Ah, so you're a troll. I get it now.
Your principles don't matter to you in the slightest, it would appear. The only thing that matters is a way to count votes that helps your candidate.
Why, oh why, don't these four states matter? Hillary won one of them anyway.
Reaper, you have a logical flaw in your argument. In order for a troll's principals to matter, they must first exist.
</snap>
The rules say it's a delegate race so since the pop vote is a "will of the voter" moral argument you have to try to determine the will of the voters - all of the voters - or you lose the ability to use the argument. That means no zero out of MI.
Key word: VOTERS
Caucus attendees can not represent registered voters at large.
Taking Texas and Nebraska as examples, it is clear that a public VOTE can produce very different results from a caucus.
You can not reliably extrapolate caucus results to the general populace.
Think what would have been in 2000 if we could have counted the Floridans that "would have voted had they known"...
Caucus voters are sexist. I can prove this by using CAPITAL LETTERS.
You got up to 6 real quick - I've got money on double figures by August!
I'd say triple figures. I expect this account to last for maybe a day. Luckily, I've prepared others.
Love the link too.
That's an argument against the pop vote being a measure in this race since caucuses are allowed as I agree that caucuses are hard to reliably count since the states don't keep accurate tallies.
You don't get to change the rules because you don't like the results. Not YOU but Clinton.
Please reread what I wrote. I am not talking about doing anything more than figuring out how many people showed up at the caucus and counting them as best we can.
I am not talking about projecting those results onto a larger group. That's not what I meant, and I expect you to read this and acknowledge it.
