How will the Hillary campaign explain it away when Bernie takes the lead in the RCP poll average....

[virtualobserver]

for the Democratic nomination?

Every time that the Team Hillary/ MSM coalition writes off Bernie, they are proven wrong as he continues to rise in the polls.

The reason that we ignore your faulty math is that everything actually points to Bernie rising in popularity.

If we go into the Democratic convention with Bernie leading Hillary by 8-10 points, and dead even in pledged delegates, we will live in interesting times.

[HooptieWagon]

1. Clinton Math.

Liberal Independant votes don't count.

[virtualobserver]

5. Hillary is hanging on by a thread - Broke, and still desperately peddling her inevitability myth

[brooklynite]

13. You know Clinton has $12 M more cash on hand than Bernie does?

[shalafi]

42. No shit, probably through the transfer of the Hillary Victory Fund

which exposed her scheme of obtaining more cash through illegal and unethical means through the 33 states.

So yeah, now that the scheme is dead, she has no more revenue to continue that joke of a campaign she's been running since 1992.

Bernie can and will tap his supporters with plenty of cash -his current number of supporters can donate a cumulative 4 billion easily if they chose to max out.

Clinton tapped, no, more like beat down her supporters for cash.

WHERE IS THAT FUCKING DOLLAR I NEED, MADDIE!!!! I NEED IT RIGHT NOW~!@@!!#!!@

That is all on Clinton. You support an completely unethical candidate, and that's not my fucking problem if she loses.

[Firebrand Gary]

61. Hillary Victory Fund? Is that the same fund that donated 10K to Bernie's Senate bid?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/2/8/1481616/-Bernie-accepted-money-from-Hillary-PAC

[senz]

82. No, it's Hill's cheesy money-handling setup with 33 state Democratic parties

You'll love it, Gary. It's very Hill.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/01/how-hillary-clinton-bought-the-loyalty-of-33-state-democratic-parties/

[Firebrand Gary]

86. Counterpunch? Really?

[senz]

93. That's so childish.

Counterpunch produces intelligent, worthwhile journalism. The article is factual, well-written, and quite interesting.

I don't know what your problem is.

[Firebrand Gary]

96. A the least, at the very least you could have provided a source that was impartial.

Their new magazine cover BTW

[senz]

99. I've enjoyed their articles for years.

I hadn't seen the cover, and yes, it's pretty gross. I don't like your candidate at all but there's no need to make people look uglier than they are. That, too, is childish.

Nevertheless, the article I linked to is a good, informative read. Interestingly, it's written by Margot Kidder. I had no idea she was such a good writer.

[beedle]

117. Really? Which one of the major networks, newspapers, media outlets

donating to the Hillary campaign do you consider 'impartial'?

[Walk away]

143. Ha!

[grasswire]

56. link? nt

[Firebrand Gary]

63. NYT

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/election-2016-campaign-money-race.html?_r=0

[grasswire]

79. LOOK!!

No super PAC money for Bernie.

NONE

[Firebrand Gary]

83. President Hillary Rodham Clinton will appoint justices who overturn Citizens United.

After all that case was about her!

[Beacool]

23. Wuuuahhhaaahhhaaa!!!!

This board is good for a laugh.



As I said to you before, you seem to have a very loose relationship with reality.

[senz]

85. You say the nicest things to people.

[Karma13612]

125. respectfully Beacool, Hillary cannot win the GE without Bernie supporters. Her core base of

supporters isn't large enuf.

That is also reality.

[Beacool]

178. Of course Hillary will need Sanders supporters' help.

I'm laughing at the ridiculous assertion of that poster, not of his supporters as a whole. Look, I understand how hard it is when one's candidate loses the nomination. As they say, been there, done that. But, at some point, everybody has to face reality. In 2008 it just about broke my heart when Hillary lost to Obama. This year I can understand Sanders' supporters going through the same disappointment. The only people I ridicule are those who seem to be blind to the reality that Hillary will end the primary season with triple the pledged delegate advantage that Obama had in 2008. To make an assertion that Hillary is broke and hanging by a thread is just plain nonsense.

For the record, if Sanders had been the nominee I would have voted for him. I would vote for any "D" to stop vile men like Trump or Cruz from taking over the WH.

[CorporatistNation]

9. They Certainly WILL NOT COUNT In The General For A Withered Candidate!

Hillary is patently incapable of winning an even remotely fairly officiated general election... The majority of America simply cannot stand to see or hear Hillary... Simple as that!

