Front Office Football Central

Front Office Football Central (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//index.php)
-   Off Topic (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   2020 Democratic Primaries/General Election Thread (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//showthread.php?t=95933)

Warhammer 01-31-2020 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3263423)
Or when they POISONED a city's drinking water and tried to hide it.


Coming from the industry, the city engineer screwed that up. If anyone changes where they are getting their water, you test it with the infrastructure, it is common nearly everywhere else.

Brian Swartz 02-01-2020 02:21 AM

I'm torn on who I want to win, but if push comes to shove it's still Warren. The radical changes she proposes makes her a better candidate than Biden, not worse. It'll expose more people to needed ideas pushing us towards globalization and dealing with climate change, while less will actually get done. A moderate leader is more likely to get milquetoast agenda passed while not actually addressing the more vital issues, and I don't think that's good for anybody.

Oh, and in terms of who wins? The Democratic nominee if they run a remotely competent campaign, or if the economy tanks even if they don't.

stevew 02-01-2020 02:38 AM

If Trump loses we’ll get 4 years of “stolen election” and diarrhea tweets. He’ll probably run again in 2024. Claim unfairness in the primary and go third party. Election to the house and something horrible happens.

Also are we positive he’s not just going to run Ivanka as VP?

Edward64 02-02-2020 10:28 AM

If true, good move for Hillary. Biden-Hillary works for Biden. I am not sure about any other candidate though.

I did say I would prefer Biden with younger VP, but I can live with Hillary.

Is Hillary Clinton angling to become vice president?Â* | TheHill
Quote:

That is, Clinton and/or her team could be negotiating with former Vice President Joe Biden, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg or the last candidate standing to join the ticket as vice president.
:
There is no doubt that the former first lady, New York senator and secretary of State once again is raising her profile and stepping back into the spotlight to reengage in political discussions.
:
Biden, still nominally the party’s front-runner, has a list of negative issues to overcome. Clinton could help him erase or mitigate all of them, in one way or another.

Bloomberg, though a former three-term mayor of New York City, is a political neophyte on the national stage and would benefit greatly by having Clinton — and her machine — at his side.

Jas_lov 02-02-2020 10:42 AM

Biden-Hillary works for nobody but Trump. Abrams should be the VP pick for Bernie or Biden.Warren could pick Booker, Castro or Abrams and Pete should pick someone older but not Hillary.

Galaril 02-02-2020 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jas_lov (Post 3263623)
Biden-Hillary works for nobody but Trump. Abrams should be the VP pick for Bernie or Biden.Warren could pick Booker, Castro or Abrams and Pete should pick someone older but not Hillary.


Yes agree. If I had my choice between Hilary as VP and even a. Moderate republican like Kasich I would go with the later for Biden or Abrams.

JPhillips 02-02-2020 12:01 PM

There is no possibility that happens.

But it got the clicks, so good job The Hill.

Atocep 02-02-2020 01:52 PM

Biden/Hillary would be the guaranteed way to lose an election the Dems should be winning, assuming we still have elections by November.

Edward64 02-02-2020 01:54 PM

Have to wait for the analysis but sounds promising. Also good that he will be participating in the debates. Want to hear more.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/01/bill...5-million.html
Quote:

Billionaire Democratic candidate Mike Bloomberg unveiled a tax plan on Saturday that would unwind corporate tax breaks granted by President Donald Trump and impose an additional 5% “surtax” on incomes above $5 million a year.

According to the campaign, the plan in total would generate roughly $5 trillion and would be sufficient to help fund Bloomberg’s initiatives, including his healthcare plan, education, combating climate change and more than $1 trillion infrastructure plan.
:
:
Bloomberg, like fellow moderate candidate Joe Biden, thinks Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act went too far. Both want to hike the corporate tax rate up to 28%, after Trump lowered it from 35% to 21%. Both want to reverse the Trump tax changes that lowered taxes on high-income households from 39.6%. to 37%. Both propose raising capital gain taxes for high-income taxpayers.
:
:
Bloomberg could take the debate stage for the first time in Nevada later this month. The Democratic National Committee on Friday unveiled new debate rules that dropped the requirement for candidates to obtain a minimum number of campaign contributors, opening a previously closed door for Bloomberg.

He is polling in fourth place in national surveys, earning approximately 8% support.

Edward64 02-02-2020 11:17 PM

I would be happy for workable medicare for all/public option from the next admin and playing offense/defense against China. I also like the idea of disrupting the energy industry to make it more competitive but would prefer subsidizing the private emerging/incubators (e.g. Elon Musk and like).

