Who Do You Think Will Win The Democrat And Republican Nominations?

[Banshees Scream 110]

It's unclear but someday not too far in the distant future there will be an answer.

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,219]

It's unclear but someday not too far in the distant future there will be an answer.

See?

Genius has returned

[YoungWillz 21,066]

New York decides it really...

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

Couple of updates of vague significance:

 

1. Paul Ryan, the recently-elected Speaker of the House of Representatives has today ruled out a presidential run, thus removing himself from the (very slim) list of possible 'third options' in the event of a deadlocked convention between Cruz and Trump.

 

2. The tight contests in Missouri have finally been ratified and are as originally called. Trump beat Cruz by 2000 votes, 40.8% to 40.6%, while Clinton edged out Sanders by 1500 votes, 49.6% to 49.4%. The main significance of this is that, in the Republican race, as the victor, Trump is entitled to 12 state-wide delegates to add to his total.

 

3. In a bizarre way of voting in Colorado that I don't fully understand, Ted Cruz has whooped Donald Trump and ended up with 30 of the 37 pledged delegates at the state convention, raising further questions about Trump's organisation 'on the ground', which could be crucial, particularly in the event of a contested national convention.

 

The latest delegate numbers in each race are as follows:

 

Republicans (1237 needed to win)

Donald Trump - 758 (479 needed)

Ted Cruz - 538 (699 needed)

John Kasich - 145 (1092 needed)

 

Approximately 842 delegates left outstanding.

 

Democrats (2383 needed to win)

Hillary Clinton - 1304 pledged delegates + 486 superdelegates = 1790 (593 needed)

Bernie Sanders - 1113 pledged delegates + 38 superdelegates = 1075 (1308 needed)

 

Approximately 1862 delegates left outstanding, though superdelegates can change their vote right up to the minute they cast them.

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

New York decides it really...

 

New York will almost certainly go to Trump and Clinton, Trump has at least 50% in most polls, with Kasich and not Cruz running 2nd, about 30 points behind. Clinton seems to be holding around a 55-45 advantage over Sanders, though of course that could tighten up. Trump likely to win most of New York's 95 delegates, the Democrats, as ever are proportional so Clinton will get about 136 to Sanders 111, a relatively insignificant difference once again.

 

There are 267 delegates up for grabs this month on the Republican side and chances are Trump will win a lot of them, let's say for arguments 3/4 without going into the particulars of each states' distribution of delegates (some are winner-take-all, some are proportional in various methods). That would mean around 200 delegates to Trump if he does really well. But then May is on far less certain ground for The Donald, with contests out west in areas that Cruz has done much better, albeit for far smaller delegates hauls than in April. 199 delegates available there, say we split them 2:1 for Cruz, a really good month for him, then he gets around 132 delegates to Trump's 60-odd. This would put Trump in the region of 220 delegates short of the nomination, with ONE DAY of primary voting left. June 7th sees California, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico and South Dakota voting, a total of 303 delegates left, which Trump would have to win over 2/3 of. The thing in his favour is that California has by far the most delegates (172) and is leaning more to him than Cruz and, crucially, is winner-take-all. That would leave him needing 50-odd delegates and New Jersey - right next door to home so should be shoo-in, has 51 which might (emphasis on the MIGHT) take him over the top.

 

Far more likely is that Trump doesn't do quite as well as hoped in April, Cruz may do better than hoped in May if he can keep some sort of momentum going and both fall short of the magic number. At the convention God only knows what's going to happen.

 

Far quicker maths on the Dems side, since everything is proportional anyway. Overall, taking the pledged delegates as a guide, Hillary is winning around 54-46 across all contests. So, with 1647 pledged delegates left to be voted on, with that split, Hillary would get 890-odd to Bernie's 750-odd. So it will stay close, and Hillary will be short of the magic number on 'pledged' delegates by about 200. On the Democratic side though, superdelegates make up the rest and she would need only 200 of the 700 superdelegates to win, just as Barack Obama did in 2008 and as she has well over that number pledged she will win on the first ballot barring a shock between June and the convention.

 

So, overall, Bernie desperately needs New York, preferably by a 60-40 margin, which won't happen. Trump will win comfortably and take most of the delegates and will hope for a significant bump in the polls through the rest of the month. Cruz's aim is simply to limit his gains as much as possible, which will be difficult since most of this month involves winner-take-all primaries.