[brush]

15. Yet she's still beating Sanders by millions of votes. Explain please.

[reformist2]

29. First off, that's mixing apples & oranges. But more importantly, many have since switched to Bernie.

[shalafi]

44. What should accomplish is now that Clinton showed her true colors

and they have learned that they agree with Bernie more, they should ignore Clinton's delegates and stand with Bernie as he EASILY confirms his nomination on the first try with Clinton defections to Bernie.

[brush]

64. How is asking for why she's leading by millions of votes is apples . . .

and oranges? It's a straight forward question.

And what proof do you have that many Clinton voters have switched to Sanders?

As if that mattered since they've already voted.

[reformist2]

71. It's too late! They've aleady voted! Hahaha! Sounds like some awful B-movie.

[HooptieWagon]

89. Forget it. Hillarians don't know difference between a primary and a caucus.

[pdsimdars]

113. And we have a winner!!!!! You nailed it.

[Karma13612]

127. precisely! +10 nt

[beedle]

144. Correct

Born on third and thinks she hit a triple.

Every single artificial advantage was given to her. The Dem establishment signed on to give all their support to her. They funnelled money through the states to bypass donation limitations so she could use that money to buy loyalty from the super delegates,

The majority of primaries are designed to either entirely keep out or severely limit input from anyone but registered Dems already invested in the establishment candidate.

Every case of election 'irregularity' (to put it politely) 'luckily' (to put it mildly) went Hillary's way.

All major media outlets, TV, Newspapers, media conglomerates, all of which donate to Hillary's campaign, have done nothing but spin the narrative to favor Hillary (take for instance the hit job by the NY Daily News, where they asked nonsense questions that had nothing to do with the issues and then spun it as though Bernie, rather then themselves, were not prepared) .. in every debate, despite even their own polls showing Bernie winning the debate, the 'pundits' all claimed that Hillary won.

Here's an example from yesterday on how the media works to keep Hillary away from any negative press.

-----------------------------------------------------------
MSNBC, MTP Daily show, Steve Kornacki was the guest host. I watched the whole show and took notes on the subjects they talked abut and for how long:

Show starts: Trump, stop trump, trump horse race. More Stop Trump movement. 20 minutes then a commercial break

Short 'Kicker' for upcoming segment: Something about Republican Ad money. 1 minute

Return to main show: Prince 3 minutes

More Trump, cut away about running mate tease. 30 seconds.

Short segment: preview of the days ahead.1m:30s (Sanders upcoming MTP interview briefly mentioned, with negative connotation about when he will get out ie. something like "And on Sunday we talk to Sanders about his future plans on remaining in the race" -- probably 5,maybe 10 seconds of negative promotion.)

Preview of fluff piece tonight about Hillary (Matthews narrates, so that should be 'critical'.) 1m:40s

"Game change" segment - VP selection, VP Stakes. Hillary. Trump, who are they going to pick for VP? Democratic guest mentioned Sanders in passing, Steve makes excuses why no one should respond to Sanders VP vetting process if asked by Bernie, Democratic guest agrees (funny he used Sanders and not one of the two Republican examples?) all together about 30 seconds of more negative Bernie comment 8 minutes

Trump again 30 sec vid clip. Round table: Trump horse race, Trump etch-a-sketch, about 10 minutes

Finally at the very end of the program, with 1 minute left, Steve says 'let's turn to the Democratic race now" -- where does the Sanders movement go from here? Does he even matter. 1m 5 seconds ... show over.

------------------
And note, this was after watching about an hour of MSNBC before I decided to take notes, and I decided to do so only because all they seemed to be talking about was Trump and the Republicans. No mention of NYS election fraud, no mention of recent discoveries of election fraud from other states being discovered. Just Republicans, some advertising for a fluff piece on Hillary later that night, and where Bernie was even mentioned it was 'bad Bernie, why is he even still relevant' bullshit.

I'll be so happy when the MSM is finally dead and buried, killed by social media and immediate access to information unfiltered by establishment spin masters, fed only in the way and measure they decide is good for their pocket books.

[redstateblues]

133. Hillary has almost 3 Million more votes than Bernie

Proof of your claim?

[HooptieWagon]

175. ^another Hillarian who doesn't know difference between primary and caucus.

[Unicorn]

51. +1

[northernsouthern]

57. +1 NT

[uponit7771]

2. 2.5 million more votes before the current poll

[SidDithers]

3. Only delegates matter...

and Bernie doesn't have enough.

