Beware persons are trying to convince you Bernie can win.

[boston bean]

He won't. Regardless of online polls results and the new found love of them and crazed belief that they actually represent more than people clicking away multiple times.

He won't win the nomination.

He will never be President of the United States.

[One of the 99]

1. Beware persons are trying to convince you Bernie can't win.

[Bubzer]

68. And trying to convince you that people vote multiple times on these polls. Which is absurd.

[daleanime]

91. ....thing to worry about.

Finished it for you.

[Bubzer]

124. Awww... thanks!

It is an absurd thing to worry about. It takes very little web-development ability to ensure only one vote per IP address... or if that's not good enough; one vote per MAC address. Both are fairly easy to implement for online polling.

[artislife]

100. +1000

[CoffeeCat]

126. They're desperate because of the Selzer Iowa poll--Bernie within striking distance!

Ann Selzer's Iowa Poll is considered the "gold standard" of polling. Nate Silver gives her methodology an A+ rating. He's only given that rating to three pollsters. Ever. Both campaigns were waiting on the results of this poll. She predicted the Iowa caucus results in 2008 and many others.

Selzer has Bernie within 9. Single digits, people!

Prepare for all kinds of posts like this.

They're convinced that their posts are magical and will lull you into voting for Hillary.

[darkangel218]

2. Bwahahahahahahahaha!!

Sure he wont. Because you say so, and that makes it true!

Thanks for the morning laugh!

[VanillaRhapsody]

32. actually no....POLLS back it up..

what is the path to victory YOU see?

indeed!

[JonLeibowitz]

104. The path to victory I see is more people voting for Bernie than Hillary

Doh!

[George II]

144. And that just isn't going to happen.

[JonLeibowitz]

148. So you say. Forgive me if I don't listen to you and vote my conscience

And my conscience won't let me vote for someone who openly dismisses and disrespects the bill of rights of the constitution she wishes to swear to preserve, protect, and defend.

[Politicalboi]

182. Yes it is

And the more Hillary people keep doing stupid OP's like this makes it even more certain. I can't wait to see Hillary in tears of defeat like in 2008. Yum! Yum!

[CoffeeCat]

129. Bernie is within nine in Iowa...

I think that Selzer poll that shows Bernie within nine--with 40+ days to go--is causing complete hysteria in the Hillary camp.

"Get out there NOW and swamp those message boards! We must convince all Bernie supporters that he is a bad man!!! Go, I tell you! Fly monkeys fly!!!!"

(((cues dramatic music)))

[VanillaRhapsody]

130. in IOWA...you realize there are 50 States right?

and so how does he get past South Carolina?


Cue dramatic music indeed!

[Kentonio]

151. He doesn't need to win South Carolina

He just needs the press bump that winning Iowa and NH would give him to make sure that SC is respectable.

[VanillaRhapsody]

155. ahahahahahahahahah!

OMG!

shakes head!

How long have you followed politics? Do you understand the Electoral College?

Texas, 222 Clinton ahead 61-10 (Delegates won: 135-22)
Florida, 214 Clinton ahead 57-22 (Delegates won: 122-47)
South Carolina, 53 Clinton ahead 71-23 (Delegates won: 38-12)
North Carolina, 107 Clinton ahead 60-23 (Delegates won: 64-25)

[Kentonio]

177. Clearly a lot longer than you have

South Carolina is so heavily in the bag for Hillary at this point that Bernie simply is not going to win there. If he did by some miracle, Hillary may as well concede the next day because it would be utterly over already. Bernie doesn't need to win there though, he just needs a respectable enough loss coupled with the name recognition and press boost than wins in Iowa and NH would give him so that when he heads to the later states with a much larger chance than if he was going there today. That's also when the many months of hard work of thousands of Sanders supporters across the nation will come into play.

[VanillaRhapsody]

178. Clearly not...

hahahahahaha...."concede the next day".....AS IF!

"utterly over".....hahahahahahahaha!!

http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2015/11/super-delegates-support-clinton



and speaking of SC

http://abcnews4.com/news/lowcountry-and-state-politics/half-of-sc-superdelegates-voice-support-for-clinton

[John Poet]

188. You're right.

She should concede NOW,
and spare the Democratic Party from an ugly loss in the General election.

[CoffeeCat]

159. If Bernie wins Iowa and NH all bets are off.

Don't you remember what happened after Obama won Iowa? The "Clinton is inevitable" meme was destroyed. The media began to break away from favoring Clinton. They began covering both candidates and treating the race as a contest between two main opponents.

That's exactly what Clinton does not want.

Without her, "But I'm next! This is my race!" meme to clutch--she is very vulnerable.

Get to work Bernie supporters! I've never made phone calls until this Bernie's campaign. If we're going to win this, we need to get people to the caucuses and the polls.

