[US Election 2016] Democratic Primary Megathread II

[Senkaku]

I'm not sure who I'd end up voting for between those two... Right now, I really want Sanders to win, and I have been ignoring Biden cos he's not running. But if Biden was out campaigning and reminding me of his existence, that would change things. He made a good impression on me in the debates in 2008, and he's never done anything since then to turn me against him, so he might be able to get my vote if he ran again.

Pretty sure Biden was running but was like the first to drop out.

No. There was some "will he, won't he, ooooooooooooohhh"stuff and then he decided not to.

[Camicon]

Pretty sure Biden was running but was like the first to drop out.

No. There was some "will he, won't he, ooooooooooooohhh"stuff and then he decided not to.

Some "will he, won't he, ooooooooooooohhh" stuff which was entirely fabricated by the media. There's no reason to think that Biden had any serious intention of running.

[USS Monitor]

No. There was some "will he, won't he, ooooooooooooohhh"stuff and then he decided not to.

Some "will he, won't he, ooooooooooooohhh" stuff which was entirely fabricated by the media. There's no reason to think that Biden had any serious intention of running.

It took him a while to shoot it down, so I think he considered it.

[The Romulan Republic]

www.denverpost.com/election/ci_29755029 ... ie-sanders

Bernie Sanders won one more delegate in Colorado than first projected after the Colorado Democratic Party admitted this week that it misreported the March 1 caucus results from 10 precinct locations.

The error — first uncovered by The Denver Post — was shared with rival Hillary Clinton's campaign by party officials but kept from Sanders until the Post told his staff Monday night.

The mistake is a minor shift with major implications. The new projection now shows the Vermont senator winning 39 delegates in Colorado, compared to 27 for Clinton.

In this Feb. 29, 2016 file photo, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks at a campaign rally in Norfolk, Va.
In this Feb. 29, 2016 file photo, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks at a campaign rally in Norfolk, Va. (Gerald Herbert, Associated Press file)
Even if Clinton wins all 12 superdelegates in the state, Sanders can finish no worse than a split decision. It contrasts with prior projections from the Post, Bloomberg Politics and The Associated Press that indicated Clinton would probably win the majority of the 78 delegates in Colorado because of her support from party leaders with superdelegate status.

If he lands one Colorado superdelegate — two are still undecided and others are facing significant pressure — Sanders could win the state's delegation.


What is a caucus in politics?
Denver Post


RELATED: Trump escalates challenge, calls Colorado GOP vote "a crooked deal"

The revelation that the state party misreported the results to the public March 1 — and kept it quiet to all but the Clinton campaign for five weeks — comes as Sanders promotes his case that he can win the Democratic nomination.

And it arises a day after the Colorado Republican Party faces blistering criticism from Donald Trump and his supporters about how it awarded national delegates in what the candidate called a "rigged" system.

The double-barrel controversies regarding Colorado's caucus system will only reinforce calls for the state to move to a primary vote that allows more transparency and participation among voters.

"It was basically a reporting error on caucus night," Democratic Party Chairman Rick Palacio said in an interview Monday.

The problem occurred when a party volunteer at Byers Middle School in Denver punched the wrong vote tallies into the party's interactive voice response system for the presidential preference poll collected from 10 precincts.

The state party's website reported March 1 that Sanders won 14,624 votes, or 54 percent, in Denver County and Clinton took 12,097 votes, or 45 percent.

But the corrected numbers for Denver County give Sanders 15,194 votes, or 56.5 percent, and Clinton with 11,527, or 43 percent, according to official party results.

The error low-balled Sanders' margin of victory in the county by nearly 4 percentage points — a boost that shifted how the delegates were apportioned in the 1st Congressional District.

The results reported on caucus night indicated that Sanders and Clinton would evenly split the district's eight national delegates, 4-4. But the new numbers gave Sanders five delegates and Clinton three.

"It was an embarrassment on our part for sure," Palacio said.

RELATED: Ted Cruz dominates Colorado GOP convention winning all 34 delegates

The new math became apparent when the 1st District convention straw poll Saturday gave Sanders took five delegates and Clinton three.