 

EDIT: As CarolAnn says below, California is not entirely winner-take-all, so unless Trump can win resoundingly he is unlikely to get to 1237.

[CarolAnn 926]

California is not winner take all at the state level.

 

California GOP is winner take all by Congressional district. Makes a difference - there are three Republican delegates in each Congressional district. There are 10 statewide delegates apportioned to whomever wins the total state vote. Unless the candidate wins every district they will split the delegates.

 

California Democrats award proportionally at the Congressional district level. There isn't a consistent number of delegates per Congressional district, but there are 317 delegates statewide with each district having no less than 4 and no more than 9 delegates based on population and how Democratic each district is. There are also 105 statewide delegates awarded proportionally.

 

California does nothing the easy way.

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

California is not winner take all at the state level.

 

California GOP is winner take all by Congressional district. Makes a difference - there are three Republican delegates in each Congressional district. There are 10 statewide delegates apportioned to whomever wins the total state vote. Unless the candidate wins every district they will split the delegates.

 

California Democrats award proportionally at the Congressional district level. There isn't a consistent number of delegates per Congressional district, but there are 317 delegates statewide with each district having no less than 4 and no more than 9 delegates based on population and how Democratic each district is. There are also 105 statewide delegates awarded proportionally.

 

California does nothing the easy way.

 

Apologies Carol, I misread Wiki's table of how state delegates are rewarded. Only the 'at large' delegates are winner take all as you say. That helps Cruz and hurts Trump and makes a contested convention all the more likely. Personally I have no idea how you Yanks have a clue how your system works at all. Out of interest (because you clearly didn't make it complicated enough) does the winner of a congressional district get all three delegates or are they rewarded proportionally within the district?

[CarolAnn 926]

 

California is not winner take all at the state level.

 

California GOP is winner take all by Congressional district. Makes a difference - there are three Republican delegates in each Congressional district. There are 10 statewide delegates apportioned to whomever wins the total state vote. Unless the candidate wins every district they will split the delegates.

 

California Democrats award proportionally at the Congressional district level. There isn't a consistent number of delegates per Congressional district, but there are 317 delegates statewide with each district having no less than 4 and no more than 9 delegates based on population and how Democratic each district is. There are also 105 statewide delegates awarded proportionally.

 

California does nothing the easy way.

 

Apologies Carol, I misread Wiki's table of how state delegates are rewarded. Only the 'at large' delegates are winner take all as you say. That helps Cruz and hurts Trump and makes a contested convention all the more likely. Personally I have no idea how you Yanks have a clue how your system works at all. Out of interest (because you clearly didn't make it complicated enough) does the winner of a congressional district get all three delegates or are they rewarded proportionally within the district?

 

 

We have no idea how it works. We depend on the League of Women Voters to explain it to us every two years. Interestingly enough, it changes fairly often.

 

As far as California goes, the Republicans award winner take all at the district level - if you win a district, you get all three delegates. The Democrats award proportionally at the district and state levels.

 

Although I legally reside in Texas (which has a mish mash split proportional system that I suspect is heavily influenced by the copious consumption of Jack Daniels in smoke filled rooms where people wave guns around), I own residential property in California and I spend about half the year there. I vote in Texas, but out of interest I keep up with what's what in California. The idea that California is a hotbed of liberalism is not the total truth. The coastal areas (read: Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego) have the majority of the population and clearly lean left, but the rest of the state is pretty conservative. If you look at the 2008 voting results for Proposition 8 (outlawing same sex marriage) you can clearly see the political divide in the state. Wikipedia has a good map that I can't post here because extension.

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

 

 

California is not winner take all at the state level.

 

California GOP is winner take all by Congressional district. Makes a difference - there are three Republican delegates in each Congressional district. There are 10 statewide delegates apportioned to whomever wins the total state vote. Unless the candidate wins every district they will split the delegates.

 

California Democrats award proportionally at the Congressional district level. There isn't a consistent number of delegates per Congressional district, but there are 317 delegates statewide with each district having no less than 4 and no more than 9 delegates based on population and how Democratic each district is. There are also 105 statewide delegates awarded proportionally.

 

California does nothing the easy way.

