2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumLatest Delegate Count Shows Bernie Can Easily Win Nomination
Only a 290 delegate difference!
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/primary-calendar-and-results.html?_r=0
WhiteTara
(29,739 posts)certainly doesn't seem like easy peasy to me.
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)Spacedog1973
(221 posts)DLCWIdem
(1,580 posts)scscholar
(2,902 posts)for the real electoral college, but instead we do something that doesn't reflect the real world. Real world.
MoonchildCA
(1,301 posts)roguevalley
(40,656 posts)and we have to end the skirmish now, how come Biden is being prepped to be crowned king if HRC is indicted? If she's going to do this and nothing is going to come of the investigations, why the speculation on granting the crown to Biden? I believe that the upper elements of both sides have pipelines into the investigation and both sides see the crashing wave of indictments coming. That's why Biden is being murmured to prep the country for her indictment and the transfer of the nomination to Biden. They're so deluded. There will be riots in the streets. GO, Bernie.
amborin
(16,631 posts)can read about FOIA, etc....., compare the legislation to HRC's actions, and conclude that charges are likely
to result.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)CentralCoaster
(1,163 posts)That just seems nutty when we have a perfectly good champion of progressive values and human rights.
jcgoldie
(11,664 posts)Maybe we should nominate the winner of the most delegates. Pretty sure that's what all these primaries and caucuses are for. It's sort of how democracy works.
CentralCoaster
(1,163 posts)So that's not how democracy works, that's how it doesn't work.
What good is winning the primary when you lose the election?
jcgoldie
(11,664 posts)I agree its a silly system but it will not affect the outcome. Also, the voting irregularities are a problem and they should be investigated and solved. They do not explain how one candidate is losing by 3 million votes nor is there any evidence they have affected either side more than the other nor that they were the result of intentional manipulation.
lancer78
(1,495 posts)by giving the impression that HRC had an insurmountable lead BEFORE the Iowa Caucus.
mythology
(9,527 posts)Being an issue needs to die. Obama won under the same circumstances. Quit whining that it's unfair when it was shown in 2008 that the super delegates will switch to the pledged delegate winner. Sanders is losing because he's not the preferred candidate of those who turned out to vote.
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)Between posts claiming there are no headlines about Sanders winning Indiana and posts claiming that Sanders can easily win the nomination, I really think DU needs padded walls.
jcgoldie
(11,664 posts)It's getting hard to tell.
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)... she's winning, and Bernie is ...
amborin
(16,631 posts)Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)The 1st part is about the TPP and TTIP--the Pacific and European "free trade for the rich" agreements that will destroy U.S. sovereignty, and the sovereignty of European countries, once and for all. The people in our country and in these other countries will LOSE their sovereign rights to regulate the environment, food safety, labor conditions, taxation and other matters of great moment.
LOSE our sovereignty altogether. It has been steadily eroded by NAFTA and other such agreements. It will be destroyed by TPP and TTIP and transglobal corporations will thereafter rule our countries without challenge. And there goes Planet Earth as a habitable place to live.
Astronomers this week announced the discovery of three potentially habitable planets 'only' 40 light years away (pretty close, relatively speaking). TPP and TTIP may well prevent us from funding NASA, cuz we'll be paying trillion dollar 'fines' to transglobal corporations instead of using our tax money the way we choose. But, if we manage to preserve some pittance of our government budget for our own projects, finding a nearby habitable planet would be a good one. As things are going now, we're going to need another planet, really and truly.
On Sanders, Hartman's guests say what the Corrupt Media refuse to acknowledge--while they give hours and hours of free publicity to Trump and even to the Puke who just dropped out, Cruz: namely, that the Bernie Sanders is still in this presidential primary, that the primary is NOT over, that California, Oregon and other states have yet to vote, that Clinton cannot seem to "close the deal" and may not be able to by the convention, and that the Bernie Sanders revolution EXISTS, and why it exists--the boiling unrest in the American electorate.
I think this broadcast was before Indiana. So they might have added that Bernie Sanders IS STILL WINNING STATES, despite the Corrupt Media narratives.
