Among the numerous factors which make the New Hampshire primary unique
and far from representative of what’s likely to happen in the remainder
of the race, residents of the state can show up and vote on either the
democratic or republican side without being registered for that party.
It means the unusually large number of antiestablishment independents in
the state can prop up an outsider candidate who isn’t popular with
voters in that party. It also means residents who belong to one party
can vote against the frontrunner in the other party’s primary just to
sabotage things. When you strip the hijinks away, it turns out
registered democrats in New Hampshire actually favored Hillary Clinton
and Bernie Sanders in equal measure last night.

According to respected political analyst site FiveThirtyEight, the
entire margin that Bernie Sanders won by in New Hampshire consisted of
non-democrats who voted for him. With those votes stripped away, the
site reports that Sanders and Clinton finished “tied� among actual
democrats. Furthermore, Sanders scored seventy percent of the vote in
the New Hampshire counties which directly border his home state of
Vermont. If you further remove those home-field voters, it turns out
Hillary Clinton received more votes from New Hampshire democrats than
Bernie Sanders did. And that’s before getting to the superdelegates,
which she dominated.

http://tinyurl.com/jfv6uuz

Keyser Söze wrote:
Among the numerous factors which make the New Hampshire primary unique
and far from representative of what’s likely to happen in the remainder
of the race, residents of the state can show up and vote on either the
democratic or republican side without being registered for that party.
It means the unusually large number of antiestablishment independents in
the state can prop up an outsider candidate who isn’t popular with
voters in that party. It also means residents who belong to one party
can vote against the frontrunner in the other party’s primary just to
sabotage things. When you strip the hijinks away, it turns out
registered democrats in New Hampshire actually favored Hillary Clinton
and Bernie Sanders in equal measure last night.

According to respected political analyst site FiveThirtyEight, the
entire margin that Bernie Sanders won by in New Hampshire consisted of
non-democrats who voted for him. With those votes stripped away, the
site reports that Sanders and Clinton finished “tied� among actual
democrats. Furthermore, Sanders scored seventy percent of the vote in
the New Hampshire counties which directly border his home state of
Vermont. If you further remove those home-field voters, it turns out
Hillary Clinton received more votes from New Hampshire democrats than
Bernie Sanders did. And that’s before getting to the superdelegates,
which she dominated.

http://tinyurl.com/jfv6uuz


Spin, spin, spin. . .

On 2/11/2016 3:53 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
Among the numerous factors which make the New Hampshire primary unique
and far from representative of what’s likely to happen in the remainder
of the race, residents of the state can show up and vote on either the
democratic or republican side without being registered for that party.
It means the unusually large number of antiestablishment independents in
the state can prop up an outsider candidate who isn’t popular with
voters in that party. It also means residents who belong to one party
can vote against the frontrunner in the other party’s primary just to
sabotage things. When you strip the hijinks away, it turns out
registered democrats in New Hampshire actually favored Hillary Clinton
and Bernie Sanders in equal measure last night.

According to respected political analyst site FiveThirtyEight, the
entire margin that Bernie Sanders won by in New Hampshire consisted of
non-democrats who voted for him. With those votes stripped away, the
site reports that Sanders and Clinton finished “tied� among actual
democrats. Furthermore, Sanders scored seventy percent of the vote in
the New Hampshire counties which directly border his home state of
Vermont. If you further remove those home-field voters, it turns out
Hillary Clinton received more votes from New Hampshire democrats than
Bernie Sanders did. And that’s before getting to the superdelegates,
which she dominated.

http://tinyurl.com/jfv6uuz


If registered Democrats split equally between Hillary and Bernie, it
says a lot more about and for Bernie than it does the Democratic
presumptive nominee we've heard all about since she formally announced
her candidacy. If my fellow Independents racked up the votes for Bernie
instead of Hillary, it says a lot more about the general mood and
feelings by many in the nation about her candidacy.

On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 15:53:58 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Among the numerous factors which make the New Hampshire primary unique
and far from representative of what’s likely to happen in the remainder
of the race, residents of the state can show up and vote on either the
democratic or republican side without being registered for that party.
It means the unusually large number of antiestablishment independents in
the state can prop up an outsider candidate who isn’t popular with
voters in that party. It also means residents who belong to one party
can vote against the frontrunner in the other party’s primary just to
sabotage things. When you strip the hijinks away, it turns out
registered democrats in New Hampshire actually favored Hillary Clinton
and Bernie Sanders in equal measure last night.

