Is this the end of Democrat front runner Joe Biden?

Outlaw Pete

No Bernie fan but awful stuff from the moderator here, who is at least supposed to try to remain impartial:


https://twitter.com/TonyClementsTC/status/1217312460685877248


His supporters even have the hashtag CNNisTRASH trending.

Boggles

Easton Melted Mineralogist wrote: »

Well it was 02:45 in the AM during live counting, a passing single (somewhat mad, coffee induced) thought perhaps, at the joy of backing Trump at generous 10.0.

Can't remember if it was even acted upon, as part of a random acca builder maybe, certainly not a short priced single.

Still, the thought of it is still funny, getting back 10 apples for a single apple.
Then watching all the crying (adults) on the tv box the next day promising to move to outer mongolia or somewhere in their sheer outrage (don't think any celebs left yet).

It was your thought to be fair.

Either way the bookies got it wrong, again that's not my opinion.

“It’s been a political betting Armageddon,” said Féilim Mac An Iomaire, spokesperson for bookmaker Paddy Power. “It’s been a difficult year for us. We didn’t get Brexit right either and now this one (Trump).”

car_radio19834

I really hate the way people go on about Trump not winning the election because he didn't get the most votes.

You play to the rules of the election.

It's like playing a 2 legged football game. A team might win the first leg 2-1 away from home, and they are happy with a 1-0 defeat at home because that way they win.

But if the only thing that mattered was the total number of goals, then that team wouldn't settle for a 1-0 loss at home.

Just like if the winner of the election was the one who got the most number of votes, every candidate would run their campaign differently.

Boggles

car_radio19834 wrote: »

I really hate the way people go on about Trump not winning the election because he didn't get the most votes.

The thing is the Donald claims he won the popular vote too.

So it obviously annoys him. Which is funny. But not surprising.

Hande hoche!

It was a good debate for Biden, Sanders and Warren trading blows with one another.
Will be curious as to how it goes after Iowa.

Outlaw Pete

Boggles wrote: »

The thing is the Donald claims he won the popular vote too.

Well, he might not be wrong. Not only about illegal votes, but had the narrative not been out there that the Trump campaign had associations with the Kremlin and had been engaging with Russian operatives, then who knows how many more votes he would have received. Those lies were fed to the media with an objective (not for the craic) and that objective of course was to try to dissuade the public from voting for Trump and vote for Hillary instead.

Not that those lies were only used for that purpose, as we know now that Clinton paid for dossier was also used in the FISA courts to spy on the Trump campaign and so the lies she paid for were also used to oust Trump from office. Comey blames Brennan and Brennan appears to be blaming Comey, but whoever is telling the truth, one thing is for sure, and that's that those rumours cost the Trump campaign votes, and by extension resulted in more votes for HC.

Of course we'll never know if the overall loss/gain was enough to see Trump having won the popular vote, but it's certainly not beyond the bounds of possibility, they were serious accusations at the end of the day, far more serious than that she might have mishandled classified emails.

ohnonotgmail

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Well, he might not be wrong. Not only about illegal votes, but had the narrative not been out there that the Trump campaign had associations with the Kremlin and had been engaging with Russian operatives, then who knows how many more votes he would have received. Those lies were fed to the media with an objective (not for the craic) and that objective of course was to try to dissuade the public from voting for Trump and vote for Hillary instead.

Not that those lies were only used for that purpose, as we know now that Clinton paid for dossier was also used in the FISA courts to spy on the Trump campaign and so the lies she paid for were also used to oust Trump from office. Comey blames Brennan and Brennan appears to be blaming Comey, but whoever is telling the truth, one thing is for sure, and that's that those rumours cost the Trump campaign votes, and by extension resulted in more votes for HC.

Of course we'll never know if the overall loss/gain was enough to see Trump having won the popular vote, but it's certainly not beyond the bounds of possibility, they were serious accusations at the end of the day, far more serious than that she might have mishandled classified emails.

he was wrong. he lost the popular vote. the numbers dont lie.

Outlaw Pete

The point appears to be going over your head. Neither he, nor I, are saying that he actually won the popular vote.

