Bernie won the pledged New Hampshire delegates 15-9

[jfern]

Superdelegates can switch at any time for any reason. No need to count your chickens before they hatch.

Here's the results where you can see how the 15-9 split is calculated.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/NH-D

[Snarkoleptic]

1. The table is tilted, the game is rigged.

As of this moment, here's how Politico shows the vote and delegate count with 89% reporting-
Sanders 60% with 13 delegates
Clinton 38.4% with 15 delegates

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/hillary-clinton-new-hampshire-african-americans-219039#ixzz3zjhSplOo

[cali]

3. The House simply doesn't lose.

[brooklynite]

6. 44 States...49 States...40 States...

Those were the losses of Clinton (80) Monday (84) and Dukakis (88) which led to the introduction of Super Delegates. You can question the value today, but let's at least acknowledge the reality of where the Democratic Party was before Bill Clinton.

[cosmicone]

8. You mean Carter and Mondale don't you?

[morningfog]

15. If the party doesn't want Bernie, they shouldn't have let him run as a Dem!

They didn't think he would do as well as he is. And you know that is true.

[Motown_Johnny]

17. Then why bother the charade of voting for a nominee?

Lets just go back to the smoke filled rooms, since those worked out so damn well.



P.S. I love when a Freudian slip manifests itself in print. Thanks for the laugh.

[LondonReign2]

18. Stupid plebe voters! They know nothing!

We need to leave the picking of the nominee to those who know better!

[morningfog]

7. I don't recall the inclusion of supers with state totals previously.

Is this new or did I just not remember?

The supers are not tied to state results, if the media feels the need to include supers, they should have their own column and not be list led by state.

[Snarkoleptic]

9. OTOH, I feel it's important to show these totals so we can better understand

how the will of the voter is not directly related to who ends up with the delegates and, ultimately, the Presidency.

[George II]

10. Super Delegates have been in existence for about 40 years, and everyone who becomes a candidate.....

.....knows about them before the primaries even start.

Also, CNN's count of pledged delegates is 13-11, not 15-9.

[KittyWampus]

12. It isn't "rigged". It's a PART of how Obama won.

[itsrobert]

2. The "Money" will keep these super delegates from deflecting

IMO.

[PowerToThePeople]

4. Record breaking Victory!!!

[morningfog]

5. Bernie is the leader now. B-36 to H-32.

[Go Vols]

11. It will get better.

[George II]

13. Actually it's 42-36 for Clinton

[morningfog]

14. No it's not.

That number does not even make sense. If you are going to apply the HIllary Handicap SUpers, use them all. It makes no sense to use just the ones for the state. Nothing the supers do is dependent on their state voting.

GOod lord, it's like Hillary's supporters just eat whatever mash they are spoon fed.

[George II]

16. How pleasant. Maybe you guys should coordinate your umbrage? On the one hand....

....when someone mentions all of Clinton's Super Delegates, he/she gets assaulted. When someone mentions only those Super Delegates who have committed only in states where the caucus/primary has been conducted, that person gets assaulted. I tend to include committed Super Delegates only in states that have already voted.

So, take it either way:

After the Iowa and New Hampshire votes, Clinton has a 42-36 delegate lead

OR...............

After the Iowa and New Hampshire votes, Clinton has a 387-50 delegate lead.

Take your pick. Either way, Hillary Clinton is ahead.

Have a great day.

[morningfog]

19. You've just shown you don't understand super delegates of the meaning of the word "assault."

Some people just don't understand super delegates and the nomination process, especially those from other countries. It's complicated and silly.

Here's a primer: Super delegates are unpledged and not bound to, or determined by their state. As unpledged, they can move at any point, including at the convention.

Thus, they are irrelevant at this point in the race. If one candidate concedes prior to the convention (which is likely), they are irrelevant. If the race is so close that it goes to the convention with both candidates, the supers will endorse the candidate with the majority of the pledged delegates. The supers really only have an effect by pressuring a candidate late in the race to drop out. Regardless of how this plays out, the super delegates are irrelevant.

Except of course to the desperate and breathless Hill folks who cannot accept that she is not inevitable. It is HIllary's handicap. Count it however you want, but you look silly and desperate doing it at this point.

[George II]

20. I fully understand the meaning, function, AND history of Super Delegates. No need to be...

....lectured by you.

So, you call more than 700 delegates, about 15% of those who will attend the convention, "irrelevant"? I would say that it is you who doesn't understand Super Delegates.

And I'm neither desperate nor breathless, just practical and realistic, and very comfortable with Clinton's position after two of Sanders' three strongest states have voted.

Last night was Sanders' last (with Vermont still to vote, perhaps second to last) hurrah. He's trailing in a dozen or more states by about 2-1 or more, and other than Vermont, he's only close (but trailing) in one or two more.

If he's in a virtual dead heat (ignoring the ubiquitous Super Delegates) at this point and he's trailing in 40+ states, not much chance of pulling this one out.

[morningfog]

21. You just argued against yourself George, and proved my point.

If, as you hope and believe, Hillary runs the table from here on out, the supers currently in her pocket are IRRELEVANT. She would win with or without them. That is what irrelevant means. They will not affect the outcome. Including them now is transparent and dumb.

[George II]

22. No I didn't, and no they aren't, morning.

[morningfog]

23. Lol. Okay. I guess we are speaking different languages.