Repeat After Me: 2383

[ruggerson]

In the interest of promoting cold, hard facts and seeing things as they are, and not as we might like them to be:

2383. That is the official number of delegates needed, this cycle, to clinch the nomination and become the presumptive Democratic nominee.

This takes into account both pledged and "super" delegates.

This is the exact same metric the Democratic party has used for over forty years to calibrate the state of the race.

Presidential primaries - Last updated May 29, 2016 at 2:15 PM PT

Delegate results - DEMOCRATIC

2,383 needed for nomination · 913 still available

As of today:

Pledged delegates: Clinton -1,769 Sanders 1,499
Superdelegates: Clinton 541 Sanders 43

Total Delegates: Clinton - 2,310 Sanders 1,542

Mrs. Clinton is 73 delegates away from becoming the Presumptive Democratic Nominee

No matter who may try to argue otherwise, this is the unambiguous state of the race.

Mrs. Clinton is 73 delegates away from becoming the Presumptive Democratic Nominee

Repeat After Me: 2383

[annavictorious]

1. But...but...but

the bird.

[barrow-wight]

35. LOL!

The bird has flown.

[beachbumbob]

2. But but but...super delagates don't count

Until the convention....nonsense

[rock]

7. Correct and as I posted elsewhere

For both declared supers delegates and pledged delegates they will not be recorded til the Convention but they count now.

[Samantha]

17. They do not count until they are cast at the convention (eom)

[rock]

33. You're a Bernie supporter

I can tell because you cannot tell the difference between 'count' and 'record'.

[Joob]

3. Repeat after me, you're counting super delegates. Much farther away.

Just saying.

Edit: to be clear, even the DNC says not to count them yet.
(less obvious that way, less attention is their reason I'm betting)

They have not voted. Is all I'm saying and have been known to follow pledged delegates.

Edit Edit: To be clearer, if this message keeps getting pushed super delegates will chose Hillary thinking it won't bother anyone as long as she gets this so called magic number with them. You're still fitting a narrative they want

[ruggerson]

4. because thats what we do in our presidential primary season

This is how we determine the state of the race. Clinton didn't invent this system of how we calculate the winning number, its been this way for decades. Those who suddenly argue that we should change our methodology are advocating that we change the rules in the last inning. Sorry, not gonna happen.

[Joob]

6. If that were true she'd win with just 70 of the super delegates left out of the about 135 remaining

super delegates. It's flawed. THAT'S why there's a contested* convention no matter what, understand?

I'm not trying to be rude but there's about 135 superdelegates left. If you're right, they are who determines who wins and just because a system is in place doesn't mean it's right. Take slavery for instance.

*Also going to add, what you're basically saying is there won't be a contested convention if 70 super delegates chose to support Hillary.

BEFORE THEY EVEN VOTE

That's why you don't add the super delegates, otherwise it could never be contested.

Edit: (I edit a lot) I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying you're fitting a narrative and it very well may be that 2383 is the magic number and it does include super delegates. I'm just saying the reason it's contested is because the super delegates Haven't voted, and it's not likely they'll get to that number with just pledged delegates. That's why it's a contested convention. That's where the super delegates will decide.

So for you to include that in her number now, is wrong. (Slightly more edit Not you wrong, the system. If all is true that you say.

[ruggerson]

8. the way they count super delegates

is to actually communicate with them and determine who they support. The remaining super delegates are those who have not yet declared. If you don't like the super delegate rules, get them changed. But you're not going to get it done retroactively.
And, as a white person, i can't begin to presume how my black brothers and sisters ancestors lived through, and ultimately survived the horror of slavery. But i'm fairly confident they would not find much of a corollary to the modern day super delegate voting system.

[Joob]

9. I understand, I added an edit up above.

Last edited Sun May 29, 2016, 08:07 PM - Edit history (3)

I only mentioned the slavery as a system we had in place that was wrong, nothing about what they might have thought.

Edit:
(Though obviously slavery wouldn't relate at all except for, and my point. Is that it was a system in the US that people thought was right which is wrong)

[demwing]

25. in other words, you poll them

and polls are only a snapshot of a moment.

The "super" delegates don't vote until the convention, and there are a LOT of moments between now and then.

[MFM008]

5. Its only far away

if your Sanders.
Keep heart through, i understand they are racketeering her Vince Foster or something like that.

[Hiraeth]

10. Repeat after me: Welcome to Ignore.

[jillan]

11. Super delegates do NOT count in that total! Don't believe me? Listen to the DNC ->

[asuhornets]

13. The media will call it for Hillary around 9ish after New Jersey. But before California.

[k8conant]

15. The media can call it whatever they want...

some of us know how it works.

