After Iowa and New Hampshire, Bernie is in trouble

[CajunBlazer]

Bernie Sanders has an outside chance of winning Iowa and is well ahead in New Hampshire. His devoted followers believe that if he can manage to win both states, the momentum gained will propel him to eventual victory. However, momentum, in order to be effective, must be maintained. Have ever watched a sporting event when one team appears to have all of the momentum and then – bang! - in only one play the momentum changes sides and the other team ends up victorious. Politics is no different.

It’s strange that Iowa’s caucus and New Hampshire’s primary are the first states to test Presidential candidates because they are so atypical of our country as a whole – Iowa because of the strange rules used to pick the winners and New Hampshire because it is arguably the most libertarian state in the nation.

While Bernie could possibly win both Iowa and New Hampshire, any momentum he gains will be quickly be blunted because the next states in line are dramatically different and he is way behind in them. So let’s explore what Bernie can gain in the first caucus and the first primary and why his campaign is very likely to travel in reverse thereafter:

First of before even Iowa and New Hampshire, Hillary starts out with a big lead in super delegates: Hillary – 344, Sanders – 12, O’Malley – 3 = Hillary +332. Super delegates are Democratic Distinguished party leaders, Governors, Senators, Representatives, and DNC members who have committed to a candidate. Currently 354 Super delegates remain uncommitted, but more are committing to Hillary every week.

Now let’s look at the poll results for the early state caucuses and primaries:

First come Iowa and New Hampshire with a total of 85 delegates
Iowa (2/1) - average of 7 most recent polls - Hillary +3.3
New Hampshire (2/9) - average of 7 most recent poles - Sanders +14.3

Then right behind are Nevada and South Carolina with a total 96 delegates
Nevada (2/20) – average of 2 most recent polls – Hillary +19.5
South Carolina (2/27) - average of 2 most recent polls – Hillary +29.5

Then almost immediately comes the what is often called “Southeastern Conference primaries” (All 3/1)
Alabama (58 delegates) – no recent polls, expected to be like other southern states
American Samoa (10 delegates) – no recent polls
Arkansas (37 delegates) - no recent polls, expected to be like other southern states
Colorado (77 delegates) – poll in November – Hillary +28
Georgia (112 delegates) – poll in October – Hillary +57
Massachusetts (121 delegates) – poll in November – Hillary +25
Minnesota (94 delegates) – poll in January – Hillary +35
Oklahoma (42 delegates) - poll in November – Hillary +35
Tennessee (77 delegates) – poll in November – Hillary +20
Texas (237 delegates) – poll in November – Hillary +31
Vermont (23 delegates) - no recent polls
Virginia (112 delegates) – poll in November – Hillary +36

As you can see many are Southern states with large minority populations, a situation which is expected to help Clinton. Looking at the polling results for the SEC primaries states, while for some states the poll results are getting a bit old for my comfort, it is going to be very difficult for Sanders to make up for those kinds of big negative numbers.

Only Vermont and American Somoa appear to be winnable for Bernie and we don’t even have polls for those areas which total only 33 delegates. If Bernie wins both Iowa and New Hampshire (a feat that is by no means guaranteed) plus Vermont and American Soma he will have victories in four “states” with 118 delegates. He would also have 12 super delegates. If Hillary wins the other caucuses and primaries as expected, by March 2nd she will have won victories in states having 1,063 delegates along with 332 super delegates. At that point the Sanders campaign could well be hanging on by a thread.

If you are a Sanders fan and you are hoping for help in the remaining caucuses and primaries, there is really no good news. There are current polls for only a few of the remaining states, and here are the results of those state polls. They don’t look very encouraging for Bernie:

Ohio (3/15 – 121 delegates) – 2 recent polls – Hillary +29
Arizona (3/22 – 75 delegates) - poll in November – Hillary +28
Utah (3/22 – 28 delegates) – poll in January – Hillary +10
Alaska (3/25 – 28 delegates) – poll in January – Hillary +3
Wisconsin (4/5 – 89 delegates) – poll in January – Hillary +2
Maryland (4/26 -105 delegates) – poll in January – Hillary +13
Connecticut (4/26 – 65 delegates) – poll in November – Hillary +19
Pennsylvania (4/26 – 181 delegates) - poll in January – Hillary +17
West Virginia (5/10 – 35 delegates) - poll in January – Hillary +17
California (6/7 - 476 delegates) - poll in January – Hillary +11
Montana (6/7 – 22 delegates) – poll in November – Hillary +39
New Jersey (6/7 – 126 delegates) – 2 polls in November – Hillary +35

At the Democratic convention there will be 3,636 pledged delegates and 713 unpledged super delegates for a total of 4349 delegates. It takes a plurality of 2175 delegates to win. The bottom line for Sanders supporters – don’t expect Bernie Sanders be raising his hands in victory at the national convention.

[cantbeserious]

1. Spreading Ever More FUD - So Predictable

eom

[CajunBlazer]

4. Another non-reply to a well thought out post

Very predictable

[cantbeserious]

7. Very Predictable Reply From A Team Without Ideas And Without A Vision

eom

[CajunBlazer]

14. All of those ideas and all of those visions are all included in the poll results

It's like - everything know about a stock is already factored into its price. This post isn't about who has the best ideas and proposals - opinions on that will vary from person to person - this post is about winning and losing.