Sid

[virtualobserver]

4. That is how they will TRY to explain it away, but Hillary will look like a weak candidate....

...because she WILL be one.

[NanceGreggs]

6. "They" will try to "explain away" ...

... how Hillary looked like a "weak candidate" by winning more votes and more delegates?



I've never seen DU this entertaining before!

[virtualobserver]

10. you can't explain away a trend in the national poll average

The campaign will not be able to explain it.

[NanceGreggs]

17. What "trend" is that?

The "trend" where Bernie is losing because there aren't enough people voting for him?

I think that's pretty self-explanatory.

[virtualobserver]

20. Then why is he continuing to rise in the national polls?

[NanceGreggs]

26. It's about votes and delegates.

HRC's got 'em - Bernie doesn't.

Simple enough for you?

[virtualobserver]

30. you avoided my question. Why is Bernie continuing to rise in the polls?

[NanceGreggs]

52. And you've avoided the obvious.

Whatever polls you have that show Bernie "rising" are meaningless.

It's about votes and delegates. HRC has 'em and Bernie doesn't.

[virtualobserver]

84. What is obvious is that Bernie's popularity continues to rise. That is not meaningless.

millions of votes have yet to be cast

[NanceGreggs]

88. Hmmm, yes.

And the millions of votes yet to be cast still won't put Bernie in the lead.

[virtualobserver]

91. your imaginary future evidence does not win your case....I'll go with the polling trend.

What Hillary supporters fail to realize is that Bernie's support grows dramatically in every state in which he campaigns and buys ads.

That is why his rise in inevitable.

[NanceGreggs]

94. And exactly how ...

...will he "rise above" Hillary's lead?

Votes already cast and delegates already awarded are not "imaginary future evidence". They are tangible numbers that Bernie has no way of catching up to, no less exceeding.

[virtualobserver]

98. Hillary has 1428 pledged delegates.....Pledged Delegates Remaining: 1,644

So....There is a way.

Bernie's rising popularity is the key.

[NanceGreggs]

102. We'll see how well BS does ...

... next Tuesday.

Then we can talk about how well this "rising popularity" theory actually works.

[virtualobserver]

105. it isn't a theory...it is a trend

[NanceGreggs]

106. Yeah, okay.

It's a "trend".

Let's see how that "trend" manages to get Bernie the nomination.











Oh, and in case you haven't noticed, there are no delegates awarded for "trends" - in the same way they're not awarded for bumper-stickers and yard signs, on-line polls, FB "likes", and number of attendees at rallies.

[hack89]

115. What if he continues to lose?

What does that say about the significance of those polls?

[virtualobserver]

118. Bernie has won 8 out of the last 10 contests....

What if Hillary continues to lose?

The only contest that she has won in the last month was in the state where she was twice elected Senator.

[hack89]

123. Her lead is increasing and will continue to increase

how can she be losing? Are you suggesting that at the convention the actual voters be ignored and party insiders make Bernie the nominee? Sure sounds like it.

[virtualobserver]

130. What I am suggesting is that Bernie's popularity continues to rise.

I believe that Bernie will close the gap in delegates.

My point is that if Bernie is outpolling Hillary significantly,if she is chosen, she will look like an incredibly weak nominee.

[hack89]

135. Didn't NY just blow a huge hole in that theory?

Hillary blew out Bernie - the results did not reflect the national polls, did they?

[virtualobserver]

147. She won the state where she was twice elected Senator....should I have used Vermont.....

to prove my theory? You are really stretching.

[hack89]

154. So next week will be the ultimate proof of your theory

if the results do not reflect the national polls and Hillary has some blow victories what will your excuse be?

[virtualobserver]

159. When all of the states are in, and all of the polls are in....THEN we will know.

All I am saying is that I can spot a trend.

[hack89]

161. But the trend applies equally to all upcoming states, right?

so each state should be close? Right?

[virtualobserver]

165. it applies to the nation as a whole. each state in which he campaigns will affect it.

The affect on individual states could be far more dramatic.

[hack89]

166. So what do invidual blow out losses in big states say about the trend?

sounds like the national trend can't tell us anything about the actual results. I thought the value of polls is being able to forcast future elections. You appear to disagree.

[virtualobserver]

167. your blow out losses are in your head---polls don't reveal those

[hack89]

169. State polls predicted a blow out loss for Bernie in NY

they are predicting big losses in PA and MD. What does your national trend say about those states?

