2015-2016 Democratic Primary Season - Bernie Math

[QuikSand]

Sanders announcement is sadly not a horrifying sex scandal, but apparently instead a boring IT-laden database matter:

DNC Bans Bernie Sanders From Voter Database After Campaign Exploited Software Error to Access Clinton Data - Hit & Run : Reason.com

*yawn*

I was rooting for something straight out of Cards Against Humanity...

[Dutch]

hehe, wasn't the 'software error' an outage to some firewall that was supposed to block his team from seeing this info?

So, in non-IT terms. The door to the sensitive filing cabinet is supposed to be locked. Sanders kept jiggling the door handle until one day, somebody forgot to lock the door and it...just popped open. So in went Sanders.

But yeah, nobody cares.

[NobodyHere]

Now Sanders is threatening to sue the DNC.

This won't help the DNC which is already 7 million dollars in debt and is run by the incompetent Debbie Wasserman Schultz

[ISiddiqui]

Not a good week for Sanders. On top of the scandal, the two national polls that came out this week (Monmouth and ABC News/Wash Post) show Hillary Clinton with leads of 30+ points.

[oykib]

Originally Posted by Dutch

hehe, wasn't the 'software error' an outage to some firewall that was supposed to block his team from seeing this info?

So, in non-IT terms. The door to the sensitive filing cabinet is supposed to be locked. Sanders kept jiggling the door handle until one day, somebody forgot to lock the door and it...just popped open. So in went Sanders.

But yeah, nobody cares.

It seems that it might be more sordid than that.

Bernie Sanders Campaign Locked Out Of Key Voter File After Data Breach : NPR

Originally Posted by NPR

"Sadly, the vendor who runs the DNC's voter file program continues to make serious errors. On more than one occasion, the vendor has dropped the firewall between the data of different Democratic campaigns. Our campaign months ago alerted the DNC to the fact that campaign data was being made available to other campaigns. At that time our campaign did not run to the media, relying instead on assurances from the vendor.
"Unfortunately, yesterday, the vendor once again dropped the firewall between the campaigns for some data."

The Sanders campaign claims they notified the DNC about security going out as far back as October. If that's true, it lends credence to charges that Debbie Wasserman Schultz is actively tilting the scales for the Clinton campaign. The press conference today was the first time I've ever noticed the Sanders campaign actually acknowledge that charge. Things could start turning nasty in tomorrow's debate.

[NobodyHere]

Hillary Clinton To Nation: ‘Do Not Fuck This Up For Me’ - The Onion - America's Finest News Source

[JPhillips]

It's moments like these that remind me Hillary can fuck things up. She's way ahead and facing no real danger. I don't buy Sanders' excuse, but so what? She should say no harm no foul, and move on. Alienating the Sanders folks won't help her in the general election.

[stevew]

Bernie needs to take the gloves off and go negative here. O'Malley as well.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

It's moments like these that remind me Hillary can fuck things up. She's way ahead and facing no real danger. I don't buy Sanders' excuse, but so what? She should say no harm no foul, and move on. Alienating the Sanders folks won't help her in the general election.

I agree, move on. Even if there was "foul", she owes Bernie for the email out.

[Edward64]

O'Malley is feisty tonight but a "normal" debate so far. I'm glad they got the security drama out of the way early.

[Solecismic]

Is there any truth to the rumor that the next debate will be New Year's Day at 4:00 a.m.?

Anyway, didn't get through the entire debate. It's harder when the outcome is a foregone conclusion.

It's clear Hillary is going to make the Republicans pay for Trump, even though her effective line about ISIS making Trump videos was a whopper.

O'Malley is getting more and more desperate, and is starting to lose the composure necessary to make people feel he's presidential. Sanders is still too much the angry old man. Hillary wins these debates rather easily, but is still having to move too far to the left, which makes her vulnerable later.

[lighthousekeeper]

I thought there's no way I'm watching all of this 25 minute video, but this was some eye opening shit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rpm4rjejFgQ

[Neuqua]

Honestly if there was anyone remotely electable on the right, I would have considered it. This looks like it very well may be a vote for "lesser of two evils" this election cycle for me.

If it's against Trump/Cruz, it's Hillary easy.
Against some of the others, I'm open.

[flere-imsaho]

According to RealClearPolitics, Clinton leads every GOP nominee except Rubio (and it's close with him).

