Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
Wed May 18, 2016, 02:18 AM May 2016

Sanders tie in KY and 11.6% winning margin in Oregon are amazing!

Last edited Wed May 18, 2016, 02:54 PM - Edit history (3)

I admit I was hoping for an even bigger Sanders blowout in Oregon. I am a strong Sanders supporter. But in trying to pull back and give this the long view--as objectively as I can, and with the history that I've lived, and that I know, in mind--it is astonishing that Sanders tied Clinton in Kentucky, this late in a primary process that Clinton started out believing was hers by right, with the entire Democratic Party establishment on her side, and with the entirety of the Corrupt Media on her side, and with every corporate and billionaire donor with an interest in controlling the U.S. president cooperating.

As the Guardian's election web site shows, Clinton's margin in Kentucky is one half of a percent with 100% of the precincts reporting, and reports are that she has conceded a tie.

Furthermore, Kentucky is a closed primary. It was almost impossible for independents to vote in the KY primary. So this was a tally of the Democratic Party BASE in KY. Half of that base is for Sanders, with independents having no say. Half of that party base is for substantial change, in the direction of the New Deal, NOT for "incrementalism" and neo-liberalism ("free trade for the rich&quot .

But Sanders' decisive 11.6% win in Oregon is even more amazing. Again, I wanted a bigger blowout to give Sanders more strength coming to my state, California, which can turn this primary around. But when I think of what has been happening over the last month, with Clinton's DNC, and the Clinton campaign, and Democratic state party officials, and Democrats like Barbara Boxer, for godssakes, and the Corrupt Media on top of all that, all trying to force Sanders out before the primary is over, with every Corrupt Media news outlet saying Clinton 'won' and treating Sanders like he doesn't exist, and treating his supporters like they don't exist--or else repeating David Brock's latest goddamn lie, that we are thugs--it is, simply amazing that Sanders is still doing this well, and it is a credit to his ideas, to his supporters and to the man himself.

Oregon has a form of closed primary--call it semi-closed. They automatically register every citizen to vote, but you have to go out of your way to become a Democrat and vote in the Democratic primary in Oregon, and you have to remember to do that in time. You have to make a special request. You can't just crossover vote.

It's somewhat like the semi-closed primary in California. In California, you can register as "No Party Preference" or NPP (which means "independent" but doesn't use the word), but NPPs have to request a Democratic Party ballot to vote in our primary. In both cases, there is a step 2, and that step takes knowledge of the system. Young voters, new voters, independent voters likely have less knowledge of the system, and less practice at it, than traditional Democratic voters. So Oregon, too, was something of a test of the party's base in that state, less so than in Kentucky, but still important.

With all the heavy handicaps on Sanders, he BEAT Clinton in Oregon by a very substantial margin, indeed. (It has slowly moved into double-digit blowout territory as returns have come in during the night. I'm updating this OP accordingly. It's currently 11.6 pts., with 92.6% of the precincts reporting, at the Guardian elections site.)

Sanders, who, as we all know, dropped out a month ago, or ran out of money, or was bleeding staffers, and whom EVERYBODY OF IMPORTANCE told to "Get out!", "Go home!", "Stick a knife in him! He's done!", has nearly tied Clinton in one state and beaten her substantially in another on this very day, a month after his campaign was "over"!



He not only has not dropped out, has not run out of money and is not bleeding staffers, HE'S WINNING!

GO BERNIE!




