Democratic Freak States Holy Saturday results thread (1st caucuses begin @1pmET) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 03:25:23 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 Freak States Holy Saturday results thread (1st caucuses begin @1pmET) (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2 3
Author Topic: Democratic Freak States Holy Saturday results thread (1st caucuses begin @1pmET)  (Read 27815 times)
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« on: March 26, 2016, 06:08:01 AM »

I wouldn't be surprised if Hillary won two out three states tonight.

Me neither, I think she may win all 3 states - Hilldawg will get a surprise sweep!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #1 on: March 26, 2016, 07:55:03 AM »

I wouldn't be surprised if Hillary won two out three states tonight.

Me neither, I think she may win all 3 states - Hilldawg will get a surprise sweep!

Shadows is playing that expectations game HARD. Props.

You can check my predictions in the appropriate thread. I don't do games, I really think she is as likely to win 3 states as she is likely to win 2 states!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #2 on: March 26, 2016, 10:07:49 AM »

Yep, Clinton can win WA, and Sanders will win NY. Tongue

I'll be caucusing this morning, so I can share how things went down at my precinct, if people are interested.

Pics please!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #3 on: March 26, 2016, 11:59:30 AM »

I'm at the North Seattle caucus location and the line is seven blocks, well over 1000 people surely.

I heard there's very heavy Bernie presence at city hall

You can still join the Bernie crowd! They don't bite!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #4 on: March 26, 2016, 12:00:21 PM »

Well, I just got to my precinct location, and it's already quite crowded. Lots of Sanders people, but Clinton has a presence here too.

Thanks for keeping us updated, its always awesome when someone is willing to give us an insider perspective on what's going on.

Sure, no problem. I probably won't be able to update folks again for a little while, since the caucus is going to start soon. The room is now packed, and it looks like turnout in my neck of the woods is close to, if not even higher than it was in 2008. We'll get an initial count at 10 PT, but based on what I can see, it looks like my precinct will be about 2-to-1 for Bernie.

I was hoping for 3-1. With the Absentee ballot thing, Sanders will probably fall below 200!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #5 on: March 26, 2016, 12:01:29 PM »

Okay this is 1 hilarious comment from a Bernie fan in reddit, thought of sharing -

My grandma is a die hard Bernie Gal and she hired a friggen BUS to take her and a bunch of other people from her retirement home to the caucuses. She said a few Hillary supporters made it onto her bus, which she was not happy about, but I told her to try her best to convince them on the way and once inside. She knows its all in the spirit of democracy so she begrudgingly let them on the bus Wink
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #6 on: March 26, 2016, 12:23:03 PM »

Some people have been asked to go after filling some preference form & then it is said their votes won't be counted. Weird - Caucuses are honestly an issue!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #7 on: March 26, 2016, 12:25:30 PM »

Clinton is doing well in many precincts in Seattle, running close. That coupled with the absentee & strong Clinton performances in major cities.

Who knows maybe Sanders would be in the 50's!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #8 on: March 26, 2016, 12:33:34 PM »

Clinton is doing well in many precincts in Seattle, running close. That coupled with the absentee & strong Clinton performances in major cities.

Who knows maybe Sanders would be in the 50's!


Where are you seeing this? Not saying you're wrong, but I'm curious what your source is.

A couple of random people saying Hillary did well in their precinct around 40% n so on. Seattle will having a bulk share of the votes, large population.

Maybe those are outliers - Some 65-75 for Sanders outside Washington as well. I am just a bit negative I guess expecting the worst!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #9 on: March 26, 2016, 12:51:25 PM »

Benchmark Politics ‏@benchmarkpol  1m1 minute ago
All 5 delegates at one University of Washington precinct go to Sanders, as expected.

52-2 but she is doing ok in many areas!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #10 on: March 26, 2016, 01:02:32 PM »

I think Seattle although being a strong Bernie city will drag this thing down - If Bernie gets 60-62% in Seattle compared to 67-70% otherwise, due to the sheer population, this thing will fall below 65%.

Dunno we just got few stray tweets n stuff, so difficult to say! I Hope Seattle stays strong!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #11 on: March 26, 2016, 01:07:36 PM »

The King5 local channel is awesome. They showed so many live caucuses, speeches & delegate allocations.

Amazing  - Real thanks to the one who posted - Thank you! Looks good for Bernie so far!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #12 on: March 26, 2016, 01:18:30 PM »

Final tally in my caucus

Sanders - 45 (four delegates)
Clinton - 18 (one delegate)
Undecided - 3

Slight improvement for Clinton from eight years ago.

The delegate haul becomes 80% Bernie, 20% Hillary if this is true.

Did the undecided switch or something? 45-18 & 4-1 is strange!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #13 on: March 26, 2016, 01:19:47 PM »

Are they counting absentees with these totals or are these numbers just the people who are showing up today?

In a couple of precincts from what I heard Sanders won the absentee thing. Given the turnout, absentee is a small % & is not effecting much - Maybe I am wrong - People caucusing can give a better idea - Cheers!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #14 on: March 26, 2016, 01:28:14 PM »

True or false, Washington will be be Bernie's biggest state that he wins nationwide?

I'm gonna say true.
What about Michigan?

Will be?

