Who's supporting Clinton?

[ronjanec]

If you are for Hillary Clinton, could you also list some reasons why you will probably be voting for her in November?

[ronjanec]

http://www.cnn.com Wow, "the Bern" is absolutely destroying Hillary in the Alaska and Washington primaries! Go Bernie!

[zetreque]

Wow. that's shocking to me. Hillary won a big over Bernie in all the red states that I saw so I expected him to loose big in Alaska being that it's a red state. Maybe people are finally waking up, or maybe those republicans are up to weird cheating games. I'd believe anything at this point. Go Bernie!

Only reason I'd ever vote for Hillary in a million years is if she was running against Hitler. I mean Trump. If it was anyone else in the republican party and Hillary was nominated I would probably abstain.

That is really shocking to me. After visiting Fairbanks last year and learning about the attitude up there... wow. We have to keep in mind this is only the Democratic, I mean Democrat side though.

[ronjanec]

zetreque,

The Republican Party has never really done anything to help me personally and I am a life long supporter of the party;

If they pull any shenanigans at the convention in regards to "the Donald" being the republican nominee for president, I have pretty much decided to switch parties for the first time in my life and vote for Bernie if he is the democratic nominee.

[mtbturtle]

Wow. that's shocking to me. Hillary won a big over Bernie in all the red states that I saw so I expected him to loose big in Alaska being that it's a red state. Maybe people are finally waking up, or maybe those republicans are up to weird cheating games. I'd believe anything at this point. Go Bernie!

Only reason I'd ever vote for Hillary in a million years is if she was running against Hitler. I mean Trump. If it was anyone else in the republican party and Hillary was nominated I would probably abstain.

That is really shocking to me. After visiting Fairbanks last year and learning about the attitude up there... wow. We have to keep in mind this is only the Democratic, I mean Democrat side though.

It's not like Cruz is going to be that much better if any than Trump (so you might want to vote if you live in a state where it will matter at all).

[zetreque]

I have pretty much decided to switch parties for the first time in my life and vote for Bernie if he is the democratic nominee.

I have heard that from a couple people this year. That they switched parties for the first time in their life to vote for Bernie. One guy was extremely vocal at the caucus about it. He got up to speak against the Hillary supporters saying that Bernie was much better to be electable because of him deciding to switch parties after his life long dedication to the republican party. After I caucused, I was so excited feeling like Bernie was a no brainer. I was soon disappointed at how things have gone so far (especially when I saw how the electral system kept giving Hillary an unfair lead every precinct I looked at the math for), but he maintains a close running. I'm optimistic because I really don't care about any other person running in either party. They are just typical politicians to me no better than the stereotypical lawyer.

I do kinda like Cory Booker though from what I have seen (very little). He is no Hillary by far though and he was speaking in place of her in my state. Maybe that has tricked some Hillary supporters.

[zetreque]

It's not like Cruz is going to be that much better if any than Trump (so you might want to vote if you live in a state where it will matter at all).

You are correct there! Cruz only came in at 31% for me on http://isidewith.com

Unfortunately I don't follow politics close enough to really know anyone that well. I am only passionate this time around because I am seeing how bad things are going and I have seen Trump on TV and whatnot. Then the icing on the cake was when I started to learn about what Bernie was all about so that got me into it.

[mtbturtle]

Unless Sanders runs as an Independent or wins the Democratic nomination, I'll vote for the Democrat. Not really Clinton support as I see her as a corporatist and hawk.

[ronjanec]

Wow. that's shocking to me. Hillary won a big over Bernie in all the red states that I saw so I expected him to loose big in Alaska being that it's a red state. Maybe people are finally waking up, or maybe those republicans are up to weird cheating games. I'd believe anything at this point. Go Bernie!

Only reason I'd ever vote for Hillary in a million years is if she was running against Hitler. I mean Trump. If it was anyone else in the republican party and Hillary was nominated I would probably abstain.

That is really shocking to me. After visiting Fairbanks last year and learning about the attitude up there... wow. We have to keep in mind this is only the Democratic, I mean Democrat side though.