73 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sanders tie in KY and 11.6% winning margin in Oregon are amazing! (Original Post) Peace Patriot May 2016 OP
He didn't tie her in Kentucky. He lost. (eom) StevieM May 2016 #1
By half a percentage point. But I will cede it to you as a half-assed win, Peace Patriot May 2016 #8
I live in KY ReRe May 2016 #29
Thank you, ReRe! So it IS a tie! Both sides agree. Peace Patriot May 2016 #38
Excellent. Thanks to Bernie Kentuckians! appalachiablue May 2016 #43
Dems for Bernie! ReRe May 2016 #48
Only for the time being. COLGATE4 May 2016 #57
If he's going back to being an Independent... ReRe May 2016 #63
yay, she only lost 15% of her total in 2008 timmymoff May 2016 #56
You know, that's not something I would say if I supported Clinton and believed that she is such bjo59 May 2016 #17
Well, not counting Pike and the other glitched counties, but who's counting? lagomorph777 May 2016 #67
It's amazing how much farther behind he is after tonight MattP May 2016 #2
Beating Clinton by 11.6 pts. is a bad night? Peace Patriot May 2016 #16
It doesn't keep him in the race hack89 May 2016 #41
He needed a 52% in Oregon to remain viable LoverOfLiberty May 2016 #44
neither goes to the convention with a clear win roguevalley May 2016 #71
I say he concedes after June 15th LoverOfLiberty May 2016 #73
K & R This post and great OP. Thanks. appalachiablue May 2016 #49
Keep telling yourself that! bjo59 May 2016 #18
This is a game that Clinton supporters play. senz May 2016 #21
... Agschmid May 2016 #35
"Finagle her way to the nomination". You mean like having the COLGATE4 May 2016 #58
Given the demographics, Sanders should have won KY and he should have won OR by more. Garrett78 May 2016 #3
Wrong! Hillary won KY in 2008 by a landslide, and both Oregon & KY are closed primaries so jillan May 2016 #9
Sanders doing well where Clinton did well in 2008 is par for the course. Garrett78 May 2016 #10
Correct. auntpurl May 2016 #11
I'm stunned that there are folks who don't see this. Is it denial or do they really not get it? Garrett78 May 2016 #19
In 2008 Hillary was running against a black man. COLGATE4 May 2016 #59
OMG! Scurrilous May 2016 #4
Bernie ended April needing 30% wins. Now he needs 35% wins heading into June. LuvLoogie May 2016 #5
Sorry to say but ... slipslidingaway May 2016 #6
Great! Stryguy May 2016 #26
It's not nice to masturbate while posting. You really shouldn't. n/t arcane1 May 2016 #55
Clinton loses to Trump, Sanders wins against Trump: it's the Clinton voters that are electing MisterP May 2016 #64
I guess you'll just have to keep[ COLGATE4 May 2016 #60
What is up with that last 2%? NYT had it 1%. alice mauna May 2016 #7
That is what I was thinking last night... ReRe May 2016 #40
Message auto-removed Name removed May 2016 #51
He did very well tonight! Turin_C3PO May 2016 #12
Wait. Wasn't Clinton supposed to win by 15%? Cause that's what the last poll said! Tiggeroshii May 2016 #13
same baloney how sanders leaning independents cant vote for him. all they have to do is register msongs May 2016 #14
You've missed the point, msongs. Peace Patriot May 2016 #22
Only 8% in KY do not have either a D or R registration. whatthehey May 2016 #42
This is a state where 52% of voters are registered as Democrats yet ContinentalOp May 2016 #15
I just made 2 corrections to my OP. Sanders' margin in OR is now 8.6%! Peace Patriot May 2016 #20
Beautiful OP, Peace Patriot. senz May 2016 #23
Kentucky is so close it could easily flip upon a recount. nt silvershadow May 2016 #24
Why would you recount it? LoverOfLiberty May 2016 #45
Sanders' lead in Oregon is now up to 9.0%! Peace Patriot May 2016 #25
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel May 2016 #27
Oh, joy! The Squirrel is back! Feel the fuzzy little squirrel! Peace Patriot May 2016 #32
Pure treasure Deb May 2016 #39
Just adding another handicap heaped on Sanders, before his big win in Oregon. Peace Patriot May 2016 #28
I awoke this morning to this in OR - MrMickeysMom May 2016 #30
Can you hear us now? raging moderate May 2016 #31
Subtract the 64,000 plus Trump and supporters who switched to vote against Hillary and this is Jitter65 May 2016 #33
Real Democrats do not have Henry Kissinger as a friend and advisor. Peace Patriot May 2016 #70
HC won KY in 2008 by 30 points - contrasted LiberalElite May 2016 #34
Two words>"White" and "Man". COLGATE4 May 2016 #62
There is no objective measure by which you can claim Sanders is winning mythology May 2016 #36
He needed to win in both KY and OR by 40 pts. He didn't. baldguy May 2016 #37
As he falls farther behind workinclasszero May 2016 #47
#berniemath, plucking numbers out of the æther to suits one's needs since 2015! Tarc May 2016 #46
10 now :) Tiggeroshii May 2016 #50
Bernie has done awesome throughout this primary process Dem2 May 2016 #52
He gained 8 delegates from those 2 states... SidDithers May 2016 #53
How many delegates did Bernie gain on Hillary? kstewart33 May 2016 #54
K&R Go, Bernie!!!!! HRC Got an Embarrassing Tie in KY in a CLOSED Primary amborin May 2016 #61
Yay! Go Bernie! trudyco May 2016 #65
He actually won OR by almost 12 and only lost 1 county by 1 vote. I love that:) heres the map litlbilly May 2016 #66
Sanders is now winning Oregon by 12% with 95.5% of the precincts reporting. mhatrw May 2016 #68
Thanks! It's been hard to keep up with how big a blowout OR is for Sanders. Peace Patriot May 2016 #72
K & R AzDar May 2016 #69

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
8. By half a percentage point. But I will cede it to you as a half-assed win,
Wed May 18, 2016, 02:55 AM
May 2016

...if you will cede it to me that Sanders was effectively exited from the race a month ago-- by fiat, apparently--according to EVERY news article and news report and Clinton supporter "talking point" I've read or heard. "Stick a fork in him--he's done!"