We can do this!!!

We're within single digits in Iowa. We'll take Iowa, then NH and then fight like dogs to win the rest of the states!

[VanillaRhapsody]

161. No that is simply NOT true

Hillary already has well more than half of the delegates needed to win...

That's WHY she has a 94% chance of winning....losing both those states doesn't significantly impact that...

But whatever gets you through the night I suppose...


by the way....have you noticed the polling in Iowa lately?

George II lays it out pretty well right here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=902689

[CoffeeCat]

164. Hillary has no delegates

The Clinton campaign tried this meme in 2008, "She has all of the Super Delegates, so the race is all ready decided."

How far did that get you in 2008?

Your schtick is bunk.

The Super Delegates always follow the will of the people. Always.

The Super Delegates will do exactly as they did in 2008--follow the will of the American people.

Let's get this party started! Bernie is within 9 in Iowa and drawing enormous crowds. What have you done to help Bernie Sanders win today?

[VanillaRhapsody]

166. Excuse Me?

My "schtick" is called Reality...

I suggest YOU take a look at the polls

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

Also see this brand spanking new poll
http://www.monmouth.edu/assets/0/32212254770/32212254991/32212254992/32212254994/32212254995/30064771087/886fdcf9-30c4-4b42-bf69-7abb6729418b.pdf

Now...you need to understand WHY she has a 94% chance of winning...

http://www.monmouth.edu/assets/0/32212254770/32212254991/32212254992/32212254994/32212254995/30064771087/886fdcf9-30c4-4b42-bf69-7abb6729418b.pdf


Now...do you forego chemotherapy or radiation if the doctor says it will give you a 94% chance of survival?

If the Doctor says you only have a 5% chance of survival...do you ignore it....or do you get your affairs in order?

[CoffeeCat]

169. Your schtick has been debunked by the 2008 race...

You said, "Hillary already has well more than half of the delegates needed to win."

Your schtick is not called reality. It's called the baloney platter with an obvious side of disproven bunk.

Were you asleep during the 2008 primary when Hillary lost--after touting the same Super Delegate talking point?

You have nothing.

[VanillaRhapsody]

170. No my dear it wasn't...and this ISN'T 2008 and Bernie Sanders is NOT Barack Obama!

In 2008....we had John Edwards in the race and viable....

Martin O'Malley does not have John Edwards polling numbers...

So in fact it is YOU that has nothing...or next to nothing.....a 5% chance!

[CoffeeCat]

172. Clearly, I've debunked your point...about the Superdelegates...

They'll do what they have always done--they'll represent the will of the American people, the voters.

They clearly did it in 2008. They'll clearly do the same in 2016.

You aren't still defending your original point, "Hillary already has well more than half of the delegates needed to win," are you?

[VanillaRhapsody]

183. clearly you have not...

You knew I was talking about "super" delegates.....how embarrassing for you..

regardless...my point STILL stands....

She has over HALF of the SuperDelegates......which is HOW Barack Obama beat her last time....

There does that make you feel any better?


by the way...


Iowa Democratic Presidential Caucus Quinnipiac Clinton 51, Sanders 40, O'Malley 6 Clinton +11
Iowa Democratic Presidential Caucus Loras College Clinton 59, Sanders 27, O'Malley 4 Clinton +32
Iowa Democratic Presidential Caucus PPP (D) Clinton 52, Sanders 34, O'Malley 7 Clinton +18


Good luck with that...

[George II]

152. These are the last three released polls for Iowa, all yesterday (47 days before the caucuses):

Iowa Democratic Presidential Caucus Quinnipiac Clinton 51, Sanders 40, O'Malley 6 Clinton +11
Iowa Democratic Presidential Caucus Loras College Clinton 59, Sanders 27, O'Malley 4 Clinton +32
Iowa Democratic Presidential Caucus PPP (D) Clinton 52, Sanders 34, O'Malley 7 Clinton +18

Even if Sanders were to "win" the Iowa Caucuses, say by 5% (VERY generous assumption of mine), there are 44 delegates up for grabs (I've seen different numbers, but they're around 44)

That would mean the Sanders would get 23 delegates, Clinton 21 - a net "win" of ONE delegate.

The real delegate wins are more complicated than this, but won't be too much different when the final numbers are in.

There's a similar situation in New Hampshire, but only 24 delegates available.

Right now it's basically a dead heat (45-44 in favor of Sanders) If it winds up like that, both Sanders and Clinton would get 12 of those delegates.

In the big picture, winning either or both of those states only gets a candidate "bragging rights", that's all.