[virtualobserver]

171. They also predicted a blowout loss in Michigan.

Individual polls are meaningless.

Trends however, matter.

[hack89]

173. MI was an outlier because they underestimated Bernie's support with independents

all the polls since then take that in to account and have been Pretty accurate. NY certainly was.

More to the point - if the national trend says Bernie is more popular than Hillary and the matter than what should they tell us about next week? Anything?

[redstateblues]

137. If she is a weak candidate, Bernie is even weaker. She has almost 3 Million

more votes than Bernie.

[virtualobserver]

149. we will see how the votes stack up at the end of the primary season

[shalafi]

48. Then go turn your damn attention to the GE

and stop bothering us fringe Bernie supporters if you think you have it locked up and ready to go. Go beat up your fellow New Yorker Trump..

You didn't think it through, didn't you?

[NanceGreggs]

49. I think it's now apparent ...

... who didn't "think it through" before posting.

[reformist2]

35. She is a weak frontrunner. Especially for such a known quantity as her.

The Obama / Clinton race in 2008 was also very close, but Obama was a newcomer, so his slim victory was still remarkable. Hillary should have been able to put Sanders to bed months ago, but hasn't yet been able to.

[NanceGreggs]

40. She's so weak ...

... she's winning without breaking a sweat.

[astrophuss42]

158. I think a cool mil to "Correct the Record" is sweating a bit

Oh, I know, I know, $1,000,000 is pocket change.

Sweaty pocket change.

[redstateblues]

134. That makes Bernie an even weaker candidate because he can't even

win the nomination

[brooklynite]

7. How will the Bernie campaign explain it away when Hillary takes the lead in delegates?

Oh, right.....

[virtualobserver]

101. Hillary is the inevitable one.....

based on the endless stream of that Hillary supporters post.

If Bernie goes into the convention with a solid lead in the national Democratic polls, it WILL be an issue.

[Bluenorthwest]

110. How doess the Hillary Camp explain this away?

[Godhumor]

8. I'll explain it away by the fact that she is winning by a lot

Moral victories don't count.

[virtualobserver]

14. Bernie's continuing rise in the national polls will not be a moral victory.It will have consequences

[Godhumor]

21. Such as? How will the national polling explain away him getting trounced next week?

The consequences of being down almost 300 delegates with 5 more states off the map where a comeback could start is a lot more pressing, I would think

[virtualobserver]

28. We will see how that goes.....but be honest with yourself.....

If Bernie goes into the convention leading in national polls....what kind of a sign is that ?

[Godhumor]

34. One that means nothing if Clinton is ahead in delegates

Because she wins the nomination on the first ballot.

[reformist2]

37. It means Dems won't be that thrilled to campiagn for her.

[NanceGreggs]

46. I've been reading on DU ...

... since last April that Hillary's campaign is doomed, imploding, falling apart, fraught with catastrophe ...

I have also been reading on DU how no one likes her, no one trusts her, and she inspires no one.

How do you Bern'splain the fact that she has waaaay more votes and more delegates?

[JonLeibowitz]

54. Closed Primaries suck. And Bernie is only getting more popular. Perhaps not fast enough.

[NanceGreggs]

58. I'd say ...

... more than apparently not fast enough.

Maybe if we extended the primary for another eight-to-ten tears, Bernie could almost come close to winning the nomination.

[pdsimdars]

114. OH . . . . .

[pdsimdars]

116. They don't seem to realize the Democrats are only 30% of the population and OTHERS can vote

in the GE. If you're slightly ahead among 30% and polls show you doing poorly in the GE. . . well, they might want to think JUST A LITTLE and get over the smug. . . .
But they don't seem to.

[alan2102]

108. here's a start

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511809324

[chervilant]

72. Oh, yeah, she's such a stellar candidate.

It's not so easy to relegate Senator Sanders to obscurity, given his burgeoning popularity here and abroad. Even if the corporate oligarchs successfully install their two Chosen Ones in the Kabuki Theater face-off this November, those of us who support Bernie will continue our efforts to recover our democracy.

Bernie is the real deal. The relentless derision aimed at marginalizing him AND his campaign will NOT deter him, nor will it stop our movement. Our younglings deserve a better future than that "promised" by the corporate megalomaniacs who've usurped our media, our politics, AND our global economy.

Oh, btw, welcome to my IL. I've no time for Hi11ary OR her supporters.