It's not like Cruz is going to be that much better if any than Trump (so you might want to vote if you live in a state where it will matter at all).

I share basically the same type of conservative political views as Ted Cruz mtbturtle, and I have nothing personally against the man;

My issue again is with the TPTB in the Republican Party possibly having "the hubris" to decide who my presidential nominee will be even if I, and the vast majority of other republican voters have chosen otherwise.

[ronjanec]

Oops, sorry mtbturtle: I am also making dinner and I somehow thought you were responding to me instead of zetreque with your last post. My bad.

[TheVat]

Many of the "Bernie or bust!" folk view Hillary as a Rockefeller Republican in Democrats clothing. I don't disagree, but I would vote for her if she was the alternative to Herr Trump. Especially if a strong Bernie presence at the convention pulls her a bit to the Left. If she teams up with Cory Booker, I will find her easier to vote for. There's also talk about Julian Castro, who I know less about.

Cruz is intensely disliked in DC. I'd advise Ron or anyone else to look into the reasons before jumping in bed with him.

[ronjanec]

Many of the "Bernie or bust!" folk view Hillary as a Rockefeller Republican in Democrats clothing. I don't disagree, but I would vote for her if she was the alternative to Herr Trump. Especially if a strong Bernie presence at the convention pulls her a bit to the Left. If she teams up with Cory Booker, I will find her easier to vote for. There's also talk about Julian Castro, who I know less about.

Cruz is intensely disliked in DC. I'd advise Ron or anyone else to look into the reasons before jumping in bed with him.

Biv,

How about this scenario instead? Hillary chooses Bernie as her vp running mate(if he loses to her in the primaries of course);

I honestly believe Trump could beat Hillary despite the polls: On the other hand, I also believe that someone like Trump(who of course strikes some the wrong way) would have a very difficult time in trying to beat someone as personable and likeable as Bernie.

If you put both of them together, I believe this could be a very scary combination for us poor republicans.

(Cruz is associated with the religious right: And I believe this has something to do with the intense dislike for him in D.C)

[zetreque]

Many of the "Bernie or bust!" folk view Hillary as a Rockefeller Republican in Democrats clothing.

Did you see this I posted? There are clear economic and financial reasons behind that decision but it is still throwing some candy into a bag of snakes or throwing in a mongoose?.

viewtopic.php?f=129&t=30218

[SciameriKen]

Many of the "Bernie or bust!" folk view Hillary as a Rockefeller Republican in Democrats clothing. I don't disagree, but I would vote for her if she was the alternative to Herr Trump. Especially if a strong Bernie presence at the convention pulls her a bit to the Left. If she teams up with Cory Booker, I will find her easier to vote for. There's also talk about Julian Castro, who I know less about.

Cruz is intensely disliked in DC. I'd advise Ron or anyone else to look into the reasons before jumping in bed with him.

Biv,

How about this scenario instead? Hillary chooses Bernie as her vp running mate(if he loses to her in the primaries of course);

I honestly believe Trump could beat Hillary despite the polls: On the other hand, I also believe that someone like Trump(who of course strikes some the wrong way) would have a very difficult time in trying to beat someone as personable and likeable as Bernie.

If you put both of them together, I believe this could be a very scary combination for us poor republicans.

That wouldn't do it for me - if anything that would make Sanders have even less power than he currently has as a senator, and he is too old to take over after Hillary in 8 years. I'm hoping today's victories will allow Bernie to do the impossible. I'll never vote to keep the "greater evil" out and I honestly couldn't tell you who that is between Clinton and Trump.

[zetreque]

What do you all think of this? I don't trust personal opinion piece but this is curious. I don't quite understand it because I don't understand the voting system I guess (and I am in a caucus state, not a primary state?).

Bernie Sanders Is Currently Winning the Democratic Primary Race, and I’ll Prove It to You
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/sanders-currently-winning-democratic-primary-race-ill-prove-to-you_b_9528076.html

[SciameriKen]

What do you all think of this? I don't trust personal opinion piece but this is curious. I don't quite understand it because I don't understand the voting system I guess (and I am in a caucus state, not a primary state?).