Bernie thinks big and that is good. Just not sure we need this just yet.

Power to the people: Bernie calls for federal takeover of electricity production - POLITICO
Quote:

Sen. Bernie Sanders has put nationalizing health insurance at the center of his presidential campaign, but his proposal to fight climate change also calls for a government takeover of a fundamental segment of the economy — electricity production.

Sanders has laid out a $16 trillion climate change plan that would transition U.S. electricity generation away from fossil fuels to renewable resources like wind, solar and hydropower by 2030. That’s far faster than any other Democratic candidate's target and sets a pace that rivals like former Vice President Joe Biden say is unrealistic.
:
:
A Sanders administration would pour funding into the four existing "power marketing administrations" that are overseen by the Energy Department, as well as the Tennessee Valley Authority and one newly created entity, to vastly expand their solar, wind and geothermal power production. Those organizations currently provide power from hydroelectric dams to 33 states, and would be able to sell the increased green energy to local utilities nationwide — creating a sort of "public option" that would compete with the coal, natural gas and nuclear plants owned by privately owned power generators.

Brian Swartz 02-03-2020 01:15 AM

I think Bernie's going in the right direction but with the wrong solution. The future of energy isn't in solar/wind/geothermal, much as I favor using them where possible. It's in fusion, preferably with our current cleanest alternative nuclear fission to bridge the gap with better alternatives such as TerraPower hopefully coming soon. I'm all for whatever needs to happen to ameliorate climate change, but I just think Sanders is backing the wrong horse here.

GrantDawg 02-03-2020 08:30 PM

Entrance polls have Sanders and Mayor Pete nearly tied at the top in Iowa.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Edward64 02-03-2020 08:52 PM

The CNN coverage with guest pundits is horrible, filling in time with nothingness.

Edward64 02-03-2020 09:46 PM

MSNBC guys seem frustrated at some sort of delay in reporting results. Wonder what's going on.

molson 02-03-2020 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3263863)
MSNBC guys seem frustrated at some sort of delay in reporting results. Wonder what's going on.


According to Bernie Bros/Russian Bots on reddit (it's tough to tell the difference), Sanders is winning and the DNC and media are trying to figure out a way to cover it up.

larrymcg421 02-03-2020 10:04 PM

Just one more reason to tell Iowa to fuck off with their entitled 1st primary status. If we have to tell New Hampshire to fuck off as well, then all the better.

Coffee Warlord 02-03-2020 10:09 PM

Fox is thoroughly enjoying this fiasco.

bronconick 02-03-2020 10:24 PM

The state Democratic Parties are almost always fuckups and this is why the GOP dominates at that level.

Edward64 02-03-2020 10:30 PM

I guess the new system wasn't tested well enough before moving into Production. Think I'll just read about it in the news tomorrow.

Young Drachma 02-03-2020 10:32 PM

Elena Schneider on Twitter: "On those technical difficulties...

"We are on paper in many cases," not the app, as was planned, said one Iowa Democrat. "The whole system largely broke.""

Jas_lov 02-03-2020 10:40 PM

What a clusterfuck. Iowa needs to go to a primary and lose its 1st in the nation status.

Coffee Warlord 02-03-2020 11:04 PM

Now, I understand that you just can't ever replicate a production environment when testing something.

That said....this ladies and gentlemen, is why you don't skimp on QA.

RainMaker 02-03-2020 11:04 PM

Just vote like normal people you fucking idiots.

RainMaker 02-03-2020 11:05 PM

Also Tom Perez should be forced to retire tomorrow.

Radii 02-03-2020 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord (Post 3263880)
Now, I understand that you just can't ever replicate a production environment when testing something.

That said....this ladies and gentlemen, is why you don't skimp on QA.


Voting Machines: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO) - YouTube

This is a great time to take this all in for our upcoming elections in every state. One large batch of voting machines we never QA'd internally before being shipped and used in our elections. Touch screen machines that offer no paper trail so there's zero way to deal with potential problems. A story about a very small election where one of those machines literally flipped the overall results, and it was only dealt with because the local area was so small that the candidates knew every single voter and got affidavits from them showing that the reported vote total was impossible.

What a time to be alive

Brian Swartz 02-03-2020 11:08 PM

I seriously don't get why everyone's so upset about this. The count's just going to take longer. That's all. So what?

What Radii's talking about is different - a system with no backup is a horrible idea. But I don't see that being the case in Iowa.