[Godhumor]

76. Toodles n/t

[senz]

97. So well said and true.

I used to find tea partiers obnoxious, but this is worse. It will be great when the primaries are over.

[virtualobserver]

67. We have been hearing this FOREVER from Hillary supporters...and yet....

[Godhumor]

73. It. Doesn't. Matter.

There are no ramifications from this. None. If Hillary leads the delegate count after the last primary she is the nominee, period.

[virtualobserver]

78. In modern History, the nominee has never come into the convention trailing in the national polls.

If you feel that this would be a small thing, I find your viewpoint hard to comprehend.

[pdsimdars]

120. Just wanted to compliment you on your intelligent posts. Refreshing. Thanks

[hack89]

132. So what should happen at the convention due to these polls? Nt

[virtualobserver]

139. I'm not recommending anything. That isn't my point.

My point is that this will not be a run of the mill convention if this happens.

If Bernie leads Hillary by 8-10 points in the polls, we will be in uncharted territory.

[hack89]

141. Nothing uncharted about it.

she wins first ballot and the GE campaign starts. Then the only polls that matter are the ones comparing her to Trump.

[virtualobserver]

150. we will see

[hack89]

156. It's do or die for Bernie next week

If he can't pull out some big victories and actually reduce Hillary's lead then it is all over.

[virtualobserver]

160. I thought that it was already "all over"?

In reality, this is a battle for the soul of the Democratic party.....It will never be over.

[hack89]

162. It is. Obviously some of us are having trouble accepting that

I don't know what your threshold is but sooner or later you will have to dial it back or start to appear really deluded.

[pdsimdars]

119. Yea, but some of us have a LARGER vision than others apparently

and for us the BIG ENCHILADA is the GE. Where Hillary SUCKS as a candidate.
But you guys don't seem to be able to think past coronating a prom queen.

[Land of Enchantment]

170. Thread Winner! nt

[brush]

22. After his NY debacle and the upcoming shellackings in PA and MD . . .

the polls you speak of will change dramatically.

[NanceGreggs]

24. Bernie ain't going nowhere ...

... without votes and delegates, my friend. And all the "polls" in the world won't change that fact.

[pdsimdars]

121. Short sighted. All the Democratic delegates in world won't make Hillary into a viable

candidate in the GE. But none of you seem capable of comprehending that. All you can see is the bubble of the meager 30% of the voters who are Democrats.
Bernie gets 70+% of the Independent votes, which make up 42% of the voters. And it looks like he is now tied with Hillary among democrats. Hillary can't do that. And she will lose the GE in the unlikely event that she is the nominee.

[Mike__M]

43. On the other hand

Immoral victories do count, it seems

[redstateblues]

11. In Bernieworld losing means winning

[virtualobserver]

18. Perpetually rising popularity by Bernie isn't losing......

It is a revolution rising.

[redstateblues]

140. Votes count. Polls don't. Revolution is an empty bumper sticker slogan

Bernie has no plan-no plan to win back Congress or the State Houses.

[MadBadger]

12. Last 5 polls have Hillary in the lead, including Reuters which was Bernie +1 a week ago

Now Hillary +6

[KingFlorez]

16. The problem is that is his trailing in pledged delegates and popular votes

And the last tracking poll I saw showed him dropping by 4%, but that is a moot point since the nomination isn't decided by polls. It's over, so move on with your life.

[RandySF]

19. These are the RCP averages I care about right now

Pennsylvania Democratic Presidential Primary: Clinton +15.8

Maryland Democratic Presidential Primary: Clinton +21.7

Connecticut Democratic Presidential Primary: Clinton +7.8

Delaware Democratic Presidential Primary: Clinton +7

[stopbush]

25. Nothing matters but the delegate count.

Nothing.

Did I mention...nothing?

[virtualobserver]

32. So, Bernie's perpetual rise in popularity doesn't matter?

[RandySF]

53. Not if it doesn't translate into votes and delegates.

[pnwmom]

153. Not unless it results in an astronomical increase in won delegates. n/t

[reformist2]

39. Yeah, right. Her overall popularity matters a hell of a lot. And she is lacking in that department.

[pdsimdars]

124. Worst negatives in the history of the Democratic party.. . . shouldn't that mean something to

these people? They seem incapable of thinking about anything.

