Sanders CLEARLY is the big winner

[EdwardBernays]

Clinton spent $13,000,000 more than Sanders for 5 more delegates... and 7 precincts were decided by coin toss... this after the first polls showed her ahead by 40+% and while getting 90% of media attention. Clinton has now lost her momentum, and her dominance of the media - to a large degree - and spent 90% of the money she raised all last summer to do it.

Any way you slice it Sanders was the real winner.

[peacebird]

1. She's gonna need her buddies at GoldmanSux, Prisons Inc, and big Pharma to pony up more $$$$

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

20. And she'll get it... not gonna make a difference though. All the dirty money in the world won't save Hillary's sinking campaign.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[Fantastic Anarchist]

27. If money doesn't work, guns will.

They've done it before when they were threatened by actual democratic tendencies.

[MariaThinks]

101. do you have any appreciation for the money the republicans spend to smear Hillary?

[peacebird]

121. Imho she smears herself well enough with her 'we came, we saw, he died', sniper fire, and the $$$

[BigGLiberal]

2. And yet, Democrats don't see it that way.

Her supporters, super delegates, and campaign staff are proud of her.

[Arazi]

4. The actual delegate count was tied. Clinton "won " by a coin toss

I'd be very worried if I were her campaign. She "won" a lucky flip. She didn't "win" it outright

[BigGLiberal]

6. Hillary has no reason to be worried.

[dpatbrown]

41. Really?????

Maybe you should tell Clinton. I'm sure she might differ.

[chervilant]

49. No reason?

Well, let's see:

Without the support of any super-pac or other corporate "supporters," with almost no M$M coverage, and DESPITE being labeled a "communist" because he is a self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist, Bernie Sanders is in a virtual tie with Hi11ary for the Iowa delegates.

Those sound like good reasons to me.

[Adrahil]

15. She got a victory in a place with an electorate tailor made for Sanders...

She'll domjust fine, I think. Sanders did well, though. Congrats to him. He'll get a nice victory next week in New Hampshire.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

102. that's a hoot.

Given how "inevitable" her campaign was a month ago, or 3 months ago.

The nature and extent of her collapse, this kind of slow motion fall, by one of the best funded candidates in history, is the real story.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

19. That "victory" speech Hillary gave tells you all you need to know... she knows her dream of becoming President is slipping away...

What a contrast to Bernie, a true progressive leader, who doesn't need a coin flip to prove he's a winner. Go Bernie!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[Proud Liberal Dem]

30. She won a slim victory

In a state she was expected to lose (and lost badly in 2008). Why would she be depressed about the outcome?

[tecelote]

44. Wow!

'Never heard that she expected to lose Iowa. Where'd you hear that?

I heard a lot about unicorns and rainbows when Bernie supporters expected him to win.

Who knew unicorns and rainbows vote?

[dpatbrown]

45. You folks

need to continue to believe that.

[earthside]

65. Expected to lose???!!!

All we heard about for months around here was how almost all the polls showed her ahead.
Her ground game was great and would not repeat 2008.
She had every major establishment endorsement that exists.
She spent millions and million of dollars.

Now all of a sudden Iowa is a state she was "expected to lose"?

The truth is she got clocked once again in Iowa.

If the "most qualified candidate ever" can only manage a tie with a guy who most Americans and Iowans hadn't ever heard of six months ago ... then she is the big loser.

[kenfrequed]

79. Yeah

Mastering the post-pre expectation game. Next she will be the come-back kid after the fact even though most of the major pollsters already were saying she would win by 3-4 percentage points.

I'm sorry but if you are the overwhelming favorite to win and lose ground from being "inevitable" and it comes down to having to toss a few coins to determine the winner then you should not be boasting about your victory. It is just absurd.

[Cal33]

81. How much credibility do you now have for all those pollsters who predicted all along

Hillary's victory, a few of them with double digits, right close to the end?

I still think polls are interesting and even necessary, but they do need to improve
their methods of making the polls more accurate. Of course, I am not speaking
of those polls made expressly with the intention of helping their candidate win. I
am referring to those polls made with the intention of informing the public. What
percentage of these are there still left?

[pangaia]

84. What in the world does 2008 have to do with anything?

Trust me. Hillary is royally pissed, again. You can bank on it..

She got her ass handed to her AGAIN !