 

Apologies Carol, I misread Wiki's table of how state delegates are rewarded. Only the 'at large' delegates are winner take all as you say. That helps Cruz and hurts Trump and makes a contested convention all the more likely. Personally I have no idea how you Yanks have a clue how your system works at all. Out of interest (because you clearly didn't make it complicated enough) does the winner of a congressional district get all three delegates or are they rewarded proportionally within the district?

 

 

We have no idea how it works. We depend on the League of Women Voters to explain it to us every two years. Interestingly enough, it changes fairly often.

 

As far as California goes, the Republicans award winner take all at the district level - if you win a district, you get all three delegates. The Democrats award proportionally at the district and state levels.

 

Although I legally reside in Texas (which has a mish mash split proportional system that I suspect is heavily influenced by the copious consumption of Jack Daniels in smoke filled rooms where people wave guns around), I own residential property in California and I spend about half the year there. I vote in Texas, but out of interest I keep up with what's what in California. The idea that California is a hotbed of liberalism is not the total truth. The coastal areas (read: Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego) have the majority of the population and clearly lean left, but the rest of the state is pretty conservative. If you look at the 2008 voting results for Proposition 8 (outlawing same sex marriage) you can clearly see the political divide in the state. Wikipedia has a good map that I can't post here because extension.

 

 

Hopefully this should work as your map does explain things very well:

 

http://s16.postimg.org/p47khqg6t/621px_CA2008_Prop8_svg.png

 

So, as our resident California expert, what do you reckon? Will Cruz do well in the more conservative areas or will wealthy TV-friendly Trump win across the state?

 

And lucky you, living in Texas, home of Ted Cruz, Rick Perry, George W. Bush and these fine folk:

 

[RadGuy 1,614]

Thank you for the analysis, Roverandout.

 

Coincidentally yesterday I also looked at Wikipedia and tried to see how likely it was Trump would reach the goal based on the states left and their methods of awarding delegates.

 

Keep in mind that although Cruz does well in the West, the only large Western state left is Washington, which I don't think he'll do as well in as in the Great Plains/Front Range states.

 

Also, still left that I don't think you mentioned are Indiana, which I believe is leaning Trump, and West Virginia, which will probably heavily go for Trump due to their bad economy and loss of blue-collar jobs.

 

And to answer a previous question, the GOP does things weirdly. Most states have primaries and caucuses. However (and I'm not so sure about this), Colorado and Wyoming don't really vote, they just have local conventions where local leaders decide on delegates for the state conventions. North Dakota allows its delegates to vote for however the fuck they want to. Again, I'm not completely sure about this but I think that's what it's like.

[maryportfuncity 10,657]

 

New York decides it really...

 

New York will almost certainly go to Trump and Clinton, Trump has at least 50% in most polls, with Kasich and not Cruz running 2nd, about 30 points behind. Clinton seems to be holding around a 55-45 advantage over Sanders, though of course that could tighten up. Trump likely to win most of New York's 95 delegates, the Democrats, as ever are proportional so Clinton will get about 136 to Sanders 111, a relatively insignificant difference once again.

 

There are 267 delegates up for grabs this month on the Republican side and chances are Trump will win a lot of them, let's say for arguments 3/4 without going into the particulars of each states' distribution of delegates (some are winner-take-all, some are proportional in various methods). That would mean around 200 delegates to Trump if he does really well. But then May is on far less certain ground for The Donald, with contests out west in areas that Cruz has done much better, albeit for far smaller delegates hauls than in April. 199 delegates available there, say we split them 2:1 for Cruz, a really good month for him, then he gets around 132 delegates to Trump's 60-odd. This would put Trump in the region of 220 delegates short of the nomination, with ONE DAY of primary voting left. June 7th sees California, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico and South Dakota voting, a total of 303 delegates left, which Trump would have to win over 2/3 of. The thing in his favour is that California has by far the most delegates (172) and is leaning more to him than Cruz and, crucially, is winner-take-all. That would leave him needing 50-odd delegates and New Jersey - right next door to home so should be shoo-in, has 51 which might (emphasis on the MIGHT) take him over the top.

 

Far more likely is that Trump doesn't do quite as well as hoped in April, Cruz may do better than hoped in May if he can keep some sort of momentum going and both fall short of the magic number. At the convention God only knows what's going to happen.

