Rigged race means Hillary takes more delegates in Bernie’s Wyoming win
April 9, 2016 | 4:44pm | Updated
Rigged race means Hillary takes more delegates in Bernie’s Wyoming win
Bernie Sanders won again Saturday — and still lost.
The Vermont senator took Wyoming by an impressive 12 percentage-point margin in statewide caucuses, beating Clinton 56-44 percent. But under the Democratic party’s oddball delegate system, Sanders’ winning streak — he has won seven out of the past eight contests — counts for little.
In fact, despite his win, he splits the Wyoming’s 14 pledged delegates 7 to 7 under the caucus calculus.
Clinton, meanwhile, also gets the state’s four superdelegates — who already pledged their allegiance to her in January. So despite “losing,” she triumphs 11-7 in the delegate tally.
Of the 500 superdelegates who have announced whom they’re supporting, 469 say they’re for Clinton.
That makes Sanders’ win in the Cowboy State and in caucuses and primaries across the country little more than a morale boost — and maybe a cruel joke to his ardent young supporters.
Meanwhile, both candidates turned their attentions to New York’s April 19 primary, and its trove of 291 delegates.
In city appearances, Clinton shied away from a slice of Junior’s cheesecake and Brooklyn-born Sanders touted his borough bona fides.
“I hope that New York state will help lead this country into the political revolution,” the Vermont senator told a cheering crowd of 700 mostly Hispanic and black voters at the United Palace of Cultural Arts in Washington Heights.
The crowd booed when Sanders said that New York is “Secretary Clinton’s adopted home state.”
“That’s not a crime,” Sanders joked in response.
“So if we can win here, it opens the door to victory to the White House,” he said, saying that a high voter turnout on April 19, when New York’s 291 delegates will be allocated, could vault him past the front-runner. Current polling averages have Clinton in the lead in New York by 13 points.
........snip..........
http://nypost.com/2016/04/09/bernie-sanders-wins-democratic-caucuses-in-wyoming/
It IS rigged, like our economy, like our financial industry, like our foreign policy, like our privatizing public services, like our monopolized industries killing entrepreneurship, like our unfair "free trade" deals, like our media. (Thus the crappy link.)
Its a "cruel joke" to more of US than just the young supporters.
= new reply since forum marked as read
But what we have here is a tie in the number of delegates.
Not so different from what happened at my precinct, actually.
As you can see, Bernie supporters outnumbered Hillary supporters slightly, 176-160, but we don't send fractional delegates to the next level, so for our precinct, the results were a tie, 4-4.
If we had been choosing an odd number of delegates to send on to the next level, it is quite possible (despite the numbers that you see on that board) that we would have sent a delegate for O'Malley as well.
That's just the way things work.
Sending fractional delegates to the next level would get a bit gory, and is rather frowned upon here.
I hope to live to see the day that a coin is toss is needed in my own precinct.
I think that would be absolutely awesome!
Anybody can tell a pollster anything.
Poll responses, unlike actual pledged delegate counts, are not binding.
But a tie in pledged delegates is still a tie in pledged delegates.
I don't know the details of how the caucus is run there, since I caucus in Iowa, but it doesn't seem like a particularly strange outcome to me.
Just like the 4-4 result in my own precinct.
PotatoChip
Response to RiverLover (Original post)
much of which is being investigated.
but i am sure she had nothing to do with any of it 
I just realized that I too could vote for Stein if for no other reason that I live in upstate NY in a conservative district. :>
) I didn't know about her until recently.
the primary is really it for us, becuse our states will be red or blue likely in a ge, so this
isn't really anything we can do much about even if we wanted to
can vote to select THEIR candidate, there are no lopsided, runaway landslides for Mr. Sanders, the reluctant Dem?
'Tis indeed rigged, in favor of genuine, declared Democrats. Quel scandale ! Quel honte !
But he won this election handily and in every other election I've seen (and I've seen a great many) that would be announced with perhaps some remarks about how delegates are awarded is much more complicated or some such, hell even the MSM admitted he won it.
He won it, and he won it by twelve percentage points, they allot their delegates in a way that does not reflect that win, (hell it may even award more delegates than a margin of victory would assume using the same rules in some elections, say a 12 point victory and a 10 to 4 Delegate win) but you are just plain spinning. He won, that is why it was "called" by the networks. It is at the same time fair to say he walked away from his twelve point victory with an evenly split delegate count - that's all true and they get to make the rules on how they allot their State delegates. Just stop spinning and feel good about having won the luck of the delegate rules of the State. A delagte victory celebration is in order and I congratulate you on that! It's just the lying bit annoys me.