[pdsimdars]

122. And that's the problem, Hillary supporters seem incapable of seeing the GE.

[stopbush]

172. Sanders supporters are incapable of seeing reality.

Are you actually saying that Sanders should be the D nominee even though he is losing the race by EVERY measure because a few polls taken seven months before the GE show him beating the R nominee by a wider margin than Hillary? Even though she still beats those same Rs? Or is it that ONE poll has Sanders within two points of Hillary on a national basis? Mind you, he's not ahead, just coming close.

Ridiculous.

I think you need a reality check.

[pdsimdars]

179. That is your fantasy projection of what I said. . . .

I won't waste my time. I've seen the lack of ability to comprehend many times so I no longer bother. If there were the possibility of an intelligent conversation I'd be all in, but I can see from your tone that that will not be possible.

Remember

[Onlooker]

27. She's regaining her lead

The Ipso Reuters poll that had Bernie leading by one point a week ago came out with a new version today and has Hillary up by six.

[virtualobserver]

33. we will see

[virtualobserver]

36. that is a pretty volatile poll....we will see how it goes.

[Squinch]

55. But you were just saying that that poll was enough to overturn the stated will of the people.

Now you are saying it's too volatile to believe.

Which is it?

[virtualobserver]

62. I didn't say any of that.....I was talking about the RCP average, which has been rising for Bernie..

and will continue to do so.

The polls ARE measuring the will of the people.

[lovemydog]

31. It doesn't need to.

[virtualobserver]

38. it will simply sit there and look weak.

[riversedge]

41. Clinton now holds strong leads in four different April 26th states: Rhode Island +7 Poll Dat

The OP's desperation is showing.





Clinton now holds strong leads in four different April 26th states: Rhode Island +7





Poll Date Sample MoE
Clinton

Sanders
Spread
Gravis 4/17 - 4/18 1026 LV 3.1 45 38 Clinton +7


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/de/delaware_democratic_presidential_primary-5805.html




Hillary Clinton now holds strong leads in four different April 26th states
By Bill Palmer | April 21, 2016

http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/hillary-clinton-carves-out-april-26th-leads-in-connecticut-and-delaware/24561/

..........But the two new polls in Connecticut from Emerson and Quinnipiac suggest that Hillary will win the state by seven and a half points. That’s a state where Sanders has spent time campaigning and has been hoping to win. In an interesting development, Gravis has just released the very first Delaware poll, which says that Hillary leads the state by seven points.

When there is just one late-arriving poll in a small state and no other data, it’s often a sign that the data may be less than steady, as evidenced by the other polling outlets’ collective unwillingness to even try their hand there. So Hillary Clinton’s Delaware lead would feel more certain if one or more additional outlets offer polling data there between now and Tuesday, but it does help confirm her April 26th strength.

As for Rhode Island, the fifth state to vote on April 26th, the only poll conducted was in February. It had Hillary up by nine points, but that data is too old to be considered viable. Still, every bit of polling data available across the five states suggests that she’ll win at least four out of five states, and perhaps all five, when voters line up on Tuesday. ....
1

[jcgoldie]

45. Maybe

They will just say that like close to 3 million more people voted for us...? I mean I dunno.

[elljay]

146. They will say that

and people who don't understand that it is an incorrect and meaningless statistic will agree with them. And will continue to argue the point rather than spending their time understanding why it is a meaningless statistic.

[jcgoldie]

155. millions more people voting for you in an election

Is "a meaningless statistic" ... got it.

[elljay]

168. Proving my point

Yes, if you are not counting the actual number of people voting in caucus states.

[alcibiades_mystery]

47. " dead even in pledged delegates"

What happens when you lose all five states on Tuesday?

[Tarc]

50. So your premise is based on crystal ball-gazing

[virtualobserver]

66. No. My premise is based on watching Bernie rise in the polls.

[Tarc]

68. Well, it's a god thing for Bernie that the nominee is chosen by opinion polling

Oh, wait, it isn't.

The superdelegates will vote for the candidate who wins the most pledged delegates heading into the convention. I realize that your last, best hope foe a Hail Mary is the supers going flippity-floppity for Sanders, even if he finishes 2nd, but you have to realize how awfully undemocratic that would be. Not to mention extraordinarily hypocritical, given how much the Sanders supporters rage at every real or imagined voting irregularity thus far.

[virtualobserver]

74. The opinion of the people matters. If Bernie's numbers keep rising, that also matters.

[Tarc]

75. So just to be clear, you feel the superdelegates should not base their vote

on the candidate who wins the most pledged delegates? That the RCP poll should be the metric?