Radii 02-03-2020 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz (Post 3263884)
I seriously don't get why everyone's so upset about this. The count's just going to take longer. That's all. So what?

What Radii's talking about is different - a system with no backup is a horrible idea. But I don't see that being the case in Iowa.


Oh I don't think its related either. Just a good thing to have awareness of related to voting results, and anyone staying up til this is sorted out has time to kill now :D

Coffee Warlord 02-03-2020 11:40 PM

No matter what the results eventually show, there's one thing I about guarantee will happen - there's going to be a shit-ton of candidates challenging the results.

molson 02-03-2020 11:42 PM

Buttigieg claims victory, maybe figuring, "why not?"

larrymcg421 02-03-2020 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 3263888)
Buttigieg claims victory, maybe figuring, "why not?"


Seems likely he's 1st or 2nd and either way, and that's a victory for him.

Jon 02-04-2020 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 3263882)
Also Tom Perez should be forced to retire tomorrow.


States run these, not the national parties.

We're watching the slow death of the Iowa caucus.

I suspect (1) the problem is math and (2) inconsistencies have always been an issue and they are now deciding to deal with it.

kingfc22 02-04-2020 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 3263881)
Just vote like normal people you fucking idiots.


This

GrantDawg 02-04-2020 03:12 AM

We don't know who won, but we definitely know the losers. 1) Iowa, who was already on the verge of losing first vote status. They is well dead now. 3) The Democratic party. This is going to be a talking point for a long time. How can you be so stupid as to not have a functioning system when the eyes on the whole world is watching? The DNC needs to clean house.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Edward64 02-04-2020 06:25 AM

Woke up and still no results. Supposedly sometime today but wouldn't be surprised if its later. Poor Bernie and Pete, but probably good for Biden and Warren.

Russian hacked the app maybe? Whoever developed and tested the app will have a lot of explaining to do.

Jas_lov 02-04-2020 06:29 AM

Bernie and Pete should be livid. One of them probably won and now it will get swept under the State of the Union and impeachment coverage. And the other campaigns can brush off a poor performance and question the cloudy results. Someone needs to be fired for this. What's so hard about counting people?

Honolulu_Blue 02-04-2020 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3263893)
We don't know who won, but we definitely know the losers. 1) Iowa, who was already on the verge of losing first vote status. They is well dead now. 3) The Democratic party. This is going to be a talking point for a long time. How can you be so stupid as to not have a functioning system when the eyes on the whole world is watching? The DNC needs to clean house.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


And this is the party running “The Deep State”...

bob 02-04-2020 06:58 AM

Just realized i never actually posted my prediction.

Iowa: Sanders
Primary: Biden
Presidency: Trump

Not my preferred choices, but what I think will happen.

NobodyHere 02-04-2020 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3263893)
We don't know who won, but we definitely know the losers. 1) Iowa, who was already on the verge of losing first vote status. They is well dead now. 3) The Democratic party. This is going to be a talking point for a long time. How can you be so stupid as to not have a functioning system when the eyes on the whole world is watching? The DNC needs to clean house.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


What happened to two?

Vince, Pt. II 02-04-2020 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz (Post 3263884)
I seriously don't get why everyone's so upset about this. The count's just going to take longer. That's all. So what?

What Radii's talking about is different - a system with no backup is a horrible idea. But I don't see that being the case in Iowa.


The issue is that Iowa is hardly at all about the delegates (41, a trivial number) and almost entirely about the media narrative it generates. People who have campaigned around that truism and banked on it are going to be absolutely screwed by the lack of media coverage. Most likely it's Pete Buttigieg who gets hurt the most, while the early reports of Biden underperforming hugely means his candidacy gets an inherent boost from the lack of coverage.

molson 02-04-2020 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue (Post 3263897)
And this is the party running “The Deep State”...


Come debate time, every time the Dem nominee brings up some massive government program and promises the world, Trump will say that they can't even count votes. And that will resonate with people.

NobodyHere 02-04-2020 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II (Post 3263908)
The issue is that Iowa is hardly at all about the delegates (41, a trivial number) and almost entirely about the media narrative it generates. People who have campaigned around that truism and banked on it are going to be absolutely screwed by the lack of media coverage. Most likely it's Pete Buttigieg who gets hurt the most, while the early reports of Biden underperforming hugely means his candidacy gets an inherent boost from the lack of coverage.


Not to mention it makes the party look horribly incompetent. Imagine if the Iowa Democratic Party tried to reach out for money right now.

JPhillips 02-04-2020 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 3263914)
Come debate time, every time the Dem nominee brings up some massive government program and promises the world, Trump will say that they can't even count votes. And that will resonate with people.