Bernie Sanders Is Currently Winning the Democratic Primary Race, and I’ll Prove It to You
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/sanders-currently-winning-democratic-primary-race-ill-prove-to-you_b_9528076.html

I like that the Huffington post has gone pro Bernie. I'm not sure what to believe is true though coming from them or any mainstream media source. But it makes it more fun to read :D

[ronjanec]

Many of the "Bernie or bust!" folk view Hillary as a Rockefeller Republican in Democrats clothing. I don't disagree, but I would vote for her if she was the alternative to Herr Trump. Especially if a strong Bernie presence at the convention pulls her a bit to the Left. If she teams up with Cory Booker, I will find her easier to vote for. There's also talk about Julian Castro, who I know less about.

Cruz is intensely disliked in DC. I'd advise Ron or anyone else to look into the reasons before jumping in bed with him.

Biv,

How about this scenario instead? Hillary chooses Bernie as her vp running mate(if he loses to her in the primaries of course);

I honestly believe Trump could beat Hillary despite the polls: On the other hand, I also believe that someone like Trump(who of course strikes some the wrong way) would have a very difficult time in trying to beat someone as personable and likeable as Bernie.

If you put both of them together, I believe this could be a very scary combination for us poor republicans.

That wouldn't do it for me - if anything that would make Sanders have even less power than he currently has as a senator, and he is too old to take over after Hillary in 8 years. I'm hoping today's victories will allow Bernie to do the impossible. I'll never vote to keep the "greater evil" out and I honestly couldn't tell you who that is between Clinton and Trump.

Yes, I can definitely see why this would not do it for you personally SK: But I still think that this would be a great move for the Democratic Party to capture all the votes of the many other people who basically just vote for who they like the most each election, and with Bernie still around, some of his personal magnetism and popularity could only help the not very personable and somewhat dour Hillary just by association.

And for what I believe is another good reason to do this: With Bernie completely out of the race, many of his democrat voting under 30 year old voters may not even bother to vote in the November presidential election, and this could end up costing her the election in a close race.

[zetreque]

I decided I'm actually not that shocked that Bernie won Alaska given how much they probably hate Hillary. Which is another reason I think Bernie is far better against the republican party because they have such a strong attitude toward Hillary. That's why I am a bit confused by the early red states going pro Hillary over Bernie but that might have been because it was still early when their primaries were and I got the feeling that a lot of people were switching parties just to caucus then switching back. These are all just guesses. I really have no idea and I'm just going to go with Bernie until the end.

I was just reading that Bill and Hillary Clinton attended Trump's last wedding.

As corrupt as Hillary is, I thinks he clearly has more potential for foreign relations. How did you score on the isidewith.com SciameriKen? Wouldn't you vote for the lesser evil if there was a clear difference in who is more in line with your ideals?

[SciameriKen]

I decided I'm actually not that shocked that Bernie won Alaska given how much they probably hate Hillary. Which is another reason I think Bernie is far better against the republican party because they have such a strong attitude toward Hillary. That's why I am a bit confused by the early red states going pro Hillary over Bernie but that might have been because it was still early when their primaries were and I got the feeling that a lot of people were switching parties just to caucus then switching back. These are all just guesses. I really have no idea and I'm just going to go with Bernie until the end.

I was just reading that Bill and Hillary Clinton attended Trump's last wedding.

As corrupt as Hillary is, I thinks he clearly has more potential for foreign relations. How did you score on the isidewith.com SciameriKen? Wouldn't you vote for the lesser evil if there was a clear difference in who is more in line with your ideals?

When I did it about 2 or 3 months ago I aligned with Sanders which is where I first heard about him. Hillary wasn't too far behind. Still, I have no trust that Hillary will do anything that she claims she will, therefore I can't really trust any supposed match I have with her from Isidewith.