[cantbeserious]

16. Wishful Thinking Since Polls Can Be Manipulated To Reflect The Establishment And Not The People

eom

[CajunBlazer]

20. Whoa, another conspiracy brewing

[cantbeserious]

22. No Conspiracy - Just Fact - Polls Are Based On Who Is Polled - Poll Selectively - Selective Results

eom

[CajunBlazer]

27. Pollsters don't stay in business by being wrong

[cantbeserious]

28. Pollsters Stay In Business By Pleasing Those That Pay Them

eom

[CajunBlazer]

59. Yep. And what those who pay want most want most of all are predictions....

.... that match the ultimate results. That way they aren't embarrassed to have their name on them like the "Des Moines Register" Iowa caucus polls or the many "CNN/ORC" polls.

If you don't predict accurately, you won't be successful in the polling business.

[cantbeserious]

92. Keep Believing Those Myths

eom

[CajunBlazer]

122. I know the statistic upon which polls are built and evaluated

What's your field of expertise in the polling business.

[cantbeserious]

129. Studied Stats As Well - Know How The Numbers Can Be Manipulated

eom

[CajunBlazer]

133. I'm not paronoid

[cantbeserious]

142. Know Thy Enemy - Oligarchs, Corporations, Banks And Their Media Minions And MIC Henchmen

eom

[tarheelsunc]

117. Didn't you know, polls are skewed! Remember 2012?

Whatever makes BS supporters feel better, I guess. They will have to face reality eventually.

[artislife]

40. Ha, your self gradulation is showing.

No one pats you on the back like you do.

[CajunBlazer]

61. Another useless off topic post.

[artislife]

86. It matches the useless OP. nt

[CajunBlazer]

107. Usefulness is in the eye of the beholder

Last edited Tue Feb 2, 2016, 05:02 PM - Edit history (1)

Apparently facts are useless to you when they don't match your predetermined perceptions.

I can't help you with that.

[Ned_Devine]

154. True, and most of we the beholders see your OP as useless

Hillary should have won Iowa by 20+ points yet she left with a statistical tie. Now I hear and read her supporters touting the results like it was a win. I guess that's what this campaign is all about; redefining "winning". I see a lot of her supporters saying that what's most important is the Democrats "winning" in the Fall. We "won" with Obama in 2008 and 2012 on a very positive message and more often than not it was those same "scared of their shadow" democrats in the House and Senate that hamstrung the Obama administration. That being said, what exactly is "winning" if it's just more of the same? We're ready to tear the system down and return the party to its most basic progressive liberal ideals. You know, the idea that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. We working folk who struggle just to get by are a huge part of that chain and we feel voiceless. A "win" for Bernie Sanders shows that our voices are being heard. So you can go ahead and pretend you're concerned that Bernie has no plan beyond NH. Meanwhile, our plan is to keep supporting the candidate that truly speaks for us. What's wrong with that? What's wrong with standing up for true progressive values?

[CajunBlazer]

155. There are winners and there are losers

And notice that only the losers claim moral victories.

Get use to being in the loser category, because after NH Bernie is going to be in that category most of the time through the 1st of March. If your nerves can stand the strain, check out out the polls for Nevada and South Caroline and the 13 States with primaries on March 1st.

Of those 15 states, only Vermont will be favored to fall to Sanders. And given the poll margins, Sanders is 15% to 35% behind in 14 of those states, there will no room for moral victories. And if you think the people in those states give a darn about votes in Iowa and NH, you're in for a rude awakening.

Enjoy your "moral victory" in Iowa and the probable win for Sanders in NH, because after that the Sanders campaign train is going to be going through a long, very dark tunnel whre the only light will be coming from an another on-rushing train.

[Ned_Devine]

156. You know your language is incendiary, right?

I mean, I'm reading it but I'm having trouble believing someone could write something so obnoxious in response to a post that I took time to write and made sure not to be offensive. You've got the luxury of being in front of a computer screen to say what you're saying because there's no way you would behave this way in person, or at least I hope you wouldn't. If you'd like to continue this discussion feel free to email me so that we're not airing hostilities for everyone in the thread to see. And for the record, it's "get used to" not "get use to". Pretty basic grammar there.

[lunamagica]

53. It is a very well thought out post

That's why all you are getting in response are snarks... They have no argument against you.

[CajunBlazer]

62. It's not their fault

They like dreams and grand possibilities, but have trouble dealing with facts.

[lunamagica]

78. Too bad, because it's going to be so much harder when reality hits them in the face

[Sheepshank]

80. Lots of info lots of data....well done

Bernie supporter Is simply a defense mechanism. But you already knew that

[John Poet]

82. Most of those polls are pretty out-of-date.

[CajunBlazer]

108. Yea, the ones in November are old...

-- but they are the only ones available for those states. I didn't use anything before November Bernie wasn't really relevant before then. You can find tons of very recent polls for Iowa and NH.

It is possible that some of those state races have tightened a bit since the November polls were taken, but I think they are still instructive for two reasons: 1) The races in states with recent poll data like South Carolina have not tightened. 2) In many of those states with old polls, Hillary had such huge leads in November, it is very unlikely that those races have tightened significantly.