I would add only a bit of fairly well known truth regarding a point your snip made toward the end.
Thus, Clinton and her surrogates have already talked up a strategy of bringing "moderate Republicans" repulsed by Trump into the Democratic "big tent."
This has always been the game plan of the Third way hybrid Right wing movement, one might say it's most long lived goal.
More
They are republicans who've infiltrated the Democratic Party. The Clintons at the helm.
This stuff is new. The norm would be to call the .02 victory "a virtual tie", and the 56 to 44 victory would have been called a "very decisive victory", the level of praise the next step from "landslide" which would have needed maybe a point or two for it to be refereed to as such, but most assuredly not a tie. There would also have been some surprised and in depth discussion by the TV anchor about how strange the way the delegates must be awarded for them to share equally the delegate count, after such a decisive victory, likely even a guest familiar with the system to embarrassingly explain it.
They are changing the game now, because the game is changing to a rigged one and they need a new and very selectively used narrative to make it less obvious.Then again what is new could be said to simply be a resurgence of something much older.
So, the next time that your Sanders brethren have a hissy fit about the existence of the superdelegates in general, or the demand that the superdelegates be forced to vote as their state voted, I will provide them a link to this post.
Thanks!
about caucuses and how unfair it is that Bernie's supporters are more active, I'll link to yours. 
Some of us have actual ones, so we can't sit around a rec center for 8 hours.
Sid
That paper is a RW rag. Wyoming was not a blowout for Sanders. Therefore, they each received 7 pledged delegates.
As for NY, he's not going to win the state. He may have been born in NY, but left the state in 1968. Hillary was NY's senator for 8 years and she still lives in the state. It's actually funny that he thinks that he'll win it.
[font size="6"][font color="green"]Great Moments in American Fascism: Republicans of Florida[/font color][/font size]
Here's how much of the nation's press were magically transformed from watchdogs into lapdogs:
The Powell Memo (also known as the Powell Manifesto)
The Powell Memo was first published August 23, 1971
Introduction
In 1971, Lewis Powell, then a corporate lawyer and member of the boards of 11 corporations, wrote a memo to his friend Eugene Sydnor, Jr., the Director of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The memorandum was dated August 23, 1971, two months prior to Powell’s nomination by President Nixon to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Powell Memo did not become available to the public until long after his confirmation to the Court. It was leaked to Jack Anderson, a liberal syndicated columnist, who stirred interest in the document when he cited it as reason to doubt Powell’s legal objectivity. [font color="red"]Anderson cautioned that Powell “might use his position on the Supreme Court to put his ideas into practice…in behalf of business interests.”[/font color]
Though Powell’s memo was not the sole influence, the Chamber and corporate activists took his advice to heart and began building a powerful array of institutions designed to shift public attitudes and beliefs over the course of years and decades. The memo influenced or inspired the creation of the Heritage Foundation, the Manhattan Institute, the Cato Institute, Citizens for a Sound Economy, Accuracy in Academe, and other powerful organizations. Their long-term focus began paying off handsomely in the 1980s, in coordination with the Reagan Administration’s “hands-off business” philosophy.
Most notable about these institutions was their focus on education, shifting values, and movement-building — a focus we share, though often with sharply contrasting goals.* (See our endnote for more on this.)
So did Powell’s political views influence his judicial decisions? The evidence is mixed. [font color="red"]Powell did embrace expansion of corporate privilege and wrote the majority opinion in First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, a 1978 decision that effectively invented a First Amendment “right” for corporations to influence ballot questions.[/font color] On social issues, he was a moderate, whose votes often surprised his backers.
CONTINUED...
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/
This story continues through today. Ask anybody you like: "Have you heard of Judge Laurence Silberman?"
Odds are good they haven't. Here's why it matters (and what's missing from the Media Monopoly's "product":
Know your BFEE: Judge Laurence Silberman, Go-To Guy of the Military Industrial Complex [View all]
If you're not into "money trumps peace," that matters.
Surely Sanders' supporters, the political sophisticates that they are, were aware of the process. Right?
Become a member in good standing of the Dem Party for more than just an opportunistic primary run, why don't ya?
That way you can "be the change you seek".
