the app crashing in iowa looks like an own goal for dems. republicans can and will dine out on that kind of mishap
Circus circa 2020
Gazza M wrote:the app crashing in iowa looks like an own goal for dems. republicans can and will dine out on that kind of mishap
Majority of establishment centrists will vote for Trump over Bernie. Simple math.
AOC not showing up, a few other Democrats walking out and Pelosi ripping up the speech. This really isn’t a good look for the Democrats who are coming across as a bit desperate and petty.
This looks like it is all going a bit tits up at the moment. The leadership need to get their shit together.
arsedoc md wrote:Gazza M wrote:the app crashing in iowa looks like an own goal for dems. republicans can and will dine out on that kind of mishap
Majority of establishment centrists will vote for Trump over Bernie. Simple math.
Yup they’ll either vote for Trump or not vote at all.
SOTU....
Typical claptrap getting the respect it deserves from the Speaker, none.
Slurred, mispronounced words....Mini strokes having their effect?
“Q. What’s in his brain?
A. A golf club, a cheeseburger, a porn video and somebody else’s credit card.”
JazzG wrote:AOC not showing up, a few other Democrats walking out and Pelosi ripping up the speech. This really isn’t a good look for the Democrats who are coming across as a bit desperate and petty.
This looks like it is all going a bit tits up at the moment. The leadership need to get their shit together.
arsedoc md wrote:Majority of establishment centrists will vote for Trump over Bernie. Simple math.
Yup they’ll either vote for Trump or not vote at all.
Maybe, but the 'they go low, we go high' approach hasn't really worked. Trump has bulldozed all the norms of decorum. Its a different arena, and dems need to start hitting harder, and - in the right circumstances - lower. Problem is they just can't organise to win a fight
Where are the rest of the numbers from Iowa? Are they seriously not going to bother after only releasing 62% of the vote?
Klaus wrote:Where are the rest of the numbers from Iowa? Are they seriously not going to bother after only releasing 62% of the vote?
They are at 71%. Still sitting at 26% to 25% for the Manchurian candidate versus Bernie. Don't know what the rush is. Rather get it right than early.
So why only release 62% for two days? That's absolutely ridiculous.
Gazza M wrote:Maybe, but the 'they go low, we go high' approach hasn't really worked. Trump has bulldozed all the norms of decorum. Its a different arena, and dems need to start hitting harder, and - in the right circumstances - lower. Problem is they just can't organise to win a fight
They're not going to win a gutter fight with Trump though are they? That man is king of that domain, to paraphrase he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
The two main things he has going for him is the strong economy and that the Republican side is united. The Democrats on the other hand are more divided than ever. With Bernie & the Socialist emergence over the last 4/5 years clear divisions forming within the party. That base needs to be fully unified behind a strong charismatic leader. None of their current current candidates strike me as that.
At this stage 5 years ago the Republican party was just as divided though - if there's a Democrat president, the base will rally around him or her.
SOTU
Trashy theatrics for TV, Limbaugh getting a MofH.
Trump doesn’t shake her hand, she retaliates.
After 3 years of his cruel, vulgar language, mean spirited actions against children among others, the bitterness on her part just emphasizes the total lack of respect for him, and it also shows her fearlessness.
He slurs his words, his brain is rotting, and the Republicans clap their hands, the entire cowardly bunch of them.
I wonder how Trump feels about her ripping up the speech. He could take the piss out of her but knowing him as the egomaniac he is, he's probably fuming she stole his thunder and everyone is talking about it.
Mirth wrote:At this stage 5 years ago the Republican party was just as divided though - if there's a Democrat president, the base will rally around him or her.
The Democrats were divided going into 2016 elections which is why Hilary lost. The Republicans I think have a different mentality. A lot of those who supported Bernie wouldn't vote for Hilary or decided to vote for Trump out of spite. Republicans may not have been happy with Trump but I think the vast majority showed up to vote for him.
JazzG wrote:A lot of those who supported Bernie wouldn't vote for Hilary or decided to vote for Trump out of spite.
That's not true. There were fewer Sanders supporters who voted for Trump than there were Hillary supporters that ended up voting for John McCain in 2008 for one thing.
He doesn’t know how to deal with Pelosi.
He is a coward unless you have forgotten.
The Dems lost because Hilary got lazy, didn’t spend time in the rust belt, and trump worked his butt off the last weeks of the campaign,
People forget she won the popular vote by millions. He won the rust belt electoral votes by a few thousand. That is where the race was decided.
Klaus wrote:JazzG wrote:A lot of those who supported Bernie wouldn't vote for Hilary or decided to vote for Trump out of spite.
That's not true. There were fewer Sanders supporters who voted for Trump than there were Hillary supporters that ended up voting for John McCain in 2008 for one thing.