[Fantastic Anarchist]

28. Proving that Hillary literally wins with the help of money. n/t

[nolabels]

64. As the race goes on it might turn out that big money could be a negative

Haven't you noticed how they try hide how their funding is coming in. They sure in heck are not proud of it.

The larger Bernie's contributor list grows the more that will be true. Maybe even later it can grow exponentially, if we could get more people to the understanding what is being campaigned for. Honesty is always works and feels best when more people know about it and find out it has a lot to do with them too.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

85. Go here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511120585

I can't volunteer, so I thought this may be a good idea. Pair up those that can volunteer with those that can donate.

[polly7]

40. She's always been a good flipper though, you have to admit. nt.

[malthaussen]

59. DUzy! n/t

[madokie]

5. Humfp

thats the sound I made when I read that.

[cali]

9. The Clintons are unhappy with this Iowa results

This has been widely reported. And they should be. Her campaign poured the vast majority of its resources into Iowa and got very little bang for their buck. And it wasn't just money, it was staff.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

21. Don't be surprised if Bernie runs the table... Hillary is toast!

[HereSince1628]

39. Lots of sad..common knowledge of how to dominate Dem politics was exposed as myth.

She had all the name recognition... got stuck in a tie.
She controlled all the traditional revenue streams which provided too much money to challenge... got stuck in a tie.
She had the best senior staff money could buy...got stuck in a tie.
She controlled the party infrastructure... got stuck in a tie.
She had the big media endorsements...got stuck in a tie.
She had the pundit's belief she'd dominate... got stuck in a tie.
She dominated all dem coverage by cable news...got stuck in a tie
She mastered at least 5 American dialects/speech patterns...got stuck in a tie
She adopted the popular parts of her opponents messages...got stuck in a tie.
She spent most of a decade planning a decisive win in Iowa...got stuck in a tie.
She spent a life-time earning the best resume, ever...got stuck in a tie.
She dominated the coin-tosses... got stuck in a tie.

Worst of all, she actually has a lead in an historically close primary, and that's a W gaddamit!... and people see it as stuck in a tie!

[kenfrequed]

80. Yup ^^^^

Completely agree.

Meanwhile Bernie supporters are going to be saying "if we try harder and push a bit more we can win!"

[ChairmanAgnostic]

103. one wonders how soon some staffers will be

heading home to spend more time with their families.

She was criticized for sticking with that moron Penn for too long. She won't make that mistake again. watch for heads to roll.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

18. They should be proud, they didn't lose in a landslide.

A coin toss was used to decide whether Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders won at six precincts in the Iowa caucus.

Ms Clinton won six county delegates through coin tosses in Newton, Ames, West Branch and Davenport, as well as two precints in Des Moines, the Des Moines Register reported.

The fact that her 'win' came through the incredible luck of winning six coin tosses in a row is pure chance in a state she was supposed to have completely tied up for the vast majority of the lead up to the caucuses.

She's about to get stomped flat in New Hampshire.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

29. It was probably a Goldman Sachs coin. n/t

[morningfog]

36. No one, NO ONE, in the Clinton Campaign is proud of this.

She blew a 30 point lead and her budget for a coin toss. The campaign is angry and embarrassed.

There will be a shake up after this wake up.

[jonno99]

77. Agreed - I would like to have been a fly on the wall of the HRC war-room as the results came in. nt

[Cal33]

106. Yes, most of them say that, but I wonder how many of them really feel it. I was actually

thinking this during the time when Hillary was first shown ahead of Bernie by 7 points (53 to 46).
Then the difference shrank gradually to 6, then 5, 4....etc..... and then finally stopped at 0.2.
One-fifth of a percentage point!!! It must have been dreadful. Of course, it could have been
worse. There is some consolation in that.

As my hopes were rising, theirs must have been going downhill - proportionately. I was
disappointed when Bernie didn't rise any further. Hillary fans must have heaved a sigh of relief
when Bernie's rise finally stopped. But the exciting wait took nearly 3 hours -- for me it was
an awesomely suspenseful 3 hours. I guess it must have been the same for many watchers.

[cwydro]

3. I'm still an undecided, but seriously, no.

I kind of feel sorry for you guys.

Listen, Iowa means absolutely nothing, so get over it.

[Android3.14]

12. Well at least you're undecided...

[cwydro]

17. I am.

I love Hillary and am a long time supporter of hers. I'd love to see a woman president, and I think she would be great.

