).

any credible reporting has been saying that.

As a matter of fact, I do.

This is how it affected Sanders:

Consider: in Arizona yesterday, the election was called almost immediately by the media, with Clinton appearing to “win” the state by a margin of 61.5% to 36.1%. Of course, this was all early voting. CNN even wrongly reported that these early votes constituted the live vote in 41% of all Arizona precincts — rather than merely mail-in votes constituting a percentage of the total projected vote in the state — which allowed most Americans to go to bed believing both that Clinton had won Arizona by more than 25 points and that that margin was the result of nearly half of Arizona’s precincts reporting their live-voting results. Neither was true.

In fact, as of the time of that 61.5% to 36.1% “win,” not a single precinct in Arizona had reported its Election Day results.

Indeed, more than two and a half hours after polls closed in Arizona, officials there had counted only 54,000 of the estimated 431,000 Election Day ballots.

That’s about 12%.

So how did Bernie Sanders do on Election Day in Arizona?

As of the writing of this essay (2:45 AM ET), Sanders was leading Clinton in Election Day voting in Arizona 50.2% to 49.8%, with just under 75,000 votes (about 17.3% of all Election Day votes) counted.

So imagine, for a moment, that early votes were reported to the media last rather than first. Which, of course, they quite easily could be, given that they’re less — rather than more — reflective of the actual state of opinion on Election Day. Were early votes reported last rather than first, Arizona as of 2:45 AM ET would have been considered not only too close to call but a genuine nail-biter. In fact, only 400 or so Election Day votes were separating the two Democratic candidates at that point — though the momentum with each new vote counted was quite clearly in Sanders’ favor.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abra ... 28076.html

That's one thing I don't understand/agree with in terms of reporting. The clock will strike 8pm, with 1% of precincts reporting and they'll call a state only to have it overturned by the numbers.

[kalm]

As a matter of fact, I do.

This is how it affected Sanders:



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abra ... 28076.html

That's one thing I don't understand/agree with in terms of reporting. The clock will strike 8pm, with 1% of precincts reporting and they'll call a state only to have it overturned by the numbers.

And imagine you've been standing in line at the polling place already for a long time when you finally see on your cell phone that CNN has called the election for Clinton 61%-36%. Are you going to stay in line? Hell no.

[Ibanez]

That's one thing I don't understand/agree with in terms of reporting. The clock will strike 8pm, with 1% of precincts reporting and they'll call a state only to have it overturned by the numbers.

And imagine you've been standing in line at the polling place already for a long time when you finally see on your cell phone that CNN has called the election for Clinton 61%-36%. Are you going to stay in line? Hell no.

You're right.

But, there's no problem here. Just a bunch of butt hurt losers, amirite Jon?

[HI54UNI]

I have never said that. I have always recognized it for the evil it is

And here it is ...

Spoiler: show

Put that crap in a spoiler!

[YoUDeeMan]

That's one thing I don't understand/agree with in terms of reporting. The clock will strike 8pm, with 1% of precincts reporting and they'll call a state only to have it overturned by the numbers.

And imagine you've been standing in line at the polling place already for a long time when you finally see on your cell phone that CNN has called the election for Clinton 61%-36%. Are you going to stay in line? Hell no.

If Bernie were gay, dback would be going nuts. But, since dback's bitch is winning, he ignores what is clearly wrong and tries to defend the shenanigans.

You can't trust a gay voter...no morale compass...and they'll try to stab you in the butt every chance they get.

[Ibanez]

And imagine you've been standing in line at the polling place already for a long time when you finally see on your cell phone that CNN has called the election for Clinton 61%-36%. Are you going to stay in line? Hell no.

If Bernie were gay, dback would be going nuts. But, since dback's bitch is winning, he ignores what is clearly wrong and tries to defend the shenanigans.

You can't trust a gay voter...no morale compass...and they'll try to stab you in the butt every chance they get.

Butt stabbing? Sounds painful.

[Ibanez]

As if we needed another reason to NOT vote for Cruz:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... ices-texas

Texans were free to use sex toys at home, but they did not have the right to buy them

Cruz's office declared, "There is no substantive-due-process right to stimulate one's genitals for non-medical purposes unrelated to procreation or outside of an interpersonal relationship."

You might as well arrest every teenage Texan male.



I bring this up because, someone that is running for POTUS is dictating morality, interjecting the government into your private life AND picks winners and losers in the economy. I'm sure the loss of tax revenue from sex toys wasn't noticed by Texas, but that isn't the point. Where does it end? With Cruz as POTUS, can we reasonable assume that he would ban the sale of other things he finds objectionable? Perhaps Tobacco? Pornographic literature? The thong? Louisiana Blue Crab?

While Cruz upheld the decision that you DO NOT have a right to buy a flesh-light, he no doubt supports businesses refusing service in the public realm. On that issue, i'm torn. On the one hand, you're in the business to make money. Who cares if two guys are buying a wedding cake? Take their money and provide the service/product. On the other hand, If you only want to sell your products to wholesome, Christian people then you might find yourself out of business.

