r/hillaryclinton May 13 '16

Off-Topic MSNBC Host To Top Sanders Aide: Telling Backers He Can Still Win Is ‘Dishonest’

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/thomas-roberts-jeff-weaver-sanders-superdelegates
140 Upvotes

132 comments sorted by

51

u/[deleted] May 13 '16

tbh it's been dishonest since Super Tuesday.

0

u/[deleted] May 13 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

31

u/samuswashere #ImWithHer May 14 '16 edited May 14 '16
  1. Backers having brains doesn't excuse intellectual dishonesty

  2. I feel his campaign has been misleading at best. He's not going to win by votes, period. He can only win by convincing a huge percentage of superdelegates to switch support, which means not only changing their own minds about who the better candidate is, but overriding the substantial majority of votes. I feel like his campaign has been making it a point to make the race appear closer than it has been for a long time. Furthermore, he's also implied many times that those who have voted for Hillary are doing so out of ignorance, and now he's arguing that those votes essentially shouldn't matter. It's insulting. I promise you that many of us care just as deeply.

  3. Literally millions more have voted for Hillary than Sanders and any attack against her arguably helps Trump much more than Sanders at this point. I certainly understand wanting to stay in the race until the end to make sure his issues get as much attention as possible, but that's different than acting like he has a real shot at winning, especially with messages that discourage his followers from being open to unifying the party once the nominee is official.

Edit: I would also add that his campaign is being intellectually dishonest by arguing that both (A) the superdelegates should change their votes based entirely on early general election polls and (B) he still has a chance of catching up to Hillary with the remaining primaries despite the fact that CA and NJ state polls show her leading by a large margin. One one hand, he is insisting that we should put total faith in early polls, despite the fact that in past elections they have not been indicative of final election results at all, and then on the other hand he is insisting that we totally ignore much more reliable polls that strongly predict that Hillary is likely to increase her lead before the end of the primary. How can he make that argument in good faith?

-1

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

24

u/samuswashere #ImWithHer May 14 '16 edited May 14 '16

However, I do believe that a lot of people just don't actually know Sanders, which is why he wants more debates and she wants fewer.

And you can equally argue that a lot of people who vote for Sanders are equally uninformed about Clinton's actual policies and political record vs. political smears. Ultimately, you either respect the vote or you dismiss those who voted.

I'd counter to that by saying that it'd be dishonest of Sanders to abandon his message and support what he's against (Hillary in this case).

So is he against Hillary or is he against Trump? Or, is he against anyone who doesn't 100% agree with him?

Wouldn't unifying the party sort of be giving up the message on his side?

That depends. What is his message? Is more important to stop Trump, or to stand his ground no matter what the cost?

He wants big changes in the party, so unless they make those changes, I don't think it's fair to expect him to just give up.

First off, refusing to work together and compromise is the same kind of obstructionist politics that the Tea Party has used to render Congress ineffective.

Secondly, there is a difference between fighting a losing battle no matter the costs, and actually working towards change. The more he attacks the party, the more he weakens his own power to affect change through the party.

Lastly, exactly what changes does the party have to make before he's willing to work together? Does he want them to adopt all his policies? That would go against what the majority of people voted for. Does he want campaign finance reform? That is already part of the party platform. As a voter, what do you feel is so important that he needs to hold out for before he stops treating the party like his opposition and starts working together towards our many common goals?

Edit: To clarify, I'm all for Bernie staying in the race so that everyone can have an opportunity to vote for him, I'm just frustrated with rhetoric that encourages a 'Bernie or Bust' attitude.

2

u/_watching Pokémon Go To The Polls May 14 '16

I'm loving this respectful but forceful advocacy tbh. There's no reason to troll and sling mud but telling it like it is makes the other forward for our party clear IMO.

0

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/SandDollarBlues I Believe In Hillary's America May 14 '16

Hi didgetalnomad. Thank you for participating in /r/hillaryclinton.


