Discussion for article #245421
Wasserman Schultz is calling this charade āa huge success for Democratsā?
Someone should point out to Little Debbie that Frothy the Dog-Man received more votes than all the Democratic candidates combined. Makes you wonder what she would consider an unmitigated disaster?
1 Like
STFU and reign, you incompetent goob.
1 Like
The Republican Party of Lincoln and Reagan is unrecognizable.
Even apart from everything else, suggesting that Reagan is some sort of aspirational figure should automatically disqualify someone from being DNC chair.
5 Likes
STFU and reign, you incompetent goob.
ā¦which is what Charles will be told when Elizabeth II finally kicks
well, wellā¦ now itās being reported that 90 democratic precincts didnāt have staffing assigned to count the votesā¦ and are requesting the campaigns to provide staffers to do that work.
1 Like
You are reading the results incorrectly. The Republican results are reporting votes cast for each candidate. The Democratic results are reporting āstate delegate equivalentsā which is how many state delegates each candidate is expected to get out of each caucus site. Because each delegate represents hundreds to thousands of people, we may never know the actual vote count. It is entirely possible that Bernie won the popular vote but lost in SDEs. Or maybe Hillary had a blowout, and it is artificially close in SDEs (less likely because her support was more broad, while most of Bernieās was concentrated in only a few urban counties).
Bottom line, you cannot compare the Democrat SDEs to the Republican raw vote count.
That being said, I am not sure any primary could be considered a 'huge success for Democrats" regardless of the outcome. Until the Rs face the Ds on the ballot for the same voting population you cannot compare them.
11 Likes
A tie in Iowa means all Hillaryās Wall Street money couldnāt beat an old man speaking the truth to power.
Feel the Bern, bitches.
5 Likes
well that is just stupid jimbo.
5 Likes
The vaunted clinton machine, along with years as the presumptive democratic nominee couldnāt decisively beat a latecomer, nonpac/nonmillionaire who was all but ignored (when not being mocked) by a national political media.
7 Likes
If "too close to call* is a huge success, I guess you were expecting to be decisively defeated?
2 Likes
If I cared at all about the royals Iād agree.
Iād say itās a pretty impressive success. Sam Wang has said that IA was must-win for Sanders, though, and itās hard to call this an undiluted win. So after NH it will be match point, then, with Clinton serving in SC.
DNC Chair Declares Iowa Caucuses A āHuge Successā
No thanks to Debbie.
I cannot wait til the day she sinks back into obscurity and we never have to hear of her again, except maybe as the punchline for a joke.
4 Likes
If I cared at all about the royals Iād agree.
ā¦Still not seeing it, eh?
1 Like
It is precisely this sort of epic critical thinking failure that represents Berniebots well. Not. Clue for you: Check the demographics in IA. Compare them to the upcoming state after NH. The demographics are all strong for Clinton. Not even close. For starters, lots of minorities as opposed to IA and NH. All favor Clinton. All of them.
2 Likes
It may well be that Clinton becomes the presidential candidate for the Democrats. But that possibility, or even probability, doesnāt detract from the rather stunning showing by Sanders. Give the man and his organization their due. And honestly, did you think heād do this well in IA?
While having a healthy loathing for DWS I do think it was a very successful night for Dems. Great turnout and participation.
5 Likes
0.2% isnāt that hugeā¦
because we know what she considers successā¦
1 Like
Besides what BTS says about the relative numbers being true, I think this is a huge success for the Democratic Party. If HRC would have won decisively, she would have pivoted back to her long-held 3rd Way Democrat stance, and the branding of the Ds as a mushy centrist party would have continued. Now, both candidates are wrangling over income inequality, and thatĀ“s hughly appealing to a large swath of working - and non-working - America. And the three top Rs are radical rightists, and the tightness of going to have to keep pushing to the right in order to differentiate themselves from one another with the wacky R primary voters, further alienating them from most of America. DWS may be lying through her teeth in that she wanted HRC to win, but sheĀ“s right this time.
4 Likes
Thanks for the explanation. Iām still baffled why they would present the information that way. But, hey ā¦
Thanks again.