[TheVat]

What I do, when I contemplate entering a booth and voting for Hillary in a general election, is remind myself that Trump thinks Bashir Assad is our friend.

[Natural ChemE]

EDIT: In the below response, I fail to account for superdelegates who overwhelmingly endorse Hillary.

What do you all think of this? I don't trust personal opinion piece but this is curious. I don't quite understand it because I don't understand the voting system I guess (and I am in a caucus state, not a primary state?).

Bernie Sanders Is Currently Winning the Democratic Primary Race, and I’ll Prove It to You
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/sanders-currently-winning-democratic-primary-race-ill-prove-to-you_b_9528076.html

Remember how Nate Silver was famous for predicting election outcomes? He's involved in the analysis of the Democratic primaries at FiveThirtyEight.

As I'm reading it, Hillary and Sanders are trying to win a simple majority of 4,051 votes, i.e. 2,026 votes. The statisticians who're analyzing the primaries realize that demographics vary by the state, so they've worked out the target number of delegates Hillary and Sanders need to win on each state to win the primary.

As the primary process goes on, the cumulative target for Hillary and Sanders increases, and we can track how close they are to their current target. Right now:

1. Hillary's at of her target.
2. Sanders is at of his target.

Currently, about 57% of the votes have been cast, so Hillary appears to be on-track to win the nomination.

While I haven't really looked into all the details, it's my impression that Hillary's pretty much got the primaries in the bag unless something big - like a major scandal - comes up.

Currently PredictWise has:

• Hillary wins the Democratic nomination at 92%;
• Hillary wins the overall election at 65%.

Versus:

• Sanders wins the Democratic nomination at 8%;
• Sanders wins the overall election at 5.7%.

[SciameriKen]

Your analysis assumes similar results as in the past. But Sanders is being reached by larger audiences than in the past and as we have seen 57% is easily passed. Nothing major needs to happen, that is just msm trying to get everyone to go home so their candidate moves on. It's better to think of this as two football halves where Clinton had the advantage to start and now Bernie has it to finish. It will be close.

[ronjanec]

What do you all think of this? I don't trust personal opinion piece but this is curious. I don't quite understand it because I don't understand the voting system I guess (and I am in a caucus state, not a primary state?).

Bernie Sanders Is Currently Winning the Democratic Primary Race, and I’ll Prove It to You
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/sanders-currently-winning-democratic-primary-race-ill-prove-to-you_b_9528076.html

Remember how Nate Silver was famous for predicting election outcomes? He's involved in the analysis of the Democratic primaries at FiveThirtyEight.

As I'm reading it, Hillary and Sanders are trying to win a simple majority of 4,051 votes, i.e. 2,026 votes. The statisticians who're analyzing the primaries realize that demographics vary by the state, so they've worked out the target number of delegates Hillary and Sanders need to win on each state to win the primary.

As the primary process goes on, the cumulative target for Hillary and Sanders increases, and we can track how close they are to their current target. Right now:

1. Hillary's at of her target.
2. Sanders is at of his target.

Currently, about 57% of the votes have been cast, so Hillary appears to be on-track to win the nomination.

While I haven't really looked into all the details, it's my impression that Hillary's pretty much got the primaries in the bag unless something big - like a major scandal - comes up.

NCE,

"Hillary's pretty much got the primaries in the bag unless something big - like a major scandal - comes up"?

I read somewhere that the head of the FBI is very upset(actually threatening to resign) that he can't bring any charges against Hillary for her alleged mishandling of classified e-mails while she was the Secretary of State, and that TPTB in the Democratic Party are the one's preventing him from doing this during the election campaign;

Who knows? If the same people at some point decide that Hillary will probably be a loser in the general election to Donald Trump, they may change their minds about this, and then allow him to do this before the convention, and effectively then back Sanders.

[ronjanec]

Your analysis assumes similar results as in the past. But Sanders is being reached by larger audiences than in the past and as we have seen 57% is easily passed. Nothing major needs to happen, that is just msm trying to get everyone to go home so their candidate moves on. It's better to think of this as two football halves where Clinton had the advantage to start and now Bernie has it to finish. It will be close.