Nah. By that time we will have lived through a thousand other crises and nobody will quite remember Iowa.

JPhillips 02-04-2020 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3263907)
What happened to two?


The Dem app lost it.

cartman 02-04-2020 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz (Post 3263884)
I seriously don't get why everyone's so upset about this. The count's just going to take longer. That's all. So what?


Plus it is 40 delegates out of an eventual 4,000. A movement of 2-3 to/from any candidate from the initial reports isn't going to change things. It is like in a basketball game in the first half when they go to the monitor for 5 minutes to put 2 seconds back on the clock.

albionmoonlight 02-04-2020 10:23 AM

Good long term news is that this might finally be the thing to break the Iowa stronghold.

Bad short term news is that this gives every candidate's supporters an excuse to feel aggrieved.

molson 02-04-2020 10:38 AM

Registered Iowa Democrat stunned to learn Mayor Pete is gay and wants her vote back.

https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreak...m_medium=web2x

NobodyHere 02-04-2020 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3263927)
Good long term news is that this might finally be the thing to break the Iowa stronghold.

Bad short term news is that this gives every candidate's supporters an excuse to feel aggrieved.


But how would that happen? Are democrats going to tell Iowa to move their caucus back so they're not first anymore? Are they going to tell another state to go first? What if Iowa doesn't comply?

The way I see it is the only stick the national party has is to not count their delegates like they did with Michigan a few years back. That won't make them very popular in the state.

Edward64 02-04-2020 10:47 AM

I bet the "hanging chad" folks in FL are happy. This will bump them down to second place for the foreseeable future.

ISiddiqui 02-04-2020 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cartman (Post 3263926)
Plus it is 40 delegates out of an eventual 4,000. A movement of 2-3 to/from any candidate from the initial reports isn't going to change things. It is like in a basketball game in the first half when they go to the monitor for 5 minutes to put 2 seconds back on the clock.


Momentum matters a lot. 538 indicated that a win in Iowa is worth quite a bit. And if it turns out it's as rumored: Sanders-Buttigieg 1-2 and Biden was a distant 4th, then the race would be completely changed... if there wasn't this snafu. Now Biden can claim Iowa was screwed up so no one look at it and Buttigieg is denied a bump (esp after he claimed victory and it seems like Sanders may actually be the winner).

molson 02-04-2020 11:06 AM

I wonder if Bloomberg gets a bump if Iowa is seen as basically not counting. Not just with the delay, but with the multitude of ways the results could be interpreted when and if they're released. New Hampshire and South Carolina seem like races for 2nd, Nevada is small, then there's Super Tuesday which Bloomberg is all-in on.

Arles 02-04-2020 11:11 AM

Yeah, all Iowa is good for is the initial boost. If you take that away, a win in Iowa is worth about as much as one in Kansas or Mississippi. It's also the main chance for a liberal candidate to get traction. After Iowa, you get New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina - not exactly a hotbed for leftist candidates.

Izulde 02-04-2020 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui (Post 3263934)
Momentum matters a lot. 538 indicated that a win in Iowa is worth quite a bit. And if it turns out it's as rumored: Sanders-Buttigieg 1-2 and Biden was a distant 4th, then the race would be completely changed... if there wasn't this snafu. Now Biden can claim Iowa was screwed up so no one look at it and Buttigieg is denied a bump (esp after he claimed victory and it seems like Sanders may actually be the winner).


If I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd be screaming that this screwup was done deliberately (via cybersecurity breach or something) to bury Biden's disastrous finish and diminish the Sanders bounce.

I mean, I'm not, but I wouldn't be surprised if like 30 years from now, a story came out outlining something like that happened.

Izulde 02-04-2020 11:25 AM

Results due out at 4 PM CST according to Iowa Dem Party chairman.

Honolulu_Blue 02-04-2020 11:34 AM

I was always aware of the Iowa Caucus, but, until this year, I was never really aware of just how it worked. Now that I am, I hate it. It's stupid. It seems like one of those things that people keep doing just because that's how it's always been done.

They should just have a primary like normal people and get over themselves.

ISiddiqui 02-04-2020 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arles (Post 3263938)
Yeah, all Iowa is good for is the initial boost. If you take that away, a win in Iowa is worth about as much as one in Kansas or Mississippi. It's also the main chance for a liberal candidate to get traction. After Iowa, you get New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina - not exactly a hotbed for leftist candidates.


