|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2016 9:11 pm Post subject: Iowa (& later NH) US Prez Primary Results |
|
|
Iowa Caucus Results
There is an extraordinary amount of nonsense out there. Most speak in the vein of "Who won Iowa?" Well, what matters are national delegates won. Here are the numbers:
DEM Delegates
29 Clinton
21 Sanders
2 Uncommitted
GOP Delegates
8 Cruz
7 Trump
7 Rubio
3 Carson
1 Paul, Bush, Fiorina, Kasich
As you can see, the Democratic race was not a "virtual tie." It was a Clinton victory. As you can see, Trump did not "lose" Iowa, he is in a virtual tie with Cruz and Rubio.
Since New Hampshire will vote on February 9, it is unlikely any of the GOP candidates will drop out before then. Martin O'Malley's dismal performance in Iowa, registering only 8 state-wide delegates, shattered his campaign. No doubt he looked at New Hampshire polls, as well. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2016 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Eh, I'm not sure if I entirely agree with your thesis. The delegate count only matters if you don't see a given candidate running away with the race before the summer. I really don't expect the Democratic nomination to remain unsettled for that long. As such, I see it as something of a tie on the Democratic side, being as the narrative is probably more important than the actual count there.
On the GOP side, on the other hand, while it's much closer to actually being a tie, I see the vote counts as potentially having more significance, given the number of candidates in the race and the fact that we may have 5+ candidates minimizing delegate totals for awhile before the field is winnowed down.
Trump is also just so quick to call anyone a loser that he's a big loser any time he doesn't win big. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2016 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
northway wrote: |
Trump is also just so quick to call anyone a loser that he's a big loser any time he doesn't win big. |
That is not what happened. Here is an account from the most biased and click-baity headline I could find.
Quote: |
Williams said Trump’s easing off that bravado in his concession speech was the right move, as did Republican strategist Henry Barbour, a strident critic of Trump. “No doubt polls will tighten, but Trump post-caucus comments were gracious and that’s a good start,” said Barbour. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 12:50 am Post subject: Re: Iowa (& later NH) US Prez Primary Results |
|
|
One thing:
Plain Meaning wrote: |
Well, what matters are national delegates won. Here are the numbers:
DEM Delegates
29 Clinton
21 Sanders
2 Uncommitted |
That "29" figure includes 6 delegates who are not technically committed, and can change their decision before the convention, does it not? The actual break down is 23 to 21, with 6 more currently leaning towards Clinton, right? Were it to actually come down to the convention, and Sanders were hypothetically in the lead in terms of actual vote-based delegates, it would be an extreme embarrassment for the party for those "superdelegates" to use their influence to hand the victory to Clinton, one which would almost assuredly alienate Bernie Sanders supporters (of which there would necessarily be many in such a circumstance) to the point where a large number might refuse to turn out on voting day at all. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 1:12 am Post subject: Re: Iowa (& later NH) US Prez Primary Results |
|
|
Fox wrote: |
One thing:
Plain Meaning wrote: |
Well, what matters are national delegates won. Here are the numbers:
DEM Delegates
29 Clinton
21 Sanders
2 Uncommitted |
That "29" figure includes 6 delegates who are not technically committed, and can change their decision before the convention, does it not? The actual break down is 23 to 21, with 6 more currently leaning towards Clinton, right? Were it to actually come down to the convention, and Sanders were hypothetically in the lead in terms of actual vote-based delegates, it would be an extreme embarrassment for the party for those "superdelegates" to use their influence to hand the victory to Clinton, one which would almost assuredly alienate Bernie Sanders supporters (of which there would necessarily be many in such a circumstance) to the point where a large number might refuse to turn out on voting day at all. |
This is important. I believe you are correct. There are 52 delegates in Iowa for the Democrats. According to ABC News, 44 may be obtained through winning state delegates. That would leave 8 superdelegates.
Bernie Sanders has a superdelegate problem
Quote: |
This time around, Clinton has the pledged support of 359 superdelegates, while Sanders has only 8, an advantage of 45 to 1. On rare occasions, superdelegates have changed their minds before the convention, but Bernie's deliberately outsider candidacy makes this a much less likely proposition. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 5:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Plain Meaning wrote: |
northway wrote: |
Trump is also just so quick to call anyone a loser that he's a big loser any time he doesn't win big. |
That is not what happened. Here is an account from the most biased and click-baity headline I could find.