It will get even more interesting if Sanders can win Wisconsin SK(but even if he does, he is going to have a very difficult time winning the eastern state primaries after that)

[Natural ChemE]

EDIT: In the below response, I fail to account for superdelegates who overwhelmingly endorse Hillary.

Your analysis assumes similar results as in the past. But Sanders is being reached by larger audiences than in the past and as we have seen 57% is easily passed. Nothing major needs to happen, that is just msm trying to get everyone to go home so their candidate moves on. It's better to think of this as two football halves where Clinton had the advantage to start and now Bernie has it to finish. It will be close.

I'd say that it's more of a race than a football game, largely because there's a set finish line at 2,026 votes.

And in this analogy:

1. Distance run:
   • Hillary has run 1,261 votes.
   • Sanders has run 1,031 votes.
   • Hillary is 22.3% faster than Sanders.
2. Remaining distance:
   • Hillary is 765 votes away.
   • Sanders is 995 votes away.
   • Sanders is 30% farther away from the finish line than Hillary.

Given that Hillary is currently running 22.3% faster and has a 23.1% shorter distance remaining, Sanders would have to speed up by 59.1% in order to close the gap by the end of the race.

That said, Hillary's had a slight downhill advantage due to demographics. The race track's fair, so Sanders will enjoy that same advantage ahead. Without getting too technical, that advantage is around 5% - so Sanders has slightly improved odds, but nothing game-changing. Basically he only needs to speed up by 51.1% to catch Hillary.

Recent polling data does suggest that Sanders is picking up speed relative to Hillary, but no where near fast enough.

Anyway, you're definitely right that my analysis here is incomplete. In technical jargon, we'd say that this is a first-order analysis because I'm failing to consider higher-order effects. Just, given the sheer gap, it's difficult to imagine what would have to change to alter the outcome of the game.

[zetreque]

I did some math before going to bed. I closed all my calculators though so I will go off of memory. I may have done something wrong because it seems weird.

For a nomination they need 2383 votes (Rather than just having more delegate by majority? I don't get why they put that).

Bernie needs only less than half the remaining delegates to Tie Hillary including even her superdelegates (not just regular delegates which represent the majority of people, then he wouldn't even need that many to tie). There are still a lot of superdelgates that haven't voted yet. But Bernie needs about 66% of all remaining delegates to get to that 2383 number. The superdelegates are bullshit as if we live in a hierarchal capitalist system rather than a democracy. Oh wait, we do....

The underdog has a disadvantage as always.

[Natural ChemE]

For a nomination they need 2383 votes (Rather than just having more delegate by majority? I don't get why they put that).

Ohh I see... apparently the Democratic primary has 714 superdelegates in addition to the 4051 regular delegates that I was seeing at FiveThirtyEight.

And according to Wikipedia:

1. 469 superdelegates endorse Hillary;
2. 29 superdelegates endorse Sanders;
3. so 216 superdelegates are not yet endorsing.

I'm not exactly sure how superdelegates work, but if their "endorsements" are determined as given in Wikipedia, then Sanders doesn't really any significant chance unless something major changes, e.g. Hillary dropping out of the race for unrelated reasons.

[zetreque]

superdelegates can change sides at any time and I read something about how they mostly vote or change sides at the last minute if the majority of voters choose a certain candidate. Since superdelegates are OUR representatives (senators and whatnot), why would they choose the candidate that the majority doesn't support?

[Natural ChemE]

zetreque,

Wikipedia's characterization makes it sound like the Democratic party's pretty explicitly stated that superdelegates are under no obligation to concur with the popular vote; apparently their ability to deviate from the popular vote is exactly why they're there in the first place.

That said, it also sounds like superdelegates can change their votes before the election despite their pledges, so it's possible that some may do so even if not required to.

[zetreque]

Natural ChemE,

Yes, and do you see anything wrong with superdelegates? It seems like a way to take away democracy at it's finest.

ok gtg to the movies. bbl