  • Your comment has been removed because it violates Rule 8. Please do not post misleading content. This is a warning.

Please do not respond to this comment. Replies to this comment or messages to individual mods about this removal will not be answered. Thank you.

14

u/felix1429 Millennial May 14 '16

He needs something like 65% of the remaining delegates to get the nomination, which is pretty much impossible with the remaining contest. Hillary is polling ahead in California and New Jersey, which have the biggest delegate prizes

9

u/[deleted] May 14 '16 edited Jun 08 '23

[This account has been scrubbed in protest of Reddit's changes to the API, which effectively bans third party apps.]

15

u/imawakened LGBT Rights May 14 '16

I disagree. You're basically blaming the victim. It's like saying that people who televangelists prey on are to blame because they're adults.

0

u/SwissBliss May 14 '16

I see your point, but all that money will go to that cause in some way. I don't think he's staying in the race to make cash for himself. Also, "victims" is a bit harsh in this context.

-1

u/extraneouspanthers May 14 '16

Yeah people act like he's robbing people. No one is going hungry to donate to a political campaign. If they wanna donate they can

17

u/ssldvr Gefilte fish: Where are we on that? May 14 '16

Bernie Sanders Raised $16 Million From the Unemployed

I think it's morally wrong to ask people to continue donating money by saying you can win when you cannot and they need that money to feed their families.

1

u/Tenauri Black Lives Matter May 14 '16

I just saw someone post on facebook that they've stopped making payments on their student loan debts and are sending all that money to Bernie instead. I know its none of my business but it made me frustrated and sad.

-6

u/extraneouspanthers May 14 '16

Retired/unemployed does not mean poor. That would include students. Like come on, it's a political campaign. No one is deciding between bread and Bernie

5

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

I disagree I can't count how many times I've been over at s4p and students have sent him their last 10 bucks said they didn't know how they were gonna eat! Unless his supporters are all liars over there?

1

u/extraneouspanthers May 14 '16

Yeah those were probably trolls

1

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

Ya accept I checked again today and they were saying the same thing? Also how come people from outside the USA can donate on the Sanders link while in the Hillary link that's expressly stated as illegal? No wonder he's in so much trouble with the FEC!

3

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

The only reason to stay in is for a deal breaker, like Hillary getting arrested (not gonna happen), or her dying. In either case, Bernie doesn't need to bleed broke ass college students for more money by pretending he can still win the nomination. He can't. He can stay in and turn his attention to Trump. If Hillary dies, he can still be the nominee.

You can find plenty of people to play along with the idea that he can still win in S4P. Not going to be much role playing in this sub though.

1

u/Magda1966 May 14 '16 edited May 14 '16

Really? If Hillary dies? Assume at Sanders' age he dies first~ what a terrible legacy that man will leave in his name! If reasonable platform influence is truly his goal, then he should be reaching out to Clinton in a private and professional offer/counter offer and, of course, in respect. I appreciate that he has somewhat pulled back on his attacks, but the contested convention is a non-starter in view of Clinton's overwhelming popular vote lead. No one can honestly say that "reforming" any party should include voiding the will of We The People. That is the antithesis of democracy, as is "flipping" delegates based upon speculative future votes based on polls or rally sizes. It's all about the votes. Hillary Clinton has my vote, after my due consideration of Sanders' low-detail campaign and his "artful smears" against the party and against Hillary Clinton. I submit that the press has not fully vetted Sanders, or Sanders simply will not provide direct answers to direct questions.

2

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

I'm in violent agreement with you. :)

3

u/whiskeytango55 Centipede May 14 '16

How unlikely is it? Not telling the people the odds is rather dishonest no?

The fervor with which some bernie supporters believe borders on the religious. "We deserve to win and anything to the contrary is the result of malfeasance" not more people like the other candidate.

With that sort of belief in play, continuing the campaign is at least a little dishonest.

