Indisputable math.

[RoccoR5955]

Not Clinton M.A.T.H. shows us that Clinton will not secure the votes necessary to get the Democratic Party nomination for president.
https://johnlaurits.com/2016/04/28/this-is-what-will-happen-at-the-democratic-convention/

If Democrats are smart, they shall nominate the only candidate who does well, not only with Democrats, but with independents as well.

[Agschmid]

1. If he did well with dems he'd be in the lead.

[grossproffit]

11. THIS! How anyone can come to a different conclusion is difficult to understand.

[rock]

17. I know how

as does every Hillary supporter. Shall we keep it to ourselves?

[Zynx]

2. Her pledged delegates plus her super delegates will be a resounding first ballot victory.

Just like Obama in 2008, but a bigger margin.

Stop lying to people.

[RoccoR5955]

9. If the super delegates don't wake up

and see who can carry independents as well as Democrats to the presidency.

This is not just about Democrats. We want a candidate who can win. We want a candidate with out values, not someone with the values of the corporate elite.

[Zynx]

14. I guarantee you that if these delegate and poll situations were swapped, you wouldn't make

this argument.

[TexasTowelie]

16. Who is "we"?

It looks like it is only the people that have cast 3 million less votes than were cast for Clinton.

[morningfog]

22. That would be over 9 million voters.

[TexasTowelie]

23. So the "we" voters that voted for Clinton?

There are 12 million that voted for Clinton. Don't those voters matter, particularly if they believe that Clinton is the best choice for keeping the White House in the hands of Democrats?

[morningfog]

24. Of course they do, never said otherwise.

Each candidate has received a level of support not to be dismissed.

[Demsrule86]

29. Hillary received a level of support

Much higher than Sanders, thus she will be the nominee.

[morningfog]

32. She has received more pledged delegates and will likely be the nominee.

[redstateblues]

64. Bernie got less votes than Trump

[morningfog]

71. That is of little value.

[Agschmid]

18. If the super delegates over turn the pledged delegates...

I won't be voting.

[Stuckinthebush]

63. That would entail sanders having more pledged

It's fantasy thinking he will. The unpledged will be reflecting the popular vote of Dems

[Agschmid]

67. Yup.

[fun n serious]

3. He obviously doesn't do well with DEMS or the majority

of minorities.... If he did, the MATH would be on his side. It's not

[morningfog]

25. He does well with Dems, Hillary does better.

He does far better with unaffiliated voters.

[SFnomad]

4. 2156 vs. 1412 ... anything else is denial of reality n/t

[morningfog]

26. 1,665 to 1,370. First to 2,026 wins.

[SFnomad]

27. Somebody needs to read the delegate rules to you .. I'm not going to waste my time n/t

[morningfog]

31. I know the total number needed is 2,383, but supers don't vote

Until the convention. And I have been assured repeatedly that the supers will do nothing more than support the pledged delegate winner and bridge the gap for the pledged delegate winner to secure the nomination.

For all intents and purposes, the race is the 2,026 pledged delegates. And that won't happen until June 7. Neither will reach 2,383 until the first round vote at the convention.

[onenote]

38. By first round, you mean only round.

[morningfog]

69. Yes.

[Demsrule86]

49. This is where you don't understand the process

On the first ballot, the supers will vote with the delegates amassed by the winning candidate...Hillary will win overwhelmingly. In fact, if Bernie does not want to be relegated to the worst committee in the Senate or no committee, he will cooperate and do what Hillary did for Obama...nominate by acclamation. Obama was put over the top by super delegates. We don't do contested or second ballots.

[morningfog]

70. I fully understand that it will be one vote.

Not sure where you got the impression otherwise.

[Demsrule86]

76. I thought you meant first round as in first round of who knows how many

My apologies.

[grossproffit]

5. Bernie math never gets old.

[youtube]

[/youtube]

[OhZone]

28. I love that. I think it's one of their most popular vids too!

OHYEAH!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

62. This

[Renew Deal]

6. Frank Bruni at the NYT wrote a great article about this a few days ago.

[RoccoR5955]

7. I see that the trolls are out tonight. n/t

[litlbilly]

30. No kidding, there are 27 replies and i only see 2 of them. love the ignore:) Oh, and btw,

Bernie is going to take OR and CA by about 78%, that'll make em shiver in their boots...