 

Far quicker maths on the Dems side, since everything is proportional anyway. Overall, taking the pledged delegates as a guide, Hillary is winning around 54-46 across all contests. So, with 1647 pledged delegates left to be voted on, with that split, Hillary would get 890-odd to Bernie's 750-odd. So it will stay close, and Hillary will be short of the magic number on 'pledged' delegates by about 200. On the Democratic side though, superdelegates make up the rest and she would need only 200 of the 700 superdelegates to win, just as Barack Obama did in 2008 and as she has well over that number pledged she will win on the first ballot barring a shock between June and the convention.

 

So, overall, Bernie desperately needs New York, preferably by a 60-40 margin, which won't happen. Trump will win comfortably and take most of the delegates and will hope for a significant bump in the polls through the rest of the month. Cruz's aim is simply to limit his gains as much as possible, which will be difficult since most of this month involves winner-take-all primaries.

 

EDIT: As CarolAnn says below, California is not entirely winner-take-all, so unless Trump can win resoundingly he is unlikely to get to 1237.

 

 

 

Relevant but not generally discussed is who amongst the likely contenders actually wants to be the candidate for his/her party. I'd say Clinton feels she has to, Saunders largely wants it but probably feels daunted at the prospect. Cruz feels he was born to do it and feels confident he could and Trump may well be more frightened of the realities than he'd like people to know. As a publicity stunt this was a great idea, as a job it might get in the way of being Donald Trump and might do serious harm to the other business ventures.

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

 

 

New York decides it really...

 

New York will almost certainly go to Trump and Clinton, Trump has at least 50% in most polls, with Kasich and not Cruz running 2nd, about 30 points behind. Clinton seems to be holding around a 55-45 advantage over Sanders, though of course that could tighten up. Trump likely to win most of New York's 95 delegates, the Democrats, as ever are proportional so Clinton will get about 136 to Sanders 111, a relatively insignificant difference once again.

 

There are 267 delegates up for grabs this month on the Republican side and chances are Trump will win a lot of them, let's say for arguments 3/4 without going into the particulars of each states' distribution of delegates (some are winner-take-all, some are proportional in various methods). That would mean around 200 delegates to Trump if he does really well. But then May is on far less certain ground for The Donald, with contests out west in areas that Cruz has done much better, albeit for far smaller delegates hauls than in April. 199 delegates available there, say we split them 2:1 for Cruz, a really good month for him, then he gets around 132 delegates to Trump's 60-odd. This would put Trump in the region of 220 delegates short of the nomination, with ONE DAY of primary voting left. June 7th sees California, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico and South Dakota voting, a total of 303 delegates left, which Trump would have to win over 2/3 of. The thing in his favour is that California has by far the most delegates (172) and is leaning more to him than Cruz and, crucially, is winner-take-all. That would leave him needing 50-odd delegates and New Jersey - right next door to home so should be shoo-in, has 51 which might (emphasis on the MIGHT) take him over the top.

 

Far more likely is that Trump doesn't do quite as well as hoped in April, Cruz may do better than hoped in May if he can keep some sort of momentum going and both fall short of the magic number. At the convention God only knows what's going to happen.

 

Far quicker maths on the Dems side, since everything is proportional anyway. Overall, taking the pledged delegates as a guide, Hillary is winning around 54-46 across all contests. So, with 1647 pledged delegates left to be voted on, with that split, Hillary would get 890-odd to Bernie's 750-odd. So it will stay close, and Hillary will be short of the magic number on 'pledged' delegates by about 200. On the Democratic side though, superdelegates make up the rest and she would need only 200 of the 700 superdelegates to win, just as Barack Obama did in 2008 and as she has well over that number pledged she will win on the first ballot barring a shock between June and the convention.

 

So, overall, Bernie desperately needs New York, preferably by a 60-40 margin, which won't happen. Trump will win comfortably and take most of the delegates and will hope for a significant bump in the polls through the rest of the month. Cruz's aim is simply to limit his gains as much as possible, which will be difficult since most of this month involves winner-take-all primaries.

 

EDIT: As CarolAnn says below, California is not entirely winner-take-all, so unless Trump can win resoundingly he is unlikely to get to 1237.