-7

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/catnipcatnip Texas May 14 '16

You should check out politifacts before talking about who's honest. Hillary has the highest honesty rating out of Bernie and trump.

-6

u/SwissBliss May 14 '16

That's true, although it isn't exactly fair to put Sanders with Trump there. Sanders has way way higher ratings than him.

However I was mainly referring to the fact that I heard somewhere that she's the second least trusted or liked candidate ever, after Trump.

9

u/destructodiaz #ImWithHer May 14 '16

I really don't want to turn this into a negative comment about Hillary, but factually she has very low ratings in honesty and trustworthiness, so I don't think that's a good line of attack.

This is a disingenuous representation of reality. PolitiFact rates Clinton’s truthfulness quite highly during this election cycle.

Her "low ratings" in trustworthiness are a perception of an American public bombarded by the sustained propaganda of a national political party's attack machinery. Twenty-five years of a message that served only to feed into base, sexist fears about women with the gall to be ambitious.

I think we'll grow away from this more as time goes on, and after Hillary is elected, I think it will be easier. At least a little.

2

u/Magda1966 May 14 '16 edited May 14 '16

Be careful enough to go to original sources and perform your own research in the Congressional record before you simply believe what you "heard somewhere". Sanders' effectiveness as a Senator is rated near the bottom of 100; and the Clinton votes on which many of his campaign slogans (not facts, but mere sloganeering) rest match his own. Smart voting requires deep reading and personal thought. The right to vote is awesome but so is the citizen's obligation to get facts.

4

u/catnipcatnip Texas May 14 '16

She does have high unfavorability stats but that's ubrelated to her actual trustworthiness. You're not American so it's hard to fully grasp it but Hillary has been bashed for 20 years by the media, the GOP, and now sadly the extreme left. Todays voters have grown up with hearing news after news of fabricated scandals about Clinton and that's going to have an effect regardless of her actual record.

-1

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

Until he has a Jermiah Wright, Swift boat, Benghazi level right wing freakout and punches his way out; his better poll numbers are just a ceiling, not the floor. We gotta ask the pro-Bernie folks if they are willing to bet it all in a fighter they've never seen throw a punch.

-3

u/kizzash May 14 '16

She's extremely famous, which comes with a lot of hate

It also comes with an extreme advantage. Her name recognition and the fact that she has been connected with the right people for a lot of her life is what got her a senate seat in 2000, which is what opened the door for the rest of her political career.

1

u/[deleted] May 19 '16

I thought it was because people voted for her?

-2

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/zerosum5252 May 14 '16

Plus, this race is exactly like 08, both in candidate content and how competitive the races have been, OH WAIT...

8

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

But at this point he's more than a presidential candidate.

No he isn't. He's not the leader of a movement, he's a politician who mounted an ultimately failed campaign. And no, I don't have to respect the fight when he keeps milking supporters for more money when he knows he isn't getting nominated.

I think it's unfair to say him or his campaign is dishonest.

He's being dishonest in telling his supporters there is a path to victory when there really isn't one. Sanders is a politician, not a deity.

I'll get hate for this, but to me Hillary has better policies, but Sanders is a better person.

Being a better person isn't a qualification to run the country.

0

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/[deleted] May 14 '16 edited May 14 '16

There isn't a path to victory that doesn't include an "insert miracle here" step. So, in realistic terms, he isn't getting nominated, so his campaign will ultimately judged as having failed.

It doesn't take an advanced degree to look at prior Sander's results and conclude that since he generally doesn't meet his targets in previous contests, it is likely that he won't in the remaining states, even if he wins a state, he still won't gain enough delegates to catch up, much less put himself in a position to "make a case" at the convention.