Quote: |
Williams said Trump’s easing off that bravado in his concession speech was the right move, as did Republican strategist Henry Barbour, a strident critic of Trump. “No doubt polls will tighten, but Trump post-caucus comments were gracious and that’s a good start,” said Barbour. |
|
Yeah, I watched the concession speech, but it's irrelevant in the context of the language he has consistently used since forever, let alone since he decided to make a foray into politics. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
northway wrote: |
Plain Meaning wrote: |
northway wrote: |
Trump is also just so quick to call anyone a loser that he's a big loser any time he doesn't win big. |
That is not what happened. Here is an account from the most biased and click-baity headline I could find.
Quote: |
Williams said Trump’s easing off that bravado in his concession speech was the right move, as did Republican strategist Henry Barbour, a strident critic of Trump. “No doubt polls will tighten, but Trump post-caucus comments were gracious and that’s a good start,” said Barbour. |
|
Yeah, I watched the concession speech, but it's irrelevant in the context of the language he has consistently used since forever, let alone since he decided to make a foray into politics. |
So much for all that.
"Donald Trump has accused Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) of "illegally" stealing his Monday-night Iowa caucus victory and suggested that Cruz's vote total should be "nullified."
http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-ted-cruz-iowa-win-results-2016-2 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 7:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Leon wrote: |
northway wrote: |
Plain Meaning wrote: |
northway wrote: |
Trump is also just so quick to call anyone a loser that he's a big loser any time he doesn't win big. |
That is not what happened. Here is an account from the most biased and click-baity headline I could find.
Quote: |
Williams said Trump’s easing off that bravado in his concession speech was the right move, as did Republican strategist Henry Barbour, a strident critic of Trump. “No doubt polls will tighten, but Trump post-caucus comments were gracious and that’s a good start,” said Barbour. |
|
Yeah, I watched the concession speech, but it's irrelevant in the context of the language he has consistently used since forever, let alone since he decided to make a foray into politics. |
So much for all that.
"Donald Trump has accused Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) of "illegally" stealing his Monday-night Iowa caucus victory and suggested that Cruz's vote total should be "nullified."
http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-ted-cruz-iowa-win-results-2016-2 |
Like I was saying... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Leon wrote: |
northway wrote: |
Plain Meaning wrote: |
northway wrote: |
Trump is also just so quick to call anyone a loser that he's a big loser any time he doesn't win big. |
That is not what happened. Here is an account from the most biased and click-baity headline I could find.
Quote: |
Williams said Trump’s easing off that bravado in his concession speech was the right move, as did Republican strategist Henry Barbour, a strident critic of Trump. “No doubt polls will tighten, but Trump post-caucus comments were gracious and that’s a good start,” said Barbour. |
|
Yeah, I watched the concession speech, but it's irrelevant in the context of the language he has consistently used since forever, let alone since he decided to make a foray into politics. |
So much for all that.
"Donald Trump has accused Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) of "illegally" stealing his Monday-night Iowa caucus victory and suggested that Cruz's vote total should be "nullified."
http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-ted-cruz-iowa-win-results-2016-2 |
Yes, so much for all that. Now its time to win New Hampshire, not continue on a concession speech. Donald Trump demonstrated he was able to act graceful when he loses nothing to do so. Nonetheless, his campaign is entirely self-funded so he will piggyback on earned media as much as he can.
Trump's campaign gets the most value for its money
At the rate they each spend money, Trump received four votes for every one Cruz received in Iowa. Ted Cruz spends twice as more a month than Trump for less votes earned, and this will get worse for Cruz in New Hampshire.
How does Trump do it? He says something bombastic and the media covers it. Free publicity. He is coasting on name-recognition and infamy.
And the best part about it is that Trump is eating establishment politicians who do have money. The Bush dynasty? It looks like it will die a humiliating death. For this alone, we are indebted to the Donald.
