Sanders Has a good shot to win Cali by 20 Plus points based on Today and Latest Polls!

[fluffyclouds]

Bernie always out performs the Polls in Liberal open primary states by 10 to 20 points on average and looking at the latest polls he has a good shot of winning by 20 or more points!

[bettyellen]

1. Isn't it semi closed? Republicans cannot vote- which is bad for SBS.

[rufus dog]

2. You are correct

The Rebublicans have a closed primary. Others, except for American Independent, can get a Democratic Party ballot.

[bettyellen]

3. Good. From here on in, totally open primaries are not great for Dems. DT has the nod.

And GOP voters are breaking for Bernie.

[JimDandy]

41. GOP voters have until 23 May to change party. I'll bet today's cleared field for Trump

is giving Republicans who can't stand him or Clinton a real dilemma.

Clinton is courting Republican women and Republican Hispanics. Bernie is probably looking good to the rest of the Republicans.

[bettyellen]

45. Oh shucks- I thought the deadline was this week.

[delrem]

49. Ah, "GOP voters are breaking for Bernie" is the new Brockspeak, you say.

How cute.

[bettyellen]

50. Cute? Nope. That is why I favor closed primaries. GOPers like to fuck with our elections.

[delrem]

51. Here's a clue: Bernie Sanders' supporters "break for Bernie".

All your Brockspeak aside.

Here's another clue: there were twice as many turning out to vote Republican in the Indiana primaries, than Democratic. So even given the rather close split on the Democratic side, that can't look good.

So don't you tell me that supporters of Bernie Sanders are Republicans, as if it were truth.

[bettyellen]

52. Another clue: RW sites have been encouraging Republicans to do it too. And Bernie does win RW-

states that are useless, I know.

[delrem]

53. Oh bullshit. Rush Limbaugh was the person who invented the PUMA, remember?

It was fucking bullshit then, it is bullshit now when turned on Sanders.

What is truth is the number of extreme right wing neocons who have publicly endorsed Hillary Rodham Clinton. What is truth is Hillary Rodham Clinton's right wing credentials, as being the darling of the big investment banks. That is FACT.

Vs that all you have is this shitty smear against people who vote for Sanders.

[bettyellen]

56. IDK about the PUMA shit, sorry. But you having faith in the word of RW neocons- LOL, not

shocked because a lot of people seem desperate for ANYONE to validate their crazy theories. Totally nuts in here.

[delrem]

59. Yah. OK. But here's another clue:

Supporters of Bernie Sanders support him because of the issues that he brings to the table.

Your Brockspeak can't negate that.

[bettyellen]

60. I know that- they share many (but not all) of my concerns, big difference is the how to do it.

[delrem]

61. That isn't what you've been saying, bettyellen.

[bettyellen]

62. I have no clue what you are going on about- like Hillary, I am fairly aligned with most

(but not all) of SBS's ideas. However I have priorities he does not seem to give a rats ass about. And he has no concrete, achievable plans based on REALISTIC economic growth. His 5% figure is a fucking joke, so he will never survive vetting.

[delrem]

63. Then I suggest you reread the thread, starting from the post that I originally replied to. /nt

[bettyellen]

64. We have only been talking about election process in terms of who can vote. and yeah- I don't want

Republicans voting in Dem primaries even though I'd like voting to be easier in every OTHER way. I have worked to make voting easier in every OTHER way.

[delrem]

66. No, you were talking about supporters who "break for Bernie".

You made "breaking for Bernie" the motive for your recommendation. For your Brockspeak spin.

Kinda shitty thing for someone to do, esp. if that someone supports a candidate who was endorsed, publicly, by Dick Cheney and Henry Kissinger and Robert Kagan, to name just a few, and for whom David Brock works a PAC devoted to internet outreach.

And you dare chastise those who "break for Bernie" as GOP. For shame.

[bettyellen]

69. I said the GOP has been encouraging people to vote for SBS in some open primaries. And it is true.

That "support" would disappear in November when they will go back to the GOP. Anyway, it is never going to come to that.
This crock of shit plan to steal SGs is never going to pan out. And he is dead in the water without it.
I will stop wasting my time now!

[Arneoker]

85. Don't forget that she is the Wicked Witch of the West

And that her secret number is 666!