I also love Bernie, and I love his message, his passion, and the hope he would bring to our country.

I like O'Malley too. I hope he at least ends up as a vp.

This is the first time in my long life that I've been happy to see any of our candidates win.

Sorry you don't believe me.

[Flying Phoenix]

37. I'm thinking he had a choice until that choice decided to suspend his campaign last night.

Give cwydro a few days... We need to be encouraging him to join us, not dismissing his "undecided" status.

I, for one, believe him, and would encourage him to take the time to decide which candidate works for him.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

31. Iowa means nothing?

What makes you say that?

[mythology]

120. By delegate count and demographics it doesn't mean much

It's really low in terms of the number of delegates needed for the nomination and doesn't demographically match the rest of the electorate other than New Hampshire and Vermont.

It may matter if it tips the minority vote in either Nevada or New Hampshire, but with the delegate count coming out in Clinton's favor, that's kind of a hard argument to make in our instant spin media cycle.

[ljm2002]

86. And right on schedule...

...we get the "Iowa means absolutely nothing" meme.

If Iowa means absolutely nothing, then maybe you should have communicated that to the Clinton campaign before they started pouring 90% of their resources into it. Maybe you should have told them to write it off, to go ahead and lose big in the first primary state.

They would not have listened, of course. Because every single state matters, but most especially these early primary states matter, because they set the tone. Had she managed a big win in Iowa, say if she had won by 10 points or more, that would have severely deflated the Sanders campaign.

You can pooh-pooh the state if you want to, but a lot of us know a little secret: momentum matters. Bernie has it, Hillary does not, especially now.

Go, Bernie!!!

[Autumn]

92. Nothing? Really?

Keep telling yourself that "undecided" .

[in_cog_ni_to]

7. Yep. And Bernie can tap his MILLIONS OF DONORS time and time again.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[JonathanRackham]

8. We are Bernie's momentum.

The ant has moved the mountain.

[Art_from_Ark]

22. Or maybe the rubber tree plant?

[Hortensis]

10. TIME will tell us how both did, not cheerleaders.

[Lil Missy]

11. such spin is predictable. The truth is, hillary was declared the winner. She won.

[Empowerer]

14. If Sanders had won by even 1 vote, his supporters would be singing an entirely different tune . . .

[Adrahil]

16. Ain't THAT the truth. NT

[Proud Liberal Dem]

32. They seem to think he won anyway

n/t

[Fantastic Anarchist]

43. If Sanders had won by 1 vote, Hillary supporters would have diminished the victory ...

... by any means whatsoever.

[cwydro]

25. Even Bernie admits that.

Folks on DU...not so much lol.

[Larkspur]

26. Hillary won a Phyrric victory in IA

She edged out Bernie by 5 state delegates but she poured a hell of a lot of $$ and staff into this state that she had led in the polls by 40% a few months ago.

Bernie can rightly claim a virtual tie and use it as momentum to NH and beyond.

[ChiciB1]

46. AND He's Fighting Almost ALL Of Our Democratic

Machine! I'm more than nauseated by our own Democratic Party who lie in bed with the BIG BUCKS!!

[backscatter712]

66. I agree. Pyrrhic victory for Clinton.

She was supposed to cruise through Iowa - a few weeks ago, the polls had her ahead by double-digits.

Now now, she wins by the skin of her teeth. She literally wins based on coin tosses.

It shows that coronation's out the window. Whoever wants to be the nominee is going to have to earn it.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

33. With a little help from a coin. n/t

[Flying Phoenix]

38. After wasting 90% of her resources and cash

just for Iowa.

She's getting clobbered for the rest of the primaries.

[Le Taz Hot]

57. Nope

The winner gas NOT been declared yet. The Iowa Democratic Party has to certify it first and they hav not done that yet.

[Gothmog]

23. Iowa was a must win for Sanders

Sanders is only polling well in four states where the voting population is 90+% and if Sanders can not win in Iowa then he is in trouble in South Carolina and the Super Tuesday states http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/02/01/iowa_caucus_stakes_for_hillary_clinton_and_bernie_sanders.html

For Bernie, meanwhile, a Hillary victory would be an undeniable blow. With the exception of New Hampshire and his home state of Vermont, the Hawkeye State—with a Democratic electorate that skews white and liberal—represents the friendliest terrain on the map for Sanders. If Bernie can’t win in Iowa, Clinton and her allies will have no problem brushing off a Sanders win in New Hampshire next week as little more than the result of the senator being a near-native son in the Granite State. Sanders, then, would be in need of a win elsewhere to reset the race—and soon—but won’t have any obvious place to turn.