I don't honestly think that means a lot at this stage.

[ISiddiqui]

What means more is that Clinton is widening her lead over Sanders.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

What means more is that Clinton is widening her lead over Sanders.

But Bernie is really winning and the media won't report it because Hillary owns them!

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

But Bernie is really winning and the media won't report it because Hillary owns them!

The Bernie fans really do amuse me. I enjoy how any positive article for Clinton indicates that the writer is a corporate shill and how, of course, Bernie won all of the debates handedly, but the media has bought Clinton and wants their person to win. It's all really interesting to see it in motion.

[flere-imsaho]

Sanders' supporters increasingly remind me of Perot supporters from back in the day. Not ideologically, of course, but dogmatically.

No offense to any reasonable and sane Sanders supporters here, of course.

[tarcone]

What is the over/under, in months, that Impeachment talk begins if Clinton is elected?
I can see her doing some shady things. Even more than any other president. And I think she has the 2nd biggest ego in both parties. Plus, I think she thinks she can do whatever she wants.

I think the number should be at 18 months.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

The Bernie fans really do amuse me. I enjoy how any positive article for Clinton indicates that the writer is a corporate shill and how, of course, Bernie won all of the debates handedly, but the media has bought Clinton and wants their person to win. It's all really interesting to see it in motion.

What I find funny is that many (not all) of the Bernie Sanders supporters I know were flying Hillary's flag for the past 8 years. Any time Obama compromised or failed to follow through on something, it was, "if only we had Hillary". It got to the point where they wanted her to challenge him in the 2012 primary. Now the same people are blasting Clinton for being a corporate whore and refusing to vote if Sanders loses the nomination.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by tarcone

What is the over/under, in months, that Impeachment talk begins if Clinton is elected?
I can see her doing some shady things. Even more than any other president. And I think she has the 2nd biggest ego in both parties. Plus, I think she thinks she can do whatever she wants.

I think the number should be at 18 months.

Impeachment talks? Those will start the moment she becomes the nominee.

Impeachment proceedings? I'll be disappointed if it takes 6 months after the new Congress forms.

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Impeachment talks? Those will start the moment she becomes the nominee.

Impeachment proceedings? I'll be disappointed if it takes 6 months after the new Congress forms.

waiting for a return of Ken Starr, then :

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

What I find funny is that many (not all) of the Bernie Sanders supporters I know were flying Hillary's flag for the past 8 years. Any time Obama compromised or failed to follow through on something, it was, "if only we had Hillary". It got to the point where they wanted her to challenge him in the 2012 primary. Now the same people are blasting Clinton for being a corporate whore and refusing to vote if Sanders loses the nomination.

Yep. All of a sudden these same people who were wishing Hillary was elected because she'd make sure some progressive bill would get through (due to political dealing and just not bending over backwards to get a GOP Senator's vote that wasn't forthcoming) are now calling her a DINO and Republican-lite (REALLY, Sanders' supporters? Really?!)

[Ryche]

Originally Posted by Neuqua

Honestly if there was anyone remotely electable on the right, I would have considered it. This looks like it very well may be a vote for "lesser of two evils" this election cycle for me.

If it's against Trump/Cruz, it's Hillary easy.
Against some of the others, I'm open.

That's pretty much where I'm sitting although I'll go one step further and actively campaign for Hillary if Trump is the nominee.

[lungs]

Hillary doesn't make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside but I really don't see myself voting for a Republican anytime soon. Even if a Republican is running for local dog catcher unopposed I'd just as soon write somebody else in.

A far cry from my first time voting in the 2000 election.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Does Hillary really think that it's a good idea to get her husband on the campaign trail? Seems like a nightmare just waiting to happen.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Does Hillary really think that it's a good idea to get her husband on the campaign trail? Seems like a nightmare just waiting to happen.

Certainly wasn't a nightmare for Obama in 2012.

[JPhillips]

This is a year old, but I'd expect the numbers haven't changed.

A new NBC-Wall Street Journal poll showed that 56 percent of people have a positive view of the former president while just 26 percent hold a negative one.

She'd be stupid not to use a guy that popular.

[PilotMan]

For the majority Bill's a rockstar. I'm not sure he'll have quite the same impact as he did 4 years ago to get out the vote, but by and large, he'll still draw crowds.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

This is a year old, but I'd expect the numbers haven't changed.