[Mnpaul]

161. I don't put much faith in the Minnesota poll

Bernie was neck and neck in Iowa, within two in Wisconsin. I don't see her being +36 here. It will be neck and neck here too.

[roguevalley]

100. bernie has no chance says no one ever

[cascadiance]

2. I feel as bad for Bernie with that news as what the media probably told Obama eight years ago...

... and BTW, what happened to Bill Clinton in both Iowa and New Hampshire when he ran and won too!

All these articles feel like is that the corporate media is NERVOUS that their GRAVY TRAIN is coming to an end, so they need to put out this "news" to help push their desired outcome to happen. Didn't work 8 years ago, even if the Obama presidency didn't hurt them that much either. No Edwards with a "secret" to divert our votes to this time around!!!

[CajunBlazer]

8. I wrote this and I am no corporate media lackey

And Bernie Sanders is not Barack Obama - not by a long shot! And Bernie Sanders is no Bill Clinton either.

[riversedge]

34. Agree--so tired of hearing about 2008. Its the math spupid is my

new motto.

[immoderate]

152. Bernie has more integrity!

--imm

[enid602]

41. other candidates

Interesting if you look at 2008. Hill kept up a 10% lead over Obama until late January. Come February 1, Obama took off and never looked back. The problem with 2008, however is that you had 3 other candidates (Edwards, Richardson and Biden) who together comprised over 20% of the polling. Once they dropped out in January, Obama took off.

Not so many people sitting on the fence or supporting other candidates this time.

[RFKHumphreyObama]

89. Not wanting to take sides here

But

... and BTW, what happened to Bill Clinton in both Iowa and New Hampshire when he ran and won too!

I'm confused. Was this meant to be an ironic statement and I'm missing the irony? Clinton didn't win in Iowa back in 1992. He (and most of the other candidates) conceded the race to native son Harkin, who won the primary. Similarly the 1992 New Hampshire primary was won by Paul Tsongas, who was from the nearby state of Massachusetts. Clinton did come in second place there -which gained him renewed traction after the Gennifer Flowers scandal and helped him in the long term -but he didn't win

[cascadiance]

93. My note was meant to say that losing these events doesn't mean someone's "done" on either side.

We've got a long primary season. We should let it play out and not let just one or two votes tell us "its over" or the polls for that matter.

It's important with these primaries that people watch them, get engaged with what the candidates' messages, etc. so that they can feel more like they understand who they will be asked to vote for when primary season comes to their state. That will also help polls be more accurate too, the more we look to emphasize more the issues and how people stand on them, rather than "who's ahead".

[CajunBlazer]

109. Hillary has a lot more leeway to lose in either Iowa or NH or both...

...than Bernie does - as I pointed out in my OP.

[global1]

3. You Might As Well Post This In The Hillary Clinton Group....

because that is the only place you'll be getting support.

[CajunBlazer]

5. Want to bet?

[Stuckinthebush]

12. I support this post

I'm sure a lot of people do.

Let's not try to make GD-P a Sanders only venue.

[CajunBlazer]

147. Thanks

[DCBob]

15. F___ that.

This is not Bernie Underground.

[riversedge]

37. Living in a Bernie bubble not cool. IMHO

[lunamagica]

54. I support this post

[asuhornets]

98. Not true...I support it 100% n/t

[tarheelsunc]

118. WRONG. eom

[oasis]

127. You can run from facts but you can't hide.

Have a nice day.

[yardwork]

138. I support this thread. It's good analysis.

[NastyRiffraff]

148. Really?

Another post supporter here.

[AZ Progressive]

6. Why are Hillary supporters so determined to demoralize Bernie supporters?

You have to think who's behind this...

[cantbeserious]

9. The DNC, DWS, DLC, Third Way Establishment - Plus The Oligarchs, Corporations And Banks

eom

[CajunBlazer]

10. I wrote it, so I'm behind it

Please demonstrate where what I have written is not factual. Facts don't take sides.

[Stuckinthebush]

13. Facts are demoralizing

If a movement is feelings-based then fact-based posts just bring everyone down. So...stop it. No more math.

[tarheelsunc]

119. How silly, "revolutionaries" don't care about facts, only the "establishment" does.

[DaGimpster]

11. Promoting mediocrity is a long standing tradition in the United States. EOM

[DCBob]

18. This is a political discussion board... right?

Discussing possible scenarios in the upcoming Democratic primary seems a legitimate topic... no?

[Lil Missy]

31. Pot, meet kettle. n/t

[yardwork]

139. You'd think it was an election or something.

[workinclasszero]

17. Bernie is a regional candidate not a national candidate

His strength is in 90% plus white northern/eastern states and then even smaller, the upper middle class.

The fact that Hillary is 3% ahead of him in a state like this...Iowa, showcases the incredible weakness of Bernie Sanders as a national candidate in a general/nationwide election.

Bernie would be a McGovern wipe out/landslide republican victory if democratic voters were foolish enough to choose him as their candidate for president.

Thank God for all the big delegate rich diverse states that aren't buying the snake oil that Bernie is selling!