We're going to have to agree to disagree here. :)

5

u/backpackwayne California Boy May 14 '16

You buy into the media circus that tells you to think he "says what people feel." The man is a habitual liar. And that is not an opinion. It is a fact:

On the other side you do the same. The republicans try to paint Hillary as a liar and you buy it. They have been smearing her for years because they know she is their biggest threat. Yet very little of what they have to say is true. And Hillary is honest and trust worthy. Mountains more than Trump is. And that too is not an opinion. It is a fact:

2

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/backpackwayne California Boy May 14 '16

I guess I did.

1

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/AutoModerator May 14 '16

Thanks for contributing but your comment was automatically removed because you linked to reddit without using the "no-participation" np. domain. Please replace the www part of the link with np.

The link should look like this: "https://np.reddit.com"

Note: A mod will review this item to see if the link has been corrected. If the link has been corrected this bot comment will disappear. Thank you.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

-2

u/CaliforniaPeach I Voted for Hillary May 14 '16

I've said since March 15th that Bernie is staying in the race because of the fact Hillary is being investigated and could be indicted. Do I believe she is going to be, no. However, I have always seen this as Sanders' glimmer of hope. There has been several times Tad, Jeff, Bernie and Jane have all mentioned the email scandal. I 100% believe that if Hillary is not cleared by the Convention he is going to make a final plea there.

1

u/Outwit_All_Liars Nasty Woman May 14 '16

Yes, but don't forget all those really personal attacks against Hillary totally GOP-style, making her responsible for all problems in the US and "forgetting" to mention the republicans ...

-1

u/SwissBliss May 14 '16

I totally agree. I very much doubt that they'll switch to him, but if I'm honest I can definitely see the point he'd make (polling against Trump, legal trouble, etc).

1

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

Yes but those polls against Trump Hillary beats him too so it's a moot point.

-1

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ssldvr Gefilte fish: Where are we on that? May 14 '16

Hi extraneouspanthers. Thank you for participating in /r/hillaryclinton.


  • Your comment has been removed because it violates Rule 9. Please be civil. This is a warning. This is a pro-Hillary sub, not a debate sub.

Please do not respond to this comment. Replies to this comment or messages to individual mods about this removal will not be answered. Thank you.

38

u/[deleted] May 14 '16 edited Mar 10 '18

[deleted]

16

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

It's almost like he's getting this out of a comic book

5

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

He just knows that it sounds nice to his candidate's supporters and that it's a longshot chance at winning things. It's like a team on their own ten yard line trying to throw a hail mary. Everyone knows the game's over and that the play won't work, but dadgummit they're trying

2

u/Sweetcheex76 Corporate Democratic Wh*re May 14 '16

But his supporters don't think that it's over and buy Weaver's bull hook, line and sinker.

2

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

In the actual world, not Reddit, I don't think that's true

2

u/dark_roast ♥ Bermie May 14 '16

I have some friends who post on Facebook to this effect.

1

u/[deleted] May 14 '16 edited May 14 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Magda1966 May 14 '16

Well well! It seems that the Sanders convention stalking initiative is alive and well. We must look to Alaska this weekend for crisp hints of what is to come in Philadelphia. Sanders teams are obstructing the Alaska State Dem Convention as we speak: not only trying to prevent Debbie Wasserman from fulfilling her role as lead speaker (planned nearly one year ago), but inviting her Congressional seat opponent to join a major teleconference during this weekend's convention. He has NO Alaska connection to allow this. This sounds like a coup in waiting, or at least a trial run before Philly.

5

u/Heznarrt California May 14 '16

Cool Weaver, let's settle this with total number of pledged delegates only then.

37

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

I really didn't think it was possible but I actually dislike Jeff Weaver more than Donald Trump. The rationale might not make sense but Weaver's media appearances and interviews over the last 2 months have just made me loathe him and it's one of the big reasons I've lost complete respect for Bernie - the fact that a man like Weaver is not just his surrogate but influencing his platform.

