Sanders Wins Colorado, But Ties On Delegates - RollCall

[WillyT]

Sanders Wins Colorado, But Ties on Delegates
By Sandra Fish - RollCall
Posted at 10:41 a.m. March 4


Sanders’s victory in Colorado didn’t net him more delegates. (Photo By Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call)

<snip>

When does a 59-40 victory result in a tie?

When it’s the Colorado Democratic caucus outcome and most of the dozen super delegates, not elected by caucus-goers, support the loser.

In this instance, that’s Hillary Clinton.

And young supporters of Bernard Sanders are none too happy about the outcome.

“I feel like it’s very unfair,” said Ally Malecha, an 18-year-old University of Denver student who supported Sanders at her first-ever caucus Tuesday. “It’s kind of unfortunate because of super delegates and the way that the DNC is very pro-Hillary.”

Sanders won 59 percent of the caucus vote and a projected 38 delegates to Clinton’s 40 percent of the vote and 28 delegates.

But the dozen super delegates – mostly elected officials and party leaders – don’t have to follow the votes of caucus-goers.

The Denver Post reported that 10 of those super delegates are committed to Clinton, which brings the delegate count even, with two uncommitted.

The super delegates for Clinton include Gov. John Hickenlooper, Sen. Michael Bennet, U.S. Reps. Diana DeGette, Ed Perlmutter and Jared Polis, and former Democratic National Committee Chairman and Gov. Roy Romer.

Malecha and others questioned the democracy behind the super delegate system, which was...

<snip>

More: http://blogs.rollcall.com/news/sanders-wins-colorado-but-ties-on-delegates/?dcz=

[MineralMan]

1. I think it's a mistake, when discussing primary events,

to count unpledged superdelegates in the results. I don't do that. I'm aware that they exist and will have an impact, but we should report only the pledged delegates from each state following the election.

Anyone who wants to see a count that is property broken out can at:

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/D

The superdelegates are also listed, but separately, as they should be, since their votes can be changed.

[WillyT]

4. Agreed...

[peacebird]

10. Thank you for that link! I prefer the two be broken out also, as supers can choose to switch

While pledged are pledged

[PyaarRevolution]

11. The problem is the perception the media is perpetuating.

Which is that Hillary has a HUGE lead, when they're adding the Superdelegates in the numbers and not noting said results accordingly. Most of us here know what Superdelegates are but for others they are not aware and it effects their perception, encouraging them to go out for Hillary and disenfranchising would-be Bernie supporters.

[MineralMan]

13. Most likely, most of those superdelegates will maintain their

preference, of course. I understand why the media includes them. However, I still prefer keeping the two separate, as is done at the link I posted. You can look at the combined total there, of course, but it's not as informative as the primary season progresses.

Still, expecting a large swing in superdelegate preferences is probably not logical. It's unlikely to occur. Only if the primaries produce a majority for a different candidate are they likely to switch.

So, adding them in and keeping track of their current intentions makes some sense, if you're not following from primary to primary.

[reformist2]

12. Superdelegates make a mockery of the so-called "Democratic" Party, and they need to go.

[MineralMan]

14. Many feel that way, but the system is not going to

change in 2016. The earliest it can change is for the 2020 election. I think you'll see that it doesn't change how this election turns out anyhow. I believe there will be a clear winner, once the primaries have been held, without the superdelegates. If that's the case, the system probably won't change.

[reformist2]

16. The "supers" can be pressured/shamed into voting for the democratic delegate winner, whoever that is

[MineralMan]

19. Yes. They'll do it voluntarily, actually.

However, I'm almost certain that Hillary will be the winner in the pledged delegate count, probably before the last primaries are held. Once that happens, it's game over. Even before, really. Once polling indicates that she will get a pledged delegate majority, she'll become the presumptive nominee. That could happen in May, actually.

The unpledged delegates won't have to change their plans, I'm pretty sure. But, we'll see, I guess.

[MADem]

15. I like them. They are the party's "weight" on the process.

They are the considered view of the party as to which candidate will best support the platform and ideals of the party, which candidate has supported the party in the past and can be expected to support the party in the future, and which candidate is perceived to have the best coat-tails.

We've been doing this for DECADES now. It's only recently that people are crabbing about it.

[reformist2]

17. Damned right we're 'crabbing' about it. It needs to go the way of senators elected by legislatures.

[MADem]

20. Why didn't you crab eight years ago? Or sixteen years ago?

Where you stand depends on where you sit.

I like 'em. I'm betting the GOP wishes that they had more than three per state, themselves!!!

[raging moderate]

2. Thank you for clarifying this matter.

59% is, indeed, a win. And 38 to 28 is the score of delegates voted on by the voters in this caucus.

[dana_b]

3. it can change, Willy

I just hope that this is explained to those who are so bummed out about it right now.

[CanonRay]

5. Turning off a generation, one caucus at at time.

Thanks, DNC.

[FlatBaroque]

9. I think this is fantastic. The burning down of both parties is essential to humanity's future

This is the end of corporatism.

[Agnosticsherbet]

6. The real difficulty in changing the race once it starts is proportional awarding of delegates.

As long as the race is very close, it can go anyway, but once a candidate takes a lead, it becomes increasingly difficult to change the race. But every delegate that a Candidate has in the leads makes it increasingly difficult for other candidates to catch up. Its not impossible, but the wins must be huge.

Superdelegates shorten the race. When Obama became the clear leader 2008, al lot of them changed and brought the race to an end, allowing the Democratic Party to focus on the General Election.

Republicans use of winner take all states can change the entire race with a single good win. With Democrats, it is not possible to jump to the front in that way after Super Tuesday.

I expect a long slog.

At some point the math will become impossible, not just difficult. Each new primary or caucus reduces the number of paths to victory.

[jillan]

7. I'm sure the millennials I know that caucused for Bernie & were so excited that he won Colo are

going to be so happy about this.

And we wonder why they don't bother to vote?! Look at what happens when they do.

[JaneyVee]

8. It wasnt a tie, Bernie won.

[EndElectoral]

18. I hadn't realized how un-democratic this superdelegate thing is. What is the origin of this mess?

[MADem]

21. In 1972, the Democratic Party nominated a guy who lost every state save MA and DC.

Thus creating the meme, "Don't Blame Me, I'm From Massachusetts."

The party vowed to never allow an un-electable candidate to be nominated again, and thus, they created (with the help of a fellow who is now working as a KEY ADVISOR for Bernie Sanders, ironically enough), the Super-Delegate system, which is, essentially, a wee DEMOCRATIC PARTY thumb on the scale. It's not enough to DECIDE the result, but it is enough to influence it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. 1968 and the riots out of Chicago

they may get riots this year.

[Cheese Sandwich]

22. Commit now to riot if super delegates ever flip the result of an election

[riversedge]

23. Change the rules if you do not like them.

[Cheese Sandwich]

24. No money, no power

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. Bad, bad reporter

supers do not get a final say until the first vote at the convention, They should not be counted, period, Same shit happened in 2008.

[gcomeau]

27. No he did not.

Nobody has any superdelegates yet. Not one single one. They are not pledged until the convention no matter what they say their preference is now.


Anyone saying differently is trying to dishonestly manipulate perceptions.