Wounded Hillary Clinton Limps to Kentucky Win. Just can't shake Bernie Sanders

[imagine2015]

Wounded Hillary Limps to Kentucky Win
In a razor-thin victory, Clinton won the Kentucky primary. But she was handily beaten in Oregon and just can’t shake Bernie Sanders.
by Jackie Kucinich
May 18, 2016


Hillary Clinton limped over the line in Kentucky on Tuesday night. She narrowly secured the chance to declare victory—even though Bernie Sanders pushed her to a virtual tie and they are likely to split the state’s delegates evenly.

With 99 percent of precincts reporting, Clinton was leading by 46.8 percent to Sanders’s 46.3 percent.

Clinton spent the last two weeks crisscrossing the state in a bid to shore up an expected win and dent the prevailing sense that she is a weak frontrunner who is only getting weaker.

Tuesday did little to change that narrative.

Sanders scored a resounding win in his favorable state of Oregon—he was almost 10 points ahead with 73 percent of precincts reporting - while Clinton stumbled in the state where she was expected to win. She annihilated then-Sen. Barack Obama 66 to 30 percent eight years ago in Kentucky.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/05/18/wounded-hillary-limps-to-kentucky-win.html

[AZ Progressive]

1. And this is that Bernie has been going relatively easy on her...

Trump is waiting to air every little bit of dirty laundry on the Clintons out...

[Proud Liberal Dem]

6. and Trump doesn't have shipyards full of dirty laundry on him?

Not to mention the fact that he offends a lot of people every single time he opens his mouth? Almost all of the stuff that he's liable to throw at Hillary is going to be stuff that is already out there, been heard before, and been discredited.

[AZ Progressive]

8. In other words: they are both extremely corrupt

Which is why it would be more likely for Bernie to win if going against Trump. Americans want better candidates than Trump and Hillary. Hillary is not popular outside of the Democratic Party.

Also, remember that left leaning voters (other than staunch HRC supporters) care more about ethics than Republicans.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

11. One does not simply

compare the level of "corruption" between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump- because there is NO basis for the comparison. If left-leaning voters want to withhold their vote from both because they are both "corrupt", that is their choice but these are going to be the only two viable candidates for POTUS this year. Left-leaning voters will have to decide whether to swallow a bitter pill this year on a vote for Hillary and keep working on grooming local, state, and national candidates for public office until somebody emerges in the next 4-8 years who can realize the dream of Bernie's pure progressivism (and win the WH) or risk putting Donald Trump in the WH. America: The choice is yours..........

[penumbra]

16. So this is the narrative you've been supporting?

"If left-leaning voters want to withhold their vote from both because they are both "corrupt", that is their choice but these are going to be the only two viable candidates for POTUS this year."

It's actually not a reality, yet. So it's a false narrative that you wish others would follow to create that reality. It's called manufacturing consent. There's a nice book by Noam Chomsky that discusses this tactic in great detail. Finally, you have no idea what people will do with their votes if these are our choices. Sanders is by far and away less corrupt than either, so if that were a concern, you would support Sanders. Thus:

--Nationwide 44% of voters claim to be Independent. I'll leave it to you and DWS to figure out why the Dem Party has been bleeding voters and why Clinton loses in open primaries. The General is open, btw.

--Those voters will have a say in what the vote is like come November.

--Those voters have made it clear that they want a candidate that will rock the boat to win their vote. So, it's really Trump or Sanders and you really seem to be helping Trump when it gets right down to consequences for your actions during this primary.

To you, it's probably "just politics" or you really somehow believe Clinton will actively do something to improve the lives of average citizens, despite much evidence to the contrary in her actions and record. A tiger really isn't going to become a zebra because it ate grass, once. For others, it's real. The lack of leadership with regard to Wall Street has turned a once prosperous country into a money-laundering pyramid scheme; concentrating wealth beyond what we've seen in a century. The injustices that income inequality produces are many and deep -- divisive, too. This is a class war.

But we can't blame power for trying to maintain itself regardless of the costs to innocents and the working-class hoi polloi, can we?/s Meanwhile, the elite, the top .01% are comfortably cushioned from the results and will do anything to stay dissidence and perpetuate the status quo through artificial means, if necessary.

[jeff47]

10. The detail you are forgetting is Trump supporters and Republicans do not care.

Republicans are not voting for anyone. They are voting against the "other". Which means it does not matter just how awful Trump is - they are still voting against the "other". (Who the "other" is changes from election to election)

Many Democrats, and more importantly almost all Democratic-leaning independents, need someone to vote for. It is part of the differences that make them Democrats (and -leaning) instead Republicans. Convincing them to not vote for Trump does not get them to vote for Clinton, it just convinces them to not vote for Trump. They have to be convinced to vote for Clinton, and "dirty laundry" makes that more difficult.

It is not the symmetrical threat you portray. Trump could literally be covered in bat guano, and his voters would still vote for him.

[firebrand80]

2. I guess that's one way of looking at it nt

[NCTraveler]

3. It's going to be difficult knowing the nomination is wrapped up. Nt

[NWCorona]

4. And AP hasn't even called Kentucky yet.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

5. Different year, different election

That aside, she has the delegate count that she needs to prevail at this point and, as I recall, Obama lost some primaries towards the end and won the primary by a much slighter margin and he ultimately did fine in the GE- excellent as a matter of fact (he freaking won Indiana!). Once the primary is over the party will unify around Hillary if Democratic and left-leaning voters want to ensure that Donald Trump is not the next POTUS. If some Bernie supporters want to continue to throw a tantrum and write him in, vote third party, or simply not vote for anybody at all, well, that's their right, of course. I just hope they understand the potential consequences of their actions and I don't want to hear any of them complaining if they, in any way, help Trump become POTUS.

Also, if Hillary is supposedly "weak" and "getting weaker", what does it say about BERNIE that he can't win against her? I mean, yeah, he's had strong showings in some primaries and won a lot of votes but she's still winning by a healthy margin. So, what's HIS problem?

[alcibiades_mystery]

7. Delegates for last night. 106 pledged available. NY TIMES tally: 55 Sanders, 51 Clinton

Four. FOUR. FOUR!



He needs HUNDREDS. He netted FOUR.

FOUR.

FOUR!

[SidDithers]

9. 1771 to 1499....nt

Sid

[mythology]

12. The author is just making things up

Clinton wasn't widely expected to win Kentucky. Yes she won it in 2008, but the demographic patterns of the race are different this year. Sanders is the candidate winning states with low numbers of black or Hispanic voters like Kentucky.

This is also a state that voted something like 40% for uncommitted in the 2012 Democratic primary against Obama. Of course the candidate running on the Obama record isn't going to be the hands down favorite.

[Capt. Obvious]

13. .

Why can't she close the deal?

[dana_b]

14. this is from TDB?!

I'm shocked. I was thinking that they would just say "Clinton won KY, Sanders eeks out a win in OR" or something like that.

[MisterP]

15. ouch, even Daily Beast's starting the "some 'frontrunner'" talk