Now, as far as the big states with lots of delegates, here are a few as of today (State, Total Delegates, Poll result, Delegates/Candidate):

Texas, 222 Clinton ahead 61-10 (Delegates won: 135-22)
Florida, 214 Clinton ahead 57-22 (Delegates won: 122-47)
South Carolina, 53 Clinton ahead 71-23 (Delegates won: 38-12)
North Carolina, 107 Clinton ahead 60-23 (Delegates won: 64-25)

[CoffeeCat]

162. That Iowa Poll is the most accurate...

I had been waiting for Ann Selzer's Iowa Poll for some time. I was unsure of the findings (because the polls have been all over the map), but I trusted that her poll would be exceedingly accurate.

She nails every Iowa race with unparalleled accuracy.

As someone with a degree in science writing, I've spent a great deal of time analyzing information and data. I'm interested in accuracy and scientific methodology. I've seen a great deal of bunk in my day.

Nate Silver gives Ann Selzer's Iowa Poll an A+ rating (a rating he's given to only three pollsters).

I judge the accuracy and the validity of other polls--as they compare to Selzer's Iowa polls. She's just that accurate. I dismiss other polls that show Hillary up by 32 or 22 in Iowa, because they are so off the mark, compared to Selzer's gold-standard methodology.

I analyzed the Monmouth poll a couple of weeks ago that showed Clinton up by 26 in Iowa. Their methodology excluded all Iowans under the age of 26. 69 percent of those polled were older than 45. That poll also excluded first-time caucus goers. What a mess. You can't get an accurate reading with sloppy methods like that.

I don't analyze sub-par polls any more. There aren't enough hours in the day.

I pay attention to the most scientifically accurate pollster, Ann Selzer. And I look forward to her next poll, which comes out in about a month.

[George II]

165. Most accurate or not, the bottom line is:

Selzer still has Clinton 9% ahead. And as I noted above, even if Sanders were to eke out a very close "win", it would mean that he earns one or two more delegates than Clinton (~23-21?). It takes almost 2400 delegates of the approximately 4800 to nominate.

[Bubzer]

70. I'm sure more bought-to-win polls will come out soon. Probably one paid by "correct the record" LOL.

[hobbit709]

3. Beware those that try to convince you a 1%er is FOR the people.

[brooklynite]

4. FDR!

[hobbit709]

5. Your chosen one is as unlike FDR as Richard Nixon.

[VanillaRhapsody]

33. So is yours....

Gunz

[A Simple Game]

64. Why does your post make me think of Peewee Herman?

Oh I remember, "I know you are but what am I?"

[VanillaRhapsody]

65. I don't know.....

Why ARE you thinking of poor Paul Ruebens?

[hobbit709]

94. Mine doesn't pal around with Wall St.

[VanillaRhapsody]

125. but does pal around with

the NRA!

[kenfrequed]

167. I give all my pals D minus to F ratings.

Bad retort.
Poor form.

No treat for you today.

[George II]

78. Check out Sanders' income tax returns - he's on the cusp of being a 1%er, a firmly established....

....2%er. And after the campaign is over most likely he'll make that leap into the 1%.

[daleanime]

93. ......

[hobbit709]

95. At least he didn't get it by taking payoffs from The Wall St. banksters.

[VanillaRhapsody]

131. and who has pray tell?

[hobbit709]

132. you have a picture right there in your signature line.

[VanillaRhapsody]

135. You have proof of that crime?

No?

Didn't think so....

just lame ass regulation defamation...

[hobbit709]

137. What crime? Evidently taking money from Wall St is a hallowed tradition.

[VanillaRhapsody]

138. actually what YOU said...IS a crime

you accused her of "payoff".....

Please show us where she was "paid off"

Even Bernie couldn't do it at the last debate...it was hilarious!

[Plucketeer]

116. C'mon now!

"Cut it out!"

[droidamus2]

122. Not even close

By income Bernie is in the top 5% mostly due to what he earns as a Senator. By personal wealth Bernie is worth less than $500,000.00 and it is estimated to be in the top 1% you have to worth somewhere in the area of 8.3 million dollars. Maybe you should do your research.

[VanillaRhapsody]

133. actually you are wrong...

http://www.usfunds.com/investor-library/frank-talk/what-does-it-take-to-be-in-the-top-1-percent-not-as-much-as-you-think/#.VnGNxUorJD8

[George II]

134. His latest return showed that HE earned $185,000 and he and his wife earned $212,000 (not counting..

...pretax health insurance and savings plan, which is also income)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/06/30/on-tax-returns-sanders-and-wife-report-200000-in-income-mostly-from-his-senate-post/

Based on this income, this site puts him at 98.1% for all American individuals.

http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2014/09/what-is-your-income-percentile-ranking.html#.VnGL3korJ7M

No doubt if his pre-tax income were also included, that would put him toward the top of the 2% and possibly in the top 1%.

These aren't my numbers, they're numbers based on his own 2014 tax return and US Census Bureau data.

