538.com: BS is even less competitive than he appears

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

Bernie Sanders’s supporters are fond of the hypothesis that Democratic superdelegates, the elected leaders and party officials who currently support Hillary Clinton by a lopsided-doesn’t-even-begin-to-describe-it 469 to 31, are going to bow to the “will of the people” if Sanders ends up winning more pledged delegates than Clinton by June.

There’s just one hiccup in this logic: Sanders fans seem to be conflating the pledged delegate count and the “will of the voters,” when in fact the two are far from interchangeable.

Sanders’s reliance on extremely low-turnout caucus states has meant the pledged delegate count overstates his share of votes. To date, Sanders has captured 46 percent of Democrats’ pledged delegates but just 42 percent of raw votes. So even if Sanders were to draw even in pledged delegates by June — which is extremely unlikely — Clinton could be able to persuade superdelegates to stick with her by pointing to her popular vote lead.

Sanders already has a nearly impossible task ahead of him in trying to erase Clinton’s pledged delegate lead. He’s down by 212 delegates, meaning he’d need to win 56 percent of those remaining to nose in front. He has dominated caucus states such as Idaho and Washington, but only two caucus states — Wyoming and North Dakota — remain on the calendar. What’s more, the biggest states left — New York and California — favor Clinton demographically.

Including caucus results, Clinton leads Sanders by almost 2.4 million raw votes, 9.4 million to just more than 7 million, according to The Green Papers. So then, what would would it take for Sanders to overtake Clinton in the popular vote by the end of the primaries in June?

More here: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bernie-sanders-is-even-further-behind-in-votes-than-he-is-in-delegates/

[Cha]

1. Thank you for this, Liberal_Stalwart!

[NastyRiffraff]

2. K&R

In reality, Bernie doesn't care about the will of the voters. Surely he, and his campaign, know Hillary leads by 2.4 million votes. But he plans to manipulate delegates.

[LiberalFighter]

5. It stuns me when anyone talks such nonsense and the data doesn't support it.

The will of the voters? Which voters is he talking about? The will of the people in red states will not win the general for him.

And the results of the delegates gives a more truer picture of the will of the people. Why? Because how states vote in the past for a Democratic President is weighted to give more delegates if they are Democratic or have in the last 3 elections gone Democratic.

They complained about Clinton's Southern State firewall failing to understand that those states had fewer delegates than Blue states with comparable population. And at the same time they did much better in caucuses that were mostly red states.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

10. He certainly ain't referring to us Negroes.

The "will of the people" are only those who support him.

[wildeyed]

15. Or Southerners.

We are just people with less access to internet I mean, it could never be that he didn't take time to learn about the unique problems and issues we deal with in this part of the country, or make any effort to respect the culture. It MUST be that we are under-educated or The Establishment. His failures are always someone else's fault.

[workinclasszero]

12. He plans to usurp the will of millions of democratic voters

While at the same time railing about the establishment.

What a hypocrite!

[Lucinda]

3. KNR

[wildeyed]

4. You're back!

And came over to the dark side, I see! Thanks for posting

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

11. The dark side, indeed. It's not easy but I'm

humble and learning.

Only one of the two candidates has defended President Obama's record, despite some misgivings (in fairness) and that candidate does not have the initials B.S. His bashing of Obama was the last straw for me, but there are many other reasons as well.

[wildeyed]

14. Well I am glad you are here,

and whatever road you needed to take is fine. I figured you would come around for the GE, regardless, but glad you showed up a bit early.

The Obama coalition was really key to my decision too. And Clinton was the only one who recognizes the importance of growing that coalition, keeping the party together. The Obama coalition is what our future as a country is going to look like. We need a leader who understands that. And Sanders, bless his heart, seems to be a little bit stuck in recreating the past. And Obamacare, for all its faults and problems, is the best we are going to do for now. I want to work on making that better, not trashing it for some pie in the sky.

So yes, I too think we should work on continuing Obama's successes, and that Hillary is the only one who wants to do that.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

6. Interesting

[sarae]

7. thanks for that...

[Surya Gayatri]

8. Massive K & R. Thanks for posting.

[Tarheel_Dem]

9. A terrific read. Thank you. n/t

[DarthDem]

13. Nice Piece. Thanks for Posting n/t

[Starry Messenger]

16. It's nice to celebrate the news in here!

Among my FB friends, pointing out that HRC is winning is harshing the Bernie squee, and evidently they are the only ones allowed to have feelings.