2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSo Sanders needed to beat Clinton by 52% in the WVa.Primary
Victoria Brownworth ?@VABVOX 4h4 hours agoSo Sanders needed to beat Clinton by 52% tonight in the #WVPrimary.
He beat her by 14%.
Just saying.
Victoria Brownworth ?@VABVOX 4h4 hours ago
Here's the math going forward.
NBC News ?@NBCNews 8h8 hours ago
Donald Trump supporters gave Bernie Sanders a boost in West Virginia http://nbcnews.to/27cydiq #Decision2016
baldguy
(36,649 posts)livetohike
(22,084 posts)win!! Send more money .
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)it seems so very unethical to me.
CorkySt.Clair
(1,507 posts)DrDan
(20,411 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Where money and enthusiasm go to die a slow and painful death.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)Plus, I think it's good to challenge Hillary from the left.
If nothing else, it will make the convention more interesting.
Fla Dem
(23,339 posts)Bernie Sanders falls further behind with each primary. After Indiana he had to win 65-70% of the delegates to even pull even. He picked up 16 delegates to HRC's 11 last night, a mere 55%. So he missed his target and only picked up 5 delegates on HRC's lead. That means the percent of delegates he has to win going forward becomes larger.
What's really troubling is the 40% of independent voters who said they voted for BS, but if the general election was between Bernie and Trump they would vote for Trump. As there has been throughout the primaries, the RW has been voting BS in order to block HRC. They have always felt they would have a better chance to win the WH if the Dem nominee was Bernie.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)VERY white, and a semi-open primary. It's demographically one of the best states for him (Oregon, being slightly better), and he missed his delegate target. In fact, he lost with Democrats. That's bad news given that Kentucky and Oregon are both closed primaries. Clinton could actually win KY, and though I still think OR is likely a win for Sanders, he won't win by anything close to 30 points in either. He'll almost certainly lose New Jersey. He'll have to win CA with well over 70% of the vote.
Fla Dem
(23,339 posts)It will be interesting to see how that one shakes out without the independents skewing the results. California will be another semi-open primary where indies will be able to vote in the primary. The latest CNN poll has HRC up by 8%.
In any event there is no path for BS to secure the nomination. All he's doing at this point is spinning his wheels and giving false hope to his fans.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)I still think he'll win OR narrowly. But not by NEARLY enough. I think Clinton has a decent chance to win KY, but if Sanders wins, it'll be a fairly narrow win. Sanders could win CA, but again, narrowly. HRC is up in the CA polls, but Sanders often overperforms in open and semi-open primaries. It would not surprise me at all if he pulls pulls out a 4-5 point victory, but FAR short of the 35-40 point margin he is likely to need by then. She will shellac him in NJ and DC.
Tarc
(10,472 posts)It does keep the Democrats and our message in the media 24/7, and makes at least a partial dent in their what-will-that-craaaaaazy-Donald-say-next fascination.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)dissecting what is mostly far beneath the notice of busy people and lose perspective and sight of what matters.
George II
(67,782 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)She only represents the top 10 percent, at best.
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)Already the zombie primary is damaging the GE...Bernie should be ashamed.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)The argument I didn't make above is that a competitive primary helps build state by state infrastructure for the GE.
LexVegas
(6,005 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)FUCK the status quo.
Fla Dem
(23,339 posts)There was never any sense that HRC was "entitled" to be the Democratic nominee. She wasn't even sure she wanted to run. She knew she had an uphill battle right from the start. All the crap the RW would throw at her, she's a woman, and she lost the 2008 campaign.
This is not entitlement. This is a woman who has worked hard, earned respect around the world, who is probably more accomplished than any presidential candidate in the last 25 years.
For you or any Bernie fan to distill her accomplishments down to "entitlement" is ill-informed, ignorant. and frankly sour grapes.
But it doesn't matter. Hillary Clinton will go down in history as one of the best President, while Bernie Sanders will be but a footnote in history as a mediocre Congressman and Senator from Vt.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)which is the sense of entitlement that I find most galling.
worked hard? -for the 1 % interests certainly. Not so much for working class interests, people of color, or gay rights.
Earned respect? - not in my book. Nor in the book of anyone who's country was bombed into ISIS strongholds because of the way she voted as senator, or the way she acted as SOS.
accomplished? - by being stuck in the 20th century, tin-eared to millennials, and taking $650,000 a speach from the guys who brought you the crisis we have been in for a decade?