South Carolina and Super Tuesday will be fun

[DebJ]

60. Sure. Just like the media said Sanders was sure to lose, and even saying by 8 points while

the caucuses were going on. I kept hearing from various sites how huge the new caucus goers turnout was, something that
was supposed to help Bernie. After an hour of such reporting, someone on CNN summed it up this way: not really any good
turnout of new caucus goers, so Hillary is a shoe in.

Someone owns the media. It isn't Bernie.

[Gothmog]

24. According to the Cook Report, Sanders needed to win 70% of the Iowa delegates to be competitive

According to one of the experts for the Cook Report, Sanders needs to win big in Iowa to have a chance http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/sanders-needs-more-than-a-win-in-iowa-to-beat-clinton

As David Wasserman wrote in the Cook Political Report last week, "98 percent of pledged Democratic delegates will come from states with lower shares of liberal whites than Iowa and New Hampshire." That is a big problem for Sanders who has yet to prove he can expand his base....

Yet, even then, delegate allocation is proportional, which means that Sanders would have to begin winning by major margins to make the race a serious contest.

Wasserman estimates that according to his models, Sanders would "need to win 70 percent of Iowa's delegates and 63 percent of New Hampshire's delegates" to even "be on track" to stay competitive with Clinton in later states where demographically speaking, Clinton has shown she has more support. And in a states like Florida and South Carolina, Clinton leads in recent polls by 36 points and 19 points, respectively.

"It is not merely the delegate process that favors Hillary, it is the voters. She has earned the loyalty and support of communities of color, women, the LGBTQ community, environmentalists, and other vital parts of the Democratic coalition," says Democratic strategist Paul Begala, a Clinton supporter. "Bernie's coalition - so far - is more narrow. It is impressive in its energy and its passion, but it is, I think, more narrow."

The Cook Report has some good analysis

After New Hampshire, Sanders is headed to states that have less than 90+% white voting populations and Sanders is not appealing to African American or Hispanic voters. Super Tuesday will be a long day

[reformist2]

47. Now Bernie needs 70%? That's just obnoxious.

[Gothmog]

67. It is called math and demographics

States were Sanders is polling well in account for 2% of the delegates. Sanders is not polling well with African American and Latino votes and the demographics of the other states means that Sanders had to do very well in Iowa to be competitive

[reformist2]

70. It's called "spin".

[Gothmog]

123. Bernie Sanders Needs More Than The Tie He Got In Iowa

Last edited Wed Feb 3, 2016, 01:52 PM - Edit history (1)

Sanders is not polling well in states with less than 90+% white populations and so Sanders needed to do much better in Iowa http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bernie-sanders-needs-more-than-the-tie-he-got-in-iowa/

We’ve said for months that Iowa and New Hampshire are two of the best states for Sanders demographically. You can see why in the entrance poll taken in Iowa. Sanders won very liberal voters over Clinton by 19 percentage points, but he lost self-identified somewhat liberals and moderates to Clinton by 6 percentage points and 23 percentage points, respectively. That’s bad for Sanders because even though 68 percent of Iowa Democratic caucus-goers identified as liberal this year, only 47 percent of Democratic primary voters nationwide did so in 2008. We’ll need to see if Sanders can do better in a state that is more moderate than Iowa before thinking he can win the nomination.

Iowa and New Hampshire also lack nonwhite voters, who form a huge part of the Democratic base. Can Sanders win over some of these voters? Clinton has held a lead among nonwhites of nearly 40 percentage points in national polls. In Nevada, which votes after the New Hampshire primary, the electorate for the Democratic caucuses in 2008 was 15 percent Hispanic and 15 percent black. After Nevada comes South Carolina, where a majority of Democratic voters will be black. Our polls-only forecast in South Carolina gives Clinton a 94 percent chance to win, and our polls-plus forecast gives her a 96 percent chance to win.

Clinton will continue to be a favorite for the Democratic nomination if she continues to hold a large lead among nonwhite voters and basically breaks even with white voters, as she did in Iowa. Sanders, meanwhile, needs to cut into Clinton’s lead among nonwhites and expand his support among white voters beyond what he won in Iowa. If he does that, he’ll put himself in contention to win the nomination. If he doesn’t, he’ll continue to be an underdog.