[frylock]

44. Right, that's why he pulls 30,000 people on the west coast..

?w=650

Because he's a regional candidate!

[CajunBlazer]

64. Well he might get 30K votes in California, maybe more

but it's a big state.

[frylock]

96. Bernie is TAKING California.

Bank it.

[corkhead]

19. You lost me at "devoted followers"

If you want your OP to be taken seriously, why the condescension?

[CajunBlazer]

23. Condescension? I don't think so

Aren't you a devoted follower of Bernie Sanders; most of his supporters are.

Besides you are just trying to deflect the conversation. Nice try though.

[frylock]

46. No, we're devoted supporters of Bernie and his policies..

Hillary has followers.

[corkhead]

65. We're supposed to be a representative democracy. I don't "follow" anyone.

I support candidates who I believe will work in my best interests.

[Peregrine Took]

50. Agreed. When I saw that word....I'm outta there. Totally unnecessary. n/t

[CajunBlazer]

55. I understrand. Facts, when they don't favor your candidate, are sometimes hard to handle

[chervilant]

94. Well, now, "devoted followers" is

but one of the condescending labels used by some herein. Supporters of Senator Sanders are called--variously-- "rubes," "dreamers," "Berniebots," "BernieBros" (this one is really silly, since we women for Bernie are not "bros&quot , "socialists," and "unrealistic." We all want "everything for free."

The bovine feces is getting deep...



#NotMeUS!

[CajunBlazer]

110. Heck, I was trying to be nice

[NurseJackie]

130. Awfully sensitive and touchy. This is the same ...

... group that embraces terms like Clintonistas and Camp Weathervane (among many others) yet innocuous words like "followers" and "fans" are somehow over the line and the absolute height of disrespect?

GMAFB!

It's a diversion to avoid the original topic.

[tarheelsunc]

120. Clintonistas, Hillbots, Vagina-Voters, Shills, Republicans... need I continue?

You've got to be delusional if you think only Clinton supporters are calling names.

[chervilant]

124. Jeez...

Is this your 'adult' version of "I know you are, but what am I?!?"

We were discussing the pejoratives used against Sanders supporters. No one said "only Clinton supporters are calling names."

Obliquely implying I am delusional is uncalled for. I have not once called anyone who supports Hi11ary ANY of the names you've listed. Maybe you should snark at someone who has.





#NotMeUs

Feel the BERN!!!

[CajunBlazer]

132. Maybe you should pay attention to the unflatering names....

.....your fellow Bernie supporters are posting. They are giving people like you a bad reputation.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

21. Red states (no help in the general) will give it to hillary

so very sad

[CajunBlazer]

24. Yep, that's what happens in primaries - welcome to reality

Democrats in states like my Alabama get to vote too. Shouldn't my vote count like yours?

For instance, there are more Democrats in the red state of Texas then there are in many NE states where Bernie is popular combined.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

26. Roll Tide

Huntsville - for me - way back when

[CajunBlazer]

29. My wife is a big Alabama fan

Alumnus of the university, but I am a big UAB fan.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

36. Is Joe Bar still around?

...

[CajunBlazer]

63. My wife is familar with a Joe's Bar in T-town, but doesn't know if it is still in business

[SoLeftIAmRight]

71. Joe Bar in B'ham five points - swinging hot spot - about 1980

be well

[CajunBlazer]

73. No, Five Points South is now filled with high in night spots and resturants,

but there is no Joe's Bar. It must of closed some time ago.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

75. yes - it is gone - looked it up - not Joe's - It was just Joe Bar

be well

[artislife]

43. She will lose in the GE. nt

[CajunBlazer]

66. Another predicion with no facts supporting it.

[99Forever]

25. The only polls that mean ...

... ANYTHING start tomorrow in Iowa.

All of this useless crap, is nothing more than propaganda and wishful thinking.

Feel the Bern

[CajunBlazer]

30. Facts are not "wishful thinking"

Ignoring facts can be detrimental to anyone. No one in the South will need sun tan lotion for the Bernie burn. His sun isn't shining down here.

[99Forever]

33. You didn't offer any facts.

Conjecture and rigged "polls" aren't facts.

Get back to me when you find some actual facts.

[CajunBlazer]

67. I'm sorry you think that this is all part of some grand conspiracy

I live in the real world.

[99Forever]

70. Not if you believe polls, you don't.

[CajunBlazer]

74. ???????

[99Forever]

77. You call "polls" the "real world?"

No damn wonder you are so freakin' confused.

[CajunBlazer]

106. When a poll provides data on the relative standings of candidates....

--- that data is a set of facts whether you like or not. Now you may may chose to belittle those facts because they don't agree with your predetermined perceptions or because they provide bad news with regards to you favorite candidate, but they are facts never the less.

Poll statics and polling methodology are sciences and surely you are not one of those people who don't believe in science, are you?

[99Forever]

111. Polls are not science, they are propaganda tools.

Nothing more, nothing less. EOD

[CajunBlazer]

116. Sure they are.....

[NastyRiffraff]

149. Except, of course

when they favor Sanders.

[99Forever]

150. Bullshit.

Don't put words in my mouth pal. I've never once said anything close to that. EVER.

