Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "Wall Street Journal article says Clinton might not be the nominee"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]"I know you have consistently stated that you prefer Clinton to me, but here me out: Why don't you vote against your own stated interest in order to disenfranchise all the voters who agree with you?" Brilliant.[/quote] Well when you consider HRC only has about 4% more pledged delegates than Sanders, the Sanders camp would only need to persuade 4.1% of the superdelegates to vote against their constituents. Not unheard of when you consider they routinely do this on other issues that go against the majority.[/quote] There are a lot of things wrong with this math, but let me just point out one glaring one: There are not as many superdelegates as there are pledged delegates. 4% of a large number is bigger than 4.1% of a small number.[/quote] Yea, that's some funny math right there. Bernie would have to get at least 75% of superdelegates to win.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
