Discreet Dolls
Toronto Escorts

Get Ready for a Contested Convention

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Others here have been talking about this....

Get Ready for a Contested Convention


There’s growing concern among Democrats that their July 2020 convention in Milwaukee could open without a candidate who receives a majority of the vote on the first ballot. The last time that happened to the Democrats was 1952.

There are now four candidates—Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren—who have enough support and money to be competitive through March. A fifth candidate, Mike Bloomberg, has enough cash to burn a wet mule and a strategy that says he doesn’t care how he does until the 27 primary contests and two caucuses in March. Many mules will perish at his hands.

That’s the field, but consider the rules. Democrats allocate delegates proportionally, meaning if you get 15% of the vote or more in a state or district, you’re in the money—you split the delegates with every other candidate who reaches that threshold. In addition, Democrats are front-loading the contest: More than 69% of delegates will be elected in February and March, when more candidates will likely still be viable and split the vote. That’s 13% more than the number of delegates selected in the first two months of the Democrats’ 2016 nomination battle.

Consider how this affects the outcomes in February’s contests in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.

In Iowa, all four major candidates are polling above 15% and would share in that state’s 41 pledged delegates. If candidates receive the same percentage they’re polling at today, then Mr. Buttigieg, who sits atop the Iowa heap with 24% in the Real Clear Politics average of recent polls, would receive 13 delegates. Mr. Sanders would get 10, while Ms. Warren and Mr. Biden would each net nine.

In New Hampshire, Mr. Biden and Ms. Warren are polling right below the 15% threshold, leaving that state’s 24 delegates to Mr. Buttigieg (13) and Mr. Sanders (11).

In Nevada, the former vice president leads at 29%, trailed by Ms. Warren at 20% and Mr. Sanders at 19.8%. They’d split the state’s 36 delegates with 15 for Mr. Biden, 11 for Ms. Warren and 10 for Mr. Sanders. Mr. Buttigieg is currently far behind and out of the running in the Silver State.

In South Carolina, Mr. Biden at 35.3% and Ms. Warren at 16.3% would divide the state’s 54 delegates, 37 to 17.

Going into the Super Tuesday contests on March 3, Mr. Biden would have 61 delegates, Ms. Warren 37, Mr. Sanders 31 and Mr. Buttigieg 26.

It could get even more splintered if the major candidates lurking right below the 15% threshold in New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina get a little wind in their sails. Unless someone gets huge momentum with big early wins, the race could remain fractured through March, making it mathematically impossible for any candidate to waltz into Milwaukee with a first-ballot majority.

In that case, the 765 superdelegates (the Democratic National Committee prefers to call them “automatic delegate votes”) could decide the nomination. A new rule prohibits them from voting on the first ballot but allows them in on the second. Imagine the anger on some parts of the convention floor if the superdelegates—party insiders and elites—go for someone other than the first-ballot leader.

Strange things happen at contested conventions. At the last such Democratic confab in 1952, the nominee was neither the front-runner, Sen. Estes Kefauver, nor Vice President Alben Barkley, ostensibly supported by President Harry S. Truman. Instead, on the third ballot, Democrats nominated Illinois Gov. Adlai Stevenson II.

Party elders felt that only Stevenson could keep Northern and Southern Democrats united, and had tried unsuccessfully to draft him to run. Only after a platform fight about civil rights; a disastrous meeting between Mr. Barkley and labor leaders; and wrangling over a loyalty oath aimed at Southern Democrats that threatened to fracture the party, as happened in 1948, did Stevenson reluctantly agree to run. Truman then arrived in Chicago and ordered some of the candidates out of the contest and favorite-son delegations to swing to the Illinois governor. The party left largely unified and mostly happy.

It is hard to see any of the Democratic ex-presidents playing Truman’s calming role in 2020. Instead, Democrats could be in for a rocky convention, featuring back-room deals and horse trades that anger and fracture the party.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,806
3,460
113
Yup.

But I think Buttigieg is in for a drop. His Iowa numbers are inflated by a huge ad buy there.

I'm waiting to see the fundraising numbers in January right now only Sanders has offices in every state and an all primary/caucus strategy and infrastructure in place.

Biden claimed he had better fundraising numbers thus quarter but I'm skeptical.

The author is using the RCP numbers and there are a few polls used there that are really bad. One had a 10 point margin of error.