[JDPriestly]

77. Hillary's wins in the South are also useless by that measure. Those states will not vote Democratic

in November, not North or South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, etc. None of them. And that is where a lot of her voters are.

Both candidates have won in states that will not vote Democratic in November.

California will vote Democratic in November. We are an important state to win.

[bettyellen]

86. I think she can turn GA purple. And she has won MORE swing states, more states period.

Give it up- there is no path. He'd need 75% of Cali and 65% of everything else.

Has he EVER got 65% of the vote?

[thesquanderer]

94. re: "Has he EVER got 65% of the vote?"

86% in VT
82 % in AK
79% in UT
78% in ID
73% in WA
70% in HI
68% in KS
64+ in ME

based on google's figures, anyway

As for "He'd need 75% of Cali and 65% of everything else" -- there are multiple paths, but none are likely. Here's one I came up with, that (barely) gives Hillary Kentucky, New Jersey, New Mexico, and DC, and gives Sanders his lead by grabbing between 64 and 72 in the rest.

http://DemRace.com/?share=5hjZ6Xf7

[bettyellen]

96. 8 states, mostly red- so that is what= 16 electoral votes total from his eight strongest states?

As I said, Hillary is killing him in swing states- the ones that will matter in the GE. And one of which has more votes than ALL of his eight strongest states.

[thesquanderer]

97. You've changed the conversation.

You said he has to start getting 65%+, and suggested he's never been able to do it before, and I showed you that he has. What color those states were, or how many electoral votes they have, is irrelevant.

[bettyellen]

98. Actually the premise of this conversation is winning when it matters- blue and purple states- and

THOSE are the upcoming states that matter, NJ and Ca and if there is a path for him there. You've not shown me one.
He doesn't do as well in elections in large blue states with diverse populations.

There is no path by continuing to win small red states.

[thesquanderer]

99. I was only responding to your comment "Has he EVER got 65% of the vote?"

I thought that was clear.

But as long as you brought it up...

To you point about which of the two of them wins red states vs blue states, honestly, I think that's irrelevant. A candidate's strength in a state versus some else of their own party is not an indication of how that candidate will do in that state against someone of the other party. For example, Hillary trounced Obama in New York in 2008, Obama still won NY handily in the general. There are tons of examples.

People who voted for either Sanders OR Clinton in the primary are much more likely to vote for the Dem in November than they are to vote for Trump. Regardless of whether their own state actually went for Sanders or Clinton.

How you appeal to members of your own party in a primary simply is not a reliable predictor of how you appeal to the general electorate. It's a different contest... a different set of candidates, a different voter pool. Put differently, sure, you can say that the Sanders people didn't vote for Clinton and vice versa... but you can also be sure that none of them voted for Trump.

[bettyellen]

100. I agree with you on all except the importance of having strong support in swing states....

that is what guarantees Clinton a path in November. I think Sanders and Trump cannibalize each other with the angry man vote- and he would be rendered a whole lot less relevant in the GE because of that.

[thesquanderer]

103. re: "strong support in swing states... is what guarantees Clinton a path in November"

It's an interesting theory, but I'm not sure I see it.

Let's look at Ohio. Clinton trounced Sanders, 56.% to 42.7%. But does that really mean that Trump more easily beats Sanders than Clinton in Ohio? Keep in mind that, despite that huge margin, they were only separated by about 165k votes. Over 5 million Ohioans typically vote in the general.

And if by some chance Sanders became the nominee, do you really not think that pretty much all the Clinton primary voters would vote for Sanders over Trump? I'm not really seeing the rationale for her strong win in that state making it more likely that she carries it compared to how Sanders would do.

[bettyellen]

105. I think it means Clinton can take Ohio, Florida for sure, and other swing states

because she is popular (already winning big with) with the Dem base PLUS people who hate Trump. SBS splits a lot of angry men with Trump- and they are not ever as reliably Dem as women and POC. We need to gain seats in congress, and I cannot see how SBS can do that.

[JDPriestly]

76. We have a lot of Peace and Freedom and Green Party voters in California who will vote for Bernie.

The Democratic Party should and will welcome them. They will not vote Democratic if our candidate is Hillary.