I mean Sanders was in the lead in both New Hampshire and Nevada according to polling, so not sure they aren't that good for leftists....

And Iowa tends to be where moderates (or Midwesterners) win over leftists a lot.

ISiddiqui 02-04-2020 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue (Post 3263942)
I was always aware of the Iowa Caucus, but, until this year, I was never really aware of just how it worked. Now that I am, I hate it. It's stupid. It seems like one of those things that people keep doing just because that's how it's always been done.

They should just have a primary like normal people and get over themselves.


I think all caucuses should die in a fire (I think Nevada's is a caucus as well). Telling people to hang out for a few hours and try to get supporters of other candidates to walk over to your side seems like torture.

bronconick 02-04-2020 11:45 AM

Supposedly, Nevada uses the same App for their caucus. That should go over well.

cartman 02-04-2020 11:49 AM

Back In the pre social media days caucuses had their place. It was tons of back room dealing, and if you got one of your guys in as the precinct chairman, you won.

JPhillips 02-04-2020 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Izulde (Post 3263941)
Results due out at 4 PM CST according to Iowa Dem Party chairman.


Partial results.

Which is a dumber idea than waiting until they are complete.

ISiddiqui 02-04-2020 12:43 PM

Next debate is Friday... that's going to be saucy

GrantDawg 02-04-2020 01:01 PM

Deep state got it.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Galaril 02-04-2020 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 3263914)
Come debate time, every time the Dem nominee brings up some massive government program and promises the world, Trump will say that they can't even count votes. And that will resonate with people.


I was telling my wife the same thing. This D party f up in Iowa will be regularly referred too by a Trump.

PilotMan 02-04-2020 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galaril (Post 3263952)
I was telling my wife the same thing. This D party f up in Iowa will be regularly referred too by a Trump.



Way too much credit. H can't even remember the names of all his kids.

Young Drachma 02-04-2020 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bronconick (Post 3263945)
Supposedly, Nevada uses the same App for their caucus. That should go over well.


Not anymore.

Reuters on Twitter: "Nevada Democratic Party says Iowa's caucus reporting app and developer will not be used during the state's February 22nd caucuses, the party chair says… https://t.co/pV5NtRUaLo"

Izulde 02-04-2020 03:21 PM


It's still gonna be a royal pain in the ass. I miss living in a primary state.

molson 02-04-2020 03:22 PM

I wonder what things are like at the Shadow Inc., offices today.

Radii 02-04-2020 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galaril (Post 3263952)
I was telling my wife the same thing. This D party f up in Iowa will be regularly referred too by a Trump.


Trump will just make shit up that's worse than this anyway. It really doesn't matter what the facts are as far as how Trump attacks everything around him.

Its a huge embarrassment and in an election where the dems need big turnout especially from younger people anything that erodes confidence in the process is a disaster, I'm extremely concerned about this. But I'm not worried in the slightest about giving Trump ammunition.

Brian Swartz 02-04-2020 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vince Pt II
People who have campaigned around that truism and banked on it are going to be absolutely screwed by the lack of media coverage. Most likely it's Pete Buttigieg who gets hurt the most, while the early reports of Biden underperforming hugely means his candidacy gets an inherent boost from the lack of coverage.


That's a fair point, but I think it's a pretty outdated one at this stage. Politicians are nowhere near as dependent on the media as they were say, 20 years ago when this would have been a much more important thing. IMO any candidate who is focused on that in 2020 is already shooting themselves in the foot.

Young Drachma 02-04-2020 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 3263970)
I wonder what things are like at the Shadow Inc., offices today.


Haha, well they're not working out of DC WeWork anymore because I suspect all of them were working remote anyway. But surely their Slack channel is hell.

JPhillips 02-04-2020 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 3263970)
I wonder what things are like at the Shadow Inc., offices today.



Vince, Pt. II 02-04-2020 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz (Post 3263974)
That's a fair point, but I think it's a pretty outdated one at this stage. Politicians are nowhere near as dependent on the media as they were say, 20 years ago when this would have been a much more important thing. IMO any candidate who is focused on that in 2020 is already shooting themselves in the foot.


Much smarter people than I think that the Iowa bump is hugely important. As in a 30%+ increase/decrease in a candidates chances to win the Primary. As I think iSiddiqui posted on the last page, fivethirtyeight has been looking at a ton of data; they seem to think Iowa is pretty much the only reason someone like Buttigieg even has a legitimate shot at the primary.