Feel free to apologize for your error.

[Alfresco]

32. An excellent post explaining why Hillary will be the nominee and Bernie will not. Thanks.

[oberliner]

35. Another anomalous feature of IA and NH is how white they are

This also favors Sanders who does very well with white people.

[RoccoR5955]

38. Didn't they say the same about Obama?

Or am I dreaming?

[CajunBlazer]

69. No you're not dreaming

But Bernie Sanders is not Barack Obama and he will not capture the minority vote in the South, or in the rest of the nation for that matter. That part is certain. It is very hard to win the nomination with out a large percentage of the minority vote. That's why you see the poll results I displayed.

[RoccoR5955]

103. Oh, it is certain? Why?

Because the pre-ordained One said so? Or was it the biased media who stands more to profit from if a corporatist is elected? From what I have seen, Bernie is doing better in the polls than Obama did at the same point in time.
Are you one of the minority voters who will vote for Clinton? If not, than I suggest you speak to them. The ones who know about Bernie's plans are in favor of him. The problem is that he STILL is not known by many in the South. Once he wins the first primaries, that should change. That's if the media, who has been censoring the facts about Bernie lets the word out. The same media, like the NY Times who is biased towards Clinton and has had more information about her than Sanders since Sanders decided to run.
Nothing is certain until after the elections. Then we shall see if we have an oligarchy, or we become what the Founding Fathers wanted, a country of WE THE PEOPLE.

[CajunBlazer]

112. Minority Democrates are going for Clinton this time around not because...

... they don't know or dislike Bernie. It's primarily because they like and trust Bill and Hillary Clinton. They know that she is on their side. Obama had a special way with minorities and once they determine he actually could win, the flocked to him in droves. Bernie, not so much.

In addition, after Iowa and NH, the primaries and caucuses will be coming fast and furious. 16 states and territories in 20 day. Bernie won't have much time to spread his message as he did in Iowa and NH. The advantage goes to the person already well ahead - and that is Hillary in most of those states.

[RoccoR5955]

125. So you really think

That people of color are going to vote for Clinton after Bill voted for minimum jail terms, and to move jobs overseas among other things against their best interests? What fools they are, if they think that Clinton is on their side. Well I guess she's better than tRump, but that's about it.

[CajunBlazer]

134. Yes, hide and watch

[RoccoR5955]

144. Yeah, you would like it if I was to hide.

No way do I intend to.

[Nanjeanne]

39. Silly to look at polls for other states at this early stage

Polls at the beginning for Iowa were pretty lop-sided for Clinton. Then people became aware of who Bernie was. Let's see how the polls look as we get closer to the other states primaries. I remember when Bernie's ceiling was 30%. Ooops.

[CajunBlazer]

72. I think that people in other states are paying attention.

Heck, a bunch of them have to vote in month or less. And remember, candidates, including Bernie, will have a lot less time to spend in those states in order to affect those poll numbers than they had in Iowa and NH. Pretty soon the primaries are going be coming fast and furious. All things considered with the huge leads that Hillary has in many of those follow on primaries, I would much rather be in her shoes than Bernie's.

[frylock]

42. Don't stop thinking about tomorrow.

[NurseJackie]

45. Bernie. Will. Not. Be. The. Nominee.

Simple as that.

[Vinca]

47. Polls change.

[Doctor_J]

48. so is the country if we have to choose between hill and JEB! in November

[CajunBlazer]

76. No, probably Hillary and Trump or maybe Cruz

If it is Bernie and Trump - OMG - a lot of people will turn to Bloomberg and he would have a good chance to win.

[Depaysement]

49. Don't be so sure

Poll numbers change. Bernie was 25 behind Hillary in Iowa and now he's 3 back.

No one has voted yet. That actually matters because that's when people start to focus on the election.

His campaign raised $20 million last month and that will grow if he wins Iowa and NH. That buys a lot of air time. That also creates momentum.

It's also a bit too early to play delegate math when no delegates have been chosen yet.

[CajunBlazer]

79. How much time did Bernie spend campaigning in Iowa and NH?

How much time will he have to campaign in Nevada and SC and then all of 14 the SEC primary states before February 1st? Did you see the big leads Hillary has in most of those states?

Good luck with that theory.

[Depaysement]

90. Good luck with you own theory

You are the one who presents polls (many conducted months ago) as "facts." That's just silly. You're espousing a theory like everyone else.

You may ultimately be right or wrong about Sanders' chances, but you are relying on data that may be dated on the day of each election you listed. That means the sampling error is much larger, especially in an election where one candidate has momentum and the other is stalling a bit.

[Bleacher Creature]

51. Bernie has one path to the nomination.

Sweep IA and NH in as strong a way as possible, and hope that three weeks of having the media talk about how HRC is doomed! He would still be a longshot, but it would at least be theoretically possible for him to change the narrative in such a way as to be competitive in the states that follow.

After tomorrow, that ends.

[Alfresco]

52. Bernie's Going To W...

[DisgustipatedinCA]

56. Where are you headed with those goalposts? nt

[SidDithers]

57. DU rec...nt

Sid

[Ferd Berfel]

58. That's what people like you said about Iowa too.....before Bernie started talking with them.

The Momentum will GROW and he will continue to WIN.

