Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 16 submissions in the queue.
Politics

Bernie Sanders Announces White House Bid

posted by martyb on Tuesday February 19 2019, @05:14PM   Printer-friendly
from the how-many-candidates-are-there-now? dept.

realDonaldTrump writes:

"Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)........is launching a second run for the White House in 2020." breitbart.com/politics/2019/02/19/bernie-sanders-2020-bid

"Reaction to the news was split......with some supporting the 77-year-old and others upset with the move." foxnews.com/politics/trump-campaign-pokes-fun-at-bernie-sanders-2020-announcement-as-reaction-splits-on-candidacy

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Bernie Sanders Announces White House Bid | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 155 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday February 20 2019, @11:32PM (2 children)

    by sjames (2882) on Wednesday February 20 2019, @11:32PM (#804280) Journal

    Trump didn't get a plurality of the popular vote at all. His was one of the rare cases where the president wins in the EC but loses by popular vote.

    That is, as bad as HRC was, slightly more people held their noses and voted for her than voted for Trump.

    It's like a 50 yard dash where nobody finished so they hung the gold on the runner who collapsed closest to the finish line as seen from one viewpoint in the stands..

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 3, Disagree) by hemocyanin on Wednesday February 20 2019, @11:51PM (1 child)

    by hemocyanin (186) on Wednesday February 20 2019, @11:51PM (#804295) Journal

    Let us remember that HRC did her level best to get a huge turnout in places like NY and CA (irrelevant b/c she would win those even if she ignored them) while ignoring the battleground states. In the end though, even HRC couldn't cross the 50% threshold and garnered only 48.2% of the vote. Is absolutely true to say that more people voted against HRC than for her (the same is true for Trump of course). This is why I'm ever annoyed about people claiming Clinton got the popular vote. She didn't. She didn't even get half the vote, let alone more than half.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election [wikipedia.org]

    • (Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday February 21 2019, @03:06AM

      by sjames (2882) on Thursday February 21 2019, @03:06AM (#804343) Journal

      However, most voting systems award the win to whoever individually gets the most votes even where there are more than 2 candidates and nobody captures more than 50%. More people voted for HRC than Trump no matter how you want to spin it.

      That they made it through the primaries is a poor reflection on their respective parties. Sadly, I can't say HRC in the White House would be much of a win either. The election felt a bit like being asked what brand of bullet would I like to be shot with.

      If you're hinting that you'd like to see a method better than first past the post, I'm with you.