Sanders is not done. He has come within half a percentage point against Clinton in one state, and beat the dickens out of Clinton in the other, when, according to y'all, he went home long ago.

The blue states in the west may be divided--especially with all the disinformation around, about Sanders being "done"--but they are divided in Sanders' favor--and what does that say about Clinton's chances in the GE, on top of everything else we know about those chances? (Clinton's high negatives; Sanders demolishing Trump in all match-up polls, while Clinton beats Trump by scarily low margins and even loses to Trump in one poll)? If she can't draw a majority of Democrats in the West, WHO is going to vote for her in November, when she has to draw all Democrats plus many independents (now 40+% of the electorate)?

KY and OR say as much about Clinton as about Sanders. Sanders did not do as well as I had expected or hoped, but he was NOT driven out of the race! What does that say about Clinton?

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
29. I live in KY
Wed May 18, 2016, 06:48 AM
May 2016

And the news this morning on our TVs says the candidates agreed to a straight up tie, 50%-50%, and that the delegates were split between the two candidates. WTVQ, ABC.

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
38. Thank you, ReRe! So it IS a tie! Both sides agree.
Wed May 18, 2016, 07:49 AM
May 2016

It was understandable to see a Clinton supporter quibble about whether KY was a "tie." If it was Sanders who had won by a half of a percent, I might do the same thing.

However, Clinton and Sanders are not equal candidates with an equal chance at the voters, and equal control over the Democratic Party structure, and equal time in the Corrupt Media. There is no fairness for Sanders in any establishment venue. So I think I would be more justified in quibbling over his win by a hair being called a "tie" than it is for a Clinton supporter to quibble, in this instance, about Clinton winning by a hair being called a "win" not a "tie." She should have done much better than this. According to her narrative, she's in the last lap of a race that she will inevitably win, and all should be bowing and scraping to her now. She should be getting blowout after blowout in her trot to the finish line.

And that is not happening. The Sanders delegates in Nevada wouldn't bow and scrape. The Sanders voters in Oregon wouldn't bow and scrape. And half the voters of Kentucky wouldn't. Nor have many, many others along the way. We don't want her. And we know that there are millions of voters who can't vote in our primaries who don't want her. That is the problem. And, rather than responding to all of these people, she's getting pissy about it and being desperately unfair to us and to Sanders.

She should have blown Sanders away by now, with all her advantages, power, connections and money--and she can't, because she is NOT a good candidate! KY and OR just reveal it even more.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
48. Dems for Bernie!
Wed May 18, 2016, 09:20 AM
May 2016

Dems for Bernie! Dems for Bernie! Dems for Bernie! Dems for Bernie!

Hillary campers always somehow forget that Bernie is a Democrat now.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
63. If he's going back to being an Independent...
Wed May 18, 2016, 02:23 PM
May 2016

... when the Primary is settled, this is the first I have heard of it.

bjo59

(1,166 posts)
17. You know, that's not something I would say if I supported Clinton and believed that she is such
Wed May 18, 2016, 03:47 AM
May 2016

an obvious winner and that Bernie is wasting his time and his supporters money at this point. 46.8 to 46.3? Come on.

lagomorph777

(30,613 posts)
67. Well, not counting Pike and the other glitched counties, but who's counting?
Wed May 18, 2016, 02:33 PM
May 2016

Certainly not the KY SoS. She lubricated KY for Clinton.

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
16. Beating Clinton by 11.6 pts. is a bad night?
Wed May 18, 2016, 03:34 AM
May 2016

Last edited Wed May 18, 2016, 03:03 PM - Edit history (2)

(Sanders' margin in Oregon has risen overnight into double-digit, blowout territory, 11.6 pts, with 92.6% of precincts reporting, at the Guardian elections site.)

