I think its time to have this discussion: Has Sanders won Super Tuesday....

[Joe the Revelator]

.....when it comes to momentum? He winning places he wasn't expected to win.

[Avalux]

1. Yes! Time for another donation!

[New Earth]

3. that's what I was just thinking!

I went to my email hoping to see another one from them but not yet....waiting for that and then I'm gonna send!

[LeFleur1]

116. I Got an Email

I got an email from Bernie's people asking for money. I have no idea where they got the information to send one. Maybe when they raided Hillary's email list?

[Joe the Revelator]

4. This is the tipping point, this is definitely the time for a donation

[morningfog]

2. You've done it now. Fits will be coming your way.

[Joe the Revelator]

5. I am as serious as dick cancer....i think that Bernie won tonight.

I'm actually amazed.

[artislife]

18. Don't know

if I would have used that metaphor but I agree with the emotion it conveys!

[Lizzie Poppet]

33. I'm not ready to go quite that far.

I don't expect the big momentum switch until the 15th of the month. Hillary will have a big pledged delegate lead at that point...but it will shrink steadily as the convention approaches. Enough to flip the result? I really can't call it. But I certainly hope so, being a progressive.

[reformist2]

88. I think you are right. Most people don't see it because the headline is that Hillary won more states

But that fact is that Bernie has now won 5 states quite decisively, and 3 additional states have been virtual ties. That doesn't sound like someone who's out of the running at all.

[demwing]

98. That's fucking serious

Pun intended

[Eko]

6. I feel confident

in saying he hasn't lost any momentum that's for sure. Keep on Bernie! As far as winning Clinton obviously won the primaries tonight.

[marions ghost]

7. remains to be quantified, but

Will MSM start to cover his campaign? That will tell ya about "momentum"....

[Garrett78]

8. Uh, no.

Sanders was a lock to win VT and hoped to win 4 others. He'll win 3 of those 4 others. So, I can understand why someone would like to think that constitutes a victory. But he's losing the Super Tuesday delegate count in a big way. He needed to win at least 40% of today's delegates, and he's not going to come close to that figure. And the next 2 Tuesdays don't look good for Sanders.

Sorry, but wishing doesn't make it so. And, no, I'm not a Clinton supporter. But I am a realist.

[jeff47]

13. Only if you assume all states are the same.

And they aren't.

Tonight is red-state-heavy. Even the Democrats are more conservative in most of the states that voted today.

The rest of the country is not so conservative.

Sanders will need better than near-ties, but there's still 80% of the delegates to go.

[Agschmid]

15. Mass... Aka "Red State"

[jeff47]

23. AL, AR, GA, TN and TX say "Hi". (nt)

[wilsonbooks]

51. How many of those states will go for the Democratic nominee

in the national election?

[jeff47]

52. None. Which is why they are penalized by the delegate formula.

A big win in a blue state helps a lot more than a big win in a red state, if they have roughly the same population.

[artislife]

24. Eked out victory.

That should worry h.

[Agschmid]

28. Bernie repeatedly said this week he expected a win here in Mass.

The expectation he set was not met.

He's running a good campaign, lots of money being raised, great social media presence.

But you need to win delegates to win the primary, and even with a proportional split this loss was something he was trying to avoid.

The pledged delegates are important, and Hillary is in the lead currently.

[artislife]

39. She had a lot of the superdelegates at this time in 2008, too

Bernie came pretty close to a win, in a state that will vote Blue.

Look at the where his votes are and look at the GE.

I know it is a delegate thing and it seems pretty daunting.

However, h must ask herself if she will get enough in the GE by the way we are voting now.

I think she will not win a GE election. Not with how the votes are shaking out on both sides and in which states.

[Agschmid]

43. I didn't say anything about super delegates.

She has the lead in pledged delegates and by a pretty good margin too.

I don't understand this whole red/blue state thing... Every democrats voice matters in the primary regardless of where they geographically reside. To say otherwise would be disenfranchising thousands of voters.