I still say that they are weighing too much in favor of older voters and lively ones. I think turnout of new voters will be up. And they will be voting progressive candidates.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,353
4,776
113
Others here have been talking about this....

Get Ready for a Contested Convention


There’s growing concern among Democrats that their July 2020 convention in Milwaukee could open without a candidate who receives a majority of the vote on the first ballot. The last time that happened to the Democrats was 1952.

There are now four candidates—Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren—who have enough support and money to be competitive through March. A fifth candidate, Mike Bloomberg, has enough cash to burn a wet mule and a strategy that says he doesn’t care how he does until the 27 primary contests and two caucuses in March. Many mules will perish at his hands.

That’s the field, but consider the rules. Democrats allocate delegates proportionally, meaning if you get 15% of the vote or more in a state or district, you’re in the money—you split the delegates with every other candidate who reaches that threshold. In addition, Democrats are front-loading the contest: More than 69% of delegates will be elected in February and March, when more candidates will likely still be viable and split the vote. That’s 13% more than the number of delegates selected in the first two months of the Democrats’ 2016 nomination battle.

Consider how this affects the outcomes in February’s contests in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.

In Iowa, all four major candidates are polling above 15% and would share in that state’s 41 pledged delegates. If candidates receive the same percentage they’re polling at today, then Mr. Buttigieg, who sits atop the Iowa heap with 24% in the Real Clear Politics average of recent polls, would receive 13 delegates. Mr. Sanders would get 10, while Ms. Warren and Mr. Biden would each net nine.

In New Hampshire, Mr. Biden and Ms. Warren are polling right below the 15% threshold, leaving that state’s 24 delegates to Mr. Buttigieg (13) and Mr. Sanders (11).

In Nevada, the former vice president leads at 29%, trailed by Ms. Warren at 20% and Mr. Sanders at 19.8%. They’d split the state’s 36 delegates with 15 for Mr. Biden, 11 for Ms. Warren and 10 for Mr. Sanders. Mr. Buttigieg is currently far behind and out of the running in the Silver State.

In South Carolina, Mr. Biden at 35.3% and Ms. Warren at 16.3% would divide the state’s 54 delegates, 37 to 17.

Going into the Super Tuesday contests on March 3, Mr. Biden would have 61 delegates, Ms. Warren 37, Mr. Sanders 31 and Mr. Buttigieg 26.

It could get even more splintered if the major candidates lurking right below the 15% threshold in New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina get a little wind in their sails. Unless someone gets huge momentum with big early wins, the race could remain fractured through March, making it mathematically impossible for any candidate to waltz into Milwaukee with a first-ballot majority.

In that case, the 765 superdelegates (the Democratic National Committee prefers to call them “automatic delegate votes”) could decide the nomination. A new rule prohibits them from voting on the first ballot but allows them in on the second. Imagine the anger on some parts of the convention floor if the superdelegates—party insiders and elites—go for someone other than the first-ballot leader.

Strange things happen at contested conventions. At the last such Democratic confab in 1952, the nominee was neither the front-runner, Sen. Estes Kefauver, nor Vice President Alben Barkley, ostensibly supported by President Harry S. Truman. Instead, on the third ballot, Democrats nominated Illinois Gov. Adlai Stevenson II.

Party elders felt that only Stevenson could keep Northern and Southern Democrats united, and had tried unsuccessfully to draft him to run. Only after a platform fight about civil rights; a disastrous meeting between Mr. Barkley and labor leaders; and wrangling over a loyalty oath aimed at Southern Democrats that threatened to fracture the party, as happened in 1948, did Stevenson reluctantly agree to run. Truman then arrived in Chicago and ordered some of the candidates out of the contest and favorite-son delegations to swing to the Illinois governor. The party left largely unified and mostly happy.

It is hard to see any of the Democratic ex-presidents playing Truman’s calming role in 2020. Instead, Democrats could be in for a rocky convention, featuring back-room deals and horse trades that anger and fracture the party.
Why are you following the Democrats. You know that Trump is 100% sure to win.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
Trump is the dark horse in this race. And while all we can do is to speculate at this point, my spidey sense(often wrong) tells me that the Democrats will throw everything they have behind a candidate most likely to unseat Donald. Someone who can reestablish the Obama coalition. The most obvious name that can do it is Hillary Clinton.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
5,927
1,198
113
Could somebody ride into the convention on a white horse and save the day?

 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,806
3,460
113
Hillary Clinton is not going to get another kick at the can.