ISiddiqui 02-04-2020 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II (Post 3263977)
Much smarter people than I think that the Iowa bump is hugely important. As in a 30%+ increase/decrease in a candidates chances to win the Primary. As I think iSiddiqui posted on the last page, fivethirtyeight has been looking at a ton of data; they seem to think Iowa is pretty much the only reason someone like Buttigieg even has a legitimate shot at the primary.


Right. Nate Silver even wrote a post about it last night:

Iowa Might Have Screwed Up The Whole Nomination Process | FiveThirtyEight

You'll note that Iowa's bounce is the second highest potential bounce after Super Tuesday.

ISiddiqui 02-04-2020 04:08 PM

Here is Nate Cohn (apparently it's only 62% of the precincts, which what?!):

Buttigieg 26.9
Sanders 25.1
Warren 18
Biden 15

edit: hold up, 538 said that's the first alignment vote... which isn't the final. This is so damned confusing.

edit2: apparently Sanders wins the first alignment and final alignment in terms of people, but Buttigieg has more delegate equivalents (that's going to go over well on Twitter)? It's still 62% of the vote though.

Izulde 02-04-2020 04:16 PM

1st Alignment
Sanders 24
Buttigeg 21
Warren 19
Biden 15
Klob 13

Post-Alignment
Sanders 26
Buttigieg 25
Warren 21
Biden 13
Klob 12

State Delegate Equivalent
Buttigieg 27
Sanders 25
Warren 18
Biden 16
Klob 13

w/62% precincts in

ISiddiqui 02-04-2020 04:27 PM

Hopefully the 38% fixes it, but Bernie having more votes but less delegates is sure going to make the internet fun the next few days.

Edward64 02-04-2020 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Izulde (Post 3263980)
1st Alignment
Sanders 24
Buttigeg 21
Warren 19
Biden 15
Klob 13

Post-Alignment
Sanders 26
Buttigieg 25
Warren 21
Biden 13
Klob 12

State Delegate Equivalent
Buttigieg 27
Sanders 25
Warren 18
Biden 16
Klob 13

w/62% precincts in


And Yang is #6 with 1.1, a dramatic drop off from #5.

Ben E Lou 02-04-2020 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui (Post 3263982)
Hopefully the 38% fixes it, but Bernie having more votes but less delegates is sure going to make the internet fun the next few days.

Ummmm...why on EARTH would any rational person want the 38% to fix it???


:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

NobodyHere 02-04-2020 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui (Post 3263982)
Hopefully the 38% fixes it, but Bernie having more votes but less delegates is sure going to make the internet fun the next few days.


For a party that wants to get rid of the electoral college in favor of just the popular vote, the Democrats do like their caucuses crazily complicated

ISiddiqui 02-04-2020 07:09 PM

Ben, you must not know any Bernie supporters in real life.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Ben E Lou 02-04-2020 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui (Post 3264000)
Ben, you must not know any Bernie supporters in real life.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Oh, I do. One dude in particular is a very recent* former member of my church. 20something. During the Prayers Of The People, probably twice a month he'd pray aloud against the military-industrial complex that controls our nation. :eek: Dude is a piece of work.


*-They moved recently--his wife is going to grad school.

Brian Swartz 02-05-2020 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vince Pt II
Much smarter people than I think that the Iowa bump is hugely important. As in a 30%+ increase/decrease in a candidates chances to win the Primary. As I think iSiddiqui posted on the last page, fivethirtyeight has been looking at a ton of data; they seem to think Iowa is pretty much the only reason someone like Buttigieg even has a legitimate shot at the primary.


This is one of the rare cases where fivethirtyeight gets into missing the forest for the trees IMO. Since 1976, the winner of Iowa in contested primaries has lost almost as often as they've won (10 of 18 times). When you also consider that most of them didn't take place in anything resembling the modern media age of social media and the internet, and the fact that there's a large bias towards the first state being predictive in the sense that usually the 'best' (as determined by the electorate) candidates are likely to do better everywhere, and that there have sometimes been prohibitive front-runners to up the numbers as well, anything close to 30% is just unjustified as far as I'm concerned. It still matters, it's still important - but anything above 10% I would consider an extreme stretch. Headlines like 'screwed up the whole nomination process' are unfortunate clickbait, and by the way also not well-supported by the article itself.

Chief Rum 02-05-2020 02:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PilotMan (Post 3263953)
Way too much credit. H can't even remember the names of all his kids.


Naw, he'll remember the general details. He'll just get the state wrong.

GrantDawg 02-05-2020 05:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 3263970)
I wonder what things are like at the Shadow Inc., offices today.



Packing boxes, sending out Resumes.