This is a primary, red states and blue states don't really matter here.

[onenote]

68. How exactly do the votes in the primary tell you who is going to win the GE?

Unless you assume that the supporters of a candidate in the primary won't support the other candidate in the GE? And if you assume that, how does either Bernie or Clinton win?

[artislife]

77. I am looking at how the republicans are voting in real numbers

And I believe there is a large part of Bernie's support that isn't for the Democratic Party per se. I believe a real underlying theme of this election cycle is Politics As Usual v Politics without the machine.

I think Trump supporters fall into the second category as well as many Bernie supporters. I wonder how many will vote for the machine if they are enthused now by not voting for the machine.

That's all.

[onenote]

90. The republican party is coming apart at the seams before our eyes.

[artislife]

91. Then why are they voting in such high numbers? nt

[onenote]

92. Because around half want crazy trump and the other half wants to stop him

But if you take a look around, there are significant signs that if Trump can't be stopped, a lot of repubs are going to sleep in on election day.

[CajunBlazer]

84. It doesn matter what the a candidate MIGHT do in the GE...

...if the candidate can't convince "his" party to make him the nominee. And no one is going convince those who intend to vote for Hillary that she is not electable. So it doesn't matter what we on DU think.

[artislife]

48. Look at the breakdown in MA

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2016/mar/01/super-tuesday-results-live-state-by-state

This is very interesting.

[Agschmid]

49. I've been looking at it all night.

I'm shocked Sanders didn't carry more of the Boston area, many universities and very liberal areas here near the city. To see it go overwhelming for Clinton was a suprise.

[artislife]

57. Look at the rural areas

Why would they be going for a Social Democrat? Maybe they are voting against a machine? Maybe not. I just find it very interesting where his votes are coming from.

Because I don't really believe this election is about Republican v Democrat. I think it is politics as usual v politics without the machine.

And how many votes are going for the second one across the board v the first one?


Yeah, that.

[Agschmid]

60. You are surprised the rural areas went for Sanders?

Two points...

- Many of those areas aren't rural they are Boston/Worcester/Hartford/Springfield suburbs.
- He claimed a win, he was promising a win in Mass. it's a big deal he didn't get it.

[artislife]

89. Look at this...

How did she eke out a win?
https://www.change.org/p/massachusetts-attorney-general-maura-healey-arrest-prosecute-bill-clinton-john-f-mitchell-violation-of-ma-election-laws

This is an issue with voters who think the Clintons skate very close to the edge and sometimes go over.

[Lizzie Poppet]

35. "Red-heavy" =/= "all red"

You're welcome.

[tymorial]

102. It was in 1984 :P

[Garrett78]

19. Where would you expect Sanders to win going forward? Oregon maybe. Washington, perhaps. Where else?

I don't see how Sanders can be expected to do well next Tuesday or the Tuesday after that. And with no winner-take-all states, there's no chance for Sanders to make a big haul. He has less of a chance than Rubio and Cruz at this point, which is really saying something.

Where Clinton is winning, she's often winning BIG...and it's almost impossible for Sanders to overcome the delegate deficit.

[jeff47]

47. He doesn't need a big haul.

Where Clinton is winning, she's often winning BIG

In states that have fewer delegates - the formula penalizes states that reliably vote for Republicans in the general election.

For example, tonight's big state was Texas with 222 delegates. California has only 33% more people, but has more than double the delegates (475).

That weighting means Sanders does not need giant wins. Winning CA by about the margin he won MN tonight erases everything Clinton got tonight except for Texas. Texas can be made up for by winning some of the midwest states like he won Oklahoma.

We have a very long way to go. Clinton might pull it off, or Sanders might pull it off.

[Garrett78]

61. Sanders does need a big haul.

Because he's in a big hole after tonight, and likely in an even deeper hole after March 15th. He could win 60%-40% in California and it still wouldn't be enough.

[jeff47]

65. California isn't the only remaining state.

Again, this race is far from over.