No, you're wrong. It was not quite a major blowout but it was a great win! It keeps him in the race. It means that my vote on June 7 in California, and that of millions of others, can still stop Clinton and take this to the convention, or even stop her permanently. KY and OR weren't decisive either way. Sanders did so well that the door is still open. Clinton did so poorly, for an "inevitable" candidate, that it becomes even clearer that there is NO unity on Clinton, even within the Democratic Party base. We are a house divided, and either the Democratic Party leaders deal with that--and deal with it fairly--or they are going to lose to Trump in November!

That is the reality that I'm trying to point out. Clinton and her campaign and her supporters have been saying that Clinton is "inevitable" from day one. They have been trying to marginalize half the Democratic Party from the moment they realized that "inevitable" was not happening. They did it in Nevada. They've done it all over the country. The DNC has done it in many ways, including allotting only 3 committee seats at the convention to Sanders, and no committee chairs, nor even neutral chairs.

This marginalization is not working. It is inflicting unhealable wounds. That Sanders has persevered through the most intense marginalization effort that I've ever seen unfold against a major candidate means that he IS a major force in the Democratic Party and CANNOT be told simply to "Go away!" His supporters will not put up with it. There are too many of us! Old Democrats like me, and new and young Democrats, and also ex-Democrats who have left the party in disgust at the corporatism and corruption, but have returned to vote for Sanders.

We are a force. Combined with Clinton supporters, we are, altogether, an unstoppable force. But the fact that probably half of us Sanders supporters will never vote for Clinton is a very big problem for the Democratic Party.

And all I see is denial and bullying--"Drop out!", "Go away!", "Here, let us kick you in the face with three committee seats!", "Here, let us shut down polling places and strip you out of the Democratic voting rolls, and see how you like that!"

So, yeah, I'm cheering tonight for that denial and bullying to STOP. I'm proud of our near win and our big win! We're still here. Deal with it--or lose to Trump. Your choice.

-------------------


The Guardian has upped Sanders margin in Oregon to 11.6%, with 74.8% of precincts reporting. It's looking more like a blowout.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
41. It doesn't keep him in the race
Wed May 18, 2016, 08:53 AM
May 2016

It put him further behind. He needs even larger margins of victory now then before. It was not a good night for him.

LoverOfLiberty

(1,438 posts)
44. He needed a 52% in Oregon to remain viable
Wed May 18, 2016, 09:06 AM
May 2016

If he can't break Oregon by 10, what makes anyone think he can take California by 30?

No disrespect to Sander supporters, its just not realistic.

 

senz

(11,945 posts)
21. This is a game that Clinton supporters play.
Wed May 18, 2016, 04:08 AM
May 2016

It's one of the reasons so many will find it difficult to rally round her should she finagle her way to the nomination.

"You always hurt the one you love..."

COLGATE4

(14,732 posts)
58. "Finagle her way to the nomination". You mean like having the
Wed May 18, 2016, 11:43 AM
May 2016

most votes and the most delegates? That kind of 'finagling'?

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
3. Given the demographics, Sanders should have won KY and he should have won OR by more.
Wed May 18, 2016, 02:21 AM
May 2016

Not to mention that Clinton didn't even campaign in Oregon.

If anything, tonight's results show that the Sanders campaign is waning.

jillan

(39,451 posts)
9. Wrong! Hillary won KY in 2008 by a landslide, and both Oregon & KY are closed primaries so
Wed May 18, 2016, 03:02 AM
May 2016

all the independents that would vote for Bernie couldn't.

He had an amazing nite. He usually doesn't do this good in closed primaries.

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
10. Sanders doing well where Clinton did well in 2008 is par for the course.
Wed May 18, 2016, 03:07 AM
May 2016

Clinton is relying on the Obama coalition of voters. That's been true throughout this campaign. Tonight simply follows a well-established pattern.

And Clinton didn't even campaign in Oregon.

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
19. I'm stunned that there are folks who don't see this. Is it denial or do they really not get it?
Wed May 18, 2016, 03:49 AM
May 2016

I felt compelled to start a thread about this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511990307

slipslidingaway

(21,210 posts)
6. Sorry to say but ...
Wed May 18, 2016, 02:34 AM
May 2016

I will not give one dime or lift one finger for her campaign, if the Dem party chooses to be that biased then that is of their own making. I will not be a participant to their game.

And yes I threw away some money to the Sanders campaign tonight

Stryguy

(209 posts)
26. Great!
Wed May 18, 2016, 06:04 AM
May 2016

Hope you enjoy President Trump and a stacked supreme court. When we're in another 15 year war or all working minimum wage jobs you can pat yourself on the back for "Sticking it to Hillary!"