She'd be stupid not to use a guy that popular.

*cough* Al Gore *cough*

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

*cough* Al Gore *cough*

That was stupid, too. Clinton still have comparatively high favorables during that campaign season: http://www.gallup.com/poll/116584/pr...l-clinton.aspx

The GOP was making hay with Clinton's personal misconduct, but many (myself included) thought Gore should have run on the economic successes (to that point) of the period 1992-2000 and used Clinton's popularity and charisma, especially when Gore definitely lacked charisma.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

That was stupid, too. Clinton still have comparatively high favorables during that campaign season: http://www.gallup.com/poll/116584/pr...l-clinton.aspx

The GOP was making hay with Clinton's personal misconduct, but many (myself included) thought Gore should have run on the economic successes (to that point) of the period 1992-2000 and used Clinton's popularity and charisma, especially when Gore definitely lacked charisma.

Exactly. I was agreeing that she'd be stupid not to use him and just "reminiscing" about someone who was that stupid.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

but many (myself included) thought Gore should have run on the economic successes (to that point) of the period 1992-2000

To be fair to Al Gore, he did try by saying he invented the internet.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Exactly. I was agreeing that she'd be stupid not to use him and just "reminiscing" about someone who was that stupid.

+1, then. What a shitshow that election was.

Originally Posted by Dutch

To be fair to Al Gore, he did try by saying he invented the internet.

Do you even remember the internet back then?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

+1, then. What a shitshow that election was.



Do you even remember the internet back then?

Prodigy & AOL!

[flere-imsaho]

Don't forget Compuserve!

[NobodyHere]

New NBC poll has Bernie trailing Clinton by only 3 points in Iowa and winning in NH by 4.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

New NBC poll has Bernie trailing Clinton by only 3 points in Iowa and winning in NH by 4.

Bill Clinton has that effect on people. It's like they forgot he's a package deal here until he started campaigning for her. Now, they're suddenly thinking, "wait, I don't want that idiot back in the White House".

I'd add that she doesn't even really need him. She needs to focus on herself, not ride his coat tails.

[JPhillips]

Again, Bill Clinton has a higher favorability rating than anyone actually running. There aren't hordes of Dems running from Hillary because of Bill.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Again, Bill Clinton has a higher favorability rating than anyone actually running. There aren't hordes of Dems running from Hillary because of Bill.

The favorability rating of a politician who hasn't made any meaningful policy decisions in 15 years has to be one of the most meaningless ratings I've seen. They don't dislike him because he's not relevant anymore, though I'm sure he'd tell you otherwise.

[JPhillips]

Find me these hordes of Dems not voting for Hillary because of Bill. The only people turned off by Bill are not voting in the Dem primary.

[digamma]

The Bill problem is not that people don't like him, it's that he overshadows her. It makes her look weak if her former president husband has to lead her to victory. The challenge is capturing his popularity and charisma and being able to use it in a way that helps HRC.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by digamma

The Bill problem is not that people don't like him, it's that he overshadows her. It makes her look weak if her former president husband has to lead her to victory. The challenge is capturing his popularity and charisma and being able to use it in a way that helps HRC.

That may be a factor in the general, but in the primary nobody is going to not vote for Hillary because Bill is campaigning.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

The favorability rating of a politician who hasn't made any meaningful policy decisions in 15 years has to be one of the most meaningless ratings I've seen.

I think we can all agree that the only thing in a primary that's actually meaningless is a policy decision.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

That may be a factor in the general, but in the primary nobody is going to not vote for Hillary because Bill is campaigning.

There are a few feminists that would love to see a female president but absolutely despises Bill. I could see them turning.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

There are a few feminists that would love to see a female president but absolutely despises Bill. I could see them turning.

Unless they've had a head trauma, they didn't forget she was married to Bill.

[flere-imsaho]

JPhillips bring the snark in the past few posts (in multiple threads). Approve!

[digamma]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

That may be a factor in the general, but in the primary nobody is going to not vote for Hillary because Bill is campaigning.

Oh, I agree with that. Was disagreeing with the position that people not liking Bubba is what is hurting HRC.

[NobodyHere]

My preview of the democratic debate

[Edward64]

Listening to the debate now. I'm enjoying listening to them debate without all the childishness from the GOP debates.