[99Forever]

68. Exactly.

Last Spring. I RSVPed to a very early Bernie rally in Minneapolis. They expected 400-700 to attend.

5000 of us showed up. We are for real and our numbers are growing larger by the second.

We will not be denied, the Revolution has started, and you are graciously invited to join.

Doubt us at your own risk, but someday soon, you too will:

Feel the Bern

[CajunBlazer]

114. The revelution is on its last leg...

It never really had a chance. It had a grand start, but reality is now starting to reel it in.

And I think that we have learned by now that large crowds at rallies don't necessarily translate into to huge numbers in of people the voting lines.

[CajunBlazer]

81. See my post above about how much time Bernie has to change minds...

... in the upcoming states.

[Ferd Berfel]

85. You mean as if Iowa and NH are isolated? As if people in all the other States

aren't paying attention to this week, hearing Bernie's message seeing the crowds?

After Bernie wins Iowa and NH the momentum and crowds will be even grater than they are now

No, We Can't will also resonate during this time.

[uponit7771]

101. If people ARE paying attention and Sanders numbers ARE this bad in southern states isn't that worse

.. then?!

Sanders has had 7 months right?

regards

[Ferd Berfel]

104. Then You, Hillary and the Corporations have nothing to fear

except fear itself

[uponit7771]

105. Doesn't address the question and I'm not afraid at all, with either dems win... we're arguing

... over best and damn good imho

[KingFlorez]

60. This is all true

[LWolf]

83. Or so the establishment would like us to believe. nt

[Mike Nelson]

84. True, but...

...if he wins Iowa, Bernie will get a big media boost - it would change levels of support across the board. He will need to target Hillary's strengths in voters, also, which could be interesting...

[aikoaiko]

87. We know the milestones that need to be met.

Bernie's chances of winning were always small given the HRC machine, but yet here he is defying the odds in the first two states.

[chervilant]

88. Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!

Love the smell of desperation on a balmy Sunday afternoon!





(Recalling similar "predictions" in 2007...still making me laugh!)

[CajunBlazer]

136. Enjoy yourself while you can

But it sounds more like whistling past the grave yard to me.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

91. "His devoted followers..." Hmmmm... Are Hillary's supporters also "devoted followers"? Or is there

...another, more Orwellian, way to describe devoted Hillary followers?

[thesquanderer]

95. It will be hard for Bernie, but not as hard as you make it seem

re:

If Bernie wins both Iowa and New Hampshire (a feat that is by no means guaranteed) plus Vermont and American Soma he will have victories in four “states” with 118 delegates...If Hillary wins the other caucuses and primaries as expected, by March 2nd she will have won victories in states having 1,063 delegates

Technically, that's true, but you're implying that Bernie would have won 118 delegates and Hillary would have won 1063, which is NOT true. These are not "winner take all" contests, delegates are awarded proportionately.

So for example, Hillary may indeed win California, a state that has 476 delegates, but that doesn't mean she wins 476 delegates. Even if the poll is right and she's up by 11 points, that means we should expect her to get about 290 of them, and Bernie to get about 185.

So yes, Bernie is definitely the underdog... there have to be more states where he wins more delegates than Hillary does. Luckily for him, things can change between now and and June... just as things have changed between October and now, so that California split (among others) may not be what it appears today. It will be tough, no question. But the delegate count isn't quite as daunting as you make it appear. If he can at least keep the race close in earlier races (to minimize the delegate defecit he'll likely have after Super Tuesday), he may be able to make it up in later ones, where current polls are less predictive, and where time has the potential to be on his side.

[CajunBlazer]

137. I never said that - wins make candidateas seem unstoppable to the voting public

not delegates. And when a candidates starts losing big states by 20% and 30% that's a heck of a lot of delegates.

[Gothmog]

97. Even if Sanders wins both Iowa and New Hampshire, he will not be the nominee

Even if Sanders wins both Iowa and New Hampshire, it is unlikely that he will be the nominee http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/bernie-sanders-new-hampshire/

So why do I still think Sanders is a factional candidate? He hasn’t made any inroads with non-white voters — in particular black voters, a crucial wing of the Democratic coalition and whose support was a big part of President Obama’s toppling of Clinton in the 2008 primary. Not only are African-Americans the majority of Democratic voters in the South Carolina primary (a crucial early contest), they make up somewhere between 19 percent and 24 percent of Democrats nationwide. In the past two YouGov polls, Sanders has averaged just 5 percent with black voters. Ipsos’s weekly tracking poll has him at an average of only 7 percent over the past two weeks. Fox News (the only live-interview pollster to publish results among non-white voters in July and August) had Clinton leading Sanders 62-10 among non-white Democrats in mid-July and 65-14 in mid-August. Clinton’s edge with non-whites held even as Sanders cut her overall lead from 40 percentage points to 19....

But even if you put aside those metrics, Sanders is running into the problem that other insurgent Democrats have in past election cycles. You can win Iowa relying mostly on white liberals. You can win New Hampshire. But as Gary Hart and Bill Bradley learned, you can’t win a Democratic nomination without substantial support from African-Americans.