[Garrett78]

70. Tell me where you expect Sanders to win.

Do you think Sanders will win the March 8th or March 15th contests? And what about CA?

[CajunBlazer]

87. The bigger the state, the more diverse the state.....

....the more diverse the state, the better chance has to win.

[jeff47]

97. Not really.

I know you really, really love the meme that only white people like Sanders. But that's not actually true.

[CajunBlazer]

100. True Hillary didn't get the entire vote, just most of it

Look at the which Bernie has won so far - Vermont New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Minneapolis, and Colorado. They all have small percentages of black voters. Look where Clinton has won big in the South - all have been states with high percentage if black voters.

What should worry you is states like Iowa and Massachusetts which do not have a large percentage of black voter where Hillary won anyway.

[jeff47]

101. So black voters are identical to latino voters, asian voters, native american voters

and every single minority?

Also, you should probably take some time to actually look at Minnesota and where Sanders did well. You'll find a lot of melanin in those places.

What should worry you is states like Iowa and Massachusetts which do not have a large percentage of black voter where Hillary won anyway.

Someday, you'll realize that none of our primaries are winner-take-all.

Today is not that day.

[Garrett78]

106. The lack of winner-take-all primaries...

...is all the more reason to believe Sanders doesn't have a chance. There's no opportunity for him to make a big score--not that he's likely to win any of the big states (NY, CA, FL, etc.) anyway.

You seem intent on denying basic math. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hillary-clintons-got-this/

[jeff47]

109. He doesn't need a "big score".

The states Clinton is winning in the South are penalized in delegates for consistently voting Republican in the general election. So he can get more delegates with a smaller victory.

If he wins CA alone by how much he won MN, he basically erases everything Clinton won yesterday except for Texas. Texas could be erased by similar wins in midwestern states.

He needs better than near-ties. That's it. He does not need crushing victories.

As for the 538 article, it glosses over the wins in MN, and treats all blacks as Southern blacks. The article also fails to even use the word "latino", despite their massive presence in the West. Instead it, like you, treats Southern blacks as the indicator for all minorities.

Sanders can still win. So can Clinton. It's going to be a long primary.

[Garrett78]

113. Clinton is winning the latino vote, as well.

Winning CA by as much as Sanders won MN by would constitute a "big score" in my opinion, but that isn't going to happen. The demographic makeup of those 2 states are completely different.

Sanders will be trailing by more than 200 pledged delegates by the time all of Super Tuesday is accounted for. You are severely underestimating how substantial that is in light of how many Clinton-friendly states (including numerous big states) have yet to vote.

[CajunBlazer]

108. You do realize that proportional distribution of delegates is a double edged sword?

Of course the loser doesn't get as far behind because he still gets delegates in every state. However, it also means that once the loser gets too far behind (where Bernie is now) there is almost no way for him to catch up without huge wins of his own.

So think about it which states are Bernie going to win big enough make up for the 74 delegates difference in Texas, 34 in Alabama, 43 in GA, 33 in SC, 29 in VA and 18 in Tennessee? And that's not even counting the Southern states which haven't voted yet. The answer is nowhere. Hillary does well enough with white voters that it simply is not going to happen.

And as long as Hillary stays ahead on pledged delegates, her super delegates are not going to move.

The logical conclusion: Hilary wins the nomination, Bernie loses.

[jeff47]

110. Yep. The problem is you apparently are unaware of the delegate penalties on Southern states.

The delegate formula penalizes states that regularly vote for the Republican in the general election.

For example, Texas has 2/3rds the population of California. Texas has less than half the delegates of California (222 to 475).

So big wins in the South are roughly equal to moderate wins in "blue" states, in terms of delegate balance.

If Sanders wins CA by about how much he won MN, then he wipes out everything Clinton gained tonight except Texas. And that is just one state. There's plenty of other states where a moderate victory wipes out a "blow out" in the South.

There is still a very long way to go. Sanders might pull it off. Or he might not. We'll see.

And if you were as sure about it being impossible, you wouldn't be pushing the "it's over" claim so hard.

