After the events of this Tuesday, I kinda morbidly thought that was Bernie as a Force ghost for a moment there (Danny DeVito of all people referred to him as "Obi Wan", after all). I guess it isn't over yet, but...

nr22 said:

After the events of this Tuesday, I kinda morbidly thought that was Bernie as a Force ghost for a moment there (Danny DeVito of all people referred to him as "Obi Wan", after all). I guess it isn't over yet, but...

The democratic election was rigged to where anyone can see that Bernie never was considered seriously. I mean, the concept of super delegate elites overriding the votes is kind of stupid for a party that supposedly represents the masses.

I like the depiction of Trump as some kind of merge between Fate/Zero Gilgamesh and Rider. And I love Carson just doing his own thing in this artist's images.

I like the depiction of Trump as some kind of merge between Fate/Zero Gilgamesh and Rider.

It's the God-Emperor of mankind from Warhammer 40k though.

79248cm/s said:

The democratic election was rigged to where anyone can see that Bernie never was considered seriously. I mean, the concept of super delegate elites overriding the votes is kind of stupid for a party that supposedly represents the masses.

The super-delegates never vote against the general public. Their votes aren't counted until the end either. They're just there in case someone tries to sabotage the election.

OskarVanBruce said:

It's the God-Emperor of mankind from Warhammer 40k though.

Being the pleb I am, I have no idea what Warhammer 40K is.

Gezbabby said:

The super-delegates never vote against the general public. Their votes aren't counted until the end either. They're just there in case someone tries to sabotage the election.

Unless someone tries to sabotage the election? Like the people? In practice you can't say they were for the people when Bernie was winning nearly all the states yet Hillary had over 2 times the delegates as him. The political leaders made their picks before any votes were made. Same thing happened on the republican side with "Jeb" Bush but Trump was able to turn the tables on them.

They poll the super-delegates or tally who they endorse and use those numbers when listing who is going for who. Upfront though it'd be kind of obvious that a large number would support Clinton, given it is an established and known brand amongst the larger population (for better or worse, but they do say any press is good press... and that seems to be working for Trump). Although perhaps it'd be better if they simply didn't indicate who they'd likely support until the actual vote became necessary.

When the time comes they'd likely back whoever had the popular vote though, otherwise they'd end up having a lot of problems and likely sour their chances at the presidential election. Certainly something that the Republican party may very likely have to consider should none of their candidates receive the minimum number of delegates.

As for Sanders winning up front, there is issue that the early primaries apparently historically tend to be poor representations of national level chances of winning. It's supposedly that it's easier for campaigns to focus on individual states when they're the only one holding a primary and no one else is, but when the Presidential election actually begins they won't be able to do that. Super Tuesdays are supposed to better represent a campaigns ability to be able to tackle a nationwide campaign, but I will admit I'm just regurgitating information I recently had heard.

As for the Democratic primaries and each's gains in delegates it's apparently like this:

• Feb 1st: Clinton +23, Sanders +21
• Feb 9th: Clinton +9, Sanders +15
• Feb 20th: Clinton +20, Sanders +15
• Feb 27th: Clinton +39, Sanders +14
• Mar 1st (Super Tuesday): Clinton +518, Sanders +347
• Mar 5th (Super Saturday): Clinton +56, Sanders +53
• Mar 6th: Clinton +9, Sanders +16
• Mar 8th: Clinton +90, Sanders +71
• Mar 12th: Clinton +4, Sanders +2
• Mar 15th (Super Tuesday II): Clinton: +371, Sanders +271

Sanders' biggest problem seems to be when he wins strong it's in a delegate poor state and of the delegate rich states he's winning he's not winning a large enough popular vote over Clinton to actually give him much gain. A good example is Mar 8th. Clinton won 1 state and Sanders won 1 state, but the degree at which each one "won" was quite different. Clinton won with an 82.6%, and made a net gain gain of +26 delegates. Sanders on the other hand only won the other state by 49.8% so he only had a net gain of +7. That's not to say winning that state wasn't a win for Sanders, as it prevents Clinton from gaining extra votes, but it's not a strong route to victory.

Gezbabby said:
The super-delegates never vote against the general public. Their votes aren't counted until the end either. They're just there in case someone tries to sabotage the election.

In their view, grassroots movements are inherently against the system so it is their role "to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists." (according to DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz)

Especially since the DNC is being criticized for having a strong bias towards Hilary Clinton.

Milo? Isn't he the gay Greek Jew who tried to join Internet-Neo-Nazis aka the altright?

OskarVanBruce said:

It's the God-Emperor of mankind from Warhammer 40k though.

No, that's Gilgamesh. Without a doubt that's Ea (the Sword of Rupture) he's holding.