[Agschmid]

46. ...

Oh boy.

[ISUGRADIA]

48. 78%?

Is that sarcasm or are you serious?

[grossproffit]

52. Sadly, they're serious. It's gonna be HUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE!

[redstateblues]

65. Keep sending $ to Bernie-Tad Devine has a payment due on his yacht

[Demsrule86]

8. You know better

The candidate with the most pledged delegates will be nominated on the first ballot...Hillary Clinton. The supers put the winning candidate over...and there is no magic number.

[Sancho]

10. Why would anyone continue to post drivel?

Delusion? Trolling? Learning disability in math?

[grossproffit]

12. Probably because Bernie is still running which gives false hopes to his most ardent supporters.

[bigwillq]

13. Hillary has the nomination locked up

She's winning big in pop vote, and has super dels in her corner.
Unless she gets indicted or some situation, there's no way she will not be the nominee. And there's no way she should be denied the nomination.

[leftofcool]

15. Yes, she will secure the pledged delegates. She needs only 214.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. RES IPSA LOQUITUR

http://www.electionprojection.com/presidential-elections.php

[asuhornets]

20. But Bernie does not do well with Democrats....eom

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. Anybody who would overturn the will of the people is a poor excuse for a Democrat.

[DavidDvorkin]

34. Welcome to Fantasy Island.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. This is what the article reminds me of...

When I first moved to Los Angeles there was this African American gentleman , dressed to the nines, on the Orange Line, and he was playing this game with a bean and three cups. You have to bet which cup the bean is under. There is all kinds of sleight of hand. Real money was being bet. Hundreds were passing hands in a short time.


This reminded me of how the Hell Bernie wins 65% of the remaining delegates when he has only won around 42% of them heretofore.

[Eko]

36. Its possible.

Not all that probable but still possible. Would be one of the biggest political upsets since,,,,Obama, and that would be pretty cool. It would change the way I look at the Democratic party, more of one where the underdog wins more and establishment politics doesn't ensure victory. Nothing against the party or Clinton, I admire and respect both and she would make a good president, I just like Sanders better for the most part. Its grasping at straws a bit, there are two things that need to happen, a major upset in votes and then a major change of super delegates.
Last thing I want to say is

[Demsrule86]

51. On tuesday

If things go as the polls suggest, she will win delegates and it will be clear even to the most ardent supporters that there is no path for Bernie...other than overturning the vote...and does he really want to go there?

[RobertEarl]

37. Most supers made up their minds before the 1st vote

Before Bernie was even in the race many backed H. That's not fair, or democratic or wise. Many of the supers are reconsidering their previous commitments. We should help them see the wisdom in voting for Bernie. That is all.

[onenote]

39. Do you have support for "Many of the supers are reconsidering their previous commitments"?

[RobertEarl]

40. Common sense

They are not stupid and they do want to have a D as POTUS. The way to get a D in the WH is vote for Bernie, like 90% of DUers vow to do. DU is the wisest group of D's any of us has ever seen!

[onenote]

41. So that would be a "no"

[RobertEarl]

42. that's in your name "no"

You must think the supers are dumb. They're not. Common sense tells you they are thinking about their votes. Try it sometime.

[onenote]

43. Quite the opposite. The supers are experienced politicians

And after four decades of working with experienced politicians, I'm fairly confident that they are not reconsidering their support for the candidate that has won 65 percent of the contests thus far and a significant majority of the popular vote, who has spent a long career cultivating relationships with these folks, who has been a proven fundraiser on behalf of the party that they have shared an identity withwith for years, not a few months.

[RobertEarl]

44. Bernie thinks they are

Good enough for me.

I think Bernie is a whole lot smarter than many here think. I get some here give him no credit, but he has shown, time and again, to be the smartest one running.

Bernie thinks many supers will get smart. Who am I to argue?