I'm sure when Hillary recently said she beat Trump already and would again, you knew the point she was making, no doubt didn't argue about how she didn't actually beat him at all 'numbers don't lie'.

Well, apply the same understanding here perhaps

Boggles

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Well, he might not be wrong.

Well he is, there is absolutely no supporting evidence to suggest 5 million people voted illegally.

Also there was only one campaign hacked. It wasn't Donalds.

Mueller concluded the Russians were actively helping Trump to win, now they are at it again.

So the question remains, if the campaign wasn't hacked, the conspiracy theories about the emails and the fact the Russians were helping Trump, would Clinton won?

---

For what's it's worth I think the "popular" vote is notable, but you can't go changing the rules after the game. Trump won the election.

But he did win it by help from the Russians.

Let that sink in for a minute. The "Greatest Democracy" on earth.

Outlaw Pete

Boggles wrote: »

Well he is, there is absolutely no supporting evidence to suggest 5 million people voted illegally.

Which is why I am including those swayed by Clinton's paid for lies spread to the media with the help of certain members of Obama's DOJ. Hillary even tweeted about it just before the election. If that ain't election meddling, I don't know what is.

Also there was only one campaign hacked. It wasn't Donalds.

The GOP was also hacked, they just didn't leak any of those emails.

Mueller concluded the Russians were actively helping Trump to win, now they are at it again.

Yeah, cause the fact they have hacked Burisma is helping Trump right now I suppose. Look, Russia's goal is to cause unrest in the States, and they have been doing that long before Trump ever decided to run for President.

So the question remains, if the campaign wasn't hacked, the conspiracy theories about the emails and the fact the Russians were helping Trump, would Clinton won?

We'll never know but the allegations about Trump were far more serious than what was in those leaked emails. Think about it: how many liberals that were set to vote for Hillary suddenly heard all that stuff about Bernie and finance stuff and thought "Oh my God, I can't vote for her now!" Not many I bet. But you can be damn sure allegations Trump had close allegiances with Russia, enough that the FBI were taking a look, absolutely damaged his chances.

For what's it's worth I think the "popular" vote is notable, but you can't go changing the rules after the game. Trump won the election.

But he did win it by help from the Russians.

Negligible effect. Sure there was nothing of any real note revealed in the hack other than what I mentioned above.

Let that sink in for a minute. The "Greatest Democracy" on earth.

Didn't Obama say before the election that it would be impossible to rig a US election and laughed at Trump for suggesting it was possible? I'm sure he did. In fact leading up to the election a big deal was made of Trump suggesting he might not accept the result.Who knew.

Anyway, will leave it there, a discussion best had on another thread sometime perhaps.

Boggles

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Didn't Obama say before the election that it would be impossible to rig a US election and laughed at Trump for suggesting it was possible? I'm sure he did. .

I imagine if he did there would be some evidence of it, how else would you hear it.

Anyway the fact remains, The Russians helped Trump win the election, to what extent, who knows.

They are at it again.

That's the biggest threat to the "Greatest Democracy".

Outlaw Pete

They didn't even try to hide their bias for Warren last night.

rossie1977

But I thought CNN were left wing?

CNN/NY times/MSNBC/Washington Post have been running these headlines for more than a decade whenever any major left wing policy is in discussion.

They tore Obama apart over ACA asking 'how are we going to pay for it', or why isn't Obama spending more time consulting Republicans even though he spent a full year attempting to get them on board. And that was a conservative candidate attempting to implement a law that was first put into practice by a former conservative presidential candidate running as a Republican.

It's not a case of CNN being bias towards Warren. They view her as the better option. Under no circumstances do the big corporate media want a left wing candidate to win.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Really?

If you believe the bookies when they say that then I have a bridge you might be interested in.

The whole point of running a book is to make a (fairly constant) profit whatever the outcome. You don't leave yourself exposed to any outcome.

Robbusquets

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVjBtv4BIII

Say goodbye to any possibility of a Bernie/Warren ticket

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

If you believe the bookies when they say that then I have a bridge you might be interested in.

The whole point of running a book is to make a (fairly constant) profit whatever the outcome. You don't leave yourself exposed to any outcome.

It's nothing about profit or loss.

The poster stated that the bookies always get the result right.