[ieoeja]

53. #HillarySoBlack

As if her racist 2008 campaign wasn't bad enough, this year we have the "Hillary loves the Blacks" meme which sounds more than just a little racist itself.

[alcibiades_mystery]

34. Hillary Clinton won the Iowa Caucus

There is no qualifier on that. She received more delegates to the state convention and more delegates to the national convention.

She won.

[DebJ]

62. With a toss of the coin. That's gambling, not winning. n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

75. Everyone knew the rules before the contest started

The coin toss method is used in many places.

Obama won delegates by coin toss in 2008.

[DebJ]

78. That doesn't reflect true support though. All it reflects is a coin toss. n/t

[shenmue]

35. If by winning, you mean losing

[EdwardBernays]

50. What did Hillary win?

A few delegates.

What did she lose?

90% of the money she raised last summer
Her media dominance
Her narrative
Many many many thousands of supporters


Which is worth more?

[ChiciB1]

42. I Didn't Watch MSNBC, Or Any Clap Trap MSM, But

there IS NO WAY, my enthusiasm for Bernie dies! I'm thrilled at how far he's come and we MUST keep fighting! No Hillary supporter should be doing ANY dances up and down!

WE ROLL ON!

GO BERNIE!

[blondie58]

48. Coin Toss?

What is this- a Banana Republic?
They Had votes. Why could they not use them?

[marions ghost]

56. Read This

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/02/02/clinton-wins-at-least-six-iowa-precincts-by-coin-flip/

[marions ghost]

51. Thanks for educating those who won't accept reality

This is a huge win for the Sanders campaign. And an unexpected loss for Hill.

Anyone who wants to call it a "win" is delusional.

[EdwardBernays]

54. 100%

And the entire establishment AND voter base will cop this in a few days.

She has 24-48 hours to try and pretend she won before its clear she just shot her campaign in the face.

[Thor_MN]

63. Reality? Clinton is ahead in Delegate count. And Super Delegate count.

Delusion is thinking that second place is somehow a victory. All that matters is the score at the end. And that is yet to be seen.

Both are miles ahead of the GOP candidates, either will be the next President.

The nomination is decided by numbers, not feelings about those numbers...

[marions ghost]

68. As you say, "Either will be the next president"

"Either" is the NEW reality.

The finals will be decided by numbers. This one was decided by the spirit and hard work of the Sanders campaign and the people of Iowa. This is a huge win for Sanders. And a loss for Hill, considering all that she put into it. A razor-thin "win" in a primary is very significant in political circles.

[Thor_MN]

91. Sorry, perhaps you misread the numbers. Sanders lost.

Reality is that the number of delegates at the convention will decide it, despite the feelings and emotions of the side that loses.

[marions ghost]

108. Sure

but this is an important boost to Sanders and a painful elbow check for Clinton. Evens the playing field. No way Hill can just sail through like she owns it anymore.

There is meaning beyond who edges out who --when it's this close. You can be sure the Clinton campaign is not celebrating this "win."

C'mon, you know it's a tie.

[Thor_MN]

110. No, it's a (extremely) narrow win for Clinton.

If it were a tie, they would have the same number of delegates.

If the Iowa results mean anything to future primaries and caucuses is yet to be seen.

Qualifying it as a win for Sanders, based on a previous lead, or based on anything is ridiculous.

If Sanders is going to win, he will need win. Actually win, not come in a close second, or have "momentum" or "surge".

And he is going to win enough to make up for his Super Delegate deficit.

[marions ghost]

111. Do you understand the meaning of "virtual tie"?

--which is what a lot of the news sources are calling it. It means that Sanders pulled even. Of course he now has to harness that momentum and it remains to be seen if that can be done. Duh--I do know how it works in the final analysis.

When I say he "won" I don't mean that literally. I mean it puts him in a much better position than was ever thought possible. Hillary does not get an easy slide into home plate.

To crow about this as a big win for Hillary is not realistic. But go ahead.

[Thor_MN]

113. Do you understand the meaning of Win and Lose?

You chide me on definitions and then go on to heavily qualify what you are saying and that you don't literally mean what you are saying. When it comes to Convention time, there are no "virtual ties". Sanders win need to be in a much better position to win the nomination. He will have to actually win and not "virtually tie".

