Rachel talking about Sanders' loss in the Washington Primary

[SharonClark]

Sanders won caucus big, 26345 attended.
Clinton won primary 54-47, 719043 voted.

Rachel says this was a big psychological boost for Hillary and bad for Sanders' appeal to the Super D's to vote how their state votes.

[UMTerp01]

1. I agree

Love me some Rachel Maddow. If it had been reverse and Hillary had won the caucus and got the delegates and Sanders had won the primary you'd hear ad nauseum about how "undemocratic" that is and they'd be calling and leaving death threats for Washington State DNC people DEMANDING that the delegates go to Bernie because this shows "everyone" who could vote did vote and blah blah blah. I actually don't care because Hillary has already won and is just counting down for it to be "official"

[bluestateguy]

2. The WA primary was a flimsy consolation prize for folks who can't caucus

Like retail and shift workers who can't take off 2-4 hours to sit around in a high school gym and chit chat about politics.

But, as I have said before, rules are rules. And these are the rules in 2016, flawed as they may be, and I won't demand that they be changed just because my candidate was hurt by them.

Prior to the 2020 cycle though, I'd like to see caucuses either gotten rid of or made more accessible for voters.

[LiberalFighter]

3. There isn't really much that the DNC can do about it. They can encourage Washington to change it.

But they can't mandate it. State laws control for elections run by the government. I was just recently advocating that as an incentive they could take away some of their pledged delegates. Maybe even some of their unpledged delegates. I was suggesting they lose all of their at-large delegates if they are using a caucus of any type. They would lose their PLEO delegates if they are using an open primary.

Washington received a total of 67 district delegates allocated among 10 congressional districts. They also received 22 at-large and 12 PLEO delegates. 9 of the district delegates and 3 of the at-large delegates are bonus delegates based on conducting their primary/caucus as part of a cluster of states voting at the same time. Washington is a cluster defined with Alaska, Hawaii, and Oregon it qualified for a 15% delegate bonus.

[Lord Magus]

7. I'm pretty sure the DNC actually can mandate it.

The DNC has chosen to let each state party decide whether to use caucuses or primaries, and whether they should be open, closed or something in between. But they don't have to leave it up to the state parties. 1968 shows that precedent. Back then only 13 states held a caucus or primary. In the aftermath of Hubert Humphrey debacle, the DNC required that every state party turn over delegate selection to the voters. No reason that after this year they can't complete the process by banning caucuses.

[LiberalFighter]

8. At best they could eliminate caucuses.

But then there would be the issue of some states that don't have a primary until later in the year. Either too close to the national convention or even after with not enough time to hold their own state convention for the purpose of electing other national delegates.

[Walk away]

4. Poor Bernie. The will of the people is to send you home without even...

a consolation prize!

[Cha]

5. Yeah, that's exactly what we've been saying about the Super Ds!

Thank you, Sharon~

[Surya Gayatri]

6. Well, yeah...

"...bad for Sanders' appeal to the Super D's to vote how their state votes".

[LisaM]

9. Actually, 230,000 (still low) attended the caucuses.

That other number refers to delegate selection. It is a bit misleading and I mis-read it the first time around.

I am so glad Hillary pulled this off. It does help the SDs.

[Her Sister]

10. So we really are the silent Majority!

HRC VOters!