They don't. It's a pretty simple concept. Primarily because they are not mystic meg.

notobtuse

Last night I kept switching between the Trump rally and Democrats arguing about who is going to screw up America the most. Biden didn’t fall flat on his face so I guess we can consider that a big win for him. While the Democrats were promising all kinds of free stuff with no way to pay for them, Trump was saying he’d tackle low-flow pressure (dictated by nutty tree-hugging liberal regulations) on washing machines, dishwashers, toilets, and showers. Genius! If he can fix the low-water pressure issues and water restrictions on appliances he’ll probably get the vote from the majority of American moms who will once again be able to get things clean. And if my daughter can once again get the soap out of her hair the confused liberal kid might even vote for him.

4068ac1elhodqr

Boggles wrote: »

The poster stated that the bookies *always* get the result right.

No one has claimed such a ridiculous statement.
They may simply be 'more accurate' than skewed polls or media biased reporting suggest. They have more too loose by way of 'real-world' consequence.

Anyway folks, expect DT to shorten further, after the latest trade deal (China), and the bullish DJIA now at 29k, races toward 30k, and stocks see a positve 100-day moving average.
Some of the media ignored this, and instead have an interesting story on Dem donor (Steyer) and his very interesting hand (pen scrawl) tattoo of the Jerusalem Cross.

Boggles

Biden just went from 6/1 to 9/2.

briany

car_radio19834 wrote: »

I really hate the way people go on about Trump not winning the election because he didn't get the most votes.

You play to the rules of the election.

It's like playing a 2 legged football game. A team might win the first leg 2-1 away from home, and they are happy with a 1-0 defeat at home because that way they win.

But if the only thing that mattered was the total number of goals, then that team wouldn't settle for a 1-0 loss at home.

Just like if the winner of the election was the one who got the most number of votes, every candidate would run their campaign differently.

Did Hillary complain about the electoral college before the election like she did afterward?

Anyway, for those who want the rules changed, you still have to find rules that are more fair as opposed to rules that could allow your preferred politics to prosper.

notobtuse

briany wrote: »

Did Hillary complain about the electoral college before the election like she did afterward?

Anyway, for those who want the rules changed, you still have to find rules that are more fair as opposed to rules that could allow your preferred politics to prosper.

Of course she didn’t, but that was when she was far ahead in Electoral College race according to the polls. And she said that Trump wouldn’t accept the results if she won. Now Ms Two-Face wants the Electoral College done away with and can’t accept Trump winning... the lowlife she is!

Boggles

briany wrote: »

Did Hillary complain about the electoral college before the election like she did afterward?

No, but I know someone who did.

ohnonotgmail

Boggles wrote: »

No, but I know someone who did.

there really is a trump tweet for everything.

notobtuse

Boggles wrote: »

No, but I know someone who did.

I guess it is for a democracy. Thank goodness we're a constitutional republic, not a democracy.

Boggles

notobtuse wrote: »

I guess it is for a democracy. Thank goodness we're a constitutional republic, not a democracy.

What country was he talking about in that tweet do you reckon?

notobtuse

Boggles wrote: »

What country was he talking about in that tweet do you reckon?

I'm sure he was talking about the US... back when he was still recovering from the affliction of being a Democrat. But he says a lot of crazy $hit. Thankfully his actions produce positive results for the US.

Boggles

notobtuse wrote: »

I'm sure he was talking about the US... back when he was still recovering from the affliction of being a Democrat. But he says a lot of crazy $hit. Thankfully his actions produce positive results for the US.

He follows through on it too, that's why he has been impeached.

Igotadose

notobtuse wrote: »

I'm sure he was talking about the US... back when he was still recovering from the affliction of being a Democrat..

In 2012? He was full on birther nazi then.

notobtuse

Boggles wrote: »

He follows through on it too, that's why he has been impeached.

He's being impeached for doing what just about every president has done... without the threat of being impeached? So all past presidents were crazy? Face it he's being impeached because he beat Hillary Clinton in 2016, and his policies have much improved the lot of everyone in the US. Democrats just can't have that!

notobtuse

Igotadose wrote: »

In 2012? He was full on birther nazi then.

In 2012 he left the Democratic party and became a Republican.