Palacio said Clinton didn't lose support in the 1st District, "we just misreported it."

"It was basically one site," he added. "Whomever dialed the numbers in must have had a little weirdness happen. The official results were reported correctly, but when they dialed them in using the touch-tone, it looks like something got transposed."

Democratic Party officials discovered the error a week or so after the caucus when it reviewed the votes from the official precinct paperwork. But it did not publicly admit the mistake, nor change the website where it reported caucus results, coloradocaucus.org. The website still featured the incorrect numbers Monday night.

The website, Palacio said, "is only used for reporting to the press. It wasn't used in an official way. So we didn't go back and actually look at the website versus the math sheets."

Palacio told the Clinton campaign, but he never informed the Sanders campaign — which didn't realize the mistake until informed by The Post.

"We are obviously pleased to essentially narrow the delegate lead by two delegates, one up and one down, it's a zero sum game," said Jeff Weaver, the Sanders campaign manager, in an interview.

As to whether Sanders can win a majority of the state's delegation with a single superdelegate, Weaver said the campaign considers them separate tallies.

"Once we get to the convention, they'll have an opportunity to take a look at the two candidates and choose the candidate who is best able to defeat the Republicans in November," he said. "We are very gratified that we not only won the pledged delegates in Colorado, we apparently won them by a larger margin."

As for being kept in the dark, Weaver said it is "certainly disturbing that that information gets sent to one campaign and not to another."

Asked why he told one campaign and not the other, Palacio said "it didn't necessarily affect (them). It was our mistake that ended up affecting the estimation on Hillary's campaign."

A Clinton campaign spokeswoman declined to comment.

Questioned about the integrity of the entire preference poll, Palacio said the party discovered no other mistakes in precinct reporting.

"I go back to my position on a presidential primary," he said. "I think caucuses are great for smaller races but Colorado has outgrown the caucus system in presidential years."

At each layer in the Democratic delegate process, the party takes a new straw poll — just as it will at the state convention Saturday in Loveland to award the final delegates. But the precinct-level results inform the vote and allow the projections used by national news organizations that track delegates.

"It's not unusual for numbers for shift (loyalties) and that's why we have straw polls at each step of the way," Palacio said.

To match the results from caucus night, a campaign's supporters need to show up in the same proportions to match the projections. Sanders won the state 60 percent to 40 percent in the popular vote and is expected to reap the benefits at the state convention if his supporters turn out.

Let's here Clinton supporters' excuses for this.

[Major-Tom]

Clinton and de Blasio make truly awful "C.P. Time" joke at event.

De Blasio made a truly awful joke.

A truly awful joke, just like his mayoral tenure.

[Kelinfort]

De Blasio made a truly awful joke.

A truly awful joke, just like his mayoral tenure.

At least he hasn't banned big gulps.

[Camicon]

*snip*
Let's here Clinton supporters' excuses for this.

Clinton's campaign didn't do anything wrong. Only fishy thing here is that the CDP didn't inform Sanders campaign.

[Cabal War-Nation]

I vote neither, they are both physco

[Cabal War-Nation]

I vote neither, they are both psycho

[Ngelmish]

Clinton claims that highest number of crime guns in New York, per capita, come from Vermont.

Point: Technically true.

Difficulty: Only 55 guns, so few it could be one or two bad actors.

Does she know Senators don't make state laws?

State laws are effected and often superseded by federal laws, and Sanders has voted against a lot of federal gun bills. It's not entirely unreasonable of her to try to make that connection anymore than it's unreasonable of Sanders to criticize Clinton's support for free trade as leading cause of job losses around the country, when those laws are hardly the cause of all of it. Pretty standard operating procedure from both campaigns.

[Khadgar]

Does she know Senators don't make state laws?

State laws are effected and often superseded by federal laws, and Sanders has voted against a lot of federal gun bills. It's not entirely unreasonable of her to try to make that connection anymore than it's unreasonable of Sanders to criticize Clinton's support for free trade as leading cause of job losses around the country, when those laws are hardly the cause of all of it. Pretty standard operating procedure from both campaigns.

Difference of course being that the evidence that free trade agreements result in job losses is incredibly tenuous.