 

 

 

Relevant but not generally discussed is who amongst the likely contenders actually wants to be the candidate for his/her party. I'd say Clinton feels she has to, Saunders largely wants it but probably feels daunted at the prospect. Cruz feels he was born to do it and feels confident he could and Trump may well be more frightened of the realities than he'd like people to know. As a publicity stunt this was a great idea, as a job it might get in the way of being Donald Trump and might do serious harm to the other business ventures.

 

 

Fair point. Something else I don't think is mentioned but is clearly coming to the fore in this election is the ridiculous nature of the American two-party system. In Trump and Bernie, you have two leading contenders for the major parties' nominations who have little in common with the party elite. Bernie only registered as a Democrat a year ago (although he has voted with them for much longer) and Trump has been across the political spectrum during his life. Indeed, his daughter Ivanka confessed last night she is still registered as an independent and thus can't vote in the Republican New York Primary for her own father.

 

Perhaps both have more in common with their parties' grassroots but it just strikes me as a strange way of electing a candidate, can you imagine such a random system operating here?

 

As for what you say, I think you're largely right. Hillary should have already been President and I'm not sure she intended to run again after losing in 2008 and was content to let her political epilogue be her spell as Secretary of State, but the groundswell of support was there and she decided she had to give it another shot. Bernie got into it mostly to raise issues and give the left of the party a voice but I don't think he ever expected to win, not least because he can't get most of his policies enacted anyway if he is elected. Cruz sees himself as God's nominee, so I'm curious to see how he'll react when he doesn't win. I think Trump wanted it, but perhaps didn't think through the whole process of what winning actually meant, and didn't expect to actually get it.

[CarolAnn 926]

 

 

 

California is not winner take all at the state level.

 

California GOP is winner take all by Congressional district. Makes a difference - there are three Republican delegates in each Congressional district. There are 10 statewide delegates apportioned to whomever wins the total state vote. Unless the candidate wins every district they will split the delegates.

 

California Democrats award proportionally at the Congressional district level. There isn't a consistent number of delegates per Congressional district, but there are 317 delegates statewide with each district having no less than 4 and no more than 9 delegates based on population and how Democratic each district is. There are also 105 statewide delegates awarded proportionally.

 

California does nothing the easy way.

 

Apologies Carol, I misread Wiki's table of how state delegates are rewarded. Only the 'at large' delegates are winner take all as you say. That helps Cruz and hurts Trump and makes a contested convention all the more likely. Personally I have no idea how you Yanks have a clue how your system works at all. Out of interest (because you clearly didn't make it complicated enough) does the winner of a congressional district get all three delegates or are they rewarded proportionally within the district?

 

 

We have no idea how it works. We depend on the League of Women Voters to explain it to us every two years. Interestingly enough, it changes fairly often.

 

As far as California goes, the Republicans award winner take all at the district level - if you win a district, you get all three delegates. The Democrats award proportionally at the district and state levels.

 

Although I legally reside in Texas (which has a mish mash split proportional system that I suspect is heavily influenced by the copious consumption of Jack Daniels in smoke filled rooms where people wave guns around), I own residential property in California and I spend about half the year there. I vote in Texas, but out of interest I keep up with what's what in California. The idea that California is a hotbed of liberalism is not the total truth. The coastal areas (read: Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego) have the majority of the population and clearly lean left, but the rest of the state is pretty conservative. If you look at the 2008 voting results for Proposition 8 (outlawing same sex marriage) you can clearly see the political divide in the state. Wikipedia has a good map that I can't post here because extension.

 

 

Hopefully this should work as your map does explain things very well:

 

http://s16.postimg.org/p47khqg6t/621px_CA2008_Prop8_svg.png

 

So, as our resident California expert, what do you reckon? Will Cruz do well in the more conservative areas or will wealthy TV-friendly Trump win across the state?

 

And lucky you, living in Texas, home of Ted Cruz, Rick Perry, George W. Bush and these fine folk:

 

 

 

I don't get the impression Californians are terribly motivated one way or the other yet. The only signs are see are for local races and for secession of the five most northern counties. At the moment my plans are to return to Texas just prior to the California primary, so I'll miss all the fun.