[Armstead]

146. You contradict your own source

"Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who rails against the “billionaire class” on the presidential campaign trail, reported relatively modest income last year: just more than $200,000 on a tax return filed jointly with his wife.

The vast majority of the couple’s income came from Sanders’s $174,000 Senate salary and Social Security benefits that both he and his wife, Jane, a former college president, receive."

How Horrible! OMG! A Senate Salary and Social Security. Oh the Horror, the Horror!

[George II]

153. How do I contradict my own source? That $212,000 puts him at 1.9% from the top, not far from 1%.

[Armstead]

176. You're yowling tghat's he's in the 1 Percent while ther Post calls his imciome "modest"

I suppose he is supposed to return all or some of his Senate Salary?

[George II]

180. The Washington Post article stated his income. The fact that the writer....

....decided to use that adjective is his choice and doesn't change the fact that his income is higher than 98.1% of Americans. Yet he's running around the country (on other people's dime, by the way) "yowling" (to use your word) about the 1%, when he's only 0.9% away from that club.

Funny he drew the line at 1% and not 2%, huh?

[Bubzer]

158. Acording to what I've read, you need to be making a little over $521k/year to be in the top 1%

For example; hillary made made $25 million in speeches since 2014. Most of that from banks, and the rest from other big corporations... so a little less than 5 times the threshold to be a one percenter. It worth mentioning, that doesn't include her retirement income from being secretary of state (which is the same as what she earned in the role), or the absurd amounts of tax-free money funneled through and into her foundation. Suffice it to say, She's in the upper echelons of the 1%.

Bernie Sanders doesn't make close to $521k/year though

The Sanders household took in more than $205,000 in 2014, and paid the feds nearly $28,000 in taxes — an effective rate of about 20 percent based on Sanders' taxable income of $141,000. That means they likely earned more than 95 percent of Americans, according to the most recent data available from the U.S. Census Bureau.

Sanders had an estimated net worth of $330,000 in 2013, according to financial disclosures filed with the U.S. Senate and analyzed by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, a watchdog group that tracks money in politics. But that's a relative pittance on Capitol Hill, where the median net worth for a member of Congress topped $1 million in 2013, according to the Center's analysis. In the Senate, Sanders is downright poor: the median there was about $2.8 million.

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/07/08/421151627/sanders-among-the-least-wealthy-presidential-candidates

[George II]

185. Actually not long after his net worth was announced at a little more than "$300,000"....

....and was questioned by skeptics, it mysteriously jumped to "between $300,000 to $800,000" (huge spread!) and now is considered to be $700,000.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/money/2016-presidential-candidates-net-worth-donald-trump-vs-bernie-sanders-and-more

[Hekate]

160. Jack Kennedy. Bobby Kennedy. Franklin Roosevelt. Teddy Roosevelt. It's the person, not their wealth.

[rurallib]

6. Good solid argument with much relevant supporting data

best argument ever for jumping on the Hillary bandwagon

for the humor impaired

[demmiblue]

7. Beware: I spilled some water on the floor. n/t

[Scuba]

8. If only Hillary's supporters could figure out how to click multiple times!

[Ed Suspicious]

20. haha! No kidding!

[upaloopa]

23. We don't have to click multiple times. All you have are Bernie supporters clicking which makes

them so bogus.

What if they gave an online poll and only Bernie supporters clicked?

"Bernie is winning in all 50 states!"

[LS_Editor]

31. Replace "Bernie" with "Obama" and you have a familiar argument from 2008.

And one completely unsupported.

[Laser102]

66. When will people stop comparing Bernie to Obama? Big difference between the two.

One is president, one will never be. Let the hate begin.

[LS_Editor]

181. We'll see.

[Plucketeer]

117. "Cut it out." nt

[George II]

60. Clinton supporters don't care to. In fact most of "us" don't even participate in uncontrolled polls.

[Scuba]

67. Source please.

[George II]

73. Source? Source for what?

[Scuba]

74. For your claim that most Clinton supporters don't participate in online polls.

Don't you know what you wrote?

[Bubzer]

173. *Crickets*...

[redstateblues]

96. I'm for HRC. I clicked many times for Secretary Kerry

Always showed him winning.SECRETARY Kerry. It's a waste of time.

[Scuba]

98. So Hillary's supporters DO participate in online polls, but vote for other candidates?

[artislife]

103. FTW!!!

[Gothmog]

139. That trick worked really well for Sanders for Time Person of the Year

[newfie11]

9. Bullshit

I think that covers it!

[darkangel218]

10. +1!!

[tecelote]

11. "crazed belief that they actually represent more than people clicking away multiple times."

Beware of people telling you we all cheat.

-------------------------------------

Hillary = Landlines
Bernie = Internet

Bernie's going to win.