[asuhornets]

16. That is how it works..plz tell me you are joking thinking Sanders can still win.

[k8conant]

18. No, I am not joking.

However, there's no reason for you to badger me about it. If you're right, we'll find out at the end of July.

[asuhornets]

21. I'm not badgering..but actually we will find out in 10 days. but ok.

[k8conant]

23. Ok.

[asuhornets]

12. 2383!!!!!!

[ProgressiveEconomist]

14. Above 2383, it's Bernie

versus Obama, Warren, Biden, and 99 percent of national and downticket Democrats, not just Bernie versus Hillary. June 7th is "get the hook" day for sore-loser crybabies.

[grossproffit]

19. I'm excited!

[lmbradford]

20. So polling people are actual votes now?

You need to look at process, even the DNC says that no Supers get to vote until convention. Including their polled support is ridiculous.

[TimPlo]

22. So why was the 2008 primary different?

Why was Obama not called the nominee till after Clinton dropped out of the race? The last vote was cast on June 3 and Clinton did not even drop out till June 7th. All you fools are really showing your mental state crying about Sanders when Clinton never even dropped out till was sure the SD where not going to give it to her, even though at that point Obama had the majority of pledged delegates. This whole thing really shows the honesty of you all and how you just don't give a shit about facts just about making up bullshit and crying about it because Clinton is your Queen.

[geek tragedy]

24. Obama was declared the winner once he had clinched both the pledged delegate lead

and the overall delegate lead.

That will happen on June 7 in Clinton's case. At that point she is the winner, period.

[demwing]

26. wow, post #243 and TimPlo comes out swinging!

[riversedge]

27. Oh, but Obama was!! He became the presumptive nominee around june 3 when many SD's

flooded over to him. Obama did not really have the needed SD's until around June3. The difference is that Hillary will have them when the NJ vote comes in.

[TimPlo]

30. No the media might of called him that

But he was not till Clinton suspended her campaign on June 7th.


"In United States presidential elections, the presumptive nominee is a presidential candidate who is assured of his or her party's nomination, but has not yet been formally nominated by his or her political party at the party's nominating convention. Ordinarily, a candidate becomes the presumptive nominee of his or her party when his or her "last serious challenger drops out" or when he or she "mathematically clinches—whichever comes first. But there is still room for interpretation."A candidate mathematically clinches a nomination by securing a simple majority (i.e., more than 50 percent) of delegates through the primaries and caucuses prior to the convention. The time at which news organizations begin to refer to a candidate as the "presumptive nominee" varies from election to election. The shift in media usage from "front-runner" to "presumptive nominee" is considered a significant change for a campaign."

Media calling her the presumptive nominee now is dishonest and wrong. We all know she is more than likely to get it but media should not be changing up election to election as they see fit. Consider 2000, the media is partly to blame for the election because they called FL for Bush before the polls closed. This was wrong because I know I probably would skipped driving down to vote after work if I already heard they had a winner. This is why the media should never call or predict a winner in any election no matter who you want to win.

[Joob]

31. Timplo droppin' truth bombs. Respect.

[mythology]

32. Incorrect

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/04/us/politics/04elect.html?_r=0

June 4th: Obama Clinches Nomination; First Black Candidate to Lead a Major Party Ticket

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4987177

June 3rd: Obama Clinches Democratic Nomination

I can continue if you'd like, but that should be sufficient to convince you that you're wrong.

[kayakjohnny]

28. Your post has a condescending tone and is very likely to change

exactly 0 minds.

But thanks for the attitude.

I'm sure it will help in the long run.

[ruggerson]

34. I have to admit

my objective was not to change minds, in this case, but just to lay out the facts. Perhaps borne of frustration, seeing so much misinformation being thrown around here on a daily basis. I was on the losing side in '08, so I do have both compassion and empathy for Sander's supporters, and have expressed it a number of times. But I think it is natural for both sides to feel frustrated at times, as we near the end of this. It has been a long, bruising primary season; perhaps all this energy can now be unleashed in the effort to defeat the Donald. I am under no illusion that that will be an easy task.

[Fawke Em]

40. It won't.

David Brock and the Clintons don't have enough money to pay me to be the slightest bit enthused about her.

[eastwestdem]

29. If you Sanders supporters don't like this, you better get out there and harass some more

super delegates. I'm sure that works really well to convince them to vote for your guy.

[ucrdem]

37. oops, did it again

but, yeah.

[Electric Monk]

36. In the year 2525

[ucrdem]

39. Thank you. I suspect that when President-elect Clinton is being sworn in on Jan. 20

we will still be rehearsing this debate on DU.

Also: Hillary is picking up steam here in Californ-eye-aye. Team B is hanging on by its fingernails but this isn't Michigan and the rabbit-hat is empty.

p.s. third time is the charm. . .