Iowa and New Hampshire do not represent the demographics of the Democratic Party and so will not help sanders

[LexVegas]

99. He has a minority problem and it aint going away. nt

[R B Garr]

102. Great post!

The ideology will only get him do far.

[morningfog]

113. You overstate the wins in the later states.

Every state is proportional allocation. As long as Bernie does well in the first two andakes strong showing in the few after that, he'll have enough to show to stay in. The super delegates can move so I set those to the side.

Obviously 50+1 is needed to win. But regularly getting 40-50+% of the delegates will sustain him for months. Until he is faced with a mathematical impossibility, he should stay in and keep fighting.

Hillary has too much baggage and too much lingering to give the nomination to her until their is no other choice.

Having said all that. If Bernie can pull off am upset on IA and then take NH resoundedly, as he will, NV will tighten, SC will tighten some (though not as much- Hillary will take SC, and the national polls will tighten. Thing about Hillary, the more the people see her, the less they like her and the more they distrust her. We have a long way to go.

[CajunBlazer]

115. Not if he loses states by over 30%

On top of that, once any momentum that Bernie gains in Iowa and NH evaporates in states like Nevada and South Carolina, voters will start band wagon jumping. Everyone wants to vote for the winning side.

[Logical]

121. A wasted post. Wow! Nt

[CajunBlazer]

123. 24 Rec's thus far - not so wasted for those folks

Lot of Bernie folks commented, including you - surely they, and you, didn't waste time on a useless post.

[doxyluv13]

126. Numbers Will change fast, if Bernie Wins or does well in Iowa and Wins NH.

Nobody beyond the first few states, where Presidential campaigns are part of the culture and economy, really focuses on this stuff till the voting starts.

[CajunBlazer]

135. Don't hold your breath

The follow up primaries are going coming one on top of the other this time around. Nevada will go for Clinton and Bernie will get killed in SC which will set the example for all of the other Southern states following on Feb. 1st. IF (and that is a huge IF) Bernie wins both Iowa and NH he will be driving a jeep of momentum. After SC Hillary will be driving a M1-A1 Tank.

On the other hand, if Bernie doesn't win in Iowa, the news channels will be playing Taps.

[yardwork]

140. That is indeed Bernie's whole strategy.

Sanders has to win big in Iowa and New Hampshire in order to get the momentum to catch fire in the rest of the states.

Having lived in the south for decades now, I don't see a path to victory for Bernie in southern states.

[oasis]

128. Kick.

[riversedge]

131. And a big REC for Feb 1, 2016 #ImWithHer

[GeorgeGist]

141. Sounds familiar ...

[Gothmog]

143. Iowa and New Hampshire are must wins for Sanders

A candidate can win both Iowa and New Hampshire on the basis of only white voters and such a victory will not help in other states http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/bernie-sanders-new-hampshire/

So why do I still think Sanders is a factional candidate? He hasn’t made any inroads with non-white voters — in particular black voters, a crucial wing of the Democratic coalition and whose support was a big part of President Obama’s toppling of Clinton in the 2008 primary. Not only are African-Americans the majority of Democratic voters in the South Carolina primary (a crucial early contest), they make up somewhere between 19 percent and 24 percent of Democrats nationwide. In the past two YouGov polls, Sanders has averaged just 5 percent with black voters. Ipsos’s weekly tracking poll has him at an average of only 7 percent over the past two weeks. Fox News (the only live-interview pollster to publish results among non-white voters in July and August) had Clinton leading Sanders 62-10 among non-white Democrats in mid-July and 65-14 in mid-August. Clinton’s edge with non-whites held even as Sanders cut her overall lead from 40 percentage points to 19....

But even if you put aside those metrics, Sanders is running into the problem that other insurgent Democrats have in past election cycles. You can win Iowa relying mostly on white liberals. You can win New Hampshire. But as Gary Hart and Bill Bradley learned, you can’t win a Democratic nomination without substantial support from African-Americans.

Sanders is likely to do well in Iowa, New Hampshire, Utah and Vermont but these states combined have less than one-half of the delegates as Texas alone.

Unless Sanders can broaden his appeal, then he will not be the nominee

[Gothmog]

145. According to the Cook Report, Sanders needed to win 70% of the Iowa delegates to be competitive

According to one of the experts for the Cook Report, Sanders needs to win big in Iowa to have a chance http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/sanders-needs-more-than-a-win-in-iowa-to-beat-clinton

As David Wasserman wrote in the Cook Political Report last week, "98 percent of pledged Democratic delegates will come from states with lower shares of liberal whites than Iowa and New Hampshire." That is a big problem for Sanders who has yet to prove he can expand his base....

Yet, even then, delegate allocation is proportional, which means that Sanders would have to begin winning by major margins to make the race a serious contest.

Wasserman estimates that according to his models, Sanders would "need to win 70 percent of Iowa's delegates and 63 percent of New Hampshire's delegates" to even "be on track" to stay competitive with Clinton in later states where demographically speaking, Clinton has shown she has more support. And in a states like Florida and South Carolina, Clinton leads in recent polls by 36 points and 19 points, respectively.