[JTFrog]

60. No, it's not the supers we think are dumb. n/t

[Agschmid]

47. Yup.

[Corporate666]

45. The basic error with the article should be obvious even to a toddler

The author states that Clinton has X pledged delegates. Then claims Y votes are needed for the nomination. Then goes on to say that therefore she doesn't have enough.

Let me illustrate the problem with that.

I want to buy a soda. It costs 75 cents. I have $2.43 in my pocket. Therefore I do not have enough to buy the soda, because I have only 43 cents.

You don't need 2383 PLEDGED delegates to secure the nomination. You need 2383 TOTAL delegates. Ignoring the fact that super delegates votes count JUST AS MUCH as pledged delegate votes is like ignoring the $2 in my pocket when claiming I don't have enough cents to buy the soda. It's either extreme disingenuity or extreme stupidity. There is no third option.


A pro tip to everyone... there is no sense in deluding yourself into believing what you wish to be true. It is FAR more effective of a life skill to accept reality and work within the confines of that reality to best effect. Talking about how HRC won't have the delegates is delusion. It's better to realize she is only around 250 away from winning the nomination, rather than deluding yourself into believing that somehow super delegates don't count.

Otherwise, you better stock up on tissues for the convention because there's going to be a lot of baffled faces followed by a river of tears when people get smacked in the face with the reality that super delegates DO count.

Of course, everyone knew that all along. It was never a secret. But deluding one's self into thinking they don't count is setting one's self up for disappointment.

[Demsrule86]

54. wonderful post!

You explained it so well.

[COLGATE4]

57. Thread Winner!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

53. Have a wonderful weekend.

It doesn't reflect well on anybody to call someone a troll for merely having the temerity to respond to his or her thread.

Have a wonderful weekend.

[Demsrule86]

56. If you read this

Why not just post in Bernie groups? There everyone agree with everyone. I like discussion myself and I have no one on ignore.

[redstateblues]

66. Have you ever noticed that it's mostly BSS that use ignore

extensively? Create their own little echo chambers

[Demsrule86]

68. Yes

I don't understand how they claim to want more democracy but can not endure any opposition

[leftcoastmountains]

73. Echo chambers are nice and cozy.

I have only one person on ignore. But I pretty much ignore you guys
anyway. I don't care what you think.

[Demsrule86]

75. Fair enough

Have a good day.

[beachbum bob]

55. what happens when sanders release their tax returns and the focus turns to Jane's tenure at

Burlington college and the fraud and financial ineptness she committed? As well as sanders using campaign monies for family members??? And the fact they are millionaires but chose to hide that to dupe supporters???


not even talking about he being an avowed socialist and pacifist....no soccer mom will vote for sanders

[DemocratSinceBirth]

74. I believe the figure is closer to 3,000, 000 votes , even if you apportion caucus votes.

Or are you saying superdegates should support the candidate with a couple million fewer votes and far fewer pledged delegates because that would be so democratic?

[Agnosticsherbet]

59. In 2008, 2117 delegates were needed to win. Obama only had 1,828½ pledged delegates. That's reality.

His 478 superdelegates brought him the victory. Notice that there was not a contested convention.

There is no difference between pledged delegates and superdelegates when it comes to voting. Whoever has enough pledged and superdelegates to equal 2383 or more wins.

This argument that not getting enough pledged delegates mean a contested election is a false argument. It has no relationship to reality. It is demonstrably false.

Currently, Clinton has 2165 according to the AP. (Pledged plus superdelegates) Sanders has 1357 (Pledged plus superdelegates)

One of them will have a total of pledged plus superdelegates equalling 2383 or more. That will be the winner.

Democratic primaries award delegates proportionally. Clinton needs 218 delegates. They can be pledged on superdelegates, because they all count in the first vote.

Finally, in 2008, there was less than 1% difference in the popular vote. Clinton is more than 3 million votes ahead of Sanders, and that will grow.

Democrats are smart, and because of their intelligence, they have voted for Sanders in overwhelming numbers. It isn't necessary to win by pledged delegates. Superdelegates and pledged delegates vote exaclty the same. There will be no contested convention.

[MineralMan]

72. Sanders Supporters Video