The 1st part of this show, on TPP and TTIP, illustrate HOW IMPORTANT IT IS that Bernie Sanders be elected president. It's not just that he demolishes Trump in poll after poll (and Clinton doesn't--one poll this week even has her losing to Trump)**; it's that Mother Earth is going down for the count, and Sanders is the only candidate who states, as a "MORAL" imperative, that we must do everything we can to stop global warming NOW. Anybody think Clinton's going to do that (if she manages to beat Trump)? She's IN BED with the 1%ers who are writing these utterly destructive secret trade agreements! And Trump is also a 1%er. Though he doesn't seem to be so tightly chained to the planet destroyers, he is not likely to undertake a moral imperative that will reduce their profits and power.
Only one candidate will do that--Bernie Sanders! He is committed to stopping global warming, and he--unlike the other two--is honest and straightforward about what he will do, and has been so throughout his career.
--------------------
**(Take a look at these stats, on Trump vs Clinton, and Trump vs Sanders:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/primary-calendar-and-results.html?_r=0 )
KelleyD
(277 posts)Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)Gothmog
(146,029 posts)SheenaR
(2,052 posts)Where is the lie? Or where do you see it as a lie? She can't get to 2383 before the convention. By definition the vote will not be a formality and campaigning for votes can and will happen
Gothmog
(146,029 posts)After New York, the small dollar donations began drying up and Sanders is lying to his supporters to keep the money coming in
SheenaR
(2,052 posts)If Hillary was at 2383 pledged and he was asking for money, I would certainly agree with you.
But a chance still exists. And people like me are still sending or $10 when we can.
stopbush
(24,401 posts)Since when is that fair?
Asking A Candidate to Reach 2383 By Pledged Delegates Only = Asking Them To Win 59% Of The PDs
Do you realize how ridiculous that is?
First of all, if there were no super delegates involved, the number wouldn't be 2383 to reach a majority. It would be 2066 (ie 51% of 4051 pledged delegates).
Hillary currently has 1635 pledged delegates. That means she's only 431 pledged delegates away from having a majority in pledged delegates. Once she gets those 431 pledged delegates, it is impossible for Sanders to get more pledged delegates than her.
The 2383 number exists only because it includes the super delegates. Imagining that a candidate needs to hit 2383 with ONLY pledged delegates is simply ignorant. That's 59% of the total of pledged delegates. That would mean that a candidate who won 58% of the pledged delegates could be denied the nomination by a candidate who received only 42% of the pledged delegates.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)He had two extraordinarily high months and then last month, he fell back to the average range he had been collecting.
Sam
Tarc
(10,478 posts)Do you not understand how Sanders' 6-point win in IN actually saw him lose ground?
amborin
(16,631 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,595 posts)Thanks for the thread, amborin.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)Clinton had the support of nearly every Democratic-leaning organization in America. She had experience running for President and a team of presidential-campaign veterans at her beck and call. She had the Democratic National Committee in her back pocket, which ensured that shed only have to attend as many Democratic debates as she chose. She had deep and longstanding support from within the media establishment. She had historical significance as the woman most likely to be the first-ever female President. She had eight years of White House experience and six years in the U.S. Senate. She had state election statutes that made it hard or impossible to either register or vote as an independent in most Democratic primaries.
Clinton had a primary schedule that put most of her strongest states first. She had the tacit agreement of media professionals nationwide that unpledged delegates could and would be reported in the exact same fashion as pledged delegates. She had as much time as she wanted to campaign, having no job at the time she announced other than voluntary non-profit work and for-profit speeches. She had the implicit assurance of CNN and MSNBC that shed have a surrogate or support
And she had a 60-point lead on her next-closest competitor.
Its now April 18th, and Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have been statistically tied in every single national poll taken in the last month.