It's not your parents world anymore.

[upaloopa]

26. Bernie is winning in all 50 states! On line polls told me so!

[tecelote]

45. Such substance!

[VanillaRhapsody]

36. Beware of people telling you they are NOT cheating!

[tecelote]

43. We all cheat?

You believe this?

[VanillaRhapsody]

53. Do you?

[tecelote]

58. I'm a Bernie supporter so, according to you, I must.

Do you get paid to post or do you benefit financially from posting?

[VanillaRhapsody]

59. Do you take everything as personal as this

could it be that someone ELSE cheated for you?

[tecelote]

62. I'm done with you.

Ka Ching.

[VanillaRhapsody]

63. You are done...that is true..

You've got nothing else..

[Jokerman]

72. Alert Troll Fail!

On Wed Dec 16, 2015, 09:30 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

I'm a Bernie supporter so, according to you, I must.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=902134

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

this poster is accusing another of being pais to post which is against the TOS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Dec 16, 2015, 09:36 AM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is BULLSHIT!!! HRC supporters start a thread that is pure flame bait and then alert troll for Bernie supporters. They need to get a life and quit conspiring behind the scenes to purge the opposition from DU.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Accusing someone of being a paid poster is a personal attack.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with alerter. These accusations make DU a worse place. People who do it regularly, like the person being alerted on here, should be PPRd.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: So tired of this moronic conspiracy theory.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[tecelote]

108. Thanks Jokerman.

I didn't know it was bad to ask about a person's reason for posting. It seems relevant to me.

I appreciate your effort here.

[treestar]

75. I'd think you need peer reviewed research

to prove that the laws of statistics no longer apply.

It's wishful thinking. The polling organizations have done polls for years and take random samples. And they are adjusting for new technology.

I know we hung onto that a little in 2004 when it showed Kerry was behind. Still the professional pollers turn out to be correct, so it's delusional to think they are going to turn out to be wrong.

[tecelote]

106. The issue is that online polls are not being regarded as accurate because everybody cheats.

But, only us Bernie supporters.

[treestar]

114. They are not accurate because they are not of random samples

Only of the people who chose to answer them. Even if no one "cheats" by voting more than once, they still aren't based on a random sample. Just whoever ended up on that web page and chose to vote in it. That's not as scientific and therefore far less likely to be accurate. Otherwise, there would be examples of past elections where their predictions were the same as the outcome.

[lunamagica]

97. You guys remind me or Rmoney so much

I can't believe you are using the same arguments his campaign was using. "Don't believe the scientific polls because (insert a hundred excuses here)".

We all know how well it went for him...

[artislife]

107. Why? the h supporters are the ones believing in the polls

6 times a day, more or less.

It is an archaic structure.

[lunamagica]

118. Because Obama was winning in the polls, so Rmoney's campaign started with

the "polls don't matter" and "don't believe the scientific polls".

They were the ones not believing in polls. The Obama campaign did believe in them

Rmoney even had that guy with the "Uneskewered Polls" site (remember him). He was the only one they believed, and they disregarded all the established pollsters as irrelevant and archaic because they didn't favor them.

That is why he and Anne looked so shell-shocked on election night...even though everyone else was pretty sure Obama was going to win, according to the scientific polls

[Gothmog]

140. Romney and Rove tried unskewing the polls in 2012

That worked so well for them

[Betty Karlson]

149. Hillary is campaigning as if the nineties never ended. eom

[sonofspy777]

12. you've got yours huh?

Welcome to the 21st century.

The Internet rules.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

13. Hillary won't win the GE. She will never be President of the United States. nt

[NurseJackie]

14. They're not very convincing, except to themselves. (Hakuna matata!)

[Bubzer]

113. I could say that for hillary supporters as well. I'm pretty sure I have, actually.

This is what I don't get. You have a quote like - "I've upped my standards..."
I just don't understand how hillary equates to a higher standard vs. Bernie.

A good number of hillary supporters have said they're voting for her because they think she has a better chance to win... and that's their primary reason for voting for her... I can understand that...and even respect that on some level... even if I don't agree.

What I don't get how she can be considered the better choice, given how frequently she's had to change her stance to be right on a subject, or the many questionable associations she's had (mostly referring to banks here).

It just doesn't make any sense to me.

[NurseJackie]

123. I guess you'll just have to continue to be befuddled.

I don't have the time, or desire, to explain or justify myself to you. It's not as though it would make any difference if I were to spend time trying to help you to "understand". So why bother? You've made up your mind, and I've made up mine.

At least I don't go around pretending to "not understand" why Bernie fans like him. I understand it just fine. I just disagree.

[Bubzer]

142. Well, I was actually reaching out to try and understand. But thats fine.

I suppose I should have expected that kind of reaction. I was hoping for more.