According to respected political analyst site FiveThirtyEight, the
entire margin that Bernie Sanders won by in New Hampshire consisted of
non-democrats who voted for him. With those votes stripped away, the
site reports that Sanders and Clinton finished “tied� among actual
democrats. Furthermore, Sanders scored seventy percent of the vote in
the New Hampshire counties which directly border his home state of
Vermont. If you further remove those home-field voters, it turns out
Hillary Clinton received more votes from New Hampshire democrats than
Bernie Sanders did. And that’s before getting to the superdelegates,
which she dominated.

http://tinyurl.com/jfv6uuz

I have been saying for a long time that Iowa and Hew Hampshire have
little to do with who the eventual winner is but if Sanders is getting
the independents and otherwise undecided, it is significant because
they are the ones who decide races.
By the middle of next month we will have a better idea of where things
stand and I imagine the GOP will be down to 2.
The open question may be who decides to run as a 3d party candidate.
That would stir the pot.
The wildest scenario would be one of the GOP apparatchiks and Bernie
as the party nominees with Trump and Bloomberg doing independent runs.
That is very unlikely but as a history buff I think it would be
interesting.

On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 15:53:58 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

Among the numerous factors which make the New Hampshire primary unique
and far from representative of what’s likely to happen in the remainder
of the race, residents of the state can show up and vote on either the
democratic or republican side without being registered for that party.
It means the unusually large number of antiestablishment independents in
the state can prop up an outsider candidate who isn’t popular with
voters in that party. It also means residents who belong to one party
can vote against the frontrunner in the other party’s primary just to
sabotage things. When you strip the hijinks away, it turns out
registered democrats in New Hampshire actually favored Hillary Clinton
and Bernie Sanders in equal measure last night.

According to respected political analyst site FiveThirtyEight, the
entire margin that Bernie Sanders won by in New Hampshire consisted of
non-democrats who voted for him. With those votes stripped away, the
site reports that Sanders and Clinton finished “tied” among actual
democrats. Furthermore, Sanders scored seventy percent of the vote in
the New Hampshire counties which directly border his home state of
Vermont. If you further remove those home-field voters, it turns out
Hillary Clinton received more votes from New Hampshire democrats than
Bernie Sanders did. And that’s before getting to the superdelegates,
which she dominated.

http://tinyurl.com/jfv6uuz

You reckon those guys are more honest than you are?
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, and narcissists...not guns!

On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 16:20:06 -0500 (EST), Keyser Soze wrote:

Califbill billnews Wrote in message:
Keyser Söze wrote:
Among the numerous factors which make the New Hampshire primary unique
and far from representative of what?s likely to happen in the remainder
of the race, residents of the state can show up and vote on either the
democratic or republican side without being registered for that party.
It means the unusually large number of antiestablishment independents in
the state can prop up an outsider candidate who isn?t popular with
voters in that party. It also means residents who belong to one party
can vote against the frontrunner in the other party?s primary just to
sabotage things. When you strip the hijinks away, it turns out
registered democrats in New Hampshire actually favored Hillary Clinton
and Bernie Sanders in equal measure last night.

According to respected political analyst site FiveThirtyEight, the
entire margin that Bernie Sanders won by in New Hampshire consisted of
non-democrats who voted for him. With those votes stripped away, the
site reports that Sanders and Clinton finished ?tied? among actual
democrats. Furthermore, Sanders scored seventy percent of the vote in
the New Hampshire counties which directly border his home state of
Vermont. If you further remove those home-field voters, it turns out
Hillary Clinton received more votes from New Hampshire democrats than
Bernie Sanders did. And that?s before getting to the superdelegates,
which she dominated.

http://tinyurl.com/jfv6uuz


Spin, spin, spin. . .



Coming from an asshole who will vote for Trump or Cruz or whatever
right wing turd wins your party nomination, that is high
praise.

Coming from an adolescent name-calling paragon of integrity.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, and narcissists...not guns!

On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 15:53:58 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

When you strip the hijinks away, it turns out
registered democrats in New Hampshire actually favored Hillary Clinton
and Bernie Sanders in equal measure last night.

===

Nice spin ass hat.

