BREAKING: Clinton wins the Democratic #NebraskaPrimary. @AP race call at 9:49 p.m.
Source: AP
...
Read more: https://twitter.com/AP/status/730213541194702848/photo/1
Renew Deal
(81,901 posts)When Democratic voters vote, Hillary wins.
JimDandy
(7,318 posts)it doesn't count for anything. Same thing happens in WA state, which has a binding caucus first, then a non-binding primary weeks later.
Renew Deal
(81,901 posts)JimDandy
(7,318 posts)Doesn't matter to me whether you understand or not tho.
Renew Deal
(81,901 posts)It would make sense if fewer people showed up to vote in the non-binding primary. But more people showed up for the non-binding caucus that "doesn't matter" than the binding caucus that matters.
JimDandy
(7,318 posts)that the Caucus counted and not the Primary. She needed to run a better ground campaign. This happened also in WA. A large number of Clinton's supporters are elderly. When I was canvassing for Bernie I came across numerous elderly voters where the conversation would go like this:
Me: Hi, I'm canvassing for Bernie... Can he count on your vote at the caucus?
Elderly Voter: I'm voting for Hillary, but what's this you're saying. Where is my ballot?
After seeing how much time I wasted explaining to the first one of my opponent's voters about the caucus versus the primary, I stopped doing that and simply said thanks and waved bye as soon as they said they were for Clinton and started asking about a ballot.
Renew Deal
(81,901 posts)I acknowledge that Bernie won the caucus that counted. Do you acknowledge that more people voted in the primary that didn't count?
You say she didn't inform her voters, but under your logic, Bernie didn't either. More Bernie supproters showed up at the primary than the caucus. Why is that?
JimDandy
(7,318 posts)Renew Deal
(81,901 posts)So you pretend that the smaller number is bigger. It's called intellectual dishonesty.
xocet
(3,875 posts)Renew Deal
(81,901 posts)Please explain how the smaller number is greater.
dchill
(38,642 posts)In this NON BINDING primary.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)33,000 voted in the caucus.
dchill
(38,642 posts)33,460 voted in the caucus.
"Winner called by A.P.
The Nebraska Democratic presidential primary is not reported because its results are non-binding. Bernie Sanders won the Nebraska Democratic caucuses on March 5."
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)dchill
(38,642 posts)It doesn't detract from Sanders' win in WV. It's just optics for HRC fans.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)And it shows caususes should be abolished.
dchill
(38,642 posts)That's how he'll "explain" it. It's not a loss. It's not a win for Clinton, either. It just doesn't count.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)Dems voted for the Dem candidate and in the GE these #'s matter.
See?
As far as the Primary goes, its over. Hillary is the Dem candidate for the GE race.
Good #'s for for her tonight translate into good Dem #'s in November.
Trump has one demographic. Hillary has everyone else.
For a red state, these NE Dem #'s are good.
Nov 2016
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Omaha Steve
(99,898 posts)It was over March!
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Omaha Steve
(99,898 posts)I'll wait t out. Western NE always comes in slow.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Omaha Steve
(99,898 posts)But there was no reason for Bernie people to go to the polls. Two of the three House seats will remain in R control. The lone D is a Dino.
There no no Governor's race this year etc.
I'm calling it a night (I think)
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)cstanleytech
(26,368 posts)about the results from a completely different state.
Of course if your goal is to defend Bernie whenever it might be a positive thread for Hillary in order to try and detract from that news please feel free to continue, alot of us here on the DU though dont care which of them wins and becomes President because we realize that they both would do a far better job than any ones running on the Republicans ticket.
William769
(55,151 posts)There is no ganging up on people when in a room.
Firebrand Gary
(5,044 posts)WTG Secretary Clinton and team!
CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)He will see this, and tomorrow he will publicly, and loudly, call for an end to caucuses. As concerned as he is with open primaries, he owes it to voters to make it clear caucuses are the ultimate for of disenfranchisement, and a an embarrassment to democracy.
beastie boy
(9,586 posts)to, as he might put it, reflect the will of the voters in Nebraska.
Altrnatively, he should quit giving the same reason to justify his expectations of superdelegates switching to him.
anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)Kingofalldems
(38,520 posts)Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)Good luck winning them over.
Bernie does well with them. . .very well. But just like Bernie supporters, independents don't matter to HRC Democrats who support someone who:
was a proud Goldwater Girl,
was on the Wal-mart BOD,
voted for the Iraq War, supported DOMA/DADT,
loves her some Kissinger and Nancy Reagan,
uses racist language like "super predators" to describe black people,
supported welfare "reform" pushed by Newt Gingrich,
gets endorsements from Cheney and the Kochs,
and is not actively trying to get Bush's donors on her side.
Yeah, she's a real Democrat with real liberal, progressive values.
Kingofalldems
(38,520 posts)Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)Sancho
(9,072 posts)Those are true progressives!!