January 5, 2016
. . . .
Democratic 7,438,655 43.1%
. . . .
Republican 4,767,259 27.6%
. . . . .
No Party Preference 4,141,860 24.0%
. . . .
Other 911,639 5.3%
. . . .

http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov//ror/ror-pages/154day-presprim-16/historical-reg-stats.pdf

[bettyellen]

78. We take Cali in the general no matter what, so can't make concessions to change candidates more

popular everywhere else. I WISH the country overall was more liberal, but I can't expect them to vote like NYC or Cali nationwide. It is what it is.

[JDPriestly]

81. One post says that Republicans are crossing over to vote for Bernie because they like him,

and the next one says that Bernie is too liberal to attract conservatives. Which is it?

You know what I think?

I think Bernie is attractive to certain conservatives because he is liberal on social issues but conservative on jobs, trade agreements and other economic issues that affect all our lives.

I think Bernie appeals to a lot of voters.

Hillary appeals primarily to Democrats.

It's Bernie who will, in the end, carry the swing states. They just don't know him yet.

And I have to ask you, as a liberal Californian who has compromised to vote for conservative Democrats over and over, why in the world should I do that again?

Maybe the rest of the country needs to be brought a long.

Most Hillary supporters assure us they will vote for Bernie if he wins in the primaries. Bernie supporters are sick of supporting conservative Democrats. I think Bernie should get the nomination. I think he will win in November if he does.

[bettyellen]

84. you know Republicans were pushing Bernie forward for the PRIMARY, right?

And you know why. So why pretend it has anything to do with the GE?
Seriously- what is it with taking the bait from RWers lately?

Bernie has been losing important swing states- by large margins because people do know him. He's this close to losing it all, if he pulls it out, of course I will vote for him. But I am not lying to myself that he is a stronger candidate, and I'm not going to buy the bullshit RWers try to feed us. You shouldn't either.

[LondonReign2]

92. Perhaps a better strategy is to get them to start voting for Democrats

[bettyellen]

93. Sure- but if registering 2-3 months in advance is an issue because they are on the fence.....

I don't trust them to make good decisions. Unlike a lot of guys here, the Dem base does see big differences in the two parties. Our lives can literally hinge on those differences.

[Brother Buzz]

10. No, only unaffiliated can choose to vote the Dem ballot

No Greens, no Libertarian, no American Independent, no Republican, no Peace and Freedom. Nobody but 'no party preference' lower case independents can choose to vote with the Democrates.

[Barack_America]

20. And they can't vote in the Republican primary.

If those independents want to vote, Bernie or Hillary are their only choices.

[Brother Buzz]

34. Correct, only republicans can vote the the republican primary - It's totally closed

Of course, EVERYONE in the state still has time to change parties and get in on the fun. I believe 23 May is the cutoff date for voter registration.

[Biaviians]

58. Thats almost the best thing I've heard all night. Hahaha

[pat_k]

16. Unaffiliated voters are the ones making a difference.

Last edited Tue May 3, 2016, 11:22 PM - Edit history (1)

Open vs. "Semi-Closed" or states where you can change party affiliation the same day are effectively the same.

The difference is allowing the biggest "party" -- unaffiliated (aka "Independent&quot voters to vote.

[bettyellen]

22. Cali does not have same day registration. So there is that.

[JackRiddler]

74. Perfect combination actually.

Independents can't waste their vote by choosing which Republican devil to support, so they will participate in the properly open Democratic primary.

[litlbilly]

4. If and when he does that, after a 25 point blowout in Oregon, he will pull it off,,,with our help:)

[artislife]

5. I think Oregon is gonna look like WA

Cascadia!

[litlbilly]

6. Yes it is. We dont want to let Washington beat us...I just voted today, best vote i ever cast.

[artislife]

8. We may have to have a microbrew off, dude!

[litlbilly]

15. You bet:)

[JudyM]

35. Mcmenamins!

[artislife]

36. Mmm!

[JudyM]

39. Wish I could get it here on the east coast, great beer.

[artislife]

40. Not my favorite beer but my favorite commercial

[JudyM]

43. Yeah, very cute!

[progressoid]

102. Mmmm, Henry's.

Used to drink a lot of that when we lived out west a couple decades ago.

[artislife]

107. Better than a lot, for sure! nt

[Pastiche423]

21. That means we must win by over 73%!

My ballot just went in the mail to further that cause.

Go Bernie Go!