 

Texas conservatism is an interesting thing. It's either highly educated and hypocritical or barely educated and offensive. Either way it's dangerous because it's intolerant and a lot of them carry guns. Texas has a streak of populism that is powerful and deep - we don't do handouts and we don't do tolerance and because we can pull ourselves up by our bootstraps we assume everyone can. The reason I spend half my time in California is because my 95 year old mother in law requires nursing care and she has no long term care insurance. California will allow me to obtain a minimum level of care for her. In Texas it would be out of pocket and my pocket isn't that deep.

 

Texas politicians get elected based on who can engender the most fear, plain and simple.

[rockhopper penguin 2,265]

Never expected to see 'Ted Cruz' and 'dildo' in the same headline http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/ted-cruz-dildo-ban-sex-devices-texas

[RadGuy 1,614]

Democratic debate tonight at 9:00PM EST on CNN.

Tune in if you have time! Things are going to get interesting.

 

Anyways, I've noticed something.

Obama made Hillary seem centrist in 2008 (despite HER being the further left of the two).

Bernie's doing it again in 2016 (of course, he is a bit further left than her, but she's not a centrist).

The reason they get away with this is because Hillary DOES seem centrist, despite not being one.

The thing is, people associate not being populist with being more centrist.

Hillary has rather left-wing views, but because she's not all hope-y/change-y, make America great-y, political revolution-y about it, she doesn't seem like she does.

[CarolAnn 926]

Nope. I'm debated out.

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

Never expected to see 'Ted Cruz' and 'dildo' in the same headline http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/ted-cruz-dildo-ban-sex-devices-texas

 

Only in America could it be deemed not a right to 'stimulate one's genitals' but is deemed an absolute right to carry a loaded gun.

[Phantom 2,535]

Never expected to see 'Ted Cruz' and 'dildo' in the same headline http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/ted-cruz-dildo-ban-sex-devices-texas

 

Ted Cruz was a bit of a w***er according to his college room-mate

 

https://twitter.com/clmazin/status/720259227067920385?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

[rockhopper penguin 2,265]

 

Never expected to see 'Ted Cruz' and 'dildo' in the same headline http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/ted-cruz-dildo-ban-sex-devices-texas

 

Ted Cruz was a bit of a w***er according to his college room-mate

 

https://twitter.com/clmazin/status/720259227067920385?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

I'd have thought this was a binary issue. How do you have a bit a of wank (answers on a tissue please)?

[Toast 16,155]

 

 

Never expected to see 'Ted Cruz' and 'dildo' in the same headline http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/ted-cruz-dildo-ban-sex-devices-texas

 

Ted Cruz was a bit of a w***er according to his college room-mate

 

https://twitter.com/clmazin/status/720259227067920385?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

I'd have thought this was a binary issue. How do you have a bit a of wank (answers on a tissue please)?

 

 

When your mum comes into your room unexpectedly?

 

 

 

Zorders could probably confirm.

[Phantom 2,535]

 

 

 

Never expected to see 'Ted Cruz' and 'dildo' in the same headline http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/ted-cruz-dildo-ban-sex-devices-texas

 

Ted Cruz was a bit of a w***er according to his college room-mate

 

https://twitter.com/clmazin/status/720259227067920385?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

I'd have thought this was a binary issue. How do you have a bit a of wank (answers on a tissue please)?

 

 

When your mum comes into your room unexpectedly?

 

 

 

Zorders could probably confirm.

 

 

:lol:

[Dr. Zorders 1,271]

 

 

 

Never expected to see 'Ted Cruz' and 'dildo' in the same headline http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/ted-cruz-dildo-ban-sex-devices-texas

Ted Cruz was a bit of a w***er according to his college room-mate

 

https://twitter.com/clmazin/status/720259227067920385?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

 

I'd have thought this was a binary issue. How do you have a bit a of wank (answers on a tissue please)?

 

When your mum comes into your room unexpectedly?

 

 

 

Zorders could probably confirm.

 

No but its probably the kind of thing she dreams about

 

But anyway, wouldn't she "deseeeeeeerve" it, as chavvy retards with a massively inflated opinion of their judging abilities like you are so fond of saying, if I am really a "nuisance" (instead of a crutch) but she doesn't have the guts to get rid of me, or in reality, for refusing to give me the basic things needed to get on in this country in the first place? At least try and engage your brain you thick fucking witch.

