Hillary .. Berns .. Who Won.. ?
- Thread starter Lumpy 1
- Start date
- Aug 10, 2008
- 47,637
- 21,341
- 2,645
Lumpy 1
Diamond Member
- Jun 19, 2009
- 43,941
- 18,933
- 2,330
- Thread starter
- #23
With the Democratic Party in control of their Iowa Caucasus we may .. Never Know....
Hillary up 696 delegates to Bernie's 693
Sheesh, even MSNBC is embarrassed
When both of you come away with 690-odd delegates there is no "winner" in numbers.
Bernie won in terms of momentum though, regardless how the numbers settle.
The funny part is that the Democratic Party screwed up all on their own, Hillary announced that she won and it's another liberal failure. Also, Democrats are saying that those votes don't count..explain that.
Politicians claiming victory have nothing to do with "liberal" or "conservative". Or with a party.
And nobody said the votes "don't count" -- they're counted up a different way. Because it's a caucus, not an election. We had
'em in Vermont too.
This your first rodeo then?
You usually claim victory when you win.. in the real world...
What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts.
The way this works isn't a straight count of "votes". It's more like committees pull together and hash out what they'll say as a unit, and then that result is what's counted. Think of it as a zillion little electoral college cells.
And that's done locally --- not by a political party, and not by any candidate. And certainly not by any political philosophy, which has zero to do with such a design.
I mean, damn.
Sometimes Lumpers --- it's like trying to explain string theory to a five-year-old.
"What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts."
Sooo you have a new policy, that's good?
Are you trying to say that the election apparatus and responsibility doesn't rest with the Democratic Party?
Last edited:
gipper
Diamond Member
- Jan 8, 2011
- 81,033
- 45,146
- 2,605
I would hope that Soros giving her pac $6 million, would disqualify her with a lot of D voters.
George Soros gives $6 million to pro-Clinton super-PAC
You would think so but the D voters don't have any more integrity than the candidates. Just look at some of the crap they post here.
gipper
Diamond Member
- Jan 8, 2011
- 81,033
- 45,146
- 2,605
Maybe, but they sure love to ***** about the Koch brothers giving money to Rs. Could it be D voters are hypocrites too?
I think it would be safe to say that, yes.
What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts.
The way this works isn't a straight count of "votes". It's more like committees pull together and hash out what they'll say as a unit, and then that result is what's counted. Think of it as a zillion little electoral college cells.
And that's done locally --- not by a political party, and not by any candidate. And certainly not by any political philosophy, which has zero to do with such a design.
I mean, damn.
Sometimes Lumpers --- it's like trying to explain string theory to a five-year-old.
"What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts."
Sooo you have a new policy, that's good?
Are you trying to say that the election apparatus and responsibility doesn't rest with the Democratic Party?
I'm "trying" to say --- actually already did say, for the slow kids --- that what they did in Iowa is not a simple "vote" that you count in absolute numbers ..... and that I find out stuff like that (or any other topic) before I go on the internets to wax eloquent on the subject, so that I don't end up looking like an eejit.
Not that there's anything wrong with that, if that's what yer into.
SmokeALib
Platinum Member
Everybody loses if either one of these incompetent boobs gets in the White House.
Lumpy 1
Diamond Member
- Jun 19, 2009
- 43,941
- 18,933
- 2,330
- Thread starter
- #34
What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts.
The way this works isn't a straight count of "votes". It's more like committees pull together and hash out what they'll say as a unit, and then that result is what's counted. Think of it as a zillion little electoral college cells.
And that's done locally --- not by a political party, and not by any candidate. And certainly not by any political philosophy, which has zero to do with such a design.
I mean, damn.
Sometimes Lumpers --- it's like trying to explain string theory to a five-year-old.
"What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts."
Sooo you have a new policy, that's good?
Are you trying to say that the election apparatus and responsibility doesn't rest with the Democratic Party?
I'm "trying" to say --- actually already did say, for the slow kids --- that what they did in Iowa is not a simple "vote" that you count in absolute numbers ..... and that I find out stuff like that (or any other topic) before I go on the internets to wax eloquent on the subject, so that I don't end up looking like an eejit.
