2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumNate Silver's "favorite part of Sanders’s underwear-gnomes strategy to flip superdelegates"
Nate Silver ?@NateSilver538 14h14 hours agoMy favorite part of Sanderss underwear-gnomes strategy to flip superdelegates is how Clinton's voters are magically totally chill with it.
Nate Silver ?@NateSilver538 14h14 hours ago
"Welp, she got 55% of the vote and the clear majority of elected delegates, but let's give it to the 74-year-old white guy!"
Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)firebrand80
(2,760 posts)It's underpants gnomes. Everyone knows that. No wonder you missed Michigan.
BootinUp
(47,144 posts)beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)sufrommich
(22,871 posts)It's fiction being promoted by a campaign that knows it's fiction.
qdouble
(891 posts)There's no way in hell Bernie would flip the super delegates after losing the popular vote and pledged delagates without massive blowback. In most GE polling, Bernie performs better than Hillary simply because Hillary supporters know she's winning and are not bitter and will say that they would vote for Bernie vs Trump, while bitter BS'ers will say they won't vote for Hillary. However, if Bernie did manage to steal the nomination undemocratically through supers, a huge chunk of Hillary supporters would refuse to vote for Bernie and he'd tank against Trump.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)Perhaps Silver is too young to recall 2008?
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)...but this year is weirder.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)in mass, they flip. Like way fuckin' weird. The non Democrat who hasn't contributed to the Democratic party, and dissed everyone in the Democratic party, is looking for support.
How, in any reasonable mind, would that work.
(and you brought up '08. One really flipped. The rest shifted because the race was over).
Orsino
(37,428 posts)But candidates still in the race will try to flip superdelegates.
It just won't make the news when Clinton does it.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)excuse.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)I don't care, as I neither consider it unethical nor expect it to change much.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)a fail.
mythology
(9,527 posts)It won't work any better this time.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)Silver is, or was, a great numbers guy. Seeing him feign ignorance of both candidates' desires to flip and retain delegates is embarrassing.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)or disagreeing with Bernie is not the same as ignorance.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)...or minimizes loss of delegates, it will have worked. In other words, we're unlikely ever to know for sure.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)But then again, I don't really understand how anyone can think that Bernie's idea of trying to persuade the SD's to go for him instead of Hillary, if she's won the majority of pledged delegates, will work.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)I think we'll never know how well it "worked." Sanders has big support, and wants to hold onto it until the convention. He has to talk up his campaign as viable, because officially, it still is.
Every candidate wants to come to the convention with the most delegates possible, because the winning number is not the only concern.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)The superdelegates have never given the nomination to the runner up in the pledged delegate race. They sure as hell are not going to betray the most stalwarth Democratic voting blocks (women and People of Color) by nullifying Hillary's historical win and giving the nomination to a white guy.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)But with more at stake at the convention than declaring a nominee, arriving with the greatest possible number of delegates is important.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)He's referencing the fact that nearly all US presidents have been old white men. The idea that the Democratic superdelegates are going to ignore the historical reality that for the first time a woman has won the primaries (and that she did so moreover with the overwhelming support of women and People of Color), in order to hand the nomination to yet another old white guy, is ridiculous.
His reference has an obvious historical reference. He is not ridiculing Bernie for being old or for being white. He is ridiculing the idea that the nomination should be handed to yet another old white guy, despite the fact that a woman won.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, JFK, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush.
If Nate Silver had left age out of it, maybe I'd give him the benefit of the doubt about whether he's making a historical point or being a creep.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)This is not sufficient reason to call a respected guy like Silver a "creep."
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)structure than Clinton did in 2008. She had a lot to lose by going rogue after Obama clinched the nomination.
Sanders does not strike many of us as a man with a lot to lose.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Joe the Revelator
(14,915 posts)I've lost a ton of respect for this kid lately.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Why no mention of the 69 year old white woman? Fuck this guy.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Why bring race into it, Nate? There's a 92% chance this guy is a self-centered asshole.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)I hope that when he's 74, people ridicule him for being a "74-year-old white guy."
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)BobbyDrake
(2,542 posts)So Bernie just needs to be 5x better than Obama at flipping super-delegates, but without any of Obama's intelligence, charisma, and integrity to help him do it.
"Good luck," Bernie.