[GannonFan]

As if we needed another reason to NOT vote for Cruz:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... ices-texas

Texans were free to use sex toys at home, but they did not have the right to buy them

Cruz's office declared, "There is no substantive-due-process right to stimulate one's genitals for non-medical purposes unrelated to procreation or outside of an interpersonal relationship."

You might as well arrest every teenage Texan male.



I bring this up because, someone that is running for POTUS is dictating morality, interjecting the government into your private life AND picks winners and losers in the economy. I'm sure the loss of tax revenue from sex toys wasn't noticed by Texas, but that isn't the point. Where does it end? With Cruz as POTUS, can we reasonable assume that he would ban the sale of other things he finds objectionable? Perhaps Tobacco? Pornographic literature? The thong? Louisiana Blue Crab?

While Cruz upheld the decision that you DO NOT have a right to buy a flesh-light, he no doubt supports businesses refusing service in the public realm. On that issue, i'm torn. On the one hand, you're in the business to make money. Who cares if two guys are buying a wedding cake? Take their money and provide the service/product. On the other hand, If you only want to sell your products to wholesome, Christian people then you might find yourself out of business.

Cruz.

People getting all up in arms about Trump have been missing the boat on Cruz. Trump is a buffoon, but likely harmless, Cruz is flirting with evil and could do a great deal of harm. There's a difference.

[Ibanez]

As if we needed another reason to NOT vote for Cruz:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... ices-texas




You might as well arrest every teenage Texan male.



I bring this up because, someone that is running for POTUS is dictating morality, interjecting the government into your private life AND picks winners and losers in the economy. I'm sure the loss of tax revenue from sex toys wasn't noticed by Texas, but that isn't the point. Where does it end? With Cruz as POTUS, can we reasonable assume that he would ban the sale of other things he finds objectionable? Perhaps Tobacco? Pornographic literature? The thong? Louisiana Blue Crab?

While Cruz upheld the decision that you DO NOT have a right to buy a flesh-light, he no doubt supports businesses refusing service in the public realm. On that issue, i'm torn. On the one hand, you're in the business to make money. Who cares if two guys are buying a wedding cake? Take their money and provide the service/product. On the other hand, If you only want to sell your products to wholesome, Christian people then you might find yourself out of business.

Cruz.

People getting all up in arms about Trump have been missing the boat on Cruz. Trump is a buffoon, but likely harmless, Cruz is flirting with evil and could do a great deal of harm. There's a difference.

Exactly. Cruz is literally, bat shit crazy.

[kalm]

As if we needed another reason to NOT vote for Cruz:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... ices-texas

Texans were free to use sex toys at home, but they did not have the right to buy them

Cruz's office declared, "There is no substantive-due-process right to stimulate one's genitals for non-medical purposes unrelated to procreation or outside of an interpersonal relationship."

You might as well arrest every teenage Texan male.



I bring this up because, someone that is running for POTUS is dictating morality, interjecting the government into your private life AND picks winners and losers in the economy. I'm sure the loss of tax revenue from sex toys wasn't noticed by Texas, but that isn't the point. Where does it end? With Cruz as POTUS, can we reasonable assume that he would ban the sale of other things he finds objectionable? Perhaps Tobacco? Pornographic literature? The thong? Louisiana Blue Crab?

While Cruz upheld the decision that you DO NOT have a right to buy a flesh-light, he no doubt supports businesses refusing service in the public realm. On that issue, i'm torn. On the one hand, you're in the business to make money. Who cares if two guys are buying a wedding cake? Take their money and provide the service/product. On the other hand, If you only want to sell your products to wholesome, Christian people then you might find yourself out of business.

That is a dude with some serious issues.

[Ibanez]

As if we needed another reason to NOT vote for Cruz:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... ices-texas




You might as well arrest every teenage Texan male.



I bring this up because, someone that is running for POTUS is dictating morality, interjecting the government into your private life AND picks winners and losers in the economy. I'm sure the loss of tax revenue from sex toys wasn't noticed by Texas, but that isn't the point. Where does it end? With Cruz as POTUS, can we reasonable assume that he would ban the sale of other things he finds objectionable? Perhaps Tobacco? Pornographic literature? The thong? Louisiana Blue Crab?

While Cruz upheld the decision that you DO NOT have a right to buy a flesh-light, he no doubt supports businesses refusing service in the public realm. On that issue, i'm torn. On the one hand, you're in the business to make money. Who cares if two guys are buying a wedding cake? Take their money and provide the service/product. On the other hand, If you only want to sell your products to wholesome, Christian people then you might find yourself out of business.

That is a dude with some serious issues.

No doubt.

[SDHornet]

Exactly. Cruz is literally, bat shit crazy.

Que JSO to storm in and quote some meaningless poll about how Cruz would do better in the general than Trump.

[Ibanez]

Exactly. Cruz is literally, bat shit crazy.

Que JSO to storm in and quote some meaningless poll about how Cruz would do better in the general than Trump.

Like that matters.

I'll preemptively post this comical meme:

[Ivytalk]

Exactly. Cruz is literally, bat **** crazy.

Que pasa, JSO? Now storm in and quote some meaningless poll about how Cruz would do better in the general than Trump.

FIFY