[litlbilly]

23. I think its doable. these are different times.

[jwirr]

101. Now each of you go find 5 more people who will do the same

thing. That is how we won the MN caucuses. Each one bring 5 more.

[Joob]

104. Noo you bastards! I predicted WA was going to be best Bernie State, Washington Pride!

Although fine whatever, it's good for Bernie if you beat us I suppose

[litlbilly]

106. :)I would happy with a tie. Washington and Oregon rocks

[StevieM]

11. I don't doubt that Bernie will win big in Oregon, but it will not be by nearly as much as he won by

in Washington state.

Washington was a caucus...Oregon is a primary. There is a big difference, especially with regards to how Hillary performs.

I am thinking that Bernie will win Oregon by about 20 points, like he did in New Hampshire. He won't win by 60 points.

[litlbilly]

17. Maybe, but, you watch the turnout, its all vote by mail, we get 75% return ballots, we

crush Hill by 40, you just wait and see.

[passiveporcupine]

19. I wonder if mail-in voting will have any affect on the totals

It's easier for everyone to vote, young and old. I guess the issue is if the Independents got switched in time to vote for him. It's closed primary here, but they had until April 26 to register as a dem.

[litlbilly]

28. I heard there was a huge voter to dem serge before the deadline. I was an indie till July

I bet there are a lot of us here in Oregon who did the same thing.

[passiveporcupine]

29. I hope you are right.

[litlbilly]

30. Me too:)

[JudyM]

37. Fingers crossed.

[Adrahil]

7. He needs to be winning by an average of 30.

He continues to miss his targets. He actually needs a higher percentage of the remaining delegtaes AFTER he won Indiana.

[bettyellen]

79. He needs more than double that- in ALL the remaining states.

[fluffyclouds]

9. Correct!

I also just realized that since the Republican primary is wrapped up, that all the independents can now vote in the dem primary instead of being split between both parties which favors Sanders even more.

[Codeine]

12. The republican primary votes still occur. nt

[Sparkly]

13. Are you replying to yourself?

If so, you might remind yourself of the electoral map, how many open primaries are left and HRC's current lead.

[StevieM]

14. Kasich is still in the race so I don't think you can call the GOP race wrapped up.

He has said he is in until Trump hits 1237, which likely means until June 7.

Welcome to DU!!

[Codeine]

18. You forgot to log your sock out

before replying to yourself.

[bettyellen]

24. HA HA HA

[passiveporcupine]

25. Oh ain't she sweet

Well see her walking down that street
Yes I ask you very confidentially
Ain't she sweet?

[JonLeibowitz]

42. LOL! Correct the record isn't paying enough.

[bettyellen]

26. Talking to yourself!?!?! HA HA HA

[JudyM]

38. Right. Also, many republicans may prefer his chances against tRump and switch over. I'll take it.

[ContinentalOp]

27. Delusional

Bernie has only won 4 out of the 14 open primaries that have been held so far, and he doesn't do well in very diverse states. And the polls I've seen all have Clinton ahead. Then again, since the Republican nominee has been chosen, there will probably be tons of ratfucking Orange County "independents" voting for Bernie just like you've all been asking for!

[JonLeibowitz]

44. diverse states like Oklahoma, Hawaii, and Alaska? Oh wait, never mind, not the 'right diversity'

[ContinentalOp]

48. Yes, he won Hawaii, which is the most diverse state in the nation.

I'm not talking about the "right kind of diversity." I only look at one kind, the non-hispanic white population by percentage. Here's the top half, ranked most to least diverse.

HI - Sanders
DC - Haven't voted
CA - Haven't voted
NM - Haven't voted
TX - Clinton
NV - Clinton
MD - Clinton
GA - Clinton
FL - Clinton
AZ - Clinton
NY - Clinton
MS - Clinton
NJ - Haven't Voted
LA - Clinton
AK - Sanders
IL - Clinton
VA - Clinton
SC - Clinton
DE - Clinton
NC - Clinton
AL - Clinton
OK - Sanders
CO - Sanders
CT - Clinton
WA - Sanders
AR - Clinton

So four of the most diverse states haven't voted yet. Out of the remaining 22, Clinton has won 17, Sanders 5. She has won 77% of the most diverse states. And 3 out of 5 of his wins are at the bottom of that list. Basically average for diversity.

Given that pattern, I find it highly unlikely that he's going to be able to win CA.

