2016 Postmortem

TwilightZone

(28,836 posts)

32. Ah, the indictment fairy. I guess I should have known.

Tue Jun 7, 2016, 08:43 PM

Jun 2016

Sorry, I don't buy into that nonsense. If we held up elections on the premise of guilty until proven innocent, any right-wing nutjob (like Judicial Watch, for example) could file a frivolous lawsuit and interfere with the democratic process pretty much anytime they wanted.

Perhaps someone representing Burlington College will file a lawsuit against Jane and Bernie Sanders for unduly influencing a financial institution to make a bad loan, which would likely be a Senate ethics violation. Whether it's true or not (at present, there's little more than rumors and a few vague claims of a source within the bank), should we hold up his next senatorial race until the legal system trudges through that? Nah.

Here in the real world, we follow the same procedures that we've been following for decades. The winner is the person who has the majority of pledged delegates. That person is Hillary Clinton. That's why she's the presumptive nominee. Because math.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

47 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What the AP did was like calling the presidential election on November 1 based on a Gallup poll [View all] democrattotheend Jun 2016 OP

No it wasn't ... but go ahead and stomp your feet and pout ... get it out of your system n/t SFnomad Jun 2016 #1

If I were a Hillary supporter I'd be "stomping and pouting" too democrattotheend Jun 2016 #14

It's disappointing, to say the least ... but in 50 years, nobody will remember that AP needed to be SFnomad Jun 2016 #18

On her husbands coattails is how they'll frame it. Loudestlib Jun 2016 #40

There is a Debbie Downer in every crowd SFnomad Jun 2016 #41

no, it's more comparable to calling it when a candidate gets the electoral number even though people JI7 Jun 2016 #2

No it's not democrattotheend Jun 2016 #6

the Clinton numbers included states and pledged delegates she had already won also JI7 Jun 2016 #12

It was more like calling it September 7th based on RealClear's average. Joe the Revelator Jun 2016 #3

Get ahold of yourself. Brickbat Jun 2016 #4

Noticed you skipped right over 2008 and chose 2004. tarheelsunc Jun 2016 #5

In 2008, nobody called the primary until the polls had closed in the last state to vote democrattotheend Jun 2016 #10

2008 TimPlo Jun 2016 #15

Bullshit, it's like calling it when a candidate gets to 270 while polls on in Alaska are still open. Lord Magus Jun 2016 #7

Agreed. A superdelegate endorsement is essentially a vote. Garrett78 Jun 2016 #16

So if the superdelegates had put John Edwards over the top with endorsements in 2008 democrattotheend Jun 2016 #22

As I wrote... Garrett78 Jun 2016 #34

Sorry, my hypo was assuming that Edwards had also won the pledged delegates democrattotheend Jun 2016 #35

The media did what the media does. Garrett78 Jun 2016 #43

I agree with you re. what Clinton would have preferred democrattotheend Jun 2016 #45

It's crooked as hell and there's no way it didn't LibDemAlways Jun 2016 #8

To be expected as with everthing engineered and approved by Clinton... JimDandy Jun 2016 #9

Is there anything wrong with predicting the election result based on a Gallup poll? Nye Bevan Jun 2016 #11

For news media yes there is. TimPlo Jun 2016 #17

Predictions are different from projections democrattotheend Jun 2016 #23

Its rigged..much laserhaas Jun 2016 #13

No actually it's like a normal election where they call it sometimes before California has finished Dem2 Jun 2016 #19

Yeah1! What's next? Weather forecasts? PepperHarlan Jun 2016 #20

Your underlying premise is faulty. Interviewing all of the voters involved in a race is not the same TwilightZone Jun 2016 #21

Key word being "intended to vote" democrattotheend Jun 2016 #24

The AP also noted that all commitments from Clinton SDs were firm. TwilightZone Jun 2016 #27

So they would have stayed "firm" with John Edwards in 2008 after the scandal broke? democrattotheend Jun 2016 #29

Ah, the indictment fairy. I guess I should have known. TwilightZone Jun 2016 #32

The AP call didn't change anything. bigwillq Jun 2016 #25

Righf because four months of voting had nothing to do with it. Briiliant analaysis. seabeyond Jun 2016 #26

As opinions goes and we see plenty here, to predict an outcome and if that outcome turns out to Thinkingabout Jun 2016 #28

No gollygee Jun 2016 #30

You really don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about Tarc Jun 2016 #31

Which is exactly why they ought to have waited until the pledged delegates had all been allotted democrattotheend Jun 2016 #37

BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! MohRokTah Jun 2016 #33

"What the AP did was like calling the presidential election on November 1 based on a Gallup poll" puffy socks Jun 2016 #36

I actually don't think Bernie should stay in until the convention democrattotheend Jun 2016 #38

um... you're totally missing the point. puffy socks Jun 2016 #42

I have never said Bernie is the only candidate who can beat Trump, or that the elections are rigged democrattotheend Jun 2016 #44

do you not understand plurals? puffy socks Jun 2016 #46

My point is, you are dismissing my argument based on a generalization democrattotheend Jun 2016 #47

Not even close. This is like news orgs having "whip counts" on major legislation like the ACA or tritsofme Jun 2016 #39