GrantDawg 02-05-2020 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz (Post 3264039)
This is one of the rare cases where fivethirtyeight gets into missing the forest for the trees IMO. Since 1976, the winner of Iowa in contested primaries has lost almost as often as they've won (10 of 18 times). When you also consider that most of them didn't take place in anything resembling the modern media age of social media and the internet, and the fact that there's a large bias towards the first state being predictive in the sense that usually the 'best' (as determined by the electorate) candidates are likely to do better everywhere, and that there have sometimes been prohibitive front-runners to up the numbers as well, anything close to 30% is just unjustified as far as I'm concerned. It still matters, it's still important - but anything above 10% I would consider an extreme stretch. Headlines like 'screwed up the whole nomination process' are unfortunate clickbait, and by the way also not well-supported by the article itself.



Iowa made Obama's candidacy. Iowa being the first real vote, gives a much better picture of who can compete and who can't. It has a better influence than polls, because it is a real vote. It will also affect fund-raising. Do better than expected, more money comes in, but do worse, your campaign is in real trouble. That is where the bump comes from. Especially the money part, because the number one reason candidates drop out is money.

Galaril 02-05-2020 06:11 AM

Good lord I wonder after that surprising 4th place finish if Biden is dead in the water and especially with Bloomberg aka Thurston Howell III likely taking some of his moderate voters away. Are we seriously going to run a card caring full bait socialist against Cheeto? Now I am wondering high Trump runs after Dad wins 2020.

albionmoonlight 02-05-2020 06:36 AM

So, do the "Anyone but Bernie" folks in the Dem establishment jump onto Buttigieg, or do they wait until after NH to see the lay of the land?

I know nothing (and I am horrible at predicting this stuff), but I could see a concerted effort to consolidate the anti-Bernie vote behind one candidate before Super Tuesday.

NobodyHere 02-05-2020 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou (Post 3264001)
Oh, I do. One dude in particular is a very recent* former member of my church. 20something. During the Prayers Of The People, probably twice a month he'd pray aloud against the military-industrial complex that controls our nation. :eek: Dude is a piece of work.


*-They moved recently--his wife is going to grad school.


I don't think I've used the phrase "military-industrial complex" since Bush was in office.

ISiddiqui 02-05-2020 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3264051)
So, do the "Anyone but Bernie" folks in the Dem establishment jump onto Buttigieg, or do they wait until after NH to see the lay of the land?


*South Carolina

Buttigieg has been polling terrible with Latines (heavy in Nevada) and African-Americans (heavy in SC). There is a chance that he just peaks with Iowa and/or New Hampshire. It would be silly to dump money into a candidate that may crash and burn before the month is up.

But you have to imagine that Buttigieg is raking in the money right now and is more viable than he would have been if he finished 3rd in Iowa (which would have likely functionally ended his campaign)

ISiddiqui 02-05-2020 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou (Post 3264001)
Oh, I do. One dude in particular is a very recent* former member of my church. 20something. During the Prayers Of The People, probably twice a month he'd pray aloud against the military-industrial complex that controls our nation. :eek: Dude is a piece of work.


*-They moved recently--his wife is going to grad school.


Talking to them can be banging your head against the wall, ESPECIALLY when they are convinced there was a conspiracy against them. I still have Bernie fans randomly bring up 2016 (even, or maybe because, knowing I was a massive Hillary supporter).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz (Post 3264039)
This is one of the rare cases where fivethirtyeight gets into missing the forest for the trees IMO. Since 1976, the winner of Iowa in contested primaries has lost almost as often as they've won (10 of 18 times). When you also consider that most of them didn't take place in anything resembling the modern media age of social media and the internet, and the fact that there's a large bias towards the first state being predictive in the sense that usually the 'best' (as determined by the electorate) candidates are likely to do better everywhere, and that there have sometimes been prohibitive front-runners to up the numbers as well, anything close to 30% is just unjustified as far as I'm concerned. It still matters, it's still important - but anything above 10% I would consider an extreme stretch. Headlines like 'screwed up the whole nomination process' are unfortunate clickbait, and by the way also not well-supported by the article itself.


Buttigieg is now more relevant because he one of the top 2 in Iowa. However his bump may be far less due to the nutty reporting. If Iowa went off without a hitch, Buttigieg is probably going to be in the Top 3 in New Hampshire and Biden is on his way out. Now, with everything muddled, its far less of a bump for Buttigieg and less against Biden (who's playing the everything was so messed up you can't rely on the numbers).