"It is not merely the delegate process that favors Hillary, it is the voters. She has earned the loyalty and support of communities of color, women, the LGBTQ community, environmentalists, and other vital parts of the Democratic coalition," says Democratic strategist Paul Begala, a Clinton supporter. "Bernie's coalition - so far - is more narrow. It is impressive in its energy and its passion, but it is, I think, more narrow."

The Cook Report has some good analysis

[CajunBlazer]

146. Well, Sander's didn't get the necessary 70% in Iowa, did he

[karynnj]

159. In what was probably the dumbest thing ever written by someone actually paid as a pundit.

The fact is that AL GORE running against Bill Bradley beat him in a landslide ... and he did not get 70% of the delegates - he got 63%.

It is like he assumed that each race was mathematically independent - thus a very close finish in Iowa followed by a NH win .. and then a good show in Nevada ... changed nothing from the snap shop of polls taken as long ago as November. It also ignored that there would actually be campaigning.

One thing that was only slightly mentioned was that he did better than expected in the rural areas. Here, I question whether that was his excellent add where a dairy farmer both acted as a character witness and spoke of the support Sanders gave him as a Senator. This could play in many parts of the country -- next to the America ad and the one that used bits of that video and had him speaking of the economic message. One thing all have in common - they are excellent ads speaking of a very very decent man.

Now, imagine that he creates ads with VT seniors - where I heard the former head of the VT AARP - say how well respected and well liked he was. Throw in his work of getting funding for community health centers in various bills - including a large amount in the affordable care bill. For small communities - in VT or elsewhere, these are important. Then imagine on ad that speaks of the various things he has done for vets.

Yet, this genius gives polls that will be long outdated before these people vote or caucus and assumes nothing can change. In fact, the results of yesterday already did at least one thing - raised his visibility. One thing that benefited certain Republicans and made things harder for Sanders and O'Malley is that they received incredibly little time on the cable shows. In addition, it is now a 2 way race - the choice is HRC and Sanders -- he is the only Democratic alternative.

It is best not to underestimate Bernie Sanders. You might consider who had bigger smiles than I ever saw him smile - and which famous family looked not that happy last night ... even as she won.

[Gothmog]

162. Bernie Sanders Needs More Than The Tie He Got In Iowa

Last edited Wed Feb 3, 2016, 01:54 PM - Edit history (1)

Sanders is not polling well in states with less than 90+% white populations and so Sanders needed to do much better in Iowa http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bernie-sanders-needs-more-than-the-tie-he-got-in-iowa/

We’ve said for months that Iowa and New Hampshire are two of the best states for Sanders demographically. You can see why in the entrance poll taken in Iowa. Sanders won very liberal voters over Clinton by 19 percentage points, but he lost self-identified somewhat liberals and moderates to Clinton by 6 percentage points and 23 percentage points, respectively. That’s bad for Sanders because even though 68 percent of Iowa Democratic caucus-goers identified as liberal this year, only 47 percent of Democratic primary voters nationwide did so in 2008. We’ll need to see if Sanders can do better in a state that is more moderate than Iowa before thinking he can win the nomination.

Iowa and New Hampshire also lack nonwhite voters, who form a huge part of the Democratic base. Can Sanders win over some of these voters? Clinton has held a lead among nonwhites of nearly 40 percentage points in national polls. In Nevada, which votes after the New Hampshire primary, the electorate for the Democratic caucuses in 2008 was 15 percent Hispanic and 15 percent black. After Nevada comes South Carolina, where a majority of Democratic voters will be black. Our polls-only forecast in South Carolina gives Clinton a 94 percent chance to win, and our polls-plus forecast gives her a 96 percent chance to win.

Clinton will continue to be a favorite for the Democratic nomination if she continues to hold a large lead among nonwhite voters and basically breaks even with white voters, as she did in Iowa. Sanders, meanwhile, needs to cut into Clinton’s lead among nonwhites and expand his support among white voters beyond what he won in Iowa. If he does that, he’ll put himself in contention to win the nomination. If he doesn’t, he’ll continue to be an underdog.

[JPnoodleman]

151. Tis' a distinct possibility, but Bernies base has moved Mountains before...

I definitely see this as a distinct possibility. Bernie and other areas may yet be challenging.

This may yet spare Clinton assuming Bernies supporters do not get a fresh boost of energy and zeal from this Caucus and NH.

[B Calm]

153. Polls change. Remember Bernie was down 60 in Iowa just a few months ago.

[CajunBlazer]

157. Not that it would matter, but Bernie doesn't have months

The upcoming states after New Hampshire are not lily white like Iowa and NH, are more conservative, and are far less attuned to Bernie's message.

After NH Bernie will have only 11 days in Nevada to overcome a 13% deficit before their primary and then only 7 days in SC where he is behind 30%. Then 3 days later 13 states where he is behind at least 20% (except in Vermont) are all having their primaries on the same day.

I'll give Bernie Vermont with its measly 23 delegates - but the rest, no way. His campaign will sag after absorbing 14 out of 15 big losses within a 10 day period. Can you say "shell shocked"?

So you had better hope that Bernie takes NH by a huge margin because after that he is going to pile up one big loss after another.

[B Calm]

158. We'll see. .

[SunSeeker]

160. K & R

[Alfresco]

163. HC-30 BS-21 :-)