A little constructive criticism for Deb from Twitter...



https://twitter.com/screenwriter/status/...6729355264

(03-08-2016 10:56 PM)Liberty Sea Wrote:  

(03-08-2016 10:45 PM)Last Parade Wrote:  jesus I just learned Michigan's 59 delegates are all done proportionally, there aren't district delegate allocations.

this isn't the first time wikipedia burned me and I think this weekend I'll need to do my own research & collect it all in this (or even a separate) thread. ugh.

So much for Trump winning the vast majority of Michigan, damn it.

It's in Mississippi that Trump came close to winning the vast majority. And it's done proportionally. Pretty sure that's what you meant. In Michigan with over 50% votes you get all the delegates (Trump is at 37% there).

Nah, I meant a few days ago I read the official delegate rules - http://www.migop.org/assets/files/Rules_...rnates.pdf

And I read this section of it, 19C(1):

Quote:If no particular Republican presidential candidate (or, if applicable, uncommitted) receives fifty percent (50%) plus one of the total vote cast for all Republican presidential candidates (and, if applicable, uncommitted) at the Presidential Preference Vote, allocations for National Convention delegates and alternate delegates shall be made as follows:
(1) The Republican presidential candidate (or, if applicable, uncommitted) who receives the most votes in the Presidential Preference Vote for a congressional district shall be allocated the three (3) National Convention delegates and three (3) National Convention alternate delegates for that particular congressional district.

And wikipedia was backing this up at the time too. The way I read that is, for each of Michigan's 14 districts, the top vote-getter in a district gets all 3 delegates in that district. Yet now everyone's reporting that Michigan's 59 delegates are fully proportional without a district split, so Trump gets like 37% of 59 = 22 delegates instead of the way I modeled it, which was closer to 50 (14 x 3 = 42 for all districts + 8 out of 17 of the at-large proportional delegates).

So yeah, I'm a bit mad.

(03-08-2016 11:08 PM)Penta Sahi Wrote:  Two hotties on the Fox Panel: Dana Perino (former White House staffer) and Dana Loesch (conservative gun-girl).

But both are super anti-Trump.

You had me until the bolded part.

WNB

Decisiondeskhq and AP are reporting wildly different results in Idaho.

Marco tonight:

   

(03-08-2016 11:15 PM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  A little constructive criticism for Deb from Twitter...



https://twitter.com/screenwriter/status/...6729355264

Her teeth are a veritable chainsaw. Shit!

(03-08-2016 11:17 PM)Liberty Sea Wrote:  Decisiondeskhq and AP are reporting wildly different results in Idaho.

They change wildly when the vote count is low.

Remember that guy that came in here on super tuesday posting wacky numbers from decisiondesk and got blown out by everyone.

(03-08-2016 11:04 PM)Dusty Wrote:  Six month's apart:

Damn. That's not too far off from:



Give it another 6 months.

(03-08-2016 11:21 PM)iop890 Wrote:  

(03-08-2016 11:17 PM)Liberty Sea Wrote:  Decisiondeskhq and AP are reporting wildly different results in Idaho.

They change wildly when the vote count is low.

Remember that guy that came in here on super tuesday posting wacky numbers from decisiondesk and got blown out by everyone.

That was me, I learned to wait until the % reporting is a bit higher on that day. I was giving myself heart attacks every two minutes.

(03-08-2016 10:59 PM)Dusty Wrote:  

(03-08-2016 09:47 PM)Dusty Wrote:  Cheye-nah

This is kind of funny, but whoever made it must not have much of a life.

As of right now Idaho is going the way of the cuck

Cruz is like that pimple on prom night that just won't go away. Fuck!

Don't worry about Idaho or Hawaii. Not really mission critical to Trump and they don't really matter because they have only a handful of delegates and are not winner take all. Almost no resources were invested in either state by the Trump campaign.

Does Idaho like having Somalis and various other muslims being bussed into their towns by the government?

Sanders is gonna win Michigan, 90% of Wayne County in and he's got a 20,000 vote lead statewide.

Hillary is mud over there, Trump will turn Michigan, Wisconsin, and Ohio bright red in November.

(03-08-2016 11:36 PM)Disco_Volante Wrote:  Does Idaho like having Somalis and various other muslims being bussed into their towns by the government?

I imagine most of the people in Idaho think Somalia is a tropical island in the Caribbean.

(03-08-2016 11:36 PM)blacknwhitespade Wrote:  Sanders is gonna win Michigan, 90% of Wayne County in and he's got a 20,000 vote lead statewide.

Hillary is mud over there, Trump will turn Michigan, Wisconsin, and Ohio bright red in November.

Yeah those Sanders states will end up being real assets for Trump if he can make it to the general election. Those people are going to be really upset when, despite their support for Bernie, Hillary gets the Democratic nomination anyway because the superdelegates said so.

On the plus side, since Idaho is famous for neo-Nazis, I guess the whole "Trump = Hitler" thing is not working.

The best part of Idaho is the 80mph speed limit in the interstates, so you can legally haul ass through that shitty state.

Guys, can someone more knowledgeable about past election cycles let me know which states typically trend purple? I added up the vote numbers for Michigan so far, and it turns out that Republicans showed up to vote 1,150,000 strong, 100,000 higher than the Democrats. I'd be curious to see those numbers in other swing states.

Trump is 2.5% from winner-take -all in Mississippi (47.5). 94% reporting though, so not sure if he's gonna get it.

edit; source=AP

(03-08-2016 11:48 PM)Sweet Pea Wrote:  Guys, can someone more knowledgeable about past election cycles let me know which states typically trend purple? I added up the vote numbers for Michigan so far, and it turns out that Republicans showed up to vote 1,150,000 strong, 100,000 higher than the Democrats. I'd be curious to see those numbers in other swing states.

http://www.270towin.com/
This site has the electoral map from every election in history. It includes swing states, polls, etc. On the basic map, the ones left uncolored are the ones that recently have been more purple.

Having lived in Idaho in many years, there seems to be two types of conservatives:

1.) Evangelicals (Mormons) and cuckservatives that buy into the whole "I'm holier than all the other candidates so vote for me" shtick that Cruz has going for him. We've seen the same phenomenon in Iowa and the like.

2.) Right-leaning libertarians that also happen to be political purists. In other words, they love Ron Paul and also hate Trump, even though Trump has points of view that align with them (auditing the fed comes to mind). Anyone who isn't a pronounced libertarian is a no-go.

I hoped that Trump would rile us up enough to pull a win in Idaho, but looks like the religious appeal of Cruz reigns supreme here. Still, second place isn't bad, and 32 delegates isn't super awesome.

(03-08-2016 11:04 PM)Dusty Wrote:  Six month's apart:

If like she was possessed by a evil monster.