"Either you think the Black vote factors into the equation and are therefore willing to wait..."

[emmaverybo]

"https://t.co/FnuJqvvhHL">pic.twitter.com/FnuJqvvhHL</a></p>— Propane Jane™ (@docrocktex26) <a href="

Link to tweet

[Cha]

1. Yay Propane Jane! Thank you for her sage

words!

Link to tweet

[emmaverybo]

2. Just discovered her. So many great tweets.

[Cha]

5. Oh good.. I've been reading her for quite awhile..

Propane Jane with her cold hard take on pundits.. I opt for this..

".. or you’re just making shit up right now. These are the options."

[dalton99a]

3. Kick

[Skid Rogue]

4. 100% Of course!!!!! nt

[Cha]

6. "We invented voting Blue no Matter Who"..

Link to tweet

[Scurrilous]

39. Thanks Cha!

[sheshe2]

7. Sadly.

The black candidates, everyone of them were kicked off the trail with the help of the media before black states had a chance to vote.

[cwydro]

17. How can we blame it on the media when the AA candidates had very poor minority support?

People here seem to think black voters only vote by race, and this is just not true.

[MustLoveBeagles]

8. K&R

Everyone should have a voice in this process.

[Garrett78]

9. History suggests NV and SC (and beyond) are greatly impacted by what happens in IA and NH, though.

Warren is basically done. As for Biden, he can cling to a glimmer of hope because of Buttigieg's alienation of Black folks and Klobuchar's lack of Black support. But Biden is on very thin ice--virtually everyone outside of the DU bubble seems to understand that.

All that said, I've been arguing for years that we should do away with caucuses and that we should start with states that more closely reflect our electorate demographically-speaking (states such as Illinois and Arizona). Nonetheless, there's no use denying the outsized influence that IA and NH continue to have. It's one thing to dislike reality. It's another thing to do what many on DU do, which is to deny reality.

[padah513]

13. Clinton didn't win Iowa or New Hampshire

But he got the nom and went on to become President. You keep naysaying but the truth is you're speculating just like everyone else. Iowa is 2.51% black, New Hampshire is 1.52% black. Neither demographic in either state is indicative of Biden's support and that is reality.

[Cha]

15. Excellent post.. thank you!

[Garrett78]

16. People have got to stop drawing comparisons to '92. It has the opposite effect you think it does.

'92 is sort of the exception that proves the rule, but it's sort of an extension of the rule. On the one hand, it's the only example in the last 40 years (from either party) of someone winning the nomination without winning either of the first 2 states.

On the other hand, it isn't really much of an exception to the rule. For 2 reasons: 1) Iowa was essentially nullified that year by there being an Iowan in the race. 2) And it was precisely how well Clinton did in NH (remember, Tsongas was from MA) and the resulting "comeback kid" narrative that propelled Clinton forward. And Clinton was almost always in the top 3 leading up to that first mini-Super Tuesday when he took the biggest prize, which was Georgia. The only threat Clinton ever faced was Brown, and that threat was short-lived.

So, yeah, the Biden vs. 1992 comparisons really need to stop.

[booley]

10. Sure... But lets not cherry pick when we care about minority votes

Sanders won the popular vote in Iowa. He got more votes than Buttigieg.

And the reason fr that was because of Latino and Black voters coming in for the Satellite caucuses.

Sanders has one of if not the most diverse coalitions right now.

Sanders is favored to win states like California because of support from the Latino and Asian American communities there.

I wish many would just admit they are making a big deal about the Southern Black vote because they are hoping it will save Biden. It's fine if that's the reason. Just admit it.

Because it's not fine when minority voters get disappeared because it doesn't fit your candidate's narrative.

[padah513]

14. Satellite caucuses?

Just how many black and Latino folk do you think are from Iowa and satellite caucusing from places, say like Paris? Really? Is this the Onion?

[rpannier]

11. I don't see why any of the five/six (Bloomberg) shouldn't hold out until Super Tuesday

Things happen in campaigns as time goes on
Warren and Biden may get no traction and are forced to drop out
No one is hurt if they stick it out until then

[ChubbyStar]

12. Totally agree

Everyone who has the means to continue to fund their run should STAY IN. Let the voters decide.

[Garrett78]

18. Egos can get hurt. There's only so much losing people can take.

[Cha]

19. KR!!

[highplainsdem]

20. K&R

[Duppers]

21. YES! +1000

[Scurrilous]

22. Look how Nate Silver is factoring things -

"The answer in the case of Iowa is that it matters a lot. Despite its demographic non-representativeness, and the quirks of the caucuses process, the amount of media coverage the state gets makes it far more valuable a prize than you’d assume from the fact that it only accounts for 41 of the Democrats’ 3,979 pledged delegates.

More specifically, we estimate — based on testing how much the results in various states have historically changed the candidates’ position in national polls — that Iowa was the second most-important date on the calendar this year, trailing only Super Tuesday. It was worth the equivalent of almost 800 delegates, about 20 times its actual number."