[Garrett78]

111. I'm pushing for folks to "get a grip on reality."

Sanders would be lucky to win CA, period. Winning CA or IL or MI or PA or FL or OH or NY (and on and on and on) by the margin by which he won MN is not going to happen.

I don't think delusion is healthy.

[jeff47]

112. If it actually is reality, then there is no harm in letting the race play out.

And the most effective way you could get the party to unify behind your candidate is to let Sanders supporters feel they got their shot and fell short.

Your current tactic is "shut up and get in line NOW you delusional idiots". That is exactly the worst possible way to help your candidate in the general election, because it creates a giant mountain of animosity.

In other words, if you actually believe your claims about it being impossible for Sanders to win, the smart move would be to shut the fuck up and stop antagonizing the people you need in November.

[Garrett78]

114. Clinton is not my candidate.

And I have no bearing on the "race playing out." Of course the race will play out.

My point is that it isn't healthy to be so severely out of touch with reality.

[jeff47]

115. Keep doubling down on "you're an idiot". I'm sure it will convince people real soon now. (nt)

[Garrett78]

117. Keep deluding yourself and insisting that I'm a Clinton supporter.

I'm sure that will change the math. I'm sure that will upend the demographic realities.

[MillennialDem]

59. I expect he'll do well in the rest of the upper midwest, northeast, and out west. But we will see.

[Garrett78]

74. I think he'll struggle in any state with a sizeable portion of POC.

There are only so many Iowas, Minnesotas and Oklahomas. I wouldn't bank on Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, Maryland or California going very well for Sanders.

Not to mention FL, LA, MS, MO, AZ and Wash. DC.

[senz]

78. As they get to know him and his history better, that could change

because, unlike Hillary, Bernie has spent his entire life advocating for Civil Rights. It's fundamental to him.

[MillennialDem]

80. He does need to start courting POC voters ASAP

[Garrett78]

86. He's been courting POC big time.

It's just not working. And many big states with many POC still remain.

[Adrahil]

27. Sanders has underperformed his targets in every state so far...

... Except New Hampshire. He needs to start signficnalty OVERPERFORMING his targets. How does that happen? I sure don't see it. Certinaly he didn't pick up any momenetum tonight. He is a deep hole.

[Agschmid]

31. That or set lower expectations.

His campaign has been struggling to set realistic expectations.

[Adrahil]

36. I'm just talking cold hard math.

To win the nomination, he needs at least half the pledged delegates. He's not winning big enough when he wins, and he loses by much too much when he loses.

[Agschmid]

38. Yup.

[MillennialDem]

62. The south has spent most of its gas, the rust belt, northeast, and out west have not. And the states

Hillary has won blow outs in are penalized in the delegates formula.

[Garrett78]

40. Yeah, 538 has Sanders way under his target at this point.

And I see him falling further behind after March 8th and March 15th. The oddsmakers give Clinton even better odds than Trump at this point.

[alcibiades_mystery]

9. Yesterday...

If Bernie loses Massachusetts, the race is effectively over. Oh, sure, by all means, stay in "until the convention" and all that jazz. But for those of us not in the bubble, Massachusetts is a big tell.

Now, if Bernie wins in Massachusetts by a lot (say 5+ points), that will also be a tell in the other direction: it will say he has legs for at least the next 30 days.

If Clinton wins Massachusetts, though, it's probably time to call last call and dim the lights. If Clinton wins Massachusetts by 5+ points, I don't see Bernie making it two more weeks.

-alcibiades_mystery, yesterday

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1370676

I agree with this. MA is the bellwether. nt // If we are being honest with ourselves.

-Joe the Revelator, yesterday

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1371664

...all our troubles were so far away...

[JaneyVee]

25. LOL.

[GusBob]

26. Nice catch

Honestly

[Joe the Revelator]

44. Well done. I've said before tonight that I thought Bernies BEST night....

was going to be VT and MA. I never thought he had a shot in the west.

