Democratic New Hampshire primary results thread (polls close @7pm and 8pm ET) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 05, 2024, 09:22:07 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Democratic New Hampshire primary results thread (polls close @7pm and 8pm ET) (search mode)
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Democratic New Hampshire primary results thread (polls close @7pm and 8pm ET)  (Read 30730 times)
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #25 on: February 09, 2016, 11:26:30 PM »

I don't see why Hillary supporters are upset.

She is by far the most likely winner and it will force herself to be a better candidate. Hillary being better is good for the general, no?

It's about angry Berniebots and the media spinning it as if Bernie is the new frontrunner when he clearly isn't.

Nice strawman.

Bernie isn't winning in NV and SC. That's not a strawman, it's called 'reality'.

BINGO!
Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #26 on: February 09, 2016, 11:30:58 PM »

Oh, let me guess: Hillary supporters in here being whiny and antagonistic after being delivered a brutal spanking in her latest underperformance? I'd recommend that everybody else stop engaging them. They've all been bragging and making grand assertions for years now, with a stealthy series of goal-posts being moved every time they fall short.

"But Hillary will win with 70% of the vote!"
"60%!"
"50%!"
"Hillary will destroy Bernie in IA"
"Hillary won* IA and it doesn't matter by how much - suck it"
"Who cares if Bernie wins NH by low double-digits? It's next to his home state!"
"It doesn't matter that Hillary lost by more than 20, there's Nevada!"

etc etc etc.

In other words: sooner or later, they might be right about something, but it won't be because they know any damn thing.

Actually, Sanders supporters are the ones moving the goalposts. Early on, the intellectually honest admitted that Iowa was a must win state for Sanders. Now suddenly just NH is enough to make him inevitable. lol

This is so true.
Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #27 on: February 09, 2016, 11:38:20 PM »

Kinda surprised at this result. Most excellent.

Yawn. It does nothing to change the course in a significant way.
Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #28 on: February 09, 2016, 11:42:49 PM »

IceSpear was literally the original Hillary hack who was convinced that Hillary would win with >70% of the primary vote, carry every state, would win the general by 20 points.

I'm confident Hillary will easily win more states than Bill did in 1992 when we won the nomination overwhelming.
Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #29 on: February 09, 2016, 11:45:15 PM »

Kinda surprised at this result. Most excellent.

Yawn. It does nothing to change the course in a significant way.

Sanders got a significant win IN ONE OF THE WHITEST STATES IN THE COUNTRY, this is fact.

Fixed.

Yep!
Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #30 on: February 09, 2016, 11:48:18 PM »

The Hillbots in this thread are.... not taking it well, that's for sure.  What Stage are they in at this point?  

Knowing without a shadow of a doubt she will become the party's nominee, and quite quickly too.
Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #31 on: February 09, 2016, 11:53:09 PM »

Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #32 on: February 09, 2016, 11:56:59 PM »

Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #33 on: February 10, 2016, 12:02:23 AM »

Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #34 on: February 10, 2016, 12:07:39 AM »


If you think Trump can carry Virginia or Pennsylvania, you're delusional. Face it: She's guaranteed to win the election if she faces Trump or Cruz.

I agree with this as well. Trump or Cruz nominations ruin any chance Republicans have this cycle.
Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #35 on: February 10, 2016, 12:10:51 AM »


If you think Trump can carry Virginia or Pennsylvania, you're delusional. Face it: She's guaranteed to win the election if she faces Trump or Cruz.

Polls says otherwise. Trump would beat Clinton in Pennsylvania.

Just like the lead washington post article is titled "Clinton loss upends Democratic contest, sets up intense race" WRONG. the media always wanted the Democrats to have race, when it never truly had a chance to be. It's all downhill now for Sanders.
Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #36 on: February 10, 2016, 12:09:35 PM »
« Edited: February 10, 2016, 12:12:03 PM by ♥♦ 3peat 2016 ♣♠ »

Hillary currently has a 15 to 13 delegate lead over Sanders, when including most delegates (4 still unallocated) from NH. I bet you won't hear the media speak of this.
Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #37 on: February 10, 2016, 12:15:12 PM »

Hillary currently has a 15 to 13 delegate lead over Sanders, when including most delegates (4 still unallocated) from NH. I bet you won't hear the media speak of this.

Rightly so because that's superdelegates that weren't "won" last night.

The nomination is still ultimately a math game. You have to win those supers or your going down, hard.
Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #38 on: February 10, 2016, 12:18:06 PM »

Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #39 on: February 10, 2016, 12:24:22 PM »

Hillary currently has a 15 to 13 delegate lead over Sanders, when including most delegates (4 still unallocated) from NH. I bet you won't hear the media speak of this.

Rightly so because that's superdelegates that weren't "won" last night.

The nomination is still ultimately a math game. You have to win those supers or your going down, hard.

If Sanders ends up winning elected delegates and the superdelegates give Clinton the nomination, there will be protests equaling 1968 Chicago.

He will never come anywhere close to that. It's all downhill now for Bernie.
Logged
Panhandle Progressive
politicaljunkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 855
United States


« Reply #40 on: February 10, 2016, 12:35:11 PM »

Hillary currently has a 15 to 13 delegate lead over Sanders, when including most delegates (4 still unallocated) from NH. I bet you won't hear the media speak of this.

Rightly so because that's superdelegates that weren't "won" last night.

The nomination is still ultimately a math game. You have to win those supers or your going down, hard.

If Sanders ends up winning elected delegates and the superdelegates give Clinton the nomination, there will be protests equaling 1968 Chicago.

Lets not get ahead of ourselves.  Much still needs to happen.

Of course, I still think Clinton will be the nominee. Yet any talk of superdelegates right now is stupid and insulting.

A delegate is a delegate is a delegate, super or not. She needs 2382 of them to win and currently has 431 or 18% necessary to clinch the nomination. YUUUGGGEEE!
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.031 seconds with 11 queries.