 

She's just a sad sadistic old hag whose greatest thrill in life is "complaining" about me (like you)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Never expected to see 'Ted Cruz' and 'dildo' in the same headline http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/ted-cruz-dildo-ban-sex-devices-texas

Ted Cruz was a bit of a w***er according to his college room-mate

 

https://twitter.com/clmazin/status/720259227067920385?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

 

I'd have thought this was a binary issue. How do you have a bit a of wank (answers on a tissue please)?

 

When your mum comes into your room unexpectedly?

 

 

 

Zorders could probably confirm.

 

Please sign this GoPetition to overturn my bosses' Islamophobic ban on masturbating to ISIS beheading videos in the office.

 

Phantard, when you started losing a debate about your puppy-dog-like admiration for ISIS whilst laughably claiming to be an "atheist", you decided to start openly masturbating to my (imagined) "school beatings", and you taunted me about my Josef Fritzl-lite parents, you shrug your shoulders at ISIS fanatics shooting up their own Christmas party, then your incredible Forrest Gump ass was actually surprised when I hit back at you for all this and you cried about it and played the victim over it like the COMPLETE fucking pussy you are, and block me like a scared little girl and call me "vile" and whatnot. Hahahah. You calling anyone else any name, w***er or otherwise, is the biggest joke.

 

Anyway I'll now let you get back to arranging sex changes for your sons so that they'll be the "right" sex for angry Halibuts to rape..

[RadGuy 1,614]

The New York Primary is today.

 

Clinton and Trump expected to win.

[RadGuy 1,614]

Trump and Clinton both win by double-digit margins!

 

Full results not in yet but both of them are so far in the lead that it's impossible for them to fall below double digit leads at this point.

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

94% of the votes now in and solid wins for both Clinton and Trump as RadGuy says.

 

Trump 60.5%

Kasich 25.1%

Cruz 14.5%

 

Clinton 57.9%

Sanders 42.1%

 

With the rough breakdown of delegates (which is done both on a statewide and congressional district basis in NY), this is what they're walking away with at present:

 

Republicans - 95 delegates

Trump - 89 delegates

Kasich - 3 delegates

Cruz - 0 (that's ZERO) delegates

 

Democrats - 247 delegates

Clinton - 139 delegates

Sanders - 108 delegates

 

Overall, this means Trump has 847 delegates, Cruz 553 (a lead for Trump of just under 300) and Kasich 148 delegates. Clinton has 1443 pledged delegates and Sanders 1183, a lead for Clinton of 260.

 

Looking ahead, tonight has made it MORE likely that Donald Trump can get to the magic 1237 he needs to win the nomination on the first ballot. He has smashed his rivals today and is likely to top 90 delegates from New York when they're finished counting. Next Tuesday sees 5 states vote: Delaware, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Rhode Island. Trump is expected to win all 5 states. Straightaway that would give him at least another 50 delegates for the statewide wins. There are then another 99 delegates split among the various congressional districts within the states, with all but Pennsylvania decided on the night. Let's say he wins 66% of those (and he may win a great deal more) that's going to be another 66 delegates. A fortnight ago, we said that if Trump could come out of April with 200 more delegates he'd done well. On that prediction he'd be closer to 230 delegates better off at the end of April, and that's being slightly conservative if anything. That would put him in the region of 1000 delegates, with favourable territory in California, New Jersey and Indiana still to come (total delegates available: 280) plus another 8 states as well, which even if he doesn't win he may well pick up a few delegates from each. Put simply, even if Trump does NOT reach 1237 before the convention in Cleveland, he may be close enough (within 100, say) to virtually guarantee himself the nomination, as there are around 150 so-called 'unbound' delegates, who are free to vote for whom they like on the first ballot, and are most likely to vote for the frontrunner should he need their support. A couple of months ago, the aim of Cruz, Kasich and the rest of the 'Never Trump' wing of the Republican party was to try and prevent Trump from getting too close, definitely under 1200, preferably under 1000 - the further away from the magic number he was, the easier it was to stop him winning. Now, he may be at 1000 before the end of this month. It's looking increasingly like 'The Donald' may have sealed the deal...

 

Oh, and if you're wondering about the Democrats, Hillary's big win tonight (nearly 20 points) has crushed any small hope Bernie had. He can fight on, but the maths is with Hillary. If she can win in Pennsylvania next week, then it's game over. But we've reached that stage now anyway.