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/iowa-might-have-screwed-up-the-whole-nomination-process/

That's right. Despite 'demographic non-representativeness' Iowa 'worth the equivalent of almost 800 delegates.'

Let's hear it for Iowa voters with their magnified influence and media coverage thereof. Remember this ass every time someone posts a poll from 538. Because he also alters his numbers there to reflect the greatness of Iowa...or as he calls it national trends.

[emmaverybo]

23. Foaming at the mouth now.

[Scurrilous]

26. He is all in on Bernie, Iowa, and white state prominence. Incredibly tone-deaf.

Iowa a +23 in impact. NH +12. S. Carolina w/ more delegates than both a +8. 14 state Super Tues. w/ 6 Southern states incl. Texas w/ 261 delegates a +30 only 7 more than white Iowa. Early and white the best! This guy is so out of touch.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/iowa-might-have-screwed-up-the-whole-nomination-process/

Sad no one payed attention to Bernie.

'So apparently the candidate in 3rd place is a bigger story than the candidate in 2nd place, who in turn is a bigger story than the candidate in 1st place? OK.'

Bernie gets a .5 for Iowa loss. LOL Twitter was incredulous.

Link to tweet

And why does Bernie lead in polls? Because Nate alters his numbers to put him there. Monday alone (the fine print at 538 says he can do this) -

Link to tweet

[emmaverybo]

27. Good you spoke up. Hard numbers hah! Silver makes up numbers. Thanks for sharing the madness.

Now I get it. And of course if he’s in for Bernie, admitting that PB has passed up the resident revolutionary leader would be tough.

[Scurrilous]

29. He makes it up and promotes it. LOL

[emmaverybo]

31. Thanks for the laugh.Needed that.

[Scurrilous]

32. This Nevada poll for example.

There hasn't been a poll taken for Nevada since January 14th. That one had Biden up 2%. The poll below is the adjusted average poll. Average polls are just that. The average of all polls to date. At 538 there is a catch. 'State polling averages are adjusted based on national trends...' So Nate can adjust the average poll himself. He says in the absence of new polls, but he adjusted the two Carolina polls 4 days after a new one. So he can change the percentages. Based on national trends. Which in this case is the magnificence of Bernie's 2nd place Iowa finish which we know he considers equal to 800 delegates. All the state averages have been adjusted for Iowa. From Florida to California. Every state must adore the Iowa. No one in Nevada is asked if they care about Iowa. It's not important. Nate cares. So he takes a sharpie to Biden's numbers and down they go. And then up goes Bernie. He's now +5.1% in Nevada. Catapults it out to the media and OMG Bernie leads in Nevada. Spread the word. Iowa is godhead.

Iowa caucus influence plus Nate Silver's polls, two "self-fulfilling prophecies to fuck you with" in one. Oh yeah, I read he describes himself thusly "I'd say I am somewhere in between being a libertarian and a liberal."

Link to tweet

commondreams right? *faints*

Nate Silver Is Making This Up as He Goes

'But even as Silver continues to present himself as an analytically rigorous alternative to the entrails-reading punditry of the “Morning Joe” variety, he also has shown an increasing affinity for precisely that brand of unquantifiable storytelling and third-scotch-at-the-hotel-bar pontificating for which his original project was supposed to be a remedy. During a recent round of the never-ending free speech debates, he opined that “false statements of fact” aren’t protected by the First Amendment, eliciting howling derision from the lawyers in the cloud. Just this week, he logged on to complain, after Trump was—entirely predictably, and without polling!—booed by a crowd at a Washington National’s baseball game on the same day he’d announced that the U.S. had supposedly killed the alleged leader of Islamic State, that “many Libs can’t even permit Trump to have *one good day* … after US forces kill perhaps the world’s most wanted terrorist.” (He has since issued a tweet suggesting, unconvincingly, that he was trolling.) It’s a curious stance from a man who claims, among other self-imposed limits and constraints, that his empirical models deliberately seek to ignore those major public events that move—usually briefly—opinions about politics and events. To use Silver’s preferred turn of phrase, isn’t one good day just more “noise?'

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/10/30/nate-silver-making-he-goes

Bernie's one 'good day' in Iowa the exception too.

[oasis]

24. Tell it! nt

[ecstatic]

25. I agree. I don't recall the media conducting themselves

in this manner in any of our previous primaries.

Well, they did destroy my preferred candidate (Dean) in 2004.

But in 2008, it seemed like they were willing to let the process play out. They weren't labeling candidates as DOA after IA or NH.

[Demsrule86]

28. I loved Dean...I was a Deaniac...sigh...still do.

[Wounded Bear]

30. Yeah, the media sucks...

playing up IA and NH like the determine much of anything.

There's like 2% of the delegates assigned so far. They really shouldn't treat every primary like it's the super bowl.

[Vogon_Glory]

33. This Texas White boy with a couple of Confederate

Ancestors on his mother’s side of his family agrees.

[Scurrilous]

34. My daughter moved to Austin in Jan.

I told to hurry up and register to vote!

[mia]

35. K & R

[oasis]

36. K and R

[Cha]

37. K!

[Scurrilous]

38. K&R