Omaha Steve
(99,898 posts)"arm twisting caucus"
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)dchill
(38,642 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)chwaliszewski
(1,514 posts)To be precise.
obamanut2012
(26,201 posts)That is the correct title usage.
chwaliszewski
(1,514 posts)John Kerry is the S o S. Hillary is the former S o S.
Hare Krishna
(58 posts)She has not earned the Secretary of State title due to her massive fuckups in Honduras, Libya, Syria, Iran and the Ukraine.
tavernier
(12,431 posts)I didn't recognize you with your alias!
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)retrowire
(10,345 posts)What state has a caucus and then a primary?
Is this binding? Does it reward actual delegates?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Just a thought.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)So that would be a big no.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)That is not spin.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)You asked why Sanders "lost" a primary that means nothing.
I told you why.
You then try to counter by contrasting these numbers and results with those from the caucus, which was meaningful and awarded delegates.
These are two very different scenarios, as I'm sure you know. Had today's primary been meaningful, the results could very well have been very different.
You're trying to change the parameters of the discussion so you can claim a "win".
Now. Question for you. Why is it when Sanders won Nebraska back in March, clinton people on DU dismissed it out of hand "because of demographics" (i.e., evil fucking white people live there! Argh! Snarl!) but now apparently Nebraska is meaningful and important for you guys?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)My point which forgive me I probably did not make clear is that more people voted for him tonight than in the caucus. So they showed up.
It is their statewide primary day for different races.
Not spin.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)When you change the parameters, it becomes a totally different experiment, see? Especially when it's a pretty big parameter, such as one election mattering, and another election being meaningless.
Now, since you responded while I was editing... Why is it when Bernie wins Nebraska, Clinton supporters chalk it up to "demographics" (i.e., evil fucking white people live there) but now, apparently the exact same state is meaninggful and worth discussion?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)But it is interesting she won.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)You know, demanding Bernie take a position on their basis, speculating how Bernie is going to "explain his loss," etc.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Just blabbing jibberish for fun.
brush
(53,978 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Last edited Wed May 11, 2016, 12:52 PM - Edit history (1)
brush
(53,978 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)brush
(53,978 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)brush
(53,978 posts)Should it say more voted last night than in the caucus?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)beastie boy
(9,586 posts)And by how much did Bernie outspend Hillary to buy his defeat?
Chicago1980
(1,968 posts)retrowire
(10,345 posts)And now I'm seeing that both sides equally complain that caucuses suck when their candidate loses.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Today the legally required primary was held and she won it.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)States hold both caucuses and primaries?
What does this do with the delegates that were distributed?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)By law the primary has to be held in both states.
Sanders won the caucuses so he gets most of the delegates.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)Would all registered voters of these states be informed of these unofficial primaries?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)retrowire
(10,345 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)retrowire
(10,345 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)TheFarseer
(9,328 posts)I voted at the caucus. Why would I go out and vote again for nothing? Had it counted, I, my wife and lots of other Bernie supporters would have went out and voted. Instead it was only a bunch of older folks that had nothing else to do all day. OMG. So desperate and you're winning. I'm afraid if Hillary were behind, people would be jumping off tall buildings.
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)It's not "an uphill battle". It is *impossible*. So why is this going on?
The writing is on the wall...and there are many with the perspective to read it.
TheFarseer
(9,328 posts)But it's nice that California etc actually get to vote and it sort of counts. It would be such a slap in the face to all the folks that donated and attended rallies to drop out while there is still a small chance. At least that's my take.
Herman4747
(1,825 posts)At a minimum, Bernie's voters will have an impact on Hillary, as she shall seek to obtain votes from at least some of them in November.
This is why, at times, she decides to be "progressive." Just recently with health care coverage policy.
(Of course we both know how extremely dishonest Hillary Clinton is, so any movement left must be "taken with a grain of salt."
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)But I am happy to see him work out her left arm, so to speak.
spyker29
(89 posts)TheFarseer
(9,328 posts)Generally they have hard time finding anyone credible to run.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)caucus.
brush
(53,978 posts)Seems some in the states want a say earlier in the presidential race so they hold an earlier caucus for the presidential race.
It seems to make little sense and a waste of money except the parties pay for caucuses and legally mandated primaries are paid for by the states.
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)But she is still winning anyway. Math is math.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Response to onehandle (Original post)
NRaleighLiberal This message was self-deleted by its author.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)Had to read the comments here to see what this was all about.
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)As in, "the news is broken."
liberal N proud
(60,352 posts)left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)rockfordfile
(8,712 posts)dchill
(38,642 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/279468-clinton-wins-nebraska-primary-but-gets-no-delegates
Hillary Clinton won a symbolic victory Tuesday in Nebraska, taking 59 percent of the primary vote to rival Bernie Sanders's 40 percent.
Democrats in the Cornhusker State held presidential caucuses in March, with Sanders emerging victorious. The two Democratic candidates appeared on the states primary ballot on Tuesday, when voters went to the polls to make their choice in the GOP race.
In the March caucuses, Sanders won 57 percent of the vote to Clintons 42 percent, taking 15 delegates to Clintons 10.