The will of the people have spoken in 2 higher turn-out primaries (WA & Neb). Superdelegates

[riversedge]

can point to this if they choose to vote for Hillary in these two higher turn out primaries. Congratulations to Hillary and her team on the Washington state primary win last night.
(And yes, I know that no delegates were at stake).


TWEET:
Steve Kornacki
?@SteveKornacki

Two states where Sanders won lopsided caucus victories have now held higher-turnout non-binding primaries. Clinton has won both of them.

[Sancho]

1. Thanks River...

a lot of people didn't see these primary results.

I suppose that means that Hillary can add to the millions that have voted for her!!

[riversedge]

8. You bet. Congrats to Hillary and her team.

[MineralMan]

2. Won't affect the convention delegates, but it's an indication of

what will happen in the General Election. It's very interesting. I'm betting that some states will follow Minnesota's lead and replace caucuses with primaries by 2020. We'll be having a primary on June 24. Non-binding, too, but the presidential candidates will be on there. Watch for a similar result here in Minnesota then.

[NWCorona]

3. Sorry but the will of the people happened at the caucus in WA.

[bahrbearian]

14. Clintonite's were to lazy to caucus, they sit at home and Mail in their ballots. Don't have time to

talk to their neighbors.

[NWCorona]

20. I've actually noticed this unfortunately.

[riversedge]

28. Hillary won the higher turn-out popular vote last night. Bernie's argument is gone, nada-out the

window now for WA. Super--delegates will point this out if Sander's tries to change their minds.

[Surya Gayatri]

18. Riiight! ~18,000 caucus voters v. ~250,000 primary voters.

As the Bern so often preaches, the more voters vote, the more he wins.

Bwaaahaaaaaaa!

[NWCorona]

19. If we in Washington want to go to a primary that would be fine with me

But the fact remains that the caucus is the one that counted.

[bahrbearian]

22. No you play by the rules, something HRC should understand, Oh wait, rules for Clinton don't apply.

we've been told for six weeks after the Caucus that the primary won't count now you now it to count . Typical Clinton

[riversedge]

23. The primary did not allocate delegates We know that. But the high voter turn-out compared

to the low voter caucus turnout tells the super-delegates that Hillary won a higher number of voters than Bernie did.

Bernie can no longer argue that the will of the people for Washington is for him because Hillary won last night. His argue for WA is out the window.

[riversedge]

29. YUP. Hillary won he popular vote last night. Congrats to Hillary and her team.

[TheBlackAdder]

4. Since it was non-binding, that skewed election turnout--failing to give a true representation.

[auntpurl]

6. But it's non-binding in both directions.

Neither candidate's supporters had a "reason" to vote in the primary if you look at it that way. Yet 650,000 did, and they went for Hillary. Why would Hillary supporters disproportionally show up to the primary? "Because Bernie won, so his supporters didn't need to support him again." But the same is true for Hillary supporters. Bernie won, so why would they come out to vote for Hillary in the primary?

I don't live inside the mind of a Washington voter, but my guess would be that it was a whole lot of people who were disenfranchised by the caucus and still wanted to be involved in the process. It's unlikely that that's any more true for Hillary supporters than it is for Bernie supporters (I suppose he has a lot of university student supporters who might have more time on their hands to participate in a caucus, but I am not one of those who says he ONLY has university students on side).

[TheBlackAdder]

9. The different camps apparently had different turnout drive initiatives, based off of it.

[auntpurl]

11. Sorry, not following - based off of what?

[TheBlackAdder]

12. Staying on topic. That this vote was non-binding.

[riversedge]

24. The WA voters voted in the primary and Hillary won. Bernie's argument is out the winder for WA

[riversedge]

17. And Hillary's team was better for this higher turn-out Primary.

[R B Garr]

5. This also shows how unreliable the caucuses are. There were posts here from someone in Washington

who said people she knew would not participate because they didn't want to be harassed or intimidated at a caucus. I can't imagine having to go in and listen to someone else's ramblings just to participate and have my vote registered.

This is a huge indication of how much deep and widespread Hillary's support is.

[auntpurl]

7. I think about people who have social anxiety.

And there are millions of them. I can't imagine a process more intimidating than having to interact with hundreds of strangers, open your mouth and speak out to people who are very likely to argue with you, just to have your vote heard. Contrast that with having to get up the courage to walk into a polling station, pick up a ballot, go into a booth, and vote.

[oasis]

31. Having to caucus in this election year with overly aggressive zealots is

like going to the dentist for a root canal.

[Tom Rinaldo]

10. The Oregon Primary is probably a good surrogate indicator

At least for Washington State: A closed primary only Democrats could vote in, but the results counted. Bernie just won by over 10% there, but still a closer margin than the Washington caucus results where Sanders swept. Different small subsets of Washington voters chose to either A) show up at the specified hour to participate in a caucus that counted or B) vote in a relatively meaningless primary when the delegates had already been chosen.

[Skwmom]

13. There was ONLY one player on the field w/their party machine so the results are meaningless

Stupid or willing to say anything for their corporate paycheck? What difference does it make...

[KingFlorez]

15. Seems fair

An election with more turnout speaks volumes.

[morningfog]

16. YOu HIll folks look so silly and petty by harping on irrelevant primaries which weren't

contested and had not bearing on the delegate allocation whatsoever.

You are overpaid.

[auntpurl]

21. But neither candidate contested them.

And a surprising number of people voted in the Washington primary, far more than voted in the caucus, for an event so supposedly irrelevant.

I'm still waiting for my Brock check, but I do think these results are significant. I think they may be indicative of what is going to happen in California, for one thing. And I think it bodes well for turnout in November too.

[riversedge]

25. Dismissing members by saying we are overpaid is an insult to members. Shame on you.

[morningfog]

32. It was meant to be an insult.

[k8conant]

26. It have?

[Garrett78]

27. Caucuses get romanticized, but the fact of the matter is they suppress turnout in a big way.

They make it difficult for working people, parents, persons with disabilities et al. to participate.

Even what is essentially a meaningless WA primary had much higher turnout than the WA caucus.

Caucuses need to go.

[fun n serious]

30. I agree and so should all Sanders supporters. nt