And now, back to your regularly scheduled:

Have a good one.

[NurseJackie]

156. I appreciate that. Thank you.

I do take you at your word ... but it wasn't at all clear to me that you were shifting gears.

Best 2U

[Bubzer]

174. Fair enough. Personally, I'm sincerely worried... and hoping regardless of who wins, DU survives.

And by that I mean we've had some pretty acerbic posts all around... up to and including people saying they can't wait to yell their "I told you so"s. I'm worried that'll really hurt the community. I've been thinking about it, and it seems to me that no matter who wins the primary, DU will lose. Maybe I'm worrying over nothing...I certainly hope so.

[notadmblnd]

147. Because she's a woman

That is THE MAIN REASON they support her.

Oh, they'll deny it alright. They'll deny it and deny it and deny it. However, you'll notice if you check- they've all but abandoned the Feminists forums and the issues they used to post in and about 24/7. If you don't believe me- take a look at the 3 feminist forums and see how participation there has declined. Now they're all in GDP directing their hate and vitriol at Sanders and his supporters.

[cali]

15. I agree that his chances are slim. Hillary is our likely loser nominee

[SmittynMo]

16. This post in nothing but fluff.

No substance, no facts. All BULLSHIT.

There's a place for you where you'll really be wanted. It's called DI.

[bvf]

17. Well, you've convinced me.

How do I change my avatar?

Are there any other websites you can recommend? All the ones I visit are absolutely crawling with know-nothings (I see that now).

While I have you here, does this look infected?

[Katashi_itto]

18. Hillarysupporters.com is the place for all true Hillary supporters

Become a true believer today!

[Ed Suspicious]

19. He will. I will continue to try to convince people of that inevitability.

[Indepatriot]

21. Beware persons who ask that you support The Lesser Of Two Evils

Bernie Sanders is clearly the rational choice in 2016.

[VanillaRhapsody]

37. Beware of persons forgetting

What evil really looks like...

[thesquanderer]

47. your post gave me a laugh...

because with your sig line, it reads like "Beware what evil looks like..." followed by a picture of Hillary! If I hadn't known your preference and sig from other posts, I really would have understood your post quite differently.

[VanillaRhapsody]

52. but that is not what wrote...

that is what you read..

[A Simple Game]

79. What you wrote...

What evil really looks like...

Pretty hard to misinterpret, thanks for leaving the dark side VanillaRhapsody!

[bvf]

84. LOL!

Those ellipses can sure trip one up, no?

[treestar]

76. Why wouldn't anyone choose the lesser of two evils if those were

in fact the two choices where one was going to win?

[PowerToThePeople]

141. Nonsense.

You choose "none of the above."

[treestar]

186. If the more evil ones wins

then you're screwed. We're voting with the other voters. We have to be careful of how many would vote for the worse of the two.

[Tote Life]

22. Clinton can't win either.

She has no crossover appeal. 30% isn't enough to win the GE.

[workinclasszero]

25. BS

And I don't mean Bernie Sanders, friend.

[Tote Life]

34. Then I ask you to prove it.

Show me where Clinton gets her crossover appeal in the GE.

Please, and thanks in advance.

[workinclasszero]

44. You prove it

You are the one saying Hillary can't win in the GE, not me.

Where is your proof, or are you just talkin crap on the internets?

[Tote Life]

55. Whoosh.

I just gave you the numbers on the last post. Guess you didn't like the proof.

[workinclasszero]

168. Sure...

Anyone can make up a number.

Still waiting for your "proof"

[Tote Life]

175. 8% independent support

And marginal, if any, support from the Republican for Clinton.

Based on recent polls you love to tout all the time. Crosstabs are fun.

[uppityperson]

179. Without a link, a number is just a number. Link?

[VanillaRhapsody]

38. hahahahahahahahah...

right that is what all the polls say 30%!!!!

[madokie]

24. LOL

Too early to be laughing my ass off like this.

Bernie will be Your next President

[upaloopa]

29. I can just see it now. Bernie issues todays talking point from the White House

Nobody should have to pay for anything!

[VanillaRhapsody]

39. Too early to be laughing my ass off like this.

Clinton will be YOURS!

[LS_Editor]

27. I will bookmark this.

We shall see.

[upaloopa]

30. You may have a problem. Hillary will win the primary and be nominated our 2016 Dem candidate.

If you can't live with that here your bookmark is worthless.

[LS_Editor]

42. We'll see.

[stonecutter357]

28. K&R!

[MoonRiver]

35. Nope, he can't.

[bahrbearian]

40. Beware of 1%ers telling you Bernie can't win.

[The_Commonist]

41. You've become a parody.

You, like too much of DU, unfortunately, have become completely ridiculous.
When I see your name on an OP, I know that what's to follow should be ignored, and I usually do ignore you.
But this is just beyond your usual level of ridiculousness.