Please cite where I have crowed about it being a big win for Clinton. I do not support any candidate over another. What I do support is reality and what I am seeing is unrealistic claims that Iowa was a win for Sanders.

But you go on, not literally meaning what you are saying.

[marions ghost]

116. Duh

there is nothing you write here that I disagree with. Not saying you crowed, you just doggedly insist it's a "win" for Clinton. Were you expecting a bigger win for Bernie? Would that have you singing a different tune? Somehow I don't think so.

[Thor_MN]

119. "To crow about this as a big win for Hillary is not realistic. But go ahead. "

Your words. Not mine.

What I'm doggedly insisting is that saying Iowa is a win for Sanders is not realistic. A bigger win for Sanders is not possible, because he didn't. But if he had actually won, I would be saying that Iowa being a win for Clinton would be fantasy.

[ljm2002]

90. "The nomination is decided by numbers,"...

..."not feelings about those numbers...".

And that is the fundamental misunderstanding right there.

In an election cycle where anti-establishment sentiment is running as high as it is in this one, feelings matter a lot.

Numbers may be totally definitive when describing physical phenomena. When dealing with human activities, such as elections, feelings can serve to change the numbers.

That is what we are seeing this cycle.

Of course this is only one state. Onward to victory, fellow Bernistas! FEEL the Bern!!!!!

[Thor_MN]

93. Iowa is over. And feelings about the Iowa numbers mean nothing.

Your fundamental mistake is believing that Iowa numbers are going to affect future outcomes. Hell, the coasts wouldn't notice if a sinkhole opened and swallowed the entire Midwest. It would be locked in LBN as Local News.

"feelings can serve to change the numbers" No, feelings can not change the Iowa results.

Iowa is in the books. Clinton won a very narrow victory. That's the fact.

[ljm2002]

94. Silly.

Of course feelings about the Iowa numbers cannot change them, after the fact.

But feelings about the Iowa numbers CAN change the numbers of other contests going forward.

That is my point: feelings do matter, very much, in a political campaign. Perceptions do matter, very much, in a political campaign.

The numbers we are talking about are not describing physical phenomena, they are describing a political campaign.

[Thor_MN]

98. Feeling about results, after the election is decided, do not matter.

Which is MY point. All the hand wringing and spinning going on today is ridiculous.

Fact:Cinton won a narrow victory. Claiming it is a win for Sanders is beyond ridiculous.

Future primaries and caucuses will be decided based on the feelings of the people of those states. Believing that they will be heavily influenced by Iowa? Remains to be seen.

The numbers I am talking about are no longer affectable by anything. They are in the books.

[ljm2002]

100. WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!

TTFN

[Thor_MN]

104. That the sound of my point going over your head?

You responded to me. See you in the funny papers.

[Cary]

52. so much spinning!

Pfeh.

[Javaman]

72. how so?

he has risen faster in the polls over the last 5 months than Hillary could ever hope for.

he's a serious threat and to say "pfeh" is foolish.

she only won by the skin of her teeth last night.

[Democat]

55. If Hillary wins, Sanders wins. If Sanders wins, Sanders wins.

I hope we can all come together and support the Democratic nominee when the primaries are all over.

[George II]

58. I don't think anyone really knows how much each spent in Iowa - last week the report was...

...that Sanders was out spending Clinton by a lot in Iowa.

[EdwardBernays]

73. Yeah

At the end.

But reports have been coming out for months saying the opposite was true. And Hillary a MUCH larger paid staff vs Sanders 15,000 volunteers.

If anything the numbers are probably more lopsided if you look at the entire cycle.

We'll know a lot more soon.

[Bobbie Jo]

61. So where is the "sea change?"

It didn't happen.

We have a competitive primary, this is a good thing.

[EdwardBernays]

71. Sorry but

You're just ignoring it

Hillary is no longer inevitable.

She no longer can have sole access to the media.

Thousands of people, tens and tens of thousands of people nationally left team Hillary.

Many of them learned the truth about her as well and will be hard to win back ever.

Kids came out and voted.

Big money went all in and only managed a tie.

Huge sea change... You're just looking at the wrong metrics.

[Bobbie Jo]

74. She was never inevitable.

If this is his "sea change" it's not going to be enough to pull him across the finish line.

He needed a decisive win here, he didn't get it.