[Geilinor]

Does she know Senators don't make state laws?

Of course she knows.

That doesn't mean she won't dishonestly try to tie Sanders to something he has no control over if it'll help her win.

He voted against the Brady Bill because he was "from a rural state", which is pretty bad in my opinion. It won't sound good to people from NYC.

[Geilinor]

De Blasio made a truly awful joke.

A truly awful joke, just like his mayoral tenure.

I don't think he's that bad, but I am not a big fan either.

[Eol Sha]

So, apparently, Sanders has been ramping up his attempts to woo superdelegates to support his campaign in recent weeks. Apparently, it's "determined, but low pressure and bereft of any Hillary-bashing."

So, this makes political sense. Sanders is trying to do everything he can to get a majority of the delegates, both pledged and unpledged, to support him. Given how tight the race will probably end up being, the superdelegates will definitely seal the deal. I just hope he keeps this as a low-visibility activity for the time being.

[Khadgar]

So, apparently, Sanders has been ramping up his attempts to woo superdelegates to support his campaign in recent weeks. Apparently, it's "determined, but low pressure and bereft of any Hillary-bashing."

So, this makes political sense. Sanders is trying to do everything he can to get a majority of the delegates, both pledged and unpledged, to support him. Given how tight the race will probably end up being, the superdelegates will definitely seal the deal. I just hope he keeps this as a low-visibility activity for the time being.

I find it hilarious that Bernie has gone from "Super Delegates are undemocratic" to "Vote Bernie!".

[Ashmoria]

So, apparently, Sanders has been ramping up his attempts to woo superdelegates to support his campaign in recent weeks. Apparently, it's "determined, but low pressure and bereft of any Hillary-bashing."

So, this makes political sense. Sanders is trying to do everything he can to get a majority of the delegates, both pledged and unpledged, to support him. Given how tight the race will probably end up being, the superdelegates will definitely seal the deal. I just hope he keeps this as a low-visibility activity for the time being.

has he had any success?

I'm thinking the only way he'll get most of the supers is if he gets most of the pledged.

[Planita]

So, apparently, Sanders has been ramping up his attempts to woo superdelegates to support his campaign in recent weeks. Apparently, it's "determined, but low pressure and bereft of any Hillary-bashing."

So, this makes political sense. Sanders is trying to do everything he can to get a majority of the delegates, both pledged and unpledged, to support him. Given how tight the race will probably end up being, the superdelegates will definitely seal the deal. I just hope he keeps this as a low-visibility activity for the time being.

has he had any success?

I'm thinking the only way he'll get most of the supers is if he gets most of the pledged.

I recall that some of Sander's supporters made a "hit list" of undecided superdelegates.

[Eol Sha]

So, apparently, Sanders has been ramping up his attempts to woo superdelegates to support his campaign in recent weeks. Apparently, it's "determined, but low pressure and bereft of any Hillary-bashing."

So, this makes political sense. Sanders is trying to do everything he can to get a majority of the delegates, both pledged and unpledged, to support him. Given how tight the race will probably end up being, the superdelegates will definitely seal the deal. I just hope he keeps this as a low-visibility activity for the time being.

has he had any success?

I'm thinking the only way he'll get most of the supers is if he gets most of the pledged.

While I recommend actually reading the article, he's had at least a few successes.

• Bert Marley, Chairman of the Idaho Democratic Party
• Erin Bilbray of Nevada
• Peter Corroon, Chairman of the Utah Democratic Party
• Larry Murakami, Vice Chairman of the Alaska Democratic Party

Apparently, he's been pushing in state's he's won big in.

has he had any success?

I'm thinking the only way he'll get most of the supers is if he gets most of the pledged.

I recall that some of Sander's supporters made a "hit list" of undecided superdelegates.

I don't know about a "hit list", although it's probably an apt term, the article specifies that of the four people primarily tasked with contacting the superdelegates (Bernie Sanders, former Senator Paul Kirk of Massachusetts, Nick Carter, and Mark Longabaugh), Kirk has been given a list of people to call and try to persuade.

Kirk, who places calls to superdelegates from a “list of possibilities” sent to him by Carter.

