[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;49706429]I'd say Hillary would be easier for Trump to beat since some people might vote against her out of spite.[/QUOTE]
I'd sooner vote for Trump than her. At least Trump isn't lying with his fascist shit. Hillary wears a thin pale skin mask.
She doesn't just have some skeletons in her closet, she has a whole goddamn graveyard.
Kasich is not as extreme as the others though. If he could get some more screen time, he could snatch voters from a broader spectrum than for example Rubio.
9.41% margin between Bernie and Hillary at 2% counted.
Anyone got any half decent live news video coverage from NH?
[QUOTE=Judas;49708482]if jeb and christie are willing to drop out, kasich/cruz could easily best trump for the nomination[/QUOTE]
The problem with having so many people to vote for is that the one who is the most different will win.
For example in canada, the conservatives have an advantage because there are two popular left wing parties(NDP and Liberal), and one popular right wing party (Conservative). There are a ton of areas where the Conservative Party got around 40%, the Liberal Party 35%, and the NDP got 25%.
[QUOTE=Jon27;49708466]This is all great, until you realise that a lot of people who only just convinced themselves to bother to go out and vote won't take the trouble to go and do it again, making the results massively different. We're a whiny bunch of cocks here in the UK and I know here a lot of people wouldn't bother to go to the trouble of voting again.[/QUOTE]
Maybe, maybe not. It would depend where ties happened at, how many people lived there, etc. If things were hyped up the second time around, you might see more people turn up. Voter turnout is low overall either way; [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-p-mcdonald/iowa-caucus-turnout-what-it-means_b_9141408.html]only 15.7% of Iowa's voting populace turned up this time around for the Democratic and Republican caucuses[/url].
Sanders and Trump are the winners according to CNN.
[QUOTE=Fat White Lump;49708491]Kasich? Kasich has zero chance, he needs to drop out.[/QUOTE]
Kasich is second place in NH.
So, he has a very good chance in states that have republicans that actually think and is more likely to pull in moderates and independents.
Trump projected to win according to CNN! YESSSSS
[QUOTE=Govna;49708238][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_primary]Presidential primaries/caucuses are a part of the presidential election nomination process[/url]. Are you being purposefully dense here or what? You're acting like these things don't mean anything; they do. And I never said that "9 precincts in Iowa elect the president of the United States", just that they are a part of the nomination process. Which, again, is a big deal and does matter-- not something which should be treated like it's a trivial game.[/QUOTE]
My point is, these few precincts in this one state isn't going to determine the entire out come of the entire election.
Fox's dashboard is already projecting Trump and Sanders as winners lmao
[QUOTE=jalb;49708771]Sanders and Trump are the winners according to CNN.[/QUOTE]
Only 10% of the vote is in though.
[QUOTE=Durandal;49708801]Fox's dashboard is already projecting Trump and Sanders as winners lmao[/QUOTE]
What's up with this?!
Way too fucking early to say they both won... No way the polls are accurate enough
[QUOTE=Code3Response;49708838]Way too fucking early to say they both won... No way the polls are accurate enough[/QUOTE]
Trump maybe.. but Bernie is still way too close to make that sort of a call.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;49708825]Only 10% of the vote is in though.
What's up with this?![/QUOTE]
Probably because it clearly doesn't look like its going to be a nail biter like Iowa, bernie is ahead by like 14% right now I think and trump is ahead of Kasich by 16%, that might be why.
Why are people reporting winners only 3% voted so far
[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/DFUxGyx.png[/IMG]
[url]http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/primaries/2016-02-09[/url]
BBC News are saying Trump and Sanders won too
Haha what the shit is up with huffingtonpost?
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/[/url]
Seems like everyone is already calling it.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;49708405]
Carly Fiorina 2.7%[/QUOTE]
Holy crap, I haven't heard ANYTHING about her in many weeks, I completely forgot she was still running
According to the tweet here [url]https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/697225768447815682[/url]
Hillary has already conceded the NH primary
I don't know how to post twitter stuff to make it display so sorry!
Edit: ninja'd damn
Wow, Clinton is literally conceding like 15 minutes after polls closed
[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;49708872]Wow, Clinton is literally conceding like 15 minutes after polls closed[/QUOTE]
Is this good or bad for Sanders Campaign
[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;49708872]Wow, Clinton is literally conceding like 15 minutes after polls closed[/QUOTE]
She knew she was going to have a bad time in new hampshire, its only a matter of how bad of a time she was going to have. was she going to lose spectacularly or less spectacularly.
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;49708884]Is this good or bad for Sanders Campaign[/QUOTE]
It could end up really hurting her and painting her as someone not even willing to put up a fight
The reason it's being called so early is that, by most accounts, Trump and Bernie were the favorites for this primary. That is, unlike Iowa where things were more split and others were favored, T&B were so heavily estimated to be the frontrunners that even the showing of a few significant numbers at the onset is enough to reaffirm those predictions.
There are also probably private exit-polls being done by people at the foot level, giving them a much more up to date picture than the mere announcement of the results.
[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;49708849]Why are people reporting winners only 3% voted so far[/QUOTE]
Get a more accurate poll than huffpost that is currently triggered
[url]http://www.decisiondeskhq.com/[/url]
It's 9% counted already, it's pretty obvious nobody will make that 18% swing to get ahead of Trump
[QUOTE=CoalTen;49708866][media]https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/697225768447815682[/media]
Already over?[/QUOTE]
Pulling the trigger - will update OP with a Sanders victory.
[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;49708892]It could end up really hurting her and painting her as someone not even willing to put up a fight[/QUOTE]
This is [i]exactly[/i] what we need to portray her concession as. She's weak. A classic politician who talks big talk but fails to deliver anything worthwhile and has a spine made of jello.
Fucking awesome.
[QUOTE=Govna;49708922]This is [i]exactly[/i] what we need to portray her concession as. She's weak. A classic politician who talks big talk but fails to deliver anything worthwhile and has a spine made of jello.
Fucking awesome.[/QUOTE]
Literally no one was expecting Clinton to win New Hampshire. Neither political analysts nor the Democrat establishment. This result means nothing for Clinton, it only goes to show that Sanders can win some primaries. She might as well have conceded before the NH polling was even opened.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.