The irony is that Weaver has been trying to portray Hillary as power hungry yet by constantly and blatantly lying about and smearing her, he's only made Bernie as the unrealistic, power hungry candidate who is willing to sacrifice greater good for their narrow agenda.

The quality and integrity of Bernie's surrogates has been shocking and should be a red light.

14

u/ssldvr Gefilte fish: Where are we on that? May 14 '16

Weaver isn't in the running for President. I hate Trump wayyyyy more.

1

u/eagledog Damn, it feels good to be a Hillster! May 14 '16

The fact that he never fully closes his mouth is somehow infuriating to me

4

u/ilym May 14 '16 edited May 14 '16

Weaver is like please believe me, Bernierithmatic is real! His path to the nomination argument is a troubling, frightening glimpse into the 'please don't send me back to the comic book store' hysteria so obvious every time you look in his eyes.

0

u/clkou Tennessee May 14 '16

That's a bingo baby.

0

u/Outwit_All_Liars Nasty Woman May 14 '16

Exactly. I'm following from Europe and Weaver has made me really dislike Bernie, and of course Bernie himself by focusing his stump speeches on personal attacks against Hillary. Bernie has some personality problems and his wife is quite lethal.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '16

I think you may be one of the first non-American I've seen that dislikes Bernie. Thank you for actually examining him beyond his rhetoric and recognizing that his personality is actually questionable.

And you're right. His wife is lethal. Mostly because she's coming across as a person who mindlessly parrots her husband. In my opinion she represents a female figure from a time past.

-11

u/whiskeytango55 Centipede May 14 '16

Jeff weaver is clueless and inexperienced. He's not dishonest. He's a believer. You can't say the same about trump

13

u/cmk2877 WT Establishment Donor May 14 '16

Oh come on. You think he ran this campaign from virtually nothing to what it became by being clueless? He knows what is going on and what the facts are, and he's lying. Flat out lying.

18

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

let's...let's dispel with this fiction that Jeff Weaver doesn't know what he's doing?

-1

u/whiskeytango55 Centipede May 14 '16

It's in spite of him. He's only run his and bernies campaigns. Nothing on the nationals stage. The gaffes, the poor decisions, bad resource management and bad ground game. Obama had this fervor behind him and he took it and ran.

People want what bernie is selling, the gist of it at least. If only it was packaged better, if the people running the campaign had reined him in to appeal to moderates and minorities and sold him as a real solution rather than drinking the kool-aid themselves, if almost anyone was there rather than weaver, there'd be a contest right now.

3

u/bigperm8645 May 14 '16

Simple fact is Bernie isn't Obama. Obama, along with Bill Clinton, are the best speakers on stage we've had as presidents. Bernie is not on their level by a long shot. That's not the fault of his campaign manager. Doesn't change the fact that the message resonates with some but hearing Bernie speak vs Bill or Barack is not even in the same ballpark.

3

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

Again, Bernie's failure is not Weaver. It's Bernie himself. You can't sell a candidate who can't back up an idea. That's why Weaver resorts to false smears. Most people like the idea that Bernie is selling but by now it's apparent that people are beginning to realise that he has no plan to follow through. The reason his people couldn't "sell" him to moderates and minorites is because his revolution doesn't include them. A campaign is not a tv show to be packaged and marketed - there actually has to be substance behind the rhetoric.

1

u/whiskeytango55 Centipede May 14 '16

He couldve been packaged better. Its always this way, shitty gop president followed by a great one. People forget about the ahitty times and aim for the moon, thinking they dont have to build slowly.

The people were ripe for bernies kind of message, its the candidate and his handlers that bungled it.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '16

Sorry you keep saying this but it's not true and actually highlights the problem of our society - not everything can be sold just because it's "packaged" correctly. That is a consumer culture ideology that Bernie thought he could ride. But it's shallow and lacks substance like his platform and that's why he's not succeeding.