Progressive thinking! That will show them!

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
64. Clinton loses to Trump, Sanders wins against Trump: it's the Clinton voters that are electing
Wed May 18, 2016, 02:23 PM
May 2016

Trump, stacking SCOTUS, for 15-year wars, and minimum-wage jobs

the old fear and shame tactics don't work any more, and Clinton won't be able to fingerwag her way to victory in November

 

alice mauna

(19 posts)
7. What is up with that last 2%? NYT had it 1%.
Wed May 18, 2016, 02:38 AM
May 2016

That was hours ago. I am still hoping that they are just holding back from reporting that Bernie actually WON by a point or two. They've done that trick before, I believe. Hold back the win until everyone went to bed and then bury it in the news the next day.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
40. That is what I was thinking last night...
Wed May 18, 2016, 08:25 AM
May 2016

The lead jumped from Hillary to Bernie at least 4 times, I was hoping it would end up settling down on Bernie. But when I stopped watching, there was a hair's difference in Hill's favor. This morning, here in KY, our local news (WTVQ/Lexington/ABC) said it was a tie, 50%-50%, and that the delegates had been split evenly between them.

Response to ReRe (Reply #40)

msongs

(67,395 posts)
14. same baloney how sanders leaning independents cant vote for him. all they have to do is register
Wed May 18, 2016, 03:14 AM
May 2016

dems for a few weeks and vote. not that difficult for motivated people with at least average intelligence

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
22. You've missed the point, msongs.
Wed May 18, 2016, 04:15 AM
May 2016

It's NOT baloney to say that Kentucky was a closed primary, and that independents would have difficulty voting in it, to make the point that the result--a half a percent margin of victory for Clinton--shows a deeply and almost evenly divided Democratic base in Kentucky.

I make a similar point about Oregon. It's not a complaint that registering to vote in the Dem primary in OR is a two-step process. It's a fact. And that would hold down the number of young voters, new voters and independents who would do so. It's not an easy crossover. It would favor traditional Dems and older voters--more experienced voters. That's the only point I was making.

Also, do you know for a fact that voters in KY can change their registration for "a few weeks"? That is not the case in many states, and I doubt that it is in Kentucky.

NY, a supposed liberal state, requires you to register 6 months in advance of a vote. This is why it was such a dirty rotten crime to strip 126,000 Democrats of their registration status in the town where Sanders was born and grew up, Brooklyn, with NO REMEDY on election day! The same thing happened in AZ! Thousands of people had registered as Democrats and showed up at polls on the primary election day, only find they had to wait in 4 to 5 hours lines, and when they got to the front, COULDN'T VOTE, because their registration had been CHANGED without their knowledge, and there was NO REMEDY.

These voters followed the rules. And they were DEFRAUDED. And part of how it was done is the onerous deadlines for voter registration with no remedy for fraud on election day. Onerous deadlines are all the fashion these days in states that want to suppress the vote. Unfortunately--and shockingly--it appears that NY is among them.

So, do find out about Kentucky before you say things like "all they have to do" is "register dems for a few weeks and vote."

whatthehey

(3,660 posts)
42. Only 8% in KY do not have either a D or R registration.
Wed May 18, 2016, 08:58 AM
May 2016

This is not a GE style situation where Indies are a plurality.

52% of the state arre registered Dems (although about a quarter of them will never vote D).

ContinentalOp

(5,356 posts)
15. This is a state where 52% of voters are registered as Democrats yet
Wed May 18, 2016, 03:19 AM
May 2016

Romney won 60% of the vote in 2012! So I would take "closed primary" with a grain of salt.

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
20. I just made 2 corrections to my OP. Sanders' margin in OR is now 8.6%!
Wed May 18, 2016, 03:49 AM
May 2016

I also changed "tie" (re Kentucky) to "near tie," in the subject line and in the text, for the sake of accuracy. I argued with a Clinton supporter about this, above, and I still say that a fraction of one percent is a half-assed win, but if it were a Sanders win, I wouldn't say that. So, accuracy wins!

It's a half-assed win for Clinton is what I meant--our "inevitable" nominee. Sanders winning by a half a percent would not be half-assed, cuz he's the underdog. But then, if Clintonites called that a tie, I would be pissed. So I won't. It was near tie for Sanders.