[SheilaT]

59. I keep on wondering if the long delay in the resolution

of the email thing isn't designed to let her win the nomination, then indict her, and totally destroy her in the general election. It's a truly scary thought, but still.

She truly is a weak candidate. She cannot win in states where independents can participate. Clinton supporters totally dismiss that, saying that this proves that REAL Democrats support her. They seem oblivious to the fact that in the general election at least a third of the voters will be independents. And she needs their votes.

Plus, the Millennials. Her campaign and her surrogates have been offensively dismissive of them, as if they don't vote, period. They are wrong. Already the younger demographic is noticeably more numerous than the Boomer generation. Yes, it is true younger voters are not reliable voters, but that changes as they get older. Heck, I didn't vote the first time I was eligible, and I'm so old that I had to be 21 to vote the first time. Her willingness to blow off that very large generation is truly stupid and ill-informed.

If she's the nominee I may well say fuck it. Why bother? Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for an evil, and I, for one, am done with that. If I can't vote for the candidate I actually want, then I don't need to vote at all. Let the rest of you decide. I'm actually somewhat better off than all those delusional people who will be voting for Hillary or for the Donald, who haven't a clue how much damage either one of them can wreak on this country.

So have at it. Gloat about how we'll have the first President with a vagina, as if that will make her special. I remember all too clearly what Margaret Thatcher, the first English Prime Minister with a vagina, did to that country. She totally fucked it up. And Hillary will do the same for this country. Brace yourselves. Anticipate cuts in Social Security, limits on Medicare, an erosion in the minimum wage, more outsourcing of jobs, and lots more wars overseas.

Enjoy.

[chervilant]

81. None so blind as those who REFUSE to see...

And, Bill Clinton just blamed our younglings for the ginormous losses in 2010 -- so much easier to do that than to acknowledge what a train wreck is our Democratic Party du jour. And, don't even get me started about the DNC!

I am so disgusted. (AND, I am with you regarding NOT voting for "the lesser of two evils." It's Bernie all the way.)

[pdsimdars]

126. I've heard they hope to tie it up in May. So . . . . should be time.

[artyteacher]

60. like they always say ...

The only poll that matters is the one on election day, and she's def winning those.

[Firebrand Gary]

65. Please provide a link to support your theory.

?

[virtualobserver]

70. OK...here is my link....

If Bernie was a stock, people would buy it. That is one hell of a trend.

[Firebrand Gary]

77. Ok, here's mine.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-delegate-tracker/

1930 delates, the nomination is almost there.

[virtualobserver]

80. Your link does not disprove my point, a Bernie lead in nat'l Democratic polls by the convention....

will make Hillary look weak...

[Firebrand Gary]

87. That's what your plan is right?

You want her to be weak right? Then you should be happy! She's still going to be the nominee and any difficulty that she has in unifying the party before November will be a job well done on your part.

Hillary has earned her votes! Almost 3 million more than Sander's, it's the will of the people that she is the democratic nominee.

[virtualobserver]

90. my plan? I'm just watching the polls. The trend doesn't look good for Hillary.

A nominee trying to limp across the finish line will have some explaining to do.

[pdsimdars]

131. Votes? Apples and oranges. Read a little.

Any difficulty uniting the party is all Hillary's doing. She has run a disgusting smear fest of a campaign.

You're just setting the narrative in case she is the nominee and loses. so you can blame someone else for her not convincing enough people to vote for her in the GE

[akbacchus_BC]

69. I love your signature line. I am not sure Bernie has a chance!

Do you think it is possible for him to get the nomination. All the Super Delegates are for Mrs. Clinton. Once in a long time, an honest politician surfaces and gets downtrodden. We can never assume who will win anymore.

[virtualobserver]

95. I do. It will not be easy.

My premise is that Hillary had her maximum number of supporters at the beginning. She can now only lose them.

When Bernie campaigns, he gains supporters state by state.

If we get to the convention, and Bernie is leading Hillary 53-42 in the national democratic polls....how can he be ignored?

[akbacchus_BC]

100. I love your enthusiasm and I hope you are right. Gosh, I really

liked what Mr. Sanders is advocating for, it is doable for all Americans. It is time to stop the greed and let the working class get a voice, which he is advocating for.

[pdsimdars]

136. Ignore the super delegates now. They do not vote until the convention and they have

never decided an election. Last time, Clinton also had more of them but when it was obvious that Obama was winning, they voted for him.

The media keeps putting them in just to dissuade people from voting for Bernie.