[alcibiades_mystery]

54. You did say that before

Here:

Not to be Debbie Downer, but if he doesn't win MA, this is effectively over.

He can lose a lot Tuesday, but he has to win SOMEWHERE outside of Vermont. If not the narrative is just going to be too much.

-Joe the Revelator http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1366590

And I responded to that post:

That's a clear-sighted view of the thing

I think there are four must wins: Colorado, Minnesota, Massachusetts, and, of course, Vermont.

A loss in any of those will be very damaging to the Sanders campaign/movement. A loss in Massachusetts would be the worst outside of Vermont (let's stipulate that Bernie will win Vermont in the 3-1 or better range).

-alcibiades_mystery http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1366649

You should have read my response. This makes me sad.

[Eko]

46. Too funny.

[stevil]

85. Blam!

.

[Number23]

95. He's not alone. Half this forum is doing the "I thought Bernie would lose everything so this is SUCH

a HUGE win!!!" thing.

DU: Where winning four races out of 11 is somehow a stunning victory.

[theboss]

10. Let me think about that....nope

He got blasted.

[RobertEarl]

11. He won

We won. No one expected we'd win as many as we did so we exceeded expectations and the momentum is ours!

[saturnsring]

20. i won the lottery !!!!!! i got 2 of the 6 numbers but no one thought i'd get even one

the momentum is mine - i won !!

[jsmirman]

50. What are you, Rubio?

it was ridiculous when he did it, too

[RobertEarl]

55. Heh

Sorry, Hill didn't come thru the Bern. Well, no I'm not.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

12. Yes he did

[mythology]

14. Yeah, that's a no

He was expected to win Vermont, Colorado, Minnesota and Oklahoma. He needed to win in Massachusetts and he needed to have narrower losses in other states. The pledged delegates after tonight are going to be rough for him given the proportional allocation. It's just hard to catch up once behind. Clinton was on the other end of this in 2008.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/super-tuesday-preview-democratic-presidential-election-2016/

[Joe the Revelator]

17. No. No he wasn't. Polls were against him in all those states just yesterday.

[Adrahil]

32. What? Polls were aginst him in VT?

Pass whatever you are smoking....

[bkkyosemite]

37. If you look at MA he won almost the entire state just lost in the Boston area and

where an ex President was co mingling with a Mayor. Just saying...

[theboss]

41. He won the whole state except for the part with the people

Isn't this the Republican argument? That the big cities shouldn't count.

[jsmirman]

53. Oh just leave it at "He won the whole state except for the part with the people"

much funnier

[senz]

73. Oh is that where Bill was pulling that stunt today?

Hope it gets closer examination.

[saturnsring]

16. i won the lottery !!!!!! i got 2 of the 6 numbers but no one thought i'd get even one

therefore i obviously won the lottery - i have the momentum ya know

[riversedge]

63. Great way to put the situation.

[Dem2]

21. I wouldn't say that

If he had won Mass I'd have said that, but he did pretty good. Momentum? Maybe a little - it's hard to say and all I can say there is "we'll see".

[jillan]

22. I think I might even turn on msnbc just to watch Rachel and Tweety eat some crow.

[snowy owl]

29. Soooo disappoint in Massachusetts

I guess loyalty more than intelligence - Ted Kennedy's widow came out for Hillary. I wonder if Ted would have... I think there's a fair chance he would have been for Bernie.

That's a tough one for me. Too many establishment (read beltway) politicians.

[reformist2]

34. Massachusetts got it wrong in 2008 as well, going for Hillary over Obama.

They are a reliably liberal state, but they are an "old-guard" liberal state. Frankly, I'm a bit surprised Bernie almost pulled out the win.

Anyway, the upshot is clear: Hillary is weaker than people think.

[Grassy Knoll]

30. OK, Im Drunk, But...

..You're Not Driving...(Hic) Ta'nite.

[Garrett78]

45. Apparently you're not the only one.

Calling tonight a good night for Sanders is the stuff of delusion. The delegate count, the delegate count, the delegate count.