Instead, we have a competitive primary. This is a GOOD thing for the Democrats going into the general.

[EdwardBernays]

76. He didn't

Need a decisive win.

That's just Hillary spin.

He won everything except 5 delegates.

And team Hillary knows this. Which is why we're getting these desperate talking points today.

She literally dropped in the polls by 50%, spent over 10M to do it, lost control of the media narrative and lost 10s of thousands of supporters nationally.

No one on team Bernie feels like we lost... Team Hillary on the other hand is spinning the one thing they manged to scrape out... a hand full of extra delegates... As proof that Sanders is doomed. Dooooooomed.

Gimme a break.

[Bobbie Jo]

83. Meh

Iowa was going to be competitive, we knew this from the outset.

He will probably win NH. Beyond that, his path to the nomination is extremely narrow. This is essentially as good as it's going to get for him. A decisive win Iowa may have turned it around.

It didn't happen...

[EdwardBernays]

105. That's nonsense

You can simply search DU and see Hillary supporters saying Bernie didn't have a chance in Iowa... you can also see Hillary refusing to even mention him on the trail for months and months, because she felt she didn't have to...

She completely changed her ads, and her behaviour, and he message, because of the growing Sanders momentum...

pretending otherwise is a waste of everyone's time...

[Bobbie Jo]

115. Disagree

I would like to see your links to the posts saying "Bernie didn't have a chance in Iowa..." I don't recall seeing anything remotely like that around here. She came into this race as the front runner, this "inevitable" nonsense came from your camp, not ours.

As I said, we have a competitive primary and that's a good thing. A loss, no matter how slight, is not a sea change.

On to the next contest...

[Yupy]

69. Toss coin doesn't make you a winner, regardless! Not "democratic"

[Uncle Joe]

82. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, EdwardBernays.

[amborin]

87. HRC's supporters are in shock, rattled. She was s'posed to win decisively; she barely eked out a tie

[marions ghost]

112. Yep

The insiders are NOT celebrating.

[concreteblue]

88. Since Hillary "won" by coin toss

And with respect to her elastic issue positioning, Can we now refer to her as " Flipper"?

[Fast Walker 52]

97. I agree that FBI investigation is important but I think Sanders' supporters will have a say too

Who do you support and who is the best candidate?

[dana_b]

95. I think the Senator did fantastically and I am so happy for him

He bridged a 30 point gap not on the backs of corporations and big donors, but from us - the little guys with little donations. Yet so many people around here are downplaying it, basically poo-pooing any good he did and going on about Hillary's big win. Did we even see the same results?? And her AUDACITY to come out and make a victory speech!! I don't think anyone was expecting Bernie to be named winner but maybe realizing that it was a tie and giving him SOME credit!! Instead so many are saying he lost and she obviously won. It's nuts!! This place is INSANE!!

I gotta get out of here and leave DU. All it does is make me angry and really despise certain factions of this party. The audaciousness, disregard and disrespect - I don't like feeling like this. Strangers on a board should not get to me like this but it does and I can't do it.

[randome]

96. After Super Tuesday, things may settle down.

But I hear you. The most joy I get from DU these days is laughing at the Bundy Bunch.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[KittyWampus]

99. You must be new to politics. It's about delegates. Not money spent.

[EdwardBernays]

109. lol

is it?

Because If you spend all your money in Iowa trying to get elected, and get all the delegates in Iowa, but have no more money, you're toast.

And if you have two spend an entire fund raising season worth of money - even when you have HUGE advantages over your opponent - and lose your bully pulpit and have your narrative destroyed, and lose tens of thousands of supporters nationwide... then yeah, you're a loser... even if you do get .03 percent more voters in one contest, and a few delegates, some of which you won on a coin tosses... lol

[mhatrw]

107. And that delegate count is bogus. Clintons always cheat.

But even with the fix in, the best she could do was tie.

[senz]

114. She's looking weak and desperate.

It's not going quite the way she expected.

[Avalux]

117. Hillary on CNN: "We (Democrats) have got to get back to the middle".

I'm not sure that's the best approach at this point.

[senz]

118. She wants Democrats to blend better with Republicans.

Still pushing the old DLC/Third Way spiel that sold out the American people.

[Ivan Kaputski]

122. The contest: Can the oligarchy's money beat the common person's money?

Clearly someone is counting on the oligarchy's money to win this election.