Media unimpressed as Sanders barely gets seventy percent of vote
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Omaha Steve (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).
Source: New Yorker
"The major cable networks briefly mentioned Sanderss vote tallies in Washington, Alaska, and Hawaii but noted that he ran out of steam well shy of eighty per cent."
"A spokesperson for CNN could not be reached for comment, as the network was busy preparing a ninety-minute special on the birth of Donald Trumps new grandchild."
<Satire obviously...>
Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/media-unimpressed-as-sanders-barely-gets-seventy-per-cent-of-vote
Roy Rolling
(7,516 posts)xocet
(4,367 posts)Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Human101948
(3,457 posts)Even though I agree with it.
AnotherVoter
(29 posts)I'm relatively new here.. I was wondering if that was the right place. Where do you think it should go? Maybe primary section?
sharp_stick
(14,400 posts)GD-P or the Lounge would probably also fit.
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)Caucuses are not such a great guide to general-election voting behavior, and the number of delegates at stake is small. Sanders has picked up 35 more delegates than Clinton over the weekend; well done for that, but in terms of the overall contest 35 delegates is just not a very large number. Contrast this with the ~500 delegates up for grabs in California, for example; a small margin of victory in CA outweighs large margins of victory in less populous states.
strategery blunder
(4,225 posts)Sanders will eventually end up with about 73 delegates (give or take 2) from WA state alone, which has 101 delegates to give.
Those delegates will be formally allocated at county/legislative district conventions.
Even though the delegate count could be estimated with good accuracy now from the initial caucus results, like the media did for Iowa, I suspect that now the media is looking for ways to 'suppress' Bernie's delegate count to make him appear less viable than he really is.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)Those delegates will be formally allocated at county/legislative district conventions.
Because I didn't understand the disparity. And you are probably right that not counting them now is more than likely an attempt to suppress enthusiasm for one side and bolster the other.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)LibDemAlways
(15,139 posts)shamelessly promote Clinton even if Bernie won every remaining primary contest. I just heard a report on the local NBC affiliate in LA that California Democrats are "uniting behind" Clinton, when, in fact, the poll they were referencing had her in front of Bernie by just 45-37%. In no way does that reflect voters' "unifying" behind her with over 2 months to go before the June primary. God, I hate the corporate whores.
JGug1
(320 posts)I think that the media has failed to be impressed with Bernie's performance in the last three primaries because he was expected to win and did and they were all caucuses, where he has performed much better than Clinton. The problem is, as Nate Silver's blog says, he is running out of caucuses. Now, IF he can perform better than expected in the Wisconsin and New York, I think he will have the attention of the press.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Criminal investigation.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/its-time-for-hillary-clin_b_9555422.html
Omaha Steve
(108,681 posts)Please consider reposting in Bernie Group and or GD-P.
Statement of Purpose
Post the latest news from reputable mainstream news websites and blogs. Important news of national interest only. No analysis or opinion pieces. No duplicates. News stories must have been published within the last 12 hours. Use the published title of the story as the title of the discussion thread.