There were quite a few supporters who didn't vote (for Hilary), but I don't think many voted for Trump.
Yep, but that's a different issue. No one owes the democratic candidate their vote. One of the strengths of Sanders, and probably Warren too right now to a lesser degree, has been the ability to attract independent voters or people who just don't vote normally.
Claudius wrote:Klaus wrote:Where are the rest of the numbers from Iowa? Are they seriously not going to bother after only releasing 62% of the vote?
They are at 71%. Still sitting at 26% to 25% for the Manchurian candidate versus Bernie. Don't know what the rush is. Rather get it right than early.
Either way, just to get back to this: I've seen both CNN and Slate claim now that Buttigieg won Iowa, despite only having 71% of the votes accounted for. Do you still not see the issue here with how everything has progressed, Claude? One candidate is getting news headline after news headline proclaiming him victorious in a caucasus he might not have won. It's dominating the news cycle.
The longer they keep holding the results back, the more people are going to feel that they're doing it in order to sabotage for someone else. And if it turns out that Bernie did indeed win those people will just feel validated. What an absolute horror show this has been from the Democrats. People were worried beforehand that they would try to fuck him over through any means available, and it's hard to disagree with them.
MSM has been bigging up pete, and glossing over biden finishing a distant fourth. Nothing new there. Buttigieg will fade away fast after new hampshire though
MSM coverage of bernie has been and will continue to be atrocious over there
Lol. I was watching Smerconish on cNN an hour ago. He said Buttigieg is the favorite coming out of this caucus. I almost fell of my seat. This is the guy who is averaging 5th behind an invisible Bloomberg on major national polls. But he’s the favorite now because he’s won a small caucus. I’m tempted to say ‘fake news’
And now CNN are saying it will be a death knell for Biden if he doesn’t finish top 2 in New Hampshire. What? Who in their right mind expects him to finish top 2 there?
Read this caucus manager’s explanation of the process. This is entertaining.
It has taken them two extra days and they still end up giving some of the votes to the wrong person. You have to think that's done on purpose.
I wonder where Tom Perez, DNC Chair is on all of this.
Carries major power within the Dem establishment.
Former cabinet secretary of labor under Obama.
Supported Clinton in 2016.
Does not want the progressive wing to move forward.
https://newrepublic.com/article/156341/tom-perez-stacks-dnc-deck-progressives
Klaus wrote:It has taken them two extra days and they still end up giving some of the votes to the wrong person. You have to think that's done on purpose.
deval patrick above andrew yang out of nowhere :boris:
bernie supporters don't need anymore conspiracy fuel 
mags wrote:I wonder where Tom Perez, DNC Chair is on all of this.
Carries major power within the Dem establishment.
Former cabinet secretary of labor under Obama.
Supported Clinton in 2016.
Does not want the progressive wing to move forward.https://newrepublic.com/article/156341/tom-perez-stacks-dnc-deck-progressives
the DNC establishment has made a lot of concessions to sanders in the last 2 years in terms of staffing and key decisions inside the DNC. what perez is going to realize is that no matter how much you concede to sanders and his "fans" its never ever going to be enough. they will blame him for everything and anything.
He kinda deserves it by the sound of it. In addition to the link mags posted, wasn't Perez behind the recent campaign finance rule change too that essentially let Bloomberg buy his way into the debates? He probably looked at Trump and decided he wanted an oligarch of his own to take office.
Klaus wrote:He kinda deserves it by the sound of it. In addition to the link mags posted, wasn't Perez behind the recent campaign finance rule change too that essentially let Bloomberg buy his way into the debates? He probably looked at Trump and decided he wanted an oligarch of his own to take office.
Yes, thanks for the reminder, Klaus.
Klaus wrote:It has taken them two extra days and they still end up giving some of the votes to the wrong person. You have to think that's done on purpose.
Klaus wrote:It has taken them two extra days and they still end up giving some of the votes to the wrong person. You have to think that's done on purpose.
It's just some people who can't use Excel correctly, looks like:
All this plus Buttigieg having donated $40 000 last year to the company that made the app makes me very sceptical.
That's amazing, Burnsy.
Quincy Abeyie wrote:
Seems like Shadow / ACRONYM are a holdall for campaign "dark money" … Tara McGowan and ACRONYM have taken $75m of non-declarable funds to do all sorts of things that aren't very clear. The Buttigieg campaign is evidently very close to them, though, loads of personal ties and Instagram tags going on between the two groups.
As a programmer I feel a bit sorry for the app developers, the bug has been described in detail and sounds like a consequence of a poor standard of integration testing with the IDP server environment, and yet we have a lot of so-called experts sounding off about this and that completely unrelated thing.