I'd go for CA - I know the sheer volume of folks we have & their passion - It's unreal, we area already close, there's time left - I think we will CA!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #15 on: March 26, 2016, 01:31:24 PM »

People on twitter are saying that old people are voting for clinton in their precincts.

WHY?

Why the F would an old democrat, one who remembers the new deal and the more liberal party of yore, vote for a third way milquetoaster?

Lot of old people for Clinton

Sanders is weeping the south & south-western part near Oregon - Pretty bad sign for Clinton in Oregon - He is absolutely sweeping areas near Oregon. Also doing very strong in areas around Idaho as well & the conservative areas.

I hope the western parts & Seattle does let Bernie down by making the margin of victory fall - Because he would be winning there as well but a lesser margin would dent the performance overall
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #16 on: March 26, 2016, 01:39:45 PM »

My super-unofficial twitter scraping (King County-heavy) has Bernie at a little over 75% of delegates in WA so far.

going by twitter reports was pretty accurate in utah on R side. I had cruz at 71% after adding all the tweets and he got 69.4 in reality,.

Seattle is a big city & could change a lot. I think if Settle doesn't play spoilsport, we will see Sanders crossing 70% & I don't think any Sanders supporters could complain with that!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #17 on: March 26, 2016, 01:43:25 PM »

Sanders needs to keep Clinton under viability in Washington in order to make a big dent in the delegate count.



Under Viability means 100% of the delegates - All 101. I don't know what people want - More than 85% of the votes in all precincts to win 101 outta 101 Delegates?

Weird - Clinton fans would always have something negative to say!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #18 on: March 26, 2016, 01:57:18 PM »

Clinton would need to be held under 15% (of the preference vote?) in order to not win any delegates.

I don't see how that is possible given that Sanders barely managed to do that in VT.

It has never happened to my mind in recent history between 2 competitive candidates - Not even people in their home states - Obama, Hillary, Bill, McCain, Bush  - No person not in a American Samoa type state has done it RECENTLY - I can't remember.

Vermont was an outlier & huge exception - Probably would not happen in the next 30-40 years among COMPETITIVE candidates
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #19 on: March 26, 2016, 02:18:45 PM »

If he can make margins this big in these states + CA + most of the remaining states -MD and NY, then we might be onto something.

No-way he is making these margins other places. And honestly does not need to either. He needs 60%+ in CA & he will still get 6-7 big wins.

I don't think he can win but theoretically he has to beat her (maybe narrowly - not lose) in NY, PA, NJ, PR, MD which I don't see happening
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #20 on: March 26, 2016, 02:22:08 PM »

NH, Vermont, Michigan were caucuses right? Oklahoma?

Even though he is almost certain to lose the nomination, he will win many more states so this ridiculous logic will probably stop!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #21 on: March 26, 2016, 02:24:23 PM »

If he can make margins this big in these states + CA + most of the remaining states -MD and NY, then we might be onto something.

No-way he is making these margins other places. And honestly does not need to either. He needs 60%+ in CA & he will still get 6-7 big wins.

I don't think he can win but theoretically he has to beat her (maybe narrowly - not lose) in NY, PA, NJ, PR, MD which I don't see happening
https://www.change.org/p/the-young-turks-dnc-debate-on-the-young-turks
If somehow the candidates get an April debate on The Young Turks, Bernie's popular vote could easily rise over 5% in all the states thereafter.

They're probably the largest online group in the US & globally also have a large volume but they're too small resources wise or among the older people who know nothing about them. Plus they are an outright progressive group & hence biased towards Bernie.

This will never happen - too small organization & attacking some candidate or 1 random debate does not cause a crash in poll numbers unless your Rubio. Clinton could shoot someone in the street & most of her supporters like the one's here would still cheer her on!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #22 on: March 26, 2016, 02:31:13 PM »

Sanders being competitive in Puerto Rico, winning California by 70%, Clinton agreeing to a debate hosted by the Young Turks.
But hey, whoever calls Berniebots delusional trolls is a hack.
Roll Eyes

No1 said he will CA BY 70% you troll. Do you know something about CA from where you are which makes you qualified to give your opinion?

Is there any certified sure-shot LOGIC behind Clinton sweeping Puerto Rico like say Mississippi or Sanders definitely losing CA - Both are ridiculous comments! You have to leave your basement & let people who knows about the ground realities comment.
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #23 on: March 26, 2016, 02:32:19 PM »

Dear lord, this forum is about to go crazy hyping up Sanders' hopeless candidacy again, isn't it?

Only if he somehow ties in NY.

If he wins NY like Michigan, even with 0.01% votes, this forum will go crazy. It will be the greatest upset ever & will give Sanders insurmountable momentum.

But honestly winning or tying NY is almost impossible!
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
« Reply #24 on: March 26, 2016, 02:43:08 PM »

No1 said he will CA BY 70% you troll.

And Republicans will win NH in the general... Bernie has less than zero chance of winning the nomination, sorry.

Our of curiosity Sir, what exactly is less than 0%? -1, -2, -3% right? Sounds much forceful eh?

Wonderful figure of speech but using such words does no good when everyone knows Bernie has a long shot, a very minor chance (almost negligible) - but it is what it is  - A chance!
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
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 0.036 seconds with 13 queries.