[mvd]

42. I think Sanders did almost as well as could be expected

So in that way it was a win. It may be that Clinton won in the grand scheme of things, but Bernie is still has a chance.

[marions ghost]

69. Absolutely

gonna take work tho.

GOTV people.

[SidDithers]

56. If by winning you mean...

got many fewer delegates, and what's more, fewer delegates that expected, then yes.

He definitely won.

Sid

[Joe the Revelator]

67. How are you quantifying fewer then suspected? Yesterday money was on him winning nothing.....

outside of VT.

[SidDithers]

82. Becuase he lost by much wider margins than expected...

in the southern states.

He lost by
60 in AL
39 in AR
43 in GA
34 in TN
34 in TX
29 in VA

And, because the awarding of the delegates is basically proportional to the vote in the state, those much larger margins mean more delegates than expected for Clinton.

Hell, in Texas alone, that 34 point margin might represent 75 delegates. The expected margin was supposed to be around 30-40 delegates. So Clinton picked up an extra 35-40 delegates in Texas, simply because her margin of victory was so high.

The 35 to 40 extra delegates for Hillary from Texas alone, will be about as many delegates as Bernie won in total from Vermont and Oklahoma.

In the end, Bernie may have won more states than expected. But because he lost so badly in the states that Hillary won, he's actually coming out with fewer delegates than expected.

Here were his targets for tonight, from 538 and MattTX:



I think that when we fill in the actual totals tomorrow, Bernie will have fallen short of what he needed to do.

sid

[Stuckinthebush]

71. Best reply of the thread!

Thanks, Sid!

[redstateblues]

58. Up is down again tonight in Bernieworld

[senz]

64. I feel pretty good about it. Bernie won four states and if there'd been

more time for people in the south to get to know him, I think he would have had more. Once people get a chance to know who he is, what he values, his concerns and vision for the future, and how consistent, honest, and reliable he is, they tend to like and trust him.

His favorability ratings are the highest of any 2016 candidate.

So, I just have a good feeling about it.

[George II]

66. No, he's lost Super Tuesday - lost about 60% of the delegates and his few wins were in some of the..

...smallest states. He now has to win about 62% of the remaining delegates to get the nomination. Considering the fact that he's behind in the polls in almost all of the remaining 35 states, his candidacy is all but over.

[basselope]

72. She was "supposed" to sweep.

But the broom seems to have many holes in it.. not just VT.

Just yesterday I was told she was up 10+ in MN, 10+ in Colorado 10+ in MA and OK was in the bag.

Not so fast Ms. Inevitable.

[senz]

75. Yes, I think the experts were probably surprised tonight.

Bernie is in it for the long haul because he's in it for us.

[redstateblues]

76. No one thought she would sweep

Bernie said he would win Mass

[basselope]

79. No, he said it would be "a dogfight"

And it is.

[elleng]

83. Good point, re: momentum, which is

'the quantity of motion of a moving body, measured as a product of its mass and velocity.'

Without 'mass,' momentum doesn't exist or can't be measured. Today there's enough 'mass,' enough locations to provide substance.

[840high]

93. Rec for - Dick cancer.....

[Rincewind]

94. No nt.

[lexington filly]

96. While I am white, I cannot consider Bernie's failing to reach people of color

and gaining any significant number of their votes, anywhere, a win. The same holds true if Hillary only gained the women's vote. If we're to keep the Republicans from taking the presidency and all that implies, our candidates need to have all vital segments of the population in the game I think. Appeal to many more of our needs and really mean it.

[bigwillq]

99. No. (nt)

[Starry Messenger]

103. No.

[Godhumor]

104. If that helps, go ahead and think it n/t

[Svafa]

105. Yes. I think given the expectations that everyone (supporters and critics alike) had for yesterday,

the results were very positive for Sanders.

[Adrahil]

107. #BernieMath NT

[DesertRat]

118. Sure. why not? nt

[LexVegas]

119. Nope. nt