[Ashmoria]

has he had any success?

I'm thinking the only way he'll get most of the supers is if he gets most of the pledged.

While I recommend actually reading the article, he's had at least a few successes.

• Bert Marley, Chairman of the Idaho Democratic Party
• Erin Bilbray of Nevada
• Peter Corroon, Chairman of the Utah Democratic Party
• Larry Murakami, Vice Chairman of the Alaska Democratic Party

Apparently, he's been pushing in state's he's won big in.

I recall that some of Sander's supporters made a "hit list" of undecided superdelegates.

I don't know about a "hit list", although it's probably an apt term, the article specifies that of the four people primarily tasked with contacting the superdelegates (Bernie Sanders, former Senator Paul Kirk of Massachusetts, Nick Carter, and Mark Longabaugh), Kirk has been given a list of people to call and try to persuade.

Kirk, who places calls to superdelegates from a “list of possibilities” sent to him by Carter.

"hit list" is an unfortunate term that implies undue force. that is the list trump is threatening to have that would put pressure on delegates to vote for him by releasing their hotel room numbers.

maybe "targeting" is a more neutral term?

[Eol Sha]

While I recommend actually reading the article, he's had at least a few successes.

• Bert Marley, Chairman of the Idaho Democratic Party
• Erin Bilbray of Nevada
• Peter Corroon, Chairman of the Utah Democratic Party
• Larry Murakami, Vice Chairman of the Alaska Democratic Party

Apparently, he's been pushing in state's he's won big in.


I don't know about a "hit list", although it's probably an apt term, the article specifies that of the four people primarily tasked with contacting the superdelegates (Bernie Sanders, former Senator Paul Kirk of Massachusetts, Nick Carter, and Mark Longabaugh), Kirk has been given a list of people to call and try to persuade.

"hit list" is an unfortunate term that implies undue force. that is the list trump is threatening to have that would put pressure on delegates to vote for him by releasing their hotel room numbers.

maybe "targeting" is a more neutral term?

*shrug* Hit list or target list, it's still a list. I'm relatively unconcerned about the terminology.

[Corrian]

Apparently, he's been pushing in state's he's won big in.

Which seems fair enough to me.

[Camicon]

"hit list" is an unfortunate term that implies undue force. that is the list trump is threatening to have that would put pressure on delegates to vote for him by releasing their hotel room numbers.

maybe "targeting" is a more neutral term?

*shrug* Hit list or target list, it's still a list. I'm relatively unconcerned about the terminology.

"List of people to kill"
"List of people to give hugs to"

The purpose behind a list of names is fundamental to understanding it. For instance, the differences between Sanders list of superdelegates he wants to sway towards his campaign, and Clinton's shit list of people that have crossed her and need to pay.

[Khadgar]

Another day another New York poll Hillary 53, Bernie 40, 7% undecided.
Marist shows Hillary 55, Bernie 41.
Monmouth says Hillary 51, Bernie 39.

[Eol Sha]

*shrug* Hit list or target list, it's still a list. I'm relatively unconcerned about the terminology.

"List of people to kill"
"List of people to give hugs to"

The purpose behind a list of names is fundamental to understanding it. For instance, the differences between Sanders list of superdelegates he wants to sway towards his campaign, and Clinton's shit list of people that have crossed her and need to pay.

I think you're taking this a bit too seriously. Of course "assassination list" isn't okay, but the difference between "target list" and "hit list" is so minuscule as to be irrelevant.

[Camicon]

"List of people to kill"
"List of people to give hugs to"

The purpose behind a list of names is fundamental to understanding it. For instance, the differences between Sanders list of superdelegates he wants to sway towards his campaign, and Clinton's shit list of people that have crossed her and need to pay.

I think you're taking this a bit too seriously. Of course "assassination list" isn't okay, but the difference between "target list" and "hit list" is so minuscule as to be irrelevant.

"List of people to try and convince to support me"
"List of people to harass/harangue/blackmail to support me"

"Hit list" has strong connotations with contract killings, which is not present for the term "target list". Calling his "list of people to try and convince to support him" a "hit list" implies nonexistent motivations and tactics.