Not that there's anything wrong with that, if that's what yer into.
What you're missing is the districts that Bernie alleges were unreported when I wrote the OP and as it turns out when she was declared possible winner by the DNC. Were those alleged caucus results included or not?
You're distraction of the individual caucus procedures (coin flips included) was interesting, a tad on the obnoxious side and missed the mark as usual.
Last edited:
Rozman
Gold Member
99 Democratic precinct results are missing. Check out new thread.With the Democratic Party in control of their Iowa Caucasus we may .. Never Know....
Hillary up 696 delegates to Bernie's 693
Sheesh, even MSNBC is embarrassed
Ninety Democratic precinct results missing from Iowa Caucus
I find comfort in the fact knowing that Rachel Maddow will get to the bottom of this.....
This is something that gets her all fired up.....
Yeah right!..... LOL
Siete
Platinum Member
- May 19, 2014
- 34,325
- 3,995
- 1,130
Caucus ...
Government Election ...
for all the quintessential IDIOTS out there, elections are WON.
hope that helps even though it WON'T.
attention morons ...
A caucus is a local meeting where registered members of a political party in a city, town or county gather to vote for their preferred party candidate and conduct other party business. Caucuses typically are used in combination with a state convention to elect delegates to the national nominating convention for presidential elections.
The caucus is the oldest method of choosing delegates in the U.S., widely acknowledged as originating in the English colonies before the American Revolution. Sixteen states hold caucuses to determine political party candidates.
Government Election ...
for all the quintessential IDIOTS out there, elections are WON.
hope that helps even though it WON'T.
attention morons ...
A caucus is a local meeting where registered members of a political party in a city, town or county gather to vote for their preferred party candidate and conduct other party business. Caucuses typically are used in combination with a state convention to elect delegates to the national nominating convention for presidential elections.
The caucus is the oldest method of choosing delegates in the U.S., widely acknowledged as originating in the English colonies before the American Revolution. Sixteen states hold caucuses to determine political party candidates.
Last edited:
Lumpy 1
Diamond Member
- Jun 19, 2009
- 43,941
- 18,933
- 2,330
- Thread starter
- #37
If the individual caucus results go unreported and he DNC okay's Clinton's win (up to 90 caucuses unreported according to Bernie Sanders), what then?
Much like Pogo you missed the point. If the the caucus results go unreported voters/caucus members are cut out of the process and not represented.
Last edited:
whitehall
Diamond Member
How about the coin flip? Hillary won six out of six? The DNC pulled out all the stops to keep Hill's head above water this time
What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts.
The way this works isn't a straight count of "votes". It's more like committees pull together and hash out what they'll say as a unit, and then that result is what's counted. Think of it as a zillion little electoral college cells.
And that's done locally --- not by a political party, and not by any candidate. And certainly not by any political philosophy, which has zero to do with such a design.
I mean, damn.
Sometimes Lumpers --- it's like trying to explain string theory to a five-year-old.
"What I "usually" do is find out how stuff works before embarrassing myself on the internuts."
Sooo you have a new policy, that's good?
Are you trying to say that the election apparatus and responsibility doesn't rest with the Democratic Party?
I'm "trying" to say --- actually already did say, for the slow kids --- that what they did in Iowa is not a simple "vote" that you count in absolute numbers ..... and that I find out stuff like that (or any other topic) before I go on the internets to wax eloquent on the subject, so that I don't end up looking like an eejit.
Not that there's anything wrong with that, if that's what yer into.
What you're missing is the districts that Bernie alleges were unreported when I wrote the OP and as it turns out when she was declared possible winner by the DNC. Were those alleged caucus results included or not?
You're distraction of the individual caucus procedures (coin flips included) was interesting, a tad on the obnoxious side and missed the mark as usual.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
-
-
Candace Owens interviews Hunter Biden- Americans can still unite- Started by Andrew_Jackson_FTW
- Replies: 4