On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 16:34:05 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/11/2016 3:53 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
Among the numerous factors which make the New Hampshire primary unique
and far from representative of what’s likely to happen in the remainder
of the race, residents of the state can show up and vote on either the
democratic or republican side without being registered for that party.
It means the unusually large number of antiestablishment independents in
the state can prop up an outsider candidate who isn’t popular with
voters in that party. It also means residents who belong to one party
can vote against the frontrunner in the other party’s primary just to
sabotage things. When you strip the hijinks away, it turns out
registered democrats in New Hampshire actually favored Hillary Clinton
and Bernie Sanders in equal measure last night.

According to respected political analyst site FiveThirtyEight, the
entire margin that Bernie Sanders won by in New Hampshire consisted of
non-democrats who voted for him. With those votes stripped away, the
site reports that Sanders and Clinton finished “tied� among actual
democrats. Furthermore, Sanders scored seventy percent of the vote in
the New Hampshire counties which directly border his home state of
Vermont. If you further remove those home-field voters, it turns out
Hillary Clinton received more votes from New Hampshire democrats than
Bernie Sanders did. And that’s before getting to the superdelegates,
which she dominated.

http://tinyurl.com/jfv6uuz


If registered Democrats split equally between Hillary and Bernie, it
says a lot more about and for Bernie than it does the Democratic
presumptive nominee we've heard all about since she formally announced
her candidacy. If my fellow Independents racked up the votes for Bernie
instead of Hillary, it says a lot more about the general mood and
feelings by many in the nation about her candidacy.

Since 43% of the voters in NH are undeclared, throwing out their votes
is pretty much just throwing out the election and choosing the winner.

On 2/11/16 7:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 16:34:05 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/11/2016 3:53 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
Among the numerous factors which make the New Hampshire primary unique
and far from representative of what’s likely to happen in the remainder
of the race, residents of the state can show up and vote on either the
democratic or republican side without being registered for that party.
It means the unusually large number of antiestablishment independents in
the state can prop up an outsider candidate who isn’t popular with
voters in that party. It also means residents who belong to one party
can vote against the frontrunner in the other party’s primary just to
sabotage things. When you strip the hijinks away, it turns out
registered democrats in New Hampshire actually favored Hillary Clinton
and Bernie Sanders in equal measure last night.

According to respected political analyst site FiveThirtyEight, the
entire margin that Bernie Sanders won by in New Hampshire consisted of
non-democrats who voted for him. With those votes stripped away, the
site reports that Sanders and Clinton finished “tied� among actual
democrats. Furthermore, Sanders scored seventy percent of the vote in
the New Hampshire counties which directly border his home state of
Vermont. If you further remove those home-field voters, it turns out
Hillary Clinton received more votes from New Hampshire democrats than
Bernie Sanders did. And that’s before getting to the superdelegates,
which she dominated.

http://tinyurl.com/jfv6uuz


If registered Democrats split equally between Hillary and Bernie, it
says a lot more about and for Bernie than it does the Democratic
presumptive nominee we've heard all about since she formally announced
her candidacy. If my fellow Independents racked up the votes for Bernie
instead of Hillary, it says a lot more about the general mood and
feelings by many in the nation about her candidacy.

Since 43% of the voters in NH are undeclared, throwing out their votes
is pretty much just throwing out the election and choosing the winner.


When do you suppose the southern repugnants will unleash the "he's a
commie new york jew" nastiness against bernie?

John H. wrote:
On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 15:53:58 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

Among the numerous factors which make the New Hampshire primary unique
and far from representative of what’s likely to happen in the remainder
of the race, residents of the state can show up and vote on either the
democratic or republican side without being registered for that party.
It means the unusually large number of antiestablishment independents in
the state can prop up an outsider candidate who isn’t popular with
voters in that party. It also means residents who belong to one party
can vote against the frontrunner in the other party’s primary just to
sabotage things. When you strip the hijinks away, it turns out
registered democrats in New Hampshire actually favored Hillary Clinton
and Bernie Sanders in equal measure last night.

According to respected political analyst site FiveThirtyEight, the
entire margin that Bernie Sanders won by in New Hampshire consisted of
non-democrats who voted for him. With those votes stripped away, the
site reports that Sanders and Clinton finished “tied” among actual
democrats. Furthermore, Sanders scored seventy percent of the vote in
the New Hampshire counties which directly border his home state of
Vermont. If you further remove those home-field voters, it turns out
Hillary Clinton received more votes from New Hampshire democrats than
Bernie Sanders did. And that’s before getting to the superdelegates,
which she dominated.

http://tinyurl.com/jfv6uuz
You reckon those guys are more honest than you are?
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, and narcissists...not guns!


That's a fact.