Presidential Primary results Tuesday March 8th

Cruz is a lock for 2nd in Michigan. He's leading by 6,500 votes with 96% reporting.

That is surprising. Would have picked Kasich for 2nd in a Rust belt state.

Gives me pause on my belief that Cruz can't compete outside the evangelical belt.
 
I wonder if Sanders was a tall, handsome 50 year old man, he would already have won by now.
 
CNN has it 764 / 544

You will find a different delegate count by every source. Don't ask me how that works.

The lead for Clinton was roughly in the 200 range before today, any movement would be minimal in implications.

As I have said before, I would give my left nut for a statistical breakdown based on regional trends and demographics, for delegates projections without the super delegates included. My hunch is that as things stand now, if all trends were to hold, Clinton would be the nominee, but by the slightest of margins. Less than 100 delegates.

As I said a few posts ago, Clinton can win by holding serve, but Sanders only has a hill to climb, not a mountain.
 
That is surprising. Would have picked Kasich for 2nd in a Rust belt state.

Gives me pause on my belief that Cruz can't compete outside the evangelical belt.

Kasich's entire narrative just collapsed. Cruz has shown Rubio and Kasich to be nothing but protest votes. Neither can win even in a brokered convention.
 
That is surprising. Would have picked Kasich for 2nd in a Rust belt state.

Gives me pause on my belief that Cruz can't compete outside the evangelical belt.

Cruz placing 2nd in Michigan and placing 1st in Maine has taken everyone by surprise.

And he's also taken Idaho by 16 points tonight.

For those that want to deny Trump the nomination without splitting the party apart through a contested convention, there's only one choice.
 
I wonder if Sanders was a tall, handsome 50 year old man, he would already have won by now.

Or a 60 soemthing year old women from Massachusetts?

Elizabeth Warren would undoubtedly be the next president if she had just ran.
 
Any numbers from Hawaii yet? You figure Trump to be the favorite
 
Cruz placing 2nd in Michigan and placing 1st in Maine has taken everyone by surprise.

And he's also taken Idaho by 16 points tonight.

For those that want to deny Trump the nomination without splitting the party apart through a contested convention, there's only one choice.

You Cruz over Trump in your preferences, or vice versa?
 
Kasich's entire narrative just collapsed. Cruz has shown Rubio and Kasich to be nothing but protest votes. Neither can win even in a brokered convention.

To be clear, they can win in a brokered convention. That silly rule about winning the majority of delegates in eight states can be changed on a whim by the party leaders.

You can bet the party will pull some dirty shit to prevent Trump or Cruz from getting the nomination, and putting in a nominee that will split the party. Perhaps that's exactly what the goal will be, to guarantee a Hillary Clinton Presidency.

Remember, it's not a Republican Establishment or a Democrat Establishment, there's only a Washington Establishment.
 
To be clear, they can win in a brokered convention. That silly rule about winning the majority of delegates in eight states can be changed on a whim by the party leaders.

You can bet the party will pull some dirty shit to prevent Trump or Cruz from getting the nomination, and putting in a nominee that will split the party. Perhaps that's exactly what the goal will be, to guarantee a Hillary Clinton Presidency.

Remember, it's not a Republican Establishment or a Democrat Establishment, there's only a Washington Establishment.

I agree with you, but basically if they do split the party, we should all assume it was done intentionally for whatever reason.

There is no way that plausible deniability can hold, when so many people saw this coming from 10 miles away.
 
My hunch is that as things stand now, if all trends were to hold, Clinton would be the nominee, but by the slightest of margins. Less than 100 delegates.

As I said a few posts ago, Clinton can win by holding serve, but Sanders only has a hill to climb, not a mountain.

We're in agreement. If I had to bet, I'd wager Clinton takes 52% of the delegates. Sanders needs back to back wins to clearly demonstrate a momentum shift. If he can make that the news story going into the final 10 states or so he can win it. He has to build that momentum first though. Michigan was crucial to this possibility.

Hillary really needed to finish Bernie tonight. She's going to have a much more difficult time getting Sanders voters to back her now.
 
I'm Cruz, or bust.

I've used to be open to Trump, but since December, he's been showing his true colors.

You know I disagree with tea-partiers, but I have 1000% more respect for the philosophical consistency of a tea-partier, over a Republican.

You guys want to gut the EX-IM bank, because you know it is corporate welfare. I can stomach the argument for cutting the social safety net, when you aren't also giving away corporate welfare. I disagree, but it doesn't make me want to hulk rage.
 
I was about to post that number. You can say it isn't an accurate representation but it really is. This isn't 2008.
But its not accurate. Hillary had over 100 superdelegates "commit" before Sanders even entered the race, and 500 by August, when Clinton had a 40 point lead in the polls. If anything, the superdelegate count is a marketing tool that intentionally or unintentionally advertises for Clinton's preordained victory.
 
What's the over/under for the gop going to a contested convention?
 
Back
Top