 

senz

(11,945 posts)
23. Beautiful OP, Peace Patriot.
Wed May 18, 2016, 04:34 AM
May 2016

It's too bad the misery crew jumped into it trying, as always, to drag everything down to their level. And so I especially loved this paragraph:

Sanders, who, as we all know, dropped out a month ago, or ran out of money, or was bleeding staffers, and whom EVERYBODY OF IMPORTANCE told to "Get out!", "Go home!", "Stick a knife in him! He's done!", has nearly tied Clinton in one state and beaten her substantially in another on this very day, a month after his campaign was "over"!

I feel good to be supporting the only candidate in this race worth voting for. Given the plethora of crude, soulless power holders arrayed against Bernie, he does amazingly well.

Thanks for a great OP!

LoverOfLiberty

(1,438 posts)
45. Why would you recount it?
Wed May 18, 2016, 09:09 AM
May 2016

Even flipping it wouldn't change the delegate allocation. Would be a huge waste of money.

Response to Peace Patriot (Original post)

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
32. Oh, joy! The Squirrel is back! Feel the fuzzy little squirrel!
Wed May 18, 2016, 07:16 AM
May 2016

Watch out! It bites! Feel the wound! Feel the pointlessness of its repetitive behaviors. Sad critter. Over and over and over, the math. Nuts in the hole, nuts in the hole, nuts in the hole, over and over and over. Count the nuts, count the nuts, count the nuts. Must count the nuts. Not enough nuts. Get some more nuts. Count the nuts, count the nuts, count the nuts. Don't touch my nuts, you! Snarl! Bite! Feel the wound! Count the nuts, count the nuts, count the nuts.

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
28. Just adding another handicap heaped on Sanders, before his big win in Oregon.
Wed May 18, 2016, 06:39 AM
May 2016

I just listened to a great podcast interview of Nina Turner, who talks about Nevada (brilliantly and precisely, as usual). After Nina's interview, the two people running the podcast discuss a few things, and the woman podcaster connects the dots between the Corrupt Media's phony fracas about "violent" Bernie supporters and the timing of it as an attempt to dampen Sanders' votes today in KY and OR.

I didn't catch this cuz I don't want TV. But she said, the Nevada convention occurred on Saturday, but not until Tuesday does Brock's lying narrative hit the corrupted airwaves. That is, today. That is, today, while people in KY and OR voted, what they were hearing all day was how "violent" Sanders and his supporters are. Not a coincidence, in her opinion--and I agree.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017372733

(Nina is about 15 minutes into the podcast.)
https://soundcloud.com/webmaster-38-3/guest-state-senator-nina-turner-sanders-delegate-what-happened-in-vegas-iurl-51716

So add that to the most handicapped "horse" in presidential race history. You might even call him a hobbled horse. The Corrupt Media heaps abuse on him all day long, all in concert with the Clinton campaign and the DNC, and all of Brock's robots on the interwebs--and still Sanders blows Clinton away by 9% in Oregon and nearly beats her in Kentucky!

I'd say we've got ourselves a Seabiscuit--the more handicapped he is, the faster does he run, the more disdained and derided he is by the Establishment, the prouder does he raise his head, and when he catches the eye of his opponent, there will be no stopping him. He will sprout wings!

MrMickeysMom

(20,453 posts)
30. I awoke this morning to this in OR -
Wed May 18, 2016, 06:52 AM
May 2016
Statewide results
748/1,000 precincts (74.8%) reporting
Bernie Sanders
264,151
54.5%
Hillary Clinton
220,943
45.5%
485,094 total votes


I guess the votes aren't quite counted with his win, plus there was a 0.5% edge of KY with 98.8% reporting (no check by her name)

It is so curious, don't you think?
 

Jitter65

(3,089 posts)
33. Subtract the 64,000 plus Trump and supporters who switched to vote against Hillary and this is
Wed May 18, 2016, 07:19 AM
May 2016

either a tie or win for Hillary among real Democrats.

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
70. Real Democrats do not have Henry Kissinger as a friend and advisor.
Wed May 18, 2016, 05:04 PM
May 2016

Nor Paul Kagan, architect of Cheney-Rumsfeld's blueprint for world domination, "The Project For A New American Century." Both are now Clinton advisors. She even vacations with war criminal Kissinger.

And there are a heap of other shocking things that make Hillary Clinton a fake Democrat, and her supporters either blind or fake Democrats themselves. And maybe some think that her faux feminist "It's Her Turn" nonsense is more important than world war, the collapse of our biosphere or Great Depression III.

The Neo-Cons are intending to ride Clinton back into the White House and they are intending that WE pay for their world domination game, again.