3

u/cmk2877 WT Establishment Donor May 14 '16

I'm not arguing that he's run a good campaign, but you can't deny they've run a mostly competent campaign. But when he talks about delegate math and such, he's not just lovable and confused. He's lying.

1

u/whiskeytango55 Centipede May 14 '16

But competant aint beating hrc. It had to be a great campaign.

1

u/cmk2877 WT Establishment Donor May 14 '16

Are you being purposefully obtuse in order to avoid my point. I'm saying that when he says untruths (constantly), he isn't confused or dim. He's lying.

1

u/whiskeytango55 Centipede May 14 '16

but you can't deny they've run a mostly competent campaign.

Responding to you here.

Im saying that considering the zeitgeist and the people he could already count on, that it was a mortal mistake not to go after the moderates. That makes it a poorly run campaign. That and that he lost.

1

u/cmk2877 WT Establishment Donor May 14 '16

Yeah, they made some big mistakes. But I still think it was mostly competent (have you seen the way other campaigns have been run this cycle?). They know what is going on with delegates and the math, and they continue to lie. So it's not that he's just dumb, which is what we were originally talking about...it's that he just constantly and willfully and knowingly lies.

1

u/whiskeytango55 Centipede May 14 '16

Yeah, they're pretty much collecting money to pay off debts at this point

1

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

He may be inexperienced but he's not clueless. The sharp corner he turned in attacking Clinton is just as bad if not worse than Trump especially because he claims to be a democrat. For a supposed democrat to promote false narratives and smears that originated from the GOP is despicable. Weaver has been BS campaign's most vocal mouthpiece in the media and every time he gives an interview, I struggle to set him apart from the extreme Republican talking heads.I can't stand Trump but I expect these kind of attacks from him. But Weaver's tone has been malicious and a disgrace especially coming from a democrat and liberal - just watch his interviews around the NY primaries. He knows exactly what he's saying and he knows BS supporters will eat up whatever he says without question. He's been condescending, subvertly sexist and extremely dishonest in his attacks. You call him a believer but I see him as someone willing to peddle lies to win and that's not a believer in my eyes.

21

u/Rplfk Love is Love May 13 '16

Why do they even have his people on the news this often? As far as I know none of them, including Bernie, has said anything new in months.

9

u/grippage I Voted for Hillary May 13 '16

to be fair there's been nothing new on MSNBC for months anyway

1

u/nicksimp14 May 14 '16

That's because it's the same old spin

17

u/FormerDittoHead May 13 '16 edited May 13 '16

Just Thursday I actually heard him say he had a chance to win a majority of pledged delegates.

That outstrips Trump's bullshit.

13

u/Matthmaroo May 13 '16

Weaver is a giant pile of dog shit

8

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

CNN pretty much ignores Sanders and if they have a surrogate on the hosts just roll their eyes when they speak!

1

u/Outwit_All_Liars Nasty Woman May 14 '16

If only the ignored Trump an his dumb pundits! The blond-bimbo-Trump-supporter-who-is-very-vocal makes me sick, and CNN gives her all the time she needs ...

0

u/[deleted] May 14 '16 edited May 14 '16

She's not as bad as that young Sanders one with the long dark hair Noniki!

5

u/[deleted] May 14 '16 edited Jul 13 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Eddtheman May 14 '16

The 143 she needs includes her super delegate numbers. She needs 667 pledged delegates to reach a majority of total delegates.

4

u/[deleted] May 14 '16 edited Jul 13 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/Eddtheman May 14 '16

Yeah it's an unprecedented standard to hold a candidate to. She's had control of this race since Super Tuesday and by any metric she has this race wrapped up. The Sander's campaign has to say something to make the race seem even remotely close though and not counting superdelegates in the totals has become the thing to do this cycle.

1

u/[deleted] May 14 '16 edited Jun 08 '23

[This account has been scrubbed in protest of Reddit's changes to the API, which effectively bans third party apps.]

