I think some people are deluding themselves when it comes to Iowa

[Doctor Jack]

Let me start by saying I like both of the remaining democratic candidates and would gladly vote for either in November, however, I am not really passionate about Sanders or Clinton. They are fine but make me say "meh" when I think about them. I definitely understand the passion and enthusiasm, especially from the Sanders supporters, I just don't feel it myself.

With that said, I've been reading the post-Iowa arguments here and around the internet and I fear that the Bernie supporters are setting themselves up for a great letdown. Sure, only one state has voted so far and as people always say, anything can happen, but I see people bending over backwards and really distorting reality to justify the Iowa results. First, the Iowa caucuses I saw had Clinton as the winner but that means she is in serious trouble and is unelectable in November? How? And since it was almost a tie that means Clinton lost even though she won. How does winning a close primary mean that the winner is the loser? Where is that in the Iowa caucus rule book? And some argue this looks like 2008 all over again. Maybe, if Sanders won by 8 points but he didn't and Clinton came in first, not 3rd.

Then there is the whole coin toss controversy which sounds a lot like Benghazi. No matter how much proof there is to the contrary, people still bring it up like its a known fact. Really, if your candidates grand strategy is ruined by an Iowa presinct captain flipping a coin, you have much bigger problems than the Iowa caucuses.

The point is I like you Bernie supporters and if your guy wins then lets all make sure he is in the white house next year but I worry that you are heading down the road of crippling disappointment, refusing to see the cracks and flaws. He did well in Iowa but this ain't 2008 and he isn't obama. You have to do a lot better at arguing that Sanders is viable in the long run than arguing about coin flip stealing his triumphant victory, Clinton somehow losing Iowa when she won, and that you met some Sanders supporters in L.A. so he will win California. You may find it convincing but from an outsider, it sounds silly and kind of desperate. Don't be that kind of supporter, you're better than that.

[rsmith6621]

1. Excuse Me!

But we dont need a politician who can not speak calmly, HRC speaks as though she is narrating a book on CD. However the fact that the drama in her voice since Tuesday has increased means she is feeling the BERN, or maybe she is feeling the pressure of her EX-Boss DOJ getting ready to drop the ball on her.

Bernie two weeks ago said he believed that HRC was in legal trouble and that statement was made as a matter of fact.

There is not much HRC that supports my best interest. She is just more of the same. We need REAL CHANGE.

Im with the BERN till the floor vote in Philly.

[Doctor Jack]

9. Drama in her voice, huh?

Do you happen to have Hillarys phrenology report? I hear she has the skull paterns of a pickpocket and a clear destructivness ridge over the central sulcus.

[Wilms]

2. An apple a day... n/t

[FSogol]

3. I agree, but hope you have your flame-proof undies on.

[NurseJackie]

4. Nice try.

It was an excellent, thoughtful, and well-written post. (But... brace for impact.)

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

5. Let's work a bit out of order.

Cointossgate or whatever - not really important. No matter how you slice it, the state split pretty much 50-50.

Second - Bernie folks have known from the start he was a long shot, facing a candidate who has already run the race once, and has a lot of experience at campaigning for President, and should be expected to have learned from her mistakes in 08. A candidate who started out with 99% name recognition. A candidate whose SuperPacs began collecting money years in advance, who has every rich or powerful person around the nation and the world in her contact list. A candidate whom most other politicians are afraid to cross thanks to the Clinton tendency to punish the 'disloyal' and reward the 'loyal'.

Rest assured, we don't see Iowa as 'winning the White House', but merely getting a chance to compete, a chance for people around the country to bother to even CONSIDER Sanders. Had he actually lost by any real margin, his campaign would essentially be dead in the water. Now, however, he at least gets a fighting chance.

He's still got a long way to go, both in winning the middle-aged and minority populations, with both of whom he's been getting more support, but is still significantly behind on. While he's worked up from 7% or so with AA voters, he'd only made it up to 34% with them in Iowa by the time Iowa rolled around, leaving Hillary pulling them 2-1 (although that's certainly far better than the 10-1 she would have gotten with them a year ago).

[Jarqui]

6. "You have to do a lot better at arguing that Sanders is viable in the long run"

That's hard to do right now because the fact of the matter is nobody really knows. it's too hard to prove credibly.

It was said that he had to do well in Iowa (at the very least) and he did. They're still bickering over who won it (doesn't deeply matter in my opinion - argue longer if they think they can get a delegate).

He looks like he's going to do well in New Hampshire. That's good. He needs to finish that off with a win.

Nevada is hard to know where he stands. No respectable polls in January. He's closed the gap some but how much - particularly with Latinos?

South Carolina is Hillary's firewall and Bernie has to prove he can close the gap with black voters.

Going to those states and campaigning, running ads, getting local press and getting a better level of free mainstream media coverage will help him get his message out better. But now that the primaries are underway, he doesn't have nearly as much time with these voters to overcome Hillary. This is where the next major test of his campaign is.

So we don't know much definitively. We know he's going to be around for a while - at least until after Super Tuesday.

But these upcoming primaries are important outcomes that will give us more insight into his viability. Can he stay close to her in elected delegates? Can he improve significantly on making his case to minorities?

All we know now is he still has some kind of a chance. We're going to learn a lot more about his viability in the long run in the next 27 days.

[CentralMass]

7. You just need to change your mindset and get on board with Bernie.

[Recursion]

8. I find both remaining candidates very "meh" too

You have to do a lot better at arguing that Sanders is viable

Well, the proof or disproof of that will be in the upcoming weeks. He surprised me by doing as well as he did in Iowa, which answered quite a few of my doubts. How he handles Super Tuesday will be a big tell for me.

I'd be fine with either as President; I just have a lot of concerns about both of their campaign skills.

[jeff47]

10. Some reasons

I saw had Clinton as the winner but that means she is in serious trouble and is unelectable in November? How?

She blew a massive lead.

She pulled money and staff from super Tuesday states to win big in IA, so she's going to do worse on super Tuesday for her tie in IA.

She also spent a lot more money in IA, and appears to have "tapped out" her main donors - the admission price to her speeches has gone way down, indicating that she's running out of the high-dollar donors her campaign relies on.

Caucuses massively favor the candidate with a large ground game and lots of endorsements. It was claimed Clinton had a fantastic ground game, and all those union endorsements are supposed to translate into more "boots on the ground" to boost her caucus results. Caucuses also skew older, which is a more favorable demographic for Clinton.

Also, it wasn't winner-take-all. So eeking out a lead does not give a large boost at the convention. She'll have between 0 and 2 more pledged delegates when all the dust settles, out of around 2000 needed to win.

Then there is the whole coin toss controversy which sounds a lot like Benghazi.

People are not seriously claiming the coins were fixed. The coin tosses demonstrate just how close it was - winning those 6 tosses works out to about half of her margin of victory.

The point is I like you Bernie supporters and if your guy wins then lets all make sure he is in the white house next year but I worry that you are heading down the road of crippling disappointment, refusing to see the cracks and flaws. He did well in Iowa but this ain't 2008 and he isn't obama.

We don't support Sanders because of Sanders. We support Sanders because of policies. It's not a campaign about one guy. It's a campaign about us.

That's the primary difference between the two remaining campaigns, and one of the main reasons Clinton supporters do not "get" Sanders supporters. They support Clinton, the person. We support policies that Sanders also supports.

[Ino]

11. Sanders may not be Obama...

but it's certain that Hillary is still Hillary.

Thanks for your concern.