Radii 02-05-2020 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3263990)
For a party that wants to get rid of the electoral college in favor of just the popular vote, the Democrats do like their caucuses crazily complicated


:+1:

Arles 02-05-2020 09:38 AM

I think the Iowa Caucus setup is perfect for a candidate like Bernie. To win in the Caucus, you need:
1. Supporters who prefer their candidate enough to take a day off work (check)
2. Supporters who love to sit in a room for 4-5 hours and argue (check)
3. Supporters willing to bully people into submission to get a chance at one more vote (double check)

I'm not surprised a candidate like Biden didn't do well in this setup. The irony of this is that Bernie is not only going to miss out on the bump because of this fiasco, but he's also going to trial in delegates after it. It's also not like we didn't have advance notice of this in Iowa. Remember in 2012 for the Republican primary, they announced Romney as the winner - then two weeks later said Santorum actually won. Then, five months later, they changed course again and said Ron Paul won. What a mess this whole process is!

Ben E Lou 02-05-2020 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3264052)
I don't think I've used the phrase "military-industrial complex" since Bush was in office.

You should have seen what an absolute jerkweed he was on Facebook this past spring when our pastor's wife posted a "proud mama" post announcing that their son had won a full Naval ROTC schollie to UNC. I'll see if I can dig it up at some point, but my recollection is something along the lines of "I pray that he will see from the inside the evil of our military-industrial complex and be an agent of change, but I fear that he will be corrupted by them and buy into their lies."

Ben E Lou 02-05-2020 10:29 AM

I found it much more quickly than I thought I could..


First post...

Quote:

The desire for Heroic triumph over "evil" is the main cause of objective Evil in the world. Remember that when you are giving and receiving orders, {name of kid}
A church member called him out with "wow...I’m dumbfounded. How about just congratulations or...just don’t post anything at all. Not everything should be a pulpit for you."
His response to that?
Quote:

There is a sea of congratulations. He can decide who he wants to listen to.

Besides, this will come as no surprise to {kid's name}, as we have talked about it extensively. If he thinks it is the right decision for him to join the death cult, then my voice of dissent in the sea of adulation won't make a lick of difference.

But if one young man can be spared the burden of a crippled conscience for the rest of his days, then that is well worth the voicing of dissent.

NobodyHere 02-05-2020 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 3263970)
I wonder what things are like at the Shadow Inc., offices today.


The naming is bizarre. The whole thing is bizarre. It's like they want to attract conspiracy theories.

Shadow Inc itself was launched by ACRONYM. Although ACRONYM is now denying this even though past images of their web page says otherwise. For a company that is suppose to be social media gurus, they should know it's near impossible to delete stuff from the internet.

Several presidential campaigns gave these guys money for their peer-to-peer app. Isn't there about million of those out there already?

The Iowa Democratic party allegedly paid $60,000 for the famous failed app. Give me a weekend and I could've whipped up website that could've tallied the votes for you.

molson 02-05-2020 11:32 AM

Mayor Pete is just so impressive when you look back at some of the forgotten candidates and their qualifications and political accomplishments. I don't understand how he's gotten to this point. I do know he has a presence that he just surprises people with when he meets them, I've heard that story from many who have.

JPhillips 02-05-2020 12:05 PM

I don't think Pete can win given his almost total lack of support from people of color, but his strategy has been solid. He's hoping early wins propel him to growing support. That probably won't work, but whether other path could he have taken that would have been more successful?

RainMaker 02-05-2020 05:45 PM

Pete has a chance because he's the establishment choice now that Biden looks to be too old for the job. What the Democratic Party is doing to Bernie in Iowa is why Pete is viable.

He'll have a tough time in a general because of what he did in Michigan. And the lack of support from minorities will crush him too. But that's Democrats for you, allergic to winning.

thesloppy 02-05-2020 06:24 PM

Reading that Iowa spent $60,000 on that app.....that'll get you close to half of the salary for one competent developer in this day and age.

Coffee Warlord 02-05-2020 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesloppy (Post 3264160)
Reading that Iowa spent $60,000 on that app.....that'll get you close to half of the salary for one competent developer in this day and age.


I read two payments for 60 each. Which either way, screams "we outsourced this to the cheapest offshore dev team we could find".

And they got what they paid for.

JPhillips 02-05-2020 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord (Post 3264165)
I read two payments for 60 each. Which either way, screams "we outsourced this to the cheapest offshore dev team we could find".

And they got what they paid for.


In this case it was outsourced by Dem campaign grifters that didn't have a clue about software development.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:37 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.