You gotta love how ancient the Democrats are. Last election you had John Podesta who leaked their entire mail server to hackers by demonstrating the same level of tech savviness as my 86 year old grandma, who once clicked a "Congratulations you've won a free ipad!" link in an email and rootkited her computer. This time you've got people who can't test run an app before a caucasus and can't click their way through an Excel column without messing up.
Just treat their phones like driver's licenses and take them away before they hurt themselves.
the other weird thing about the reporting is the obsession over the percentage of state delegate electors. it seems the more worthwhile numbers, in terms of where the candidates stand (which is all that iowa is good for, given its very low number of electoral votes for the convention) is the first choice vote and the final realignment vote. i say this as a warren fan, but its weird how they keep freaking out over these state delegates
Quincy Abeyie wrote:
Seems he's not the only one who gave money to this company.
mdgoonah41 wrote:the other weird thing about the reporting is the obsession over the percentage of state delegate electors. it seems the more worthwhile numbers, in terms of where the candidates stand (which is all that iowa is good for, given its very low number of electoral votes for the convention) is the first choice vote and the final realignment vote. i say this as a warren fan, but its weird how they keep freaking out over these state delegates
I think probably because it's the main method of determining who wins Iowa, which has been won by the Democratic candidate since 2000.
Ultimately, this farce has allowed people like Biden to play down the results.
Bryant wrote:I think probably because it's the main method of determining who wins Iowa, which has been won by the Democratic candidate since 2000.
Ultimately, this farce has allowed people like Biden to play down the results.
the reason iowa has been so important in the past is that it gives a big surge/boost to the winner, which then tends to carry over into another predominantly white state (NH) before things shift. it helps build momentum for the winner, which helps in their fundraising and polling, because its all the media talks about right after the winner is declared.
this year, with the massive fuckup, mayo pete hasn't really gotten a big bump, because no one really knows what the hell is happening, and the narrative has been about how bad the caucus system is and how much the iowa dems fucked up. even if it turns out pete won more votes/delegates, it wont really matter. there is a NH debate on friday and they vote next week. any big bump from iowa probably isnt going to happen. also, given all the other news that has happened in the last week, from kobe to the impeachment stuff to the iowa fuckup, the "winner" is going to get drowned out, to some degree
mdgoonah41 wrote:the other weird thing about the reporting is the obsession over the percentage of state delegate electors. it seems the more worthwhile numbers, in terms of where the candidates stand (which is all that iowa is good for, given its very low number of electoral votes for the convention) is the first choice vote and the final realignment vote. i say this as a warren fan, but its weird how they keep freaking out over these state delegates
Aren’t the State Delegate Equivalents what matters in the end though? In practice they should be a direct outcome of how good you were in steps 1 and 2, but the use of prior electorate counts and not the present electorate count differentiates the SDEs. These candidates are fighting for delegates after all. Remember this is the first Iowa election where any info beyond delegates has been released
And it will be a good thing if there is no bump. I don’t understand how winning one small, unrepresentative state that pretends a game of musical chairs is an election should inform voters of bigger states. These guys are campaigning for a year, and all the media attention is all about how you are going to do in Iowa, when there are about one million things wrong with Iowa as a concept for anchoring on. So “Mayo Pete” as you call him doesn’t deserve a bump
mags wrote:SOTU
Trashy theatrics for TV, Limbaugh getting a MofH.Trump doesn’t shake her hand, she retaliates.
After 3 years of his cruel, vulgar language, mean spirited actions against children among others, the bitterness on her part just emphasizes the total lack of respect for him, and it also shows her fearlessness.He slurs his words, his brain is rotting, and the Republicans clap their hands, the entire cowardly bunch of them.
Very pleased with the picture you painted. Please continue to narrate this theatre all the way to election day please!
By the way mags, who is the candidate (active or not) that most resonates with you?
KingslandBarge wrote:By the way mags, who is the candidate (active or not) that most resonates with you?
Am sitting on the fence right now.
Have paid little attention to the Iowa shenanigans.
Just working on getting re-energized after the impeachment trial.
One person that caught my eye early on was Sherrod Brown, Ohio Senator, major supporter of labor. He dropped out early.
Warren And Sanders are both candidates On my possibilities roster. Both imperfect, both have some plans I am uncomfortable with, her on foreign policy, him on gun control. But they top the list on climate issues which is a key area for me. Voted for Bernie last primary., and lean toward him.
Bottom line: who is most likely to beat trump (if he doesn’t have a stroke before November or put his foot in it to the point his base wakes up-ain’t gonna happen)...And who has the $$$$ to run a strong campaign into November. One more thing... The DNC....Powerful. Worrisome.
Whoever gets the nomination will have a brawl, an ugly, dirty fight, no holds barred from the trump camp.