She would lose. Every single progressive voter would stay home.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
5,927
1,198
113
She would lose. Every single progressive voter would stay home.
And their parents were looking forward to getting them out of the house for even just a day.
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
27,877
49,630
113
Every election someone writes something about a contested convention. Political reporters want it because it would be exciting. It is very unlikely (even if the Democratic primary makes it more possible than the Republican one).

If people get past super Tuesday and there is a realistic split, then talk. The press will still be pushing a contested convention but look at the numbers. (Remember last time the press inflated Bernie to keep it exciting even though he was effectively eliminated after super Tuesday.)
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
5,927
1,198
113
Yes, it is unlikely. Even with the more proportional allocation of delegates, the later primary voters tend to coalesce around the leading candidate.

It would take two very competitive candidates duking it out to the very end. I believe it is also unlikely because the also-ran candidates can and will release their pledged delegates from their pledge to vote for them at the convention.

The Superdelegates have not been completely taken out of the process. They can vote if the nomination is not decided on the first ballot.
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
27,877
49,630
113
I see two scenarios it could happen.

1) two candidates only at the end but a bunch of other candidates got delegates early. Enough to overwhelm the super delegates. If I recall, there is no real enforcement for making someone vote for the candidate they are pledged to, so enough lose cannons floating about could actually muck things up.

But I think with two people are likely to have real preferences that stampedes one to the finish line.

If there are three candidates and one isn't way out in front, then j could see some real drama. Especially if they are close enough that the minor candidates who lingered in still have delegates in play.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
I see a real split between Sanders/Warren and Biden/Bloomberg/Buttigieg wings of the party, so strongly that Obama said he would try and stop the Warren/Sanders wing.... it could get interesting if one of these candidates consolidates they support from their wing.
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
27,877
49,630
113
I see a real split between Sanders/Warren and Biden/Bloomberg/Buttigieg wings of the party, so strongly that Obama said he would try and stop the Warren/Sanders wing.... it could get interesting if one of these candidates consolidates they support from their wing.
The "wings" of the party stuff is kind of overrated. For a long time, Biden's supporters had Bernie as their second choice and vice versa. Those wings exist, but those are more internal to the party than crucial to voters.

It does seem unlikely that there will be one runaway candidate, but if it does come down to two, something like the 55-45 split we saw last time is likely, which means a clear winner and front runner despite a serious split in the party.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
80,473
17,805
113
The "wings" of the party stuff is kind of overrated. For a long time, Biden's supporters had Bernie as their second choice and vice versa. Those wings exist, but those are more internal to the party than crucial to voters.

It does seem unlikely that there will be one runaway candidate, but if it does come down to two, something like the 55-45 split we saw last time is likely, which means a clear winner and front runner despite a serious split in the party.
Bloomberg can buy it, but nobody knows if that will work.
Buttigieg has Zuckerberg and FB behind him now, biggest real media influence demographically.
The rest are trying to stay in.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,806
3,460
113
Bloomberg can buy it, but nobody knows if that will work.
Buttigieg has Zuckerberg and FB behind him now, biggest real media influence demographically.
The rest are trying to stay in.
Bloomberg can buy airtime. Not votes. No Progressive will vote for him.

Wanna know who else had a private dinner with Trump? Yep Zuckerburg. He isn't in any camp. Just keeping access open.

If you think Sanders is "just hanging on" you really don't know what's going on. He will be at the convention.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
5,927
1,198
113
If you think Sanders is "just hanging on" you really don't know what's going on. He will be at the convention.
I heard he paid for a big booth at the convention and hired lots of pretty girls to man it.

 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,806
3,460
113
I heard he paid for a big booth at the convention and hired lots of pretty girls to man it.

Have you seen his college age base? He doesn't need to HIRE them. They are lining up around the block for the old man.

One think Bernie has is good lookin' young girls working for him. For free.
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
27,877
49,630
113
Bloomberg's big ad buy went down and we will see if it moves the needle. I am skeptical, but unlike the other major rich guys, the MSM will be more on his side.

Buttigeg is going to get the social media manipulation stuff it seems. He's corporate friendly like Obama, but has a better story than Bloomberg. Big money really wants Warren and Sanders out. They aren't worried about Sanders because he seems to have a natural ceiling, but Warren is going to get more hatchet jobs like the one that just came out about how she is really a secret corporate tool and hypocrite.
 
Toronto Escorts