For you to call me ill-informed is to repeat that nauseating insult Clinton hurled at my generation: that we are easily duped and don't do our homework. The reverse is true: the more people do their homework, the less reason they find to support Mrs Status Quo. The status quo is untenable. But you, comfortable in your sheltered age group, won't agree so until the status quo starts to hurt you personally. And then you have the unmitigated gall to call me ignorant and sour-graped.
Enjoy the last 20th-century campaign. In four years time, all it may be remembered for is driving away half the democratic base, and all the party's future.
But I still hold out hope that it will come to a very final failure, and that we will nominate the candidate who guarantees lots of landslide victories and the future of the Dmocratic Party: someone with sound judgement who gets major decisions right at once (gay rights, TPP, IWR). We had better nominate Bernie Sanders.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)perhaps a little homework into her actual service records would have you at least avoiding all the stupid sweeping and misinformed statements you just made.
dchill
(38,315 posts)I've seen today. Her post is completely accurate, and you know it. Just because something sticks in your craw doesn't make it poison.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)and you blind hatred is holding you back from seeing the bigger picture. I feel sorry for you.
dchill
(38,315 posts)But it could also be Brocksplainin'.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Since you have none - except a repeat of that tired old lie about millennials who "haven't done their homework" (ageist much?) - we may as well have expected the adverb.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)But somehow, it fails to diappoint anymore.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Bernie voters are VERY informed, that's why we're not supporting Hillary.
We may be fighting until the bitter end, but at least we don't have our heads in the sand regarding a NON-PARTISAN FBI investigation that could affect the entire Democratic Party for years.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)PufPuf23
(8,687 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)If she can only win in sheltered and conditioned contests (only regeistered democrats, with lots of establishment favors and all chance events going her way) then she won't be able to win in the GE. And her flaws will reverberate downticket too.
Why are you guys so desperate to lose - to Trump, of all people?
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)lost nine primaries at the end which included Ohio and Pennsylvania. Delegate math trumps zombie wins.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)GE (un)electability and net negative favorability matter more than conditioned delegate accumulation in a primary process tailored to your needs by your former Florida campaign manager.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)She will not secure a majority of the pledged delegates until June 7, if she does.
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)she might after Jersey.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)It is mathematically impossible for her to secure a total majority of pledged delegates until June 7. And it most likely will not be until the CA polls close.
apnu
(8,722 posts)The race isn't over, but everybody can see that Hillary has led in pledged delegates from very early on, how is this not a majority of Democratic Party voters?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)That number, 2,026, is the clinch number. She leads but has not clinched a majority of the pledged delegates.
apnu
(8,722 posts)That's the way the rules are for Democrats. In 2008, neither Obama or Clinton secured 2,026 pledged delegates.
Obama collected 1,828.5 PDs and Clinton 1,726.5. That year the magic number was 2,117 at the Convention. Obama, in the end had 2,285.5.
This number is 2,383 to secure the nomination w/out a floor fight. PD's are only part of the equation, one cannot win the nomination on PDs alone.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)bridge the gap for the pledged delegate winner.
The candidate who secures the majority of pledged delegates, 2,026, will have enough supers vote for them to get them to 2,383 at the convention. It is a race to 2,026 pledged delegates.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Renew Deal
(81,801 posts)She will be very close after PR
w4rma
(31,700 posts)Hillary will, absolutely, *not* win through pledged delegates, alone. She'd have to win more than 65% of the delegates from every race onward.
Trenzalore
(2,331 posts)Also, Bernie has spent the past 9 months complaining about super delegates. Now that is his only path to victory they are going to endorse him en masse?
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)If she is ahead in delegate count, the supers act to put her over. Also, they commit before the convention as they did in 08 for Obama.
Renew Deal
(81,801 posts)The super-delegates have made public committments.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....the hole is getting deeper and deeper.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)OnlinePoker
(5,702 posts)There are two people in the race and everyone is showing the results as (approx) Sanders 51.4% and Clinton 35.8%. Where did the other 12.8% of the votes go?
apnu
(8,722 posts)dchill
(38,315 posts)including Martin O'Malley.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)He took 9% statewide, IIRC.
OnlinePoker
(5,702 posts)Who decides how a state's delegates get divided up if they aren't using the percentages? As a Canadian, I see the way Americans elect their people for president as absolutely bizarre. The superdelegate system for the Democrats is anything but democratic, for instance. Our first past the post system isn't great either, but Trudeau promised reform as one of his election promises last year so we'll see.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)If a candidate doesn't get at least 15%, no delegates. Any above 15% are awarded proportionally by some often complicated math.
OnlinePoker
(5,702 posts)...because of the supers.
hellofromreddit
(1,182 posts)Enjoy the party. You've clearly earned it.