Scrutable

dyqik wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2020 8:35 pm There's a fairly high chance of Warren (or Bloomberg, but I think he'll fold unless he does astonishingly well tomorrow) going into a contested convention holding the balance of delegates between Biden and Sanders.

What that turns into, I'm not sure, but a negotiated deal that sees Sanders delegates back Warren to prevent a Biden nomination surely isn't out of the question entirely?

Given how the two are currently polling, surely Warren delegates supporting Sanders is the more likely way around?

Either way, a Warren-Sanders double-team would be super-duper.

Anything's possible, but I'm not sure why you'd think Bloomberg will fold after tomorrow and Warren won't. Bloomberg has an effectively infinite budget and a better chance than Warren of accumulating enough delegates to play kingmaker at the convention.

bolo wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2020 10:53 pm Anything's possible, but I'm not sure why you'd think Bloomberg will fold after tomorrow and Warren won't. Bloomberg has an effectively infinite budget and a better chance than Warren of accumulating enough delegates to play kingmaker at the convention.

Bloomberg clearly doesn't know how to be told "No", and will likely disappear in fit of pique, which is why I list him as more likely to pull out when its clear he won't win.

Bird on a Fire wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2020 8:48 pm

dyqik wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2020 8:35 pm There's a fairly high chance of Warren (or Bloomberg, but I think he'll fold unless he does astonishingly well tomorrow) going into a contested convention holding the balance of delegates between Biden and Sanders.

What that turns into, I'm not sure, but a negotiated deal that sees Sanders delegates back Warren to prevent a Biden nomination surely isn't out of the question entirely?

Given how the two are currently polling, surely Warren delegates supporting Sanders is the more likely way around?

That's the first paragraph - Warren delegates holding the balance of power.

Wouldn't it be more likely for Biden to ask Warren to be his running mate, thereby attracting Sanders delegates once the horse-trading begins?

Martin_B wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2020 12:11 am Wouldn't it be more likely for Biden to ask Warren to be his running mate, thereby attracting Sanders delegates once the horse-trading begins?

Yeah, that's a fairly plausible option. The slight wrinkle is that Warren would have to be replaced in the Senate, and MA has a Republican governor who would appoint a replacement and voted in a Republican senator before her. Although I think that's extremely unlikely to be repeated in the current climate.

Bird on a Fire wrote: Sun Mar 01, 2020 6:59 pm Even without covid there's a good chance the next prez will die in office. Attention has certainly been paid to the fact that most of the leading candidates have actuarially iffy-looking odds of completing the term, e.g. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ ... old-116117

That article linked to something about JFK's serious health problems, which was really helpful because it's just turned up as a plot point in the disc that I'm watching. (S2Ep5 of Timeless).
As you were...

Bird on a Fire wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2020 6:09 pm

plebian wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2020 3:06 pm

Fishnut wrote: Sun Mar 01, 2020 11:25 pm Buttigieg has dropped out

Thank f.ck, he was a tw.t.

tHaT's HoMoPhObIa!

My homophobia is so internalised it's external and directed at a c.nt for being a terrible candidate. He's horrific on gay issues and is a corporate shill. I'd prefer Biden to Buttigay.

plebian wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2020 10:51 am My homophobia is so internalised it's external and directed at a c.nt for being a terrible candidate. He's horrific on gay issues and is a corporate shill. I'd prefer Biden to Buttigay.

He isn't exactly popular in the African-American community, either

https://prospect.org/civil-rights/afric ... very-well/

Warren came third in her home state. She has to be out of the competition. I wonder what price she'll ask for an endorsement of Biden.

Bloomberg tried to buy the election with circa $400 million worth of ads and he fizzled out.

So it looks like a fight between Biden and Sanders.

The latter seems to continue to have severe problems with African American voters. He's had four years to make some meaningful outreach to that constituency. So its a major weakness.

Woodchopper wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 8:08 am Warren came third in her home state. She has to be out of the competition. I wonder what price she'll ask for an endorsement of Biden.

Bloomberg tried to buy the election with circa $400 million worth of ads and he fizzled out.

So it looks like a fight between Biden and Sanders.

The latter seems to continue to have severe problems with African American voters. He's had four years to make some meaningful outreach to that constituency. So its a major weakness.

And yet Sanders is polling well nationally with African Americans.

Fair enough, he has severe problems with African American primary voters.

How are the delegate counts decided? Is it winner takes all in each state, or are they split proportionally? Or are the delegates assigned per county?

El Pollo Diablo wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 8:39 am How are the delegate counts decided? Is it winner takes all in each state, or are they split proportionally? Or are the delegates assigned per county?

Its rather complicated, see here: https://www.vox.com/2020/2/28/21153287/ ... -2020-math

Cheers chops.

dyqik wrote: Sat Feb 29, 2020 2:37 pm Oh, and I should probably point out that Sanders is probably my second choice when I go and vote on Tuesday.

Unfortunately, I don't get ranked choice voting though, so I haven't though too hard about my second choice.

Did you vote? Did you have to queue for 5 hours, which appears to be the American way?

People are writing off Bloomberg, but if all remaining states replicate American Samoa he could still win.

So odd nobody is voting for Warren, easily the best candidate left. And my twitter feed is almost unanimous for her - which implies voting is being rigged.