Bernie Sanders entered the 2016 primary election a superlatively old and, to be honest, old-looking Independent socialist Jew with a bevy of Old-World tics (like talking with his hands), no fashion sense whatsoever, unruly hair, no super-PACs, and no national name recognition. The Democratic Party felt no loyalty to him, at either the state or national level. He was at three percent in the polls. He was from one of the smallest states in the nation, one of the ones that few outside New England ever talk about or think about. He had no money. He had no friends in the media. He had surrogates, indeed a diverse cast of them, but somehow they never got invited onto major-media political panels. He had a fringe-candidate sign on his back that it seemed he would never get off. He had no way to force Clinton to do more than four or five debates, all of which would be held, per the decree of the Democratic National Convention, at the most inconvenient hours. He had a penchant for blunt talk that seemed certain to sink him in a political climate where every mental lapse quickly becomes a meme.
Im sorry, but the truth is that less than a year ago Bernie Sanders had absolutely nothing, and Hillary Clinton was better positioned to win the Democratic nomination for President than any Democrat in the year before an election since Franklin D. Roosevelt. That we pretend that any measure in which Sanders comes up short say, in his support among African-Americans is somehow a fatal flaw in the man and not a sign that absolute nobodies dont become household heroes in under six months is an insult to Americas collective intelligence.
So its time to get real.
And the sign that its well past time for somebody to just say what most of America already knows to be true is that today Philip Bump of The Washington Post wrote a scathing editorial complaining that Bernie Sanders says his average contribution is $27 when its in fact $27.89.
Its official: Weve been through the looking glass for far too long, America.
JudyM
(29,294 posts)COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)professor who at night becomes "Abramson - political anti-Hillary pundit at large" on these boards. Seth doesn't seem to get a whole lot right in his free-wheeling essays.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)The_Casual_Observer
(27,742 posts)highprincipleswork
(3,111 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)by a margin that he's accomplished in only one of the previous 38 (?) primaries.
Easy!
Sid
bobbobbins01
(1,681 posts)If California comes through for us, I'm moving there.
synergie
(1,901 posts)Has little chance of winning on delegates, his ham handed attempts to threaten, harass and abuse superDs into ignoring their own common sense and good judgement, and also the will of voters is not going over well. It is absolute self delusion, if not outright willful dishonesty to claim otherwise.
imagine2015
(2,054 posts)Let us all pray and shed a crocodile tear for the super delegates. They are so fragile.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Great chart that shows HRC's 'huge" lead of 290 pledged delegates comes overwhelmingly from the early southern states. In fact her advantage from those states is nearly 400 delegates and this is important in thinking about the General Election vs Trump. The Dems can only really hope to win 2 or 3 of these states(FL.VA,NC) so the primaries after March 15 are more relevant and Bernie is winning them.
amborin
(16,631 posts)electorate
Codeine
(25,586 posts)Amirite?!
<----- So the Loyal Opposition doesn't jury me into a bogus hide.
onenote
(42,885 posts)Contests in states won by Obama in 2012 GE: 23
Sanders wins: 10 (representing 76 electoral votes)
Clinton wins: 13 (representing 186 electoral votes)
Clinton has won primaries/caucuses in more "blue" states than Bernie and in more of the large electoral college vote heavy blue states.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)MFM008
(19,839 posts)from the state of Denial.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)doc03
(35,459 posts)Gothmog
(146,029 posts)Sanders is totally unvetted because the new media does not believe that he will be the nominee and the Clinton campaign has been treating Sanders with kids gloves. There is a ton of stuff that would be used by Trump to destroy Sanders. I am not willing to risk the control of the SCOTUS to a candidate who I firmly believe is not electable. Trump and Rove has way too much material that would destroy Sanders in a general election.
KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)UMTerp01
(1,048 posts)When you are down by that much and you only shave off 6, with NJ still to play in which he's down 30 and in which Hillary is likely to wipe out any gains he gets from Indiana, Oregon, and North and South Dakota, I'm confused on his this "can easily win the nomination" comes into play?
Please explain.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)#BernieTheQuark
Matariki
(18,775 posts)about time.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)onenote
(42,885 posts)And its not pretty for Bernie.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/30/upshot/clinton-sanders-delegate-calculator.html