DU used to be, and probably still is, the best news aggregator on the internet.
I first came here for Top 10 Conservative Idiots #1.
But when it comes time for a Democratic primary, I find DU to be less helpful, useful or interesting than a typical Youtube comments section. And it's because of people like you, and OPs like this one.

You used to be cool.
Now you're just a parody.
And not even an amusing one...

[Bohunk68]

49. +1,000

[boston bean]

187. A blip on my radar. I dont even recognize you.

Still, sorry to disappoint you so.

[Thinkingabout]

46. I got the answer, only allow Sanders supporters vote in the primaries and then

Sanders can win the nomination. Afterward only allow only Sanders supporters to vote in the GE and then Sanders could win.

This will not happen, Hillary supporters will be out and active in the primaries, she is running a great campaign, she is well positioned on the issues and is the most qualified candidate running.

[Bohunk68]

51. Yup the most qualified candidate for Wall Street.

[Thinkingabout]

77. Currently the best candidate for Wall Street is the one wanting to reinstate Glass Stegall which

will allow them to return to the old ways to another financial crisis. On the other hand, beefing up Dodd Frank and invoking the Volker Rule would prevent the banks from doing their games or fail. Who is pushing for the regulations to be relaxed, Sanders, Hillary is pushing for stricter rules. Return to the old ways or go forward, I will stick with going forward.

[Bohunk68]

85. You are sticking with the Wall Street robbers.

[Thinkingabout]

87. No, quiet the opposite, out with the old and in with the new. You must be for sticking with the old

which does not prevent financial crisis, I will go with the candidate who is working to prevent financial crisis. Stuck in the 40's or present day, I will stick with present day.

[DFW]

48. Don't count him out this early

Stranger things have happened, and politics is nothing if not unpredictable. I know how things look today. I don't know how things will look in four months.

My rewording would say rather: "Beware of persons trying to convince you Bernie can't lose." Of course, that goes for ANY candidate a year out, as far as I'm concerned.

[thesquanderer]

50. Why "beware"?

I don't know why you find such people dangerous!

FWIW, I think it's unlikely he will get the nomination. But if by some chance he does, I think he would have an excellent chance of becoming President (probably better chances than Hillary, though my money at that point would be on either one of them).

[HERVEPA]

54. Thank you so much for your deep and totally profound wisdom. It has changed my life.

[truebluegreen]

56. Beware persons who are trying to convince you Hillary should win.

[George II]

57. It's very likely that he'll win only one state primary/caucus. Two tops.

[CBGLuthier]

61. Well then since you said so it changes everything.

I shall give up my hopes and dreams that America can ever escape its corporate masters and warmongering ways and follow the wisdom of some person who posts on an internet board for she is knowledgeable beyond all belief.

Now where the fuck is that sarcasm tag.

[hopeforchange2008]

69. The smell of fear is strong with this one. /nt

[Helen Borg]

71. In short: Hillary is panicking!

[Thinkingabout]

80. Oh my, would this explain why she is complaining about the media coverage and the debates

times and dates?

[marmar]

81. You guys are getting really bad at the psyops.

[lunamagica]

82. Clinton supporters don't need to stuff online polls. She's winning the real, scientific polls

Even online pollsters have a disclaimer that the their polls aren't accurate or reliable.

Or did you miss the spoke person from times who said they don't take into account the online polls because of people repeatedly clicking to have their favorite win?

[MineralMan]

83. None of that matters. DU won't determine who the nominee is.

The voters will, and DU isn't at all representative.

People here should vote for the candidate they want. The voters will decide. I think Clinton will be the nominee, and I'm pretty sure of that. But, how DUers vote is up to them. I don't care how any DUer votes, frankly.

I'll be voting for Clinton at my precinct caucus on March 1. How other DUers vote isn't going to influence who the winner is. It's a big country, full of voters.

[Helen Borg]

111. I'll be voting for Hilary.

If she'll return all the Wall Street money!

[appal_jack]

86. Beware, beans make me fart.

Oddly enough, it stinks in here already...

-app

[Divernan]

88. 1289 views and only 19 recs. Your opinion loses.

[artislife]

102. But somehow will be twisted into a win

Because this is ...wait for it.....an online poll!

[Fearless]

89. Desperate much??

[daleanime]

90. Because you say so?

[lark]

92. For the sake of us all,

I hope you are wrong. He would bring the greatest positive change to this country so I will definitely vote for him in the primary. However, I'm not stupid or self-destructive so I will vote for whoever the D is in the general and that person will be 1,000,000 times better than any of the Repugs running.

[OnyxCollie]

99. From shouts of "Misogyny!" to "Bernie can't win!"

You're getting desperate and oh so tiresome.