Long, long-time Democrat here--I started in 1960 canvassing for JFK and the first Gov. Brown in California, at age 16. Long, long-time feminist here--been in that struggle since I was about 5 years old as well. So don't preach to me about "real" Democrats!

We have A PROBLEM in the Democratic Party. And I was going to say that that problem is Hillary Clinton, but it's much bigger than Hillary Clinton, who has merely fit herself into a niche that satisfies Wall Street, our financial overlords, and war profiteers and Neo-Cons all at the same time, and is cheered on by the Corrupt Media. Clinton is NOT a "liberal." Her flip-flopping on gay rights and on abortion and on mass incarceration of black and brown people, and on "free trade for the rich," and the horrors she engineered in Libya and Honduras, indicate her real self, which is empty of principles. She cozies up to the rich and powerful, no matter how criminal they are, and spouts empty rhetoric, that she can switch on a dime, for public consumption.

Our problem is that so many Democrats have bought into this, and so many of our leaders and elected officials have been bought by it, literally, with money funneled to their campaigns and cushy "revolving door" employment waiting for them when they retire, or, as the Clinton's have found out, $225,000 a speech from Goldman Sachs, et al, total of a half a billion dollars directly into their own pockets. Being a Corporate Democrat is lucrative.

And even our so-called "liberal" icons, like Barbara Boxer, who had the nerve to cheerlead the Clinton anti-Sanders fiasco in Nevada, cannot be relied up to uphold any principle of the REAL Democratic Party whatsoever. The "big tent" party. The New Deal party. The democratic with a small d party.

Corporatism and militarism are ripping the Democratic Party to pieces. And Clinton is their chameleon, so willing to be bought, so willing to play with the "big boys," so anxious to be accepted by them and funded by them, that I don't think even she knows who she is any more. Maybe Trump will help her define herself. She is not a racist, sexist, fascist pig. Okay. But what IS she? I'd like to know what she IS, not just what she is not. And, frankly, when you look at the murders of brown women democracy and environmental activists, by the fascists in Honduras, whom Clinton put in power, you gotta wonder about "racist, sexist and fascist." Clinton's Kissinger-like toppling of a democratic government in Honduras is very worrisome, indeed.

What Sanders has done is to vastly expand the parameters of what a Democrat IS, today, back to the New Deal and what it was then--the "big tent"--and forward to the future and what it must become to save Mother Earth and all her children, not to mention our democracy, our only hope for fairness and mitigation for the poor majority in the unfolding global climate catastrophe.

Which brings me to your comment about Trump voters in KY and "Trump supporters who switched to vote against Hillary." I suppose you have some evidence that Trump supporters "switched" to vote against Hillary? Or is it just hot air? And please provide some numbers, please. How many "switched"? KY is not an easy crossover voting state, and I can only presume that they have a voter registration deadline, probably an onerous one like other states that try to suppress the vote. So, when did these "switches" occur?

I have no reason to believe this, but say it's true. What is this telling us about Clinton's chances in the GE, when there are no limits on who can vote against her? But, more importantly, what is it telling us about Trump voters? Why would they be so anti-Clinton? They just hate women, gays, blacks? They don't like Social Security and they think she will defend it? What?

I think we have to understand the anti-establishment phenomenon that is Trump. I think the root cause of Trump support is economic hardship, and that hardship has also aroused the dragons of racism and sexism that have always threatened our society. There may also be an anti-war element in Trumpism--a rejection of Bush-Cheney and "foreign entanglements" (the old "isolationist" tendency of Republicans), especially for blue-collar Trump supporters, who, with all U.S. workers, have borne the immense cost of the ME war on top of the immense cost to their pocketbooks of global "free trade for the rich."

Sanders is addressing the root cause of unrest--economic hardship--and that is why Sanders demolishes Trump in all national match-up polls---has been doing so since January and is doing so now, as we head into the summer. And that is why Clinton doesn't demolish Trump and barely beats him, and even loses to him in one matchup poll. Address that gross financial inequity and Trumpism goes away. Things have turned around. Clinton, and thus our party, now represent those who inflict economic hardship on all of us, and also represent the Bush-Cheney Neo-Con war expansion that has cost us all so much.

Someone with a big "D" by her name now represents the opposite of what that big "D" should mean: fairness to all. Half our party are now awake to this. Independents have been awake to it for a long time (the many who have exited the Democratic Party). And Trump supporters, I think, are only dimly aware of the real reason they hate Clinton: the economic impacts of "free trade" and war, which the Clinton's have been promoting and lying about for decades.

