commented on How Green Is My Recount?
@2 because Greens ostensibly care about environmental policy, increasing the minimum wage, paid sick and family leave, protecting and expanding Medicare/Medicaid/etc., protecting voting rights for all people, etc. They needed to be convinced merely that voting for Hillary Clinton was the right strategy for their policy goals. They're lower hanging fruit than the fools out there who are convinced that Donald Trump is right when he calls climate change a hoax, or agree with him that Muslims should be banned and desperate refugees are one of the biggest threats to the country. They ought to have allied themselves with those Americans (and non-Americans) who are threatened by a Trump presidency, but they chose not to, while portraying themselves as more righteous than those who did.
I've seen Dan spend plenty of time on issues advocacy (obviously with the most emphasis on LGBT rights), which would fall under trying to convince Republican voters and swing voters to join our side.
(Also w/re to the recount, it's almost certainly not going to change the result. Democrats aren't wasting money on false hope. Maybe you think it would be valuable for her to make a show of it, despite not expecting the outcome to change. But know that this would be a show based on misleading people about the likelihood of a favorable outcome.)
commented on It Would Be Helpful If Hillary Clinton Stopped Lying
Keep some perspective. Hillary Clinton had 100 classified emails (out of >30,000), only two of which had any classified markings, and none of which had been properly classified at the time and properly marked. Treating this as if it's a huge scandal, anywhere on par with things that have been given this much coverage in the past, is a bit ridiculous.
And quit acting like Comey is a purely neutral actor. He's a Republican and he hasn't treated this like he would other cases (normally, when they don't recommend pressing charges, they simply say so, and don't hold a press conference talking shit about the people they've concluded are innocent).
commented on Donald Trump Clinches GOP Nomination, Sanders and Trump May or May Not Debate
@4 Trump has nothing to lose as long as Bernie is willing to burn those final bridges and spend the whole night attacking Hillary.
If Bernie instead flipped the script, accepted that he won't beat Hillary (and indications are that he realizes this and he has made overtures to Dems not to worry about unity) and spent the whole time going after Trump, Bernie still gains:
he still can say, "Hillary wouldn't debate me, but Trump would. And I creamed him" which could help him in CA.
He also gains with the party - by making an argument to his supporters that Trump is unacceptable, and attacking Trump instead of Hillary, he helps to unify the party for November. He gains in the primary, Hillary gains in November, Bernie gains goodwill from the party he can use for later.
The person who loses in that scenario, and very badly, is Trump.
I think it's smart of Trump to decline. He has nothing to gain unless Bernie goes into it planning on burning down the Democratic Party. Not a bet I would take if I were Trump.
commented on Why I'm Glad, But Not Psyched, About Bernie Sanders' Comeback Victory in Indiana
@23 90%/85% (the two models on 538) do not equal 100%.
For those percentages to have any meaning, it means that those 10% and 15% outcomes need to happen sometimes. There's nothing about a 15% chance that leads to the conclusion that it was a world-shaking upset. 15% is almost the same as the chance of rolling a 6 on a 6-sided die. It is not a trivial chance.
If an 85% chance of victory meant they were predicting that Hillary would certainly win... then they should list it as a >99% chance of victory. 15% is unexpected, but only mildly surprising. Especially given that the demographic predictions had Indiana as a favorable state for Bernie.