[Amimnoch]

101. Sorry, but I do think I have to disagree with you there.

I believe either Bernie or Hillary, or hell, against this Republican Candidate field Homer Simpson could win.

The real interesting thins is.. would it be a good thing for him? For his devoted? For the US? For the world?

The biggest problem I've mentioned again and again is there is absolutely no potential congressional make up.. at all.. that will be willing to work to make his programs and his mass of promises even a remote possibility.. UNLESS he begins compromising, and then he'll be dubbed the traitor and another DINO, much as happened with President Obama after he won. If Bernie chooses not to compromise then he'll be come the most ineffectual president history and his only accomplishment will be his superior use of the Veto power.

Part of what everyone loves about Bernie is that he is a political outsider. Unfortunately, unless a Senate and a House is elected that also has enough political outsiders to work with him.. he'll be a toothless lion that gives great speeches.

[Kentonio]

154. He gets things done by finally teaching the public that its on them

Either they mobilize and support the legislation they want by calling/writing their reps and putting pressure on them to vote right, or else nothing ever happens. It's been a core part of his message since day one.

[Lazy Daisy]

105. IF he can't win

Why do so many Hillary supporters go on and on about it? Why do they seem to worry about it. And don't say they don't. People don't post over and over again about things they don't worry about. The truth is many Hillary supporters DO have a nagging doubt, a small concern She may not make it, although the MSM tells us all daily that her coronation will be next November.

Republicans may be rolling over, but we Bernie supporters know we have a damn good chance. Hence the posts from Hillary supporters who have to "remind" us daily that it's HER turn.

[stupidicus]

109. jack did alright with his magic beans

but you don't seem to have jack here

[retrowire]

110. boom

No, this is not true.God, I'm sick of hearing this.

Which major polls are we referring to?

Facebook. It requires each vote to have an individual email address and account. Unless people are making hundreds of accounts, NO they are not voting as many times as they can for their candidate.

Live polls, NOPE, they only allow one vote per IP address, and refuse to let anyone vote any further, this can be circumvented through various means, but NOT in a way that would allow someone to vote hundreds and hundreds of times.

Official online polls like Democracy For America. They require a name, an email address and a zip code. They use cookies and IP logging as well.

So there you have it. NO, major online polls do NOT ALLOW PEOPLE TO VOTE AS MANY TIMES AS THEY LIKE.

This excuse is bunk. Hillary supporters have no excuse whatsoever.

[roguevalley]

112. another disappointing post, bean

Absolute statements have a way of biting the ass. I will assume this is more say it and hope it's true talk

[tk2kewl]

115. great argument

[Hepburn]

119. Whistling Past the Graveyard much?

You are one of two Hillary supporters I have not put on Ignore and the reason is due to the humor you both provide!

[Nonhlanhla]

120. I don't think he's likely to win

But why should we "beware"? It's not like it is dangerous for people to hope that their candidate will win, or to think that he can win. For now, that's what everyone should be doing: support the candidate of their choice. It's called the primaries.

[Hepburn]

121. Apparently one of the two HRC supporters I do not have on Ignore

is afraid of Bernie. So, it's BEWARE time!

[HoosierCowboy]

127. Because if Bernie Sanders does win...

...a candidate NOT promoted by the Main Stream Media will have come out of no where and won the Presidency for the second time. Obama being the "nominal" first. Obama however,did engage the MSM for ads that I didn't watch in the general election, like everyone else.

Because if Bernie Sanders does win, the MSMs political king making power will have been broken. No more billions spent on campaign ads that no one watches. Already the big six public media companies are slowly starting to merge their local news as public broadcast becomes less lucrative as ads revenues fall, a sure sign they're teetering in local media markets.

Because if Bernie Sanders does win, it will be because in the end, politics is local and it will be the locals, wherever they are that make the decision.

[Kalidurga]

128. You mad bro?

[Gothmog]

136. Sanders is down to a 5% chance of being nominee according to Predictwise

http://predictwise.com/politics/2016-president-winner/ Sanders supporters can make some decent money by betting on Sanders if they really believe that he will be the nominee

[Armstead]

143. Beware?....That sounds dangerous, like they're members of Isis or something

[randome]

145. So. Many. Numbers.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[UglyGreed]

150. .

[bowens43]

157. blah blah blah blah bet you said the same thing about Obmama

hill is toast

[Logical]

163. Classy as usual! Nt

[R B Garr]

171. LOL, and as usual, multiple threads favoring Bernie

with the same message are just fine, but one juxtaposed title not favoring him causes much anxiety and pitchforks.

You should know by now that Bernie's image and well-being is the No.1 concern. Everything else comes second.

[NaturalHigh]

184. While I agree with you on this...

your OP is senseless shit stirring that is meant to do nothing but cause hard feelings.