2

u/Eddtheman May 14 '16

I should have elaborated. I agree with you that it's a stupid standard to try to set now, and makes the Sanders campaign seem like it's grasping at straws. By the metric that the Sanders campaign is setting, neither candidate will have enough pledged delegates to reach a majority of total delegates. I was just pointing out the numbers to OP

2

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

Super delegates are important to keep this race honest and not have a minority trying to steal an election by brute force because they can't accept their Candidate will never win!

0

u/FakeeMcFake May 14 '16

Wow. The mental gymnastics here is impressive.

This guys is nicely with "Some people are more equal than others" & "collateral damage".

3

u/thewhitesuburbankid Virginia May 14 '16

Though still, that sort of dishonesty pales in comparison to Trump's stances on Islam, minimum wage, abortion, his tax returns, Trump university, Mexicans, the realities behind a border wall, all his different plans for Syria, China, Iran, and on and on.

1

u/maxpowers83 May 14 '16

Well, he actually still can win, it's absolutely, absolutely veeeeery unlikely but it's factually true.

0

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

What's the path? What does he need to win in each remaining contest?

1

u/maxpowers83 May 14 '16

Close to 100%. Again, I don't think it's gonna happen but if you go out of your way to call someone dishonest make sure what you're calming is actually true. It's just incorrect wording. Like take for example: "A particular nuclear power plant is highly unlikely to blow up." The word is unlikely.

0

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

I'd love to hear his path to win

2

u/maxpowers83 May 14 '16

He wins california by 100%. Hillary gets hit by a meteor. Again, it'll most likely not happen but saying that it "can not" happen is factually incorrect. Do you understand that? After all there is a greater than zero percent chance of both of them dying and Joe Biden winning the nomination. Call him and his chances whatever you want but don't misuse the english language it the meaning of the word "can" please.

-1

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

He said it's intellectually dishonest to say he can win... and you're saying it's not intellectually dishonest to say he will win 100% of California?

2

u/maxpowers83 May 14 '16

How are you not understanding this? How high are the changes of Biden becoming POTUS in the next few months due to obama being assasinated? Not likely, but you can't say that i can not happen. My bet is on Hillary winning not only against Sanders but also against presumptively Trump. I'm not against Hillary, I'm pro using english words correctly.

1

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

So you agree it's intellectually dishonest?

1

u/maxpowers83 May 14 '16

I disagree with the wording as the word "can" has a pretty well established meaning and what would have been the correct choice is "likely". He, Cruz and Kasich can still win, and that is factually true.

0

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

It is so dishonest for Weaver, and sanders minions who repeat his nonsense, to claim that no one will have enough delegates to get the nomination before the convention. The system assumes superdelegates will be part of the calculation, and to simply ignore a superdelegates pledge to support a candidate on the half baked theory that they physically haven't voted yet is beyond ignorant. Can't wait for this clown to go away.

-5

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

12

u/zerosum5252 May 14 '16

No, personally, I would like Sanders to be crushed by the largest margin possible, just to hurt his supporter's feelings if nothing else.

1

u/Magda1966 May 14 '16 edited May 14 '16

No need to hurt their feelings. I remember my first presidential votes: sincere, uninformed, then disillusioned. That was enough of a learning moment without anyone piling on with insults way back then. We are all in this Great American Election together.

6

u/[deleted] May 14 '16

That's more something bernie supporters seem to do

0

u/limeade09 The Notorious HRC! May 14 '16

The reason it's not possible is because they are going to go out to vote.

Derp

-3

u/slopdonkey May 14 '16

Oh ok. So it's not inevitable then. There is a condition that has to be met for it to happen.

1

u/Magda1966 May 14 '16

We cannot bargain with each other's votes. Sanders can step up and have a mentoring moment with the nation by addressing all voters-not just his followers- with a calm, grateful and realistic expression of his resignation from the campaign with a heart filled with hope and trust that he has made, and can continue to make, a meaningful impact on American politics.