Discussion for article #245797
âBlastedâ⌠oh the Luntz-like wording sometimes.
http://corporispublica.org/images/e/e5/D-FTW-300.png
[Standard Disclaimer: This commenter wishes it to be known that in November he or she plans to vote for the Democratic nominee, whoever that turns out to be, and will encourage their fellow primary candidate supporters to do likewise.]
Everything in that memo was just stating facts. so what?
Blasted implies they were firing shots.
I guess uppity women blast out memos.
Ladylike creatures âshareâ memos.
Really, we need other states leading the primaries. just watching the whiteness of the voting lines and the speech audiences make my irish pale blush.
It also means that she has to win.
Not every has to be a crush, but when you say âMarch mattersâ, they better mean it.
Whatâs interesting is that sheâs picked up just as many delegates as Sanders has so far from New Hampshire. 13 each with 6 outstanding. She definitely knows how to play to win this time.
Clintonâs campaign manager is Bobby Mook? How did I miss that?
Except the memo never uses that phrase. The closest he comes is one paragraph is titled âWhy March Matters So Muchâ, and why technically you can parse that phrase and pull out âMarch Mattersâ from the center, its not in fact what he said. He merely lays down the math of why she is strongly favored to win in basically every state going forward.
Uh, as a professional English major, I gotta say that âMarch Mattersâ pretty much means that âMarch Mattersâ. It doesnât even rise to the level of the question of "It depends on what the meaning of the word âisâ is."
Nevada and South Carolina matter too.
Good catch.
I read some where about how the âout siders wonâ I hate to say this but the only outsider that won tonight was Donald the diva. Sanders is a carrer politician it showed tonight. For now anyway.
Well, to be fair, the subject of the memo is also âMarch Mattersâ
ETA: and by âsubjectâ I mean âsubject lineâ or âtitleâ
The point is that Nevada and South Carolina are next,not March.
Oh, come on Emiliano. Les would have written that about a man as well as a woman.
âIowa and New Hampshire Donât Matter!â
[Here][1], Stephen:
Sanders won women by 53-46 percent, as well as prevailing far more widely among men, 65-34 percent. Sixty-nine percent of women under 45 backed Sanders (including 82 percent of those under 30 women), while Clinton won women 45 and older by 56-43 percent.
Among all voters under age 30, Sanders beat Clinton by a huge 84-15 percent margin, another result similar to Iowa.
Between you and me, Iâm not exactly sure how Clinton can win if she canât carry Democratic white women in a white state. She is a stronger candidate that Sanders in a general election? Based on what?
@ProfessorPoopypants
[1]: http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/voted-live-hampshire-primary-exit-poll-analysis/story?id=36805930
ââThe reason is simple: while important, the first four states represent
just 4% of the delegates needed to secure the nomination; the 28 states
that vote (or caucus) in March will award 56% of the delegates needed to
win,â the memo said.â
Well, all this is true. However, Bernie just won NH by a 20% margin. That is not nothing. Then thereâs this statement:
âthe March states better reflect the true diversity of the Democratic Party and the nation.ââ
Iâm not sure it helps her to have her campaign call NH âunrepresentiveâ - sheâs sort of dumping on the entire Northeast.