Eventually, I believe Trump should really put more money into his candidacy. But for now? He is right to play it slower early. He can watch as Rubio pushes all in to become the establishment favorite, and the Trump can fund his campaign entirely from his gains on passive income until he really needs the money. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Swartz
Joined: 19 Dec 2014
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 7:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Northway, Leon, and Kuros are absolutely hopeless, though Kuros is feigning like he gets it above. These “guys” are signally MSM repeater drones with no original opinions and they should never be allowed to speak about their discontent with the “establishment,” because they do it's job for it. They want nice lies from career swindlers and the big brother state, and they're too feminized to handle real talk from a man our establishment is actually threatened by without mimicking MSM whines regarding his tone. What a beta fest. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 8:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Swartz wrote: |
Northway, Leon, and Kuros are absolutely hopeless, though Kuros is feigning like he gets it above. These “guys” are signally MSM repeater drones with no original opinions and they should never be allowed to speak about their discontent with the “establishment,” because they do it's job for it. They want nice lies from career swindlers and the big brother state, and they're too feminized to handle real talk from a man our establishment is actually threatened by without mimicking MSM whines regarding his tone. What a beta fest. |
Too many adjectives get in the way of clear succinct writing. Care to try again in a more readable fashion, and perhaps add your own thoughts about Iowa and NH? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Swartz
Joined: 19 Dec 2014
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Leon wrote: |
Swartz wrote: |
Northway, Leon, and Kuros are absolutely hopeless, though Kuros is feigning like he gets it above. These “guys” are signally MSM repeater drones with no original opinions and they should never be allowed to speak about their discontent with the “establishment,” because they do it's job for it. They want nice lies from career swindlers and the big brother state, and they're too feminized to handle real talk from a man our establishment is actually threatened by without mimicking MSM whines regarding his tone. What a beta fest. |
Too many adjectives get in the way of clear succinct writing. Care to try again in a more readable fashion, and perhaps add your own thoughts about Iowa and NH? |
Leon, your grammar is terrible, you make errors constantly, and you fail to form coherent arguments every time we converse. I was being favorable towards you not bringing these things up when you would try to criticize my methods of communication, but niceties only go so far, don't they? Don't embarrass yourself again, bud. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Swartz wrote: |
Northway, Leon, and Kuros are absolutely hopeless, though Kuros is feigning like he gets it above. These “guys” are signally MSM repeater drones with no original opinions and they should never be allowed to speak about their discontent with the “establishment,” because they do it's job for it. They want nice lies from career swindlers and the big brother state, and they're too feminized to handle real talk from a man our establishment is actually threatened by without mimicking MSM whines regarding his tone. What a beta fest. |
I haven't even criticized Trump... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Swartz wrote: |
Leon wrote: |
Swartz wrote: |
Northway, Leon, and Kuros are absolutely hopeless, though Kuros is feigning like he gets it above. These “guys” are signally MSM repeater drones with no original opinions and they should never be allowed to speak about their discontent with the “establishment,” because they do it's job for it. They want nice lies from career swindlers and the big brother state, and they're too feminized to handle real talk from a man our establishment is actually threatened by without mimicking MSM whines regarding his tone. What a beta fest. |
Too many adjectives get in the way of clear succinct writing. Care to try again in a more readable fashion, and perhaps add your own thoughts about Iowa and NH? |
Leon, your grammar is terrible, you make errors constantly, and you fail to form coherent arguments every time we converse. I was being favorable towards you not bringing these things up when you would try to criticize my methods of communication, but niceties only go so far, don't they? Don't embarrass yourself again, bud. |
I actually get paid very well to help people improve their writing, you should be glad for the free advice. Although writing on a phone does hurt my writing, I will admit. So, what do you think about Iowa and NH? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 8:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Trolls
Quote: |
There are two fundamental reasons why a troll trolls:
They’re bored: Trolls lack stimulation “IRL” (in real life), for good or ill, so they seek it online where it’s readily available and easily acquired. A troll’s behavior reflects a deep insecurity so having someone respond to their words gives life meaning, regardless of how pathetic that may sound. I raided that wedding because I wanted to be noticed and talked about. Random people cursing me out through private messages or the general chatroom invigorated me. I was so bored with my real life, and even my virtual character’s life, that I learned to find joy in harming others. If a troll had something better to do, like work or a hobby, they wouldn’t have time to troll. The next time you find yourself posting a negative comment think about why you’re doing it.
They want attention: All a troll wants is you to turn the spotlight onto them. They want you to repost their comment to your followers. They want you to write a blog post or status about them. They will use anything and everything to get it. They will criticize you, post inflammatory comments, or write remarks just to make you wonder how someone could be so dumb. The problem is that you will feel compelled to respond to “set things right.” Even if you respond in a cheerful or positive way, you’re still feeding the troll.
. . .
Because technology is maturing faster than we are, trolls will always exist and will feel compelled to sabotage you and your work. Why? Because they have nothing better to do. It unmans them to see you pursuing an artistic and worthy endeavor.
Is a world without trolls possible? Highly unlikely. So we must stop asking the impossible. Instead, we can follow the one principle that safeguards our creativity and productivity, and keeps the troll at bay. Whatever you do: Don’t feed the trolls. |
- - - - - - -
Rand Paul drops out
Perhaps he wanted to save himself from humiliation in New Hampshire, where his message should have been better received. Live Free or Die and all that.
He definitely was getting pressure from back home in Kentucky. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|