2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress

Status
Not open for further replies.
I might be wrong (it’s been 4 years) after all, but I remember coin toss to decide delegates as part of the previous caucus as well, pretty sure watched a video on it.
 
How do the Dems expect young people who are marginalized by these rule changes to show up if say Biden becomes the nominee.

Its madness, they’re literally relying on high turn out and youth engagement due to gerrymandering and yet they are insisting on disenfranchising them.
 


Watch the video- he literally cannot win. Gerrymandering. It's Biden.


Can someone explain this, because there doesn't seem to be any connection between the tweet and the video in the tweet. It's a bit late to be complaining about a caucus of all things being a bad way to do things; that's been the case since about forever. Same with first past the post. It's bad, but it's always been bad, and it's always going to be bad.
 
Can someone explain this, because there doesn't seem to be any connection between the tweet and the video in the tweet. It's a bit late to be complaining about a caucus of all things being a bad way to do things; that's been the case since about forever. Same with first past the post. It's bad, but it's always been bad, and it's always going to be bad.

the reduced weighing of college cities (which, according to the msnbc video, is new) means bernie's popular vote margin won't matter.

edit - also, iirc, other caucuses do not do this complicated weighing, it's based on a simple count.
 
the reduced weighing of college cities (which, according to the msnbc video, is new) means bernie's popular vote margin won't matter.

edit - also, iirc, other caucuses do not do this complicated weighing, it's based on a simple count.

It’s self inflicted gerrymandering and it makes no sense.

The only way it would make any sense to do it is if they were trying to reflect actual gerrymandering to give a representative voting power to primary candidates. This doesn’t seem to be the case at all.
 
If they screw him again I hope he runs as an independent this time. feck em.

9912962-3x2-940x627.jpg
 
What is this supposed to mean? That he won't run or that he won't win? The second one is obvious to everyone , and the first: no one really knows , depends on how all of this unfolds and how many bridges are burned in the process.
 
the reduced weighing of college cities (which, according to the msnbc video, is new) means bernie's popular vote margin won't matter.

I'm not getting that from that video. What is new is that they are releasing three different sets of numbers, seemingly for transparency. It doesn't say anything about the skewed weighting being new, just that, well, it's skewed.
 
What is this supposed to mean? That he won't run or that he won't win? The second one is obvious to everyone , and the first: no one really knows , depends on how all of this unfolds and how many bridges are burned in the process.

Bernie wont run as an independent no matter what.
He and others like him including AOC believe in fighting the fight from within.
 
I'm not getting that from that video. What is new is that they are releasing three different sets of numbers, seemingly for transparency. It doesn't say anything about the skewed weighting being new, just that, well, it's skewed.

1:00 to 1:25
 
1:00 to 1:25

Yes, I have seen the entire two minute video. It says the precints that accounted for 41% of the turnout in 2016 account for 32% of the delegates this year, but it doesn't say how large their portion of the delegates were in 2016. I'm not saying there's not anything here, but to be convinced that this means Trump 2020 and that the Dems are gerrymandering their own race and that Biden has already won... it takes a bit more than a brief comment in a short video. Do you have any other sources for this, what it actually means?
 
Yes, I have seen the entire two minute video. It says the precints that accounted for 41% of the turnout in 2016 account for 32% of the delegates this year, but it doesn't say how large their portion of the delegates were in 2016. I'm not saying there's not anything here, but to be convinced that this means Trump 2020 and that the Dems are gerrymandering their own race and that Biden has already won... it takes a bit more than a brief comment in a short video. Do you have any other sources for this, what it actually means?

"they only account this year" was the line, suggesting to me it's a change.

i didnt say trump 2020, i said this is good for biden. i think it is gerrymandering to not give precints weight at least roughly in line with their votes, and given the age demographics this seems like targeted gerrymandering to me.

i dont have any other sources, i got the facts from the video and drew conclusions based on my worldview.
 
there's 2 major threats - warren on 2nd alignment and biden on this age shit. i think bernie gets the raw vote counts but that's not going to be enough.
 
there's 2 major threats - warren on 2nd alignment and biden on this age shit. i think bernie gets the raw vote counts but that's not going to be enough.

I guess Warren could do well after alignment if she consistently tops 15% statewide; she's also the most popular 2nd preference candidate.

Difficult to see how a candidate winning the raw vote could be fecked over subsequently. Could happen I suppose if their support isn't uniform across the state.

538 simulations show that the "topline effects of realignment are fairly simple. Candidates comfortably above 15 percent tend to gain votes and see their leads grow — for instance, Sanders’s share of the vote grows from 23.6 percent (first alignment) to 28.1 percent (final alignment) in our projections. Candidates near 15 percent tend to tread water. And candidates well under 15 percent can lose the large majority of their vote, perhaps almost all of it, to other candidates."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.