Also, Sanders supporters like to tout his success in the "west", but she has won the heavily latino states bordering CA like NV and AZ, which are more similar in many ways to CA than WA or OR are.

[Protalker]

31. Bernie courage I admire

I support Hillary but his hard fought win after last week is admirable. I remember his announcement he was running outside the Capital compared to Trump escalator in Trump Tower. Let the best person win and we will beat Trump.

[amborin]

32. We're working hard for Bernie here in CA!

[highprincipleswork]

33. I always have thought Bernie could win big in CA,, and working to make it so. We can still register

till May 23rd, so if you know Californians who should register, let them know. Also, there are tools available to check your current registration, which is a good thing to do.

[pnwmom]

46. He could win EVERY STATE by 20 points and he would STILL LOSE.

Hillary only needs 34% of remaining pledged delegates to win the majority of pledged delegates. He has a better chance of winning the lottery.

But with regard to CA, Survey USA's poll released 2 days ago puts Hillary 19 points on top. So he's going to need quite a swing just to break even.

http://abc7.com/politics/poll-ca-voters-resigned-to-vote-for-donald-trump-vs-hillary-clinton/1318792/

[rusty fender]

55. Yes, but the polls also had her winning big over Bernie

In Indiana and we know how that turned out

[creeksneakers2]

65. The most recent Indiana poll

had Hillary up by only 4 points.

[SheilaT]

72. Not to mention Nate Silver gave her a 90% chance of winning

Indiana.

His final polling had her at 54.2%, Sanders at 43.8. Instead, the numbers are almost perfectly reversed in the final result.

[pnwmom]

68. No, they were predicting about a 4% win, which was within the margin of error.

But I don't think you've let it sink in. To win the majority of pledged delegates, he'd have to win 67% of all remaining delegates. Even in Indiana just now he won only only 52.5%. How do you plan on him upping his game?

[rusty fender]

75. There was a poll on Monday

that had Hillary leading by 14 points!

Be that as it may, with this loss and more Hillary losses to come, our civil war will continue through July. I've been hoping that one or the other would wrap up the nomination so that we can focus on beating the Repukes.

This limbo is bad for our morale and our chances in Nov.

[pnwmom]

80. That was an outlier. The aggregate made them much closer. I agree that this "limbo"

is very bad for our morale. Now Hillary will be having to deal with attacks from both the left and the right, even though Bernie has a 0.0 mathematical possibility of gaining the majority of pledged delegates (the total number of pledged delegates remaining is smaller than the number he needs to get a majority, so he would lose even if he got 100% of them)

The only way he could possibly win would be to lose the majority of pledged delegates and yet somehow convince hundreds of Hillary's super delegates to switch to him. That's not going to happen.

[rusty fender]

90. I was neutral in this primary race,

but, as you point out, one contender has 0% chance of winning the nomination even if he wins every state from here on out and by staying in he makes the actual nominee waste resources on the primary when she could save them for the general. This situation is really bad for us.

[pnwmom]

112. It is. Hillary now has to fight a pointless two-front war. nt

[progressoid]

109. Another poll that only used registered Democrats.

I don't expect Bernie to win CA by 20 points but citing a poll that only uses registered Dems isn't really making your point. CA allows Indies to vote in the Dem primary. That's an area that should have been covered in any reliable poll.

[pnwmom]

110. That sentence saying "registered Democrats" was misleading shorthand. The correct information

is at the bottom of the article, and is confirmed by looking at the survey instrument itself. They worked from lists of adults, and then asked people if they were registered to vote; and then if they going to vote and which party they were going to vote in or leaning toward. So of the 2400 adults, 2011 said they were registered voters -- registered for SOMETHING. Of that group, 826 were determined to be likely to vote in the June Democratic primary. That would include non-declareds who indicated that they were planning to vote Dem.

For this poll, SurveyUSA interviewed 2,400 California adults from April 27 to April 30. Of the adults, 2,011 were registered to vote in the state of California. Of the California registered voters, 529 were determined by SurveyUSA to be likely to vote in the June Republican presidential primary, 826 were determined by SurveyUSA to be likely to vote in the June Democratic presidential primary, 1,502 were determined to be likely to vote in the June U.S. Senate primary, and 1,683 were determined to be likely to vote in the November general election.