We'd better pay attention to the bigger picture, and not be locked into whether a vote is "a tie or a win for Hillary among real Democrats." We need to ask WHY her campaign is doing so poorly, this late in the primaries, and what it really means that Sanders--whom the Corrupt Media has 'buried' time and again--has just tied her in Kentucky and beaten her badly in Oregon.

LiberalElite

(14,691 posts)
34. HC won KY in 2008 by 30 points - contrasted
Wed May 18, 2016, 07:23 AM
May 2016

with this very very close win against an old, cranky, "SOCIALIST!!!!" white man with no money or staffers and "VIOLENT SUPPORTERS" who just YELLS A LOT and

who just won ANOTHER state - well..... the optics are pretty pathetic for Her.

 

mythology

(9,527 posts)
36. There is no objective measure by which you can claim Sanders is winning
Wed May 18, 2016, 07:37 AM
May 2016

By failing to win by 30% margins, he's fallen further behind when compared to the remaining delegates. That's not winning. It's losing.

Sanders has won another state that has effectively no black or Hispanic voters. Those are the states Sanders wins. It's not about closed or open primaries. Clinton has won nearly 3 times open primaries than Sanders has. Sanders also does well in caucus states, which have lower turnout and I would hazard a guess result in lower turnout among black and Hispanic voters given socio-economic realities.

And it's not corrupt of the media to point out that there is no viable path to the nomination for Sanders. It's the ability to do basic math. At this point, he is effectively irrelevant and it's been obvious he can't win since at least March 15th. But nobody with any real power in the Democratic party has called for him to drop out. They've said he can't win the nomination (and he can't), but some Sanders supporters seem to have a persecution complex where they have to claim everything is some big conspiracy against him.

 

baldguy

(36,649 posts)
37. He needed to win in both KY and OR by 40 pts. He didn't.
Wed May 18, 2016, 07:44 AM
May 2016

Every time Sanders "wins" he falls further behind.

Tarc

(10,476 posts)
46. #berniemath, plucking numbers out of the æther to suits one's needs since 2015!
Wed May 18, 2016, 09:09 AM
May 2016

Sanders missed his target by 21% in Kentucky, and by 13% in Oregon.

Still no viable path to catch up, so yes, it is quite over.

Dem2

(8,168 posts)
52. Bernie has done awesome throughout this primary process
Wed May 18, 2016, 10:01 AM
May 2016

It's a shame that this is his only chance to run for President as those who do not ultimately succeed are very quickly forgotten. I hope a charismatic younger person takes over his movement after this cycle is over.

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
53. He gained 8 delegates from those 2 states...
Wed May 18, 2016, 10:03 AM
May 2016

He's now 272 delegates behind Clinton, instead of 280 delegates behind.

That's not WINNING.

Sid

trudyco

(1,258 posts)
65. Yay! Go Bernie!
Wed May 18, 2016, 02:25 PM
May 2016

Really, go people who want a truly Progressive candidate! There's millions and millions and millions of us out there!

mhatrw

(10,786 posts)
68. Sanders is now winning Oregon by 12% with 95.5% of the precincts reporting.
Wed May 18, 2016, 04:43 PM
May 2016

Clinton won just one Oregon county, Gilliam 101 votes to 100 votes.

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
72. Thanks! It's been hard to keep up with how big a blowout OR is for Sanders.
Wed May 18, 2016, 05:24 PM
May 2016

You're right. It's now a solid 12 pt. win and could go higher.

No wonder the frantic, hysterical activity of the Clinton campaign and its bots, and the Corrupt Media as echo, for the last couple of days. Their internals must have been telling them what kind of trouble they're in. KY and OR are not decisive, from a strictly "math" point of view, but they must be causing serious headaches in Hillaryland, which is why they are lashing out.

She CAN'T "close the deal." Sanders has proven that, not out of perversity, but because there are just too many people who are sick unto death of Corporate/War Democrats, and want fundamental reform. He jumped in a year ago, feeling this himself, because he is such a wise man. And he has become the focus of this revolt of ordinary people as a positive direction for our country. Trumpism, of course, is the negative reaction to economic hardship with no alternative--that is, no remedy coming from the traditional healer of economic hardship, the Democratic Party. It's pretty clear that even some Trump supporters feel this lack of an alternative (thus, the revolt within the Republican Party against all their old leaders including the Bush-Cheney crowd), though they are muddled about what the solution is.

It's also clear, according to all polls, that Sanders can un-muddy the brains of some Trump supporters and maybe even save their souls. Sanders' numbers against Trump are awesome!

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Sanders tie in KY and 11....