[larkrake]

92. half the dems, independents and many republicans would vote for Bernie in the general, hillary has

southern blacks and half the dems. as far as numbers, indys outnumber partys

[MFM008]

103. POLLS are not VOTERS

polls are crap. Look at all the ones that had Romney winning against Obama. Whoops.
All those crowds of 28 thousand or more in New York and he lost by 16 points.
Not saying hes not popular or that his message is worthless.
He is not going to flip superdelegates or delegates.
Sometimes you have to swallow the huge bitter pill.

[Lil Missy]

104. She won't have to explain it. She's winning by a large margin.

[Demsrule86]

107. the primary is over

National polls are meaningless.

[alan2102]

109. no prob. she'll just buy more facebook likes

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/22/hillary-clintons-support-base-as-bogus-as-us-democracy/

[pdsimdars]

138. Maybe she should just offer people cash to vote for her. Cut out all that advertising nonsense

just a direct cash deal between her and the voters. Probably save her a lot of money, which she seems to be running out of.

[redstateblues]

145. Bernie is the one promising that

[pampango]

111. "If we go into the Democratic convention with Bernie leading Hillary by 8-10 points, and dead even

in pledged delegates, we will live in interesting times."

That scenario seems to contain a might big IF. But IF that happens, "we will live in interesting times" indeed and it might be good news for us Bernie supporters. However, the role of the party establishment (the super-delegates) will be crucial. How do they balance each candidates performance (in popular vote and pledged delegates) in the recently concluded (by the time of the convention) primary season with their current performance in national polls?

If the establishment goes against the leader in popular vote and pledged delegates (be that Bernie or Hillary) and choose the other one based on current polls of the two of them or of how they might do against Trump or whoever the republicans put up, there will be 'interesting times' also. 6 months ago I would have thought that would be how the establishment would take the nomination from Bernie and hand it to Hillary. It is no more acceptable if it works the other way around.

[virtualobserver]

112. When the primaries started... I hoped, rather than believed, that Bernie's message would resonate.

I started out with a belief that the Democratic Party primary process was actually "small d" democratic.

After watching the ridiculous mish-mash of rule variations in primaries and caucuses, and the thumb on-the-scale behavior of party regulars all the way up to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, I no longer have any illusions concerning fairness or "democracy". People thrown off the rolls in multiple states has called that into question even more.

Previously, I had wondered where Bernie's ceiling would be in the polls.
Watching Bernie's steady rise in the polls has convinced me that it will continue, and that his ceiling may be higher than anyone ever imagined.

This situation is unique. We have never seen a "front-runner" trailing in Party polls going into a convention.

If that occurs, we will then find out whether "democracy" is influenced by the will of the people, or by party rules and arbitrary (or not so arbitrary) voter disenfranchisement.

[hack89]

128. So throw away the votes and have party insiders make Bernie the nominee due to the polls?

is that democratic?

[Trust Buster]

129. Votes represent the actual valid polls. Everything else is b.s.

[bigtree]

142. when did we start electing presidents by polling results?

...think before you post silliness like this.

[Agnosticsherbet]

148. Clinton has won more states, won more pledged delegates, and won 2,694,273 more votes

Those are all "small d" democratic."

Popular vote totals courtesy of Real Clear Politics.

[virtualobserver]

151. there are plenty of states left.....some very big ones.

[Agnosticsherbet]

157. RCP polls has Clinton well ahead in almost all of those states.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

Even in the big ones.

Sanders can not win enough to reduce the pledged delegate lead, win more states, or win the popular vote.

He will lose on each of those measures.

Because of that, there will be no mass switch of superdelegates. They can see the "small d" will of the voters and will not switch because RCP moves in Sanders favor.

[virtualobserver]

163. We will see how those states actually turn out

[Agnosticsherbet]

164. Yes we will.

[redstateblues]

152. I remember when BSS said polls were meaningless.

Funny how now they think polls mean more than actual voting totals. Bernie is getting crushed. A lot of denial on DU

[Ace Rothstein]

174. A lot of my fellow Sanders supporters are flat out delusional.

[rjsquirrel]

176. How will the Sanders campaign explain it

when they still trail in delegates and votes in June?


Oh yeah I know it will be vote rigging by Wasserman-Schultz. Because we all know everyone really voted for Bernie.

[virtualobserver]

177. It takes time and exposure to overcome Hillary's name recognition advantage

.....and Bernie is doing that.

[Major Hogwash]

180. They won't.

They will just claim it doesn't matter.