538 considers SurveyUSA to be consistently one of the most accurate and reliable pollsters, giving them an A rating.

[progressoid]

113. That seems even more vague.

Just says that '826 were determined by SurveyUSA to be likely to vote in the June Democratic presidential primary'. Doesn't say whether they were Dem or not.

[pnwmom]

114. It isn't vague if you go into their site and read their questionnaire. But they are incentivized

to including undeclareds in their sample because they want their results to be accurate. And leaving out undeclareds certainly won't give them a realistic sample.

This pollster isn't a Democratic lackey. It's a very reputable independent pollster that 538 gives an A rating to.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

47. He lost the non-white vote in IN by 28 points

http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/polls/in/Dem

When he loses the non-white vote by 28 points in heterogeneous CA he will be crushed.

IN is 83% white. CA is 42% white!

You can do the math.


The first thing I did was check the demographics and was encouraged.

[kcjohn1]

57. Clinton only dominates AA minority voters

Indiana has more AA voters then California.

[ContinentalOp]

67. She has done well in states with big hispanic populations too.

Of the top 10 states by hispanic population, she won Texas, Arizona, Nevada, Florida, New York, and Illinois, and Sanders won only Colorado.

New Mexico, California, and New Jersey have yet to vote, but I expect she'll continue the trend in those states.

[kcjohn1]

70. Bernie won hispanics in IL

He also won in Washington State/CO. Polls said he won NV (I think shady stuff in those Casinos).

NY/AZ were closed primaries. TX/FL are part of the South.

AA are the only ones that have consistently voted for Clinton 70-80%. Hispanics are not monotheistic and vote in the same way. Different states we have seen different results.

CA is open and very liberal state. It is not machine state like NY. If turnout is large, he should do well with hispanics.

[ContinentalOp]

73. True, he won the hispanic vote in IL by 1% which is probably within the margin of error

The common denominator between WA, CO, and NV is that they were all caucuses which probably don't accurately represent the hispanic voters of those states. The idea that he won the hispanic vote in NV is disputed. http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/02/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-hispanic-voters-fight-219578

I don't know what "NY/AZ were closed primaries. TX/FL are part of the South." is supposed to mean. I guess you're saying they don't count?

In general she tends to do well with hispanic voters and she tends to do well in primaries, either open or closed.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

87. To amplify on your thoughts.

I don't know what "NY/AZ were closed primaries. TX/FL are part of the South." is supposed to mean. I guess you're saying they don't count?

The majority of Hispanics in AZ and TX are of Mexican ancestry. The latter don't stop being of Mexican ancestry because they live in the south. Their Hispanic ancestry is the independent variable, not their region.

Hillary won 67% of Hispanics in CA in 08 and will do so again:



If you go state by state, many of whom have already voted, the results are similar to 08. The pattern is repeating itself. If Hillary was to falter with the Hispanic vote in CA it would be an anomaly.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

83. I believe most Hispanics believe in one God.

"...Hispanics are not monotheistic..."


-kcjohn


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1895633

I believe most Hispanics believe in one God.

[NWCorona]

71. They do? I didn't know that. nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

82. Non-white =more than African American voters

The Vermont independent is losing California 57-38, according to A rated pollster Survey USA:


http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton


and much of this loss is a function of losing the Hispanic vote 58-35:


http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=431efd5f-c395-4390-bfb0-9f7b4d3941ac


This is approximately the same margin or less than she won Hispanics in TX, AZ, and NV, all of whom have similar origins.

This election was over in March.

Bookmark this post, please.

[mvd]

54. Hope you are right. A very strong finish would..

help Bernie make his case to the super delegates. Still a month away so I am sure we will see a lot of polls both ways.

[LWolf]

88. KICK AND FUCKING RECOMMEND.

[DCBob]

91. LOL.. latest polls!! ... May 03, 2016, Poll: Sanders trails Clinton by double digits in California

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/278588-poll-sanders-trails-clinton-by-double-digits-in-calif

[thesquanderer]

95. Unfortunately, winning CA by 20+ points probably won't be enough.

He probably needs to win it by 30+.

[pdsimdars]

108. I hope so, but didn't we hear about some more voter registration "irregularities" in CA last week?

[book_worm]

111. So what it won't be enough to get the nomination even if he did win CA by 20--

which he won't.