Biden and Sanders will be almost equal on delegates after California's figures come in - about 500 each. But Biden will get Florida, New Jersey, other good sized states, steadily outweighing Sanders. The target number of delegates is 1,990 for an outright win. Unless Sanders goes backwards more or folds, no-one will get there. Biden will be about 1,800, Sanders 1,400. Biden then wins in nearly every contested scenario*.

But... Covid. Will 50,000 people gather in person? And will Sanders still be alive in July? He's looking really old and ill these days - particularly compared to memories of 2016 when he seemed much more energetic.

* ETA: there are about 750 delegates who are the equivalent of the super delegates that were controversial in 2016. The big change is these 750 can't vote in the first round. There are 3,980 regular delegates, hence the 1,990 to win target. These super delegates will split something like 500 to Biden, 250 to Sanders, and put Biden over the top.

Has anyone seen a good explanation of why Biden does so much better than Sanders among black primary voters?

On paper, you'd think that Sanders' flagship policies like M4A, ending the war on drugs, improving access to higher education and so on would all be immensely popular with the black community, which is disproportionately affected by those issues. Not to mention Sanders' well-documented involvement with the civil rights movement in the 60s.

Obviously Biden was Obama's VP, but it seems a bit patronising to suggest that politically-engaged black people would be swayed by "I have a black friend", so what's going on?

lpm wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 10:27 am
Biden and Sanders will be almost equal on delegates after California's figures come in - about 500 each. But Biden will get Florida, New Jersey, other good sized states, steadily outweighing Sanders. The target number of delegates is 1,990 for an outright win. Unless Sanders goes backwards more or folds, no-one will get there. Biden will be about 1,800, Sanders 1,400. Biden then wins in nearly every contested scenario*.

In addition, Warren, Bloomberg and Buttigieg will probably have about 150-200 delegates between them (depending upon when the latter two pull out). They'll probably vote for Biden.

lpm wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 10:27 am So odd nobody is voting for Warren, easily the best candidate left. And my twitter feed is almost unanimous for her - which implies voting is being rigged.

These twitter bubbles are interesting.

I saw somebody the other day point out that older female academics are unanimously pro-Warren - what are your demographics like?

My twitter bubble is mostly pro-Sanders, and is mostly young academics (of both sexes). I've not seen any of the really nasty "Bernie bro" behaviour there, but I wouldn't really expect to.

Democrats: Bernie Sanders is too old and problematic with women!

Also Democrats: Joe Biden!

I know, I know. Not all Democrats etc.

Bird on a Fire wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 10:46 am Has anyone seen a good explanation of why Biden does so much better than Sanders among black primary voters?

On paper, you'd think that Sanders' flagship policies like M4A, ending the war on drugs, improving access to higher education and so on would all be immensely popular with the black community, which is disproportionately affected by those issues. Not to mention Sanders' well-documented involvement with the civil rights movement in the 60s.

Obviously Biden was Obama's VP, but it seems a bit patronising to suggest that politically-engaged black people would be swayed by "I have a black friend", so what's going on?

Small c conservative voters, Christian voters but not in the mad-hate-cruel sense of the Christian Extremists, practical voters. For example, opposed to liberal drugs reforms despite the damage done by imprisoning drug users, because consider the damage done by drug use worse.

Unfortunately, Warren's run for President looks to be over. What do we think she'll do next?

Options:

1) Endorse Biden, become his pick for VP and try to drag his presidency to the left (or hope that he dies)?
2) Endorse Sanders, become his pick for VP and try to help implement their shared progressive agenda (or hope that he dies)?
3) Endorse either candidate (or none) then continue to be a progressive voice in the Senate?

lpm wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 10:58 am

Bird on a Fire wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 10:46 am Has anyone seen a good explanation of why Biden does so much better than Sanders among black primary voters?

On paper, you'd think that Sanders' flagship policies like M4A, ending the war on drugs, improving access to higher education and so on would all be immensely popular with the black community, which is disproportionately affected by those issues. Not to mention Sanders' well-documented involvement with the civil rights movement in the 60s.

Obviously Biden was Obama's VP, but it seems a bit patronising to suggest that politically-engaged black people would be swayed by "I have a black friend", so what's going on?

Small c conservative voters, Christian voters but not in the mad-hate-cruel sense of the Christian Extremists, practical voters. For example, opposed to liberal drugs reforms despite the damage done by imprisoning drug users, because consider the damage done by drug use worse.

Black people in the USA consider the damage from smoking weed worse than the damage from imprisoning young people for decades to work as slaves? I'd be surprised if that part is true.

lpm wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 10:27 am

dyqik wrote: Sat Feb 29, 2020 2:37 pm Oh, and I should probably point out that Sanders is probably my second choice when I go and vote on Tuesday.

Unfortunately, I don't get ranked choice voting though, so I haven't though too hard about my second choice.

Did you vote? Did you have to queue for 5 hours, which appears to be the American way?

Yes. No queues, because the the queuing thing largely happens in GOP run states that cut the number of polling places in bluer areas. We have early voting for a week before the election, postal voting and 4 voting precincts that vote in 2 locations for a town of 10,000, each of which has a dozen booths to fill your paper ballot in and an electronic reader.

Bird on a Fire wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 11:04 amBlack people in the USA consider the damage from smoking weed worse than the damage from imprisoning young people for decades to work as slaves? I'd be surprised if that part is true.

It's not for you and I to say. But rich white drug users are c.nts who knowingly spread murder and gang related crime in black communities, not giving a sh.t about the damage they do so long as they get some momentary pleasure. Smoking weed is a racist action, as well as a criminal action.